"Party girl" reputation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's peculiar that "having respect for yourself" is often code for "acting in conformity with someone else's more conservative moral code."

I think it's peculiar that people think they should be able to escape the consequences for their bad behavior by attacking those who call them out on it.

+1

And this sort of attitude tends to form an underlying foundation of a lot of "feminist" writing on blogs these days - and I call it "feminist" because it's not actually feminist at all. And I say that as a woman who has proudly called herself a feminist her whole life. But I think bullshit like accusing everyone of slut-shaming and celebrating bad behavior because it's "empowering" or "liberating" or "fighting the patriarchy" is disingenuous.

Nonsense. People are being called out for hateful, destructive name-calling. Sleeping around doesn't harm anyone; it's nobody's business if you do. Name calling harms people and is directed at harming people.

You're being "attacked" for being a jerk. Jerks are very harmful.

Once again, you have made the common error of thinking that you are arguing with one person. These are two different posters; I know, because I am one of them.

And I have not called anyone any name, nor has the other poster you are quoting, so far as I can tell. I have not, therefore, by your own reasoning, harmed people.

You, however, just called me a jerk. I guess that means you are hateful and destructive and want to harm me. Interesting rhetorical technique you've got there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's peculiar that "having respect for yourself" is often code for "acting in conformity with someone else's more conservative moral code."

I think it's peculiar that people think they should be able to escape the consequences for their bad behavior by attacking those who call them out on it.

+1

And this sort of attitude tends to form an underlying foundation of a lot of "feminist" writing on blogs these days - and I call it "feminist" because it's not actually feminist at all. And I say that as a woman who has proudly called herself a feminist her whole life. But I think bullshit like accusing everyone of slut-shaming and celebrating bad behavior because it's "empowering" or "liberating" or "fighting the patriarchy" is disingenuous.

Nonsense. People are being called out for hateful, destructive name-calling. Sleeping around doesn't harm anyone; it's nobody's business if you do. Name calling harms people and is directed at harming people.

You're being "attacked" for being a jerk. Jerks are very harmful.

Once again, you have made the common error of thinking that you are arguing with one person. These are two different posters; I know, because I am one of them.

And I have not called anyone any name, nor has the other poster you are quoting, so far as I can tell. I have not, therefore, by your own reasoning, harmed people.

You, however, just called me a jerk. I guess that means you are hateful and destructive and want to harm me. Interesting rhetorical technique you've got there.

*shrug*

You are using scare quotes around "feminist" for people who don't agree with your sex negative attitude. You are playing the victim card because someone called you out for slut-shaming. You are being a jerk.

I'm perfectly comfortable giving back what you are putting out to the world. If you act like an aggressive jerk, I will be an aggressive jerk right back. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All these people who say that they "outgrew" the drunk hook-up years - why did you stop, if the behavior itself is not the problem?

When I was in my late teens/20s, if I met someone that I was interested in having sex with, I generally had sex with them when I wanted to, whether we were in a relationship or not. If the sex was good and we liked each other, we agreed to be in a relationship. Part of "being in a relationship" means not hooking up with other people.

I had no behavior with my behavior if I was not actually in a relationship with someone, nor did I have any delusions that sleeping with random interesting people was a great way to get into a relationship. I don't see why you equate "settling down" with "the behavior must've been a problem".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not OP, but because I have mad skills in bed.

I get it, you also think you have a golden vagina.

You have no idea.

well now, little Ms Sexy, how YOU DOIN?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not OP, but because I have mad skills in bed.

I get it, you also think you have a golden vagina.

You have no idea.

Golden from crusted up disease sores

Thread winner, she probably pees like a sprinkler

[Anonymous]

I'm PP who said the slut-shamers are self-loathing repressed people who are very much like the gay-haters.

I feel the behavior is fine among consenting adults - and let's just be honest: it's not the drunken hookups that upset people, it's the female promiscuity - but I do agree that doing this in a work setting - and that includes non-work locations (bars, etc.) with people you also work with - is colossally dumb. There's an old saying: don't shit where you eat.

