I'm 24 and I've had 23 partners, most of them were

Male or female?

>>18200359

You've had more dicks than birthday cakes.

Yes it's too much.
It's also average, these days, sad.

>That's too much, isn't it?
To some people, obviously.

But it's not like you can do anything about it, so why worry? If you don't like that part of you, be more selective about who you sleep with from now on. If you don't care, then keep on not caring.

All this thread is going to do is start arguments, including guys posting those graphs about bullshit like how likely people are to be in marriages by sexual partner count and whatnot

>>18200364
I don't know if it's average. I've met plenty of girls who've had say, 3 relationships by then. Nowhere near 23.

That is a lot, but different strokes for different folks. I've had 6 partners my whole life, and of those, two were hookups that made me realize I don't like them. I prefer to get to know girl, really like her, and then have sex. But some people prefer hooking up and in my book there is nothing wrong with that if it makes you happy.

>>18200368

I was talking about the shitty civilised world, not you dune-coon infested shithole, Ackmed.

>That's average

Maybe in your degeneracy ridden Western countries. Here most girls will have had sex with only two or three guys by the time they are 24. Some may still be virgins.

>>18200375
I'm Australian. Maybe I just don't hang around whores.

File: IMG_0406.jpg (21KB, 750x158px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 750x158px

>>18200359

That's really trashy. Before people bash me saying "well maybe it's what she likes?". Regardless, it shows who you are. It shows that you don't value yourself. Because if you did value yourself, you wouldn't spread open your legs so 23 men could cram part of their body beside if yours and swap tons of each other's body fluids. If you valued yourself. You'd save those experiences for men who you actually value, and those who actually value you (aka a boyfriend).

Bleh don't listen to them. 24 Ppl whatever is kind of a lot but it depends on where you live and what circles you run in.

>>18200396
But anon

a) I've never found a boyfriend, I waited until I was 21 to lose my virginity to a boyfriend and then I gave up and lost my virginity through casual sex. Would you rather I just never have sex?
b) I don't see where value comes into play. Could you elaborate?

>>18200359
That sad part is that you've never had a relationship.. I hope find a meaningful one eventually and experience love.

That said, no, it doesn't bother me. And you're getting this from a 31 yo guy who has only had sex once and got head from 2 other people. Just perspective.

However, if you feel dirty for doing what you've done, you can always choose to stop and keep yourself. You're not better or worse than anyone else for the experiences you've had or haven't had. You're just human at the end of the day.. people make different decisions.

But yeah, I do wish you feel love some day.

>>18200464

>would you rather I just never have sex?

ok, so you lost it through casual sex. Whatever. But you were with TWENTY THREE different men. You literally opened up your body so 23 different men could enter you, and you exchanged body fluids with them. Sex, which is the most intimate act a human can possibly do. You did with 23 men. That's a lot. A whole lot. You opened yourself up freely to the possibility of getting an STD or pregnant with 23 men.

That would be like if someone got a new car and put 100,000 miles on it within 3 years. High mileage.

>>18200467
I've felt love before but it was unrequited.

>>18200473

I forgot to add. I'm 29 and I've only had sex twice with 2 different girls. Both were ONS and awful experiences. Those experiences happened when I was 20. I'm not going to have sex again unless it's with a woman I actually want to be with

>>18200475
Well, then I wish for you an ideal -apex companion.. one that will reciprocate your attraction. And make you feel special.

https://youtu.be/FJSxX95PH8o

>>18200484
Thank you :) I hope you find love and companionship too.

>>18200359

Why did you chose to have sex with so many people?

>>18200495
What a fucking retarded question. Because sex is hot, of course.

>>18200495
I was trying to find a way to enjoy sex so I experimented with a lot of people (I still can't enjoy sex) and I wanted to find a boyfriend, but none of them wanted any more from me

I thought I could make myself feel better about being rejected by the man I love by finding acceptance and being wanted by a lot of guys.

File: IMG_0409.jpg (32KB, 750x352px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 750x352px

>>18200500

Well I was asking a genuine question. But since you're being a bitch..

>>18200506
Your question was genuinely retarded.

>>18200502

I don't understand that really. I'm the opposite of you. I had sex once each with 2 different girls and felt terrible about myself. I didn't enjoy either experience. All it did was kill my self esteem. I want a girlfriend sometimes, but thinking back to those experiences deter me from actually finding a girlfriend. I really fucking wish I would have waited for sex until I met someone I like

>>18200359
>That's too much, isn't it?
If you're a nun, fuck yeah that's too much. Otherwise, who gives a fuck? As long as you stay clean and safe, you're fine, don't worry about it.

>>18200521

Would you date a girl who's been with 30 guys?

>>18200359
Nothing special, move on.

If you had a relationship with even half as many, now that'd be a real problem.

>>18200536
I've been with women who've been with a fuck of a lot more than 30 guys, and I think you'd be surprised how many girls have. For a lot of pretty girls Tinder is basically a dick finder used for hookups, not a dating app. I know 4 (possibly 6) girls who have probably had *hundreds* of different dudes.

Human beings aren't inherently monogamous, and over time society is becoming more and more comfortable with that fact. Who cares if a girl gets around? As long as she's clean, it's not an issue, just means you've gotta work a little harder to keep up with the competition.

>>18200548
>you've gotta work a little harder to keep up with the competition
>work
>competition
Way to trigger 90% of the neckbeards here.

>>18200548

Say you start dating a girl you really like. She's been fucked stupid by 30 different men in a short time. How would anything you shared together hold any value to her? She's experienced so much. Why would you really matter to her? Maybe there was 1 guy she was with that was the best of her entire life. So the point no one else can compare, even you.

>>18200562
>thinking that the amount of experiences and not with who you have them matter

>>18200536
I probably wouldn't, but it's not directly because of that. We'd be unlikely to have similar values or goals.

File: 1489990745275.jpg (91KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1000x800px

>>18200380

>degeneracy ridden Western countries

Look, I wouldn't date anyone, male or female, who'd had that many partners, but many would. It's really down to who you want to go out with.

>>18200562
>How would anything you shared together hold any value to her?
I'm assuming you mean this in a purely sexual sense, not a general one.

It might hold meaning for any of the following reasons:
>I might be better than them in bed.
>She might like me a lot more.
>If she really likes me she'll cum harder, because women objectively orgasm harder with a man they have strong, passionate emotional ties to.

And even if it doesn't hold any deep meaning, who gives a fuck? Not every relationship has to be "te best EVAR" in all regards. If we're both enjoying it, what's the problem. Even if I'm not the best ever in all regards, we're still sure as shit enjoying it. My grandma doesn't make the best lasagna in the world, but I'm sure as shit not eating out that night if she's cooking.

>why would you matter to her
Presumably because my personality and lifestyle appeals to her?

Okay, reading this, you really sound like a young man, with a (said with as little condescension as possible) rather childish view of what relationships are. Not every girl you date is going to be true love, happily ever after, and it's almost certain that every single girl you fuck has gotten better dick elsewhere. Your average western woman has 6 sexual partners in her life, so odds are with each girl she has 5 other points of reference. If you're standing in a room with 5 other guys, how likely are you to to think that you have the biggest dick and the best skills out of the group? You've gotta get over that insecurity man. If she didn't enjoy it, she wouldn't be fucking you, and even if you aren't the best she'd ever had, she might like you more and even like fucking you more than any of those other guys, because love makes sex better.

>>18200570

Guys do the same shit. A guy could fuck a 10/10, and that's something he will never forget. I know some chads who have girlfriends now. When we hang out and drink, I've heard some of them talk about previous hook ups and say "man that girl gave the best head of my life. Nothing can compare to that". He has a girlfriend! So he's basically saying that his girlfriend is not as desirable as that prior girl.

How can you be real with someone when you still fantasize over prior experiences with prior people?

>>18200595

Question.

How do you know if someone has been around that much? Like you, id prefer to not date someone whose done all of that. But what is worrisome is I know some very innocent looking girls who dress modestly and act innocent. But I know as a fact they have been with close to a dozen men. They've told me

File: 1475891064913.gif (433KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 500x375px

>>18200473

>That would be like if someone got a new car and put 100,000 miles on it within 3 years.

No, it isn't. I'm not on OP's side at all but I'm definitely tired of this autistic car analogy. Human bodies aren't like cars. That's retarded.

If that were the case then none of us should be with athletes either because they put tons of "mileage" on their bodies too. So what exactly counts as mileage? What if a some has sex with one person a hundred times? Is that more "mileage" than having sex with a hundred people one time?

Like I said, I'm not siding with OP, I just think this analogy is super autistic and overused and it doesn't make any sense.

Also, this is a shitty bait thread and you all are pathetic neckbeards.

>>18200605
You don't. If a woman has been with a lot of partners and wants to get with you she'll simply lie. They don't even see it as amoral to do this.

