what porn has done to millennials - Lewd

what porn has done to millennials

Steph

nerd wrote:
malmon73 wrote:
I can't tell if you guys are being serious anymore.

I'm legitimately being 100% serious.

That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

Ashley

RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
malmon73 wrote:
I can't tell if you guys are being serious anymore.

I'm legitimately being 100% serious.

That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

malmon

nerd wrote:
RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
malmon73 wrote:
I can't tell if you guys are being serious anymore.

I'm legitimately being 100% serious.

That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

I really try not to bash people's opinions, but... @RX14 is right - surely you've got to be joking?

Backlash

Sluts are the best tbh. Too bad the divorce rate is sky-high, or I'd marry one in a heartbeat.

Steph

nerd wrote:
RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
malmon73 wrote:
I can't tell if you guys are being serious anymore.

I'm legitimately being 100% serious.

That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

The main problem I have with this sentiment is that it implies that you own your wife, and you get to control who she has sex with. You don't. Relationships should be equal.

Saikou

truly this is the death of western civilization

Ashley

malmon73 wrote:
I really try not to bash people's opinions, but... @RX14 is right - surely you've got to be joking?

of course I'm not joking, why would you think that?

Backlash wrote:
Sluts are the best tbh. Too bad the divorce rate is sky-high, or I'd marry one in a heartbeat.

you are a disgusting pig.

RX14 wrote:
The main problem I have with this sentiment is that it implies that you own your wife, and you get to control who she has sex with. You don't. Relationships should be equal.

are you advocating for polyamory? the point of the relationship is that your partner only loves you.
I was never talking about women specifically anyway. I like how you try to make it seem that way, but in truth men are equally as guilty as women.

machomuu

nerd wrote:
RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
malmon73 wrote:
I can't tell if you guys are being serious anymore.

I'm legitimately being 100% serious.

That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

No, it's not. It just means she had a life before she married you.

Scary thought, I know.

Backlash

nerd wrote:
you are a disgusting pig.

Hao r00d! >:C

Ashley

Aniki wrote:
No, it's not. It just means she had a life before she married you.

it means she's already given her body to someone else, and ultimately, any dignity she may have had previously.

Aniki wrote:
Scary thought, I know.

condescension gets your argument nowhere, and I really do not appreciate it.

machomuu

nerd wrote:
Aniki wrote:
No, it's not. It just means she had a life before she married you.

it means she's already given her body to someone else, and ultimately, any dignity she may have had previously.

Aniki wrote:
Scary thought, I know.

condescension gets your argument nowhere, and I really do not appreciate it.

It doesn't, but I'm not really trying to convince you of anything. Your view seems very grounded in this belief that sex is the be all end all, as if virginity has any value in regards to a person's character, and I disagree. Sex is sex, and it really only has as much value as you put on it. I think, that it had sanctity at all was solely a societal thing, but it's just a natural process and that humans can have fun with it gives context to why people are having it so much. I see no problem with that, nor do I think it degrades character.

After all, considering in most places women were pretty much viewed as possessions during the time where sex did have that sanctity, I vastly prefer the freedom they have now by comparison, so I see this as a non-issue.

Backlash

On a more serious note, regardless of @[deleted] and his/her personal sentiments, I'm pretty sure pornography isn't to blame here. It's an easy target, when what people really oughta attest this to is a more competitive job market, the growing popularity of college education, and dwindling social services in the US. People simply don't have time to have kids, and even if they did, they'd have to pay a slew of expenses out of pocket.

Besides, a growing number of millennials (myself included) feel as if we actually don't desire any children, or in some cases even a wife. To us, casual sex is just that.

Ashley

Aniki wrote:
It doesn't, but I'm not really trying to convince you of anything. Your view seems very grounded in this belief that sex is the be all end all, as if virginity has any value in regards to a person's character, and I disagree. Sex is sex, and it really only has as much value as you put on it. I think, that it had sanctity at all was solely a societal thing, but it's just a natural process and that humans can have fun with it gives context to why people are having it so much. I see no problem with that, nor do I think it degrades character.

After all, considering in most places women were pretty much viewed as possessions during the time where sex did have that sanctity, I vastly prefer the freedom they have now by comparison, so I see this as a non-issue.

I'm not sure why everyone is trying to make me out to be some "Victorian-era Nazi trying to force the world to believe what I do," (hyperbole, in case you didn't know what that was.) and that's not true. am I trying to convince you to believe what I do? yes. I think that if you would believe it, you would have better standards. I do think that the world would be better if we all believed this, but I know that's an unrealistic goal. I never said women shouldn't have freedom, I'm just trying to convince you to raise your standards out of the trash.

Backlash wrote:
On a more serious note, regardless of nerd and his/her personal sentiments, I'm pretty sure pornography isn't to blame here. It's an easy target, when what people really oughta attest this to is a more competitive job market, the growing popularity of college education, and dwindling social services in the US. People simply don't have time to have kids, and even if they did, they'd have to pay a slew of expenses out of pocket.

Besides, a growing number of millennials (myself included) feel as if we actually don't desire any children, or in some cases even a wife. To us, casual sex is just that.

I don't think the article was really about having children. I personally don't want children either (partly because of a genetic illness I have).

machomuu

nerd wrote:
Aniki wrote:
It doesn't, but I'm not really trying to convince you of anything. Your view seems very grounded in this belief that sex is the be all end all, as if virginity has any value in regards to a person's character, and I disagree. Sex is sex, and it really only has as much value as you put on it. I think, that it had sanctity at all was solely a societal thing, but it's just a natural process and that humans can have fun with it gives context to why people are having it so much. I see no problem with that, nor do I think it degrades character.

After all, considering in most places women were pretty much viewed as possessions during the time where sex did have that sanctity, I vastly prefer the freedom they have now by comparison, so I see this as a non-issue.

(hyperbole, in case you didn't know what that was.)

Huh.

Yup.

Had a serious response to the rest of the post.

Ashley

Aniki wrote:
nerd wrote:
Aniki wrote:
It doesn't, but I'm not really trying to convince you of anything. Your view seems very grounded in this belief that sex is the be all end all, as if virginity has any value in regards to a person's character, and I disagree. Sex is sex, and it really only has as much value as you put on it. I think, that it had sanctity at all was solely a societal thing, but it's just a natural process and that humans can have fun with it gives context to why people are having it so much. I see no problem with that, nor do I think it degrades character.

After all, considering in most places women were pretty much viewed as possessions during the time where sex did have that sanctity, I vastly prefer the freedom they have now by comparison, so I see this as a non-issue.

(hyperbole, in case you didn't know what that was.)

Huh.

Yup.

Had a serious response to the rest of the post.

I only included that because I foresaw someone saying "no one said that exact phrase!!!1!"

pixelwitch

RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
I'm legitimately being 100% serious.

That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

The main problem I have with this sentiment is that it implies that you own your wife, and you get to control who she has sex with. You don't. Relationships should be equal.

Given the point of marriage is (legally substantiated) mutual emotional investment consolidated via physical intimacy, surely extending that physical intimacy to other individuals would detract from that. It's not a matter of ownership, or control (as contemporary feminism would have you believe), but one of mutual respect, and hence equality.
If you want to fool around, or engage in cuckoldry you really oughtn't get married. Unless both parties are entirely in favour, and one has not bullied the other into submission, it's simply unethical and ridicules the idea of the emotional investment.
You mustn't forget as well that marriage exists to create an environment for reproduction, and child rearing. A delicate situation, that this would very likely complicate.
The control of either party's interactions prior to the relationship is bogus, but not what is being referred to. What @[deleted] is referring to is the selection of a wife based on personal preferences, which is harmful to nobody, besides perhaps @[deleted] himself, given the reduction of his choice in partners.

Steph

pixelwitch wrote:
RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
RX14 wrote:
That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

The main problem I have with this sentiment is that it implies that you own your wife, and you get to control who she has sex with. You don't. Relationships should be equal.

