Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 223 posts

Re: undefined

#171

Post by time_management »

sho wrote: post #159
time_management wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A woman who can't be satisfied by one man is not going to "settle" for the best guy out of N available. She's going to date one and fuck the others on the side. Just sounds like your whole strategy for winning the beautiful babies is to deny them the information they need to make an informed decision. No. I think women would she able to make informed decisions, but I also think they ought to be ladylike, resolute, an…

But you have no evidence for any of this. It's just your personal theory. To me at least, it sounds highly dubious. In my experience most people do not act like that. Casual sex does not necessarily make people emotionally unstable. Alpha males do not need to become rapists. Nothing you say makes sense. And what on earth do you mean by "ladylike"? They are ladies, by definition they act ladylike. You live in a very s…

Alpha male "badboys" become rapists because they feel entitled to whatever they see. Mike Tyson's behavior in 1991 is an example of this: the man was rich and famous, but did it anyway because he was arrogant.

A man who is successful in getting lots of casual sex stops seeing women as people, and starts seeing them as objects to be "acquired". At this point, bad behavior is likely to ensue.

They are ladies, by definition they act ladylike.

Lady is a proper subset of woman. Look the word up.

Re: undefined

#172

Post by jhancock »

time_management wrote: post #157
jhancock wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The fact is that, if a woman's had a lot of casual sex, she's developed a taste for variety and you have no hope of being her ideal man." No, this is not a fact. Perhaps the real problem here is you don't know a whole lot about women. I'm not trying to be rude to you. Most women, regardless of sexual history, DO NOT marry and stay with a man for the same reasons as a man marries and stays with a woman. Here is a fac…

You may be right-- you're older and more experienced than I am-- but I wouldn't be inclined to take the risk. All considered, I don't think I could marry a woman with a history of casual sex when there might be someone out there who is just as good and doesn't have that kind of history.

I hope you do find the right girl for you. Its very healthy to openly discuss these issues. You don't need to change how you feel about who the right girl is for you. In fact, you may not be able to change it. You just need to understand it.

My only advice to you is to not project this as an issue of morals. To be certain, there are times when what you would call "loose morals" come in to play and this is correlated to high sexual activity. But I have found this correlation does not extend to the majority of women. In fact, I have known women with low or no sexual activity who had questionable morals.

Re: undefined

#173

Post by time_management »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #163
time_management wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think I'm "afraid of women"? The fact is that, if a woman's had a lot of casual sex, she's developed a taste for variety and you have no hope of being her ideal man. When you're in bed with her, she's wishing you had Biff's abs, Jethro's penis girth, and the "roughness" of that club promoter whose name she's forgotten. So she's likely to cheat after a while in search of those traits, and even if she doesn'…

This is more of an indication of your insecurity than the actual opinions of people with multiple sexual partners. Sex isn't the Olympics. You're not always going to hook up with the best person and if you find a new person move on to them. Looks aren't everything. As Ben Franklin observed about having sex with older women "All cats are gray in the dark" I've been in relationships with girls who had multiple partners…

You'll never compare up to the best of 20 other guys -- and if you think you have to, you don't understand what having a relationship means.

This is where I have to remain idealistic. I'd much rather have no relationship at all than one in which the woman's constantly pining for some other guy.

In any case, I'd dump a girl on the spot if I found out she'd had 20 partners, so that particular example's not very relevant to me.

Re: undefined

#174

Post by sho »

time_management wrote: post #146
ahoyhere wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had good, consexual sex with another teenager. And unlike the other young people on the forum, I read a lot of scientific books, so I was able to counter such idiotic, voodoo-type teenaged beliefs such as "stretched out" vaginas.

You lost your virginity at 14, and you admit this in public? I'm shocked. I honestly don't know what to say to that. I hope that either you or Biff tipped the overnight guy at the gas station. Cleaning those restrooms is not a fun job.

You're just jealous.

