NATION

PASSWORD

Love, Dating, Sex, and Marriage

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Lyuboftopia
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 5
Founded: Mar 09, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Lyuboftopia » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:41 pm

Arkinesia wrote:
Tokos wrote:Monogamy prevents STDs. This is not rocket science.

Reduces the risk. Not prevents.


Exactly!

User avatar
Tokos
Senator
 
Posts: 4870
Founded: Oct 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:41 pm

Arkinesia wrote:Reduces the risk. Not prevents.


You know what the S stands for, aye? If two people are having sex with each other only they aren't spreading STDs. This is not opinion, it's logic.
The Confederal Fasces of Tokos

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.05

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:42 pm

Grainne Ni Malley wrote:
Norstal wrote:Not to mention monogamy doesn't mean your partner can't cheat on you.

Then that's not monogamy, is it?

Yes, well, what I meant was that your partner can cheat on you at anytime. But nevermind...
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Bottle
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14985
Founded: Dec 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:42 pm

Grainne Ni Malley wrote:
Norstal wrote:Not to mention monogamy doesn't mean your partner can't cheat on you.

Then that's not monogamy, is it?

Monogamy can refer merely to the marriage form in which each partner has only one spouse at a time. It doesn't always refer to having only one mate at a time, although it is often used that way.
"Until evolution happens like in pokemon I'll never accept your 'evidence'!" -Ifreann
"Well, excuuuuuuse me, feminist." -Ende

User avatar
Tokos
Senator
 
Posts: 4870
Founded: Oct 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:43 pm

Norstal wrote:Yes, well, what I meant was that your partner can cheat on you at anytime. But nevermind...


If you don't follow, say, British army rifle safety procedure correctly, then it's still reasonable to say that following that procedure does in fact prevent accidents. It says nothing about the procedure itself that following it incorrectly doesn't work!
The Confederal Fasces of Tokos

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.05

User avatar
Grainne Ni Malley
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7564
Founded: Oct 17, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Grainne Ni Malley » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:45 pm

Bottle wrote:
Grainne Ni Malley wrote:Then that's not monogamy, is it?

Monogamy can refer merely to the marriage form in which each partner has only one spouse at a time. It doesn't always refer to having only one mate at a time, although it is often used that way.

Well, if I got married under the guise of a monogamous relationship, discovered that my partner was cheating on me, and his response was, "But Honey, I'm only married to you!", we would have a serious problem. Perhaps a hospital bill.

But thanks for your persistence in enlightening me. :)
*insert boring personal information, political slant, witty quotes, and some fancy text color here*

Гроня Ни Маллий - In fond memory of Dyakovo. I will always remember you. Thank you for the laughs.

User avatar
Bottle
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14985
Founded: Dec 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:48 pm

Grainne Ni Malley wrote:
Bottle wrote:Monogamy can refer merely to the marriage form in which each partner has only one spouse at a time. It doesn't always refer to having only one mate at a time, although it is often used that way.

Well, if I got married under the guise of a monogamous relationship, discovered that my partner was cheating on me, and his response was, "But Honey, I'm only married to you!", we would have a serious problem. Perhaps a hospital bill.

But thanks for your persistence in enlightening me. :)

Well yeah, I mean, I'm on board with you there. Just saying, it's possible to be "monogamous" according to the definition of the term, and still have affairs. Some people choose that form for their marriages, with the full consent of both parties. Which, hey, whatever works for them...it's not for me, but I'm a pretty dull person all things considered. :)
"Until evolution happens like in pokemon I'll never accept your 'evidence'!" -Ifreann
"Well, excuuuuuuse me, feminist." -Ende

User avatar
Kobeanare
Minister
 
Posts: 2767
Founded: Nov 02, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Kobeanare » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:56 pm

Tokos wrote:
Arkinesia wrote:Reduces the risk. Not prevents.


You know what the S stands for, aye? If two people are having sex with each other only they aren't spreading STDs. This is not opinion, it's logic.

...you get an STI from someone who is carrying an STI, not from the number of people you have sex with. It's entirely possible to sleep with 100 different people and come out clean, and equally possible to sleep with one person and contract something.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:35 pm

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:It depends on the person and his/her convictions, really.

I advocate sex before marriage, so you know what it's like. However, I don't mind if others wish to wait to have sex after they marry.


I think it makes it out to be more than it is - and tends to encourage people to make bad decisions. If you're considering "yay, I might finally get laid" as one of your reasons for marriage, you're not making a great decision.
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:38 pm

Tokos wrote:
Lyuboftopia wrote:I hope you know that you can get an STD during marriage, you do know that, right?
It's not like a magical guy in the sky gives people who have sex not in marriage an STD and people who are not. It just does not work that way!


