Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /r9k/ - ROBOT9001
You are currently reading a thread in /r9k/ - ROBOT9001
Memes aside, is there anything objectively wrong with being promiscuous?
>>27180200
uh, well our contraceptives aren't advanced enough to guarantee protection against herpes and warts, so promiscuous people pretty much all have one or both, along with higher rates of other STDs and unwanted pregnancies in general.
other than that promiscuity is a symptom, not a cause. women aren't damaged because they're sluts. they're sluts because they're damaged.
the thing about sluts is that they're great fun. but men are not programmed to invest in them or "love" them. women know this, and "slut shaming" is a female tactic to devalue romantic competition. this is why women get bitchy, because they want to eat their cake then have it too. they want to slut around in their youth then pretend they can still have prince charming in the end, but prince charming doesn't end up with the town slut.
>>27180200
I'll stop using the word "slut" when roasties stop using "virgin" as an insult.
I'll just end the "as much fun as men" argument here.
>>27180200
There is nothing objectively wrong with being a slut. Theres a greater than 0% risk of stds, and pregnancy, but there is nothing wrong with being a complete reckless hedonist and having as much sexual pleasure as you want.
That being said I am a virgin and want someone who has the same smount of experience as me. Therefore I hate sluts for not having their virginity and not being fuckable. I'd hate them whether they were actively trying to sleep with me, actively trying to shame me, or just passively shrinking my dating pool.
I won't care if I get experience but I can't get experience because of how many people have it.
No there isn't.
I would just never be in a relationship with one.
>>27180431
Basically this
Assuming they're having safe sex, and not putting themselves in harmful situations because of it, there's nothing "objectively" wrong, but obviously there are many arguments from mens point of view that they wouldn't want/respect women who slut around, which still isn't actually an inherent issue with being a slut, it's just that men don't like it.
There are statistics showing that the more pre-marital partners a women has the more likely her marriage will end in divorce, however most theorys on this agreed that it wasn't the slutting around that made them that way, it was the fact that the kind of person who sluts around before marriage is the same kind of person who gets into a marriage without thinking it through properly
>>27180200
Funny how the author of the pic didnt push for retiring the word 'virgin' as an insult
>immaturity
>destructive, rampant hedonism
>inability to be satisfied with a normal, long-term relationship
>equating "finding yourself" with "having lots of sex with strangers"
>the destruction of the healthy nuclear family model
>staggering dating scene inequality in favor of women
Sluts are disgusting and immoral, whether they be men or women.
>>27180200
If they're willing to sleep with me, no. If they won't, then yes. (Heads up: none sleep with me)
>>27180643
>immaturity
elaborate?
>destructive, rampant hedonism
Is hedonism inherently bad now?
>inability to be satisfied with a normal, long-term relationship
Why is that a fault? Many people aren't interested in that at all
>equating "finding yourself" with "having lots of sex with strangers"
Who mentioned "finding yourself"?
>the destruction of the healthy nuclear family model
Sure, from a national perspective, but why is that wrong at a personal/moral level?
>staggering dating scene inequality in favor of women
Surely more sluts = more sex for guys?
Bear in mind OP said "objective" wrongs, not ones based off your conservative worldview.
>>27180200
>Memes aside, is there anything objectively wrong with being promiscuous?
Nope.
Just like there's nothing wrong with having your own personal standards. Go ahead and fuck all the dudes you want, but don't expect us to not be grossed out by it.
And yea, sure, we'll stop calling you sluts. We'll still think it, and still not marry or date you, but we won't call you sluts anymore to your face.
Memes aside, is there anything objectively wrong with sharing heroin needles?
>>27180840
The very high chance of sharing any latent bloodborne diseases, next?
>all these retards saying no
Casual sex literally leads to the destruction of society.
Look at what's happening to our world right now.
Look at how women treat men--like garbage.
Look at what men have become--subservient little whiteknight betas.
Look at where "diversity" has gotten us.
Look at the alarming single mother epidemic.
Look at the degeneracy being taught to our children in schools.
Look at the staggering number of abortions done each year.
Look at the alienated, mentally-ill users of this very board.
All of this is a result of this free-love "DUDE IT'S JUST SEX LMAO" attitude, where love doesn't exist, people only think twenty minutes into the future, people refuse to take responsibility for their actions, people behave like fucking animals instead of civilized human beings, social dynamics are destroyed, people only think with their genitals and not their brains, family life is dead, children are being raised in broken homes, and the world we live in is crumbling around us. This is on you.
