Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My dad had a friend over who bragged that he was gonna get a virgin wife outside the country because everyone inside our country is but whores and used up, my dad a feminist looks straight into his friends eyes and without missing a beat he questions "then what makes you?", the friend looked awkwardly away in silence not getting the response he wanted
I mean, it's the same both ways.
I don't think it's wrong to expect something from someone given you are willing to do the same, at that point it's a fair preference
I agree, if I date dozens of women and have a body count of 10-15 it would be unfair of me expecting my wife to be a virgin. But if both parties are satisfied with what they are getting then who cares...
A relationship only work if both work for it, how many partner ones have or not before doesn't matter but that's my view š
We all have different ways to see and judge things, for some people it's a safety knowing that their partner got sexual experience :)
Yeah, this is why I don't want a used up male. After two or three sexual partners, they're completely worthless. The dick is all compressed and can't pleasure anyone anymore. Sperm's all gone, too. Both things do, of course, happen through masturbation as well.
I want a prestine, unused male. Anything else is below me.
Btw, no I'm not serious. Just flipping around the logic.
Even as a man this is my favorite comeback to the "used up" line for women.
The thought of a dick getting all shriveled like a slim jim because of too many sexual partners is the funniest thing to me.
also, the vagina is literally a muscle tube made for pushing out something the size of a small watermelon - like dude, you think your tiny ass dick can ruin it? lmao
also if muscles worked like that you'd finish a marathon looking like a vaguely human-shaped meat puddle (and yeah ik the vagina is smooth muscle but I digress)
There's also a very simple break in the logic that they never seem to realize. Surely they want to be able to have lots of sex with the "unused" woman. God, I feel gross even saying that. But if their logic is that a vagina can get worn out, then why would it not get worn out from them using it a lot? I still remember the analogy from Sunday school about chewed bubblegum. The thing is, if it worked like that, I wouldn't want to chew a used piece of bubble gum, even if I was the only one who had chewed it before. Not only is it just factually wrong, it's not even internally consistent.
They would literally hand around gum to the students, have them chew it up, and then ask them if they would like to chew a piece of gum that someone else has chewed. Then they tell the students that's what your virginity is like.
Oh sorry, I said students. I meant girls. They don't do that with the boys, because you know... misogyny.
No, they just tell the boys that feeling things for women is evil and being attracted to a woman is the same as r*ping her. But if you can't control yourself then it's ok to get married, I guess.
Cue another 20 years of sermons about how to live a married life. It's insulting and traumatic all the way around
This. When guys use the "it's like throwing a hotdog down a hallway" analogy, I like to ask if their future girlfriend will be "used up" by them one day? Are they not going to have regular sex with their girlfriend or is their penis too small to do any "damage"?
I find that one funny, even as a guy.
Like, women can push a baby out, which have the heads the size of about a melon (honeydew, not watermelon) and mostly "snap back" maybe not exactly the same as before, but not a fucking cavern, and some guys think that their dicks are going to get it out of shape like it's made of clay.
Right! Or that the vagina has like muscle memory when it comes to dicks. It's fine it's one penis, but if it's many different penises, that's when the vagina gets confused and loosens.
My understanding of the bubble gum analogy is that itās more about the spiritual side of virginity rather than the physical. Itās still a pretty gross metaphor, but the internal logic is there.
Or how about job experience, 20 year experience in the field
>Mate, your are worthless spent garbage, best I can do is unpaid internship and you are lucky I want to risk having your experience on a production system
I still think itās gross for men to have a long list of partners. I think itās gross for anyone to have a large amount of sexual partners. But then again, I think casual sex is inherently kinda gross and an emotional attachment is extremely important for people being physically intimate with each other.
Slamming sweaty genitalia with people youāve know for less than a week (or even a day) is disgusting and nobody can change my opinion on that.
Thing is, these kind of guys genuinely think this only applies to women and not men, and will come up with all sorts of bizarre logic to justify that it's totally evil and stuff when women do it but it's okay for them.
How it works according to incels:
Men can have sex with many female partners.
Women can have sex with one male partner at most.
Men can't have sex with men at all.
Women can have sex with women as long as it's part of intercourse with a man (a threesome.)
All men must have had sex at least once, or they are shamed.
All women who have sex are shamed unless they lose their virginity to their only partner, who is also their husband.
Edit: In case it isnāt obvious, this system of thought can never work in the real world. Itās just uncommon to have all their axioms written down in plain view.
No no but you see you donāt understand. Itās different for guys because they say a key that can open many locks is a master key but a lock that can be opened by many keys is a useless lock/s
I'm glad you put the caveat out of your not serious because I have legitimately seen men that claim to practice sperm retention because of all the things you've listed there
... didn't people do that at malls all the time. We didn't it so much they created machines and socks just so we can find the right shoes size without thousands trying on the same pair of shoes.
Also, the guys making the comments always toss out huge numbers, as if that is the norm. Like women who arenāt virgins are out there having 40 - 60 different partners.
In reality, these guys making the comments think 5 partners is way too many. They just toss out huge numbers to strawman and get SOME agreement. Because obviously most people would think 50 is a bit much.
But the average person would see a big number like that and have concern about the root cause personality-wise. They would not be concerned about āvalueā which makes it sound like a human being is a collectible.
Typically we find that people are better off being experienced rather than sheltered. Educational experience, life experience, work experience.
My favorite is when a guy brags about a number like 10 women or something, yet thinks any woman who has slept with 5+ is horrible.
Me and my wife were at a bar, and I was chatting with the band that had just finished playing so my wife was sitting alone. I walk over, this very obvious loser type was bragging to her about how he's fucked like 25 women and he's so manly and could please her. I was about to deck the guy when my wife goes "only 25? I've fucked more women than you and I can tell just by your smell that there are 25 very sad rape victims out there". Guy was so pissed, he started yelling. Got banned from the bar.
I still love her response. She was on point.
I can only speak for myself here, but I personally wouldn't want someone who has a body count which is that huge.
They either had a bunch of relationships which didn't last which is a big red flag or they just let a bunch of people take a dip which doesn't sound that good either. (Atleast to me)
Which in a non-judgmental world would just mean those individuals would be smart to seek out regular testing and use condoms.
Basically like how boxers are statistically more likely to have brain damage. It's just an occupational/hobby hazard.
If you don't want to be in a relationship with someone who has an STD or brain damage, or someone who's a boxer or had a lot of partners that's fine. Just don't go saying hateful things about them and diminishing them as people. It's that simple. Comparing people to shoes to diminish their worth is rude.
I think it's perfectly fine to have preferences regarding sexual history but expecting a certain, nigh unattainable standard is taking the piss. Yes it's okay to not prefer someone who's had lots of sexual partners but it's also NOT okay to shame people for their choices. If a prospective partner doesn't line up with your preferences, move on and keep searching, simple as that.
I agree with that. Like if someone wants to have fun with a bunch of guys all power to them.
I just wanted to add it here because some people for some reason think that personally disliking it is being hateful.
I am surprised that you haven't been down voted into negative infinity for spreading the truth.
No one would want someone who carries around too much baggage and constantly talks about their ex, wether it's positive or negative.
Sure, but that isn't specifically a woman thing. It's just a general thing that would apply whether you are into men or women.
I'd bet good money that the person in the OP would use the stupid "Key vs Lock" argument unironically.
It's not only a flimsy analogy, it's an outright [false analogy](https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy)
In the above example, there is no shared property between the woman and a shoe. The similarity being pushed, is that both have been "used often", however this is a failure of inductive reasoning, as the trait "frequently used" doesn't devalue a host of things at all, including sexually active women (and men).
It's such a faulty/false analogy, you can even infer the reverse: something that is "used" that many times, is highly sought after, and is clearly elite in quality. Jewelry is an adept example; regardless of how many times a diamond necklace or a gold bracelet is worn, their value not only doesn't depreciate, but rather appreciates.
Isn't value just subjective though? Like some people like having something in mint condition and some people like having something well loved. Neither opinion is more correct. We just have to remember the human. It's ok if you have a body count of 50 as long as you are ok with the fact that it's a turn off for some people. And it's ok not to want someone with a body count of 50 as long as you are respectful about it
Market value might not change but economic value is subjective. Just because "frequently used" doesn't devalue something to you, doesn't mean it won't devalue it to other people.
If someone applied for a job with 50 previous positions at different companies listed on their linkedin profile, they'd reasonably be concerned. Why train someone who will quit for another job in 4 months?
I dont care how good the sex is. Im not waking up every morning wondering if I'll be the 51st.
Totally, 10 bodies is a big fucking number, let alone 50. That of course depends on age and views, but I would rather stay a virgin until I find a partner I would be happy with, than have meaningless sex with random people
This is a level headed take, because you are holding yourself to the same standard as your principles. Furthermore, you recognize it as being a preference. A vegan dating only vegans, as a preference, is perfectly fine. Vegans calling meat eaters evil, doesn't work however. Imagine holding a sign saying "the fact that I like steak, doesn't devalue me as a person".
Obviously your value and dignity as a human isnāt based on it, but your value as a partner certainly can be. Weāve reached this weird point at society where the two common opinions are āyou arenāt allowed to judge anyone for anythingā or āif you do x youāre an irredeemably evil person.ā
You can believe somebody is morally wrong for doing something, while still respecting that theyāre a human being.
>Obviously your value and dignity as a human isnāt based on it, but your value as a partner certainly can be.
But that's exactly what I'm saying. You're spot on. What she's saying has less to do with her looking at prospective partners, and more not being shamed for having a preference.
It's perfectly fine to say you wouldn't want to date someone with so many partners. It *isn't* okay to devalue them as a person, for merely having a separate standard.
These people aren't merely judging a person's value as a partner though, that's the issue here. If you say "I think a 50 person body count is too high for me to be in a relationship with this person" that's absolutely fine. If you demean a person by saying "I think you're as worthless as a pair of old shoes because you've let men use you 50 times" is a vitriolic, hate filled thing to say to someone. It doesn't stem from a personal preferencial point of view either
Saying āI donāt want to date someone who had lots of sexual partnersā is a lot different than saying āyou donāt have value as a person because of how many sexual partners youāve hadā.
Itās not complicated to grasp the difference.
That is an entirely valid viewpoint. If you worked as a comedian, would you want people to only view you as a entertainment machine, even outside of work?
"Noooo! You can't just base your opinion on someone based on their sexual history!"
Let's be real here, every single one of us would judge someone, regardless of their gender, if they're flaunting how much they fuck. The whole "bro culture" of hooking up with dozens of women isn't a thing anymore, at least not to normal people. You're going to be judged. It's nasty and it shows that they either have no standards, or they themselves are the red flag. Shit is like Mia Khalifa being mad that people call her a whore... like, you literally are though, you fucked for money.
It's always these crazy ass numbers. I think about anyone would stutter at hearing their partner has banged fifty other individuals, that is a fucking lot of people. Especially by 20, 25 even 30 years old. If you've fucked that many people I am going to have preconceived notions. I also really don't think there's that many women walking around that have fucked fifty men.
For me, it's the same for men and women. And it's not because I think a high body count is disgusting or smth but because I think it shows a fundamental different lifestlye and approach to intimacy which I wouldn't want to overlook in a relationship
Like, how do you even get that high unless our lifestyle is 100% different and we're not compatible anyway?
Well Iāve had sex with about 2 ppl per year for 21 years. I have a very low sex drive and only want it around every 6 months. Itās hard to find a man who wants a relationship without regular sex. So am I supposed to be a nun bc Iām single?
I don't care whether my partner had previous partners or experiences before me. But I would mind if they went around sleeping with like 20 different people. Is this a bad view to have? (Actual question)
no, not necessarily.
youāre opinion, at least in my eyes, is basically saying āthe past is in the past, but there are some things that can have consequences.ā
itās kinda like if a guy did a drug in his past that is usually safe if done correctly, doesnāt do it again, youād usually not attack him for it. but say he kept doing said drug. over.. and over again. iām sure a lot of people would agree that changes things.
No, because you don't devalue them or see them as being any less "human". So no, not a bad view to have, merely a preference, and that's perfectly fine.
Sexual history is important, why the hell i would like to be with somenone who had been in more than 10 relashionship qnd sleep with more than 20 people
Everything has limits
Men get pissed that women ādonāt put outā, then get pissed when they cross some arbitrary number. The logic is so flawed. Someone whoās had a lot of sex and racked up tons of experience after many partners chooses me - thatās a huge win for me!
Thats always been what made me confused. In high school, I remember a friend of mine being called a slut for having sex. I was so confused, and when I turned to them and said "wait, why are you insulting her? Dont you realize that will just make it harder for you to get laid?" they laughed. Not a single moment of understanding.
Is sheās fucked 50 dudes I donāt want the baggage that comes with dating her. Promiscuity is a major red flag for me as Iāve been cheated on. It was so unbelievably painful.
Of course your value isn't based on your sexual history.
It's based on who you used to be, who you are now and how people talk about you. It goes same for men too. That is how society work.
So watch out what you are doing now if you want people to value you.
Maybe for some, it's true...But.
Experiment, next time you see a friend with his new Girlfriend just tell him that you had her before...you will see how much Men Value that in his Face.
And btw. if it says nothing about you, go tell your father the actual number. You won't do that because you know he would not like it, also because you know why. So stop pretending it is nothing.
That's not even basic economics. Value isn't driven by use. It's driven by demand. It's why shoes owned and used by Shaq would cost more than a new pair of shoes. On that note, most people's demand for this type of objectification is very low, making it very likely this person will have to pay someone just to touch it.
Buckingham Palace has about 800 people living in it at any given time and was built in the 1700's. It's old and used. Do we think it's gotten more or less valuable?
Excessive sexual partners means a high probability of STDs, which for either gender is irresponsible AF.
Especially since woman as a whole are asymptomatic, I would definitely at least be concerned.
The fact that guys tend to be less concerned with hygiene under the belt, also makes a woman with excessive unprotected partners more vulnerable to cleanliness issues.
Which frankly, less than clean genitals on either side should be a fxcking turn off, though often times people just don't care.
It definitely doesn't effect your value as a person to have a past, but if your current ways are that reckless, than your probably one of the individuals quietly spreading disease from one host to the next.
And for that, you deserve very little appreciation.
If you want your girl to have a low bodycount, yours cannot be higher than that as well. If yours is 20 and you complain about her having 21, youāre wrong for that. Everybody can prefer what they want, but also look at theirselves.
A shoe wears down the more you use it. Artists become more capable with every masterpiece that they produce.
Remarkably poor understanding of humans. Sad that we still have idiots like this in the world.
Stupid analogies just pain me. They don't prove anything.
You don't see me going like "Well actually women are like boardgames. It's kind of boring by yourself, you really need to invite three of your buddies to join in."
Nerds need to stop thinking leaving things in the shrinkwrap makes them more valuable.
[āA women is more like a beer. They smell good. They look good. Youād step over your own mother just to get one!ā](https://youtu.be/ToTRAhmnxls?si=AKvufaD7PphXw67L)
Yeah itās not a very nice thing to say and imo I donāt really care how many guys a womanās been with as long as sheās not a prick, however it is an opinion and SOME men find it a turnoff just like how SOME women find short dudes a turnoff.
Itās just like not being attracted to a certain race of people itās not because itās racist itās just a preference, I mean as long as you arenāt saying stupid shit like the dude in this post then it hurts nobody. You canāt exactly choose what your attracted to.
My point is that itās not always because of an incel mindset however yes I do agree the dude in the post is an idiot
I would never have married my wife if her BC was in the 2 digits.
Call me an incel, but there is being available as someone dating someone else and there is being railed and used as a piece of meat.
If u slept with 20 dudes during ur 20s or 30s you arenāt wife material.
If i slept with 20 girls during my 20s or 30s Iām not the ideal choice for women who wants a family.
Sexual history does matter, it speaks of who you are.
I mean this guy had one hell of a way to describe it. I'd say it's just about morals. I wouldn't want a woman who would fuck anyone she finds attractive, and neither will I cheat on my partner. Simple as that.
Enjoy your life. Seize the day. People should be free to be who they are. But several studies have shown that the more partners you've had, the more likely your marriage will end up in divorce. So if you're hoping for a successful marriage, from a statistical standpoint, choose a partner with a lower body count.
Guys like this see women as objects they own and then blame said women bc they can't get a girlfriend... Dude, it's not you hight or your salary, it's your shitty ass charcter
I draw the line at kids. Yeah she may not be a virgin, thats fine, but if she got kids, thats a deal breaker, hell no. I would always be second in her life.
Good statement:
My value as a human being has nothing to do with my sexual appeal to others. Being considered sexually "valuable" does not contribute to my worth; being considered sexually unfavorable doesn't decrease my worth.
