The reason why promiscuity is bad is this: when a woman is promiscuous she gains a reputation for being such. Men view her as promiscuous and begin to desire her sexually (if she is attractive or known for being good in bed). Thus, she has degraded herself and turned herself into a sexual object because now men primarily view her sexually; she is an object of their sexual desire and primarily a means of fulfilling their lusts. This not the men's fault since they are naturally inclined to have shallow lustful desires. Essentially, promiscuity serves as a marker of a sexual object for men looking for quick or easy gratification.
When a man is promiscuous he degrades himself to a slave to his sexual desires. Rather than pursuing meaningful endeavours, he devotes his time to chasing women and turns himself into a sexual animal. This also applies for women.
This is not to say that all sex is bad but sex outside of meaningful relationships is by nature self-degrading and animalistic. Some people might retort by saying that there is nothing wrong with giving in to our animalistic desires but this is not true because a hallmark of humanity and human civilisation is rising above animal desires, showing self-restraint and preferring more meaningful pursuits instead. For more "practical" minded people, promiscuity is bad because it is a waste of time and energy; all that effort and time could have been spent working, enjoying art, or doing something meaningful and useful.
Thoughts? Critiques of this argument?
inb4
>virgin trying to justify his virginity
Women get pregnant when they have sex.
>>1280875
Also this. You get teenage mothers, fatherless children, shotgun weddings, and abortions as a result of sex but contraception is eliminating this threat, although not everyone uses it.
>>1280874
tl;dr: promiscuity is a degrading waste of time and sex should be reserved for meaningful relationships
>>1280874
>degraded
you make this emotional judgment in what is supposed to be a rational/neutral argument, rather than building up to it as a conclusion
this is a strong sign that you are being illogical
>turned herself into a sexual object
>because now men primarily view her sexually
all men and women are 'sexual objects' by default. you are making the assumption that men did not primarily view her sexually beforehand without giving a coherent reason as to why they wouldn't.
you also assume that the woman should not act on her desires for reasons that aren't clear but vaguely have something to do with affecting action in men. in other words you have not considered the woman's desires seriously, you have only considered men's and given men's greater weight: essentially your argument is that a woman should deny her instincts because men don't want her to.
>>1280894
>don't want her to act on them
>>1280874
Actually I'm pretty sure most people in the world would agree. Even in the west. Campaigns against slut shaming are something relatively unpopular, contained to very specific spheres of society (and the internet). Even the most promiscuous often dislikes to be seen as such and in theory seek for actual "meaningful relationships".
The problem is that those values are not corresponded by acts. A lot of people today has a very hard time dealing with the fact that actions have consequences. That's the actual problem, not promiscuity.
>>1280894
I'm saying that men should deny their instincts as well because by constantly acting on them they become slaves to them. If the situation were reversed and women were desired by multiple men and men desiring multiple women then the argument used for women would apply to men.
> you are making the assumption that men did not primarily view her sexually beforehand
If she were in some way distinguished beforehand then no, she would not be view primarily sexually. If she were, say, top of her class then she would be viewed as intelligent and hardworking before she is viewed as a sexual object.
>you make this emotional judgment in what is supposed to be a rational/neutral argument, rather than building up to it as a conclusion
This is a good point. I did not develop my idea of "degradation" well so I'll briefly explain it now. What I have described is degrading because it is a waste of our humanity; just like, as Socrates said, being physically unfit is a waste of our body's capabilities so too is promiscuity a waste of our efforts and energy and therefore our capacities as humans since this effort and energy could be devoted to, forgive the phrasing, "higher" pursuits. By wasting our mental and physical faculties on meaningless sex, we degrade ourselves and figuratively spit in the face of our humanity and capacities. Promiscuity is also impractical, since as I said it is a waste of time and energy.
>>1280915
This is a very good point. Many people want to be promiscuous but don't understand that their are consequences, regardless of "social constructs" or "double standards". If you are promiscuous then you will be known for being promiscuous and people will associate you with sex.
>>1280874
I don't get the fixation with other people's sex lives OP.
If you yourself consider it a negative to be promiscuous, then don't be, but don't just assume that you know everything about someone else's life, simply because people spread rumors that might be false.
