Support NeoGAF

[Devolution]

Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either.
Albert Einstein

all you want the demographic is quite narrow in age, gender, race and interests.

 

[Trey]

Well its a good sample size of the male thought pattern.

I personally wouldn't say so.

 

[Liquidsnake]

all you want the demographic is quite narrow in age, gender, race and interests.

I guess I meant of a higher class of individuals in an American society. But of course I know that to each his own.

 

[FyreWulff]

A forum with limited registration meaning you have to have your own domain or paid service to even get approved, that attracts mostly geeks, nerds, and artists, with a extreme minority female population when the real world averages 50% female total population in each country.

Yeah, this sounds like a stellar cross section of society to base data off of. In a thread where a minority of the niche are even going to bother replying.

 

[THRILLH0]

You're not the only one posting in this thread. I've had a whopping two sexual partners in my life time so you assumed I was liberal about sex since I don't feel inclined to be a judgmental asshole about the sexual history of others. I don't have a problem with conservative attitudes towards sex if it's limited to their own choices. I've already made it clear that I have a problem with conservative attitudes that shame and assume the worst of others. It's obviously bred out of some insecurity because it's frankly not true on an individual level and anyone with some real experience in the world would come to that conclusion pretty quickly.

So when you said "stop projecting shit onto others" when replying directly to my post were you addressing me or these "other posters" because if it's the former, then you've failed to comprehend what I'm saying.

Merely hoping that you and your life partner share similar values on a range of issues is not the same as projecting.

Stating that a history of behaviour can be reflective of certain values and attitudes is not shaming or "assuming the worst".

If you want to continue being snarky and defensive, handle your shit directly instead of wantonly labelling a bunch of indiscriminate people insecure assholes.

 

[User 100115]

So when you said "stop projecting shit onto others" when replying directly to my post were you addressing me or these "other posters" because if it's the former, then you've failed to comprehend what I'm saying.

Merely hoping that you and your life partner share similar values on a range of issues is not the same as projecting.

Stating that a history of behaviour can be reflective of certain values and attitudes is not shaming or "assuming the worst".

If you want to continue being snarky and defensive, handle your shit directly instead of wantonly labelling a bunch of indiscriminate people insecure assholes.

I found out several years after we were married that my husband used to be a drug dealer, and was in fact, still dealing drugs when we started dating.

Just because he had a history of it doesn't mean he is going to do it again.

 

[THRILLH0]

I found out several years after we were married that my husband used to be a drug dealer, and was in fact, still dealing drugs when we started dating.

Just because he had a history of it doesn't mean he is going to do it again.

Ok. Let's say that when you started dating you had discussions about a mutual condemnation of drugs only to find out that he didn't actually share your values as strongly as he'd suggested.

I'm not suggesting it should be any cause for deep heartache but was your reaction just "Fuck it, YOLO!" when you found out like people in this thread are suggesting it should be when finding out something about a partner's past?

 

[Narolf]

I'm not suggesting it should be any cause for deep heartache but was your reaction just "Fuck it, YOLO!" when you found out like people in this thread are suggesting it should be when finding out something about a partner's past?

Having antecedents of drug-dealing is better than fucking while in college? I don't get it. :\

 

[hypostasis]

Why aren't people attracted to short people, tall people, dark people, light people, skinny people, fat people, big breasts, little breasts, big dicks, little dicks, full asses, petite asses ... so on and so on. Pointing out that attraction is often emotional instead of logical isn't really a groundbreaking observation.

The insight isn't that attraction isn't based upon pure logic and reason; we all know that. The insight is that many people who are asserting things about the specific sexual behavior in question are doing so on the basis of their emotions rather than having been led to the view by any argument (in the logical sense of the word).

Knowing this can simplify the discussion in a variety of ways. For example, it can allow us to make better sense of what precisely is being asserted. If someone claims that "having 20 partners over the course of one's college career is disgusting" and yet fails to offer a single reason or argument in favor of the view over the course of the discussion, we may justifiably suppose that they are simply expressing their feelings rather than the conclusion of an argument, and thus may translate their claim into something like, "I feel that having had 20 partners during college is disgusting." To the extent that both sides are doing this, there isn't any actual disagreement in the thread (as odd as that may seem): no single statement is being fought over because each side is asserting a statement about their own feelings ("I feel x" vs. "I feel y"), assertions which are mutually compatible and almost certainly true.

This also makes the thread more entertaining because one realizes all the indignation and back and forth is occurring in a context where literally nothing is in disagreement.

 

[Bleepey]

I don't think 20 is the norm, I just think 4 over the course of a life time is too low. There's nothing bad about low or high, you're right, I don't really care. What I do find despicable however is the shaming.




Because you shouldn't really care and yet here you are calling those people disgusting. And even going so far as to say:



Are you a robot? Do you have sex with one? All matter of relationships take some kind of investment. Welcome to humanity.

I am curious would you shame a man who frequently visited prostitutes?

 

[twinfin]

Why aren't people attracted to short people, tall people, dark people, light people, skinny people, fat people, big breasts, little breasts, big dicks, little dicks, full asses, petite asses ... so on and so on. Pointing out that attraction is often emotional instead of logical isn't really a groundbreaking observation.

Pretty much this... Sexual history is just one element of our personal story, and it is silly to pretend that personal stories don't have meaning. They're the culmination of every action & decision we've ever taken.

No one has any right to take your story away from you, or shame you for it. The great thing is that everyone else has a story too, complete with amazing parts & fucked up parts, so it's easy for us to understand & empathise with others. That's life-- we're all in the same boat & have all done stuff we later regret.

But if your story really matters to someone, whether positively or negatively-- then that person's feelings are real. And you, as a helpless 3rd party observer, can never really, truly understand it.

 

[Byakuya769]

The insight isn't that attraction isn't based upon pure logic and reason; we all know that. The insight is that many people who are asserting things about the specific sexual behavior in question are doing so on the basis of their emotions rather than having been led to the view by any argument (in the logical sense of the word).

Knowing this can simplify the discussion in a variety of ways. For example, it can allow us to make better sense of what precisely is being asserted. If someone claims that "having 20 partners over the course of one's college career is disgusting" and yet fails to offer a single reason or argument in favor of the view over the course of the discussion, we may justifiably suppose that they are simply expressing their feelings rather than the conclusion of an argument, and thus may translate their claim into something like, "I feel that having had 20 partners during college is disgusting." To the extent that both sides are doing this, there isn't any actual disagreement in the thread (as odd as that may seem): no single statement is being fought over because each side is asserting a statement about their own feelings ("I feel x" vs. "I feel y"), assertions which are mutually compatible and almost certainly true.

This also makes the thread more entertaining because one realizes all the indignation and back and forth is occurring in a context where literally nothing is in disagreement.

That's my point exactly. Besides shaming and double standards, people are being tasked to explain (now with statistics) on what basis they are attracted to different shared principles about sexual habits. And that's just silly.

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

This also makes the thread more entertaining because one realizes all the indignation and back and forth is occurring in a context where literally nothing is in disagreement.

Broadly, I think the vehemence with which some of us say "there's nothing inherently wrong with sleeping with twenty people in four years" stems from a belief that there is still a great deal of sexism in our societies; in this case a double standard that celebrates large numbers of partners in men but decries it in women.

 

[Omegasquash]

Broadly, I think the vehemence with which some of us say "there's nothing inherently wrong with sleeping with twenty people in four years" stems from a belief that there is still a great deal of sexism in our societies; in this case a double standard that celebrates large numbers of partners in men but decries it in women.

That's possible, but when shown an example of that sexism, in this thread, we're going to speak up and out about it. For every person that is revolted by someone having sex with people, it's empowering for those being shamed (whether direct or indirect) to have more than that saying it's perfectly normal.

And it's not a belief that there's a great deal of sexism. There IS a great deal of sexism in our society.

 

[hypostasis]

That's my point exactly. Besides shaming and double standards, people are being tasked to explain (now with statistics) on what basis they are attracted to different shared principles about sexual habits. And that's just silly.

Whether such demands are reasonable depends on what the given individual is asserting. As I indicate in my previous post, if it's just an expression of emotion then you and I agree that there is no substantiating to be done. On the other hand, in this context if the person is asserting something about how others should behave (e.g., 'promiscuity is ill-advised') regardless of their feelings then there is a need to substantiate the claim with an argument (which will in all probability utilize data of some sort).

That said, this might not be particularly relevant given that almost everyone seems to be expressing their feelings rather than arguing for specific modes of behavior. Maybe there is an implicit prescription not to be promiscuous on the part of the people who feel such promiscuity is "gross" (or whatever), but I'm not certain of this. If the prescription is there then it needs to be make explicit and defended.

 

[pikablu]

Well you'd think shed likely give you any sexual pleasures you desired. Or am I totally wrong to think that?

 

[Omegasquash]

It's not personal, there is no "personal" connection. I'm not going to walk up to someone smoking and tell them they are disgusting, what's the fucking point?

I don't even see why this matters.

Jesus Christ. It is personal because you look down on that person because of their personal actions and choices that they've made with consenting adults. You're making a judgment against them.

They should have the opportunity to not associate with you. Kind of like how I choose not to associate with people that look down on others because of who they are/what they do. Like racists, bigots, abusers and fundamental Christians. They're not all the same. I just choose to not associate with them and I don't hide it.