>>27180200
No, as long as you're honest about it
If you want to go around being a slut that's great on you but you can't expect every guy to be okay with it just the cucks
>>27180892
But they're not. If women are honest about their partner count with their boyfriends there would be no marriages.
if a girl who sex with many different guys i wouldent date her because i would just be another number she fucks before she moves on to the next one, im only interested in a long term relationship
to me loyalty and trust are the most important things in a relationship, and im not inclined to believe a slut is loyal
>>27180200
Sexually transmitted diseases.
It is not objectively morally wrong by itself but lying about your history or stds is morally wrong. Also just because something isn't morally wrong doesn't mean it doesn't still harm you.
>>27180873
Bloodborrrrrnneeeeeee
There's nothing objectively wrong with it, but then you can argue that there's no such thing as an objective wrong (other than categorical of course)
There are many many things that people subjectively perceive as being wrong with it, some of which are more rational than others, but I'm pretty sure that for the most part people don't actively hate sluts (I'm sure many do though) the just would have no interest in being in a relationship with them, which is fine.
>>27180873
Good anon. Now transfer this train of thought over to the current analogy and you have the answer to OP's question.
>>27180200
It's an evolutionary advantage, by and large.
Speaking objectively, everything else is sour grapes.
>Roastie saying that white men have smaller cocks than other races
>Don't disagree but inquire as to her "sample size"
>She says "Large enough"
>Call the roastie a slut
>She says it's a bad word with a "negative implication"
>Say sorry, instead call her a promiscuous female and that slut only hurts her because she lets it
It's hardwired into men to find sluts less attractive. Primitive brain wanted to avoid diseases and women who were already pregnant.
Not to mention that girls who can't get long term boyfriends usually have something wrong with them.
>>27180200
The fact that the person can not control their sexual urges, is not loyal and views you as a piece of meat.
>>27180200
The west is dying
>>27180200
There's no emotional attachment anymore. Just like fucking stretches vagina, so do emotions. You jump from sex to sex without any emotional involvement therefore you cannot hold long-term relationship.
>>27181020
Well yeah, but being promiscuous does not necessarily mean having unsafe sex.
Obviously that's one of the biggest issues, but most people ITT that have attempted to justify it in some way or another began with the preface "assuming they practice safe sex..."
That's something objectively wrong with unsafe sex, sure, but the two arent mutually inclusive
>>27180967
what's so good about marriages anyway? Children can be reared fine so long as they have food, security and love.
>>27181023
>It's an evolutionary advantage, by and large.
wait, what?
Women have to invest a huge amount of time and energy into having a child, they should be as picky as possible when it comes to choosing the most apt mate. It's an advantage for men, as they simply need to jizz in them then fuck off, but by the very nature of sexual selection it is definitely not an advantage for women to be sluts.
>>27180996
WHAT'S THAT SMELL
THE SWEET BLOOD, IT SINGS TO ME
IT'S ENOUGH TO MAKE A MAN SICK
>>27181109
That's what I don't understand about all these female slut proponents. Women objectively and undeniably have far more at risk when it comes to sex. They bear the responsibility of child-rearing, which could literally kill them if gone wrong and if they get impregnated by a man who doesn't care about her or his offspring, then she's pretty much fucked for life.
Why would any girl in her right mind want to fuck around just knowing that alone?
>>27181109
Hahaha, you think this is about you?
It's about your genes.
Your body is a self-perpetuating machine who's only function is self-replication.
Your entire identity, the corpus of your body, and everything you own is just an extension of the biological mechanism's urge to propagate.
>>27181196
>Why would any girl in her right mind want to fuck around just knowing that alone?
Because modern birth control methods are effective enough that the vast majority of women can be extremely promiscuous and not get pregnant, and if they do get pregnant, they can get rid of it with a pill in the first week, then a simple non-intrusive chemical abortion for the first few month or two.
Reposting for the anon that cucked himself with a literal whore
I don't approve of it but I'm not going to condemn anyone for their decision-making, no matter how piss poor it is.
I can't say it's wrong without sounding like I have sour grapes, which I do. I'm not going to sit here and act like I don't want the grapes. Sex is so easily accessible for you, I have to put in an absolutely absurd amount of effort combined with blind luck to get any. You don't know the half of it, but I'm not going to pretend I know what it's like to have people constantly rag on you for being promiscuous.
>>27181233
I've known tons of guys/girls who fuck around without any protection. Humans are fucking stupid and impulsive man. A lot of them don't give a shit about pregnancy or STDs in the heat of the moment.
