GF Past

>>16651375
What kind of porn?

>>16651375
She made money by fucking? Big goddamn deal. Did she give you herpes or something? The hell does this bother you for?

If you guys are in the midwest and you can't get past your hangups, I can support her in exchange for blowjobs. Hell, if she's a good cook, maybe I can treat her like people too.

Oh hey, can you post her work? I wouldn't mind beating off to her tits and your tears.

>>16651375
Did she do porn when she was in a relationship with you, or was it before? Why didn't she tell you to begin with?

As of now, it shows she doesn't need you. She can fuck strangers for money and that's how she'll make her living. What's the problem?

I think the problem is you found out just now. She should have told you before you moved in, if not earlier. Would you mind elaborating how you found out, what she said, etc.?

>>16651415
What kind of question is this. It wasnt professional or anything. Didnt ask if she was paid to do it either. Shitty lighting, dark, bad camera angles. One looked like a house party.

>>16651422
C U C K
U
C
K

>>16651436
Not really, I just don't get hung up over knowing that some bitch fucked other men before me. What are you, muslim? Is she unclean and impure?

Whatever, long as she swallows and is free of disease, I'm good. Enjoy your angst.

>>16651422
>She made money by fucking?
Im not sure she did it for money. Although it seems like she did from the sources. But the conversation didnt make it any where near that far before falling apart.
>Big goddamn deal.
Im glad we're on the same page here.
>The hell does this bother you for?
How would you feel if your SO was a serial rapist?
>>16651429
No from what Ive heard it was 4 or 5 years ago. She probably knew I wouldnt date her if I did know which is part of why Im so mad.
>>16651430
Friend back home sent me a message about it. Not sure how he found out but I think he was in contact with one of the guys in it and my name or her name came up.

>>16651375
Vids where?

>>16651450
>>16651461
People have different values and nobody's opinion is the correct one for everybody. That's why she should have discussed it with him early on as he is obviously not ok with it and she withheld the information because she thought he wouldn't be ok with it and would dump her. She decieved him, that's the issue.

OP, how did she react when you talked with her?

>>16651471
Not in the mood. Maybe after if we break up so I dont feel like a cuck.

>>16651478
Defensively of course. Tried to play it off as a thing of the past. Not a big deal. Tried to blame me for digging into her past. That its my fault for being upset. But I admit I became fairly accusatory very fast even though I tried not to be at first.

>>16651461
>>serial rapist

Lol, the fuck? Did she put a gun to their heads before sucking them off? Force their unwilling, soft cocks into her pussy? Totally different scenario.

You know what, doesn't matter if it was for money or she just did it because she enjoyed it.

What she did with her pussy before you met her is and was her business. If you're a big enough bitch to let that ruin a relationship that means something to you, well then yeah you're getting fucked, but it's you fucking yourself out of a girl you care about and who cares about you. But whatever man, do what you do.

Also, whoever told you about this isn't your friend. They're wrecking your and her life together for their own ends.

>>16651487
>She probably knew I wouldnt date her if I did know
>Tried to blame me for digging into her past.
>That its my fault for being upset

Abandon ship. She's a manipulator. Talk to her after you've calmed down, explain that the problem is how she handled it. Don't let her play the victim.

You do understand that you are not entitled to know about her sexual history, right? That being said, since the porn was found, if you can't deal with it, break up. Chances are slim that you'll ever be able to have a loving relationship again since you're already having such issues with it.

>serial rapist
You're not a very bright one, are you?

>>16651375
Honestly, you're probably a fool to ever have deep feeling for any girl in this day and age. Consider yourself lucky.

Personally if i was you i would tell her i can't justify being in a relationship with a girl after that. My feelings would be removed and i wouldn't care wtf she did/does, might even just try being friends and sharing the apartment until new arrangements got sorted.

>>16651481
this isn't the first time this has happened anon, we got the vids then, we want the vids now.

Just man up and marry that slut, op. You don't want to be a manchild do you? Just do the best you can for her and your wife's children.

>>16651493
I like how all a man needs to do to rape a girl is have sex after a girl had any amount of alcohol and have her report it.

But for a guy to not be raped his dick can't even be slightly hard.

You mean life is about taking chances? NO WAY.

Yeah, I get it. This threw a wrench in your plans and it's obvious why. But how fucking comfortable has your life been that this is the first time something like this has happened? Get used to disasters, bro. This won't be the last one. Quit your bitching and start making constructive actions to move through this situation. I don't care exactly which route you take. Just don't stand in the middle of this dead end street screaming at your fucking GPS. We get it, the GPS fucked up. Now turn your fucking car around and keep going.

>>16651512
>>16651450
Found the roasties

>>16651512
>You do understand that you are not entitled to know about her criminal history, right?
ftfy

>>16651537
Not anywhere comparable. But cute.

>>16651538
True, I'd rather have a gf with a criminal history than a dirty slut that fucked on camera

>>16651493
Id expect any friend of mine to tell me as soon as they found out something like this. Blissful ignorance is just living a lie.
>What she did with her pussy before you met her is and was her business
When you decide to be in a relationship with someone you start losing this. You don't marry someone youre keeping secrets from.

>>16651538
State the difference that isolates the reason why one history is more important that the other and doesnt have that privilege over the other.
If its just your 'feelings' than your logic is just trash.

>>16651522
Deliberately obtuse. Those guys participated in a sexual act of their own will with a girl who participated of her own will. The two things aren't the same, the comparison is retarded.

>>16651522
it doesnt work that way at all. A girl gets wet. A girl gets hard. My penis can go into a girl soft and she can grind away. And Im pretty sure men are more likely to become erect that women are at becoming wet.

>>16651537
>still trying to pull of some shitty false equivalence

>>16651550
Telling others about your sexual history is a breach of trust between you and whoever you fucked. It's not anyone else's business on the details of your former sexual partners in bed.

Criminal history should be disclosed for the safety of the person you're with. That being said, people should always present STD test results when getting involved with someone new.

>>16651526
>You mean life is about taking chances?
Life is about dealing with consequences for your actions and other actions that are beyond your control. Only a child would think its about taking chances.
>But how fucking comfortable has your life been that this is the first time something like this has happened?
Not sure how many girls you youve dated were in pornography, but this is a first for me.
>Now turn your fucking car around and keep going.
Yeah just drive somewhere without a plan until you run out of gas.
If I fucking new where to go I wouldnt be in this terrible place.

>>16651567
>Criminal history should be disclosed for the safety of the person you're with.
Not every criminal is a danger to another person and not every crime means you endangered another person.
If criminal history isnt private than neither is sexual.

Simple as this man, she doesn't get to be upset about what you did with your cock before you guys started dating, you don't get to be upset what she did with her twat.

All your criminal history, rapist equivalency is bullshit. It's that simple.

>>16651590
>my 'feelings' disagree

>ITT: Cucks, white knights, and whores defend a whores actions.

>>16651580
If you stole something, that means you could steal from your partner, potentially causing them problems later. If you were trespassing, that means that you may not leave a girl's place if she asks you to. Just because a crime didn't physically damage someone doesn't mean that it didn't hurt someone.

You're still drawing false equivalencies, though.

>>16651599
Your feelings are stupid and logically inconsistent. Enjoy being alone.

I respect the fact that you are not attracted to a partner who did porn. I respect the fact that you feel cheated if your partner knew this preference and chose to not not communicate this information. People in a relationship should communicate relevant information that may affect feelings, especially when a preference is known. I agree that you can call this partner dishonest. I disagree about making any other negative comment about this person. Doing porn is not wrong. You are just not attracted to a person who does it. It is a relationship preference, not a social commentary. I disagree about comparing the act of doing porn to being a serial rapist. You can communicate your feelings on the matter without making such a crude and extreme metaphor.

>>16651609
>if you have sex with others it could mean you could cheat on them later
You havent distinguished a difference. You can say false equivalence as much as you want if it makes you feel better.

>>16651632
Having sex with someone is not the same as having a history of cheating.

>>16651572
>Only a child would think its about taking chances
You just called yourself a child, genius. You dated her without hiring a private investigator and scrutinizing every aspect of her past, didn't you? OH GUESS WHAT YOU TOOK A CHANCE. My point is that there are so many consequences which you cannot reasonably foresee and avoid. Consequences of the choices other people have made. What you're experiencing is an example of what every fucking person goes through dozens of times in their life. It's absurd but that's adulthood. You have to accept the odds of absurdity striking. Life is about taking chances. It's about exposing yourself to ridiculous possibilities as a matter of course.

>this is a first for me
But you're acting like this is the first absurdity in general. Fuck me, do you freak out every time something disastrous happens? When you were a kid and someone broke your favorite toy, did you go mental too? At least then I would understand because you were a kid. What's the excuse today? Get a grip dude. This situation is fucked. Yes. Now having acknowledged that, stop having a conniption and act on it. You're the kind of person who would see some kind of emergency happening and just stand there screaming instead of helping. Start helping. In this case, that means helping yourself get out of this fucked situation and into a better one.

>If I fucking new where to go
How about out of the fucking relationship and back on the market, retard? Maybe dating someone who didn't conceal a history in porn from you? Fuck me you're literally the guy screaming at the emergency. SOMEONE'S DROWNING WHERE DO I GO WHAT DO I DO? Get your fucking head on straight and help the victim or find someone else who can.

>>16651622
Im not saying doing porn and being a rapist are the same. But that a persons history comes with all of it. Not the parts you feel like sharing if your plan on being in a long committed relationship with each other.
And yes I feel like porn is wrong, but thats a topic for another discussion.
Overall Im just angry and feel betrayed.

>>16651646
Theres a correlation between having more sexual partners and cheating. The same as your correlation that a person who did a crime is more likely to do a crime again than someone who didnt.

>>16651654
>Being angry over text from an anonymous user posting on a Mongolian Cave Depiction board
>Being angry on the Internet at all
>Trying to instil morals herr

Reddit calls to you, friendo.

>>16651669
Correlation does not equal causation. Keep trying.

>>16651654
>OH GUESS WHAT YOU TOOK A CHANCE
Whats this childish mentality. Life kicks in now, where I have to deal with the consequence of not hiring a private investigator. If I did I wouldnt have to be here.
>My point is that there are so many consequences which you cannot reasonably foresee and avoid
Being an adult is about picking the best choice within your power and dealing with the unexpected gracefully. Only a child protected by their parents wouldnt understand this.
>When you were a kid and someone broke your favorite toy, did you go mental too?
lol you think this is equivalent to my situation. Cute.

