Value of virginity and slut-shaming

[Condunum]

Then your problem is with yourself, and you need to deal with what seems to be major self-esteem issues.

So you take back the apparent charges of prejudice and sexism? Because I honestly do not recall discriminating against anybody.

Not until said issues are addressed, no.

[Transhuman Proteus]

Explain.

It can be agreed that a lot of guys view women as objects they can fuck all they want and toss around. Hence that attitude "yeah bro let's get laid tonight".

This is bad. I do not a woman to have this mentality and treat me in a similar fashion.

While I really can't speak as an authority, I don't think truly casual sexual relationships are the most common relationships out there. Most people tend to have had sex (or the majority of their sex) in the confines of relationships that likely last longer then the sexual act. Months, years, decades...

Now lots of people get into these romantic relationships because they like the person - plenty of times they get to a point of saying "I love you" and all that jazz. But emotions change over time and plenty of these relationships slowly cool and break ups occur (happens with marriage as well). A girl who says she's slept with 2 guys before you might well have simply had 2 serious relationships that didn't last - which is common for most people. It is far less common to find the people that marry their first boyfriend/girlfriend.

I think you should be safe from being sought by women only wanting sex from you, and if you do meet such women you are entitled to say "no, I don't want a one night stand". If you get into an actual relationship you should have no good reason to believe it is only because she wants to have sex with you as opposed to her liking you and wanting to be your partner. Even if she has had sex before there is no real reason to think "I'll just be another notch on her belt" as opposed to "maybe I'm her "the one"'. I'd suspect if it is a serious relationship she'll be thinking that, and you might be thinking "she's the one"

[Libertarian California]

So you take back the apparent charges of prejudice and sexism? Because I honestly do not recall discriminating against anybody.

No.

Mental illness doesn't excuse you from prejudice, unless you're claiming you're a paranoid schizophrenic.

You need to realize you're prejudiced and get over it, and if you can't, get some help getting over it.

Maybe actually talk to women and realize virginity has little to do with the personality of a woman.

I never stated that virginity is connected to a woman's personality...nor do I believe that.

If you read through my posts, you'd find that I said that I'd be the loser in having sex with a non-virgin because there's a chance the girl would not appreciate me.

If anything, I'm being "prejudiced" against myself.

[Dyakovo]

I never said non-virgins were tainted.

I wouldn't like to put my penis in a place whether other penises have been in before. It seems icky,

Intellectual honesty is a bit much to expect.

[Libertarian California]

I think the same applies to men as well.

Your point?

So if you were a women( or gay, I don't judge being bi myself) if you weren't the first to touch a guys cock then you wouldn't be special or important to him?

Depends on the context.

[Libertarian California]

I'm not sure how I'm being misogynistic...

"Non-virginal women have less value"

Not sure where you get that from.

[Dyakovo]

"Non-virginal women have less value"

Not sure where you get that from.

From what you've said.

[Libertarian California]

I never said non-virgins were tainted.

I wouldn't like to put my penis in a place whether other penises have been in before. It seems icky,

Seems icky. Does not mean that it is.

[Grenartia]

It's. Still. Wrong. And. You. Should. Be. Ashamed.

I'm unsure if libertarians know what shame is.

Being libertarians and all.

Its a problem inherent to the ideology of most libertarians, that they can't see that negative social attitudes can, in fact, be JUST AS BAD as directly harming others.

I'm unsure if libertarians know what shame is.

Being libertarians and all.

Why talk about shame? Morality isn't objective.

But ethics ARE. And shaming others is, by ANY sane definition, unethical.

You believe that I think women who aren't virgins are inferior.

I do not believe that.

You disagree with their life choices. That's a judgement on their character. The simple fact that you make a negative judgement on their character means you're lowering their standard in your eyes, whether you recognize it or not.

Good rule: Do not judge anyone for their actions unless it directly affects others in some way. Do not view anyone negatively if their actions do not negatively affect others in some way. If said actions are justifiable, refrain from judgement.

This.

No, it doesn't, but it makes it the objective morality.

The more people think something's right, the less likely they're going to think it's wrong, and the less likely opposing viewpoints are going to be tolerated.

We should make sure the objective, overriding morality are the ones that are actually logical and decent.

For example, not prizing virgins like they're mint-condition action figures or something.

It's a preference held by many men. It's not inherently bad. Is preferring blonds over brunette bad, too?

When it creates a set of social attitudes that creates a social stigma on those who are brunettes, yes, it is bad.

AH, but your attitude contributes to a social attitude that encourages others to harm women. Which is just as fucking bad.

How does me holding a particular belief encourage people I've never met before to harm women?

Do I really have to explain this simple fucking concept?

It influences people you know, which influences people they know, and so on and so forth. Its a chain reaction.

Was it really that hard to figure out?

[Libertarian California]

Not sure where you get that from.

From what you've said.

Give me a quote.

[Fabachor]

Everyone in Saudi Arabia agrees with the oppression of women, therefore it is an objective truth.