>>27180200
You can be whatever you want, but you can't force me to like it. You want to fuck a different guy every day that's your thing, but I will think less of you and you are in fact a slut.
>>27181203
I'm a zoologist m8, I understand evolutionary selection
What I don't get is why you think that anything you said means that it is biologically advantageous for women to have sex with lots of men?
There is a reason that internal fertilisation and gestation is so prevalent in the animal kingdom, because it allows one half of the species to forfeit the strain of carrying a child and to be concerned only with spreading their genes, and the other half to be sexual selectors ensuring that only the most well suited genes are allowed to be mated with them in order to increase the aptitude of the population as a whole.
Obviously in modern times the rules of selection for genetic improvement are sketchy to nonexistant what with free will and modern culture, but why on earth would women being sluts be good from an evolutionary perspective?
>In humans (and perhaps in all Placentals) the most common form is fetomaternal microchimerism (also known as fetal cell microchimerism or fetal chimerism) whereby cells from a fetus pass through the placenta and establish cell lineages within the mother. Fetal cells have been documented to persist and multiply in the mother for several decades. The exact phenotype of these cells is unknown, although several different cell types have been identified, such as various immune lineages, mesenchymal stem cells, and placental-derived cells. A 2012 study at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, has detected cells with the Y chromosome in multiple areas of the brains of deceased women.
>Allotransplant (allo- from the Greek meaning "other") is the transplantation of cells, tissues, or organs, to a recipient from a genetically non-identical donor of the same species.[1] The transplant is called an allograft, allogeneic transplant, or homograft. Most human tissue and organ transplants are allografts
>Male microchimerism was significantly more frequent and levels were higher in women with induced abortion than in women with other pregnancy histories.
Every male you absorb spermatazoa from becomes a living part of you FOR LIFE. The women autopsied in this study were elderly. Some had carried the living male DNA for well over 50 years!
tl;dr, roasties are full of chads dna and their brains have his y chromosome in them
>>27181380
I knew it wasn't just a meme.
>>27181070
Abstinence is proven the only 100% method for not contracting STDs (aside from non-sexual instances, such as shared bodily fluids and needles).
And like others have mentioned: the higher number of partners, the lower the chance of any healthy, happy long-term relationships (well, at least where both parties are mutually benefitting). Regardless of gender, the party that had multiple partners will be evaluating their long-term partner, maybe even spouse if married, to all of their past sexual partners. This creates a rift where unhappiness with the relationship is at a high risk. Especially with the mindset that they feel cheated that the other partner got to "have more fun" in their youth, the partner with less/no sexual experience "can't fulfill sexual obligations" due to their partner being a loose whore who's sexual nervous system is numb from their excessive amount of encounters,or if one believes that the other can't fulfill an urge and is more likely to cheat in order to fill that urge.
I'm a firm believer in sex before marriage and I would never hold any level of a romantic relationship with someone who is not a virgin before marriage, so I know I'm extremely biased and not a reliable one-source for an opinion. However, I do believe that a nuclear family model filled with people who hold high morals is the answer to many of today's issues in society and it makes me seethe with rage to see people wonder why this country is going to shit when nobody looks at where many social issues start at: the childhood level. Provide children with a stable home and society gets better. Better seeds provide better plants with higher yields of fruit, anon.
>>27181380
>Some had carried the living male DNA for well over 50 years!
>>27181320
The first world is not the only world, and the majority of people have lived will always live in animalistic filth and poverty, so propagation dispersal is still a perfectly valid evolutionary criteria for them.
>>27181825
>The first world is not the only world, and the majority of people have lived will always live in animalistic filth and poverty,
How does that have any bearing on anything I said? I literally pointed out that sexual selection for genes is not really much of a thing in the first world.
>propagation dispersal is still a perfectly valid evolutionary criteria for them.
Exactly, for the men.
The whole basis of that leading to positive genetic change is that the men try to impregnate every women, while the women restrict them and only mate with the most genetically promising.
How is this hard to grasp?
Please explain how, from an evolutionary perspective, it is better for women to mate with lots of men rather than the select few best men?
>>27181900
Women are the selector sex, duh.
And "positive" genetic change occurs by the culling of the unfit, and the propagation of the fit as determined by environmental criteria.
>>27181968
Yes? and?
Again, why does that mean it's advantageous for women to slut around rather than restrict themselves to the "best" men?
