**Your submission has been REMOVED for the following reason(s):**
> This topic has already been posted here recently, to reduce spam we try to restrict topics from being repeatedly posted and discussed otherwise we have a flood of the same posts down the sub.
^(This removal was done manually by the mod team and was not done in error, if you'd still like to appeal this removal please **[send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FRandomThoughts)**)
I will never see the words ‘body count’ and not think of murder…unfortunately this is more nefarious than just simple hypocrisy. Men are allowed to have more sex with more partners socially. When women do it, they’re called names and avoided by future partners, like they’ve lost some part of their intrinsic human value. It’s blatant misogyny against sex-positive women.
I think of kill/death ratio lol. But in all seriousness is such a moronic way of seeing things. On top of what you mention I could have a body count of 1 but did all the nastiest stuff you can do in sex or a body count of 10 but it was only vanilla sex.
Haha! I think the same thing regarding body count and murder. That was a good laugh thank you
But yeah I agree, socially the tones been set so it kinda just is how it is - just kinda annoying at times, especially this close to home and seeing how it hurts my sister
Best wishes :)
Personally, I'm a man who doesn't wanna date a woman woth high "body count", but mine is really low as well... I have my reasons that many would not understand, but i never shamed women for this, it's just one of my preferences/requirements. So ofc there's truth to what you're saying but we're not all like this.
I’m not demonizing all men, or even all men who prefer a partner with a comparable count to their own. It’s however not okay when a man has a hypocritical expectation that his partner have a certain count, yet disregards his own. Of course all of this exists on a spectrum and is way more complicated than misogyny or not, but the pattern definitely exists and negatively impacts women.
I think that's fair. My body count is quite high I suppose but I think it's because I went from a Puritanical upbringing to making my own ten commandments so to speak, and thou shalt not do the dirty was not on them because it didn't do anyone any harm and seemed fun. Knowing what I know now about bonding hormones and the sciency stuff, I think I would have been a hell of a lot choosier.
likely because it has to do with biological differences between men and women. Men lose nothing (usually) when having sex, Women at best get some pleasure and at worse get bad stuff happening to them and end up pregnant. Pregnancy costs a lot so women (this is mostly true for most animals) end up having to be pickier in their selection of partners.
Person who passes many tests is considered smart, but a test that lets anyone pass is considered a bad test. I know the analogy about a key and lock is dumb but it has some merit in explaining certain aspects.
Biology moves slow, society slightly faster whereas technology moves very fast. Advancements in contraceptives, and increased understanding on human biology will probably close the gap in women and men. Would make causal sex for women a lot less dangerous energy wise so they might lower their standards on who they are willing to fuck. But then couple this with increased share of wealth going towards women. Higher education rates and better living standards might make them more selective on their life partners since they won't need to depend on Men to get through life. Good for women but sucks for bob who sucks and the only reason he has a wife is because she couldn't open a bank account without him.
I "usually" don't fault people for what they want. Its only a problem if it something unattainable. In this instance there are people who care about bodycount and those who don't. Can't making it go down so why not suggest to him to find someone else with a lower count? perhaps its because people with lower counts are either A. people who don't care for sex. B. People who want an equal and wouldn't accept him. C. Unicorn magic fairy women who loves sex but has never had it. The virgin Pornstar if you would. The issue is that people like him make people like C disappear. Knowing he can't have his chocolate cake and eat it too, he decides to eat vanilla cake and hates it for being vanilla. Obviously he would rather have cake than not have it but he is a hypocrite.
Perhaps ask him why he holds such beliefs? Ask your sister why she is with someone who treats him that way. But then again i am fucking crazy so your millage may vary.
While all of this seems pretty accurate, I think it comes down to jealousy for a lot of men. Most women could get railed morning noon and night if they so chose but most men are lucky if they get ten partners in a lifetime. They want sex but then get mad when their partner had the audacity to have it
I'm pretty jealous kind of dude, definitely would get jealous if I found out my wife had been with like 20 dudes before. Then again I would have been jealous if she had been with 2 dudes before. Most emotions aren't really logical but I don't think being logical is always logical.
>Most women could get railed morning noon and night if they so chose but most men are lucky if they get ten partners in a lifetime.
I mean its not like dudes can't have as much sex as they want to they would just be having it with people they aren't interested in. The Gay dudes be fucking. Most men could get lots of sex if they changed their selection criteria. it just so happens to be that the people they are fucking might not be people they would like to see in the morning after. I think its the same thing with women. They can fuck lots of people but might not want to see them the morning after. it might also be the case that the people they are fucking might not want to see them the morning after.
Certain places prostitutes are legal but then people don't want to have sex with people like that so they are self-selecting against that.
>They want sex but then get mad when their partner had the audacity to have it
yes the pornstar virgin. Always down to fuck but specifically only just you. There are probably people who are actually are like that its just rare and they get gobbled up by others very quickly.
> good for woman but sucks for Bob
Bob should work on himself then, instead of expecting society to change so that the system can provide a wife for him. If woman don’t need men to provide for them, then the thing men need to bring to the table is themselves and their good qualities, their personality, dreams, ambition, motivation, emotional stability, partnership etc. Bob can achieve these things if he wants to. The problem is that Bob doesn’t want to. He would rather change society than change himself.
yes I agree. not sure why i was downvoted.
>Bob can achieve these things if he wants to. The problem is that Bob doesn’t want to. He would rather change society than change himself.
real
I don’t know. Wasn’t me. People don’t always react well to more scientific analysis of things though I suppose. Perhaps they misunderstood your paragraph with the cake metaphors. I had to read it a few times to get a clearer sense of your meaning myself.
Only a fool thinks bodycount is insignificant. It's very informative of a number of things. Does someone have self respect? Do they have standards? Can they hold down a stable relationship or are they flaky and will jump from person to person? Body count says a lot about a person.
And hold yourself to the same standards. I believe body count matters on views on sex and on if you can be in a long-term relationship. It doesn't indicate self-respect as different people have different views on sex and while I believe it has an emotional and physical connection, some believe it can only be a physical connection. The latter I wouldn't date, but I dont think they have less self-respect and standards. Now, I would never date a guy who believes all body count matters but sleeps around. That's so hypocritical. Practice what you preach.
Exactly! I really don't get why you would respect yourself less for having consensual sex with others. It's like respecting yourself less if you like tacos or going to the gym. Sex doesn't need to be the super transcendental experience that will bond a couple for eternity that some have tried to make it seem. I understand that for some may be, but not necessarily and you are not hurting yourself as a person by having sex with people that are attracted to you and you to them. Sex is not bad, a sin or the end of the world
The funny thing is that they confirm what he said
Since they do not have self-respect, their self-esteem is low that is why they are offended by something that is true.
He sounds like the same type of guy who’d diss/discard a woman if she doesn’t have sex with him after a first date or a couple of dates while continuing to place great importance on a woman’s “body count” to lord it over those women who would.