>>18200598
>He has a girlfriend! So he's basically saying that his girlfriend is not as desirable as that prior girl.
When it comes to sex. That's just sex. It's not the entirety of a relationship, it's just one component. I'd much rather date a girl who's great to hang with, low maintainance, and actually has ambitions and hobbies of her own than a vapid, annoying cunt who just happens to be more attractive than the other girl. I'd rather fuck the hotter girl, because that's just one night, and it's just sex, BUT that might change if I really love the other girl.

>>18200605
>But what is worrisome is I know some very innocent looking girls who dress modestly and act innocent.
I get that shit all the fucking time, and it always makes me laugh.

>Ahg, this is crazy, I can't believe we're doing this!
>Sure, sure, then how the fuck do you know how to do that with your tongue? You gotta practice that shit, bitch, don't lie to me.

>>18200611

So how do you trust them?

>>18200598
> A guy could fuck a 10/10, and that's something he will never forget.
Which is the point, not the amount matters. He could've fucked 200 chicks but all of them sans that 10/10 would be long forgotten.

>So he's basically saying that his girlfriend is not as desirable as that prior girl.
In looks/bed skills sense, which is only a tiny part of a relationship. There are always going to be people better than you at couple aspects, who cares.

>How can you be real with someone when you still fantasize over prior experiences with prior people?
Fantasizes and thinking back are different things. If someone has a great memory from the past, who cares. Your relationship doesn't compete with a single fuck in any way.

Besides, why limit it to sex? The person probably had 1000ths of other great experiences with their friends and family that you'll never be able to emulate.

>>18200605

>How do you know if someone has been around that much?

You don't, you live life and experience it at face value just like the rest of us human beans. Honestly, if you love her and she loves you and you're happy I don't see a reason to dig. Just like I realize that someone has probably spit in my soup or farted on my burger at some point at a restaurant but I don't want to know when because eating burgers makes me happy and I don't feel the need of ruining that for myself just for the point of ruining it. I'll eat some spit. Idgaf.

>>18200611

>They don't even see it as amoral to do this.

>>>/r9k/

>>18200605
I don't know. It's why I'm so scared of dating-I'm a girl, by the way, but I swing both ways.

I wouldn't want a manwhore anymore than you guys would want a slut (I don't want a slut either). I'm alright with some previous partners, but I don't have casual sex and I don't want anyone who has, as it seems to me that they have comittment issues and don't value sex as an intimate moment between two people. It just seems a very broken way of being, throwing yourself at the next available dick or pussy without a second thought to whether or not it's enjoyable or if you have any genuine connection with the person. I couldn't do it.

I suppose the best you can do is hope someone you're dating is honest with you.

>>18200624
The whole idea of trust is having faith in the other person, believing that they are not withholding things that would change your opinion of them. Knowing everything about their past is not the same as trust, which is something you must choose to do, it is a judgement based on incomplete knowledge. Personally, I simply don't trust them.

File: 7703407b-cb2f-4e4d-8b8b-fe42629b8c4f..png (52KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 625x626px

>>18200359

Okay, what's even the problem with dating lots of people? I don't get what you're all afraid of. What do you think is going to happen? Is this just a fear of STD's, or what?

>>18200562
In an ideal relationship, that wouldn't even come up.. even if it's simply out of respect.

My real concern isn't physical in a woman, it's spiritual. It would hurt me more to think that she considers me ..like a sort of afterthought.. like her experiences have made her emotionally disconnected.. spiritually indolent.. I fear spiritual indolence even in myself and I'm very inexperienced.

It is important to me, for the sake of maintaining a strong family bond, raising children in a truly loving home, etc. I fear that a lot.

But I also know.. people are pretty resilient.

File: 1485392841494.gif (503KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 200x200px

>>18200624

>So how do you trust them?

Immediately get off of 4chan, stop taking advice about women from a bunch of red-pilled teenage virgins and angry middle-aged autists on the internet and start interacting with people to formulate your own processes for developing relationships with other human beings.

>>18200638

>Personally, I simply don't trust them.

What a sad life you must live.

>>18200630

I feel the same as you

>>18200640
They're autists who are obsessed with having their own pure virgin waifu.

>>18200652
Fuck off.

>>18200640
>Okay, what's even the problem with dating lots of people?
We've had this discussion a million times, there's two opposing sides and neither will ever be convinced. Asking this question is only inviting bait posts like this >>18200650

>>18200640
I don't overtly want nor obsess over a virgin, I just wouldn't be comfortable dating someone who's really into hookup culture. I'm a girl, not a redpilled virgin neckbeard. I just don't think the kind of men who date around like that have much respect for women, nor do I think they care about dating. Same goes for women, only I don't think they respect men.

It just seems like a total devaluing of sex as a connection between two people, reduced to meaningless fucking.

