Gay marriages....now what about siblings parents or animals?

[Individuality-ness]

I'd rather not have the word "slut" be used to shame anyone at all. Gender neutral please!

Gender neutral is overrated. Just add the prefix "man-" to it. Does the job well enough.

No, because that still implies that slut is inherently feminine, shaming women, and that you have to do something special to make it refer to a man. If you must shame a cheating partner, call them a cheater, not a slut or any derivatives of the word slut. Period.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

No, it doesn't. Not unless the couple involved has agreed on being monogamous.

In most American culture, the one we are, for the most part, dealing with here, saying you are in a relationship with someone implies it is monogamous. That is why Facebook has different options for "in a relationship" and "in an open relationship".

Ok, I just will point out that you're using, as an example to sustain your point, Facebook, which is social media.

Relationships are what those involved make of them. You can very well say you're in a relationship, in FB (to use your *gods* example), and be in an open relationship with more than 2 people.

[Person012345]

Because people always do what they say they're gonna do, amirite?

If I got a dollar for every time I said I was going to do something and I didn't, I'd be rich.

Well, by your own admission, Individuality-ness, you're a lying, thieving, adulterer at heart and you've got to face God on Judgment Day.

Or something.

[Llamalandia]

It's as if he thinks the wedding rings are welded on their fingers or something.

Some people do wear 24/7 though I admit most take them off at least at night. But that another thing nobody wears them as much because guess what people don't consider marriage that big of a deal anymore which I believe is wrong and messed up.

[Thrice Crownlands]

I don't know what sort of planet you're living on, but my media and popular opinion rarely depict it as such.

I live on Earth and the sky is blue. What about you?

Asking somebody to face the consequences of their actions? Oh, I'm such bad person.

Then call them a cheater, not a slut.

If one acts like a slut with the intent of acting like a slut (or a player, or a horn-dog, or a jerk, ect.), one should be expected to be labeled as such.

Again, I might as well requote myself.

Because the word "slut" is almost always used to describe a sexually active woman, implying that women shouldn't be sexually active. This feeds into the Madonna/whore binary and is a part of patriarchy.

2. Well, if she actually does consent and go activly goes along with it (Instead of, oh, I don't know, not doing so), then yes, she deserves the title of slut because she acted like one.

Presuming that she even knew that her partner was married in the first place, she would be a cheater. Not a slut.

The word slut shames sexually active women, stop using that term.

I don't see why she should get a special excuse simply because she's a woman.

I'm asking you not to use a word that has negative connotations for women. Why is that so hard to understand?

If she doesn't consent, and she's forced into it... well, then, she's lawded with public and personal support.

You do not live on planet Earth my dear.

When was the last time you saw a rape victeam who wasen't a prostitute get sent to prison? Nobody, because you're almost never blamed for what happens to you that't outside of your control; you're blamed for what you choose to do.

Ha. Ha. Hahahahahaha. No.

1. No one ever deserves to be raped, no matter how the person's dressed, how the person acts, what the person does for a living, how much did that person have to drink, etc. Implying otherwise is rape culture, which is part of patriarchy.
2. You've never heard of victim-blaming then?
3. Or rape culture for that matter?

3. Well... she gets rejected for sex, and then actively pushes for it and exclaims the demand loudly in a public place. It wasn't in the best form, certainly, but its not woman-hating. Its just taking a "Looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, acts like a duck" approch to titling.

He went out and described her as a NYMPHO. You know, sex addict? You know, shaming women for wanting to have sex?

Also, if I might recall, in the opposing scenario presented, the woman never specifically brought up sex. The man did. Am I to interpret that as you calling all men horn-dogs, and thus you being man-hater? No, I would not, because I understand that, for the sake of these scenario's to work, somebody has to be the "bad party". If both were good parties, this wouldn't even happen. Its a matter of using commonly-used phrases and setting up a scenario without walking on the eggshells of political correctness; not active hatred.

The scenario would never happen anyway; it's completely unrealistic.

"Nympho" isn't commonly used in place of "horny", by the way. It's only used to shame women for being sexually active. Patriarchy.

The word slut shames sexually OVERACTIVE women, not simply sexually active ones. I'm a free person, and I will use such words if a please. You seem to be throwing the word Patriarchy around quite a bit; its shames men who happen to have some level of power. If you hold to your own standards, please cease using it.

