Reply to I wish women would demand more in a relationship before getting intimate

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "I wish women would demand more in a relationship before getting intimate "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment. 
[/quote]

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong.  Of course people are free to shame sluts.  There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon.  It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man.  It doesn't help you build a family.  The "silent majority" and wise people understand this. [/quote]

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.[/quote]

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way?  Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it.  You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.[/quote]

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it? [/quote]

It doesn't actually work that way in educated populations.  In educated populations, the more sex partners people have the less lilkely they are to have STDs. The mechanism behind that isn't clear, but it's probably because they are more careful and take more care of their health. They use condoms more consistently and get tested more frequently.  People who have fewer partners have more STDS.  Again, the mechanism isn't clear but it's probably because they feel "safe" and assume their partner is "safe" and so they don't use condoms and don't get screened as much as they should.

More people should be responsible sluts.  It's better for the health of the community. [/quote]

I have heard something like that before but it is not really true. It is true among gay men, and educated older urban folks, but NOT true among teens of any social background. AND, there are TONS of uneducated people around the DC area. The big bias is that in this generation, the people with few partners tend tone rural and poorly educated, but I have a feeling that will change. HPV has been on the rise in all populations. Even elderly people. [/quote]

The populations you are pointing out as it being "not true" are excluded by the descriptor "educated."  Teens are not educated. Poor people are not educated. Rural people are not educated. It is true for educated and better off groups.

The rest of your post is how you feel.

Confirmation bias is a bitch, but that doesn't make your point true.

The key to preventing STDS is education and access to health care. Shaming does nothing. Abstience does nothing.  Limiting the number of partners does nothing. 
[/quote]

Also, all the health care in the world is NOT going to protect you from a new variant of HPV not covered by a current vaccine. All the antibiotics in the world won't help you with drug resistant strains of chlamydia and gonorrhea. 
You post is silly, you're saying that to reduce STDs in the US, first give everyone a college degree and more extensive sex ed, then ask them to run out there and have more sex? Crazy.
I am a doctor and the first way to prevent disease is to avoid it. Of course you have to know about the disease, so yes, more sex ed, but best to avoid it. If someone has MRSA, don't touch, but if you touch, wash. If someone has TB, stay away. And so on. 
BTW, to all the "lots of sex" people, not everyone is as "empowered" as you, many women can not say no to persistent men. Maybe that will be the next thread...Men, why do you persist when you know she would rather not? [/quote]

You may be a doctor, but you're obviously completely unfamiilar with the research on this.  Teaching absitence/reduction of partners doesn't prevent STDs or pregnancy or unwanted sex.  In fact, teaching abstinence/partner reduction is correlated with an INCREASE in STDs and unplanned pregnancies and unwanted sex. (Probably because people say they aren't going to have sex, dont plan for sex, and then have sex anyway.) Teaching people how to use condoms, get tested, use birth control, what consent is, and how to say "yes" or "no" without shame is associated with a descrease in STDs, unplanned pregnancies, and non-consensual sex.

[/quote]

Our culture is indeed pushing women toward YES. Because NO is uncool. Marriage is uncool. Trivializing sex is COOL. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics