Slut shaming

[Tyler Robinson]

5 minutes ago, evgn said:

You can join it then, i hope you are proud of yourself

I'm not a slut nor am I proud of them. No clue where you got the idea, probably didn't bother to read the thread.. Goodluck. 

[Bobby_2021]

18 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Should slut shaming be done? No.

With that said, high body counts are correlated with more divorces, baggage, trauma, trust issues and low pair bonding capacity. 

This applies for men too, not just women.

@Tyler Robinson I am sorry that it offended and hurt your feelings.

It's not misogynistic to say racking up a higher body count has consequences. I included men as well in my assessment. So I don't get where the misogyny part comes from. 

The same issues also applies to men. The men who smoothly attracts hundreds of women are not going to ve highly developed spiritual sages. They themselves will narcissistic confident assholes. 

The only way you can get rid of the baggage is by doing deep spiritual work which most people will never ever do. 

7 hours ago, Tyler Robinson said:

You're trying to degrade women who want to be sexually free and not be under your patriarchal hammer. 

Are you saying that "sexual liberation" has zero consequences on future relationships? 

The sexual market place is not a sweet and fail place where everyone is equally valued for who they are. 

That slut shaming that you lowkey support is itself a mechanism built by partriarcy so that women preserve their value.

It's the same way how men who are poor, short, different skin colour & accent, has a tougher time in the dating market because they are associated with lower value by women. This is done so with zero explanation or compassion to the men that are being eliminated from the Market. 

Similarly women can also be of low value. Women who can preserve their feminity will be of higher value. 

It's not hateful to observe either of those. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Bobby_2021

[Tyler Robinson]

@Bobby_2021 it's one thing to say low sexual value which is actually based on the rating on attraction and applies to both men and women. 

You're now trying to divert the subject and trying to throw what you said before under the rug 

You did not say low value. You specifically used the word "damaged." 

That's derogatory. Nobody should be considered damaged. It means a person who shouldn't be dated because they are a "discard." 

Don't try to manipulate what you said. Stick to it 

 

Nobody deserves to be considered a "discard." That's horrible level of ostracization and that does not fall in the category of shaming. Shaming is condemning. But ostracization is a moral evil. It means outcasting a person 

Who the hell are you. 

Fuck off with your outdated patriarchy and grow the fuck up 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Tyler Robinson

[Bobby_2021]

1 hour ago, Tyler Robinson said:

You specifically used the word "damaged." 

I didn't say women are damaged.

It's the capacity to commit is what gets damaged. And women who has low levels of commitment are low value. This is a consequence of sleeping around. 

Which is true.  

Again this applies to men with commitment issues as well. His ability to commit will also become damaged. Fact. 

You nitpick what you want to hear. 

1 hour ago, Tyler Robinson said:

Don't try to manipulate what you said. Stick to it

I stick to every word that I have said. And even explained my reasoning with facts and statistics. 

And you are not going to bully me away with childish accusations of "misogyny".

Men having higher standards will obviously result in some women not qualifying to such standards. 

It's not "ostracization" or "misogyny" lol  ? 

You are exaggerating my words to make me look as such.

[Bobby_2021]

12 hours ago, something_else said:

Not anyone's problem but the guys if he feels he can't compete on any of these traits. Most women, like most guys, will have a few traits that they prefer in a guy and some they are willing to sacrifice. Exploration helps you work out what those are. Women having high standards is only a problem for guys who offer little value to women to begin with.

The flip side of the coin is relationships which collapse because one or both parties had little experience and constantly wonder what could have been if they had seen more of what life has to offer. Over-committing too soon is often just a waste of a life.

why are you competiting with random young guys in the first place.

And you are conflating high standards with high expectations. A women who has been in more relationships will only have more expectations.

And you will always fall short. She definitely and certainly feels like she lost a great catch. It becomes harder for you to satisfy her. 

This is worse than the flip side. You never really wonder about other guys if you haven't been in a serious possibility that you could be with them.

If you dated and dumbed a film star celebrity, you would always wonder about how great your life would be with them.

If you have never dated a film star, you don't seriously entertain that possibility anyway. 

Plus young people are more malleable and adjustable. Older people are more rigid. So comitting young instead of sleeping around had it's own benifits.

22 hours ago, something_else said:

Touch grass my man

???

2 hours ago, Tyler Robinson said:

Who the hell are you. 

Fuck off with your outdated patriarchy and grow the fuck up 

You know what?

It's completely ok that you responded like this.