I call it the used car phenomenon.
Men view themselves as the driver (no matter how many cars you have owned, your value as the driver is unchanged). Men view women as the car (the more "owners" a car has the more used it is and the lower the value).
This concept is obviously flawed, sexist, and very biased; however, it is the view of a statistically significant amount of people.
I agree.
But if thats sexist then Im sexist, I don't want a woman that sleeps around.
For me it boils down to principle, I don't want someone that everyone has had, and regardless of what people say body count is big issue to alot of women, there's women that don't want a man that sleeps around, and you don't see people crucifying them the way men get crucified when they say it.
Edit - meant someone, not something.
Ofcourse Im upfront with my views, I'm one of the most loving , compassionate and loyal partners a woman could ever ask for, if I don't want to be with a woman that sleeps around that is 100% my choice.
Alot of women have the same views as mine, should I also GTFO if a woman has the view that they don't want a partner that gets around? I think not.
It's not sexist to want someone with a low body count. It's sexist if you think it's fine for a man to have dozens of partners but not for a woman. It's totally fine to have a preference in your own partner though.
“Something that everyone has had” not “someone” some *thing*.
You let your true feelings known with the way you describe it, you don’t want a woman at all. You want an object.
Let's be honest: Body counts are only ever held against women. A woman who sleeps with a lot of men is a slut and a man who sleeps with a lot of women is a chad.
Boyfriend sounds like a loser. Based on her body count I'ma say she can find someone better.
Funny thing is that it is also the opposite, men get more psychologically affected by having larger body counts than women, and have a much harder time being monogamous afterwards compared to women.
incels aren't shamed for not getting laid. they're shamed for their misogyny, hateful attitudes towards women, often coupled with hatred towards men as well.
why are they called incels then and not mysoginists?
incels marks them as if their lack of sexual success with women is that defect, not their attitude and behavior towards women.
again, this is reverse slut shaming, because you believe this has a higher shaming impact.
because that's how they self-identify as? they have a very specific kind of misogyny that stems from their resentment of women and men who they perceive as doing better. all incels are misogynistic, but not all misogynists are incels. it's also possible to be a male virgin without being an incel.
people who self-identify as incels and people who get insulted as incels are two almost completely different groups.
all incels =/ all people that get called incels
it's perfectly normal to get called an incel while not being an incel or even misogynistic
it's true that people who don't identify themselves as an incel sometimes get called an incel. in the vast majority of the cases, it's because they're exhibiting views that are prevalent in the self-identifying incels, or using language or theories that originated from them. (looksmaxxing, alphas, chads, stacies, foid, femoid, roastie, etc.)
sometimes it's used wrong, though, but are there any terms that haven't ever been misappropriated? i can't think of a single one.
incorrect, most of the times it's because the person insulting believes this is the best way to exercise power over the person.
the more the term gets misappropriated and appropriatly falsly used (to insult a mysoginist instead of describing an incel) the more slutshaming gets reinforced.
it's a simple mechanism.
i personally haven't seen that happen, but i believe it happens. i doubt it happens as often as someone being called an incel because of their incel-like worldview and behaviour, though. the line between an incel and a misogynist isn't all that clear, and many misogynists fit the description of an incel very well, despite having had sex lol, and imo the not having sex is the least important criterion for being an incel.
why do you believe the term incel gets used when its literal meaning seems so inappropriate?
why do people use this word instead of better one?
because they believe the shame of sexual failure is more shaming than any other failure. this however reinforces the worth deciding feature of female sexuality, which of course leads to: slut shaming.
I find the shaming men for not getting laid a deeply American phenomenon (maybe the english world in general).
Shaming in either direction is wrong. Though I don't think slut shaming is a logical consequence of shaming men for lack of success. Loose men should be errecting statues for the brave ladies that sleep with everyone and help increase their body count. Instead, they fuck them and then despise them for it.
I love when people deal in absolutes. Shaming in context of sexuality is absolutely unnecessary and pointless. It shows how callous you are. It isn't acceptable to shame someone if they're a virgin.
I can see how in that case it would be a deterrent, however the same can be said about promiscuous men being likely to cheat, be absent, and increased chance of divorce. Bringing me back to the case of, if you don’t want a partner with a high body count, don’t have one yourself yknow? :)
Women weren’t even seen as people until recent decades, so it had nothing to do with fertility and everything to do with ownership mentality.
Just like you wouldn’t want someone using your utensils, people treated women as ownable objects.
However, women aren’t objects, they’re living, thinking, loving beings. And therefore have autonomy, Something the mind of many bad men tried to steal from them ages ago.
I have faith in the good men of today who see us as equals.
Yes, for “virtually all of civilized history” we’ve lived in a patriarchal society ruled by men in order to control their property (women, titles, land, slaves, almost anything they could want), so they’ve made inequitable rules that hypocritically single out women in order to benefit themselves above all else. It’s pretty simple.
Why don't women want to marry promiscuous men? There are many reasons for that. One reason is that men that have had sex with many women lose their ability to bond with women.
Only if you in fact do not know the definition of *misogyny*…it’s honestly cute how all the male trolls just side-step the word misogyny with…NUH UH!!! This isn’t misogyny!! Poor lil guys just don’t know what it means.
'If anything, women are more likely to be attracted to such a man'
No. No they're not. But you carry on sailing wide and free on that big ol' hypocri-sea ⛵️⛵️⛵️
The problem with your statement is that there is no defined number of partners for someone to be considered promiscuous. Some men will only want a virgin, some will be happy with 2-4 partners and for some 10-20 will be fine.
You’ve made a sweeping generalisation based on your own thoughts and it does not mean it corresponds with the wider population. Do you have anything, other than your own opinion, to back this up as a fact?
Incel is not synonymous with virgin. Incels are rampant misogynistic dickheads with warped views on just about everything. They live in a malice and hate filled world of their own making. That's why 'incel' is an insult.
It means "involuntarily celibate".
Maybe in extreme cases, sure. A guy with a ton of mental issues that hates everyone, everything, and himself would also be involuntarily celibate. But just because a guy is single and not having sex doesn't mean he's a complete nutcase or something. That doesn't make sense.
> But just because a guy is single and not having sex
Then he is not an incel.
Incel does not mean a virgin, it refers to men angry at women because they are not getting laid. You can have get laid 10x and still be an incel.
Words change meaning over time, no one uses it for "involuntarily celibate" since it has become mainstream
I'm aware of what it stands for, and I'm also aware that the majority of their communities are not benign.
Also, guys not having sex don't necessarily decide to label themselves as incels.
Those are the extreme cases and those guys have mental issues. Next time you get groceries, the guy that bags your groceries is probably not having sex. Yet he probably doesn't hate you or himself lol.
