Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Womens attitudes to previous sexual encounters see mod note post #1

Options
1…2122232527

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    fits
    Registered Users Posts: 13,298 ✭✭✭✭fits


    h.bolla wrote: »
    What..??? When did I ever say that? Or anything even remotely like that?

    you never did just like I never said whatever you said I said.
    This is sexist rubbish

    "Nowadays some people behave like sluts.
    But, some others behave like a lady, and yet still waiting for their gentleman. Be the one, and you will find! "


  • Options
    #723
    h.bolla
    Registered Users Posts: 86 ✭✭h.bolla


    fits wrote: »
    you never did just like I never said whatever you said I said.
    This is sexist rubbish

    "Nowadays some people behave like sluts.
    But, some others behave like a lady, and yet still waiting for their gentleman. Be the one, and you will find! "

    Ok look Im not really pushed on the mind games or whatever. But she basically said that some girls sleep around and that some other girls like to wait for the right man.

    Im really failing to see how thats sexist?


  • Options
    #724
    NZ_2014
    Registered Users Posts: 306 ✭✭NZ_2014


    Wow, some of the replies on here fascinating stuff.


  • Options
    #725
    constance tench
    Registered Users Posts: 862 ✭✭✭constance tench


    h.bolla wrote: »
    Myself and my GF broke up a few months back and it happened after a discussion about another girl with a similar story to the Magaluf girl.

    I said something like 'no self respecting man will date the girl after this' and my GF defended her saying that shes young and drunk and what you do expect at that age.

    I replied by saying "you were young and did you ever do anything like that?". Then her face changed I knew something was up.

    After a lot of rowing she admitted she had a 6-some one night (her and 5 other men) along with a dozen or 3-somes over the years and has lost count on the amount of drunken one night stands shes had with randomers. Oh and for most of her teens right up to her mid 20's she has always had 1 or 2 friends with benefits at any given time most of them lasting for 3-4 months. She guessed all in all that she'd had around 500 partners give or take.

    Its not exactly the kinda image that sprang to mind when we first got together and told me she only ever had 2 boyfriends and I'd be her third.

    But alas, apparantly its none of my business what went on in her past, and if Im annoyed about her past then obviously I dont deserve her.

    I thought I just had the worst luck and was dating a right bitch and put it behind me and moved on. But then I was reading a few threads on here (in the personal issues section) and I noticed that quite a lot of women posters have the same attitude.

    This attitude really blows my mind. How do you gentlmen feel about the whole thing?


    Bill explains:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNSt3wJXZk0


  • Options
    #726
    h.bolla
    Registered Users Posts: 86 ✭✭h.bolla


    ^^^^

    That is uncanny! I mean really unbelievable. That guy must have the went out with the same exact girl as me. He just perfectly described how our arguments usually went and he was able to make it funny too!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    GalwayGuy2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,269 ✭✭✭GalwayGuy2


    h.bolla wrote: »
    What..??? When did I ever say that? Or anything even remotely like that?

    It's an interpretation of why you would say that. It may be true and it may be false, but it's looking into the mentality behind the words that you said.


  • Options
    #728
    fergus1001
    Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭fergus1001


    Think everyone is talked out on this one ha


  • Options
    #729
    goz83
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭goz83


    fergus1001 wrote: »
    Think everyone is talked out on this one ha

    Bill summed it up for us all ;)


  • Options
    #730
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    h.bolla wrote: »
    Ok look Im not really pushed on the mind games or whatever. But she basically said that some girls sleep around and that some other girls like to wait for the right man.

    Im really failing to see how thats sexist?

    On reflection, I don't think this is about sexism, double standards, or even promiscuity.

    I think it's about how able one is capable of loving someone else, an acceptance that includes their ugliness, their diseases, the character deficits,their imperfect or deeply flawed past.

    It really has more to do with one's own personal meaning systems.


  • Options
    #731
    fergus1001
    Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭fergus1001


    diveout wrote: »
    On reflection, I don't think this is about sexism, double standards, or even promiscuity.

    I think it's about how able one is capable of loving someone else, an acceptance that includes their ugliness, their diseases, the character deficits,their imperfect or deeply flawed past.

    It really has more to do with one's own personal meaning systems.

    But if your not told then you are not being given a chance to see all a persons flaws before you are shoved up the isle with a cattle prod


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    diveout wrote: »
    On reflection, I don't think this is about sexism, double standards, or even promiscuity.

    I think it's about how able one is capable of loving someone else, an acceptance that includes their ugliness, their diseases, the character deficits,their imperfect or deeply flawed past.

    It really has more to do with one's own personal meaning systems.

    Diseases... good grief... She wilfully infected him. And you defend this.


  • Options
    #733
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    fergus1001 wrote: »
    But if your not told then you are not being given a chance to see all a persons flaws before you are shoved up the isle with a cattle prod

    It also takes a lot of courage to fess that up.


  • Options
    #734
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Saipanne wrote: »
    Diseases... good grief... She wilfully infected him. And you defend this.



    You are missing is that when I say 'disease' I don't literally refer to her STD, but all those contaminated parts of ourselves, whether they are illness, spiritual, emotional etc.