I do live on planet earth; just not... I can't think of a neutral term to put here, since there is none. So I'll use neo-feminist la-la land where it is never the woman's fault, men have some kind of evil hive-mind, and are all out to get you, all the ills of the world can be blamed on the back of "Patriarchy" (You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means). Victim blaming does happen to a certain extent... to ALL victims, regardless of gender. In domestic assault cases, the man is blamed for being a "pussy" and not standing up for himself. In fraud cases, the victim is blamed for not being smarter. In certain rare cases, the victim even receives the majority of the blame. (Say, a small child runs out onto the street in front of car... in that case the driver receives most of blame even if the accident wasn't their fault.) It is not, however, sexually-divided as you claim it to be. I never said anybody deserves to be raped; I'm saying if she bloody consents (And you can not rape somebody who consents), then she shares the moral blame for her activity if society provides one. Again, I've yet to see any popular media outlet sneer at rape victims, though they will readily do so towards the rapist (With good reason). Only a few, somewhat more vocal then the norm, people suggest otherwise. I've heard of rape culture... but to be blunt, I'd assert its a myth. There is not some quiet acceptance of rape; rapists go to jail for a LONG time, are heavily frowned upon by society, ect. Even if 1/4 women are raped (Which is assuming the absurd statistic that only 1/10th of rapes are reported... and all of those were actually rape... and in that case I question why the raped women, in a society where rape is heavily punished crime and you can easily have the criminals DNA, leading to a known identity, don't report it.), that still means, at the VERY MOST, only 1/4 of men are rapists; obviously not true, since rape is a common serial crime. That's hardly a majority, and so I fail to see why I should be stained with that brush simply because I happen to share a specific chromosome with the guy who did it. That's the very definition of sexism.

Now, if you want to judge men more for being sexually active, then go right ahead. You have the right to do so. Nothing is stopping you.

I'm not saying he had the best choice in words. I'm not saying it couldn't have possibly been tailored more specifically to political correctness. However, I find the speed at which everybody leaped to the conclusion "Women Hater" merely because he used a not-all-that-uncommon term to be failure witch-hunty.

Now, I have to go to bed, as it is 1:30 in the morning and I have places to be in the morning. I suggest this thread return to its regularly scheduled programming.

[The Rich Port]

It's as if he thinks the wedding rings are welded on their fingers or something.

Or screwed on.

To be fair, nuts would make cool wedding rings for robots.

[Anachronous Rex]

No. They don't.

For many reasons not the least of which being that it is not always obvious if someone is married. I ran into this problem recently, in fact (my dreams of dating an Ethiopian goddess were horribly dashed.) But also because it is possible to say "no." If they continue after you say no, that's sexual harassment.

And all people have a right and reasonable expectation to not being sexually harassed.

Yes I agree all people have a right to be free from harassment (which is repeated and unreasonable attempts not just one 'no') however married people have traditionally been seen as totally off limits, not even to be asked once (except perhaps in error).

Yeah, well, some people have open marriages. Some people have agreements as to seeing other people. Some people are married in name only.

It doesn't hurt anyone to ask.

[Individuality-ness]

If I got a dollar for every time I said I was going to do something and I didn't, I'd be rich.

Well, by your own admission, Individuality-ness, you're a lying, thieving, adulterer at heart and you've got to face God on Judgment Day.

Or something.

I was already destined for Hell, I'm not scared.

(By the way, call me Indi, it's a lot easier on the fingers.)

[Hathradic States]

1. Not in my experience, but that may just be my circle of friends, there.
2. That's when you break it off. But sleeping around because the relationship is shitty, instead of, you know, talking about it with your partner? No, not good. Far from it.

1. My circle of friends doesn't tend to shame anyone for their sexual behaviour. In the broader culture, this is what happens though.
2. No. The relationship made me miserable. The fact that this man berated me, accused me of cheating on him (I didn't) and made me feel like I couldn't do any better than him over the course of a few years hurt me and caused me distress. When I finally scraped together enough self-respect to dump his ass, I felt awesome.

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.
2. Steps of what happens: 1. Relationship goes shitty. 2. Talk it out. 3a. If talking works, great. 3b. If it doesn't, enjoy the single life for a bit.

[The Rich Port]

Well, by your own admission, Individuality-ness, you're a lying, thieving, adulterer at heart and you've got to face God on Judgment Day.