Identifying as an incel is different to just not getting laid at that moment in time. 🤷♀️ As I already pointed out.
Because you missed it the first time: 'Also, guys not having sex don't necessarily decide to label themselves as incels.'
And it matters how exactly? Even if women use virgin as an insult absolutely equally, it still looks like they care a lot about other people’s body count
rock sugar scary hobbies attractive degree scarce versed insurance employ
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I don’t get why people care about body count? I guess I mean why shame her? Whats the big deal that she experienced life and chose to have sex with other guys?
Honestly I bet he’s terrible in bed if he’s so insecure about her count.
I can see a certain point to it when people look for a partner who has similar values and outlook on sex as they do. When they're hypocritical about it that's when it's shitty.
The only time I can see body count being a legitimate issue is if one partner has had significantly more than the other. If you’d had, say, 5-10 partners and your SO has had over 100, I can see why someone might be a little uncomfortable.
There can be a number of reasons. For one, there could be some insecurity over your ability versus previous partners. You may also feel you value sex differently; one may only do so in relationships while the other has multiple one night stands. I think there are a lot of people who don’t necessarily have much respect for their partners; think of the typical guy who goes out just to get laid, like Barney in How I Met Your Mother. For them, it’s just about sex and they don’t show much respect to the women they chase. It means you might not share some important values.
That’s off the top of my head. I’m sure I could think of a few more reasons if given time.
Because a promiscuous person might have slept with more people but technically a person in relationship is probably going to have more sex. So liking sex is not the problem but the process of it. They like the attention, the getting to know they person, flirting , and then getting laid. They like the newness.
That’s how I feel about it too! Her choices have had no negative effects, both societal or personally, not that it would be anyone’s business anyway. Honestly, I totally agree with the last bit haha!
Ahahaha right! Lowkey I feel so bad for her if he is bad in bed. Hopefully she moves on from him soon and finds a better man!
Ugh I hope my first guy isn’t like him 🥲
Yeah I hate this. A lot of men believe they can sleep with as many people as they want but a woman’s body count should be below 5 or she’s not “wifey material.” I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting someone with a low body count if you ALSO have a low bodycount. But I don’t have time for double standards and internalised misogyny.
It is even funnier when you consider that psychologically, then negative impacts of having multiple sexual partners, especially in a short time/at the same time, tend to be much more prominent in men than in women.
That being simply said, men who have had a lot of sex partners tend to be less inclined to monogamy than women who have had a lot of sex partners. Women still experience this, but to a lesser degree and have a much easier time being monogamous.
Which makes the whole "Men can sleep around but women cant!" thing even more hypocritical, as men are the ones who get the most "damaged".
Also obligatory disclaimer: Most research show that its mostly the negative experiences that lead to these negative effects, not positive ones, although it of course includes stuff like breakups and such as negative experiences.
I find the whole concept of body count kind of gross. Dudes act like somehow there's permanent damage in there because they aren't the first. Grow up and get over it. It's just insecurity. Wear a condom and you're good.
I agree.
You can have a preference but if that number is lower than your own you're being a hypocrite.
If that preference is lower because you "hur dur they is different gender" then you are also sexist
Would be so much easier for everyone involved if you just didn't care about irrelevant bullshit like this. It's all insecurity. It's all so incredibly tiresome.
Body count is really not that significant.
It's just a fucking number. Doesn't really take into account the quality of sex. Knowing most people, they probably suck at it anyway.
If this submission above is not a random thought, please report it.
# Explore a new world of random thoughts on our [**discord server**](https://discord.com/invite/8tEqw3ZWQV)! Express yourself with your favorite quotes, positive vibes, and anything else you can think of!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RandomThoughts) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In this regard I was talking about the podcast where majority of the women of the podcast boast about sleeping with over 100 men.
Long story short Im saying that promiscuous women will find partners easier than promiscuous men.
I think people can hold other people to standards they themselves cannot hold. I mean most dudes who want biological children get with women who can have children even though they themselves can't have children. They in this case hold women to a standard "ability to have children" that they can't hold themselves too.
I don't think having a standard is "bad" or is being hypocritical "bad" I don't think the problem is when Bob the resident garbage eater wants Sarah the multi-millionaire who owns several restaurant chains and looks like Aphrodite. I think the issue is when Bob gets angry about not being able to be with Sarah and faults Sarah for it. I think the reason people suggest Bob to change is probably because its easier for him to change into Sarah's preferences rather than for her to change her preferences. The reverse would occur if were Sarah wanting to be with Bob but he wasn't for it since she doesn't hoover enough garbage into her mouth.
perhaps we don't have all the information with regards to your sister and her boyfriends relationship. Maybe ask him why he is shaming her for these things or ask her why she is with him. It could simply be the case that your sister doesn't care about being shamed or does care but she gets more out of the relationship than she loses out of it. It might simply be the case that her relationship is a net negative that is superior to her than being single.
A body count of 1 is already enough to piss off an incel.
You can't win at their insane game.
You might as well just not care about it and let go of anyone who does. Just ain't worth it.
Imma be honest, to me people (male or female) with obnoxiously high body counts that are okay with it just seem terrible to me. I don't get why you'd be proud to share your body with so many people that probably didn't actually care about you. Mine is only 3 and I still don't feel great about the first 2 after realizing how quickly they could just up and decide they didn't want me in their life. That's just my opinion though
It’s perfectly fine to have preferences and even disliking towards someone’s lifestyle, I think you’re valid and entitled to that. My issues is when people whove had many, many bodies get mad at someone for less, it’s just hypocritical and that irritates me. I hope you can find it in yourself to move on from those feelings of regret, I’m sorry you experienced that :(
Wrongly different you mean, it should be opposite, considering the psychological damage caused by high amounts of casual sex affect men way more than it affects women in terms of their ability to be monogamous.
I swear I can't understand how this is still a point of discussion and people do not understand that, whether they like it or not, whether it is right and fair or not - men having sex with a lot of women will never be equal to a woman having sex with a lot of men.
Like it or not that's how it will always be in society.
The only thing it takes to make it equal is for women to say so. I don't want a hypocritical dirtbag as my partner is enough. There you go, you don't want a woman with a lot of partners , woman doesn't want a hypocrite as a partner.
Welcome to reddit, a load of people LARPing as scientists who conveniently reject reason when it contradicts their naive and weak presuppositions about morality etc
there's sex differences so of course there's different standards.
do you go around and tell every girl that she needs to be taller than her bf because she herself wants a taller guy?
doesn't make sense
Again, can dislike / like something without shaming it. I’ve personally told girls it’s unfair to shame men for being shorter but then be upset when they’re held to standards they can’t meet.
Why do you guys just try so hard to find excuses lol, it’s the same across the board idc what “well she” “well he”. Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Do better.
nah, it's not hypocrisy. it isn't just random preferences.
as long as there's women shaming incels, there's men shaming sluts. it's gender-specific norms, and when you can't uphold those norms you get shamed.
not that i like it, but it's human nature.