I never expect a woman to objectively understand the base level mechanics of dating market.

It's too harsh for the feminine psyche. 

[Tyler Robinson]

1 hour ago, Bobby_2021 said:

I didn't say women are damaged.

It's the capacity to commit is what gets damaged. And women who has low levels of commitment are low value. This is a consequence of sleeping around. 

Which is true.  

Again this applies to men with commitment issues as well. His ability to commit will also become damaged. Fact. 

You nitpick what you want to hear. 

I stick to every word that I have said. And even explained my reasoning with facts and statistics. 

And you are not going to bully me away with childish accusations of "misogyny".

Men having higher standards will obviously result in some women not qualifying to such standards. 

It's not "ostracization" or "misogyny" lol  ? 

You are exaggerating my words to make me look as such.

I can grill you on this but I don't wish to, you're already frightened enough. So I'll have some mercy here. 

I'll let you go.. Not because you won the argument in which case I would have found some honor in you. But because you aren't willing to own that you tried to put down women and I'm not interested to keep dragging you on it. It's a waste of my time to do that. So you get to enjoy your perk. 

There was no childish accusation. Whatever you are implying is old school patriarchal typical misogyny but you don't see it because you're are stymied, ignorant and stuck in your dogmatic box. And I don't hope you'll ever see anything outside of it. Well stay stuck, no problem for me. If someone points out something to you, instead of endlessly arguing and proving yourself right, try to see what you could integrate out of it for yourself, just a piece of advice. 

Coming to the argument as to why I was triggered, because you said some exceptionally offensive stuff that can be classified as misogyny. 

I have evidence for it so I'm not crying bollocks. 

Statements like this - Women who can preserve their feminity will be of higher value. 

It's laughable that you think that a slutty woman is not feminine. In fact they are more feminine and that's why it's easy for men to sleep with them. 

Next thing you used words like "nice women" "well meaning women", "loving women."

Again these words are purposely used to contrast women with low count from women with high count. But discrimination is the basis and the main component of ostracization. You're indirectly implying that these women are not good enough. Well that's straight up judgmental. 

You can easily say - "I wouldn't date a slut" and I won't find any offense with that because you're being frank and bold about dating preferences in women. Which could also mean that other men can date them. 

It's one thing to explicitly state your own dating preference but another to preach around what other men should consider desirable. You aren't other men. Again shades of ostracization where you think all men should dump them. 

Your next statement was - 

You wouldn't willingly choose to undo the damage done by other guys lmao.

This statement implies that the girl is damaged in some manner. Why else say "undo the damage"... If you thought that the girl's ability to commit is damaged and not the girl then what you say doesn't make sense. What is the guy trying to repair if he already knows she can't commit? 

That statement alone proves that you think such women are damaged. 

 

Just a general suggestion to you and I don't expect you to man up and take up it. You are in the habit of arguing and not ever listening, typical self righteous dogmatic behavior. 

So my suggestion is that you cultivate more empathy and respect for women and don't treat them like toys in a shop. 

Your lack of respect is what triggered me. 

And I'm not the only one who questioned you on it. 

Some guy even asked you if you ever been with a woman because your opinions are just flat out contemptuous 

 

With that said, I gracefully end my discussion with you here. 

 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Tyler Robinson

[Bobby_2021]

Thank you. I hope we both understood something. I certainly did. 

I don't intend to continue this discussion either. 

With that said I need to clarify one point for others reading this. 

There is huge difference in interpreting what I said as

"woman are damaged"

vs

"damage has been done to aspects of her".

The latter is true. Former is not. 

The former is implying that everything about her is damaged. Slut shaming happens from the former. Slut shaming is meant to degrade her as an individual. Which is why it's ugly and misogynistic.  

Your leg can be damaged and you are still functional as an individual. When I say her leg is damaged, you are interpreting it as "she is damaged".

The damage has certainly be done. 

1 hour ago, Tyler Robinson said:

This statement implies that the girl is damaged in some manner. 

Nope. It does not. Girl is not damaged.

"Girl has been damaged" is a whole different statement lol. That means she is dysfunctional as an individual who won't even be able to properly function in society. 

What I said is that aspects of her which magnify her feminity has been damaged.

Undoing the damage has to do with overcompensating because you have to cater more, because guys have disappointed her in the past, and she naturally thinks you would do the same. Not to mention higher expectations, mental baggage & trauma. Many even turn into man haters, just because of bad things that happen in the relationship. 

1 hour ago, Tyler Robinson said:

It's laughable that you think that a slutty woman is not feminine. In fact they are more feminine and that's why it's easy for men to sleep with them. 

Nice joke. ? 

You should put this up for discussion. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Bobby_2021

[Shawn Philips]

A free woman should never be slut-shamed.

But, here comes the exception.

If a woman has taken the compromise to get married, form a family, have children... if she stills acts slutty, then she deserves to be shamed, because she accepted the responsability of focusing in 1 man and their children.

[vladorion]

Energetically, every time a woman sleeps with a new man, she takes on some of his limitations.

She will also keep feeding him energetically for years after the intercourse.

That's why women who have been with less men are more attractive.

That's why women don't want to have casual sex (unless they've been brainwashed by the leftist agenda to think it's good for them and empowering). Deep inside they know it's damaging.

I'm against slut shaming since casual sex is only damaging to the women engaging in it and not to other people.

[Tyler Robinson]

1 hour ago, vladorion said:

Energetically, every time a woman sleeps with a new man, she takes on some of his limitations.

She will also keep feeding him energetically for years after the intercourse.

That's why women who have been with less men are more attractive.

That's why women don't want to have casual sex (unless they've been brainwashed by the leftist agenda to think it's good for them and empowering). Deep inside they know it's damaging.

I'm against slut shaming since casual sex is only damaging to the women engaging in it and not to other people.

Why do you think it's damaging? 

[Tyler Robinson]

I mean if I were born a dude, I personally wouldn't want to marry a slut woman. 

That's just my preference. 

Not wanting to judge the woman as low value or high value (value is  not a problem) but deep down I'll have suspicions about her character and virtue. The biggest suspicion would be around the area of loyalty. If she would continue a similar lifestyle in marriage or relationship. 

So my biggest apprehension would be that she would most likely cheat or make me put up with her lifestyle choices and since I prefer ultra strict monogamous relationships(the way Mormons do), I think that it wouldn't fit well with my values in a relationship. 

So it's mostly not about calling a woman bad for having a slut lifestyle, but more about that it doesn't align with my relationship values. It hurts my sexual integrity to have a woman like that and constantly have to worry about her transgressions in the relationship. 

This does not mean that a virgin woman or a woman who has a few partners isn't capable of cheating on her spouse/bf or that she is some virtuous highly precious woman, it's just that she makes the relationship a bit easy on the brain and less stressful. 

No there is no distinction here or inferiority/superiority judgements, I don't consider non slutty women as something more desirable, feminine or coveted prizes,  it would be shameful and cringe to think along those lines. I just think that they would be much easier to deal with. Whereas someone with a slutty history with too many mates, unstable relationships would signal someone who doesn't value commitment, loyalty, hard work and understanding in a relationship, someone who is shallow, fickle, easily dumps others and doesn't really care too much about having a deep connection and treats others as "easy come" or simply doesn't hold much value for who they want to engage with. I see them as weak, shallow, superficial, fragile, flippant and not having strong values in a relationship, also as someone who wouldn't work hard if something were to go wrong in a relationship. Someone who will easily leave you if someone better comes along. 

Of course you can argue that this is a matter of internal insecurities. 

But insecurities are a part of a relationship. They will exist naturally and one way or another, just like jealousy. You can't simply wish these things away, that would be idealistic. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You cannot on one hand engage in behaviors that make your partner insecure and uncomfortable and also expect them to not have any reaction. It's mildly disrespectful if you thought it's okay. So it's your job too, to make sure that your partner doesn't feel awkward about you and part of this means you don't want to give them an impression that you don't care about commitment, you want to put in the best effort to make them feel at home, at ease, to make them feel that you will be fully faithful to them and that would entail a certain level of self restraint, discipline, tact, a certain level of shamefulness, inhibition, coyness, not fake coyness, (by the way this applies to both men and women), some degree of self control, purity, preserving yourself for the other, some level of grace and restriction in order to show to your current /future partner that you care about their desire for you to solely belong to them. I guess that's where the value for virginity (keeping yourself pure for the other) comes from. Although on one hand it looks puritanical and judgemental, even  condescending and selfish, on the other hand knowing that someone is ready to keep themselves as pure as possible by keeping few partners looks like an incredible sacrifice and respect for a future partner's need for loyalty. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Tyler Robinson

[something_else]

9 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

And you are conflating high standards with high expectations. A women who has been in more relationships will only have more expectations.

