Good Girls Have Reached Unicorn Status

I will speak for Aura and say that what she most likely meant is that she doesn't know anybody else who is so vehemently against it and yet altogether so passive when it comes to matters of judgement.

Casual sex is anything but a new phenomenon and predates history, Matt. What you are talking about is the attention factor which has become explosive in line with social media, the branding of which is self-denominated. That is a fashion, a tend, while casual sex is a behavior which finds expression in many different cultures (all?) and has been handled in many different ways.

 

The question was pertaining to the financial status being transferred, not the moral. It seems that you recognize this and therefore would constitute a prime example of what I referred to above as "insecure and afraid".

 

I should have said "casual sex." You are exactly right, though, John.

 

It's not for me, either. Although it depends on what you consider casual sex. I wouldn't be opposed to hooking up with a friend, who I know is relatively responsible and totally disease-free.

But a random stranger? Nah, fuck that. I have no interest in sex with someone who I don't know on some level. As a person who is very centered on the world of ideas, if you don't have a brain I'm not interested.

But, if other people want to have casual sex, I see no problem .

I think it's great that women are becoming more free.

I'm glad I'm in a stable relationships, all of the romance games are tiresome.

 

I don't really believe in casual sex although I did try it a handful of times when I was much younger so i certainly don't fit the elusive unicorn ideal. I could absolutely care less what other people do though. I was celibate for 2 or 3 years a few years ago after I decided casual sex wasn't for me and I even envied people who could go about sex casually. Sex is an intense thing for me so it was always weird to share that intensity with someone I didn't really care about.

the guy in the article seems to want someone who has no sexual history at all. Even more sexually conservative people can rack up a decent number of partners by their late twenties unless they're in a long term relationship with one person. If someone starts having sex when they're 18 and only has sex with one person on average a year that's still 10 people by the time they're 28.

I refuse to even discuss numbers with my boyfriend. if he had been with 100 people before me I would probably only feel flattered that I was the one he wanted to settle down with and I hope he would feel the same about me.

 

Yes, this is where a confusion comes in. To put what I've previously said in the light, I am considering casual sex to be any kind of sex which is not shared between two people who are in a meaningful, loving relationship; not necessarily married, but on that level of commitment. I consider the body to be sacred and the act of sex to be very special, and I've understood since I was an early teenager that I am probably hopelessly romantic, anachronistic and foolish for it. If so, I couldn't care less. It is not the end of the world for many people to engage in sexual acts with friends, but it would be close to it for me, and so I've mostly refrained. It has happened, no doubt, and I definitely regret it, and there have been times when I've literally had another person undressed in my arms before I made the decision to stop it, which has been especially regrettable to me, for allowing it to have gone that far in the first place, but I was less able to control my lust in my youth. I am very lucky though in my circumstances and memories, and sometimes I wonder if my life weren't the way it has been, would I change my mind out of desperation? And this is why I don't abhor it in others. I sincerely doubt I would change on circumstances, but anything is possible and I can't know for sure otherwise.

 

Does the notion of a girl being financially above you that comes from a developing country bothers you? Does it make you feel insecure the idea that there's a girl you can't have in a country that's beneath yours? Your behavior and reaction to what I said to Matt is really weird and your statement would be like me saying everyone in The US is obese and ignorant,but I'm smarter than that.

I can't say morally she's above you as she would also refer to other women as gutter sluts or trashy whores and that's not a very redeeming quality.

To Matt and John. John is the only person I know who is very much not for it and has taken a personal choice not to indulge. I don't know any other person that when they had the opportunity to casually sleep with someone they. Inside red attractive has rejected them. Except for girls, but I think that it would be important to define what casual sex is. To me casual sex is anything outside of a committed relationship. So it doesn't need to be one night stands or randomly sleeping with random people all the time. It can be sex with a good friend or sex with someone you've been dating, but you can't say the person is your boyfriend or girlfriend and it never really evolves to that. Obviously I don't know the details of everyone's sex life and what their approach to sex is, but I'm speaking for the people I'm close to. Most of my friends also happen to be he more open minded, let's try everything once kind of people and I think when people are often high on something their desires are less controlled. Except for John lol.

 

Exactly my point, and what I meant by 'sacred'.
Every person has a different level of sensitivity and that again alters at the point of conscience. Drugs and alcohol are often behind casual sexual encounters, and the reasons why should be obvious. But this is delving into the matter of morality and not everybody considers consensual sex under those terms (mistakenly, I believe).

 

This is the important key here, what you've said about reading rejection, because that is the kind of very unfair situation I've managed to put people in while myself confounded as to how it even got there. I know that, for example, the girl who I had to stop from bringing me into having sex with her at the point where she was already on top of me was definitely hurt and very confused, and me not wanting to make things worse didn't properly explain my reasons, and I'm certain that if I had she would have assumed I was lying anyway. A very, very sad memory and one which taught me a very important lesson. The amazing thing about it to me was that I could even be put into a position to turn a girl of her level of beauty down in the first place, and so it spiraled out of control, driven in part by my entertaining the hope that she found me attractive. Well, but that was a very confusing time in my life anyway, and I had only been used to thinking I was never meant to have the love I so desperately wanted.

