Men who are exceptional natural pickup artists don't have those skills magically kick in at the age of consent, you know, like dimwitted feminists believe. The qualities that make some men promiscuous in adulthood obviously also tend to make them more attractive to women and hence sexually active in adolescence. So you should logically expect a boy who is having sex with women at 12 to also get more women than his peers later in life. Only an utter moron or a feminist would conclude that the latter promiscuity was caused by early "abuse," which of course isn't abuse at all but rather an expression of superior fitness, the same alpha traits that make men incredibly successful with women later as well. Blaming promiscuity on early sexual experiences, and pretending it is bad, makes as much sense as saying Bill Gates became a billionaire because of childhood abuse. And that the rest of us should be so glad we weren't abused, because then we would go out and become billionaires, which only someone abused would do, and easily could do just because he was abused...
The notion that superior fitness can be caused by "abuse," and statutory abuse at that, arbitrarily defined into existence by feminist legislators, is mind-bogglingly insane. Yet this is what feminists literally claim. Please try to do some independent thinking before accepting their harebrained theories.
15 comments
You think that "earlier sex" or "more sex" or "better pickup artist" are necessarily good? In what way? None of these things qualify a person for a contented, happy life with a loving partner. In fact, nowhere do you even mention the word "love", thus you say nothing about life.
I am forcibly reminded of a certain brand-new president of the USA, who seemed to think that the job consisted entirely of an ability to campaign. It never occurred to him to prepare himself for doing the job, and it shows.
you should logically expect a boy who is having sex with women at 12 to also get more women than his peers later in life. Only an utter moron or a feminist would conclude that the latter promiscuity was caused by early "abuse"
Leaving aside the comment equating a feminist with a moron, this is about the only thing that is almost correct in this quote. The problem is that the rest of the quote assumes three things:
1) Being sexually promiscuous is automatically better. This is not the case, regardless of whether you're talking about a heterosexual male, as here, or any other gender or sexuality.
2) It is always the case that an underage boy who is having sex is doing so because he is seeking to have sex, and succeeding. This does happen, but is not necessarily the case.
3) A boy's ability to give informed consent to sex appears at the same time as his desire to have sex.
"Being sexually promiscuous is automatically better."
If everyone is always consenting, then I'd say yes, promiscuity is better.
Blaming promiscuity on early sexual experiences, and pretending it is bad, makes as much sense as saying Bill Gates became a billionaire because of childhood abuse
image
Seems that Mr & Mrs Fart didn't beat Lil' Donny hard enough, then: if they ever raised a hand to their son.
Please try to do some independent thinking before accepting your own harebrained theories, Eiverd Bilge.
There are some people who, I swear, do not understand much if anything about what their own political allies and leaders think. They can recite some talking points and engage in jingoism. When it comes to any topic deeper than a teaspoon, however, they become as lost as, well, this idiot (and I don't mean Colbert) .
The OP is no different in this regard: He learned this shit - or some small portion of it - and attempts to fill in the substantial gaps, cracks, and cave-ins throughout the largely dark, empty vault that is the OPs mind with whatever he can find.
What is this idiot talking about? It's at a point, with some of these people, where I can only ingest so much word salad before I puke. It isn't (only) their ideas that make me sick - although their fumbling idiocy makes me laugh - but their inability to articulate those ideas in a sensible manner...as if they're merely borrowing these concepts without fully understanding how they work
Thanos6:
"Being sexually promiscuous is automatically better."
If everyone is always consenting, then I'd say yes, promiscuity is better.
So it's better to be sexually promiscuous than not to be?
Nope, completely disagree with that. It's not necessarily worse (bar the risks of STDs and such-like), but it's not better, either.
Seeing as how I think consensual sex is basically the best, most fun thing two or more adults can together, yes, I think it is. I view promiscuity as a virtue. But then, I'm very sex obsessed and focused, so...
@Pharaoh Bastethotep:
No, quality AND quantity. I make sure anyone in bed with me has as good a time as possible. If they're not enjoying themselves, I don't enjoy myself. I just see no reason to restrict the number of partners I have. Yay for polyamory and open relationships (not to mention all the emotional benefits they bring, too).
Thanos6:
I make sure anyone in bed with me has as good a time as possible. If they're not enjoying themselves, I don't enjoy myself. I just see no reason to restrict the number of partners I have. Yay for polyamory and open relationships (not to mention all the emotional benefits they bring, too).
Fine, that's your choice, but explain how this is automatically and intrinsically better than an alternative one, which is what you seem to be saying.
As I said earlier, it's one of my beliefs--bordering on a personal axiom--that consenting sex is basically the most fun adults can have. And each potential partner brings their own uniqueness to the experience, a little something different that no one else could. Partner A has something that Partner B doesn't, who has something that Partner C doesn't, who...
Honestly, it's like "you can never have too many friends" but with sex. :)
Thanos6:
As I said earlier, it's one of my beliefs--bordering on a personal axiom--that consenting sex is basically the most fun adults can have. And each potential partner brings their own uniqueness to the experience, a little something different that no one else could. Partner A has something that Partner B doesn't, who has something that Partner C doesn't, who...
Honestly, it's like "you can never have too many friends" but with sex. :)
Sorry, this still doesn't explain it. It sounds like you enjoy having casual, no-strings sex with many different people, possibly even at the same time. As long as all your partners go into that situation of their own volition, with foreknowledge of what they are getting involved with, I have no problem with that. However, it is something I would not get involved with myself, as I view sex as best kept to be part of a broader and more rounded relationship with someone. What you seem to be saying is that my view of sex, and subsequent choice is intrinsically and automatically worse, but haven't really explained why it's worse, instead of just different.
I don't see sex as something you should only do with a romantic partner, any more than, say, golf or video games. Do it with anyone that would make it fun, is my POV.
This doesn't mean I'm against romantic relationships, far from it; I've been in a poly quad with three people for roughly a decade now. And lovemaking with any--or all!--of them is amazing, but we don't think sex should be exclusive between us and only us.
"What you seem to be saying is that my view of sex, and subsequent choice is intrinsically and automatically worse, but haven't really explained why it's worse, instead of just different."
Sorry. That's just how I'm wired. I tend to think any beliefs and opinions that differ from mine in non-trivial ways are Wrong. It's part of my narcissistic tendencies. :)
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.