This isn't a tyranny by majority.

And I'm not shaming any "sluts". All I really stated was that I prefer virgins more.

No, it doesn't, but it makes it the objective morality.

The more people think something's right, the less likely they're going to think it's wrong, and the less likely opposing viewpoints are going to be tolerated.

We should make sure the objective, overriding morality are the ones that are actually logical and decent.

For example, not prizing virgins like they're mint-condition action figures or something.

But The Muslims of Saudi Arabia (or at lest the good one that have even the most basic since of their religion) know that women mustn't be oppressed they are honoured.

[The Silence of Night]

Seems icky. Does not mean that it is.

Unless you're actively thinking about the man fucking her, I doubt you'll have an issue.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

From what you've said.

Give me a quote.

I wouldn't like to put my penis in a place whether other penises have been in before. It seems icky,

[Desperate Measures]

It's scary when people don't have their personal decisions made for them by other people?

It's okay DM... I'll make your personal decisions for you.

I could get into that.

[The Rich Port]

No, it doesn't, but it makes it the objective morality.

The more people think something's right, the less likely they're going to think it's wrong, and the less likely opposing viewpoints are going to be tolerated.

We should make sure the objective, overriding morality are the ones that are actually logical and decent.

For example, not prizing virgins like they're mint-condition action figures or something.

But The Muslims of Saudi Arabia (or at lest the good one that have even the most basic since of their religion) know that women mustn't be oppressed they are honoured.

... They're honoured by hiding them away behind veils and walls and keeping them away from cars?

Next thing you're going to tell is that the cuffs African slaves wore were a fashion statement.

[Dyakovo]

From what you've said.

Give me a quote.

All you have to do is look back At Umbra's last post...

[Libertarian California]

Why talk about shame? Morality isn't objective.

But ethics ARE. And shaming others is, by ANY sane definition, unethical.

Good thing I'm not shaming anyone.

When it creates a set of social attitudes that creates a social stigma on those who are brunettes, yes, it is bad.

Good thing I don't create social attitudes.

:palm: Do I really have to explain this simple fucking concept?

It influences people you know, which influences people they know, and so on and so forth. Its a chain reaction.

Was it really that hard to figure out?

Good thing I've never talked about this with anybody outside of NSG, and therefore have influenced almost nobody.

[Dyakovo]

It's okay DM... I'll make your personal decisions for you.

I could get into that.

O.o
You're a glutten for punishment, aren't you?

[Transhuman Proteus]

No, it doesn't, but it makes it the objective morality.

The more people think something's right, the less likely they're going to think it's wrong, and the less likely opposing viewpoints are going to be tolerated.

We should make sure the objective, overriding morality are the ones that are actually logical and decent.

For example, not prizing virgins like they're mint-condition action figures or something.

But The Muslims of Saudi Arabia (or at lest the good one that have even the most basic since of their religion) know that women mustn't be oppressed they are honoured.

You've got a strange definition of honored.

Unless you mean by "good ones" the ones that respect women as their equals and don't try to control their lives, expressions or any of that.

[Libertarian California]

Give me a quote.

I wouldn't like to put my penis in a place whether other penises have been in before. It seems icky,

The thought of me having sex with men is icky. Does that mean I think people should be prevented from doing so? No.

[Desperate Measures]

I could get into that.

O.o
You're a glutten for punishment, aren't you?

You have no idea...

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

The thought of me having sex with men is icky. Does that mean I think people should be prevented from doing so? No.

The fact of the matter is you are calling non-virgin women tainted, whether or not you try to be coy about it.
Eww there was a penis there 2gross I couldn't ever be with you ;n;
The only way you could more blatantly say that you think non-virgin women are tainted is by literally saying just that. You're saying that you can't have meaningful relationships with them. Hence, you're saying they have less value as a human being.

[Grenartia]

But ethics ARE. And shaming others is, by ANY sane definition, unethical.

1. Good thing I'm not shaming anyone.

When it creates a set of social attitudes that creates a social stigma on those who are brunettes, yes, it is bad.

2. Good thing I don't create social attitudes.

:palm: Do I really have to explain this simple fucking concept?

It influences people you know, which influences people they know, and so on and so forth. Its a chain reaction.

Was it really that hard to figure out?

3. Good thing I've never talked about this with anybody outside of NSG, and therefore have influenced almost nobody.

1. But, you are, by contributing to the negative social attitudes.

2. But, whether or not you realize it, desire to, or even acknowledge it, whenever you express an opinion, you contribute to social attitudes, whether positive or negative (and the particular attitude you're contributing to is most decidedly negative).

3. And that's actually worse than saying it in real life, because total strangers lurk these threads, including many social conservatives. Who then go on to share those types of insights with others, thus contributing to the chain reaction.

[Individuality-ness]

O.o
You're a glutten for punishment, aren't you?

You have no idea...

What did I just walk into?

[The Silence of Night]

You have no idea...

What did I just walk into?

The best porno you've ever seen.