 

What is a good girl? One that's loyal, honest, (hopefully= funny), respectful toward others, a creative conversationalist, showers occasionally, is giving/sharing and is TOUGH when necessary. Sex? Pfffttt--one size fits all.

 

The author of the article is just another guy who hasn't come to terms with his own double standards.

 

Too bad this was not done as a satirical piece as then it would be brilliant.

Sadly it was not.

 

Ugh, it will be a nice day when women will no longer be defined by the amount of sex that they have and who they have it with.

I'm actually pretty conservative about sex, but judging someone else about it is just total bullshit.

 

Well, I would say I'm more pissed off than insecure and afraid, but fair enough I suppose. I guess if you can always see people in a sympathetic light, you are much further along the way to enlightenment than I am.

It's difficult for me to take the high road when someone has pissed me off. I don't like when I think someone is trying forestall legitimate debate with sarcasm and ridicule.

I agree that there is much to criticize in the original article. For example, the suggestion that it's ok for guys to sleep around but not for girls. Also, whether or not casual sex is a good idea, it's still the right of an individual to decide. Criticism of contemporary gender relations is a worthy topic in my opinion, however.

I'm already irritated by the fact that every thread that I've started (or that others have started) criticizing feminism or gender relations has been deleted. So when I said:

And Acuarela then said (albeit not quoting me):

It struck me as a smug and insulting dismissal of the criticisms that I and others have.

I'm sure that strong libido and an uninhibited attitude are elements that motivate casual sex in some cases. But often times there are darker elements to it, as you observed yourself with Kristen.

In general, I think we live in an increasingly dysfunctional society, and it infuriates me when people want to pretend that there is nothing wrong (and I think that often these same people know that things are fucked up but are trying to hide that fact for their own political reasons).

To state explicitly that a forum member is beneath the social class of her friend seemed to take the cake. So maybe Acuarela is just trying to deal with her own insecurities by using sarcasm and elitism, but I felt compelled to retaliate.

For the record, I don't think it's right to degrade women for sleeping around, but I used words like "slut" and "whore" because they were convenient weapons.

My apologies to any Domincan women who may have been offended.

 

There was sarcasm, but if was meant as a criticism to the girl in question and not to Matt! I also happen to be beneath her social class, so do most people I know. I don't take that as an offense, some people have more moneys than other. It just happens to be a reality that her family is extremely rich and whoever she ends up with will be equally so. I think that kind of thinking is shallow and materialistic, also very stupid, but it doesn't make it any less real. The same way that the double standard that exists for men and women is stupid and very real.

Matt if I offended you in anyway, I apologize. I know we always end up disagreeing about stuff and there's things we don't like about each other, but I don't consider you or anyone to be beneath me. The hippie in me still thinks we're all equal. I can be very elitist, but I only ever consider intangible things.

When I said we're broken, I was quoting the article, which to me was a joke. And it was a response to Meliai. I consider the topic to be interesting, I always discuss gender roles and relations, it's. Topic that interests me too. I also have nothing to do with your threads being deleted, so I dunno what the issue is.

 

I didn't read much of this thread OR all of the article. But I read enough. I saw in article "they've decides somewhere along the way they want to be like us" (or something of the sort)...and... tune out. Ignore. La la la. You just lost any credibility.

 

I'm pretty much only interested in good girls anymore. I admit to having a double standard but it is what it is.

 

I get the feeling the author of the article would define a good girl and good "boy" (lolz) in totally different ways.

Like, a "girl" could be alone or totally faithful for years and years (either with no one or one person).... but if she used to party... in the same ways most guys partied.... not a good girl. But the guy could STILL be doing those things and that's okay- he wants a girl who has been waiting for her bad boy and is ready to lose her whole self and life and friends for him. Just the impression I get.


That said? What's a good girl anyways? You know what I mean? If someone does drugs, parties, how many people she's been with?.... or is it how people treat others- if they cheat- if they lie-steal- if they're mean girls? Etc? I don't know. I've always only been into good PEOPLE but I have never cared how many ppl a person has slept with. And I'm def. a good girl myself in recent years... have grown up... but I used to party. Oh well... I'm sure I wouldn't have wanted some jerkoff w double standards anyways.

 

Good girl to me: honest loyal not a druggie not a tramp. Ill befriend a not so good girl but no thanks on getting involved. (Cept junkies and thieves)

 

Yeah. Okay, that's a good definition. I just picture the author of what the OP posted doing certain things and shunning women who do the exact same things. Like it's okay for men but not for women..."they started trying to be like us"--- I hate that type of attitude.


Anyways, I feel so old all the time anymore but this is all irrelevant to me anyways because everyone I talk to is just all about their kids and like cleaning their houses and decorating and budgeting. (including me)--- that this all seems like a topic from my other (younger) life..