>>16651622
>>16651657
Listen to anon and get rid of her, it's not about the morality of doing porn, it's about dishonesty and manipulation.

>>16651646
Having sex on camera is the same as having a history of making poor life decisions.

>>16651688
Yes, which is exactly why its unreasonable to say that a person who's committed a crime is a danger to others and thus has to tell everyone because of that. Your turn.

She probably didn't tell you because
a) it's none of your fucking business.
b) she figured you'd react like a child. Which you're doing.
c) it wasn't a defining moment in her life, it was in fact, no big deal. Have you told her about every time you took a shit?
d) all of the above.

>>16651693
You first have to prove that porn is bad.

>>16651700
Then why do sexual predators have to tell everyone?

>>16651719
because society agrees the correlation is strong enough to take action against.

>>16651375
Dump her so she can start dating someone that isn't so violently insecure. You've been dating her for 11 months. Why would you expect to know everything about her? Why would you make life plans with someone you've been dating less than a year? Why did any of this make sense to you?

>>16651714
>it's none of your fucking business.
yep, nothing about your significant other is your business. Just gonna hide everything from now on. Might even through in a few lies.
>she figured you'd react like a child. Which you're doing.
yep, when someone wont like something about me, better not ever tell them. blissful ignorance right
>it wasn't a defining moment in her life, it was in fact, no big deal. Have you told her about every time you took a shit?
Yep, that time I raped someone wasnt a defining moment for me. I remember taking shits better than that.

>>16651733
>Why would you expect to know everything about her?
I expect to know the important things about a person. You know the things that couples do where they have a talk about things that might make the other person bail out. Well surprisingly this didnt come up in those talks.
>so violently insecure
Look I know that you cucks think your lifestyle is a sign of how secure you are, but dont try to turn others into cucks.

>>16651742
There you go with the false equivalency again. OP is a troll.

Some things aren't your fucking business.
Bitch didn't rape anybody. She had great sex. She probably didn't know she was a lesbian before she started fucking a giant pussy like you.
You're refusing to listen to anyone who isn't telling you what you want to hear. That's childish.

>>16651764
Nothing childish besides making this thread.

If he doesn't like it then he can just leave her and that's that.
It's not that complicated really.

>>16651733
>Why would you expect to know everything about her?
At least, the most relevant things.

>>16651714
It is his business if it affects his emotional compatibility with his relationship partner. It is not his business for the purpose of judging her. Therefore the OP is right when saying that she did not communicate properly in the relationship but he is wrong when saying that doing porn is inherently abhorrent. There is no need to assert that OP is right about everything or wrong about everything. We should point at the exact source of the problem.

>>16651764
>Some things aren't your fucking business.
Dont invest yourself in others if you honestly believe this.
>You're refusing to listen to anyone who isn't telling you what you want to hear.
No youre saying its not by business. Which I have always disagreed upon such a contrived philosophy and its not the point of the thread.
>false equivalency
Please point out how they arent equivalent in the given context.

>>16651781
>relationships arent that complicated. if you dont like something you can just leave
children for you

>>16651823
If you don't like something to the extent that it's a deal breaker then yes you just leave.

>>16651831
If your mother stole something from you would you just throw her into the trash. When theres a certain amount of investment in someone, its not that easy. If it were something at the beginning of the relationship than it would be easy.

>>16651487
Bud just leave her. Maybe give her one more chance to discuss it but if she's really going to get mad at you and blame you or try to make you feel guilty for finding out she did something like this than she's not a good person. That's pretty open and shut.

>>16651375

Keep calm. It's no suprise she had sex before she met you, the only difference is that she did it in front of the camera. I'm guessing that you can't respect her the way you want to now that it's out there.

How bad was it?
Was it just 1v1 sex or worse?
Can you ask the website to remove it?
How long time ago was it?

Imo if you break up it's solely because of your insecurities. Try and act mature, afterall she's not your wife yet so just stick with it and see where it takes you. God bless.

>>16651897
>Imo if you break up it's solely because of your insecurities.
When you find out your partner has done things outside of your moral beliefs its hard to stay together. Its not just sex.

>>16651949
You sound like some kind of moralfag who's all tied up in puritanical-judeo Christian bullshit.

Explains the false equivalency with rape at least.

Go flog yourself and beg the invisible man in the sky for forgiveness fag. Already told you what the problem is (it's your attitudes towards sex and your whiny, childish persecution complex) but arguing with people who believe in cosmic zombies is pointless. Might as well shout at a wall.

>>16651897
He's right. Try to get it taken down first so you can have some leverage to seem like the good guy when everyone hates you for dumping her.

>>16652005
>false equivalency
You keep using that phrase wrong each time and now youre projecting and arguing points no ones made. Please contain your butthurt.

>>16651431
>What kind of question is this

A very valid one.

>>16652023
I dont care about looking like the good guy and I doubt everyone would hate me if I did.
Getting it taken down seems like far more work than Im willing to do for something that I dont approve of.

>>16651764

You're going to make a great first husband for some lucky young gal out there.

>>16652005
>hurr morals said the rapist

>>16652055
So have you even TALKED to this girl about how you feel it's wrong???

>>16652060
Dont leave out the part about providing for her kids. Such a great guy.

>>16652063
Why would you think the conversation ended poorly if that didnt come up.

>>16651949
Dude, chicks these days are sluts. You think all the tricks she does with you in bed you taught her? It's ok to be upset about it but don't let it ruin everything. What people here are trying to tell you is that it's not THAT big of a deal. Ofc it's still up to you what you wanna do but the majority of us have spoken, and we all agree that it's sad, but don't end it solely because of it.

>>16651375
And you never watch porn yourself?

The girl made money how she could, I bet now she has a better way.

>>16652121

Replying to my own post:

Shit even Kanye married and had kids with Kim, and you tell me you can't keep seeing this girl cause of a sad little porno?

>>16652131
Of course Ive watched porn. Dont see how thats relevant.
>The girl made money how she could, I bet now she has a better way.
Whoring is one of the oldest occupations. Im sure there are jobs out there that are in fact terrible and things one shoudnt do. Making money isnt really an excuse.

>>16652143
Kim is an attention whore and kanye knew that going in. Its not like I chose to date a porn star.

>>16651478
>deceived him
No. She just didn't tell him.

I am in no way compelled to tell my GF what I worked before or whom I fucked before. Be it for money or for love. The past doesn't change who I am now, and everyone above a mental age of 18 knows that.

>>16652164
>The past doesn't change who I am now,
Your past actions define who you are and how other people see you. Not just the convenient things you want others to see. Only a child would believe that his previous actions are of no consequence.

>>16651546
>When you decide to be in a relationship with someone you start losing this.

Glad you got to realize this, faggot. WHEN. Not before.

>>16652149
>Dont see how thats relevant.
Of course, because you're a hypocrite. You never think of people in porn as people. And they are just people, just like you and me, doing groceries, going to bars. Every day you talk to people who probably had done much worse things in their lives than a shitty porn film, but they wont tell you about that. Unless some "good guy" messages you about it. And why would he do that, hmm?

Man up, go to that girl and say that you can't be more than friends, because her past is more important to you than her present. You can share rent for a while, then more out, and find yourself someone as prune as yourself.

>>16652173
>all my previous mistakes and actions dont matter
>that criminal record
Its cool though as long as its not when you start dating.

>>16651754
I expect to know the important things about a person. You know the things that couples do where they have a talk about things that might make the other person bail out. Well surprisingly this didnt come up in those talks.

You will grow up, son. Cheezs, how can someone be that immature, what the actual fuck.

>I expect to know the important things about a person

The more I read this, the worse it gets. Cheezs boy...

Look I know that you cucks think your lifestyle is a sign of how secure you are, but dont try to turn others into cucks.

I think you do not know what a cuck is, please refrain from using words whose meaning you do not know. Makes you look even more childish than your insecurity and flawed logic.

Protip: Having sex on cam does NOT equal cheating. You can wave with your shit about "the more sex the more likely she will cheat" as much as you want, this does not make it true. I myself am a dude who has had a ton of girls, and I never ever cheated on one of them. And the girls I know who fuck around when single do and act the same.

>>16651688
Correlation does not ALWAYS equal causation. If two things are very heavily linked, where if A happens then B is more likely to happen, then it IS causation. Stop regurgitating shit someone put into your head without thinking about it.

>>16652184
>Of course, because you're a hypocrite. You never think of people in porn as people
I see them as degenerates. Ill leave it to you about whether or not degenerates are people.
That clothing you wear from china. Made by kids in sweat shops. But Im sure you condone child labor and poor working conditions. You just see the finished product because thats what youre looking for. Just like porn could be elaborate cgi and it wouldnt make a difference. Theres nothing hypocritical about it.
>Every day you talk to people who probably had done much worse things in their lives than a shitty porn film, but they wont tell you about that
Wouldnt enter into a relationship with those people either if I knew.
>find yourself someone as prune as yourself.
Yeah from looking at the ideologies of the people who condone this behavior, its probably not going to work out. I dont plan on living with her though if were not together. Especially with that past.

>>16652172
>not really saying anything

Ok man, whatever floats your boat.

>>16652187
I won't even bother to talka bout vailidity of making criminal records public. BEcause, even still, criminal records and having sex with people is not the same.

>>16652184
Man, why the fuck are you treating porn like it's a common life choice? Plenty of perfectly mature, secure and well-adjusted people, men and women both, wouldn't be exactly thrilled to find out there were videos of their sweetie floating around for strangers to masturbate to. The guy above who said this was an issue of compatibility was right. Doing porn doesn't make you a "whore", a "slut" or any of the other pretty fucking vile things people have lobbed at her above -- this website sucks sometimes -- but it's not wildly unreasonable for somebody to have a problem with it, and feel hurt and upset that they were never told.

>>16652199
>the more sex the more likely she will cheat" as much as you want, this does not make it true
Statistics. Learn what they are. The more sexual partners one has the more likely a marriage will end with infidelity. Dont use yourself to generalize people when stats exist.

>>16652207
>Plenty of [yadayada]

Thats what YOU think.

>but it's not wildly unreasonable for somebody to have a problem with it

Being uncomfortable with this is perfectly fine. But what distinguishes you from children is the ability to reason about your feelings, which inevitably will lead you to the conclusion that there is no logical reason to be uncomfortable, because

>porn ain't cheating
>having sex ain't cheating
>its been five fucking years

>>16652212
>Statistics

Those statistics have been talked about pretty much everywhere but /r9k/. The conclusion you draw is false, let alone the statistical reports were flawed too. You see, I know what statistics are.

>statistics about smoking being healthy
>statistics over reason

Ok son

>>16652205
>criminal records and having sex with people is not the same
Theyre the same in regards that they are both part of your past and affect others perception of you. If you think a persons past is private then that includes all of it. Not just the convenient parts.

>>16652223
>scientific studies are now invalid because I didnt cheat
not even going to waste my time

>>16652218
>person Im with does not meet my moral character expectations
Better through all expectations from a partner away because its not cheating.

>>16652227
>includes all of it

It indeed does, but as I said, I won't even bother to talk about the vailidity of making criminal records public.

And even then, you do not have the right to know everything about your partners past, regardless of what youve been taught in soap operas. Its their business to decide what they tell you, as its your business to decide what you tell them.

Example of difference: If I were a single father, I'd like to know if my GF is a predator - even tho im in no way entitled. Because of my child. Why would I want to know whom she fucked before if it were not due to

>durr sex equals cheating hurr r9k told me

>>16652231
>trying to put words in my mouth to prove his point

Can you be even more of a child?

>>16652234
uwot mate. Sorry, I do not comprehend.

>>16652238
>If I were a single father, I'd like to know if my GF is a predator - even tho im in no way entitled. Because of my child
Were you pointing out a difference. Because you didnt. Only confirmed why the past matters. Thanks for validating my point I guess.

>>16652231
But statistics about human related things are never scientific.You can never ask ALL the people so they are never correct. And those ask groups are bullshit, it all depends on location, class, race, whatever.

>>16652247
>thinking caring for my child and satisfying my insecurities is the same

Oh boy, where do I start here...

>>16652218
>Thats what YOU think.
Uh, yeah. And I'm right. Are you seriously contending that most people -- not just people in your friend group, not random internet weirdos, and not a random selection students at a college with a very liberal sexual atmosphere -- would be A-OK with this? Are you that out of touch with our society?

>there is no logical reason to be uncomfortable,
Emotions aren't logical. In the age of reliable birth control and abortions, there's no LOGICAL reason for cheating to be considered a betrayal or a taboo at all, and yet sexual jealousy remains a very strong instinct. Thoughtful people usually on some level come to terms with the fact that everybody's full of messy urges and impulses which make no sense, really, but which it's not reasonable to expect everybody to just drop now that we've made it out of the fucking jungle.

>>16652250
>out of touch with our society

No, I just do other things than browsing /r9K/ bro. But as you will most likely know, your social circle just like mine does not let you deduce a general concept, right?

>>16652250
> In the age of reliable birth control and abortions, there's no LOGICAL reason for cheating to be considered a betrayal or a taboo at al

There is, because the concept of monogamy is biological for us. It ensures that children get taken care of. Cheating then again breaks this, and breaks a stone-old moral code as well.

>yet sexual jealousy remains a very strong instinct
Actually no, it doesnt. My first GF cheated the shit out of my bacj-then sorry beta-ass. I got over it, pulled my consequences, and never got cheated on again. But I still lost my jealousey over every single unimportant thing.

>but which it's not reasonable to expect everybody to just drop now that we've made it out of the fucking jungle

I expect people to use their brain. Emotions may be illogical, but your brain can put them into a relation and decide to what to ACT upon: Emotion or reason. (Sidenote: Yes, you can decide to trust someone, I know that. It's only hard if the bitch continues cheating!) And as I stated, there is nothing wrong with a girl who fucked people or did porn.

(Not just because of porn at least. Might be likely to be retarded in my books looking at some pornstars; But since OP fell for his girl I consider her to not be retarded)

>>16652249
You pointed out that if theres something about your partner that would make you not want to be in a relationship with them you have the right to know. Glad we agree there.
If rape was legal and not a crime and only you thought it mattered, would you no longer have the right to know.

>>16652265
>because the concept of monogamy is biological for us
No its not. Where do people come up with this bs.

>>16651375
>dating a whore that did porn
Don't be a cuck, dude

>>16652267
>You pointed out that if theres something about your partner that would make you not want to be in a relationship with them you have the right to know

>... depending on the severity and possible impact

You left something out, mate. Never go full retard, mate.

>>16652274
Well, if you refuse to acknowledge this, let there be another reason why

>cheating to be considered a betrayal or a taboo at al

Because you agreed on something and that person broke that agreement. Is that enough to consider the betrayal betrayal?

>>16652248
>what is a sample group
>what is statistics
>what is math
You are basically saying that the whole basis for statistics are wrong. Read up on stochastic sampling and what mathematics can tell you about how many people you need for reaching a level of certainty in x %. You do know what standard deviations are for, right? Doesn't seem like it at all.

>>16652283
I didnt leave something out. Its not up to you to decided what a person should look for in their partner.
>depending on the severity and possible impact
Yeah thats something for the individual to decide. Im sure the rapist doesnt think its severe or will have a possible impact.
Its not up to you to decide what your partner finds acceptable.

>>16652283
>Because you agreed on something and that person broke that agreement. Is that enough to consider the betrayal betrayal?
Its just another broken promise. Since the promise doesnt hold consequences its nothing major. Like forgetting to keep a promise to do laundry or something.

>>16651375
You should be in a relationship with someone you are proud of, respect and will not embarrass the hell out of you in public. Problem with women making these videos they do surface and now all OP's friends know what his gf looks like sucking dick and fucking.

>>16652283
In that case there clearly was betrayal in OP's case.
She knew he'd break up with her, or that it was at least likely he would upon finding out. Yet she deliberately withheld that information.
You could very well say it was implied in that relationship, much like a relationship being monogamous is usually just implied and not explicitly stated.

>>16652265
>No, I just do other things than browsing /r9K/ bro.
Dude, I can't remember the last time I was on /r9k/. I'm an adult, in a committed and very happy relationship of several years' standing. My friends are also adults, of varied backgrounds and of a fairly wide age range. I browse /adv/ (and a handful of other boards) as an occasional stress reliever. Drop the condescension: it's completely inappropriate here.

My position isn't hard to defend, even though I'm afraid I don't know of any "would you date an ex-porn star" surveys. For fuck's sake, the very existence of porn is still controversial in some circles. When actresses make the leap from porn to mainstream production, is it openly spoken of, or a tacitly understood but seldom acknowledged secret? Harmless softcore nudity is still taboo, celebrities' leaked pictures occupy the news for months (accompanied by not a little judgment.) How can you possibly believe that the general public is completely comfortable with porn stars? Are you delusional? Do you just live in an exceptionally liberal area?

>There is, because the concept of monogamy is biological for us. It ensures that children get taken care of.
>Actually no, it doesnt.

I honestly don't say this to belittle you, you're flailing around and not really addressing what I said or making a clear point with any of this. I'm willing to hear what you have to say, but I'm not convinced you're prepared to talk about this.

So everyone missed the part where OP was trolling because something set him off and made him look down on women?

>>16652338
>Its not up to you to decide what your partner finds acceptable.

Its up to me to decide what I tell about my past. Its up to my partner to decide whether he or she thinks Im a lovable and good person. And to decide this my past is not necessary.

>I didnt leave something out. Its not up to you to decided what a person should look for in their partner.

You did, fuckhead. Because you tried to make me say something I didnt.

>>16652349

A broken promise is a broken promise, period. To me its important for my partner to keep her promises. If to you it ain't, then you dont have a problem with cheating, fine with me mate.

>>16652358
>She probably knew I wouldnt
>probably

>>16652360
It is perfectly acceptable for me to admit that there are prople who wouldnt like their partners to have done porn. To me not having a problem with this is a consequence of my own rational thinking, which tells me that just because she did porn doesnt mean shes going to bang the postman.

Then tell me what you want to hear from me. Its hard to discuss with multiple people at once, maybe I got carried away.

>>16652361
If I could write a script to hide every post asserting that so-and-so was clearly trolling, I'd do it in a second. They're honestly way more irritating than responding to the occasional troll OP.

>>16652375
Good, I'll post one in every thread now. Thanks for letting me know.

>>16651493
>what she did doesn't matter

lol right.

actions should not have consequences, right anon? so when a girl doesn't care about herself to sell her pussy for cash, or just to fuck a random for pleasure, that should never be used to weigh her moral integrity, character, self-worth and candidacy as a partner in a relationship.

keep living in your blissful fantasy. fact is your past matters.

File: Pornography definition.png (118KB, 550x897px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 550x897px

>>16651375

How come men LOVE pornography and will religiously defend it as SEKSHUL LIBURATION and then when they find out that a woman intimate to them was in porn they get so angry?

How come the hate and disdain tends to be directed towards the woman in the porn, despite the fact that taking the role of a whore (the "porn" in "pornography" literally means "cheap whore" in Greek) means that she's being demeaned and her worth as a human being insulted; how come the hate is not targeted towards those who consume, produce, encourage, and glorify pornography?

Anon, women get into porn either because they would otherwise starve, or because they're in a sort of abusive relationship where it's forced on them, or because they have mental problems of their own that makes them "willing" to do it, or perhaps in our more "modern" times, because it's glorified so extremely and because they're told that taking on that role of the cheap whore is going to make her popular and likeable among men. Indeed, if this weren't your GF, you'd probably say to yourself "good girl, good girl!" while watching her porn.

All in all, pornography and porn culture are a part of the systemic sexual and otherwise personal dominance of men over women. Even if a woman is ostensibly willing to partake in porn, she is ultimately being deeply exploited.

Maybe that will help you gain some sympathy towards your GF, see your own role in this whole ordeal, and direct your hate and disdain towards those men who foster this culture of pornography.

>>16652374
>It is perfectly acceptable for me to admit that there are prople who wouldnt like their partners to have done porn. To me not having a problem with this [etc etc etc]
Then I'm not sure we even disagree. Do we?

I never said anything like "doing porn is wrong, and if you're OK with your partner having done it, then that makes you a cuck." I know some people in this thread have said that, but whatever, they're twats.

My position is: plenty of regular people would be uncomfortable at the thought of their partner having done porn, especially if it's still floating around somewhere online. If you have any suspicion that your partner is like that (e.g. they're sexually conservative / clearly not at all promiscuous themselves) then the right thing to do is to let them know before things get too serious -- because being open with your partner is the right thing to do. If they really struggle with the idea, then it's probably best that the two of you separate, not because either of you is a bad person, but because you two have some serious compatibility issues, which isn't anybody's fault.

Do we disagree?

>>16652374
She still knew there was a high probability and withheld that information.
And now you are obfuscating what I said. I said she knew that he would probably break up, not that she probably knew, there is a huge difference between the two.

Btw., there are definitely valid reasons for breaking up with someone over a history of porn that have nothing to do with insecurity. I would personally never date anyone with such a history.

Claiming your (sexual) history does not matter at all is also downright retarded.
Yes, it's true that you do not have a right to know everything about your partner, but then again neither does your partner have the right to be your partner. Everyone does have the right to set their own conditions that must be met to enter a relationship and if OP does require disclosure of a sexual past, it is well within his rights to do so.
And it is also true that more sexual partners one has had results in a way, way higher likelihood of a marriage failing. And this study is representative, whether you like it or not. It's statistically sound.

>>16652409
>fact is your past matters.
fact is is matters only to insecure fags when it comes to whom she fucked.

>>16652380
Always glad to do a service for the community.

>>16652414
OK, see this? Now this is actual bait.

>>16652418
it's not about whom it's about how. the situation is telling of a person with low self worth (therefore a low basis for moral empathy) and bad character. you want to prove you changed, come clean and express remorse before your partners friend has to break the news over a year later.

the. past. matters.

>>16652414
I don't defend porn. in fact I think every girl that does porn is disgusting.

but I don't watch porn to get off to their good moral character, I get off to their bodies and then imagine they have good moral character.

it's a combination of reality and fantasy, that's the beauty of the porn user and the shame of the porn star.

File: 1307656693494.jpg (35KB, 389x500px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 389x500px

>>16652418
>I can't see a reason for it, therefore there must be none

>>16652374
>Its up to me to decide what I tell about my past.
And all rapist and criminals think that they are lovable and its up to a sexual offender to decide whether their past is necessary regardless of if you have a child.
You dont seem to understand that if you leave it up to the person, you have to assume that the person could have a completely different moral system than you. For all they know, its perfectly reasonable to molest children.

File: Pornography and women.png (530KB, 1548x877px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 1548x877px

>>16652428
On 4chan, intelligent arguments often tend to serve as bait, yes.

>>16652445
>I think every girl that does porn is disgusting
That's like finding people who work in sweatshops disgusting.

>>16652415
I agree. The term is

> before things get too serious

I personally wouldn't consider a relationship of less than a couple of years as something remotely serious.

>>16652416

>And it is also true that more sexual partners one has had results in a way, way higher likelihood of a marriage failing.

This is not what said statistics said man. They were inaccurate and inscientific, but then again, even if they were both, this was not what they said. It said "more sexual partnars = likely to have a failed marriage". How about turning this around? If your marriage fails, youre more like to fuck around.

>you can actually interpret this statistic that way

And this, my friend, is one of the reasons why those stats are complete BS

>>16652431

>implying fucking around means bad character and low self worth

You know nothing, John snow. And changing myself does not depend on whether I tell others about it.

>>16652446
>thinking your own opinion is in any way general principle

uwot mate

>>16652374
>A broken promise is a broken promise, period.
Lol so if youre not to be hypocritical, youd break up with someone if they forgot to take out the trash right? Lets say after 10 years of being married. Gotta keep the consistency.

>>16652469
>I personally wouldn't consider a relationship of less than a couple of years as something remotely serious.
You get married after a year. The fuck are you doing. If you move in with someone its serious.

>>16652477
Only a sith knows nothing but extremes, yound padawan.

>>16652479
I dont get married after a year. And if you hurry into marriage you shouldn't complain about finding out stuff about your future wife you would've wanted to know beforehand.

File: teachman.jpg (74KB, 666x692px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 666x692px

>>16652467
If you're serious about marriage don't marry someone who isn't serious about sex.
http://socialpathology.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/21/more-sexual-partners-unhappy-marriage_n_5698440.html
http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2012/08/more-promiscuity-data.html

>>16652469
How would you even come to the conclusion you can turn this around in that way?
To turn this around correctly you would have to say "a failed marriage hints at more sexual partners IN THE PAST".
It was all about previous sexual partners and yes, you can turn it around in that way.
The study I am referring to can not be used in any way to say anything about the number of future sexual partners.
And yes, the study I refer to is statistically sound.
And btw,. "more sexual partners = likely to have a failed marriage" is basically what I said. I do fully understand that the one thing is about groups of people (statistics) and the other about an individual situation and that you can indeed end in the group with a lot of sexual partners and a lasting marriage. However, the chances aren't in your favour.

>>16652469
>If your marriage fails, youre more like to fuck around.
Holy shit you are actually stupid.
The statistic does not say or support that people with failed marriages are more likely to have more sexual partners.
Its that those with more sexual partners are more likely to have failed marriages
Youre actually stupid. I cant believe I got baited by someone who thinks that because P implies Q, Q implies P.
Im so fucking salty. Theres a level of intelligence I expect from people.

>>16652469
Wasn't talking about a general principle. I was simply saying there are valid reasons to not want to date someone who has done porn.
You on the other hand are making your own opinion out to be a general principle, calling everyone who disagrees with you "insecure fags", dismissing all possible reasons anyone could have for such views, which is as retarded as anyone on here is going to get.

>>16652467
You didn't post anything intelligent, just a sex-negative (and fallacious) argument couched in feminist language that would get absolutely torn apart by 95% of actual contemporary feminists.

>>16652489
>posting those false statistics
>thinking he makes a point
ishygddt

>>16652491
Not going into detail as to why those statistics are empirical nonsense. Im not your teacher, brah.

>>16652495
As said above

>>16652499
Well, moral should be rooted in reason, not emotion. Gimme reason other than those false statistics /r9k/ quotes all the time, and we continue talking.


Other than that, Im out of here, bros. Keep going.

>>16652503
If you were, you'd be a mathematics professor and all of them have a basic understanding of statistics. You on the other hand can't even form the negative statement of one correctly, so I am glad you are not one of my "teachers".

>>16652467
in a similar regard, I wouldn't date someone that comfirtably flips burgers for a living either, that's inductive of either low self worth or low ability, either of which are not attractive.

>>16652503
>Not going into detail as to why those statistics are empirical nonsense. Im not your teacher, brah.
Confirmed bait, if you don't want to attack the evidence you have nothing to contribute I'm not going to get sucked into an anecdotal slapfight with a troll.

>>16652503
>moral should be rooted in reason, not emotion
She values sex differently than you making you incompatible, and it's fairly reasonable to assume someone with a casual approach to sex is more likely to cheat than some without.

There's your reply.

>>16652489
I see a good chance that those women are just conservatives who are terribly shamed for "unloyalty".

>>16652502
>sex-negative
>implying that pornography = sex
This is how retarded porn culture makes you.

>95% of actual contemporary feminists
>quality over quantity
Yeah, no.
http://www.feministcurrent.com/2016/01/04/reclaiming-femininity-crippling-feminism/
http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/11/04/shit-liberal-feminists-say-swerf/
http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/12/14/shit-liberal-feminists-say-choice/
http://www.feministcurrent.com/?s=porn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YpHNImNsx8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7A62CdYyNSE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDcTt0emXhE

Not to be hostile towards anyone who has a sincere interest in bettering women's condition, and not to discount all of liberal feminism, but if you want intelligent feminism you go second-wave/radical.

>>16651375
source?

>>16652503
Reasons for not wanting to date someone who has done porn?
It can always come up and cause unnecessary trouble in your life together, cause your significant other to lose a job, f.e.
Someone who has done porn obviously views sex very differently than I do and since views on sex are important in a relationship, this could easily become a bigger problem.
She either wanted to do porn and thus makes fairly poor life choices, unless she makes a full career out of this like a major porn star, or she had to do it for the money, in which case she is either lazy and did not want to work a different job, or she did not have any skills whatsoever to even do the shittiest of jobs, which shows problems with ambition, drive, and future planning, as she did not develop any marketable skills.
If she had skills and the like, but she did porn anyway (because it seemed easier or whatever), we are back at viewing sex entirely differently and making poor life choices.
How is any of that desirable in a partner?
And if you claim for all of that to be untrue, I would actually like some proper reasoning as to why I am entirely wrong here.

>>16652519
>I see a good chance that those women are just conservatives who are terribly shamed for "unloyalty".
Women initiate most divorces so it's unlikely that this is the result of a bunch of men bullying women and ditching them. And secondly you just pulled that completely out of your ass there's no real logical connection between your theory and the data. If you want to tease out political bias read the paper and see if they collected it but as it stands the data is damn solid and none of this brings down the fact that virgins have an INCREDIBLY high success rate compared to their peers and according to the study in the huffpo link virgins are happier when married too.

File: 1307657933687.jpg (34KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 400x400px

>>16652519
>but if you want intelligent feminism you go second-wave/radical
As if anything radical was ever intelligent...

>>16651375
stop being a little bitch OP. your gf could of been a completely different person back then. you can define our present selves based on all our choices in the past. we fuck up sometimes as people. she has obviously moved on from where she was mentally as she wants to be with you and make something of herself. you need to stop being so insecure. i feel you just feel ashamed of other people knowing and associating you with her. well man the fuck up. if you can't except that people change, and develop then you dont even deserve her. its true that she should of told you but your reaction has verified exactly why she hasn't. be more fucking understand or no one will be open with you. bitch

>>16652536
Anon, it's not a big logical jump to go from "literally a virgin when she married" to "holding conservative attitudes and forcing herself to put up with the negative aspects of the marriage".
I will look into the links though.

>>16652544
"Radical" literally means going to the roots of the problem. You can look it up in a dictionary.
Anti-capitalism is a radical idea. Slave abolitionism was a radical idea. Women's suffrage was a radical idea.
Radical is bad when the alleged problem is, well, not a problem. For instance, a radical Islamist sees it as a very serious problem that the whole world isn't ruled by an Islamic caliphate.