  • Options
    #735
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    diveout wrote: »
    You are missing is that when I say 'disease' I don't literally refer to her STD, but all those contaminated parts of ourselves, whether they are illness, spiritual, emotional etc.

    So you condemn her action?


  • Options
    #736
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Saipanne wrote: »
    So you condemn her action?

    Condemn what action?

    I'm not moralising here. It's not my place. Nor is it yours.

    I don't even know what the STD is . I can't assess much without the facts, and neither can you.


  • Options
    #737
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    diveout wrote: »
    Condemn what action?

    I'm not moralising here. It's not my place. Nor is it yours.

    I don't even know what the STD is . I can't assess much without the facts, and neither can you.

    So the type of std matters? It's ok if it's a less dangerous one?

    These are the facts, she gave him an std. Two options here:

    a) She knowingly did it, which seems to be the case

    b) She didn't know she had it. Which means she slept with 500 men, didn't bother getting tested, and infected the op.

    Both are reprehensible acts. You seem eager to defend them. Why?


  • Options
    #738
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Saipanne wrote: »
    So the type of std matters? It's ok if it's a less dangerous one?

    These are the facts, she gave him an std. Two options here:

    a) She knowingly did it, which seems to be the case

    b) She didn't know she had it. Which means she slept with 500 men, didn't bother getting tested, and infected the op.

    Both are reprehensible acts. You seem eager to defend them. Why?

    I'm sorry but I left my cudgel at home. Case dismissed.


  • Options
    #739
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    diveout wrote: »
    I'm sorry but I left my cudgel at home. Case dismissed.

    Run away, sure. You'd think you could just address the points, you're entitled to disagree


  • Options
    #740
    D'Agger
    Registered Users Posts: 13,385 ✭✭✭✭D'Agger


    Saipanne wrote: »
    Run away, sure. You'd think you could just address the points, you're entitled to disagree

    Saipanne, this isn't a playground, if you think somebody is acting like a toddler, then move on rather than responding in kind


  • Options
    #741
    JeffKenna
    Registered Users Posts: 4,535 ✭✭✭JeffKenna


    Not sure if this is very off topic but did anyone else hear this been picked up by 4fm yesterday??


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    Pawwed Rig
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,334 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    JeffKenna wrote: »
    Not sure if this is very off topic but did anyone else hear this been picked up by 4fm yesterday??

    No but if there is a podcast of it feel free to post here.


  • Options
    #743
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    Pawwed Rig wrote: »
    No but if there is a podcast of it feel free to post here.

    They don't seem to keep the website too up to date. Last podcast on the webpage is the 10/07 show.


  • Options
    #744
    Est28
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Est28


    hoodwinked wrote: »
    i don't know why you are asking me if it is ok?, i only quoted your post because you were saying sleeping with 500 people meant more of a chance of an sti

    i was making the point that it doesn't, you could have sex with just one person, no protection, who has an sti and catch it,

    like wise you could have sex with 500 protected and catch nothing.

    What an idiotic thing to say.

    Read up on the topic of "Probability" and the mathematics behind it. Pretty relevant in anything like this.
    If I play the lotto every week or just once and win... which is more likely?
    Can both happen? Yes, but what is the probability.

    But in terms of being safe, this is a ridiculous and trashy attitude to have. It's not a joke.


  • Options
    #745
    Privileged White Male
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 58 ✭✭Privileged White Male


    500 partners?? Just shows how easy women have it when it comes to sex. People are talking about double standards but what percentage of men will sleep with 500 women? Very few will sleep with 40 or 50, many will be lucky to get to 10.

    The stereotype is that men just want to **** whereas women want something meaningful. I honestly think its the opposite.


  • Options
    #746
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,111 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Privileged White Male wrote: »
    Very few will sleep with 40 or 50, many will be lucky to get to 10.
    In my experience you could apply that pretty equally to both genders. Indeed going by my own personal experience, while the women I've known both as mates and lovers would vary in their "number", most would be under 20, some well under. The ones with the highest "number" are the men I know. The ones with the lowest number tend to be the men too and I certainly have known more male virgins at 30 than women virgins at that age. With men it seems to be a feast or a famine.
    The stereotype is that men just want to **** whereas women want something meaningful.
    It's a dumb stereotype on more than a few levels. Numero uno, regardless of the genitals of the individual people differ.
    Just shows how easy women have it when it comes to sex.
    Right... OK yes because it's largely a sellers market women can have easier access to sex if that's what they want. However it's quantity not quality. Personal standards would drop. Men too can get more sex if that's all they want and they drop their personal standards.

    Plus it depends on how one defines easier. Women are more at risk from contracting STD's. Women get pregnant with all that comes from that. Women are more likely to be sexually assaulted(though the risk can be overblown by some). Women are judged far more on their appearance and reproductive value by both men and women. Women, as we've seen, are far more likely to be judged on their sexuality. Like I say, depends on how you define easier. I would say that overall, your average socially adjusted guy who doesn't look like the creature from the pit generally has it easier when it comes to sex and options.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #747
    paddy1990
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 245 ✭✭paddy1990


    Privileged White Male wrote: »
    500 partners?? Just shows how easy women have it when it comes to sex. People are talking about double standards but what percentage of men will sleep with 500 women? Very few will sleep with 40 or 50, many will be lucky to get to 10.