Monogamy prevents STDs. This is not rocket science.


It's not science at all.

STDs can be acquired in other ways. The 'S' in STD doesn't necessarily indicate that actual fucking is the only possible vector of infection.
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Bottle
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14985
Founded: Dec 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:39 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Tokos wrote:
Monogamy prevents STDs. This is not rocket science.


It's not science at all.

STDs can be acquired in other ways. The 'S' in STD doesn't necessarily indicate that actual fucking is the only possible vector of infection.

Not to mention that monogamy doesn't prevent STD transmission in any way...if you already have herpes and then you enter a monogamous relationship, it doesn't matter how faithful to your partner you are, you've still got herpes, and you still need to practice safe sex if you want to reduce your odds of passing herpes to your partner. If your partner gets herpes from you, it doesn't matter how monogamous they were, they still have herpes. Monogamy doesn't protect them. If they end their monogamous relationship with you and enter another monogamous relationship with somebody else, monogamy won't protect that person either.
Last edited by Bottle on Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Until evolution happens like in pokemon I'll never accept your 'evidence'!" -Ifreann
"Well, excuuuuuuse me, feminist." -Ende

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:42 pm

Bottle wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
It's not science at all.

STDs can be acquired in other ways. The 'S' in STD doesn't necessarily indicate that actual fucking is the only possible vector of infection.

Not to mention that monogamy doesn't prevent STD transmission in any way...if you already have herpes and then you enter a monogamous relationship, it doesn't matter how faithful to your partner you are, you've still got herpes, and you still need to practice safe sex if you want to reduce your odds of passing herpes to your partner. If your partner gets herpes from you, it doesn't matter how monogamous they were, they still have herpes. Monogamy doesn't protect them. If they end their monogamous relationship with you and enter another monogamous relationship with somebody else, monogamy won't protect that person either.


Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.

There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.
Last edited by Grave_n_idle on Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Bottle
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14985
Founded: Dec 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:47 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Bottle wrote:Not to mention that monogamy doesn't prevent STD transmission in any way...if you already have herpes and then you enter a monogamous relationship, it doesn't matter how faithful to your partner you are, you've still got herpes, and you still need to practice safe sex if you want to reduce your odds of passing herpes to your partner. If your partner gets herpes from you, it doesn't matter how monogamous they were, they still have herpes. Monogamy doesn't protect them. If they end their monogamous relationship with you and enter another monogamous relationship with somebody else, monogamy won't protect that person either.


Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.

There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.

Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):

HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies

This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.
"Until evolution happens like in pokemon I'll never accept your 'evidence'!" -Ifreann
"Well, excuuuuuuse me, feminist." -Ende

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:49 pm

Bottle wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.

There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.

Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):

HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies

This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.


I'm so out of the loop, I didn't even know you could get a doctorate in it.

*nods*
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41248
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fartsniffage » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:50 pm

Tokos wrote:
Norstal wrote:Yes, well, what I meant was that your partner can cheat on you at anytime. But nevermind...


If you don't follow, say, British army rifle safety procedure correctly, then it's still reasonable to say that following that procedure does in fact prevent accidents. It says nothing about the procedure itself that following it incorrectly doesn't work!


The A1 or A2 model? Because the A1 model was a bit dodgy whether you followed them or not...

User avatar
Bottle
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14985
Founded: Dec 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:51 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Bottle wrote:Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):

HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies

This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.


I'm so out of the loop, I didn't even know you could get a doctorate in it.

*nods*

I hold internet doctorates in fucking, psychoactive drug use, and Henry Rollins. /flex
"Until evolution happens like in pokemon I'll never accept your 'evidence'!" -Ifreann
"Well, excuuuuuuse me, feminist." -Ende

User avatar
Yuktova
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11882
Founded: Feb 09, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Yuktova » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:32 pm

Bottle wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.

There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.


That's what I'm saying and this idiot says "if your abstinent until marriage, then you won't get an STD!" What an idiot!
Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):

HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies

This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.
I'm Morrissey... Nice to meet you.
Goldsaver said: This is murder, not a romantic date!

