Comments by "TheDionysianFields" (@TheDionysianFields) on "Sydney Watson - The Men vs. Women Problem" video.

No, it's how selective they WERE in choosing partners. By your thinking, you should question yourself if a promiscuous person takes an attraction to you.
5
@jesmcalli Can I ask you what the cutoff is for promiscuity? How many partners am I allowed to have as a woman before I'm classified as a slut?
4
"Welcome to the controlled opposition!"
4
@richardcrook2112 I think having too many relationships is a bigger problem than having too much sex. You may have just been experimenting. What I ask a woman is, "how much time have you spent OUT of a relationship in the past 10 years?" I think a healthy, confident person spends at least half their time single, unless they were in one long 10-yr relationship. If I was going to ask for a body count, it would only be for the past year. Anything over three = pass. But I'm not sure I would ask at this point.
3
@1nsertcred1t Lol, you gave me the perfect example. Yes, I would definitely mind if my health insurance based my rate on when I used to be fat and out of shape, rather than on the fit person I am today.
3
@samsby14 First of all, admit that you would have had a LOT more sex (i.e. sexual partners) in your youth if it had been available. Then, admit that you made some mistakes and slept with women you probably shouldn't have (or that were below your standards). Then let me know if there's anything left to talk about.
2
@1nsertcred1t I don't need any loans, and judging people on their past is a flat out disgrace. Just because you feel weak and lacking of the capacity to change, doesn't mean others lack such a capacity.
2
@jesmcalli Wow, that was a complete cop-out answer. Say I'm a 30-yr old white chick in suburbia. What's the max number?
2
@andrewbaer2820 Way to embrace the double standard! Did you take a class on rationalizing?
2
@tuseroni6085 Yeah, that's not questioning yourSELF. Give it up, you're never going to get a virgin.
2
@gregc6535 To answer your question...because we expect insurance companies to reduce human beings to statistical data on a page. We don't expect human beings to reduce other human beings to statistical data. It seems like a disgrace. The final thing I would say is that we don't know how much of the shame (trauma?) a woman incurs from sleeping around is natural and how much is externally induced. Slut-shaming is still a thing in many parts of the world, and men participating in it is a surefire way to produce women with lower self-esteem.
2
@mattduncan3304 If you read through the comments here, you'll understand why social coercion is bad. A person who's been abused is likely to lack boundaries (and/or be self-harming) and have a lot of partners as a result. To have a society that heaps more shame on that person is disgusting. In fact, shame is just a bad motivator all around. What we don't want is promiscuity, which isn't defined as anyone who's had more than one sexual partner. Curiosity is healthy for a young person (and pretty much anyone else). Are these genuine questions you're asking or are you just making me do all the work?
2
Definitely not the same for both men and women, and that's part of the reason it should be disregarded. But the message here is that we all do silly stuff in our youth and people can change.
1
She outs herself somewhat at the end, with her refusal to call a trans woman a woman. But overall this was a good, balanced discussion. Expect their subs to go down.
1
@SirBrasstion I agree with you, but that's why I think you have to take it on a case by case basis. Some people will still be stuck in the same pattern of insecurity, but others will have self-reflected and adjusted their behavior. The sentiment I see here is that people don't change, and I believe it's the people who don't feel capable of changing who express this sentiment. We were all young and foolish (and lacking self-control) once, but there is such a thing as growing up.
1
@gregc6535 What I'm saying is that your thinking is flawed. I would much prefer to insure someone who's made a proactive decision and adjusted their lifestyle in the name of better health than the person who happens to have a naturally high metabolism and continues to eat junk food all day long. I ALSO wouldn't want to insure the person who places undue stress on themself by adhering to a purity standard that requires them to tyrannize and deprive themself at every turn. I can think of nothing more unhealthy. (I'll give you a hint: your only move is to assert that people don't--or can't--change.)
1
@gregc6535 "Explain how judging people on their past is a disgrace. Past behavior is indicative of a person's personality and decision making ability." My decision-making ability has improved over time (or I wouldn't even be alive right now).
1
@gregc6535 We all eat poorly from the getgo, it's called being a kid. Very few people turn 18 and suddenly adopt a health-conscious diet. And I don't recall any insurance company asking me to divulge my diet, past or present (maybe you're contending they should have access to our grocery receipts??). I said nothing of calorie deprivation, I was speaking of depriving oneself of foods one truly enjoys. (From what I hear, there are women out there who genuinely enjoy sex, even with someone they're not emotionally bonded to.) I can admit that I'd PREFER a woman with lean sexual history (a virgin, even), but you're bent on your (prejudiced) perspective. My guess is that you simply don't want to feel you're competing with a woman's past sexual partners. That's not the woman, that's YOU. "It's irrelevant if they can change if the damage has already been done." I'm not denying that possibility, but I'd say this is even more true for men and porn. And that it's the men who watch porn who are doing a fair amount of the "damage."
