What Kind of a Guy Sends a Dick Pic?
When Persistence is Perturbing
Real Data on Red Pill Toxicity and Bigotry
Last-Minute Dates: Spontaneous or Disrespectful?
Death to the Dual Mating Strategy Theory
Flaunt Your Imperfections to Get More Dates
Smart Men Want to Date Smart Women
Keep Risking Rejection
Embrace the Power of the Sexual Gatekeeper
What Is Attraction?

It’s not surprising how some people think that any ideas that differ from their own constitute hatred. Such non-reasoning is largely emotive in nature. Over the long-haul, it doesn’t serve much puporse. We can build our opinions around situational ethics all we want, but sooner or later, life will demand that we find a more permanent system of values – whatever they may be. A philosophy of ‘Yeah but, yeah but . . .’ can only go so far.

It also doesn’t amaze me that Tom thinks I’m ‘against’ women’s rights just because I disagree with him. I don’t expect anything deeper from Tom, since his criticisms of me are largely incoherent. I probably know more about feminism and women’s rights that Tom ever will. One of the things I know is that women’s rights and sexual freedom have nothing – NOTHING -at all to do with the amount of sex one has. It has to do with WHY one has sex. The contemporary ‘Pro-sex’ ala Marcote movement is extremely shallow in this sense.

I have seen NOT ONE instance of the age old double sexual standard promoted in this discussion. NOT ONE SINGLE INSTANCE. If anyone can find it, quote it to me. Otherwise, I’ll consider such accusations clumsy straw-man arguments and ignore them.

“This attitude that a woman has to be pure as the driven snow is so antiquated.”

Really, WHO here has said that? WHO?

tom says:
December 19, 2011 at 10:28 am
Jhan… I know you are new here, especially to this particular thread. I do agree with a lot of what you said, especially about the narcissist and the boarderlines..good stuff. If you had been here over the last 6 months or so the things I brought up would have made sense to you. There are people here who have the opinion that all women who have casual sex are damaged goods. I now doubt you are one of them. I am of the opinion that the damaged people both male and female were mostly already damaged before they started having a lot of sex. Iam sure some people grow bitter from a lot of bad experiences with casual sex. But life experience teaches me that there are people who come thru the experience just fine and actually learn from it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

jhan6120 says:
December 19, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Not to drop into the defensive, but I never said that EVERYONE who goes through a period of sexual promiscuity emerges scarred for life. They couldn’t make enough psycho-pharmaceuticals for the world if that was the case. What I AM saying is that, based upon the personality in question (and perhaps to echo Susan Walsh’s sentiment), heavy sexual promisctuity can have its costs. These costs can often be a lot greater for those who already have significant psychological or emotional problems. To ignore this cost/benefit aspect of sexual promiscuity – even as it applies to NORMAL people – is to abjure one’s moral responsibility to oneself and the rest of humanity. It’s no different than ignorning child hunger or thieving investment bankers.