It's okay to have sex with as many people as you want. I think it's a bit snobbish to turn your nose up at someone because of something they did in the past which hurt no-one. To me, being sexually inhibited is an unattractive trait and being sexually liberal is an attractive trait.
It's no more snobbish than preferring blondes over brunettes, or Asian women over black or white women.
Sexual inhibition has nothing to do with it.
Take for an example a person with many partners but only wants sex in one position and with the lights off, Vs. someone who believes in having few partners but wants it in every conceivable position as well as anal, oral & with the curtains open so the neighbors can see.
Perhaps you're right. I disagree, but I can't articulate it. I think turning your nose up at someone because of the colour of their hair or race is just as snobbish, though.
PS. Sorry for re-editing so many times. Your reply made me squirm a little as I re-evaluated myself, and it still is. And I should clarify that for me, "turning your nose up at someone" and "being snobbish to someone" means rejecting them because you think you're too good for them.
I'm not trying to be judge-y, although it wouldn't be the first time I'd been judge-y without realising it. If I turned down someone because they had few sexual partners, which I wouldn't ever do, you'd be well within your rights to judge me just as heavily.
Is it normal for a 19 years old having that many sexual partners?
← View full post
It's okay to have sex with as many people as you want. I think it's a bit snobbish to turn your nose up at someone because of something they did in the past which hurt no-one. To me, being sexually inhibited is an unattractive trait and being sexually liberal is an attractive trait.
--
VirgilManly
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
It's no more snobbish than preferring blondes over brunettes, or Asian women over black or white women.
Sexual inhibition has nothing to do with it.
Take for an example a person with many partners but only wants sex in one position and with the lights off, Vs. someone who believes in having few partners but wants it in every conceivable position as well as anal, oral & with the curtains open so the neighbors can see.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
-
SkullsNRoses
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Perhaps you're right. I disagree, but I can't articulate it. I think turning your nose up at someone because of the colour of their hair or race is just as snobbish, though.
PS. Sorry for re-editing so many times. Your reply made me squirm a little as I re-evaluated myself, and it still is. And I should clarify that for me, "turning your nose up at someone" and "being snobbish to someone" means rejecting them because you think you're too good for them.
--
VirgilManly
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
It seems to me that you want to judge those who prefer few partners but don't want others judging you for having many.
Because sex is such an individual thing, everyone has their own preferences. It is what it is.
I guess the key is finding sex partners who share ones own view of sex. Then there won't be conflicts.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I'm not trying to be judge-y, although it wouldn't be the first time I'd been judge-y without realising it. If I turned down someone because they had few sexual partners, which I wouldn't ever do, you'd be well within your rights to judge me just as heavily.
I agree with you, it is what it is.
"amp"?
--
disthing
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
EccentricWeird
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
IIN sometimes can't deal with the & sign and sticks an 'amp' in it.
This often happens after a comment is edited - suddenly the & has an 'amp' in it.
Similarly, if you edit a comment you've made with a link in, sometimes it messes up the link with a load of HTML-type code surrounding it.
--
disthing
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
VirgilManly
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
For example...
& and http://www.google.com
After an edit and save, becomes...
& and <a href="http://www.google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com</a>
--
EccentricWeird
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Sorry, honey. It doesn't work that way. Might want to check it again.
--
disthing
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yes it does, happens to my posts all the time after I edit them.
^^^Like he said. It was edited.
It is probably HTML abbreviation for ampersand.
It's a device used to make guitars louder.
--
SkullsNRoses
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I see, that makes perfect sense in the context, thank you good sir, *tips hat*.
--
EccentricWeird
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You're welcome, bones and plants!