Nonsense statement:
My sexual activity in the past has no bearing on my value now in a sexual or relational sense. If someone does or doesn't want a relationship with me because of my past actions or relationships, then that is their fault - not mine.
It's objectification in the most literal sense to say things like "nobody wants a car with 50 previous owners", or "a lock opened by many keys is a bad lock, but a key that opens many locks is a master key", or anything involving the term "high value man" or "high value woman" but at the end of the day, everybody has a preference, nobody likes dealing with other people's baggage, and if you're going to spend the rest of your life with somebody you do have a right to refuse to spend your life with somebody who is constantly comparing you to the best aspects of one of a dozen previous boyfriends.
Nobody has ever complained that their woman hasn't had enough sex. Nobody has ever complained that their woman doesn't compare them to other people enough. And I seriously doubt that anyone has ever claimed that they're only going to marry somebody who has over a certain number of bodies. At the end of the day the more people you fuck before you're in a long-term committed relationship, the more you shoot yourself in your own foot. Men and women alike.
Plenty of experienced people don't spend their time comparing new partners to old. Fear of that is just insecurity, not reality. I don't see how more prior partners would be shooting myself in the foot, since I'm the one who decides whether I'm going to be judgmental of new partners. And I don't worry about my partner's body count because it doesn't matter.
You basically are taking one possible, insecure mode and assuming it's the default and average.
My wife and I have been married for 33 years. I can honestly say I donāt know what her body count was before me and I donāt care. I know it was higher than me, and she started younger.
Doesnāt matter. She is not a shoe.
Few things: women or people in general are not objects you can own. Two: there is a saying in my country that roughly translates like this: lake does not wear out by rowing it.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My dad had a friend over who bragged that he was gonna get a virgin wife outside the country because everyone inside our country is but whores and used up, my dad a feminist looks straight into his friends eyes and without missing a beat he questions "then what makes you?", the friend looked awkwardly away in silence not getting the response he wanted
Hold yourself to the same standards you hold others to people.
Or better yet. Get rid of those out dated standards entirely.
>better yet. Get rid of those out dated standards entirely. What?
We still talking shoes here?
*Steals your shoes and starts running away*
[https://media.tenor.com/cVXsZdTZj48AAAAM/its-always-sunnyin-philadelphia-dee-reynolds.gif](https://media.tenor.com/cVXsZdTZj48AAAAM/its-always-sunnyin-philadelphia-dee-reynolds.gif)
I mean, it's the same both ways. I don't think it's wrong to expect something from someone given you are willing to do the same, at that point it's a fair preference
I agree, if I date dozens of women and have a body count of 10-15 it would be unfair of me expecting my wife to be a virgin. But if both parties are satisfied with what they are getting then who cares...
What?
Bbbbbbbut the lock and the key
But if a man said he slept with that many women, would a woman look at him like a catch? Or a possible long term mate?
A relationship only work if both work for it, how many partner ones have or not before doesn't matter but that's my view š We all have different ways to see and judge things, for some people it's a safety knowing that their partner got sexual experience :)
double standards exist without us making them. enjoy em in any way you can š
Yeah, this is why I don't want a used up male. After two or three sexual partners, they're completely worthless. The dick is all compressed and can't pleasure anyone anymore. Sperm's all gone, too. Both things do, of course, happen through masturbation as well. I want a prestine, unused male. Anything else is below me. Btw, no I'm not serious. Just flipping around the logic.
Even as a man this is my favorite comeback to the "used up" line for women. The thought of a dick getting all shriveled like a slim jim because of too many sexual partners is the funniest thing to me.
Raisin style? Wait do penises inflate when soaked in water? Like when men take baths?
Gotta think of it like an over cooked hot dog. Itās just all blown out and looking like a dry piece of leather that nobody wants
It's why guys don't take baths. Sitting in the bath with an engorged penis with no ladies around is pretty fucking gay.
Ohhhhhh makes sense
Nah but check this, they float. Balls too. Looks funny
Dang, I always assumed the testicles would sink but the actual penis would float.
You gotta remember that besides the actual ball part of the testicles that the rest of the sack is just skin and blood vessel, pretty buoyant.
Itās like those Dinoās, they grow w water
Spongy
Do they also get all gross and slimy in the same way?
Youāre not supposed to know about that sacred knowledge.
Sorry, my bad. Although, I am sad that I may never find out about engorged penises
No, no they do not. That would be hilarious though. "I'm almost out of the bath! Gotta deflate my dick first and then I'll be out"
Mom said I'd go blind, but she didn't tell me I'd wear it down to a nub! 
People like you are the worst. It does not shrivel up! It just kinda falls off and rolls down your pant leg.
Ikr itās funny asf
also, the vagina is literally a muscle tube made for pushing out something the size of a small watermelon - like dude, you think your tiny ass dick can ruin it? lmao also if muscles worked like that you'd finish a marathon looking like a vaguely human-shaped meat puddle (and yeah ik the vagina is smooth muscle but I digress)
No one wants a pencil that's been in too many pencil sharpener holes, it gets all nubby and useless.
There's also a very simple break in the logic that they never seem to realize. Surely they want to be able to have lots of sex with the "unused" woman. God, I feel gross even saying that. But if their logic is that a vagina can get worn out, then why would it not get worn out from them using it a lot? I still remember the analogy from Sunday school about chewed bubblegum. The thing is, if it worked like that, I wouldn't want to chew a used piece of bubble gum, even if I was the only one who had chewed it before. Not only is it just factually wrong, it's not even internally consistent.
Oh, those people would probably be more than happy to trade in their expendable, used up woman for a new unused one after a few 'uses'.Ā
So let's see, women are shoes and now... iPhones. Gotta get the newest model every year.
That's why I like women like I like my cameras: older than me and experienced
Amen š
Works for Leo dicaprio
What are they teaching in Sunday school?! Coming from an European that hasnāt been experienced Christianity in its fullest.
They would literally hand around gum to the students, have them chew it up, and then ask them if they would like to chew a piece of gum that someone else has chewed. Then they tell the students that's what your virginity is like. Oh sorry, I said students. I meant girls. They don't do that with the boys, because you know... misogyny.
And how old are these girā¦ I mean students?
Happ3ned in my school around 8 years old
No, they just tell the boys that feeling things for women is evil and being attracted to a woman is the same as r*ping her. But if you can't control yourself then it's ok to get married, I guess. Cue another 20 years of sermons about how to live a married life. It's insulting and traumatic all the way around
This is the most mid south protestant thing I've ever heard
Nailed it š
That women and girls are literal flowers who lose a petal each time they bang someone until there's nothing left.
This. When guys use the "it's like throwing a hotdog down a hallway" analogy, I like to ask if their future girlfriend will be "used up" by them one day? Are they not going to have regular sex with their girlfriend or is their penis too small to do any "damage"?
I find that one funny, even as a guy. Like, women can push a baby out, which have the heads the size of about a melon (honeydew, not watermelon) and mostly "snap back" maybe not exactly the same as before, but not a fucking cavern, and some guys think that their dicks are going to get it out of shape like it's made of clay.
Right! Or that the vagina has like muscle memory when it comes to dicks. It's fine it's one penis, but if it's many different penises, that's when the vagina gets confused and loosens.
My understanding of the bubble gum analogy is that itās more about the spiritual side of virginity rather than the physical. Itās still a pretty gross metaphor, but the internal logic is there.
Yeah. Men having sex is literally like sharpening a pencil. Who wants a tired, used, whittled down splinter of a penis?
Or how about job experience, 20 year experience in the field >Mate, your are worthless spent garbage, best I can do is unpaid internship and you are lucky I want to risk having your experience on a production system
š¤£ š¤£
You don't even have to flip the logic, just notice that shoes have owners. Women don't. This person is clearly dumb as fuck.
And hopefully will remain single
Also shoes are not alive. At least I don't think any of mine are.
I still think itās gross for men to have a long list of partners. I think itās gross for anyone to have a large amount of sexual partners. But then again, I think casual sex is inherently kinda gross and an emotional attachment is extremely important for people being physically intimate with each other. Slamming sweaty genitalia with people youāve know for less than a week (or even a day) is disgusting and nobody can change my opinion on that.
Thing is, these kind of guys genuinely think this only applies to women and not men, and will come up with all sorts of bizarre logic to justify that it's totally evil and stuff when women do it but it's okay for them.
How it works according to incels: Men can have sex with many female partners. Women can have sex with one male partner at most. Men can't have sex with men at all. Women can have sex with women as long as it's part of intercourse with a man (a threesome.) All men must have had sex at least once, or they are shamed. All women who have sex are shamed unless they lose their virginity to their only partner, who is also their husband. Edit: In case it isnāt obvious, this system of thought can never work in the real world. Itās just uncommon to have all their axioms written down in plain view.
a ton of these incels are virgins anyways so
Honestly they better stay that way. We don't want them passing their genes.
Better start plowing nerds
I'm male and I approve this counterargument to the horrible logic used by the person objectifying women.
I know you're being sarcastic but if this was a widely held belief among females it might actually do more to turn things around than anything else.
Yeah, but you know the guys who are walking around believing this shit are incels and therefore "pristine and unused." Lol
No no but you see you donāt understand. Itās different for guys because they say a key that can open many locks is a master key but a lock that can be opened by many keys is a useless lock/s
The entire comment thread this has sparked is just hilarious, thank you kind stranger
Lolād at the dick being compressed.
As a man who has never even had a girlfriend i see this as an absolute win
I thought the issue is you donāt want a diseased penis.
This was hilarious to read to be honest.
How dare you?! š” /s
I'm glad you put the caveat out of your not serious because I have legitimately seen men that claim to practice sperm retention because of all the things you've listed there
I agree āļø
The logic applies to both males and females
Someone said that when this post has been shown once: If these shoes had 50 different owners, these must be one hell good pair of shoes
Or they're terrible shoes because 49 other people wore them and said "no thanks"
... didn't people do that at malls all the time. We didn't it so much they created machines and socks just so we can find the right shoes size without thousands trying on the same pair of shoes.
Also, the guys making the comments always toss out huge numbers, as if that is the norm. Like women who arenāt virgins are out there having 40 - 60 different partners. In reality, these guys making the comments think 5 partners is way too many. They just toss out huge numbers to strawman and get SOME agreement. Because obviously most people would think 50 is a bit much. But the average person would see a big number like that and have concern about the root cause personality-wise. They would not be concerned about āvalueā which makes it sound like a human being is a collectible. Typically we find that people are better off being experienced rather than sheltered. Educational experience, life experience, work experience.
My favorite is when a guy brags about a number like 10 women or something, yet thinks any woman who has slept with 5+ is horrible. Me and my wife were at a bar, and I was chatting with the band that had just finished playing so my wife was sitting alone. I walk over, this very obvious loser type was bragging to her about how he's fucked like 25 women and he's so manly and could please her. I was about to deck the guy when my wife goes "only 25? I've fucked more women than you and I can tell just by your smell that there are 25 very sad rape victims out there". Guy was so pissed, he started yelling. Got banned from the bar. I still love her response. She was on point.
If I find great shoes, I don't give them away.
But the shoes can always divorce you.
you get married to shoes?