>>16652503
>As said above
You just got called out for being stupid and now youre gonna try to play it off.
You thought that because P implies Q, Q implies P. Just admit youre stupid like an adult. Dont run like a child.

>>16652551
>she has obviously moved on from where she was mentally as she wants to be with you
Or she simply got too old for porn or made enough money to be comfortable, I can make stuff up to you and I don't know her or her reasons, if you hope for the best despite giant red flags you're setting yourself up to get burned.

>>16652519
>sex-negative
>implying that pornography = sex
>This is how retarded porn culture makes you.
What possible reason could there be to oppose pornography unless you believe sex is something shameful? Unless you're specifically talking about the working conditions in the porn industry, the particular demands the market places on performers, etc, something I don't believe you're remotely informed enough to talk about, but do specify if that's what you're trying to get at.

>>16652553
>Anon, it's not a big logical jump to go from "literally a virgin when she married" to "holding conservative attitudes and forcing herself to put up with the negative aspects of the marriage".
This is so dumb its actually funny.

File: huh.jpg (51KB, 720x541px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 720x541px

>this thread

>>16652559
>What possible reason could there be to oppose pornography unless you believe sex is something shameful?
Or something important and that your shouldnt whore yourself out. That pornography is a poison to society like drugs. Some people think drugs are good though but that doesnt mean everyone has to.

>>16652553
>"holding conservative attitudes and forcing herself to put up with the negative aspects of the marriage".
They report happier marriages though, did you not read the huffington post link?
Also working hard to make a marriage work isn't a bad quality or necessarily a bad thing, by confirming that virgins or conservatives are more likely to tough it out you just make the argument for pursuing such persons all the much stronger if you want a long marriage, and as the studies show a happy one too.
Also there's no confirmation that the virgins are all conservatives, seems a fair assumption but it's still not something I know for certain.

The amount of cuckolds, whiteknights and whores who have found their way to this website astounds me every time.

Drop it like it's hot OP.

>>16652553
And radical feminists see it as a problem that the whole world does not cater to their every demand, even if it's based on false data, data not corrected for factors or the like.
"Radical" does not only mean addressing the roots of a problem (it can, but there is more than one definition).
To quote Merriam Webster:
>having extreme political or social views that are not shared by most people
There is not just a positive meaning to it. It in fact has a pretty negative connotation when it comes to politics (at least in the general population).

>>16652489
>http://socialpathology.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
There's a pay wall to get the actual study so I can't judge this. The abstract reads like it was made by someone trying to defend conservative attitudes of strict monogamy though.

>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/21/more-sexual-partners-unhappy-marriage_n_5698440.html
>Researchers in this field, who were not involved with this particular study, told The Huffington Post that these findings should be taken with a grain of salt.
Well color me surprised.

>http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2012/08/more-promiscuity-data.html
Again pay walled studies. And a disgustingly conservative tone in the author of that blog, by the way.

Implying that divorce is bad is, in first place, idiotic. When things don't work out, you divorce. Many people don't have this understanding. I would see women *not* divorcing as a larger problem, because the sexual history of the *woman* doesn't tell much about the quality of her future *husband*. If you have two groups of women, and you don't have any data on their types of husbands, then the group that's more likely to divorce means they're simply more aware of what they want in life. After all, the actual *quality* of the marriage is presumably the same. (There's an argument to be made about the possibility of multi-partner women making worse husband choices; you can use that line to argue if you want, though I'm not interested in continuing this debate.)

>>16652559
>What possible reason could there be to oppose pornography unless you believe sex is something shameful?
Maybe that pornography is something hurtful?
Since, you know, the word "pornography" literally stands for "graphics of cheap whores", implying that all women in pornography are depicted as being cheap whores?

The whole premise of pornography is based on the debasement of women.

>>16652563
If you're a right-wing politician, I can see you being so fucking idiotic that you fail to see something as utterly obvious as the link between virgin marriage and conservative attitudes.

>>16652578
>They report happier marriages though, did you not read the huffington post link?
Yes, see previous post. "The study should be taken with a grain of salt." Admitted by Huffpo themselves.

>working hard to make a marriage work isn't a bad quality or necessarily a bad thing
Putting up with a bad marriage is a bad thing.

>no confirmation that the virgins are all conservatives
Guess which political group loves to slut-shame and keep women virgins until marriage.

>>16652597
>radical feminists see it as a problem that the whole world does not cater to their every demand
This is a vain statement that you could fling at any political group.

>>having extreme political or social views that are not shared by most people
Yes, abolitionism, civil rights for blacks, giving women the vote, and so on were all extreme views. That's why they were so difficult to achieve.

If an idea is radical, it merely means that it has a higher chance of being *very* bad or *very* good, depending on whether it's bad or good in first place.

>>16652204
Yeah there's a pretty big difference there. You're not morally against porn. The way it's made is by people having sex, the finished product is watching those people have sex and enjoy it sexually. With child labor you don't watch it happen or see any of the people involved. And well, it'd be a lot harder to find or see the people involved in making it.
If someone bought clothing, and every time they did so they sat down and enjoyed watching a video about child labor to see his clothing specifically made.. If they said they were against it, they would be a hypocrite too.

>>16652572
Thanks for the reply. I don't mean to be dismissive, though, but I'm mainly interested in getting an answer from Ms. Self-Identified Radical Feminist (although I'm really not expecting much from her given what she's posted so far.) Obviously plenty of people on 4chan have problems with porn (and promiscuity in general), I don't need a restatement of all the arguments people have already made against them in this thread, what I'm curious about is whatever circuitous logic she's going to use to claim to be both anti-pornography (not just against the porn industry) and also sex-positive.

(Incidentally, Radical Feminist, your etymology for 'porn' is pretty irresponsibly misleading. Translating pornē/pornai as 'whore' instead of 'prostitute' wouldn't be unconscionable, but 'cheap whore' is just an abuse of linguistics in service of a political point.)

>>16652603
I do agree that the socialpathology website is pretty bad.
However, there is more than that one sentence in the Huffington Post article from researchers not involved. They do colour this "grain of salt" in a different light than "the study is wrong". They simply say not to confuse correlation with causation and that there could be other factors to this.
And yes, the line drawn at the top 40 % is arbitrary. And even if it's not a causality (which I would never claim), it is an indicator and indicators is really all we have to choose our partners, so I'd prefer to go with such an indicator than going against it.

This study also did not only look at women, which it sounds like you think does (I am not saying you actually do, just sounds like it). It looked at people in general and the results were simply stronger pointing into this direction for women.

Divorce obviously is a bad outcome. It is true that divorce may be the only way out and it is good to divorce in that situation, but it even coming to that is bad in itself.
The study the Huffington Post wrote about was talking about happier marriages though and not divorce rates. So people with less sexual partners do report happier marriages and don't just not divorce because they are pressured into staying.

>>16652615
You are literally taking the one sentence from the Huffington Post article supporting your side out of context.
How about reading what that grain of salt actually is? It is definitely not "the study is completely wrong and the data is shit" like you are suggesting. That's not what the researchers or the Huffington Post said.

File: Woman Hating intro.png (82KB, 669x897px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 669x897px

Just to clear this up, because people nowadays don't have the slightest clue what radical feminism actually is:

Radical feminism is built on the idea that society is structured around restrictive gender roles pushing men into dominance and women into submission. Apart from the sexual and otherwise personal subjugation of women below men, "collateral" damage of this system of male supremacy and masculinity glorification includes said dominant men going on to pursue war, genocide, imperialism, capitalism, totalitarianism, you name it. Destroying the male supremacy that positions women below men as a social class, and contributes to the many crimes on humanity mentioned before, is the root cause of radical feminism.

>>16652615
>Maybe that pornography is something hurtful?
Is that seriously your fucking argument? Contemporary porn is bad because the etymology of the word is unpleasant? (not even the correct etymology, as I posted.) What about in non-IE-speaking cultures, is pornography not bad then? Perhaps atheists should stop referring to animals by the word 'creature', as it originally implied a creator?

>>16652626
Then why fling it at muslims and claim that is inherently bad and when it is flung at feminists it is suddenly "a vain statement"?

And the way feminism is developing and based on the demands of feminists, we can clearly say that the results would be very bad.
There have been major feminists stating all rape claims should be taken at face value and not questioned.
Feminism is anything but about equality.

>>16651555
>And Im pretty sure men are more likely to become erect that women are at becoming wet.

You're very wrong then.

>>16652634
>Translating pornē/pornai as 'whore' instead of 'prostitute' wouldn't be unconscionable, but 'cheap whore' is just an abuse of linguistics in service of a political point.)

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pornography
>porne "prostitute," originally "bought, purchased" (with an original notion, probably of "female slave sold for prostitution")

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_ancient_Greece
>The "pornai" (πόρναι)[4] were found at the bottom end of the scale.
>In the classical era of ancient Greece, pornai were slaves of barbarian origin
>In regards to price, there are numerous allusions to the price of one obolus for a cheap prostitute; no doubt for basic acts. It is difficult to assess whether this was the actual price or a proverbial amount designating a "good deal".

The insult goes deep.

>>16652635
>Divorce obviously is a bad outcome.
Divorce is a solution to a problem. A solution that for centuries was not allowed in any way (still isn't in many countries around the world), and continues to carry a huge stigma on it among certain sub-populations of even the most "modern" countries. I'd like to remind everyone how many religious nutheads there are in the USA in particular. Therefore, using divorce as the scale for marriage problems is fairly ludicrous unless the society on which the study is done has fully cleansed itself from the associated stigma.

>>16652641
This is either decent bait or you are retarded, I can't really decide.

>>16652646

Mainstream pornography continues to depict women as whores who enjoy getting debased.