I think the OP was trolling (quite effectively as it turns out) but if it was a legit question and she actually wants to know about getting an LTR, the drunk hookups are not the best way to meet people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's peculiar that "having respect for yourself" is often code for "acting in conformity with someone else's more conservative moral code."

I think it's peculiar that people think they should be able to escape the consequences for their bad behavior by attacking those who call them out on it.

Lemme ask you something Mr-High-and-Mighty: who exactly does this "bad behavior" harm? Why is it bad behavior? Like, show me the harm to random passers by that this behavior causes that makes it 'bad". The woman and the men who make out with her aren't random passers-by - they're willing participants. You sound like the straight morons who complain that "gay marriage" is a threat to your straight relationship. I've got news: if you and your spouse are really straight - truly, not just closet cases in hardcore self-denial - then what gay people do has zero effect on you or your marriage.

The women who slut shame are angry that these "easy" women are more attractive to men and the men who slut shame just want women who they think they have no risk of losing. It's all about sexual property and ownership.

It is harming the OP, or didn't you read that? It is harming her career and attaining the serious relationship she says she wants.

The harm is directly due to her lack of discretion and engaging in this behavior in a work environment. She needs to keep it away from the office. The behavior itself is not the problem.

All these people who say that they "outgrew" the drunk hook-up years - why did you stop, if the behavior itself is not the problem?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not OP, but because I have mad skills in bed.

I get it, you also think you have a golden vagina.

You have no idea.

Golden from crusted up disease sores

Thread winner, she probably pees like a sprinkler

It's a bit pathological that you associate sex with disease. Have you always been terrified of sex?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's peculiar that "having respect for yourself" is often code for "acting in conformity with someone else's more conservative moral code."

I think it's peculiar that people think they should be able to escape the consequences for their bad behavior by attacking those who call them out on it.

+1

And this sort of attitude tends to form an underlying foundation of a lot of "feminist" writing on blogs these days - and I call it "feminist" because it's not actually feminist at all. And I say that as a woman who has proudly called herself a feminist her whole life. But I think bullshit like accusing everyone of slut-shaming and celebrating bad behavior because it's "empowering" or "liberating" or "fighting the patriarchy" is disingenuous.

Nonsense. People are being called out for hateful, destructive name-calling. Sleeping around doesn't harm anyone; it's nobody's business if you do. Name calling harms people and is directed at harming people.

You're being "attacked" for being a jerk. Jerks are very harmful.

Once again, you have made the common error of thinking that you are arguing with one person. These are two different posters; I know, because I am one of them.

And I have not called anyone any name, nor has the other poster you are quoting, so far as I can tell. I have not, therefore, by your own reasoning, harmed people.

You, however, just called me a jerk. I guess that means you are hateful and destructive and want to harm me. Interesting rhetorical technique you've got there.

*shrug*

You are using scare quotes around "feminist" for people who don't agree with your sex negative attitude. You are playing the victim card because someone called you out for slut-shaming. You are being a jerk.

I'm perfectly comfortable giving back what you are putting out to the world. If you act like an aggressive jerk, I will be an aggressive jerk right back. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Oops. Picked the wrong poster AGAIN. I was the one who said the thing about escaping consequences. But nice try!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm PP who said the slut-shamers are self-loathing repressed people who are very much like the gay-haters.

I feel the behavior is fine among consenting adults - and let's just be honest: it's not the drunken hookups that upset people, it's the female promiscuity - but I do agree that doing this in a work setting - and that includes non-work locations (bars, etc.) with people you also work with - is colossally dumb. There's an old saying: don't shit where you eat.

I think the OP was trolling (quite effectively as it turns out) but if it was a legit question and she actually wants to know about getting an LTR, the drunk hookups are not the best way to meet people.

So glad that there is someone who knows others better than they know themselves. How... what's the right word - ah yes - judgmental of you.