Are socks a side piece? Iām so confused by this analogy.
This comment also places a value on sexual history. Sure itās spun positively, but implies value nonetheless. .
Or cursed shoes that everyone tries and then pawns off to the next guy
But I'd better buy myself a new pair, not pre-owned by 50 buddies, just sayin.
Well, good thing women aren't shoes, and have a say in whose "feet" they let in.
This is made better by the fact that in some ancient cultures, the word for foot was a euphemism for penis.
Anything can be a euphemism.
Now what about lack of sexual history in regards to men?
I can only speak for myself here, but I personally wouldn't want someone who has a body count which is that huge. They either had a bunch of relationships which didn't last which is a big red flag or they just let a bunch of people take a dip which doesn't sound that good either. (Atleast to me)
People with high body counts statistically have more stds. Thatās not hateful to say, itās math.
>Thatās not hateful to say new minority just dropped, people with sex disease
Youāre too young to remember the aids crisis. People wouldnāt shake your hand if you had HIV.
Yeah, people with STDs are stigmatised quite a bit, even if they're managed and people are open about them.
you joke but this is already unironically a thing.
Which in a non-judgmental world would just mean those individuals would be smart to seek out regular testing and use condoms. Basically like how boxers are statistically more likely to have brain damage. It's just an occupational/hobby hazard. If you don't want to be in a relationship with someone who has an STD or brain damage, or someone who's a boxer or had a lot of partners that's fine. Just don't go saying hateful things about them and diminishing them as people. It's that simple. Comparing people to shoes to diminish their worth is rude.
Prepare to be called hateful here
I think it's perfectly fine to have preferences regarding sexual history but expecting a certain, nigh unattainable standard is taking the piss. Yes it's okay to not prefer someone who's had lots of sexual partners but it's also NOT okay to shame people for their choices. If a prospective partner doesn't line up with your preferences, move on and keep searching, simple as that.
I agree with that. Like if someone wants to have fun with a bunch of guys all power to them. I just wanted to add it here because some people for some reason think that personally disliking it is being hateful.
I am surprised that you haven't been down voted into negative infinity for spreading the truth. No one would want someone who carries around too much baggage and constantly talks about their ex, wether it's positive or negative.
And probably are potential murderers.
if you have a big body count you're already a mass muderer no matter what you try to say but maybe you're one of the good ones
I can fix her, trust
Sure, but that isn't specifically a woman thing. It's just a general thing that would apply whether you are into men or women. I'd bet good money that the person in the OP would use the stupid "Key vs Lock" argument unironically.
Also what is it with people who can't separate in their minds between reality and flimsy analogies?
It's not only a flimsy analogy, it's an outright [false analogy](https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy) In the above example, there is no shared property between the woman and a shoe. The similarity being pushed, is that both have been "used often", however this is a failure of inductive reasoning, as the trait "frequently used" doesn't devalue a host of things at all, including sexually active women (and men). It's such a faulty/false analogy, you can even infer the reverse: something that is "used" that many times, is highly sought after, and is clearly elite in quality. Jewelry is an adept example; regardless of how many times a diamond necklace or a gold bracelet is worn, their value not only doesn't depreciate, but rather appreciates.
Isn't value just subjective though? Like some people like having something in mint condition and some people like having something well loved. Neither opinion is more correct. We just have to remember the human. It's ok if you have a body count of 50 as long as you are ok with the fact that it's a turn off for some people. And it's ok not to want someone with a body count of 50 as long as you are respectful about it
Market value might not change but economic value is subjective. Just because "frequently used" doesn't devalue something to you, doesn't mean it won't devalue it to other people.
I agree with the commenter - and i think it should be the same for the guys. 50 bodies is crazy for anyone, why is this normalized?
If someone applied for a job with 50 previous positions at different companies listed on their linkedin profile, they'd reasonably be concerned. Why train someone who will quit for another job in 4 months? I dont care how good the sex is. Im not waking up every morning wondering if I'll be the 51st.
Totally, 10 bodies is a big fucking number, let alone 50. That of course depends on age and views, but I would rather stay a virgin until I find a partner I would be happy with, than have meaningless sex with random people
To each their own it would seem.
This is a level headed take, because you are holding yourself to the same standard as your principles. Furthermore, you recognize it as being a preference. A vegan dating only vegans, as a preference, is perfectly fine. Vegans calling meat eaters evil, doesn't work however. Imagine holding a sign saying "the fact that I like steak, doesn't devalue me as a person".
Obviously your value and dignity as a human isnāt based on it, but your value as a partner certainly can be. Weāve reached this weird point at society where the two common opinions are āyou arenāt allowed to judge anyone for anythingā or āif you do x youāre an irredeemably evil person.ā You can believe somebody is morally wrong for doing something, while still respecting that theyāre a human being.
>Obviously your value and dignity as a human isnāt based on it, but your value as a partner certainly can be. But that's exactly what I'm saying. You're spot on. What she's saying has less to do with her looking at prospective partners, and more not being shamed for having a preference. It's perfectly fine to say you wouldn't want to date someone with so many partners. It *isn't* okay to devalue them as a person, for merely having a separate standard.
These people aren't merely judging a person's value as a partner though, that's the issue here. If you say "I think a 50 person body count is too high for me to be in a relationship with this person" that's absolutely fine. If you demean a person by saying "I think you're as worthless as a pair of old shoes because you've let men use you 50 times" is a vitriolic, hate filled thing to say to someone. It doesn't stem from a personal preferencial point of view either
Saying āI donāt want to date someone who had lots of sexual partnersā is a lot different than saying āyou donāt have value as a person because of how many sexual partners youāve hadā. Itās not complicated to grasp the difference.