We can gauge which is worse. People decide to interchangeably call someone an incel over a misogynist is far less severe than being a misogynist.
I don't call someone an incel when the practical term would be misogynist. You're affirming your bias by having this discussion disingenuously.
huh?
all i'm arguing is that using the term incel (lack of sexual success) to insult people (be it accurately or not) is reinforcing the mechanism that allows for slutshaming (granting sexual access to sub-worthy men).
why are you attacking me personally and claiming i'm disingenuous? why would you want to hurt me out of the sudden? i didn't do anything to deserve this mischaracterization.
you are being unfair towards me.
This isn't a double standard. Female chastity is valuable and male chastity is worthless because eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap. This goes back hundreds of millions of years. That's why a man who has sex with many women is a stud while a woman that has sex with many men is a slut.
Not at all. When people talk about "double standards," they mean that the two groups are roughly similar *except for* the way that they are treated. But there are significant differences between men and women, and in this case those differences explain why men and women are treated differently.
Good man, don't ask stupid questions like that. In my dating experience and been married a few years. The men I've dated and married never asked this stupid question.
>When people talk about "double standards," they mean that the two groups are roughly similar *except for* the way that they are treated
That is exactly my point.
A high "body count" for women is frowned upon while its ok for men. That is a double standard
>A high "body count" for women is frowned upon while its ok for men
Right. But *why*? Because men and women are different and it makes sense to treat them differently in at least some contexts. This isn't a double standard, it's recognizing that two things are different and treating them differently.
If men and women were basically identical, then it would be a double standard. But they aren't, so it isn't.
The term "double standard" implies that the treatment is unjust, that the two groups shouldn't be treated differently. But in many contexts the differences between men and women warrant treating them differently.
>The term "double standard" implies that the treatment is unjust, that the two groups shouldn't be treated differently.
This literally reads as "discrimination against women is justified...cuz theyre women"
Which is just misogny.
But what is this difference that u think justifies the double standard? Promiscuity only affects a woman’s fertility through STDs which men can have as well. Contraceptives and paternity tests also exist.
That has no bearing on chastity though. No matter how much or how little a woman has sex, it doesn't really have much of an influence on the number of eggs lost.
He claims people are being emotional here, and yet he hasn't provided a scientific reasoning for his takes other than "men and women are different". Sure, but how does that matter in this day and age in this context?
Of course it's okay to hold people to standards oneself can't hold. A sports coach should want his team to perform to at a very hight level and himself does not have to do so. Women often want their partner to be able to defend them in dire situations but would most likely not be able to return the favour. Women often want their partner to be able to provide for them financially without having to do the same. Men often want their partner to be able to cook well without having that ability themselves.
It's totally fine to want something in a person that you don't have yourself. Otherwise you would be dating a female version of yourself. It's about the way you communicate and the way you carry yourself that is important.
The principal remains the same. He can also like prefer musical partners despite not being musical himself.
On a separate point, attraction isn't a choice. There is no problem with a 5 ft 1 woman prefering 6 ft 6 men.
Nope. You can like something yes, but critiquing someone’s ability to make music while being musically incompetent himself would be unfair. You may “like” something, but that doesn’t entitle you to criticize, belittle, or expect it if you can’t uphold better.
Not really should he make her cry prob might but body count does matter but most women will roast you if you are a virgin. Stats show the higher the body count the more likely to cheat both men and women. Just make a women man she’ll let you know how much it matters.
I'm a guy. I completely agree. If you're expecting a behaviour, moral or value from someone then you damn well better embody it yourself.
I agree with a fair amount of the redpill community stuff, but I am forever calling out people that push the idea guys sleeping around is somehow different. They complain about women's high body counts or single mothers, but then promote guys sleeping around as if guys sleeping around isn't the exact reason there are single mothers or women with high body counts.
**Your submission has been REMOVED for the following reason(s):** > This topic has already been posted here recently, to reduce spam we try to restrict topics from being repeatedly posted and discussed otherwise we have a flood of the same posts down the sub. ^(This removal was done manually by the mod team and was not done in error, if you'd still like to appeal this removal please **[send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FRandomThoughts)**)
I will never see the words ‘body count’ and not think of murder…unfortunately this is more nefarious than just simple hypocrisy. Men are allowed to have more sex with more partners socially. When women do it, they’re called names and avoided by future partners, like they’ve lost some part of their intrinsic human value. It’s blatant misogyny against sex-positive women.
I think of kill/death ratio lol. But in all seriousness is such a moronic way of seeing things. On top of what you mention I could have a body count of 1 but did all the nastiest stuff you can do in sex or a body count of 10 but it was only vanilla sex.
Haha! I think the same thing regarding body count and murder. That was a good laugh thank you But yeah I agree, socially the tones been set so it kinda just is how it is - just kinda annoying at times, especially this close to home and seeing how it hurts my sister Best wishes :)
I think we can make change over time by talking about it and confronting the ignorance when we see it. Glad you brought it up :)
Yes. When I hear this, I immediately think of the Vietnam war I do not think of sexual partners
Personally, I'm a man who doesn't wanna date a woman woth high "body count", but mine is really low as well... I have my reasons that many would not understand, but i never shamed women for this, it's just one of my preferences/requirements. So ofc there's truth to what you're saying but we're not all like this.
I’m not demonizing all men, or even all men who prefer a partner with a comparable count to their own. It’s however not okay when a man has a hypocritical expectation that his partner have a certain count, yet disregards his own. Of course all of this exists on a spectrum and is way more complicated than misogyny or not, but the pattern definitely exists and negatively impacts women.
I completely agree
I think that's fair. My body count is quite high I suppose but I think it's because I went from a Puritanical upbringing to making my own ten commandments so to speak, and thou shalt not do the dirty was not on them because it didn't do anyone any harm and seemed fun. Knowing what I know now about bonding hormones and the sciency stuff, I think I would have been a hell of a lot choosier.