Or something.

I was already destined for Hell, I'm not scared.

(By the way, call me Indi, it's a lot easier on the fingers.)

You will make a fine bride for Teh Debul.

I hear he likes long walks on the magma beach.

[Llamalandia]

Oh right, I'll just go edit the slang of the English language, shall I? Let me find the config file.

Just remember to keep the parenthesis in order.

I screwed that up once a while back while touring Babylon... You wouldn't believe the trouble it caused.

Isn't that what this whole thread was originally about arbitrarily changing the definition of marriage to include things like incest and animals ?

[Person012345]

Well, by your own admission, Individuality-ness, you're a lying, thieving, adulterer at heart and you've got to face God on Judgment Day.

Or something.

I was already destined for Hell, I'm not scared.

(By the way, call me Indi, it's a lot easier on the fingers.)

Well, I just copy-pasted the rest of it (since it's a parody of ray comfort's brand of insanity), but indi definitely fits the flow of the sentence better, so that works.

[Anachronous Rex]

I live on Earth and the sky is blue. What about you?


Then call them a cheater, not a slut.


Again, I might as well requote myself.




Presuming that she even knew that her partner was married in the first place, she would be a cheater. Not a slut.

The word slut shames sexually active women, stop using that term.


I'm asking you not to use a word that has negative connotations for women. Why is that so hard to understand?


You do not live on planet Earth my dear.


Ha. Ha. Hahahahahaha. No.

1. No one ever deserves to be raped, no matter how the person's dressed, how the person acts, what the person does for a living, how much did that person have to drink, etc. Implying otherwise is rape culture, which is part of patriarchy.
2. You've never heard of victim-blaming then?
3. Or rape culture for that matter?


He went out and described her as a NYMPHO. You know, sex addict? You know, shaming women for wanting to have sex?


The scenario would never happen anyway; it's completely unrealistic.

"Nympho" isn't commonly used in place of "horny", by the way. It's only used to shame women for being sexually active. Patriarchy.

The word slut shames sexually OVERACTIVE women, not simply sexually active ones. I'm a free person, and I will use such words if a please. You seem to be throwing the word Patriarchy around quite a bit; its shames men who happen to have some level of power. If you hold to your own standards, please cease using it.

I do live on planet earth; just not... I can't think of a neutral term to put here, since there is none. So I'll use neo-feminist la-la land where it is never the woman's fault, men have some kind of evil hive-mind, and are all out to get you, all the ills of the world can be blamed on the back of "Patriarchy" (You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means). Victim blaming does happen to a certain extent... to ALL victims, regardless of gender. In domestic assault cases, the man is blamed for being a "pussy" and not standing up for himself. In fraud cases, the victim is blamed for not being smarter. In certain rare cases, the victim even receives the majority of the blame. (Say, a small child runs out onto the street in front of car... in that case the driver receives most of blame even if the accident wasn't their fault.) It is not, however, sexually-divided as you claim it to be. I never said anybody deserves to be raped; I'm saying if she bloody consents (And you can not rape somebody who consents), then she shares the moral blame for her activity if society provides one. Again, I've yet to see any popular media outlet sneer at rape victims, though they will readily do so towards the rapist (With good reason). Only a few, somewhat more vocal then the norm, people suggest otherwise. I've heard of rape culture... but to be blunt, I'd assert its a myth. There is not some quiet acceptance of rape; rapists go to jail for a LONG time, are heavily frowned upon by society, ect. Even if 1/4 women are raped (Which is assuming the absurd statistic that only 1/10th of rapes are reported... and all of those were actually rape... and in that case I question why the raped women, in a society where rape is heavily punished crime and you can easily have the criminals DNA, leading to a known identity, don't report it.), that still means, at the VERY MOST, only 1/4 of men are rapists; obviously not true, since rape is a common serial crime. That's hardly a majority, and so I fail to see why I should be stained with that brush simply because I happen to share a specific chromosome with the guy who did it. That's the very definition of sexism.

Now, if you want to judge men more for being sexually active, then go right ahead. You have the right to do so. Nothing is stopping you.

I'm not saying he had the best choice in words. I'm not saying it couldn't have possibly been tailored more specifically to political correctness. However, I find the speed at which everybody leaped to the conclusion "Women Hater" merely because he used a not-all-that-uncommon term to be failure witch-hunty.