Some of us have actual experience with alcoholics, with drunk drivers, with sloppy drunk people embarrassing themselves and others. Sober people watch heavy drinking and see how stupid it makes people, and they make stupid, regrettable decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should party with fun, exciting, good looking dudes for the next 2 or 3 years. Then, when you hit 30 - before your looks start to go, you should find a stable, reasonably successful guy to settle down with, even if you wouldn't have bothered hooking up with him in your 20s.

And why should he want to settle with her?

Not OP, but because I have mad skills in bed.

But no man wNts to show up at a party with a wife of gf and have 5 or 10 other guys know how good her skills are in bed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm PP who said the slut-shamers are self-loathing repressed people who are very much like the gay-haters.

I feel the behavior is fine among consenting adults - and let's just be honest: it's not the drunken hookups that upset people, it's the female promiscuity - but I do agree that doing this in a work setting - and that includes non-work locations (bars, etc.) with people you also work with - is colossally dumb. There's an old saying: don't shit where you eat.

I think the OP was trolling (quite effectively as it turns out) but if it was a legit question and she actually wants to know about getting an LTR, the drunk hookups are not the best way to meet people.

So glad that there is someone who knows others better than they know themselves. How... what's the right word - ah yes - judgmental of you.

Some of us have actual experience with alcoholics, with drunk drivers, with sloppy drunk people embarrassing themselves and others. Sober people watch heavy drinking and see how stupid it makes people, and they make stupid, regrettable decisions.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
whole life. But I think bullshit like accusing everyone of slut-shaming and celebrating bad behavior because it's "empowering" or "liberating" or "fighting the patriarchy" is disingenuous.

Nonsense. People are being called out for hateful, destructive name-calling. Sleeping around doesn't harm anyone; it's nobody's business if you do. Name calling harms people and is directed at harming people.

You're being "attacked" for being a jerk. Jerks are very harmful.

Once again, you have made the common error of thinking that you are arguing with one person. These are two different posters; I know, because I am one of them.

And I have not called anyone any name, nor has the other poster you are quoting, so far as I can tell. I have not, therefore, by your own reasoning, harmed people.

You, however, just called me a jerk. I guess that means you are hateful and destructive and want to harm me. Interesting rhetorical technique you've got there.

*shrug*

You are using scare quotes around "feminist" for people who don't agree with your sex negative attitude. You are playing the victim card because someone called you out for slut-shaming. You are being a jerk.

I'm perfectly comfortable giving back what you are putting out to the world. If you act like an aggressive jerk, I will be an aggressive jerk right back. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

???

I'm an NP, for the record, and I think you're completely nuts. The only person being an aggressive jerk around here is you.

[Anonymous]

Well, this thread has been interesting....there are two trains going here: one is dealing specifically with OP's situation and the other is about what is "feminist", what is "slutty" and what is inappropriate or not about having many sexual partners.
The second train has little or no bearing on the first except that no matter what you THINK should be acceptable for women, it is NOT for many people. And whether you think it is acceptable or not, people in OPs professional life will judge her for her behavior and they will use a different standard than they would if she were a man. Maybe that is wrong but it is the state of the world today and OP needs to change her behavior if she wants to get ahead in it.
In the meantime, she (and all of us) can work on changing societal attitudes so this will not be an issue in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, this thread has been interesting....there are two trains going here: one is dealing specifically with OP's situation and the other is about what is "feminist", what is "slutty" and what is inappropriate or not about having many sexual partners.
The second train has little or no bearing on the first except that no matter what you THINK should be acceptable for women, it is NOT for many people. And whether you think it is acceptable or not, people in OPs professional life will judge her for her behavior and they will use a different standard than they would if she were a man. Maybe that is wrong but it is the state of the world today and OP needs to change her behavior if she wants to get ahead in it.
In the meantime, she (and all of us) can work on changing societal attitudes so this will not be an issue in the future.

While you've made a very balanced, sensible, and good contribution to the thread (thank you), I do wish someone would stop the feminazis in here, including the very immature OP who has since run away, from frothing at the mouth. The sexual double standard took THOUSANDS of years to evolve, and we've had half a century of female sexual freedom. The OP is just in denial that this is a social fabric that isn't to disappear, likely for centuries.