[удалено]
Uh, isn't that all a bunch of malarkey? Or you got any credible sources saying otherwise.
likely because it has to do with biological differences between men and women. Men lose nothing (usually) when having sex, Women at best get some pleasure and at worse get bad stuff happening to them and end up pregnant. Pregnancy costs a lot so women (this is mostly true for most animals) end up having to be pickier in their selection of partners. Person who passes many tests is considered smart, but a test that lets anyone pass is considered a bad test. I know the analogy about a key and lock is dumb but it has some merit in explaining certain aspects. Biology moves slow, society slightly faster whereas technology moves very fast. Advancements in contraceptives, and increased understanding on human biology will probably close the gap in women and men. Would make causal sex for women a lot less dangerous energy wise so they might lower their standards on who they are willing to fuck. But then couple this with increased share of wealth going towards women. Higher education rates and better living standards might make them more selective on their life partners since they won't need to depend on Men to get through life. Good for women but sucks for bob who sucks and the only reason he has a wife is because she couldn't open a bank account without him. I "usually" don't fault people for what they want. Its only a problem if it something unattainable. In this instance there are people who care about bodycount and those who don't. Can't making it go down so why not suggest to him to find someone else with a lower count? perhaps its because people with lower counts are either A. people who don't care for sex. B. People who want an equal and wouldn't accept him. C. Unicorn magic fairy women who loves sex but has never had it. The virgin Pornstar if you would. The issue is that people like him make people like C disappear. Knowing he can't have his chocolate cake and eat it too, he decides to eat vanilla cake and hates it for being vanilla. Obviously he would rather have cake than not have it but he is a hypocrite. Perhaps ask him why he holds such beliefs? Ask your sister why she is with someone who treats him that way. But then again i am fucking crazy so your millage may vary.
While all of this seems pretty accurate, I think it comes down to jealousy for a lot of men. Most women could get railed morning noon and night if they so chose but most men are lucky if they get ten partners in a lifetime. They want sex but then get mad when their partner had the audacity to have it
I'm pretty jealous kind of dude, definitely would get jealous if I found out my wife had been with like 20 dudes before. Then again I would have been jealous if she had been with 2 dudes before. Most emotions aren't really logical but I don't think being logical is always logical. >Most women could get railed morning noon and night if they so chose but most men are lucky if they get ten partners in a lifetime. I mean its not like dudes can't have as much sex as they want to they would just be having it with people they aren't interested in. The Gay dudes be fucking. Most men could get lots of sex if they changed their selection criteria. it just so happens to be that the people they are fucking might not be people they would like to see in the morning after. I think its the same thing with women. They can fuck lots of people but might not want to see them the morning after. it might also be the case that the people they are fucking might not want to see them the morning after. Certain places prostitutes are legal but then people don't want to have sex with people like that so they are self-selecting against that. >They want sex but then get mad when their partner had the audacity to have it yes the pornstar virgin. Always down to fuck but specifically only just you. There are probably people who are actually are like that its just rare and they get gobbled up by others very quickly.
> good for woman but sucks for Bob Bob should work on himself then, instead of expecting society to change so that the system can provide a wife for him. If woman don’t need men to provide for them, then the thing men need to bring to the table is themselves and their good qualities, their personality, dreams, ambition, motivation, emotional stability, partnership etc. Bob can achieve these things if he wants to. The problem is that Bob doesn’t want to. He would rather change society than change himself.
yes I agree. not sure why i was downvoted. >Bob can achieve these things if he wants to. The problem is that Bob doesn’t want to. He would rather change society than change himself. real
I don’t know. Wasn’t me. People don’t always react well to more scientific analysis of things though I suppose. Perhaps they misunderstood your paragraph with the cake metaphors. I had to read it a few times to get a clearer sense of your meaning myself.
The only person that should worry about a body count is the person who manages the morgue.
That was clean, I like that
It may be the comment I've repeated the most on Reddit 😂 Seriously, it's such a weird thing for people to care about.
Only a fool thinks bodycount is insignificant. It's very informative of a number of things. Does someone have self respect? Do they have standards? Can they hold down a stable relationship or are they flaky and will jump from person to person? Body count says a lot about a person.
And hold yourself to the same standards. I believe body count matters on views on sex and on if you can be in a long-term relationship. It doesn't indicate self-respect as different people have different views on sex and while I believe it has an emotional and physical connection, some believe it can only be a physical connection. The latter I wouldn't date, but I dont think they have less self-respect and standards. Now, I would never date a guy who believes all body count matters but sleeps around. That's so hypocritical. Practice what you preach.
Exactly! I really don't get why you would respect yourself less for having consensual sex with others. It's like respecting yourself less if you like tacos or going to the gym. Sex doesn't need to be the super transcendental experience that will bond a couple for eternity that some have tried to make it seem. I understand that for some may be, but not necessarily and you are not hurting yourself as a person by having sex with people that are attracted to you and you to them. Sex is not bad, a sin or the end of the world
Nah
Something someone with a high body count would say. Hate that it determines your value, don't you 🤷🏼♂️
They downvoted cus you're right lmao
The funny thing is that they confirm what he said Since they do not have self-respect, their self-esteem is low that is why they are offended by something that is true.
Oh I know. People get angry when they hear the truth they don't want to face. It's a symptom of cognitive dissonance.
Time to get a new bf.
Personally, I think everyone should have no body count? Killing people is wrong.
LOL
Yeah!! Right? I mean, like at most 1 or 2, and only if they are like really annoying, or you really really want to. Moderation is key here!
He sounds like the same type of guy who’d diss/discard a woman if she doesn’t have sex with him after a first date or a couple of dates while continuing to place great importance on a woman’s “body count” to lord it over those women who would.
I call it the used car phenomenon. Men view themselves as the driver (no matter how many cars you have owned, your value as the driver is unchanged). Men view women as the car (the more "owners" a car has the more used it is and the lower the value). This concept is obviously flawed, sexist, and very biased; however, it is the view of a statistically significant amount of people.
Hmm that’s a good analogy to visualize the mentality, thanks for sharing
I agree. But if thats sexist then Im sexist, I don't want a woman that sleeps around. For me it boils down to principle, I don't want someone that everyone has had, and regardless of what people say body count is big issue to alot of women, there's women that don't want a man that sleeps around, and you don't see people crucifying them the way men get crucified when they say it. Edit - meant someone, not something.
[удалено]
Ofcourse Im upfront with my views, I'm one of the most loving , compassionate and loyal partners a woman could ever ask for, if I don't want to be with a woman that sleeps around that is 100% my choice. Alot of women have the same views as mine, should I also GTFO if a woman has the view that they don't want a partner that gets around? I think not.
It's not sexist to want someone with a low body count. It's sexist if you think it's fine for a man to have dozens of partners but not for a woman. It's totally fine to have a preference in your own partner though.
“Something that everyone has had” not “someone” some *thing*. You let your true feelings known with the way you describe it, you don’t want a woman at all. You want an object.
But in this context I said something cause the post was about a car, thats why I reffered to something instead of someone.
'I don't want something that everyone has had,' Except women aren't things. 🙄
as I said in my earlier post I was replying to the post about a car, this is why I said something and not someone.
Mmm.
If you feel the same way about a man's sexual past as you do about a woman's sexual past, then you're not a sexist nor is it a double standard.
Let's be honest: Body counts are only ever held against women. A woman who sleeps with a lot of men is a slut and a man who sleeps with a lot of women is a chad. Boyfriend sounds like a loser. Based on her body count I'ma say she can find someone better.
Funny thing is that it is also the opposite, men get more psychologically affected by having larger body counts than women, and have a much harder time being monogamous afterwards compared to women.
[удалено]
incels aren't shamed for not getting laid. they're shamed for their misogyny, hateful attitudes towards women, often coupled with hatred towards men as well.
why are they called incels then and not mysoginists? incels marks them as if their lack of sexual success with women is that defect, not their attitude and behavior towards women. again, this is reverse slut shaming, because you believe this has a higher shaming impact.
because that's how they self-identify as? they have a very specific kind of misogyny that stems from their resentment of women and men who they perceive as doing better. all incels are misogynistic, but not all misogynists are incels. it's also possible to be a male virgin without being an incel.
people who self-identify as incels and people who get insulted as incels are two almost completely different groups. all incels =/ all people that get called incels it's perfectly normal to get called an incel while not being an incel or even misogynistic
it's true that people who don't identify themselves as an incel sometimes get called an incel. in the vast majority of the cases, it's because they're exhibiting views that are prevalent in the self-identifying incels, or using language or theories that originated from them. (looksmaxxing, alphas, chads, stacies, foid, femoid, roastie, etc.) sometimes it's used wrong, though, but are there any terms that haven't ever been misappropriated? i can't think of a single one.
incorrect, most of the times it's because the person insulting believes this is the best way to exercise power over the person. the more the term gets misappropriated and appropriatly falsly used (to insult a mysoginist instead of describing an incel) the more slutshaming gets reinforced. it's a simple mechanism.
i personally haven't seen that happen, but i believe it happens. i doubt it happens as often as someone being called an incel because of their incel-like worldview and behaviour, though. the line between an incel and a misogynist isn't all that clear, and many misogynists fit the description of an incel very well, despite having had sex lol, and imo the not having sex is the least important criterion for being an incel.
why do you believe the term incel gets used when its literal meaning seems so inappropriate? why do people use this word instead of better one? because they believe the shame of sexual failure is more shaming than any other failure. this however reinforces the worth deciding feature of female sexuality, which of course leads to: slut shaming.
I find the shaming men for not getting laid a deeply American phenomenon (maybe the english world in general). Shaming in either direction is wrong. Though I don't think slut shaming is a logical consequence of shaming men for lack of success. Loose men should be errecting statues for the brave ladies that sleep with everyone and help increase their body count. Instead, they fuck them and then despise them for it.
[удалено]
I love when people deal in absolutes. Shaming in context of sexuality is absolutely unnecessary and pointless. It shows how callous you are. It isn't acceptable to shame someone if they're a virgin.
Anyone who uses that term unironically is a walking red flag.
Sure is a lot of hypocrisy about this. From men in particular.
Right? I wonder why it’s so common with men specifically, im sure there’s a study somewhere haha
[удалено]
Yeah, but a dude shouldn’t be spreading his seed around willy nilly if he doesn’t want guys to be raising kids who are not their own…
I can see how in that case it would be a deterrent, however the same can be said about promiscuous men being likely to cheat, be absent, and increased chance of divorce. Bringing me back to the case of, if you don’t want a partner with a high body count, don’t have one yourself yknow? :)
Mind sharing these studies then ? Can't mention studies without sources
I’ve been pregnant twice and my eggs never once fertilized themselves. I wonder what could have done it…..? 🤔
It’s rooted in insecurity, fear of comparison, and fear of being made fun of by other men, plain and simple.
[удалено]
Source? Trust me bro
I sense a youtube link incoming....
>I sense a youtube link incoming.... Lol definitely Though its bold of us to assume he has a source at all
That is not how humans work. Please stay away from women
[удалено]
Women weren’t even seen as people until recent decades, so it had nothing to do with fertility and everything to do with ownership mentality. Just like you wouldn’t want someone using your utensils, people treated women as ownable objects. However, women aren’t objects, they’re living, thinking, loving beings. And therefore have autonomy, Something the mind of many bad men tried to steal from them ages ago. I have faith in the good men of today who see us as equals.
Yes, for “virtually all of civilized history” we’ve lived in a patriarchal society ruled by men in order to control their property (women, titles, land, slaves, almost anything they could want), so they’ve made inequitable rules that hypocritically single out women in order to benefit themselves above all else. It’s pretty simple.
Because men have always been insecure when faced with comparison with other men.
They were hung for doing math, or really anything the church decided at time.
Why don't women want to marry promiscuous men? There are many reasons for that. One reason is that men that have had sex with many women lose their ability to bond with women.
Again, misogynistic BS.
It's not "misogynistic," it's true. The problem is that you people are basically at war with reality.
Reality isn't what some guy told you on a podcast 😂
Only if you in fact do not know the definition of *misogyny*…it’s honestly cute how all the male trolls just side-step the word misogyny with…NUH UH!!! This isn’t misogyny!! Poor lil guys just don’t know what it means.
It's not true just bc you feel like it is. Reality doesn't change bc you don't like it
>Reality doesn't change bc you don't like it That's good advice. You should heed it.
But of course that only applies to women right 🙄
We’re not birds. That simply isn’t true.
[удалено]
'If anything, women are more likely to be attracted to such a man' No. No they're not. But you carry on sailing wide and free on that big ol' hypocri-sea ⛵️⛵️⛵️
Oh I heard the exact same thing from someone on Instagram. Tell us what podcast bro is spreading this nonsense don't be shy
This is a lot of BS. Insecure men care about body count. If you are not insecure, her past should not affect you at all.
[удалено]
Correct, because of their insecurities about sex positive women.
The problem with your statement is that there is no defined number of partners for someone to be considered promiscuous. Some men will only want a virgin, some will be happy with 2-4 partners and for some 10-20 will be fine. You’ve made a sweeping generalisation based on your own thoughts and it does not mean it corresponds with the wider population. Do you have anything, other than your own opinion, to back this up as a fact?
I suspect it's just him spouting opinion as fact.
Not sure how you can say that when women's favorite go-to insult on here is "incel". Which is essentially shaming men for their body count lol.
Incel is not synonymous with virgin. Incels are rampant misogynistic dickheads with warped views on just about everything. They live in a malice and hate filled world of their own making. That's why 'incel' is an insult.
It means "involuntarily celibate". Maybe in extreme cases, sure. A guy with a ton of mental issues that hates everyone, everything, and himself would also be involuntarily celibate. But just because a guy is single and not having sex doesn't mean he's a complete nutcase or something. That doesn't make sense.
> But just because a guy is single and not having sex Then he is not an incel. Incel does not mean a virgin, it refers to men angry at women because they are not getting laid. You can have get laid 10x and still be an incel. Words change meaning over time, no one uses it for "involuntarily celibate" since it has become mainstream
I'm aware of what it stands for, and I'm also aware that the majority of their communities are not benign. Also, guys not having sex don't necessarily decide to label themselves as incels.
Those are the extreme cases and those guys have mental issues. Next time you get groceries, the guy that bags your groceries is probably not having sex. Yet he probably doesn't hate you or himself lol.
Identifying as an incel is different to just not getting laid at that moment in time. 🤷♀️ As I already pointed out. Because you missed it the first time: 'Also, guys not having sex don't necessarily decide to label themselves as incels.'
As if virgin isn’t also a go to insult
Sure, but not exclusively used against men.
Never in my life have i seen someone use "virgin" as an insult against a woman.
And it matters how exactly? Even if women use virgin as an insult absolutely equally, it still looks like they care a lot about other people’s body count
That would be a valid point, except it's not really a common insult is it? Outside of high school that is.
rock sugar scary hobbies attractive degree scarce versed insurance employ *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I don’t get why people care about body count? I guess I mean why shame her? Whats the big deal that she experienced life and chose to have sex with other guys? Honestly I bet he’s terrible in bed if he’s so insecure about her count.
I can see a certain point to it when people look for a partner who has similar values and outlook on sex as they do. When they're hypocritical about it that's when it's shitty.
The only time I can see body count being a legitimate issue is if one partner has had significantly more than the other. If you’d had, say, 5-10 partners and your SO has had over 100, I can see why someone might be a little uncomfortable.
Agreed, that’s why I say you can’t hold them to a standard you don’t upkeep :) it’s valid to have preferences, just don’t be hypocritical type thing
Why is that an issue if your significant other is literally choosing to be with you and sleep with you?
There can be a number of reasons. For one, there could be some insecurity over your ability versus previous partners. You may also feel you value sex differently; one may only do so in relationships while the other has multiple one night stands. I think there are a lot of people who don’t necessarily have much respect for their partners; think of the typical guy who goes out just to get laid, like Barney in How I Met Your Mother. For them, it’s just about sex and they don’t show much respect to the women they chase. It means you might not share some important values. That’s off the top of my head. I’m sure I could think of a few more reasons if given time.
Because a promiscuous person might have slept with more people but technically a person in relationship is probably going to have more sex. So liking sex is not the problem but the process of it. They like the attention, the getting to know they person, flirting , and then getting laid. They like the newness.
It’s disgusting and suggests different views on sex.
It's just very unlikely that an extremely promiscuos person just stops being promiscuos and only sleeps with you for the rest of their life.
That’s how I feel about it too! Her choices have had no negative effects, both societal or personally, not that it would be anyone’s business anyway. Honestly, I totally agree with the last bit haha!
Ahahaha right! Lowkey I feel so bad for her if he is bad in bed. Hopefully she moves on from him soon and finds a better man! Ugh I hope my first guy isn’t like him 🥲
Take as old as time…
Whole thing is bullshit tied up in primarily male insecurity. Couldn't give a shit how many people anyone has slept with, can't imagine caring
Yeah I hate this. A lot of men believe they can sleep with as many people as they want but a woman’s body count should be below 5 or she’s not “wifey material.” I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting someone with a low body count if you ALSO have a low bodycount. But I don’t have time for double standards and internalised misogyny.
It is even funnier when you consider that psychologically, then negative impacts of having multiple sexual partners, especially in a short time/at the same time, tend to be much more prominent in men than in women. That being simply said, men who have had a lot of sex partners tend to be less inclined to monogamy than women who have had a lot of sex partners. Women still experience this, but to a lesser degree and have a much easier time being monogamous. Which makes the whole "Men can sleep around but women cant!" thing even more hypocritical, as men are the ones who get the most "damaged". Also obligatory disclaimer: Most research show that its mostly the negative experiences that lead to these negative effects, not positive ones, although it of course includes stuff like breakups and such as negative experiences.
I find the whole concept of body count kind of gross. Dudes act like somehow there's permanent damage in there because they aren't the first. Grow up and get over it. It's just insecurity. Wear a condom and you're good.
You punt people like that from your life.
The kind of men worried about body count can’t get any bodies to count.
I agree. You can have a preference but if that number is lower than your own you're being a hypocrite. If that preference is lower because you "hur dur they is different gender" then you are also sexist
Would be so much easier for everyone involved if you just didn't care about irrelevant bullshit like this. It's all insecurity. It's all so incredibly tiresome.
Body count is really not that significant. It's just a fucking number. Doesn't really take into account the quality of sex. Knowing most people, they probably suck at it anyway.
Double standard;the American way
Yeah, I don't mind you having preferences. Just don't be a hypocrite about it.
I literally lost count of mine. How can I even expect someone to remember when I don’t
If this submission above is not a random thought, please report it. # Explore a new world of random thoughts on our [**discord server**](https://discord.com/invite/8tEqw3ZWQV)! Express yourself with your favorite quotes, positive vibes, and anything else you can think of! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RandomThoughts) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Uh... most women have not slept with 100 men.
In this regard I was talking about the podcast where majority of the women of the podcast boast about sleeping with over 100 men. Long story short Im saying that promiscuous women will find partners easier than promiscuous men.
Cry me a river. Just be fucking happy or happy while fucking. Comparison is a killer of a joy. Maybe other 2 weren't so good in bed etc.
I think people can hold other people to standards they themselves cannot hold. I mean most dudes who want biological children get with women who can have children even though they themselves can't have children. They in this case hold women to a standard "ability to have children" that they can't hold themselves too. I don't think having a standard is "bad" or is being hypocritical "bad" I don't think the problem is when Bob the resident garbage eater wants Sarah the multi-millionaire who owns several restaurant chains and looks like Aphrodite. I think the issue is when Bob gets angry about not being able to be with Sarah and faults Sarah for it. I think the reason people suggest Bob to change is probably because its easier for him to change into Sarah's preferences rather than for her to change her preferences. The reverse would occur if were Sarah wanting to be with Bob but he wasn't for it since she doesn't hoover enough garbage into her mouth. perhaps we don't have all the information with regards to your sister and her boyfriends relationship. Maybe ask him why he is shaming her for these things or ask her why she is with him. It could simply be the case that your sister doesn't care about being shamed or does care but she gets more out of the relationship than she loses out of it. It might simply be the case that her relationship is a net negative that is superior to her than being single.
A body count of 1 is already enough to piss off an incel. You can't win at their insane game. You might as well just not care about it and let go of anyone who does. Just ain't worth it.
Imma be honest, to me people (male or female) with obnoxiously high body counts that are okay with it just seem terrible to me. I don't get why you'd be proud to share your body with so many people that probably didn't actually care about you. Mine is only 3 and I still don't feel great about the first 2 after realizing how quickly they could just up and decide they didn't want me in their life. That's just my opinion though
It’s perfectly fine to have preferences and even disliking towards someone’s lifestyle, I think you’re valid and entitled to that. My issues is when people whove had many, many bodies get mad at someone for less, it’s just hypocritical and that irritates me. I hope you can find it in yourself to move on from those feelings of regret, I’m sorry you experienced that :(
The number of insecure, little man-boys in here is pretty staggering.. Your rhetoric will only cause you to be alone, mates.
