51–60 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Downvoted. Attempting to discredit someone by labelling them in this way is a distasteful and intellectually bankrupt way to argue. You play the "sexism card" like this far too often and it grows tiresome. No matter if what someone says is right or wrong, it should stand by itself and be judged on its merits regardless of the larger trends in their opinion or their posting history. And for what it's worth, I strongly…
I'm calling his comments sexist, and he's calling 85% of American women worthless. Who's the distasteful and intellectually bankrupt one here? So what you're saying is, that I'm a bad commentor because I used a label like "sexist" to apply to someone's publically, voluntarily, and vociferously stated opinions... ...but it's just fine to apply the label of "unmarriagable," "selfish," "crass," "immoral," "low quality,"…
The worst side effect of casual sex is its cultural effect. "Hookup culture" is extremely debased and elevates deviant behavior to accepted status, if not a social requirement in some circles (e.g. being inexperienced, even for moral reasons, is looked down upon by many women in New York). However, if the sex is entirely private, and doesn't involve the woman I end up marrying, then I don't know about it, it's none of my business, and I don't care.
What I don't like is living in a culture that engenders distrust and dislike between the sexes, and encourages dishonorable behavior in young people. It seems like a lot of young American men behave unscrupulously and rack up a number not because they want to do so, but because of social pressures; they know most women won't respect them if they aren't at least as experienced as they are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay then, your comment about this in the post was dishonest. Rather than explain that this is something you oppose and that's the reason you won't do it, you tried to explain it as something that "quality women" won't do (and then added an aside about how you're not really interested so that's not a big deal). I wonder if this attempt to rationalize is related to the reasons you're dissatisfied, and whether there ar…
It's both something that I oppose and something that I've observed most potentially marriage-worthy women oppose. I don't think casual sex is necessarily immoral, assuming that neither person intends to get married in the future. The main victims of consensual casual sex are future romantic partners of the participants, so if both participants have completely foresworn the possibility of having long-term relationship…
People make some bad choices, everyone has their flaws. If you are looking for a relationship that really makes you happy, find someone you love and deal with things you don't agree with.
What caused you to have this reverse "Prince charming" desire? No offense, but you seem to have an incredibly high exclusion rate for women. A lot of it seems to come from sexual oppression.
Lastly, what do you possibly mean by "The main victims of consensual casual sex are future romantic partners of the participants". You claim to not think it is immoral, but lay that judgement down like it is factual?
I've been in a friends-with-benefits situation for the better part of a year. I wasn't the one who suggested it, and I was initially reluctant, but it's been pretty awesome. This is very different from unattached casual sex, mind you. We're very good friends, we care about each other and so forth. But we've been able to keep this up long term with no romantic attachment at all. Technically we're both free to see othe…
but since we're both busy and pretty satisfied with the arrangement that hasn't happened I guess. I hate to break it to you, but you're in a relationship. Try sleeping with someone else, you'll see what I mean. :)
[edit] At any rate, the main point I was making was to keep the relationship low-key, if you don't want it to affect your work productivity.
Otherwise, most of the time, viewing a relationship as a hinderance on your productivity is viewing the relationship as an excuse. There really is no concrete solution to your problem because the problem is all in your head. Chances are, you just haven't found the right person to be in a relationship with. And yeah, the good ones are scarce...
I have been a single college hacker for quite a while. I've had my ass n' tits stage. I'm currently in an amazing relationship, see my girl almost every day, and still have plenty of time on my hands. She boosts my mental health in most ways I can think of: creativity, happiness, open-mindedness, etc... About to see how working full-time in the "real world" (vs student) will affect us.
Trust yourself and your judgement, and find yourself someone who compliments you. Otherwise, you're stuck with a mess in your head and seeking advice on HN... which will probably still leave you with a mess in your head ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm calling his comments sexist, and he's calling 85% of American women worthless. Who's the distasteful and intellectually bankrupt one here? So what you're saying is, that I'm a bad commentor because I used a label like "sexist" to apply to someone's publically, voluntarily, and vociferously stated opinions... ...but it's just fine to apply the label of "unmarriagable," "selfish," "crass," "immoral," "low quality,"…
To bring up the obvious, I can't pass judgment on a woman who's had casual sex if I never know about it. The worst side effect of casual sex is its cultural effect. "Hookup culture" is extremely debased and elevates deviant behavior to accepted status, if not a social requirement in some circles (e.g. being inexperienced, even for moral reasons, is looked down upon by many women in New York). However, if the sex is e…
Very interesting social theories you have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's both something that I oppose and something that I've observed most potentially marriage-worthy women oppose. I don't think casual sex is necessarily immoral, assuming that neither person intends to get married in the future. The main victims of consensual casual sex are future romantic partners of the participants, so if both participants have completely foresworn the possibility of having long-term relationship…
Try to stop drawing an imaginary line between women and women you could marry. Your concept of a woman needing to be 'pure' and fitting some set of standards you impose on them is a recipe for disaster. People make some bad choices, everyone has their flaws. If you are looking for a relationship that really makes you happy, find someone you love and deal with things you don't agree with. What caused you to have this…
You have got to be kidding me. He's imposing standards on women? Since when did being selective about people who you start relationships with become an act of imposing standards on other people?
When you selectively choose your co-founders, are you imposing your set of standards on them? Is it a recipe for disaster? When an interviewer for a popular company is more concerned about false positives than false negatives, is that a recipe for disaster?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but since we're both busy and pretty satisfied with the arrangement that hasn't happened I guess. I hate to break it to you, but you're in a relationship. Try sleeping with someone else, you'll see what I mean. :)
Well, that already happened. Kind of. Also, she's been on other dates, but didn't end up getting involved. We're both perfectly cool with it. Like I said, there is no emotional/romantic attachment. Why is this hard to believe? [edit] At any rate, the main point I was making was to keep the relationship low-key, if you don't want it to affect your work productivity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still racism if you think something good about an entire group of people based on skin color... ...and it's still sexism if you limit your "judgment" to only the 150 million women around you, rather than in other countries.
My adversity is toward a culture ( Sex and the City ) that encourages women to be selfish, oversexed, mean-spirited, uncultured, and unladylike, even when such behavior is usually against their own interests. I don't consider it sexism because I don't believe that there's any intrinsic reason to consider one gender "better" than the other. Unfortunately, though, there's a lot of rot in our popular culture with regard…
"Friends" also happened on TV, in New York, and i'd say it's got a decidedly different view of the world and relationships (and it was certainly at least as popular as Sex and the City, if not more so).
And the problem is not whether it's intrinsic or learned behavior. You are ascribing things that are questionably true in the extreme to people who you do not know, and can not know the disposition of.
Pop culture certainly has some influence on the real world, but i'm afraid you are either very shallow, or very naive if you're buying your world view from a television show (or in opposition to it).
==============================
Your concession that men could be equally unfit is rather hollow in the context of what you've said, particularly given the things you cite. Sex and the City in particular is a show with an entirely female main cast, and the show is about their lives. :p So i'm not all that mollified to be frank.