>>16652603
>The abstract reads like it was made by someone trying to defend conservative attitudes of strict monogamy though.
He's not a conservative and spends time trying to coach the results, the heritage study was the conservative one jay teachman is a liberal.
>Again pay walled studies. And a disgustingly conservative tone in the author of that blog, by the way.
He may be conservative but that's meaningless because he didn't do the studies.
>Implying that divorce is bad is, in first place, idiotic.
It's bad for children, single parent homes rank pretty damn low for metrics child wellbeing. Further if you're getting married you want it to be long term, so you take the precautions to increase your chances so if a behavior makes it less likely to stay married you avoid those who exhibit said behaviors.
>When things don't work out, you divorce.
Flippant attitude to sex, flippant attitude to divorce, bailing at the first bump in the road makes for a poor life partner.
>If you have two groups of women, and you don't have any data on their types of husbands
You didn't read the whole blog, men who have more sexual partners are also less likely to stay married the effect is less profound but it's still there. Presume less and read more.
>they're simply more aware of what they want in life
Yes, could mean they don't want marriage or commitment making them a poor marriage partner. I wage it's this.
>After all, the actual *quality* of the marriage is presumably the same.
I have evidence to the contrary, you have zero evidence to support your claim 'a grain of salt' does not invalidate the research done on the happiness of virgin marriages nor do accusations of conservative bias carry far when the research team is nonpartisan.
>(There's an argument to be made about the possibility of multi-partner women making worse husband choices;
Sure that's possible.

>>16652680
How nice of you to only quote that one part and not the part on how I said the problem was it even coming to that point where a divorce was needed and actually called divorce good in such a situation.
That's a feminist for you.

File: Freeze Peach.png (298KB, 1596x891px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1596x891px

>>16652647
>Then why fling it at muslims and claim that is inherently bad and when it is flung at feminists it is suddenly "a vain statement"?
When did I say it was inherently bad? Radical Islamism is bad because Islamism is bad. (Note the difference between Islam and Islamism, by the way, though I'm not a supporter of religion overall.)

>And the way feminism is developing and based on the demands of feminists, we can clearly say that the results would be very bad.
If you take any angry political mob and uncritically accept *every* argument of *every* member of that group, you're obviously not going to get very pleasant results.

>There have been major feminists stating all rape claims should be taken at face value and not questioned.
I'm open to believe that utilitarianistically that would be a good choice. The number of rapes that go unreported in first place due to the difficulty of proving it, and the number of rapes that get reported but don't lead to a conviction, are absolutely appalling.
False rape accusations are, most likely, a very small percentage of all rape accusations. If I remember correctly, the FBI stated that provably false rape accusations are about 2% of all accusations. That would be a small price to pay to get convictions for the massive amounts of rapes where not enough proof can be gathered, and the massive amounts of rapes that currently go unreported.

But that's just a utilitarian stand-point...

>Feminism is anything but about equality.
Oh but it is. That just means that some folks are going to lose a lot of unjust power which currently they see as their birthright. Naturally this enrages them, and gives them the impression that *they* are being done injustice. Pic very much related.

>>16652687
>post introduction of a radical feminist manifesto
>summarize what it means
>HURR DURR BAIT RETARD

4chan/10

>>16652701
How does that change what I said? You seem to have missed the fundamental point of my post: divorce rates cannot be used as a metric for quality of marriage because so many people refuse to divorce no matter how horrible their marriage is.

Do you know about wife battery? Do you know how common it is of the women to stay in the relationship, sometimes to the point they get killed?

>>16652627
No ones against sex. Just fornication.

>>16652204
>I see them as degenerates.
Given that you probably enjoy porn, that means you enjoy watching degenerate people being degenerate, meaning you support degeneracy.

Would expect you to be in support of your girlfriend.

>>16652641
Men are dominant because they have more to contribute physically and mentally to the world, it's not a cultural artifact but a biological one. There are basically zero female dominated societies none of which accomplished anything significant or noteworthy.
>>16652708
>Oh but it is. That just means that some folks are going to lose a lot of unjust power which currently they see as their birthright. Naturally this enrages them, and gives them the impression that *they* are being done injustice. Pic very much related.
It won't because women have different natural goals and desires and will always fail to by and large become the equals the radicals desire them to be. Life has hierarchy and women fall below men on the totem pole there's nothing evil about this and attempts to correct this won't do much of anything (see sweden and it's failure to close equality gaps).

They're simply not equal and I don't get too upset because it can't be changed by govt mandate or cultural revolution, it'd be like mandating that men get pregnant too it won't happen.
>>16652680
>has fully cleansed itself from the associated stigma.
That's a silly approach, you could just look at smaller communities in said society that don't have the stigma. And it doesn't change the fact that divorce isn't the only metric, we also know that marriages provide better homes for kids and that lower sexual partner count leads to happier marriages.

OP here. Just thought I should say after doing a bit more thinking that Im probably going to leave her. By probably I mean I plan to talk to her and explain how the situation is not okay and I cant support her and theres little chance that she'll be able to change my mind.
Talked to some friends and they say I can crash at their place for small time. Gotta read the lease contract to see whats the best case scenario now...
Any tips on how I can leave without completely fucking her over or having to pay to rest of the rent.

>>16652680
And that's why it's best not to try and discuss topics without at least a passing familiarity with them. I mean -- you literally didn't even read the entirety of the single relevant section ('pornai') you linked, did you? It pretty much noted that the pornai were below the hetaerai and then went on to discuss the further levels of nuance that could be applied. The terms could be applied to the same woman in different contexts, much like how a modern sex worker might bluntly or insultingly be called a "whore", or euphemistically, an "escort" or archaically a "courtesan" (or, yeah, a "sex worker.")

There's a reason the term is almost always translated simply 'prostitute.' In fact, do a quick search for 'porne' with the diacritical (too lazy to add it right now) and 'whore.' You'll find several translator's notes, specifically clarifying why they chose to translate it as 'whore' instead of 'prostitute' (it was a Biblical context, and they wanted to better communicate the author's disdain -- not for prostitutes in general, actually, but for Babylon.)

Sorry, but I can't see any reason a reputable linguist would ever translate it as 'cheap whore.' Not sure why you're sticking to that point either, as it's not like it even forms the crux of a strong argument.

(and no, to be clear, I'm not claiming any particular familiarity with Ancient Greek, any of its varieties, specifically -- but I do have a fair amount of formal training in linguistics, I know how to read an etymological dictionary, and I can tell when somebody doesn't, and has no respect for the field beyond what it takes to push their particular agenda.)

>>16652737
>that means you enjoy watching degenerate people being degenerate,
It could be a video of him having sex. Watching sex doesnt make you a degenerate. What goes on behind the scenes of the fantasy is what makes them degenerates.
Also as long as youre not funding them saying he supports them is quite the leap.

>>16652744
>more to contribute physically and mentally to the world
It's been about ten thousand years that strategy beats individual strength. The higher average physical strength of men is absolutely irrelevant at this point.
>mentally
Absolute bullshit. Study after study proves that women are equally intellectually capable, and recently studies of thousands of brains have concluded that there are no such things as a "female brain" and a "male brain". (You can google for those, they're mere months old, will pop up immediately.)

>women have different natural goals and desires
>natural
[citation needed]

>>16652708
And how is Islamism in itself bad?
You did exactly what I did with feminism and your statement is not vain but has value to it?
Just like Islamism in itself is bad, I claim feminism to be bad itself.

I was looking at general developments, not at extreme arguments only. And in my opinion you will get horrible results if you take what seems to be mostly agreed upon already.

Your 2 % are provably false, so only the ones with a bulletproof alibi or the like.
There are statistics of false rape claims to be as high as 50 % at colleges (where only those where the accuser recanted were counted).
So your utilitarian point is plain wrong and if you honestly believe it would be okay to do so, it also shows what kind of messed up understanding of a proper legal system you have.

So feminism is also all about quotas for men when women are overrepresented?
They actually changed a gender neutral law in my country to exclude men from quotas when they would have had to hire men over women to get back to parity.
Where does feminism ask for the same responsibilities and not just rights?

>>16652716
>Do you know about wife battery? Do you know how common it is of the women to stay in the relationship, sometimes to the point they get killed?
And do these situations make up the bulk of divorces? What's their statistical significance?
You haven't finished making your case you've just declared a potential problem with no clue as to the size, it could be irrelevant to the majority of divorces.

>>16652708
That would not be good utilitarianistically because you have to look at the likely consequences of taking all rape accusations at face value and not questioning. What would the likely consequences be? Well more rape accusations would be made and certainly more rapists who deserve it would get convicted, but wouldn't the mentality towards the accusations change if someone knew they wouldn't be questioned for their accusation? It is, in general, poor logic to take anything with such severe consequences at face value due to the fact that people can be spiteful and malicious. It is best to take most claims that have strong consequences with a grain of salt and with great deliberation because having severe consequences affect someone when they are undeserved would cause great harm.

>>16652688
As regards this, you've pretty much just restated 'pornography is bad' with slightly more words. I don't even disagree, actually, that the porn industry can be very degrading. But not always. What kind of 'debasement' are you talking about? Really, that's present across all genres of porn, produced by every studio? You're not going to bother distinguishing between, say, relatively well-run studios like Vivid, and the seedier ones (none of which, I'm relieved to say, I can name.) What about webcam modeling? How about amateur porn, which is sometimes produced by couples in actual committed relationships and distributed for relatively little money, or even for free, for their own enjoyment? It's all debasement. Right across the board. Please be clear -- that's what you're saying?

>>16652754
>It pretty much noted that the pornai were below the hetaerai and then went on to discuss the further levels of nuance that could be applied.
You are missing the fundamental point that pornai were the lowest social class in the whole hierarchy. So low that male slaves could buy them. They were, in the view of the society, worthless whores.

This corresponds even with the modern view on prostitutes and women in pornography. Generally, they're seen as deranged women. The blame is put on them, despite that they are the ones who are getting exploited.

That's the point. From ancient Greek up to this day, women in pornography and prostitution are primarily viewed as degenerate, despite being subject to exploitation, and the *target* of abuse rather than abusers themselves. The male logic manages to be so abhorring, it legitimizes the idea that *you* can abuse someone to *make* them dirty and worthless, then cast them out of society and even kill them to "cleanse" the world.

This is how deep sexual hate of women goes, and it's been a constant throughout millennia.

>>16652716
Do you know that spousal abuse is very strongly presumed to be yet another thing women lead the statistics in?
But if feminism is truly about equality, you must see the issue of men not reporting abuse nearly as much due to our culture and how they would be perceived, right? And you must also see the issue of men not reporting crimes like rape because of the same reason? The issue of there being usually no shelters or helplines for abused husbands?

It still stands that you ignored the rest of my statement and made it seem like I said divorce is bad in any and all cases, period. That's not a way to argue as it was blatantly and wilfully misrepresenting what I said.

Divorce rates are definitely an indicator of quality of marriage though.