It literally means the opposite, I don't get how you don't get that
>>27180873
>the assertion that STDs are bad
>objective
You kids are hilarious.
>>27180469
We don't have to take this shit anymore, brother
Fuck these roastie bitches
>>27180888
We all know who's behind this corruption
>>27180200
It shows poor judgment. It shows that that person is more concerned with having fun and feeling good than making sound decisions.
>>27181999
Scattergun approach nigga, why put all your eggs in one basket?
Fuck some meatheads, fuck some wealthy poindexters, fuck some scummy assholes too, because the more multifarious and versatile your offspring the more secure your lineage is against catastrophe or changing times.
>>27180200
Nothing's wrong with it. I just can't stand the thought of having my first be with someone who has done it multiple times. It's already too late for me.
>>27180200
Yes.
It affects a woman ability to pair-bond.
I can't trust someone who's had 150 partners. It shows poor judgement, and poor character. People stick to what they know. If they're slutting it up, they're bound to return to their old ways eventually.
How can I invest in a person like that?
>>27180200
What if I told you all words are made up?
>>27181380
Is this only through vaginal sex? Just got a blowjob yesterday; does this mean I'll always be a part of her even if we never end up having sex? That came out a lot weirder than I'd intended.
>>27182312
Honestly?
Maybe a more experienced partner could help you overcome that.
It may sound counterintuitive, but frankly, if you're lost you seek guidance, and someone who knows what it's like to have a regrettable first time can take you by the hand and show you the way.No, I don't mean me.
>>27182449
Go home Wittgenstein, you're drunk.
>>27180888
lol you're a posterchild for conservatard trumpfag with zero life experience who sits in mom's basement masturbating to anime and shitposting autistic fantasies onto the internet.
maybe we should treat our women as they do in the middle east, because they're such paragons of civilization and progress?
>>27180200
Its women that made being a slut so bad.
When men see another man being promiscuous we call them players, and applaud them to a certain extant. Even women will at times praise these men for being playboys.
For women, when they act promiscuous they immediately get jealous and call each other out on it, calling each others sluts to defame the slutty girl. To top it all off men call them sluts as well.
These threads are completely pointless because nothing terrible you point out will ever be retorted by the slutfaggots with anything other than, "Yeah, so? How does it affect me as a slut?"
It's a total waste of time. There's no prohibition against murder or rape under their world view. After all how does killing or raping someone affect them personally?
>>27182548
lol maybe if type all in lowercase and make armchair character assessments from your fruitphone you'll totally fit in at 4chad and no one will realise you're some 16 year old faggot who got lost on his way here from tumblr lol/lmao
the idea of being promiscuous, not at all.
but the WAY they choose to do it is retarded literally women are void of empathy and are pretty much sociopaths when it comes to sex.
that's what I think anyway.
some people have no problem donating tons to charity or refusing to eat meat cos "aww poor cows" but give a depressed suicidal virgin 10 minutes of sex? "ewwwww like no way!"
>>27182736
>proceeds to unironically do exactly what he accuses others of doing
back to /pol/ with you, cuckeroo.
>>27182976
Fuck off you dumb shitposting nigger. No one here gives a flying fuck what you think about anything.
We're not primitive animals. The purpose of sex is to reproduce and to be so obsessed with sex that you have had sexual partners in the double digits is a shameful thing, you may as well take a shit in the Louvre or eat from a trough if you're going to behave in such a barbaric manner. Promiscuous people are statistically more likely to end up in a failed marriage as you can see in these links as well as this picture.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/24/relationship-between-early-sex-and-divorce_n_882681.html
https://www.focusonthefamily.com/about_us/focus-findings/marriage/premarital-sex-and-divorce.aspx
Also, I recommend you read Lone Survivors by Chris Stringer, one of the worlds leading anthropologists. You will se that he has found that humans have come this far as a species partly thanks to the fact that we are monogamists as opposed to other hominds that died out due to their polygamy.
>>27182282
I'd say this applies more to men than women
Men can Blow 'n Go where as women actually have to bear the child and raise it, which obviously makes it difficult to get around
I mean, if they're just slutting around nobody _really_ cares
if they're trying to get into a serious relationship though nobody is going to want a slut, and they always eventually want to get into a relationship
>>27182548
>LE CONSERVATIVE LE TRUMP LE ANIME LE PROGRESS LE LE LE LE LE I WIN LE DEBATE
>>>/reddit/
>>27180200
Slut is an insult so what do you think you fucking faggot. "Promiscuous" women are sluts, and that's wrong