And you will always fall short. She definitely and certainly feels like she lost a great catch. It becomes harder for you to satisfy her. 

This is worse than the flip side. You never really wonder about other guys if you haven't been in a serious possibility that you could be with them.

If you dated and dumbed a film star celebrity, you would always wonder about how great your life would be with them.

If you have never dated a film star, you don't seriously entertain that possibility anyway. 

Plus young people are more malleable and adjustable. Older people are more rigid. So comitting young instead of sleeping around had it's own benifits.

Expectations and standards are pretty synonymous. 

I don’t think this mechanic plays out in reality as much as you think it does. 

Most of the time people explore their sexuality when they are younger and then find someone who ticks most of their boxes and who they enjoy being around to settle down with

I don’t think it’s especially common for guys or girls to pine over past relationships when they’re in a new one that they are truly happy with

The idea of women always wishing they could’ve locked down some super attractive guy they had a fling with once is I think mostly an idea developed by guys who feel they themselves aren’t worthy or can’t compete with her past lovers

Thats the only reason I can think of for a guy to be super picky about a girl being a virgin. A truly self-assured guy wouldn’t care

If you are a high value guy none of this matters because you know deep down you are worthy and can satisfy your girl even if she’s had a fair few relationships and flings before you

[Bobby_2021]

@something_else  

ok so let me get this straight.

You have to compete, perform and  bring more to the table for an older, less attractive, less valueable version of girl with tons of baggage, trauma & trust issues. 

I don't have fear of lack of performance nor my value.

But that will be for a highly feminine virtuous girl that protects her value. Not some deranged hoe. 

Anyways you go ahead king. ?

Not my cup of tea. 

[GLORY]

On 10/6/2022 at 9:29 AM, Tyler Robinson said:

When I tell a man that I had many boyfriends in the past, they usually take it as a sign that I sleep with everyone. This is where I have a problem with it. 

@Tyler Robinson
Having many men in the past doesnt mean you sleep with everyone. No,
It just means that you just stick to ONE man for a longer time (till you replace him with an other man)
 

[Ry4n]

On 6/10/2022 at 4:20 PM, Tyler Robinson said:

Is slut shaming a projection of male insecurity is there some truth to this moral shaming of women?

Only seen and heard about Women slut shaming other women personally but Male insecurity could sometimes be the reason.

It's tricky because male attractiveness to a woman does decrease if she's slept around a lot, but I mean A LOT. Not only that but (scientific fact) pair bonding hormones that release during sex will not be released as much after enough "hoe-ing around" which dramatically decreases chances of success with regards to Long term relationships, so doing it enough will certainly have consequences at least for the people who want long term relationships.

Bottom line being a "slut" is bad for everyone, and whilst nobody should be getting bullied for it, I'm honestly not quite sure that what Gen Z need right now is less shame lol, 5 minutes on Tik Tok makes me think they need more of it. We've lost a lot of basic behavioural standards these days.

 

 

[Ry4n]

@Myioko Sexual preferences are sexist.

[Breakingthewall]

The problem with being a slut is not that a girl loves sex and greatly enjoys having it with different guys, that's great. the problem is that he does it begging for love due to low self-esteem, which is the most common. so yeah it's pretty embarrassing

[Tyler Robinson]

15 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

The problem with being a slut is not that a girl loves sex and greatly enjoys having it with different guys, that's great. the problem is that he does it begging for love due to low self-esteem, which is the most common. so yeah it's pretty embarrassing

Understandable. 

 

[something_else]

On 08/10/2022 at 7:27 PM, Bobby_2021 said:

@something_else  

ok so let me get this straight.

You have to compete, perform and  bring more to the table for an older, less attractive, less valueable version of girl with tons of baggage, trauma & trust issues. 

I don't have fear of lack of performance nor my value.

But that will be for a highly feminine virtuous girl that protects her value. Not some deranged hoe. 

Anyways you go ahead king. ?

Not my cup of tea. 

The problem you are going to have is that the chance that the first girl you end up with is going to be a suitable partner for the rest of your life is extremely low

Because the only way you can really find out if you’re suitable for spending your life together is to try. What if it fails? Now by your own standards both you and the girl are screwed

And a lot of girls (in the west at least) will be very iffy about a guy who has zero or little experience as well

If I was still with my first GF I’d be beyond miserable right now, but I’m still glad I had that experience, it taught me a lot about what I wanted and didn’t want. Same goes for the various relationships I’ve had since then

Edited October 10, 2022 by something_else