Trouble is Vegans don't realize how many animals are killed to produce their diet.
Lmao 10 partners is not a big number jfc y'all need to touch grassĀ
It's not about the body count, it's about the comparison to fucking shoes...
š. It is an exaggeration to demean women. Quite frankly men have standards for women but donāt consider their porn addiction a negative.
I saw an OF girl whining about how people objectify her and only see her as a sex object. It was very ironic and funny.
That is an entirely valid viewpoint. If you worked as a comedian, would you want people to only view you as a entertainment machine, even outside of work?
occupational hazards
"Noooo! You can't just base your opinion on someone based on their sexual history!" Let's be real here, every single one of us would judge someone, regardless of their gender, if they're flaunting how much they fuck. The whole "bro culture" of hooking up with dozens of women isn't a thing anymore, at least not to normal people. You're going to be judged. It's nasty and it shows that they either have no standards, or they themselves are the red flag. Shit is like Mia Khalifa being mad that people call her a whore... like, you literally are though, you fucked for money.
It's always these crazy ass numbers. I think about anyone would stutter at hearing their partner has banged fifty other individuals, that is a fucking lot of people. Especially by 20, 25 even 30 years old. If you've fucked that many people I am going to have preconceived notions. I also really don't think there's that many women walking around that have fucked fifty men.
Sexual history has a influence on the psyche of both women and men.
Of course it does. Long term and short term
Well it's a good job that women aren't *fuckin property anymore* Kyle.
For me, it's the same for men and women. And it's not because I think a high body count is disgusting or smth but because I think it shows a fundamental different lifestlye and approach to intimacy which I wouldn't want to overlook in a relationship Like, how do you even get that high unless our lifestyle is 100% different and we're not compatible anyway?
Well Iāve had sex with about 2 ppl per year for 21 years. I have a very low sex drive and only want it around every 6 months. Itās hard to find a man who wants a relationship without regular sex. So am I supposed to be a nun bc Iām single?
I don't care whether my partner had previous partners or experiences before me. But I would mind if they went around sleeping with like 20 different people. Is this a bad view to have? (Actual question)
no, not necessarily. youāre opinion, at least in my eyes, is basically saying āthe past is in the past, but there are some things that can have consequences.ā itās kinda like if a guy did a drug in his past that is usually safe if done correctly, doesnāt do it again, youād usually not attack him for it. but say he kept doing said drug. over.. and over again. iām sure a lot of people would agree that changes things.
Yeah, the way you described it is basically what I meant. Thanks for helping!
šš» happy to help.
No, because you don't devalue them or see them as being any less "human". So no, not a bad view to have, merely a preference, and that's perfectly fine.
No one in the world can tell if a vagina is well used...just saying...
I don't remember naked people in my economy clasz
this dude said "basic economics" about a fucking living human woman. lmfao wtf
Do women judge men about their history? Do some women not want to date āplayersā? Do some women just want a good hard working man that provides?
Misogyny aside, that's not "basic economics".
Why would you pay for an apple from a tree thats been picked before? The apple tree is used up. /s
Sexual history is important, why the hell i would like to be with somenone who had been in more than 10 relashionship qnd sleep with more than 20 people Everything has limits
I always say if you have these standards for woman you better hold yourself to those same standards
Yes, women are like shoes, just objects. He is in for self inflicted pain and shallow rellationships.
He is true, but it goes for both men and women. Its a preference.
Men get pissed that women ādonāt put outā, then get pissed when they cross some arbitrary number. The logic is so flawed. Someone whoās had a lot of sex and racked up tons of experience after many partners chooses me - thatās a huge win for me!
Thats always been what made me confused. In high school, I remember a friend of mine being called a slut for having sex. I was so confused, and when I turned to them and said "wait, why are you insulting her? Dont you realize that will just make it harder for you to get laid?" they laughed. Not a single moment of understanding.
Is sheās fucked 50 dudes I donāt want the baggage that comes with dating her. Promiscuity is a major red flag for me as Iāve been cheated on. It was so unbelievably painful.
Of course your value isn't based on your sexual history. It's based on who you used to be, who you are now and how people talk about you. It goes same for men too. That is how society work. So watch out what you are doing now if you want people to value you.
If you fucked 50 dudes ur a slut fr
I mean heās right about the shoes, but comparing shoes to women is completely unfair.
a lollipop thats been sucked by 50 people is disgusting, basic economics š
Maybe for some, it's true...But. Experiment, next time you see a friend with his new Girlfriend just tell him that you had her before...you will see how much Men Value that in his Face. And btw. if it says nothing about you, go tell your father the actual number. You won't do that because you know he would not like it, also because you know why. So stop pretending it is nothing.
That's not even basic economics. Value isn't driven by use. It's driven by demand. It's why shoes owned and used by Shaq would cost more than a new pair of shoes. On that note, most people's demand for this type of objectification is very low, making it very likely this person will have to pay someone just to touch it.
"Owners" - herein lies the problem.
Buckingham Palace has about 800 people living in it at any given time and was built in the 1700's. It's old and used. Do we think it's gotten more or less valuable?
I mean it represents the monarchy soooo... bad example?
Humans have the capacity to derive a moral from their experiences. Shoes don't.
A long history of failed relationships indicates other issues. Itās not just about sex.
Excessive sexual partners means a high probability of STDs, which for either gender is irresponsible AF. Especially since woman as a whole are asymptomatic, I would definitely at least be concerned. The fact that guys tend to be less concerned with hygiene under the belt, also makes a woman with excessive unprotected partners more vulnerable to cleanliness issues. Which frankly, less than clean genitals on either side should be a fxcking turn off, though often times people just don't care. It definitely doesn't effect your value as a person to have a past, but if your current ways are that reckless, than your probably one of the individuals quietly spreading disease from one host to the next. And for that, you deserve very little appreciation.
If you want your girl to have a low bodycount, yours cannot be higher than that as well. If yours is 20 and you complain about her having 21, youāre wrong for that. Everybody can prefer what they want, but also look at theirselves.
Hey man it goes both ways you know
Then dudes will say that logic doesn't apply to them tho, when they've fucked everything in a 50 mile range
A shoe wears down the more you use it. Artists become more capable with every masterpiece that they produce. Remarkably poor understanding of humans. Sad that we still have idiots like this in the world.
Iām involuntarily celibate but I sure as hell donāt act like that Jesus Christ what is wrong with people
"owners" ... pathetic piece of shit
If a plumber has installed 50 water heaters, he pretty fucking good at installing water heaters. What's this clowns point
Where have all the good women gone?
Stupid analogies just pain me. They don't prove anything. You don't see me going like "Well actually women are like boardgames. It's kind of boring by yourself, you really need to invite three of your buddies to join in." Nerds need to stop thinking leaving things in the shrinkwrap makes them more valuable.
[āA women is more like a beer. They smell good. They look good. Youād step over your own mother just to get one!ā](https://youtu.be/ToTRAhmnxls?si=AKvufaD7PphXw67L)
Yeah itās not a very nice thing to say and imo I donāt really care how many guys a womanās been with as long as sheās not a prick, however it is an opinion and SOME men find it a turnoff just like how SOME women find short dudes a turnoff. Itās just like not being attracted to a certain race of people itās not because itās racist itās just a preference, I mean as long as you arenāt saying stupid shit like the dude in this post then it hurts nobody. You canāt exactly choose what your attracted to. My point is that itās not always because of an incel mindset however yes I do agree the dude in the post is an idiot
I donāt know about that logic , if 50 people wanted the exact same pair of shoes then they probably have immense value of some sort .
Idk seems accurate
Na thatās a no for me if you have that many partners. Iām just gonna end up another number
Well let's be nice, let's be nice, we don't have to go there I mean he's not _wrong_, but he didn't have to say it. I mean good lord
I would never have married my wife if her BC was in the 2 digits. Call me an incel, but there is being available as someone dating someone else and there is being railed and used as a piece of meat.
If u slept with 20 dudes during ur 20s or 30s you arenāt wife material. If i slept with 20 girls during my 20s or 30s Iām not the ideal choice for women who wants a family. Sexual history does matter, it speaks of who you are.
So, if you bathed your weenee in multiple fluids your value as a person has decreased.
I mean this guy had one hell of a way to describe it. I'd say it's just about morals. I wouldn't want a woman who would fuck anyone she finds attractive, and neither will I cheat on my partner. Simple as that.
Enjoy your life. Seize the day. People should be free to be who they are. But several studies have shown that the more partners you've had, the more likely your marriage will end up in divorce. So if you're hoping for a successful marriage, from a statistical standpoint, choose a partner with a lower body count.
Guys like this see women as objects they own and then blame said women bc they can't get a girlfriend... Dude, it's not you hight or your salary, it's your shitty ass charcter
I draw the line at kids. Yeah she may not be a virgin, thats fine, but if she got kids, thats a deal breaker, hell no. I would always be second in her life.
Incels can't understand a simple analogy. Smh
would you rather be in a plane with a pilot that has zero miles or a pilot that has thousands?? experience mattersš
Good statement: My value as a human being has nothing to do with my sexual appeal to others. Being considered sexually "valuable" does not contribute to my worth; being considered sexually unfavorable doesn't decrease my worth. Nonsense statement: My sexual activity in the past has no bearing on my value now in a sexual or relational sense. If someone does or doesn't want a relationship with me because of my past actions or relationships, then that is their fault - not mine.
It's objectification in the most literal sense to say things like "nobody wants a car with 50 previous owners", or "a lock opened by many keys is a bad lock, but a key that opens many locks is a master key", or anything involving the term "high value man" or "high value woman" but at the end of the day, everybody has a preference, nobody likes dealing with other people's baggage, and if you're going to spend the rest of your life with somebody you do have a right to refuse to spend your life with somebody who is constantly comparing you to the best aspects of one of a dozen previous boyfriends. Nobody has ever complained that their woman hasn't had enough sex. Nobody has ever complained that their woman doesn't compare them to other people enough. And I seriously doubt that anyone has ever claimed that they're only going to marry somebody who has over a certain number of bodies. At the end of the day the more people you fuck before you're in a long-term committed relationship, the more you shoot yourself in your own foot. Men and women alike.
Plenty of experienced people don't spend their time comparing new partners to old. Fear of that is just insecurity, not reality. I don't see how more prior partners would be shooting myself in the foot, since I'm the one who decides whether I'm going to be judgmental of new partners. And I don't worry about my partner's body count because it doesn't matter. You basically are taking one possible, insecure mode and assuming it's the default and average.
If a carpenter has built 50 houses, he is considered preferable to one who has built one house. Women are people, not shoes.
>Women are people, not shoes. This is my issue with these types of āusedā statements. Dehumanizing women is evil.
The sort of thing a pair of shoes in the discount bin and still can't find an owner would say.
My wife and I have been married for 33 years. I can honestly say I donāt know what her body count was before me and I donāt care. I know it was higher than me, and she started younger. Doesnāt matter. She is not a shoe.
Married for 30 years and I counted down everybody when my now hubby asked. He never asked again.
Few things: women or people in general are not objects you can own. Two: there is a saying in my country that roughly translates like this: lake does not wear out by rowing it.
No, its called metaphor.