I'm not bothered by people having previous boyfriends or girlfriends. I am bothered by a lot of casual sex- if I liked them enough I suppose I could overlook it, but I'd probably be a little wary of putting my all into a relationship with someone who might just leave me in order to get easy, casual sex.

>>18200656
But I seriously don't know the answer. I didn't feel like reading every post in the thread, so I figured I'd just ask.

>>18200660
>I just don't think the kind of men who date around like that have much respect for women, nor do I think they care about dating. Same goes for women, only I don't think they respect men.
Why do you think that?

>>18200660
I've always wanted to ask this question to people with your mentality:

Do you think it's wrong to pay someone for a massage? How about paying a personal trainer? If not, why is it okay to casually obtain pleasure in those ways, but not okay to casually obtain pleasure through sex? It's not a facetious question, what do you think?

>>18200666
Because it seems to start becoming objectification, either as a dildo or fleshlight- they don't seem to view the people they fuck as well, people. Just things to fuck.

>>18200660
>I just don't think the kind of men who date around like that have much respect for women, nor do I think they care about dating. Same goes for women, only I don't think they respect men.
That's a pretty silly theory given it's the people who can't get laid often go into hate tirades about the other sex.

>>18200669
Yeah but is that really a problem if you aren't dating someone? *Very* few people have a deep respect for every single person's inner complexities and whatnot, you just care about your friends and loved ones, and you offer strangers some basic courtesy, or not. If someone isn't going to be your friend, not going to be your SO, why *should* you have any great respect for them, it's really do different from someone you'd meet on craigslist to pick up some item they're giving away: both parties got what they wanted, then everybody went their separate ways. What's wrong with that?

>>18200669
>people who shop for groceries objectify other people as cashiers and don't view them as people, just things to give money to
At least that's how it sounds.

>>18200668

Because you're not swapping body fluids with your massage therapist or personal trainer

People think differently.

Arguing is not going to help.

Accept that.

>>18200668
>How about paying a personal trainer?
Why do you think exercise and sex are comparable in this way?

At least a massage is intimate. But that's the difference. It's about sex as an intimate, personal thing with meaning in a relationship, or just some fun thing. It's two different perspectives, neither actually invalid.

File: fe909f9a-6582-4d99-8651-ddc9de7e2a57..gif (227KB, 612x3671px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 612x3671px

ITT

>>18200677

Most people actually do that Tbh

>>18200687
Because they are assholes and not because the act of grocery shopping objectifies another person. Same with sex.

>>18200668
I view sex as a way of connecting with someone on a deep level. I'm not religious or anything, nor am I a "wait till marriage" kind of girl- I've had relationships etc. I just wouldn't be comfortable fucking someone mindlessly.

Also, I don't view it as bad or wrong, I tend to take a "live and let live" approach to life, but I couldn't do it and wouldn't really want to be with someone who didn't value relationships etc.

Also, I don't know why you imply gym training is pleasurable. It's a chore.

>hat's a pretty silly theory given it's the people who can't get laid often go into hate tirades about the other sex.

I did not say it was the only group who didn't respect the opposite gender. And I think it's just that, a lack of respect.

What those who don't get laid have is more akin to hatred- misogyny or misandry.

I tend to believe in the middle way, moderation. Relationships etc.

>>18200690

Which is pretty fucked up.

It's just like "hey! I want to go exchange fluids with that person who I don't know anything about!"

>>18200670
Sorry, forgot to click reply. See bottom of >>18200692

>>18200676
It just seems like people who fuck around tend to stop seeing the entirety of the other gender as people- just potential fuck buddies or whatever. It's not limited solely to someone you're actually having sex with.

And no, not everyone deserves respect-respect was the wrong word. But not treating half the population as anything more than potential sex can have negative repurcussions for you in the world.

>>18200680
Do you realize how retarded this logic is? So anyone who donates blood is being immoral? Serious, what the fuck are you talking about?

Giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you just mean "because you aren't fucking your traininer", what is different about a massage or a good workout versus having sex? Both feel great, both are pretty fucking intimate, both set off pleasure centers in your brain. Is it specifically the orgasm? If so, why?

>>18200684
95% of arguments come down to people having access to different information. In a perfect world where every human knew everything else everyone else knew, there would be pretty much no arguments.

>>18200694
>wanting to have an enjoyable activity with another person is fucked up unless you know something about them
Because? Also how much do you need to know about someone before it becomes not fucked up? What if everything they told you about themselves was a lie, is it still fucked up on your part since you don't know a real thing about them?