Given the point of marriage is (legally substantiated) mutual emotional investment consolidated via physical intimacy, surely extending that physical intimacy to other individuals would detract from that. It's not a matter of ownership, or control (as contemporary feminism would have you believe), but one of mutual respect, and hence equality.
If you want to fool around, or engage in cuckoldry you really oughtn't get married. Unless both parties are entirely in favour, and one has not bullied the other into submission, it's simply unethical and ridicules the idea of the emotional investment.
You mustn't forget as well that marriage exists to create an environment for reproduction, and child rearing. A delicate situation, that this would very likely complicate.
The control of either party's interactions prior to the relationship is bogus, but not what is being referred to. What @[deleted] is referring to is the selection of a wife based on personal preferences, which is harmful to nobody, besides perhaps @[deleted] himself, given the reduction of his choice in partners.

I agree with you for the most part, that it's @[deleted]'s buisness what criteria he selects his wife with, but I think that @[deleted] should also respect other people's choices as to what they do with their bodies.

The most important part of marriage varies between people, for me the emotional relationship is much, much more important than the physical relationship, so as long as we both agree I wouldn't mind a non-monogamous relationship.

machomuu

pixelwitch wrote:
RX14 wrote:
nerd wrote:
RX14 wrote:
That's fucked up man, requiring your wife to be a virgin is some 1800s shit.

so you're just fine with your wife having had intercourse with numerous other men? it's like letting those men into your marriage.

The main problem I have with this sentiment is that it implies that you own your wife, and you get to control who she has sex with. You don't. Relationships should be equal.

Given the point of marriage is (legally substantiated) mutual emotional investment consolidated via physical intimacy, surely extending that physical intimacy to other individuals would detract from that. It's not a matter of ownership, or control (as contemporary feminism would have you believe), but one of mutual respect, and hence equality.
If you want to fool around, or engage in cuckoldry you really oughtn't get married. Unless both parties are entirely in favour, and one has not bullied the other into submission, it's simply unethical and ridicules the idea of the emotional investment.
You mustn't forget as well that marriage exists to create an environment for reproduction, and child rearing. A delicate situation, that this would very likely complicate.
The control of either party's interactions prior to the relationship is bogus, but not what is being referred to. What @[deleted] is referring to is the selection of a wife based on personal preferences, which is harmful to nobody, besides perhaps @[deleted] himself, given the reduction of his choice in partners.

I'd assumed you were going in a different direction, but the ending actually rounded itself out quite nicely.

That in mind, I don't know if I necessarily think that her having had sex with other men (or, going the other way, him having had sex with other women/men, her with women) necessarily detracts from the emotional investment that is present in marriage. I feel that, that she chose to have sex with only you for the rest of her life despite already having experienced the joy that is sex with other men they be more physically fit to please her better says a lot more about her choice than the simple promise of sex.

Because the way I see it, it's not that that physical intimacy is being extended to other individuals, it's that the intimacy is being retracted to just you, and I think that carries an incredible amount of weight, certainly moreso for someone who isn't a virgin than someone who is. It shows conviction to one's partner.

None_At_All

nerd wrote:
it means she's already given her body to someone else, and ultimately, any dignity she may have had previously.

Thought I'd pitch in. I believe that statement to be completely ridiculous by any standards.

First, not trying to strawman you but actually curious as to your response, would you marry someone who hasn't had consensual sex, but that has been raped?

And what I wanted to say, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to state that a woman's dignity is purely based on her virginity. Do you believe the same holds for men? Again, I don't mean to assume an answer, I'm just curious.

Whoever someone ends up dating has probably dated somebody else before. Does that mean they've been 'used up' and are now unworthy of further relationships? No! Almost nobody ever gets married with the first person they dated. It's normal to have had a life before marrying someone.

Still, what @[deleted] said's right - you can choose your life parner however you like.

I guess I'll try to elaborate further on the topic in a bit, since I feel like my input has been lackluster.

garett

Internet is still welcoming us. World-wide. Hurah!

Edit:
No joke/kidding.

« Previous Page Next Page »