User avatar
Rolamec
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6860
Founded: Dec 15, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Rolamec » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:38 pm

PrncssOfCuddles wrote:
Rolamec wrote:In the past, I was rather promiscuous. I won't lie. I had sex a lot. However recently I returned back to the Church of Rome, with my convictions stronger than ever. I have to say that though I'm rather indifferent about others who do it, I have restrained myself considerably, especially since the beginning of Lent (where I said I would not engage in sex for 40 days -very much a struggle). I personally think the intention of sex within marriage is to preserve its beauty, sex is after all a great thing. But for some people, a test drive is in order. For some a relationship is mostly physical rather than anything else (it was with me for the longest of times). But I am looking for something deeper, something more meaningful, a girlfriend whom I can eventually call my wife. A woman who shares the same views I do in regards to faith, sex, and procreation. Perhaps I'm being rather sentimental about it all, but I fear I have developed a rather puritanical view towards it. But unlike Dimmesdale, I know that I am weak so I will not condemn others. I hate hypocrites above everything else. My beliefs are my own business, and nobody else's.

Dimmesdale Condemned only himself. It was the town that condemned Hester


:palm: Head getting banged against the headboard too much? :p
Last edited by Rolamec on Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rolamec of New Earth
A Proud and Progressive Republican.
"Life is hard; it's harder if you're stupid." -John Wayne

Economic Left/Right: 4.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.05

User avatar
Tokos
Senator
 
Posts: 4870
Founded: Oct 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:42 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.

There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.


This is true; I should have thought of it given I'm of a demographic quite likely to get those kinds of diseases out of sexual contact. I guess it wouldn't be transmitted sexually in those cases though. Something like, say, chlamydia, how often do people get that from something other than sex?

But yeah point taken.
The Confederal Fasces of Tokos

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.05

User avatar
Yuktova
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11882
Founded: Feb 09, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Yuktova » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:38 pm

Tokos wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.

There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.


This is true; I should have thought of it given I'm of a demographic quite likely to get those kinds of diseases out of sexual contact. I guess it wouldn't be transmitted sexually in those cases though. Something like, say, chlamydia, how often do people get that from something other than sex?

But yeah point taken.


It would be strange if someone got Chlamydia from something other than sex but I agree. Point Taken
I'm Morrissey... Nice to meet you.
Goldsaver said: This is murder, not a romantic date!

User avatar
Corporate Cyborgs
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 11
Founded: Feb 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Corporate Cyborgs » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:53 pm

I say let people do what they want, even if I disapprove. Unless they're infringing on their partner's rights.
Economic Left/Right: 3.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.08

User avatar
Prussia-Denmark
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Nov 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Prussia-Denmark » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:57 pm

All I am going to say is this:

If sex in a relationship is bad then a good bit of the blame falls on the woman (read the rest before attacking me -> ) for not telling the guy how she likes it/or etc.
Males aren't psychic, which is something a lot of females I know don't seem to realize in this area of life until I point it out.

User avatar
Tokos
Senator
 
Posts: 4870
Founded: Oct 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:59 pm

Prussia-Denmark wrote:All I am going to say is this:

If sex in a relationship is bad then a good bit of the blame falls on the woman (read the rest before attacking me -> ) for not telling the guy how she likes it/or etc.
Males aren't psychic, which is something a lot of females I know don't seem to realize in this area of life until I point it out.


Women do love the psychic male, but bad sex doesn't just have to be from the woman's POV surely.
The Confederal Fasces of Tokos

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.05

User avatar
AETEN II
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12949
Founded: Aug 31, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby AETEN II » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:02 pm

lol seeing as I'm 16 years old an never had a girlfriend (I really don't 'love' anyone, never have really) and the fact every female in my age group that I have met in person I tend to be lacking in the smarts area. Well, so far, no sex, dates, crushes, nuthin'. Hopefully in college I'll meet someone who looks good and is smart.
"Quod Vult, Valde Valt"

Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the V.P. is such a V.I.P., shouldn't we keep the P.C. on the Q.T.? 'Cause if it leaks to the V.C. he could end up M.I.A., and then we'd all be put out in K.P.


Nationstatelandsville wrote:"Why'd the chicken cross the street?"

"Because your dad's a whore."

"...He died a week ago."

"Of syphilis, I bet."

Best Gif on the internet.

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 126465
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Libertarian Police State

Postby Ethel mermania » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:05 pm

Tokos wrote:
Arkinesia wrote:Reduces the risk. Not prevents.


You know what the S stands for, aye? If two people are having sex with each other only they aren't spreading STDs. This is not opinion, it's logic.



No absolutely incorrect!

There are diseases and conditions that can be acquired in one way and then transmitted sexually. AIDS for example. A monogamous Intravenous drug user can pass AIDS to their faithful spouse AND KILL THEM.
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

The most fundamental problem of politics is not the control of wickedness but the limitation of righteousness. 



http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], Ostroeuropa

Advertisement

Remove ads