1
@mattduncan3304 I haven't had a one-night stand since the early 90s, but I still choose not to judge people based on their past. If you feel bad after a one-night stand, stop having them. If a woman has had 3 in the past month before meeting her, I'd certainly consider that a red flag.
1
@mattduncan3304 We were all young and lacking self-control, but we didn't all have sexual opportunity...and for others there was too big of a stigma surrounding it. You think I'm advocating for promiscuity, and you couldn't be more wrong.
1
@mattduncan3304 Not young "people" in this case, young "women." Should I assume you're in favor of the stigma? Did you really think about what I wrote?
1
@mattduncan3304 No, because we want people to abstain from sex because it's a choice, not out of social coercion. Also, we're supposed to experiment to some degree when we're young. Those who completely abstain from sex (or other risky behavior) usually have--or end up with--other issues.
1
@DiogenesDworkinson Please use actual words if you mean to communicate.
1
@jesmcalli Right, it's all subjective and people's standards are arbitrary. Thanks for making my point.
1
@jaybo7813 No, there has to be a number or you won't be able to make a decision when the time comes. Think about it. Also, if a 35-yr old had 15 different partners in her 20s but only one since she turned 30, that's pretty solid evidence of change. Note: I haven't told anyone here they should date someone (male or female) who's been with 100 partners.
1
@adrianharry5336 If you were a 5'2 skinny guy, I bet you'd be willing to override paternal uncertainty if it meant the chance at a fulfilling relationship with a reasonably attractive woman.
1
@birthemuller7310 Thank you, I admire your bravery.
1
@mattduncan3304 Yes, curiosity carries a risk (in every case). But I DO believe the only way it's satisfied is through first-hand experience. If we must use (cheap) operant conditioning, it should focus on rewards rather than punishment. So, no, none of those things are acceptable motivators IMO. They may be necessary at times (execution notwithstanding), but produce no net positive results. Shame is probably the worst of all because it pushes us into a "child" state of mind, as it was used most frequently by our parents growing up. Any society that treats its population like children is doomed to get a society of children. Having said all this, I need to add one caveat. I believe there's a natural amount of shame produced when we do something like overeat (severely or consistently), or have sex with someone who wouldn't care if we got hit by a bus tomorrow. Hence, I don't support a society that tells people how healthy or beautiful they are when they've obviously been overeating, and neither do I support a society that tells women how strong and independent they are while they've been sleeping around.
1
@DiogenesDworkinson I really don't have much to say on that stuff and I'm not sure what you were rebutting. I agree that there are problems to iron out, and that both men and women are HIGHLY guilty. My guess would be that half of that 63% are not "electively" single, and definitely not electively celibate. Statistics can be twisted any given way. At this time I would ask you what YOUR point is.
1
@jesmcalli I'm asking what your personal standard is on the matter?
1
@jesmcalli Which is exactly why we shouldn't prejudge anyone based on a single number. What's so funny is that I can answer my own question, while everyone else remains afraid to. The reason I can answer it is because I know the difference between a social standard (in the interest of the welfare of a society) and a MORAL judgment...plus I recognize that there are always exceptions. However, the group in this comment thread has been such miserable sports that I'm not going to, you know, 'give it up.'
1
@jesmcalli That's exactly my point. The question is, how many partners PER YEAR constitutes promiscuity? And we should put the same question toward men.
1
@jesmcalli Thanks for playing. I'd like to keep it closer to 2 for women, personally. But I see a different standard for young men (3-4) and then tapering off as they get older, all the way down to 1 in their 40s (as they need to be changing their focus and attitudes by then). It's not unreasonable to have specific "guidelines" as long as we don't use those to outright ostracize someone and we take things like past trauma, abuse, etc. into account.
1
@jesmcalli If we all locked ourselves in box until our issues were worked out (issues we might not even be aware of), the human race could easily die out before we resume dating.
1
@jesmcalli This is about the light in which we view people socially, not whether they're ready for a relationship. But so you know, I've yet to meet anyone who's worked through all their sht and is realistically fit for a relationship.
1