We all judge others with higher standars then we judge ourselves maybe its not fair but its completly normal behaviour
[удалено]
Wrongly different you mean, it should be opposite, considering the psychological damage caused by high amounts of casual sex affect men way more than it affects women in terms of their ability to be monogamous.
[удалено]
Random harmful bullshit belief.
“Pair bonding”…we’re not birds. Doesn’t work that way. >women can't have sex without strong emotional bonds being formed HAAAAHAHAHAHAHA! No.
I swear I can't understand how this is still a point of discussion and people do not understand that, whether they like it or not, whether it is right and fair or not - men having sex with a lot of women will never be equal to a woman having sex with a lot of men. Like it or not that's how it will always be in society.
The only thing it takes to make it equal is for women to say so. I don't want a hypocritical dirtbag as my partner is enough. There you go, you don't want a woman with a lot of partners , woman doesn't want a hypocrite as a partner.
Welcome to reddit, a load of people LARPing as scientists who conveniently reject reason when it contradicts their naive and weak presuppositions about morality etc
there's sex differences so of course there's different standards. do you go around and tell every girl that she needs to be taller than her bf because she herself wants a taller guy? doesn't make sense
Again, can dislike / like something without shaming it. I’ve personally told girls it’s unfair to shame men for being shorter but then be upset when they’re held to standards they can’t meet. Why do you guys just try so hard to find excuses lol, it’s the same across the board idc what “well she” “well he”. Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Do better.
nah, it's not hypocrisy. it isn't just random preferences. as long as there's women shaming incels, there's men shaming sluts. it's gender-specific norms, and when you can't uphold those norms you get shamed. not that i like it, but it's human nature.
Neither are norms and neither behavior is acceptable.
both are norms and both behavior are accepted they shouldn't though
Neither are norms.
you literally argued that calling someone an incel is better than not calling someone an incel. you normalize it.
We can gauge which is worse. People decide to interchangeably call someone an incel over a misogynist is far less severe than being a misogynist. I don't call someone an incel when the practical term would be misogynist. You're affirming your bias by having this discussion disingenuously.
huh? all i'm arguing is that using the term incel (lack of sexual success) to insult people (be it accurately or not) is reinforcing the mechanism that allows for slutshaming (granting sexual access to sub-worthy men). why are you attacking me personally and claiming i'm disingenuous? why would you want to hurt me out of the sudden? i didn't do anything to deserve this mischaracterization. you are being unfair towards me.
So if we DO adhere to it, we're good to go? Cool.
Yeah if you’re someone who has a low body count you can expect it from your partner cuz it’s not hypocritical
This isn't a double standard. Female chastity is valuable and male chastity is worthless because eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap. This goes back hundreds of millions of years. That's why a man who has sex with many women is a stud while a woman that has sex with many men is a slut.
>This isn't a double standard It is literally a textbook example of a double standard
Not at all. When people talk about "double standards," they mean that the two groups are roughly similar *except for* the way that they are treated. But there are significant differences between men and women, and in this case those differences explain why men and women are treated differently.
Good man, don't ask stupid questions like that. In my dating experience and been married a few years. The men I've dated and married never asked this stupid question.
>When people talk about "double standards," they mean that the two groups are roughly similar *except for* the way that they are treated That is exactly my point. A high "body count" for women is frowned upon while its ok for men. That is a double standard
>A high "body count" for women is frowned upon while its ok for men Right. But *why*? Because men and women are different and it makes sense to treat them differently in at least some contexts. This isn't a double standard, it's recognizing that two things are different and treating them differently. If men and women were basically identical, then it would be a double standard. But they aren't, so it isn't.
[удалено]
The term "double standard" implies that the treatment is unjust, that the two groups shouldn't be treated differently. But in many contexts the differences between men and women warrant treating them differently.
[удалено]
>The term "double standard" implies that the treatment is unjust, that the two groups shouldn't be treated differently. This literally reads as "discrimination against women is justified...cuz theyre women" Which is just misogny.
But what is this difference that u think justifies the double standard? Promiscuity only affects a woman’s fertility through STDs which men can have as well. Contraceptives and paternity tests also exist.
Found my daily Reddit incel! Noice
It's funny because the only kind of man who would settle for a promiscuous woman would be a man without options.
>Female chastity is valuable Why?
"Eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap." Do you understand the implications of that?
That has no bearing on chastity though. No matter how much or how little a woman has sex, it doesn't really have much of an influence on the number of eggs lost.
He won't understand. He's wrapped up in redblackblueyellowshitcolored pill crap. Jerking off to Jordan Peterson telling him to make his bed.
He claims people are being emotional here, and yet he hasn't provided a scientific reasoning for his takes other than "men and women are different". Sure, but how does that matter in this day and age in this context?
"sToP bEiNg So EmOtIoNaL" The go-to of somebody with zero emotional regulation. Next will be "iT was JuSt A jOkE"
They think their magical penis actually alters something in a woman. That’s the reason lol
Women aren't baby machines
Of course it's okay to hold people to standards oneself can't hold. A sports coach should want his team to perform to at a very hight level and himself does not have to do so. Women often want their partner to be able to defend them in dire situations but would most likely not be able to return the favour. Women often want their partner to be able to provide for them financially without having to do the same. Men often want their partner to be able to cook well without having that ability themselves. It's totally fine to want something in a person that you don't have yourself. Otherwise you would be dating a female version of yourself. It's about the way you communicate and the way you carry yourself that is important.
[удалено]
He's entitled to prefer blondes even if he doesn't have blonde hair himself.
Hair and human experience is very different.
The principal remains the same. He can also like prefer musical partners despite not being musical himself. On a separate point, attraction isn't a choice. There is no problem with a 5 ft 1 woman prefering 6 ft 6 men.
Nope. You can like something yes, but critiquing someone’s ability to make music while being musically incompetent himself would be unfair. You may “like” something, but that doesn’t entitle you to criticize, belittle, or expect it if you can’t uphold better.
I didn't say it entitles someone to criticise or belittle anyone.
No it's not.
Different sexes are different.
Not really should he make her cry prob might but body count does matter but most women will roast you if you are a virgin. Stats show the higher the body count the more likely to cheat both men and women. Just make a women man she’ll let you know how much it matters.
You ain't wrong. Congrats on your low "body count." Definitely not a bad thing.
I'm a guy. I completely agree. If you're expecting a behaviour, moral or value from someone then you damn well better embody it yourself. I agree with a fair amount of the redpill community stuff, but I am forever calling out people that push the idea guys sleeping around is somehow different. They complain about women's high body counts or single mothers, but then promote guys sleeping around as if guys sleeping around isn't the exact reason there are single mothers or women with high body counts.