Re: undefined

#175

Post by time_management »

bretthoerner wrote: post #168
time_management wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some things are unacceptable, though. Casual sex is one of them. Would you marry an ex-child molester? Assume he claimed to be reformed, and that he didn't do it anymore, and that it was something he only did when he was intoxicated and "caught up in the moment" (whatever that means). Obviously, the reasonable answer is no . Nobody wants to marry someone who's done something like that in his or her past. Experiences…

How the hell does consenting casual sex between adults relate to child molestation? Holy crap man, please seek lots and lots of therapy.

They're both deviant behaviors looked down upon by the mainstream for the permanent emotional harm they cause to the people involved.

Re: undefined

#176

Post by time_management »

sho wrote: post #170
time_management wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least I didn't fuck up my life in the first year of high school .

What the hell is wrong with you? Do you act like this in person? Shut the fuck up, asshole. I mean seriously, I don't want to talk like that on HN, but just look at what he's saying.

Such comments wouldn't be hurtful-- or "assholish" to use your phrase-- if she didn't know she had done something wrong.

Re: undefined

#177

Post by ahoyhere »

sho wrote: post #170
time_management wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least I didn't fuck up my life in the first year of high school .

What the hell is wrong with you? Do you act like this in person? Shut the fuck up, asshole. I mean seriously, I don't want to talk like that on HN, but just look at what he's saying.

When a man talks on a public forum about "quality women" and the horrors of casual sex, this is pretty much always where it ends up.

If, that is, you know how to poke them into revealing their true nature. Which I do.

Now you see what I meant originally. :)

Re: undefined

#178

Post by time_management »

sho wrote: post #174
time_management wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lost your virginity at 14, and you admit this in public? I'm shocked. I honestly don't know what to say to that. I hope that either you or Biff tipped the overnight guy at the gas station. Cleaning those restrooms is not a fun job.

You're just jealous.

Trust me that I don't think anyone is jealous of a woman who lost her virginity at 14.

Re: undefined

#179

Post by likpok »

yters wrote: post #150
michaelkeenan wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps, but some issues are more important than others, and moral character is a big one. A person's sexual history is evidence of that person's character (or lack thereof). It's the one area of life where people are easily pushed to do awful things to themselves and each other. How did you reach this strange conclusion? It seems to me that a person's sexual activities are completely orthogonal to their moral charac…

There's probably some reason based on objective reality that this has been the predominant belief in most cultures in most times. If you disagree, name such a belief that does not correspond to objective reality.

There was a commonly held belief that women were property.

This was held throughout large parts of the Western world, throughout history (Indeed, I have not heard of any sort of egalitarian society in the past, perhaps barring some special cases).

Re: undefined

#180

Post by DanielBMarkham »

time_management wrote: post #173
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is more of an indication of your insecurity than the actual opinions of people with multiple sexual partners. Sex isn't the Olympics. You're not always going to hook up with the best person and if you find a new person move on to them. Looks aren't everything. As Ben Franklin observed about having sex with older women "All cats are gray in the dark" I've been in relationships with girls who had multiple partners…

You'll never compare up to the best of 20 other guys -- and if you think you have to, you don't understand what having a relationship means. This is where I have to remain idealistic. I'd much rather have no relationship at all than one in which the woman's constantly pining for some other guy. In any case, I'd dump a girl on the spot if I found out she'd had 20 partners, so that particular example's not very relevan…

If a woman was pining for some other guy, you wouldn't want a relationship with her whether or not she was promiscuous.

You're conflating concepts that don't relate. I dated a girl once who was pining for some other guy and who wasn't promiscuous. I dumped her. Likewise I dated a girl who had had better sexual partners than me who did not pine for any of them. The relationship lasted a while until another unrelated event caused it to split.

I've dated girls and had sex with them and dated girls and didn't have sex. I've seen all of these combinations, and it really looks like you're taking shortcuts that don't always hold up.

You've got your cause and effect mixed up -- in my opinion only, of course.

The most risky relationship? One with someone who had never had sex or made any "moral" mistakes at all. Because everybody has to screw up sometime. I'd much rather have somebody who has sewn their oats and learned from it. To mangle an old phrase, if you're a kid and not promiscuous, you have a problem with your heart. If you're an old person and are promiscuous, you have a problem with your head.

Post reply on HN