Now, I have to go to bed, as it is 1:30 in the morning and I have places to be in the morning. I suggest this thread return to its regularly scheduled programming.

What the hell?

I don't even...

[Ovisterra]

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.

Oh please. Boys are applauded for hooking up with everything that breaths.

[Hathradic States]

In most American culture, the one we are, for the most part, dealing with here, saying you are in a relationship with someone implies it is monogamous. That is why Facebook has different options for "in a relationship" and "in an open relationship".

Ok, I just will point out that you're using, as an example to sustain your point, Facebook, which is social media.

Relationships are what those involved make of them. You can very well say you're in a relationship, in FB (to use your *gods* example), and be in an open relationship with more than 2 people.

Yeah...I may be a little drunk. Or more than a little.

Um..."*gods* example"? o.O And I was speaking with the social implications of it, which do matter, Nana. Most people, maybe not you, maybe not everybody, but most people, when there hear "Hey, I'm in a relationship with this person", automatically assume it is monogamous. Likewise, when most people say "they are in a relationship" they are imply monogamy.

[Llamalandia]

1. My circle of friends doesn't tend to shame anyone for their sexual behaviour. In the broader culture, this is what happens though.
2. No. The relationship made me miserable. The fact that this man berated me, accused me of cheating on him (I didn't) and made me feel like I couldn't do any better than him over the course of a few years hurt me and caused me distress. When I finally scraped together enough self-respect to dump his ass, I felt awesome.

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.
2. Steps of what happens: 1. Relationship goes shitty. 2. Talk it out. 3a. If talking works, great. 3b. If it doesn't, enjoy the single life for a bit.

2. Unless your married married in which case return to step 2. and repeat.

[Anachronous Rex]

Just remember to keep the parenthesis in order.

I screwed that up once a while back while touring Babylon... You wouldn't believe the trouble it caused.

Isn't that what this whole thread was originally about arbitrarily changing the definition of marriage to include things like incest and animals ?

You seem to have either not gotten the joke, or are very ignorant regarding one of two subjects, and I don't know which one...

Which makes it difficult to respond to you.

[The Rich Port]

Just remember to keep the parenthesis in order.

I screwed that up once a while back while touring Babylon... You wouldn't believe the trouble it caused.

Isn't that what this whole thread was originally about arbitrarily changing the definition of marriage to include things like incest and animals ?

Yeah, but, in case you hadn't heard... OP is a hag.

Besides, I haven't heard of any focus groups wanting to bone animals, so we're safe on that front.

Besides Sequel, some guys's sisters are hot. I could understand them wanting some from them.

[Occupied Deutschland]

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.

Oh please. Boys are applauded for hooking up with everything that breaths.

Not EVERYTHING.

[The Rich Port]

Oh please. Boys are applauded for hooking up with everything that breaths.

Not EVERYTHING.

To be fair, pedophiles probably encourage each other the same way frat boys do after scoring some serious tail.

[Ovisterra]

Oh please. Boys are applauded for hooking up with everything that breaths.

Not EVERYTHING.

Everything that breathes, is human, and has a vagina, in the case of heterosexual boys. Happy?

[Hathradic States]

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.

Oh please. Boys are applauded for hooking up with everything that breaths.

Could you be more sexist? Some guys, probably. Just like how some girls applaude eachother when they sleep around. My group of friends? Hell no. If you weren't dating the person, you got a talking to from hell.

[Llamalandia]

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.

Oh please. Boys are applauded for hooking up with everything that breaths.

Used to be too true not so much anymore. Times change marriages shouldn't. Not a bad slogan, eh?

[Pillea]

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.
2. Steps of what happens: 1. Relationship goes shitty. 2. Talk it out. 3a. If talking works, great. 3b. If it doesn't, enjoy the single life for a bit.

2. Unless your married married in which case return to step 2. and repeat.

You still haven't explained why divorce should be hard to do/is bad.

[Hathradic States]

1. We give someone shit, no matter their gender. There is, normally, no heat to the words, but the shaming is still there.
2. Steps of what happens: 1. Relationship goes shitty. 2. Talk it out. 3a. If talking works, great. 3b. If it doesn't, enjoy the single life for a bit.

2. Unless your married married in which case return to step 2. and repeat.

Step 3c. Divorce.