Vanrift wrote...
I hear this topic come up a few times but not really talked about. How far can you go and call it harmless before saying it's a problem, and why does it happen?
I would call it a problem when it starts to effect other parts of your life in a major way or when it is 'controlling' your life, same way you say about addictions basically, because just like you can be addicted to alcohol, nicotine, drugs or chocolate, you can be addicted to sex too.
Vanrift wrote...
This came up because I overhear coworkers talking about some woman being a slut. I stayed away from that mess. It did make me think of a good friend of mine that does sleep around a lot. I don't think anything bad about her but I wish she didn't jump in to so many beds.
Why you wish that? Isn't it her business what she does, how many times a week she has sex?
Vanrift wrote...
Why have so many sex partners? I never understood some people have so many. Now the number for "how many" changes from person to person. But when it's a new person every night I say that's to many.
Well that is just your opinion. Why should a person only have one sex partner? I use the term 'sex partner' in the context of it being essentially like a 'friend with benefits', you are not lovers, you are not in a romantic relationship, you are just two people who like to have sex with each other for the pleasure of it.
Vanrift wrote...
Sex is the physical form of love and should be only shared with someone special. That's the standard now when when to have sex.
Excuse me for saying this, but who the fuck are you to say that that is the standard? Who the hell are you to say sex should be only shared with single person who is special to you? The word 'love' is purely subjective, so to say "sex is the physical form of love" can mean almost anything. Sex is an activity which we humans get pleasure from, there is nothing wrong in trying to get it as much as you can (as long as the other party is as willing as you are).
Vanrift wrote...
So I don't get it when some say "it doesn't count if there is no love". It like saying a racecar diver doing warm-up laps doesn't count because they don't towards the laps of the race. Point is he's still going around the track. If sex with no love doesn't count then like saying adultery doesn't count.
I don't know who says that, but again the word 'love' is subjective so that can mean almost anything. I also don't understand what the question is getting at, what doesn't count?
Your race car analogy is horrible, because the purpose of warm-up laps is different from the purpose of the actual race. The same way people have sex for different reasons, there is no this 'standard' that you have to only have sex with your wife/husband.
And because your race car analogy is bad, it's illogical trying to equate it to adultery, it just doesn't make any sense.
Vanrift wrote...
The other part of it is the judgement of it all. For a while when a woman sleeps around she's called a slut or whore, but for a man he's called a stud or player. Now fields have changed as player is now used for both genders.
There are multiple possible reasons to why women are called sluts and men studs, but i am not gonna go into those, because that is not a problem of sex, it's a problem of hypocritical society.
Vanrift wrote...
And when a guys sleeps around a lot. Two questions pop-up 1) Can't he keep it in his pants for more then a day?
So fucking what if he can't? What is the problem?
Vanrift wrote...
2) How the hell is he able to find so many women to sleep with him when the rest of us have a hard time just finding one girlfriend?
Wow, is the whole point of this topic to vent about your jealousy of women not wanting to have sex with you? Because you can't get 'lucky' with the opposite sex, no one else shouldn't either?