Just break up and move on dude

>>16652750
OP better start a new thread regarding rent, this thread has been derailed beyond hope and you'll have a better chance of finding posters who know something about the topic that way too

>>16652761
And you do know that men outnumber females 8 to 1 when it comes to IQs of 145 and above?
So yes, there is a mental difference backed up by plenty of statistics.
They score the same on average, but male scores are more extreme, both for the good and the bad. That might be why women still do not contribute nearly as much in the scientific world as men and why they are outperformed especially in STEM fields and top level research.

>>16652765
>how is Islamism in itself bad?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism

>I claim feminism to be bad itself
You're free to do that.
But don't expect me to take you serious when you compare feminism to Islamism. It's a bit like comparing the civil rights movement to the Ku Klux Klan.

I don't have time to respond much more because I need to go soon.

>>16652773
Sure, there's a chance that a substantial number of women would start exploiting the law.
I really doubt that there are many feminists in first place who *literally* want rape accusations to be never questioned. I was just toying with your claim.

>>16652788
You can distinguish erotica from porn and say it's fine. I don't really care much. *Mainstream* pornography tends to debase women in very obvious ways.
The concrete definition of pornography in >>16652414 is a good guideline in such discussions. I'll note that some lesbian videos from the X-Art studio are literally not pornography under this definition, and many "erotic" videos where no genitals or intercourse is shown *are* pornography under that definition simply because the videos objectify and debase women.

>>16652761
>It's been about ten thousand years that strategy beats individual strength. The higher average physical strength of men is absolutely irrelevant at this point.
Not for a desk job but you'll never have equality in the manual labor force.
>there are no such things as a "female brain" and a "male brain". (You can google for those, they're mere months old, will pop up immediately.)
This is what I got when I googled.
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/08/male-female-brains-are-just-a-little-different.html
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/males-and-females-differ-in-specific-brain-structures
I don't see any study saying they're interchangeable, they find differences how profound and what those differences mean are unknown.

From what I know historically and what I've seen in places where they attempt to eliminate gender differences and gender gap, (trying to raise boys as girls and vice versa, trying to institute quotas), it seems incredibly reasonable to conclude that you will never see equality between the sexes.

>>16652750
I think it's for the best, I wish you well and hope you two have a good talk. Maybe you can find out why she didn't tell you too.

>>16652834
I haven't compared them in any way.
I am just saying that both are inherently bad. I did not rank them.
That's like claiming I compare apples and oranges by saying I like both.

I also know about Islamism and simply linking wikipedia is as condescending as it's going to get.
My only goal was to simply point out the idiocy of stating that one thing is inherently bad and casting an identical statement aside as vain when it comes to something you are in favour.
Guess what, Islamists don't think Islamism is bad either.

>>16652793
>But if feminism is truly about equality, you must see the issue of men not reporting abuse nearly as much due to our culture and how they would be perceived, right? And you must also see the issue of men not reporting crimes like rape because of the same reason? The issue of there being usually no shelters or helplines for abused husbands?
About ending male supremacy. Yes, the things you describe are also things caused by male supremacy and masculinism. No feminist (radical or not) will hold you back from rallying up against prison rape, from opening shelters for homeless and abused men, from working towards ending the stigma of mental illness, etc.

>It still stands that you ignored the rest of my statement and made it seem like I said divorce is bad in any and all cases, period.
No, I'm only saying what I'm saying: that you cannot use divorce as a metric of marriage quality because of the stigma around divorce that keeps people in bad marriages.

>>16652824
>men outnumber females 8 to 1 when it comes to IQs of 145 and above?
Citation needed, and explanation of relevance needed. Steve Jobs probably had a high IQ. Didn't stop him from becoming a mega-capitalist.

>>16652837
>equality in the manual labor force
There's enough manual labor jobs that don't require physical strength and are equally important.

>This is what I got when I googled.
You ignored the most recent ones.
http://news.sciencemag.org/brain-behavior/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-10/30/male-female-brain-difference-not-significant

>From what I know historically and what I've seen in places where they attempt to eliminate gender differences and gender gap, (trying to raise boys as girls and vice versa, trying to institute quotas), it seems incredibly reasonable to conclude that you will never see equality between the sexes.
Look at Sweden, and note that feminism hasn't really existed in the last couple millennia.

>>16652791
Again, and I realize how rude this is, I just don't think you're qualified to discuss this, given that you apparently are under the impression that in Ancient Greece slaves were about as low as you could go, socially. In several Ancient Greek city-states -- I don't know about all of Greece all the way through the Byzantine era, and I'm burnt out after tracing the etymology of 'pornai' for fifteen minutes so I'm not going to look it up -- slaves weren't the lowest of the low. Unattached workers, who had neither the patronage or protection of a household, were.

You've also elegantly dodged the point that 'the pornai' weren't as clearly-defined a social caste as you're claiming. There was significant variation within the group and the boundaries of it weren't clearly defined. As with Greek slaves, in fact.

Granted, Ancient Greece was a hellish place to live if you were a woman of almost any social standing, even a rich one (well, unless you were a free Spartan.) I want to be very clear, I'm not arguing that Greek prostitutes weren't debased and objectified. But I'd like you to stop abusing etymology (and now history) -- it's not even central to the point you're making! How women were treated in classical societies is certainly of interest to feminism, I'm not saying it's irrelevant to the whole movement, but when you're trying to argue THAT something is bad -- and not WHY and HOW things developed the way they did -- statements like "the condition of women in Ancient Greece was brutal" frankly aren't relevant. (and please do make sure you understand what I'm saying before you accuse me of ignoring historical context)

>>16652846
>Guess what, Islamists don't think Islamism is bad either.
Halfway "modern" people tend to understand that monarchy is bad, and that that eradicating sexism would be good.

I don't even understand your point. From post #1 I've told you that "radical" doesn't make an idea inherently good or bad. You're talking as if I blindly stated radical feminism to be good because it's radical. I didn't. Great derail.

Going AFK now.

>>16652856

It is central to the point I'm making. Women were debased and sexually abused (literally slaved) in ancient Greece, and called porne. Women are now debased and sexually abused in videos, and we call it PORNography.

Progress, everyone.

Anyway, AFK now.

>>16652861
This ignorance. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. The world does not think islam is bad. Just the west. Christanity is about 30% and islam is about 25% with islam being the fastest growing religion.

>>16652834
That claim wasn't mine because this is my first post in this thread.

In regards to your definition of pornography, my first issue is calling your definition concrete. No definition is concrete because the way things are defined changes over time.

Secondly pornography in general use tends to mean images that depict sexually explicit material. If I were looking at genitals getting penetrated at work I would still be fired even if it weren't debasing women or the other criteria. To the average person, which may not be the average browser of 4chan, it is not going to be accepted. So outside of radical feminist circles your definition is ineffective.

File: 1407102210210.png (283KB, 546x432px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 546x432px

>>16651375

I think you need to just leave her, man. Some girls do slutty stuff, a lot of girls do slutty stuff, you just have to be one of the first guys to get to her and lock down her affection. The one's who don't get caught early, they end up becoming the same age as girl's who are just too slutty to keep a stable relationship. They get lost in a sea, like a needle in a haystack. Then you have to go find a good girl in a sea of sluts. Some guys are wired this way too, but these girls are still single because they love cock to much to keep a stable relationship. I'm not saying they're bad people, I'm just saying eventually their nature is going to catch up to them and they'll either cheat, "need a break" (read as: cheat), or leave you. But based on what your girlfriend has done she must be an absolute FIEND for cock, surpassing even a normal slutty girl. Your girl was willing to do it on camera for money. Her alignment is murky as fuck so the chances of her cheating sooner rather than later are understandably much higher. Again, she may not be a bad person, but she's objectively a bad person to have strong feelings for. She's almost certainly a great FWB, but if you start to get emotionally attached you're inevitably going to get hurt when she needs to seek other dick again. It may be a month, a year, or maybe ten years, but eventually it'll happen. But considering your girlfriend was willing to be fucked on film for money I'd wager it'll be nearer than that.

>>16652834
If you're going to define pornography as "depictions of women as sexual objects who enjoy pain or humiliation" (and so on and so forth) you need to be aware that's not the usual definition, and you're going to be talking at cross-purposes with many well-meaning people.

But all right. I'll accept that definition for the sake of argument. Let me offer you a hypothetical.

I'm a straight man, engaged to a straight woman who I love to death. Of our own free will -- in fact, let's say she proposes the idea, just out of the blue one day -- we decide to shoot a sex video and upload it somewhere. We both have good jobs, we're not being forced into this by harsh economic realities, our thought process is more along the lines of, "Well, what the hell, we're not ashamed of the fact that we have sex and it sounds kind of fun." It's quite clear from the video that we're both consenting, and in fact, that we love each other, and that neither of us feels degraded by the experience. We host it on some website for free, and receive a small amount of money each month in ad revenue, occasionally think ingto ourselves, "Huh. Well, there's less pleasant ways to pay for a couple dinners out."

In this scenario, which yes, I've written to be about as benign as possible, was that film morally problematic? And was it porn?

>>16652872
God. OK. One last time. It's not central to the point you're making, it's completely tangential; an interesting historical parallel at best. How can you not see this?

If THIS was not true
>Women were debased and sexually abused (literally slaved) in ancient Greece, and called porne.
would THIS not be a problem anymore?
>Women are now debased and sexually abused in videos, and we call it PORNography.

>>16651375
Leave her. It will bother you the rest of your life.

>>16652852
>No feminist (radical or not) will hold you back from rallying up against prison rape, from opening shelters for homeless and abused men, from working towards ending the stigma of mental illness, etc.
You seem to have a very, very idealistic view of feminism. Just see what all they rallied against.
If you open a homeless shelter exclusively for men, do you honestly believe they will not roast you over that and try to force you to open it to women? Are you that blind?

This is not about what you said. This is about what you made my statement look like. You did quote me in a way completely ripping one statement out of context, making it seem like my statement was contrary to what it actually was.

>There's enough manual labor jobs that don't require physical strength and are equally important.
Like?

Yes, look at Sweden. Look at how well they are doing when it comes to rape.