    The stereotype is that men just want to **** whereas women want something meaningful. I honestly think its the opposite.


    A good looking girl just has to install tinder on her phone and go shopping for guys. She could have sex any night of the week. Most of the girls who would argue against this are simply not good looking enough to be able to pull hot guys whenever they want.

    The reverse is true as well by the way. I'm a good looking guy (work for a modelling agency) and get about 3-5 messages a day on my POF online account and get swiped by girls on tinder all the time. I could actually employ a secretary to sort out all the women messaging me. So it works both ways. The only people who complain I think, are less attractive and unable to live this lifestyle as a result. Your looks dictate where you are on the dating spectrum... it's call darwinism. Once you're good looking, you have no problems with dating and can have sex whenever. Most people who think they are good looking are actually not and probably barely above average, if that.

    So to conclude, I wouldn't be too hard on women, yes they can have sex whenever (their looks will dictate the kind of guys they can have sex with - why would a good looking guy waste time with a fat minger when he can be with a good looking girl?) but the reverse is true for guys. However, it's only a select few really good looking guys like myself or guys who have some kind of status (musician/actor etc) who can and do pull women with ease.

    Actually, women pull us.


  • Options
    #748
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    Privileged White Male wrote: »
    500 partners?? Just shows how easy women have it when it comes to sex. People are talking about double standards but what percentage of men will sleep with 500 women? Very few will sleep with 40 or 50, many will be lucky to get to 10.
    This is one woman, so no, it doesn't show anything about women.
    The stereotype is that men just want to **** whereas women want something meaningful. I honestly think its the opposite.
    How on earth could you think it's "the opposite"? For both sexes, it's a mixture of just wanting a **** or something more meaningful.


  • Options
    #749
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    paddy1990 wrote: »
    A good looking girl just has to install tinder on her phone and go shopping for guys. She could have sex any night of the week. Most of the girls who would argue against this are simply not good looking enough to be able to pull hot guys whenever they want.
    But the claim the other person is making is that any woman ever, no matter how physically unattractive, can get sex whenever she feels like it.
    Of course it's every woman's dream for a man to think she's repulsive but to shtick it in anyway (and then leg it) just for the sake of getting a drunken shag on a Saturday night.
    (My point being: while the above may happen more easily for women, it's hardly livin' the dream, and only something women with terrible self esteem would go for, in order to feel any bit wanted). And the thing about women getting sex more easily than men.... eh, who's having sex with these women?


  • Options
    #750
    Daveysil15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,301 ✭✭✭Daveysil15


    Magaggie wrote: »
    But the claim the other person is making is that any woman ever, no matter how physically unattractive, can get sex whenever she feels like it.
    Of course it's every woman's dream for a man to think she's repulsive but to shtick it in anyway (and then leg it) just for the sake of getting a drunken shag on a Saturday night.
    (My point being: while the above may happen more easily for women, it's hardly livin' the dream, and only something women with terrible self esteem would go for, in order to feel any bit wanted). And the thing about women getting sex more easily than men.... eh, who's having sex with these women?

    Or maybe they're just horny?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    paddy1990
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 245 ✭✭paddy1990


    Magaggie wrote: »
    But the claim the other person is making is that any woman ever, no matter how physically unattractive, can get sex whenever she feels like it.
    Of course it's every woman's dream for a man to think she's repulsive but to shtick it in anyway (and then leg it) just for the sake of getting a drunken shag on a Saturday night.
    (My point being: while the above may happen more easily for women, it's hardly livin' the dream, and only something women with terrible self esteem would go for, in order to feel any bit wanted). And the thing about women getting sex more easily than men.... eh, who's having sex with these women?


    Well I think most average looking women can and do have sex with guys that are above average looking and that's what they are aiming for. They are generally not going to "settle" for an average guy, even if they are an average girl themselves. The concept of hypergamy is seen everywhere in the animal kingdom, including our nearest genetic relatives - the female choosing the superior/best male she can get and a lot of times the top males are the ones that reproduce. I don't think humans are much different to be honest. There are plenty of average looking guys that would have sex with most women but women tend to go for guys "above them". The amount of average or below average looking girls that try to get chatting to me on tinder/pof and in real life is staggering. Thankfully I also get tons of attention from girls that are very attractive. The sad thing is, I have friends that are average looking or a bit below and they really struggle with women and they are aiming for girls that are "on their level" so to speak (using the term loosely) in terms of looks/status/career etc, so it does seem to me that women tend to have higher standards than men.

    For guys like me, tinder and POF are a godsend. If you're a good looking guy, you'll never have any issues. I'd imagine that the growth of social media has been bad for guys that are average or below average though. The rich get richer etc (in terms of good looking guys getting more and more women). I really do feel for my close guy friends that are really struggling though. If I showed them my Tinder they'd probably have a heart attack!


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement