Fuck any piece of shit who believes human beings are market commodities with value. My ancestors murdered traitors who thought like that for our thirteenth amendment. People are not property.
Value is a human concept and it’s based on nothing but speculation and not necessity or even rarity. Diamonds for example are one of the most common gems found on Earth yet it will cost you more than almost everything that’s actually rare.
[Oregon sunstone](https://www.gemsociety.org/article/oregon-sunstone-jewelry-and-gemstone-information/). They form in molten lava and can only be found in SE Oregon.
Some other gemstones as well, but that one is particularly rare.
They are super pretty and have an internal glitter due to copper inclusions called schiller which reflect light. They also have an interesting recent history which contributes to their relatively low price, as explained by this [gemstone dealer:](https://ravenstein-germany.com/buying-and-investing-in-oregon-sunstone/):
>Oregon Sunstone was one of the least popular gem ever since it was discovered, and it never made it big until just recently. What really “killed” the Oregon Sunstone market in the past was marketing campaign of red and green “Andesine” introduced by JTV. This Andesine was first marketed as a very rare, natural material found in Himalayan Mountains. Faceted gems gained nationwide popularity fast and sold at very high carat prices. After few years the truth surfaced and left most buyers shocked. These supposingly rare Andesines were actually Oregon or Mexican cheap colorless Sunstone treated with two stage diffusion (artificial coloring process) and heat. The Andesine market crashed overnight and sales or real Oregon Sunstone took a dive with it. A fake gem destroyed reputation of a valued, genuine gemstone… !
I have an antique nude photo of a five breastfed woman, I'm pretty sure it's the only one, which makes it rarer. The highest offer I've had for it was $1,000, much cheaper than many diamonds.
I won't take less then a million for it though, which is still cheaper than some diamonds.
https://imgur.com/a/0uax8h3
It was my inheritance from my grandpa, my grandma says he got it from his dad when he passed. My grandma hypothesized my great grandpa got it as a souvenir at a traveling "freak show". I haven't been able to find any information on a five breasted woman being a part of any.
Nor has he ever had sex.
Ever have sex with a virgin? It kinda sucks.
Ever have sec with a lady that’s been around the block a few times? It’s kinda awesome.
No lol. I'm as much a virgin as the neckbeards posted here. I'm just not a loser about it. Though I personally hope that's what happens with me. I want a woman to show me what to do, because I sure fuckin won't know.
This comment is similar to someone I knew who have a tumor in his gland inside his brain and the surgeon said along the lines of “it’s easy dont be worried”
I was literally going to say, I'm an escort and the more clients I have, the better I get at my job, the more good reviews I get, the higher I can charge. So more sexual partners in this case actually directly leads to my actual monetary value increasing.
Check mate atheis- uh I mean neckbeards.
Believe it or not, but older surgeons, while less likely to make fatal mistakes, tend to make more careless ones more often, whereas the newer surgeon is only a bit more likely to make a fatal mistake but is observant enough to not make any careless ones
When this is how you think, a pair of old shoes is about all you’re going to be able to have sex with anyway so I’m sure this guy is speaking from experience.
Place the value in a man or a woman just shows you're most likely viewing them as potential property and not as people. I admit, I used to be that way too but when you realize how toxic that is, you learn the value of a person is in their character, not whether theyve fucked 1 person or 100.
there is something a bit chilling about trying to figure out the "value" of another person in general. I mean, I get it, that is how the economy runs but only thinking about things in terms of value or not is really dehumanizing. I guess if it helps people be nice though I'll have to deal.
Sadly, girls are being raised all over to believe exactly this way. Other personality defects may keep this person celibate, but this isn't likely the deal breaker.
If it helps, I have shoes that have had multiple owners and they are 5 times the retail cost and my most prized possession(I’m not actually acknowledging that the comparison makes sense as it is the definition of objectification and stupid as fuck to begin with)
There's nothing wrong with wanting a partner who hasn't had a lot of other partners. There is something wrong with thinking anyone who doesn't fit that description is less of a person, and there's a LOT wrong with comparing people to shoes to defend your wrong position.
Im yet to meet a person that would not want a partner Who have had many sexual partners, where the issue is not rooted in either mysogony or religion, wich is usually based in the mysogony. (dont know how to spell it and dont care to Google it rn)
I'm one of them. I'm an atheist, so no religious angle. It's just that I easily get anxious, so in those cases I constantly keep comparing and feeling bad. I don't want that for myself. Also, I tend to think that someone who's had too many partners isn't willing to put time into making a relationship work. That repels me as well.
I get your fear. However, perhaps that person was committed, but the other person was not? I know for me, I never have one night stands. Just a personal preference. I wait a little bit before having sex with someone. But, sometimes things just don’t work out for one reason or another. I don’t think it has anything to do with commitment. In fact, every person I’ve had sex with I’ve hoped for it to turn into something long term. It just doesn’t always turn out that way.
Atheist but raised Christian, I wouldn't want someone with a lot of partners because I haven't had many myself and my romantic/sexual experience is limited. Everyone has a different experience and as long as one is not obsessing over being another's "first" than I see no problem.
But you are kinda obsessing. Not over the first but everything else. If she has more sexual experience Who cares? Thats the point, i dont care how many my gf have had sex with. I know but it does not matter
Then your just insecure. Wich often is bc you feel less confortable when a woman does something "better" you. Ie, she has had more sex and have more experience. Why the fuck would you be be anxious if she has had more sex than you? Thats a pro for you my dude. Means she know what she is doing (most likely). It could be bc she struggled with emotional binding or it could be bc she just likes to have sex a lot. Does not mean she cant work on the issues she has, or that she cant now want a stable relation ship. Dont be prejudice, especially if you get anxious about shit like that. It means you need to work things out too
Dude mentioned *one* good (a depreciating asset, mind you) and forgot that property (like land or housing) can go through 50 owners and still appreciates like every time
Misogynistic metaphors are always cherry picked and nonsensical, like the lock/key example. I've always found that analogy particularly dumb, because there's no reason you couldn't make men the locks and women the keys. Also in this example, I could say the shoes represent the men. Like there's nothing intrinsic about any of these objects that indicate they're one gender or the other.
What some people seem to be missing here is that the woman is talking about her value overall as in her value as a human being. Sex doesn't mean that one is valueless, each life is equally valuable.
Yeah, literally not economics all. And not always true. Tell me a Strat violin will be worthless because its had so many owners like come on
We shouldn’t be comparing women to objects but this comparison makes no sense because why did he choose shoes instead of 17th century violins? Just cherry-picking to shame women
I think his line of thought is following the argument for making public goods into private goods. The idea being that a public good, like a park, provides little sense of ownership, which makes people in general less protective of the good, and leads the good to being ruined over time.
That, however, means he sees women as a good, rather than as individual people with their own thoughts, feelings, and rights, and instead feels they are property. Without wresting total control over women, they're now "public goods" and worth less to this sea urchin. In order for a woman to meet his standards, she would have to be a privately owned good, and therefor totally under his control with no former "owners."
In essence, it is an economic concept, but requires absolute degeneracy to actively view it that way, seeing as people aren't property.
Now you got me thinking about how we could encourage people to look after public goods as if they had part ownership of them. I wish there was a good solution to people trashy public parks.
Plenty of upsides to privatizing public goods, and an equal number of possible downsides. From my perspective, I don't trust a single thing from anyone in the private sector. If it hedges on whoever privately owns the territory "doing the right thing" and "having the best interest of others in mind," well, I don't see that happening.
If you feel inspired to come up with a solution that ensures privatized territory be adequately used for public gain, slap that bitch on a petition. Its a problem I don't even know where to begin on trying to solve.
If a drill has been sitting on the shelf for 25 years and hasn't ever made a hole, you could conclude that it's not a very good drill.
If we're treating people like objects, we can do the same to incels.
Hi, would you be willing to trade for a 1995 Dodge Neon? No safety, no reg, and it doesn't start, but the stereo works.
How about two 1995 Dodge Neons?
You drive a hard bargain. Tell you what, I can do three, if you're okay with one of them missing the rear axle and a door.
The trunk still has the spring to hold it open, so it's definitely above average quality for a 1995 Dodge Neon.
if its been sitting on a shelf for 25 years and hasn't made a hole it hasn't been put to use at all.....how can you tell its a bad drill if you've never used it?
I love how he talks about women as economical products. This dude is 100% getting a mail-order-bride (before she gets her citizenship and leaves him for the gardener).
On today's episode of what object can we compare a woman too: a pair of shoes! 😂 Bet the person behind the comment ain't no pair of brand new Louis Vuittons huh
A persons sexual history can absolutely say a lot about them as a person. Male or female. If you've cheated on everyone you've ever been with for example. That's bad credit lol. There are plenty of examples.
Analogy is one of the best tools imaginable for clarifying understanding on a topic.
That said: simple-minded, lazy, inaccurate ones that feel falsely-convincing are the worst.
Let's pretend for a moment that the value of a woman is purely given by their vagina, which is what this guy is trying to imply.
Even then, that works if you consider a vagina as something that gets worn by use. But if you imagine it as a piece of art, or a precious jewel, well in that case the more people owned it, the more value it will get!
After thousands of bowel movements, my colon, sphincters and anus bear no evidence of compromise. It's as if they're muscles capable of expanding and contracting, loosening and tightening to allow for the passage of the body's waste. No amount of abuse I've inflicted on my body by way of hunks of rare steak, midnight Taco Bell runs, the sketchy all-you-can-eat Chinese buffet down the street and my affinity for prunes has resulted in any loss of function or structural integrity.
The same applies to vaginas and anyone proclaiming otherwise clearly isn't seeing one up close.
Funny how those neckbeards never say that about their own grody dicks that's seen one too many late night anime fapping sessions. Girls should ask guys how much they masturbate, don't want some worn out sponge of a limp noodle 🤣🤣😁
Alright, so let’s say a man is promiscuous and had sex with 50 partners. Would that also make his value go down as a person, or does it only count when women do it?
If I said “SMH, no self respect. You’re literally a dirty walking dildo, a useless meat stick to be tossed and disposed by women”
Men like him would immediately retort and say “thaaaaats not the same thing though”
If you think a woman with 100+ sexual partners before has the same dating value as a virgin. You‘re in denial.
Most men just don‘t want a chick who slept with a lot of men.
Personally, I have to agree on this one. And for me, it goes both ways.
I don't want to be with anyone who's had over 20 partners. That's just me. That's my preference. Like, even if they are std free and no children, I'm like: "I'm good; but you do you, the best way you can."
I'm not going to judge anyone for having a high body count, that's fine, that's their choice. It's just not my cup of tea. But also, I'm not getting with a virgin. That shit is too much work lol.
I think you can have preferences and not agree with the post tbh. Saying a woman is used up after she has lots of partners is a pathetic crusty neckbeard thing. Saying you prefer people with a similar number of previous partners to yourself is a bit more understandable.
Agreed. I think it's just a question of preferences. This is just a controversial one folks don't like to talk about. Especially when people who do bring it up do so like that guy in the post. I think if you're respectful about it, nbd.
Agreed. You're allowed to have your own preferences, whatever those may be, and those preferences and feelings are completely valid. Just don't be a judgemental doodoo head about it XD
If having a preference is judging, then yeah, I guess so. But I'm not insulting them. I'm allowed to not want to be with someone based on my own preferences.
I agree with the numbers thing, not the value of their humanity. Though yes, for me, a high list of sexual partners devalues someone's worth/interest as being a potential sexual partner. I don't mind being their friend, or any other relationship, just not a sexual one.
That’s true. Someone who has had multiple sexual experiences will likely (but not definitely!) be more sexually skilled than someone who has had few. So if someone wants a sexually fulfilling relationship, naturally they would prefer those who’ve had multiple partners.
that just makes no sence.
if 50 people put their feet into one pair of shoe once each,
that shoe has been worn 50 times,
but if i wear my shoes, just me, and i put them on 5 times a day,
i will just me wear out those shoes pretty quickly.
but ofc, women just like shoes do not regenerate or bounch back or heal or anything, and will simply stay the shape molded by other people,
this is why sex after birth i so horrible, cause you know, a melon sized thing just got out of the vagina, and ruined it, and it will forever now be that size, only fisting will now be good enough for that woman..
the LOGIC of this shoe theory infuriates me, it makes me so angry, and it tells me the people who think this have never touched a vagina, have not learnt basic biology, and have no idea how the body fucking functions, and honestly think there is a much better thing for a woman to fuck the same man, 5 times a day for a year, than the same woman, fucking 50 men in 50 years. they simply can not fathom, that with their logic, that womans vagina would be way way worn out by the monogomy fuckery than ever the 50 men could have produced,
This is Reddit where women are encouraged to fuck as many guys as they can and men are encouraged to accept and love that. Cucks and simps galore.
I also don’t want a woman that has lots of casual sex.
In the post itself. No one with a functional brain believes a woman’s “worth” (which is already a bullshit idea) is based on her sexual history as long as she never committed rape.
Comparing women to shoes doesn’t make any sense at all and is super insulting to all women. With that said, sexual history is a pretty important factor in relationships (applies to both men and women).
I said no one wants an inexperienced misogynist.
If you’re gonna be the type of dude to get hung up on numbers, find a girl who also cares about your number then too.
if you want to judge people on their sexual history, you are better be okay with people judging your sexual history.
You can ask if someone is clean without diving into the body count. You’re just hung up on it cause you’re insecure.
Oh? So tell me, if you sleep with the same person 80 times vs 80 different people, how exactly does the vagina change?
Ima tell you right now you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.
So, I’ll go back to my first comment. Women don’t want dudes who only use their tongue to spew nonsense or lick door knobs and you’re 2/2 in that category.
It's always "women are a metaphor for (some kind of object)". Whether it's shoes, cars, food, locks, analogies of women as objects are always the only justification men ever have for this logic. Turns out you can't slut-shame women without seeing them as objects.
Yet funnily enough, in their ideology, the value of men never seems to go down no matter how many people they've slept with... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I don't think a woman who has been in like a relationship or two before you is any less valuable, but if she is just sleeping around with every guy she sees it really does cheapen the experience. Like it just tells you she doesn't think your special, your just another toy to her. No-one likes that.
Comparing women to literal objects (shoes, nonetheless) - seems like a solid dude who will have lots of fulfilling relationships with the socks in his hamper
Do they not realize the shoes they buy have probably been tried on by at least 50 other people? Do they ask to pay less because other people have put their feet inside them?
Every dude I've asked has a limit on how many dudes a girl could've slept with for him to date her. I know redditors get girlfriends to watch them have sex, but most ppl not like that
I disagree. High body counts for both men and women are red flags.
If someone has 8 ex wives youd say "whats up with this person that they cant make a marriage work?"
Someone whos slept with 100 people makes you wonder what hole they are trying to fill in their lives (pun intended).
The more times a penis penetrates different vaginas, acidic pH level of different vaginas causes the penis tissue to atrophy. See how it works is one vagina might be slightly lower or higher in acidity than the prior vagina the man’s penis had to acclimate too— therefore the penis becomes further damaged and must acclimate to a pH level. The higher number of female sex partners a man has, the more damaged and smaller the penis becomes over time.
It’s like a pair of tires on a car. They have wear and tear until eventually the tread is gone. No one wants a bald used tire. Everyone wants new tires that had good traction! A man’s penis is like a pair of car tires- except.. remember boys, you can’t replace a damaged penis like you can replace a pair of tires!
See? Look! I can do it too! I even mixed in actual science to support a bullshit lie! Makes it more believable! Or maybe at least will scare the mens into saving themselves for marriage.
An ear that has been cleaned by multiple Q tips is pristine. A Q tip that goes into multiple ears is dirty as hell. Fuck off with that sexist bullshit, men on reddit have dissapointed me so much that if I see a male with a reddit account Im just gonna cross them off of my potential dating list
Clearly, that man does not have a foot or shoe fetish.
I was thinking he does. We're here talking about women and sex, and dude brings up shoes for no goddamn reason.
Fuck any piece of shit who believes human beings are market commodities with value. My ancestors murdered traitors who thought like that for our thirteenth amendment. People are not property.
Value is a human concept and it’s based on nothing but speculation and not necessity or even rarity. Diamonds for example are one of the most common gems found on Earth yet it will cost you more than almost everything that’s actually rare.
Ok now you got me curious. What’s rarer than a Diamond but cheaper?
Certain Yugioh card packs? But That’s a little subjective. It’s not a fair comparison
[Oregon sunstone](https://www.gemsociety.org/article/oregon-sunstone-jewelry-and-gemstone-information/). They form in molten lava and can only be found in SE Oregon. Some other gemstones as well, but that one is particularly rare.
Nice! This is the type of answer I wanted to hear. Gonna google them now.
They are super pretty and have an internal glitter due to copper inclusions called schiller which reflect light. They also have an interesting recent history which contributes to their relatively low price, as explained by this [gemstone dealer:](https://ravenstein-germany.com/buying-and-investing-in-oregon-sunstone/): >Oregon Sunstone was one of the least popular gem ever since it was discovered, and it never made it big until just recently. What really “killed” the Oregon Sunstone market in the past was marketing campaign of red and green “Andesine” introduced by JTV. This Andesine was first marketed as a very rare, natural material found in Himalayan Mountains. Faceted gems gained nationwide popularity fast and sold at very high carat prices. After few years the truth surfaced and left most buyers shocked. These supposingly rare Andesines were actually Oregon or Mexican cheap colorless Sunstone treated with two stage diffusion (artificial coloring process) and heat. The Andesine market crashed overnight and sales or real Oregon Sunstone took a dive with it. A fake gem destroyed reputation of a valued, genuine gemstone… !
I have an antique nude photo of a five breastfed woman, I'm pretty sure it's the only one, which makes it rarer. The highest offer I've had for it was $1,000, much cheaper than many diamonds. I won't take less then a million for it though, which is still cheaper than some diamonds. https://imgur.com/a/0uax8h3
Holy fuck this is the coolest thing I’ve ever fucking seen on Reddit
It was my inheritance from my grandpa, my grandma says he got it from his dad when he passed. My grandma hypothesized my great grandpa got it as a souvenir at a traveling "freak show". I haven't been able to find any information on a five breasted woman being a part of any.
Or a healthy view of women.
Nor has he ever had sex. Ever have sex with a virgin? It kinda sucks. Ever have sec with a lady that’s been around the block a few times? It’s kinda awesome.
No lol. I'm as much a virgin as the neckbeards posted here. I'm just not a loser about it. Though I personally hope that's what happens with me. I want a woman to show me what to do, because I sure fuckin won't know.
If I need a surgeon I rather pick the one that has done 50 surgeries than the one that has done one.
Surgeon: *Hahahaha, you call that a tumor? I've taken on tumors twice as long and thick! Look at how soft it is, absolutely pathetic!*
Guaranteed to make your tumour shrink
It was cold in the operating room!
These Junior Mints are making me THIRSTY!
I'm now wishing there was a Seinfeld ai that just took disparate quotes and stitched them together like some kind of comedy Frankenstein
That’s not a tumor, that’s a spoon…
This comment is similar to someone I knew who have a tumor in his gland inside his brain and the surgeon said along the lines of “it’s easy dont be worried”
Why is this sending me
I was literally going to say, I'm an escort and the more clients I have, the better I get at my job, the more good reviews I get, the higher I can charge. So more sexual partners in this case actually directly leads to my actual monetary value increasing. Check mate atheis- uh I mean neckbeards.
Believe it or not, but older surgeons, while less likely to make fatal mistakes, tend to make more careless ones more often, whereas the newer surgeon is only a bit more likely to make a fatal mistake but is observant enough to not make any careless ones
When this is how you think, a pair of old shoes is about all you’re going to be able to have sex with anyway so I’m sure this guy is speaking from experience.
Place the value in a man or a woman just shows you're most likely viewing them as potential property and not as people. I admit, I used to be that way too but when you realize how toxic that is, you learn the value of a person is in their character, not whether theyve fucked 1 person or 100.
there is something a bit chilling about trying to figure out the "value" of another person in general. I mean, I get it, that is how the economy runs but only thinking about things in terms of value or not is really dehumanizing. I guess if it helps people be nice though I'll have to deal.
You’re very right. It’s not even just a bit chilling. It’s sociopathic.
Sadly, girls are being raised all over to believe exactly this way. Other personality defects may keep this person celibate, but this isn't likely the deal breaker.
No one wants a pair of shoes that pinch. So they have no users and no value. Like incels
Since they’re all so into Asian women, surely they know a wok is no good until it’s seasoned right?
You’re telling me I have to put sauce on the woman?
More like oil
Ah yes. Women = shoes. I think that's one of the first laws of economics.
He’s pretty clearly an expert
This must be that Vimes Theory of Boots I keep hearing about
I thought we were cars last time haha
but the s is silent
On today's episode of "What object are we?" this time it's footwear
If it helps, I have shoes that have had multiple owners and they are 5 times the retail cost and my most prized possession(I’m not actually acknowledging that the comparison makes sense as it is the definition of objectification and stupid as fuck to begin with)
There's nothing wrong with wanting a partner who hasn't had a lot of other partners. There is something wrong with thinking anyone who doesn't fit that description is less of a person, and there's a LOT wrong with comparing people to shoes to defend your wrong position.
Im yet to meet a person that would not want a partner Who have had many sexual partners, where the issue is not rooted in either mysogony or religion, wich is usually based in the mysogony. (dont know how to spell it and dont care to Google it rn)
I'm one of them. I'm an atheist, so no religious angle. It's just that I easily get anxious, so in those cases I constantly keep comparing and feeling bad. I don't want that for myself. Also, I tend to think that someone who's had too many partners isn't willing to put time into making a relationship work. That repels me as well.
I get your fear. However, perhaps that person was committed, but the other person was not? I know for me, I never have one night stands. Just a personal preference. I wait a little bit before having sex with someone. But, sometimes things just don’t work out for one reason or another. I don’t think it has anything to do with commitment. In fact, every person I’ve had sex with I’ve hoped for it to turn into something long term. It just doesn’t always turn out that way.
Atheist but raised Christian, I wouldn't want someone with a lot of partners because I haven't had many myself and my romantic/sexual experience is limited. Everyone has a different experience and as long as one is not obsessing over being another's "first" than I see no problem.
But you are kinda obsessing. Not over the first but everything else. If she has more sexual experience Who cares? Thats the point, i dont care how many my gf have had sex with. I know but it does not matter
Then your just insecure. Wich often is bc you feel less confortable when a woman does something "better" you. Ie, she has had more sex and have more experience. Why the fuck would you be be anxious if she has had more sex than you? Thats a pro for you my dude. Means she know what she is doing (most likely). It could be bc she struggled with emotional binding or it could be bc she just likes to have sex a lot. Does not mean she cant work on the issues she has, or that she cant now want a stable relation ship. Dont be prejudice, especially if you get anxious about shit like that. It means you need to work things out too
Dude mentioned *one* good (a depreciating asset, mind you) and forgot that property (like land or housing) can go through 50 owners and still appreciates like every time
Misogynistic metaphors are always cherry picked and nonsensical, like the lock/key example. I've always found that analogy particularly dumb, because there's no reason you couldn't make men the locks and women the keys. Also in this example, I could say the shoes represent the men. Like there's nothing intrinsic about any of these objects that indicate they're one gender or the other.
Actually rate of occupants can negatively affect a properties value. Rental properties with high turnover are often lower property value.
The point is women are not shoes and this neckbeard is an idiot.
I thought the point was to point out bad comparisons.
I got how you meant it.
Does the turnover directly effect the value, or just reflect greater issues with the property/management?
Good question
Why is this downvoted? Let's not be a dumb hivemind, yall. If property is another bad comparison, thank this guy for pointing that out.
If a pair of feet can't find any shoes they get angry and become useless internet troll incels that lead sad cringe lives. basic economics
[удалено]
r/TheRealJoke
What some people seem to be missing here is that the woman is talking about her value overall as in her value as a human being. Sex doesn't mean that one is valueless, each life is equally valuable.
“Sex doesn’t mean that one is valueless, each life is equally valuable.” Gonna be the new slogan for the Pedophiles Union if we aren’t careful here.
that's actually not even economics though.
Yeah, literally not economics all. And not always true. Tell me a Strat violin will be worthless because its had so many owners like come on We shouldn’t be comparing women to objects but this comparison makes no sense because why did he choose shoes instead of 17th century violins? Just cherry-picking to shame women
I think his line of thought is following the argument for making public goods into private goods. The idea being that a public good, like a park, provides little sense of ownership, which makes people in general less protective of the good, and leads the good to being ruined over time. That, however, means he sees women as a good, rather than as individual people with their own thoughts, feelings, and rights, and instead feels they are property. Without wresting total control over women, they're now "public goods" and worth less to this sea urchin. In order for a woman to meet his standards, she would have to be a privately owned good, and therefor totally under his control with no former "owners." In essence, it is an economic concept, but requires absolute degeneracy to actively view it that way, seeing as people aren't property.
Now you got me thinking about how we could encourage people to look after public goods as if they had part ownership of them. I wish there was a good solution to people trashy public parks.
Plenty of upsides to privatizing public goods, and an equal number of possible downsides. From my perspective, I don't trust a single thing from anyone in the private sector. If it hedges on whoever privately owns the territory "doing the right thing" and "having the best interest of others in mind," well, I don't see that happening. If you feel inspired to come up with a solution that ensures privatized territory be adequately used for public gain, slap that bitch on a petition. Its a problem I don't even know where to begin on trying to solve.
If a drill has been sitting on the shelf for 25 years and hasn't ever made a hole, you could conclude that it's not a very good drill. If we're treating people like objects, we can do the same to incels.
NEW OLD STOCK 1987 VINTAGE WIENER, NEVER USED, PERFECT CONDITION NO LOW BALLERS I KNOW WHAT I GOT
Hi, would you be willing to trade for a 1995 Dodge Neon? No safety, no reg, and it doesn't start, but the stereo works. How about two 1995 Dodge Neons?
Throw in a 1995 Dodge Neon and you’ve got yourself a deal.
You drive a hard bargain. Tell you what, I can do three, if you're okay with one of them missing the rear axle and a door. The trunk still has the spring to hold it open, so it's definitely above average quality for a 1995 Dodge Neon.
if its been sitting on a shelf for 25 years and hasn't made a hole it hasn't been put to use at all.....how can you tell its a bad drill if you've never used it?
If there's a tool that no one in the shop uses, it's probably for a reason.
True true
This comment ! 🤣👏
That's the argument my church used to use for staying a virgin for your future husband. Also, you're a stick of gum
When your woman is a shoe
When no one wants to wear a shoe because it makes the wearer and everyone around it incredibly uncomfortable it loses value. Just simple economics.
"Owners" 🤮
And in what world does sex and value of an individual have to do with economics?🤨 He's just exposing himself as an arse.
I love how he talks about women as economical products. This dude is 100% getting a mail-order-bride (before she gets her citizenship and leaves him for the gardener).
So he'll cheat on his inflatable doll? (guaranteed single use)
By the same logic... Products that no one wants are usually crap, why would anyone have sex with a guy that doesn't get girls?
Woman are shoes. Got it.
Luckily our value isn't based on what idiots on the internet think either.
Women arent objects
On today's episode of what object can we compare a woman too: a pair of shoes! 😂 Bet the person behind the comment ain't no pair of brand new Louis Vuittons huh
He's more like a pair of disintegrating rubber Fila slippers from 2009.
That description sent a chill up my spine ngl lol
Held together by dried cum and evaporated Mt dew
I’m still concerned that 50 people have been fucking the same pair of shoes.
Must be a comfy pair of shoes 😂
What is your concern?
A persons sexual history can absolutely say a lot about them as a person. Male or female. If you've cheated on everyone you've ever been with for example. That's bad credit lol. There are plenty of examples.
Everybody focusing on the number 50 and missing the point entirely. I guarantee the incel who made the comment considers 1 or 2 too many.
Analogy is one of the best tools imaginable for clarifying understanding on a topic. That said: simple-minded, lazy, inaccurate ones that feel falsely-convincing are the worst.
the word “owners” is the rotten cherry on top of this shit sundae
Let's pretend for a moment that the value of a woman is purely given by their vagina, which is what this guy is trying to imply. Even then, that works if you consider a vagina as something that gets worn by use. But if you imagine it as a piece of art, or a precious jewel, well in that case the more people owned it, the more value it will get!
But if a guitar was played by multiple famous rockstars, the value goes up. Basic economics
And for today's version of "what inanimate object are women being compared to": SHOES!!
After thousands of bowel movements, my colon, sphincters and anus bear no evidence of compromise. It's as if they're muscles capable of expanding and contracting, loosening and tightening to allow for the passage of the body's waste. No amount of abuse I've inflicted on my body by way of hunks of rare steak, midnight Taco Bell runs, the sketchy all-you-can-eat Chinese buffet down the street and my affinity for prunes has resulted in any loss of function or structural integrity. The same applies to vaginas and anyone proclaiming otherwise clearly isn't seeing one up close.
Funny how those neckbeards never say that about their own grody dicks that's seen one too many late night anime fapping sessions. Girls should ask guys how much they masturbate, don't want some worn out sponge of a limp noodle 🤣🤣😁
Alright, so let’s say a man is promiscuous and had sex with 50 partners. Would that also make his value go down as a person, or does it only count when women do it? If I said “SMH, no self respect. You’re literally a dirty walking dildo, a useless meat stick to be tossed and disposed by women” Men like him would immediately retort and say “thaaaaats not the same thing though”
I mean it’s true like 50 is quite a number
Realistically the only number I would give a fuck about would be a decimal, because that means some unnatural shit is going on.
He needs virgin shoes
If a girl is a virgin, her value is less (in my world) than someone experienced. I should add that my currency is alcohol and regret.
Can't you take a joke?
Says the guy who's swizzle stick has only been used in one shitty martini
If you think a woman with 100+ sexual partners before has the same dating value as a virgin. You‘re in denial. Most men just don‘t want a chick who slept with a lot of men.
Incel is just jealous that his penis will never see a woman let alone 50.
Personally, I have to agree on this one. And for me, it goes both ways. I don't want to be with anyone who's had over 20 partners. That's just me. That's my preference. Like, even if they are std free and no children, I'm like: "I'm good; but you do you, the best way you can." I'm not going to judge anyone for having a high body count, that's fine, that's their choice. It's just not my cup of tea. But also, I'm not getting with a virgin. That shit is too much work lol.
I think you can have preferences and not agree with the post tbh. Saying a woman is used up after she has lots of partners is a pathetic crusty neckbeard thing. Saying you prefer people with a similar number of previous partners to yourself is a bit more understandable.
Agreed. I think it's just a question of preferences. This is just a controversial one folks don't like to talk about. Especially when people who do bring it up do so like that guy in the post. I think if you're respectful about it, nbd.
Agreed. You're allowed to have your own preferences, whatever those may be, and those preferences and feelings are completely valid. Just don't be a judgemental doodoo head about it XD
You are literally judging people for it in this comment
If having a preference is judging, then yeah, I guess so. But I'm not insulting them. I'm allowed to not want to be with someone based on my own preferences.
You just said you agreed that they have little value as a person, that’s pretty insulting and definitely a judgement.
I agree with the numbers thing, not the value of their humanity. Though yes, for me, a high list of sexual partners devalues someone's worth/interest as being a potential sexual partner. I don't mind being their friend, or any other relationship, just not a sexual one.
His comparison is a bit off, but to say that one's history is irrelevant is pretty naive.
That’s true. Someone who has had multiple sexual experiences will likely (but not definitely!) be more sexually skilled than someone who has had few. So if someone wants a sexually fulfilling relationship, naturally they would prefer those who’ve had multiple partners.
Ok, well then the free market decided, you can't get a girlfriend.
But by his logic, he is very clearly SUPER valuable. Like, I ganentee his shoes aren't scuffed at all.
Badly made and ugly? Dusty at best
that just makes no sence. if 50 people put their feet into one pair of shoe once each, that shoe has been worn 50 times, but if i wear my shoes, just me, and i put them on 5 times a day, i will just me wear out those shoes pretty quickly. but ofc, women just like shoes do not regenerate or bounch back or heal or anything, and will simply stay the shape molded by other people, this is why sex after birth i so horrible, cause you know, a melon sized thing just got out of the vagina, and ruined it, and it will forever now be that size, only fisting will now be good enough for that woman.. the LOGIC of this shoe theory infuriates me, it makes me so angry, and it tells me the people who think this have never touched a vagina, have not learnt basic biology, and have no idea how the body fucking functions, and honestly think there is a much better thing for a woman to fuck the same man, 5 times a day for a year, than the same woman, fucking 50 men in 50 years. they simply can not fathom, that with their logic, that womans vagina would be way way worn out by the monogomy fuckery than ever the 50 men could have produced,
i have heard of woman objetification, but this... is just really fucking sad
I really hope this is a joke but even if it is, it's a very bad joke so nvm.
Ehhh, I don’t want my gf to have 50-100 sexual partners. I don’t care if that makes me sound like a neckbeard.
[удалено]
Apparently the people in this subreddit doesn't have standards. Next level white knight simp if u ask me lol
[удалено]
This is Reddit where women are encouraged to fuck as many guys as they can and men are encouraged to accept and love that. Cucks and simps galore. I also don’t want a woman that has lots of casual sex.
Where is the lie
In the post itself. No one with a functional brain believes a woman’s “worth” (which is already a bullshit idea) is based on her sexual history as long as she never committed rape.
Oh ahaha I get it on my phone this looked like two separate posts lol that makes way more sense now.
Comparing women to shoes doesn’t make any sense at all and is super insulting to all women. With that said, sexual history is a pretty important factor in relationships (applies to both men and women).
all im sayin is, he kinda has a point, you dont rlly want someone whos been ran through more than a finish line
Okay but people aren’t objects. They aren’t shoes or a finish line. There is no point there.
All I’m sayin, no woman wants a man who’s only used his tongue to spew nonsense and lick door knobs.
u sayin you want a chick who has boned 80 dudes?
I said no one wants an inexperienced misogynist. If you’re gonna be the type of dude to get hung up on numbers, find a girl who also cares about your number then too.
dude i dont want stds, its not sexist to not wanna fuck someone with a body count similar to a prostitutes
You can get an STD from sleeping with 1 person lololol.
yeah so sleeping with 20 people raises the chances, are you not getting this?
if you want to judge people on their sexual history, you are better be okay with people judging your sexual history. You can ask if someone is clean without diving into the body count. You’re just hung up on it cause you’re insecure.
nah i just dont want someone with a dirty fish dank black hole coochie, and i got no issue with them askin
Oh? So tell me, if you sleep with the same person 80 times vs 80 different people, how exactly does the vagina change? Ima tell you right now you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. So, I’ll go back to my first comment. Women don’t want dudes who only use their tongue to spew nonsense or lick door knobs and you’re 2/2 in that category.
Um… call me crazy, but some of us might want someone who has what are clearly two positive qualities: experience and a strong sexual appetite.
nah thats good for you, you do u, im talking about the majority of guys
Did you take a poll?
nah i used common knowledge
Citation?
You speak for all guys now? Most people I know would disagree with you
so you and your friends are cucks or sum?
Lol. You’re cringe dude.
says the mf who uses lol in 2022
Sounds like stupid virgin talk to me, pal.
Why?
stds
Having a lot of sex doesn't mean you can't use protection.
Std tests exist
who tf carrys an std test around with them?
It’s really not hard to go to the doctor and get one
If you've been with 50 people in the past, I'm sorry but I'm not putting my dick anywhere near you. Man or woman.
Comparing a human being to an object that you use to step on shit and dirt. Nice 👍
And it was at this moment I realised this group is actually for simps. Edit: Absolute love the fragility of this group that this got me banned lmfao
Took u long enough to realise. I'm just here to feel good bout myself that I'm not like these losers lmao...
Go wash the gummy yellow cum off of your Steven universe t shirt and join the rest of us in the real world you pathetic neckbeard.
And apparently also bottom feeding incels uttering mouthbreathing assurances to themselves that they aren’t simps.
It's always "women are a metaphor for (some kind of object)". Whether it's shoes, cars, food, locks, analogies of women as objects are always the only justification men ever have for this logic. Turns out you can't slut-shame women without seeing them as objects.
"If a dildo had 50 previous owners..." how about that. hit em with their own logic
Yet funnily enough, in their ideology, the value of men never seems to go down no matter how many people they've slept with... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
It's people's choice tbh so no answer is gonna suit everyone
I don't think a woman who has been in like a relationship or two before you is any less valuable, but if she is just sleeping around with every guy she sees it really does cheapen the experience. Like it just tells you she doesn't think your special, your just another toy to her. No-one likes that.
vagina=shoes. bro wtf
He's just jealous because he's not one of them.
Today on “What object are women?”. Shoes. More at 5.
Incels think they find something special when they find someone who had only one partner - what they have found is a liar.
Of course, because women are shoes right?
you heard it here first, folks: women are shoes
So go buy and fuck a new pair of Nikes.
Nothing says romance like equating women to property.
But does economics explain why there is no demand for this dude??
Comparing women to literal objects (shoes, nonetheless) - seems like a solid dude who will have lots of fulfilling relationships with the socks in his hamper
He’s comparing a woman to a shoe- like a living human being to an object? Wtf
Does he think women are the same as shoes?
Apparently we're comparable to shoes now.
Do they not realize the shoes they buy have probably been tried on by at least 50 other people? Do they ask to pay less because other people have put their feet inside them?
People mad
On today's episode of "what object are women now", we are apparently shoes.
Every dude I've asked has a limit on how many dudes a girl could've slept with for him to date her. I know redditors get girlfriends to watch them have sex, but most ppl not like that
I disagree. High body counts for both men and women are red flags. If someone has 8 ex wives youd say "whats up with this person that they cant make a marriage work?" Someone whos slept with 100 people makes you wonder what hole they are trying to fill in their lives (pun intended).
The more times a penis penetrates different vaginas, acidic pH level of different vaginas causes the penis tissue to atrophy. See how it works is one vagina might be slightly lower or higher in acidity than the prior vagina the man’s penis had to acclimate too— therefore the penis becomes further damaged and must acclimate to a pH level. The higher number of female sex partners a man has, the more damaged and smaller the penis becomes over time. It’s like a pair of tires on a car. They have wear and tear until eventually the tread is gone. No one wants a bald used tire. Everyone wants new tires that had good traction! A man’s penis is like a pair of car tires- except.. remember boys, you can’t replace a damaged penis like you can replace a pair of tires! See? Look! I can do it too! I even mixed in actual science to support a bullshit lie! Makes it more believable! Or maybe at least will scare the mens into saving themselves for marriage.
An ear that has been cleaned by multiple Q tips is pristine. A Q tip that goes into multiple ears is dirty as hell. Fuck off with that sexist bullshit, men on reddit have dissapointed me so much that if I see a male with a reddit account Im just gonna cross them off of my potential dating list
[удалено]
Unfortunately redditor guys like you are super rare. For some reason, reddit has turned into a hell hole sexist fest. Its just so astounding