>>16652852
Here's a criticism of that paper:
http://www.isogem.com/?CategoryID=172&ArticleID=394
> There are also questions pertaining to the methodology of this paper. The MRI images the researchers examined were comprised of “still images”, that is, images which by their very nature cannot represent and demonstrate dynamic functions of distinct parts of the brain. Looking at these images is more akin to examining a road map and draw conclusions about traffic patterns , without looking at the actual traffic. Moreover, the paper makes no mention on whether MRIs from women and men were matched with any parameters, such as age, occupation, background diseases, time of the day etc.
>Despite the substantial body of data on these issues, the subject research does not relate to this aspect and chose to exhibiting the absence of morphological differences between the brains of men and women. There was in fact no need for such an elaborate study that eventually corroborated a rather obvious fact that one cannot morphologically distinguish between a male and a female brain like one can concerning male and female genitalia. This adds but very little to scientific understanding of gender related research. Did any anatomists or pathologists ever claim that they could determine the sex of a person by mere morphological and quantitative examination of their brain or even dissection of brains ? Are slices of male brains supposed to be colored blue and those of women pink?

>>16652852
>Citation needed, and explanation of relevance needed. Steve Jobs probably had a high IQ. Didn't stop him from becoming a mega-capitalist
Relevance? If there is such a mental difference, how do you expect women to achieve the same things as men?
Steve Jobs was anything but a genius. He had ideas and other people did the actual work, the development, programming, engineering, everything.
Being a capitalist is also nothing wrong or bad. Why would it be? Capitalist does not equal anarcho-capitalist after all.
Socialism is simply retarded and there are not too many other options.

>>16652852
>look at sweden
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/22/can-the-gender-gap-be-solved.html
They haven't closed it.
> In fact, Sweden’s labor market is among the most sex segregated (PDF) in the world and their wage gap shows it. Mothers take in only about 20% as men, much the same as in the United States.

I could only just about read over half of the thread before I had to stop, the general theme is

>if you don't like her past behavior that she kept hidden from you through deception, you need to man up and are being childish
>you are not allowed to enquire about someones past sexual history with someone you're having a serious relationship with

Fucking whores and whiteknights man. I would be pissed too if I found out that about my GF, in fact I would dump her. I want a wife, not some whore who got facefucked on camera for a bunch of men to jerk off to.

>>16652861
No, I am talking as if you have blindly stated radical feminism is good/intelligent no matter for what reason because that is exactly what you did.
I am also talking as if you stated that simply by wanting the world to be governed by Islamism radical Islamists are bad and then called it vain when I did the same with feminism because, again, you did.

Halfway modern people "understand" a monarchy is bad? You do know that the UK is a monarchy? Monacco? The Netherlands? Sweden? The whole Commonwealth accepts the Queen of England as their head of state? That includes Canada and Australia. Japan is also a monarchy. So is Spain and still more countries. I can't really be bothered to list them all, the Commonwealth alone is huge.
Claiming that "halfway modern people tend to understand that monarchy is bad"... I am at a loss for words on this one. You are so, so badly informed on world politics.

>>16652955
You missed the second half where the statistics on divorce and happiness and their relation to sexual history were rolled out.

>>16652955
>>16652990
And the history of feminism and sexuality as well.

>>16652955
Additionally OP either ignored or actually twisted that first group, even though it was agreeing with him. But remember we're not allowed to point out that OP was obviously trolling. That hurts people's feefees.

>>16651375
hahahaha you might as well just actually fuck prostitutes because i see no difference then dating the modern women.

>>16651375
She's a whore. Discard her and move on. DO NOT worry about her financial or living situation. It's not your responsibility. She isn't a kid or a dog. She's a manipulative slut and deserves to be treated as one. Throw her skank ass out in the street and don't make contact with her ever again. Also post vids.

Sorry as away
>>16653299
Didnt think of it that way but youre right.
>>16653620
The thing is, I care about her. Cant just through her to the sharks.

>>16653878
>I care about her
Watch her porn for a while and then reflect on your feelings.

OP you dump her, duh. Obviously the relationship is irreversibly damaged, and for good reason.

>>16651375
So OP watches porn and beats off to porn, and thinks that's perfectly ok.

But for his girlfriend to have had the same profession as those girls he's jerked off to, that's too much for OP?

You don't deserve her. Leave her.

>>16654945
>You don't deserve her

Kek, you're right he doesn't. He deserves way more.

This is one of the things that OP will regret when he gets up to the age of 40.

Can I take your place OP?

This is one of my dream relationships and fetishes.

Let this thread die you shitcunts.
Fucking drug addicts.

>>16654945
>watching sex
Perfectly fine
>being a degenerate who has sex for the world so to see for money
Not okay.

>>16655156
>watching and beating off to degenerates having sex for money for the world to see, and giving them click and ad revenue
>Perfectly fine

Fixed your post for you

>>16651801
>>false equivalency
>Please point out how they arent equivalent in the given context.

Porn actor and rapist are not the same thing.
Porn actor and rapist are two different things.

Porn actors have consensual sex for money.
Rapists force people to have sex with them.

Being a porn actor is not a crime.
Being a rapist is a crime.

>>16655191
>I dont use adblock
Im not involved in the revenue. I just open the video. If you can make money that easily I cant stop you.

>>16655205
>Porn actor and rapist are not the same thing.
They are both people with a history that others will not like. It is equivalent in that context only proving you dont know what false equivalency means.
>Porn actor and rapist are two different things.
Every single person is different. because you dont know what false equivalency means by your logic abstraction is impossible and you cant compare anything because no two things are the same. Thank you for proving you are stupid.
>Porn actors have consensual sex for money.
Degenerate
>Rapists force people to have sex with them.
Degenerate
>Being a porn actor is not a crime.
Goes against someones moral ethics
>Being a rapist is a crime.
goes against someones moral ethics

Man by your bad logic, before rape was 'illegal' it was perfect fine to do. No need to tell others you did it right. Who cares if they are concerned with it. Society doesnt put you in jail for it so it doesnt matter.
Remember that time I raped someone and got away with it. No record. You dont need to worry about that. Society didnt mind and its my history.

Can you hang op if so stay and talk it out

If you can't then bounce

It's that simple

>>16655227
Being a slut is not immoral. I'm a godamn slut and I'll never regret it bitches.

>>16651512
No we are entitled to the full sexual history.
Most men don't want to date or move in with whores.
You may not understand the difference between casual sex and a relationship.
Men will fuck you if you're their best option and they want to fuck. This in no way means they will ever date you or want anything else with you.

>>16655241
That's like your opinion man
My opinion is you're disgusting.

>>16655227
Are you the same person who thinks it's fine to watch porn?

By the logic of your post, this is also true :
>OP watches porn
Degenerate, voyeur.


>Man by your bad logic, before rape was 'illegal' it was perfect fine to do. No need to tell others you did it right. Who cares if they are concerned with it. Society doesnt put you in jail for it so it doesnt matter.
Remember that time I raped someone and got away with it. No record. You dont need to worry about that. Society didnt mind and its my history.

It's not just your history, it's the history of the person you raped, too.

I'd be ok if OP didn't want a gf who had been in porn AND didn't watch porn, either.

>>16655467
>watching sex
Nothing degenerate about that.
>It's not just your history, it's the history of the person you raped, too.
I also killed them.

>I'd be ok if OP didn't want a gf who had been in porn AND didn't watch porn, either.
This is a logical fallacy. Watching sex is not degenerate.
Being a whore is.

>>16655513
You keep simplifying it to "watching sex," but by your standards, what it really means is "enjoying watching whores have sex"

Do you think it is ethically moral to watch and masturbate to videos of people who are having sex for money?

>Probably got aids.

>>16655576
>enjoying watching whores have sex
No Im enjoying the fantasy without actually thinking about the degenerates bringing it to me. For all I care it could be that a loving married couple is on camera not doing it for money. But when you pull yourself away from the fantasy and see them for actual people. All I see are disgusting degenerates.
>Do you think it is ethically moral to watch and masturbate to videos of people who are having sex for money?
Since when is watching a crime illegal?

>>16655227
>being not Muslim is violating someones morals

So, what I took away from this thread after carefully skimming it is;

OP has a gf for almost a year.
OP discovers she did porn
she isn't doing porn anymore though and loves him
OP feels RAAAAGE
"SHE HAD SEX WITH PEOPLE BEFORE ME AND RECORDED IT!"
Is not taking any advice given to him whatsoever.

All in all, everyone here is subscribed to his rant blog where he vents about having a gf who's probably great at sex all because surprise surprise he wasn't her first and she had a great time and possibly even got paid hundreds to thousands of dollars just to lay down and orgasm. She's given him no STDs, but she's still a slut. A slut meaning that she enjoys sex. Because don't we all hate when that happens. Much better when they hate it and avoid it all costs so we can bitch about them never putting out.
There's nothing else I can say that hasn't already been said. Enjoy your self inflicted agony OP.

>>16655732
Oh wait I left out the part where he constantly brings up rape. I think he's probably a rapist or is heavily considering being one. Either way, his obsession with equating enjoying sex with raping someone is really kinda creepy.
OP also wants to rape someone.

>>16655732
The amount of cuckolds flocking to this thread to defend a whore and her whore actions is simply mind blowing.

>>16655744
If she's not doing porn while she's in a relationship with someone then it shouldn't be a problem. Sounds like she did it years ago. Some guys take a hard one up the asshole once or twice just to see what it feels like. Doesn't mean they're gay forever. Just means they tried some dick.

I don't know man.
If I had a great gf and the only big downside about her was that she did porn a long time ago I can't say I'd really care. But to each their own. OP can leave her and she'll move onto someone who isn't as beta as he is. In fact, OP should leave her for sure. An alpha would grab that ass, wife it, and fuck it so hard he put her past co-stars to pure shame.

Unsubscribing from this blog now, too much clutter on my feed.

>>16655732
>>16655741
>>16655744
You do realise this thread is over 22 hours old, I doubt its OP its been for a while.

>>16655758
>Doesn't mean they're gay forever
This is what homo fags believe. Shes a whore. She will always be a whore. If she didnt want to be a whore she shouldnt have done porn.

>>16651522

You know, just perhaps that wasn't his point

>>16655744
>The amount of cuckolds flocking to this thread to defend a whore and her whore actions is simply mind blowing.

The one cuckold who keeps trying to defend his hobby of sitting at home and touching himself while watching women he fantasizes about get fucked by other men is even more mind blowing.

Gj Elliot