That's at least being fair.

But whatever, it's a day later and I don't think it's worth getting into again.

 

[grumble]

Jesus Christ. It is personal because you look down on that person because of their personal actions and choices that they've made with consenting adults. You're making a judgment against them.

They should have the opportunity to not associate with you. Kind of like how I choose not to associate with people that look down on others because of who they are/what they do. Like racists, bigots, abusers and fundamental Christians. They're not all the same. I just choose to not associate with them and I don't hide it.

That's at least being fair.

But whatever, it's a day later and I don't think it's worth getting into again.

No one likes every single thing about someone else. There is always some degree of judgment involved. Operating in a society and maintaing a relationship of any kind involves taking people as the sum of their parts (other than true dealbreakers), and not shutting them out as soon as you find a subjective imperfection.

 

[Omegasquash]

At the end of the day, it all comes down to whether you want to draw the line between sex and love, as Sorian pointed it out earlier in the thread. In retrospect, I should have worded my problematic this way: would you mind your lover having sex-friends while you remain dedicated to them (your lover of course, not their sex-friends, lol)?

I for one wouldn't mind it and remain exclusive. Sex is just meant to give birth to me. That's all.

For some that line exists, and for others it doesn't. I do want to share sex exclusively with my lover, and there's a vacuum if ever sex all of a sudden dries up. It's happened in the past. Now, if sex dried up and she was boinking other people, I'd take issue for a few reasons, primarily because it's something we agreed on and that would be breaking the agreement. That agreement can be broken in other ways, so there's always some kind of wiggle room. I.E. if I'm a piece of shit that doesn't care about her for anything else than sex and she isn't getting her needs met and doesn't WANT to have sex with me because she doesn't feel the connection.

Personally, I think that sex is something that two (or more) people can share. As long as there's a clear understanding between them. I'm married, so I only want to share that with my wife. It's my understanding that she wants to share that with me. Sex is important enough to me that if she wanted to have sex with other people as a practice, I would end the marriage. If she had an affair, we could try to work through it and I'm sure that we could, and if she fucked up one night I'd just ask that she get tested, talk through a few things and move on.

No one likes every single thing about someone else. There is always some degree of judgment involved. Operating in a society and maintaing a relationship of any kind involves taking people as the sum of their parts (other than true dealbreakers), and not shutting them out as soon as you find a subjective imperfection.

Subjective imperfection is pretty mild, considering that the words "disgusting" and "revolting" were used. Phosphor took accountability for that, at least. And the fact that it's a negative is important to note. Why not just know that the person is DTF? Why is there a negative at all? Why is the person being judged? That's (I think) the meat of the disagreement.

 

[Dark Octave]

When you get into a new relationship and it matters to you, never be afraid to ask. That way, provided she told you the truth, there are no surprises 20 years later.

 

[jehuty]

A little off topic but I truly believe that the amount of sexual partners one has had is almost entirely dependent on oppurtunity. People like to act like in prior decades and centuries that people weren't banging like rabbits. Problem is, that this is almost entirely not true. From the Greek and Roman orgies, to some religions making it okay for a dude to have tons of wives, its always been known that given the oppurtunity most people will bang anything in sight with reckless abandon. Hence why in college some students tend to bang a lot. Tons of parties makes it relatively easy to have random hook ups. I see nothing wrong with it. If your feelings get hurt because after 20 years of marriage you find out you have tons of eskimo brothers then you need to push those fragile emotions out the way and man up.

 

[Byakuya769]

A little off topic but I truly believe that the amount of sexual partners one has had is almost entirely dependent on oppurtunity. People like to act like in prior decades and centuries that people weren't banging like rabbits. Problem is, that this is almost entirely not true. From the Greek and Roman orgies, to some religions making it okay for a dude to have tons of wives, its always been known that given the oppurtunity most people will bang anything in sight with reckless abandon. Hence why in college some students tend to bang a lot. Tons of parties makes it relatively easy to have random hook ups. I see nothing wrong with it. If your feelings get hurt because after 20 years of marriage you find out you have tons of eskimo brothers then you need to push those fragile emotions out the way and man up.

Because people don't have different sex drives or the ability to make conscious decisions about sex. Ok.

 

[BeEatNU]

Jesus Christ at this thread. How can some people not accept the fact that people are human and like to have sex. So long as it's consensual and no ones getting hurt, you, nor should anyone else really give a fuck.

exactly.

people got this 1 side mentality that women can't like sex like men, that they have to be conservative about their appetite. :/

Well you'd think shed likely give you any sexual pleasures you desired. Or am I totally wrong to think that?

that's wrong too, going back that you are pretty much calling her a slut :/

just because a person likes sex doesnt mean they open to anal or orgy's