>>18200685
>Why do you think exercise and sex are comparable in this way?
Why wouldn't they be? It's just two examples of another person bringing you good feelings in a physical way.

>>18200702
Do you get bodily fluids back when you give blood? Here they just give you a cup of juice, not a cup of semen.

>what is different about a massage or a good workout versus having sex?
One side views sex as a thing between lovers, the other as just something you do for fun. It's about intimacy and emotion.

You know, it's okay for people to have differing opinions.

Some people would only date a virgin-that's okay.

Some people will only date people who haven't fucked around too much. That's their prerogative.

Some people simply don't care about a person's 'number'. Also fine.

Some people have specifications that casual sex is a no go, but relationships are fine. That's okay.

Why do you all feel it's such a big deal what others think? Are you all that insecure about your choices that you feel the need to attack anyone who doesn't agree with you?

>>18200702

People like you are why sex is being devalued more and more.

>>18200707
BUT WHAT IF ANOTHER PERSON GAVE THEM GOOD FEELINGS BEFORE, IT MAKES THEM LESS GOOD!

>>18200713
You say it like it's something bad.

>>18200685
>Why do you think exercise and sex are comparable in this way?
Why wouldn't they be? It's just two examples of another person bringing you good feelings in a physical way.

>>18200692
That's fair, and thank you for taking the time to explain your thoughts, I appreciate it.

>>18200700
I don't know why you feel this way, but I think you're wrong to assume that. Getting laid a lot doesn't make you stop caring about people, it just means you're less likely to put sex on a pedestal. A lot of these people getting lots of casual sex are only doing that when they aren't in a relationship, and when they are in one, if functions the same way as any other relationship does, except now they're a lot better at sex.

>>18200711
That's wrong. You can't have a different opinion. Mine is right, yours is wrong because it isn't mine. Fuck you for thinking different in a way that doesn't have a negative effect on me and actually might make things better for me because we're not competing as much for partners.

>>18200711

>Why do you all feel it's such a big deal what others think?

Because people lie

>>18200708
And you can't feel intimacy with a stranger? Hell, the most intense, soul-touching sex I ever had was with a girl at a concert I never even spoke to, and never saw again after that day. Yes, there was some LSD involved, so if we follow the logical continuity of your reasoning, any sex had outside of an LSD trip doesn't have the proper intimacy or emotion.

>>18200717
I still don't know what your secret is that exercise gives you "good feelings".

What are your thoughts on the matter anyway?

>>18200711
Would you people calm the fuck down? Some people enjoy talking to other people who have different opinions from them, that's how you learn things.

>>18200717
>Why wouldn't they be? It's just two examples of another person bringing you good feelings in a physical way.
Read >>18200692 again. Some people don't want or enjoy meaningless sex. Some people do.

>>18200723
"Good feelings" just means it releases dopamine and that's what sex and exercise do.

>>18200716
>You say it like it's something bad.

Yeah, I am. Because I believe sex should be between 2 people who have emotions feelings for each other. But, the more sex is devalued. The harder it will be to find people with these views. I don't want to fall in love with a girl who doesn't value our sex as much as I do, because she's been with 25 other guys. It would really fucking hurt me if I really thought our sex meant everything, just to learn that to her, it isn't that great because she's had better

>>18200725
I was specifically talking about the people getting really aggressive and defensive, not the people actually discussing stuff.

>>18200713
It's not being devalued, it's just being taken off this stupid fucking pedestal people still put it on, mostly as a remnant of more religious times. Sex *can be* intimate, intense, and emotional. But it can also be casual, fun, and just animal pleasure. It doesn't have to be all one thing. Can you imagine if society had arbitrarily decided that eating or sleeping was a sacred activity that must always be undertaken with your loved ones, and must always be given the proper sincerity and emotion?

>>18200728
I was kidding. I just don't enjoy exercise at all and envy people who do.

>>18200722
>any sex had outside of an LSD trip doesn't have the proper intimacy or emotion
You're clearly not actually interested in a discussion.

>>18200723
>I still don't know what your secret is that exercise gives you "good feelings".
It just feels good. Being healthy and strong feels good. Yeah, not the exact same way as sex, but it still gives your body pleasure, still gives you a head rush of happiness.

>>18200729
>just to learn that to her, it isn't that great because she's had better
For that the amount is irrelevant. If you suck, she could be a virgin and still have better sex with her hand.

>>18200733
Do you at least enjoy the feeling at the end when you're finally done? (Exercising)
I don't enjoy the process itself and getting started is a pain but afterwards it feels damn great.

>>18200734
No, I really do mean that, and if it's so clear and obvious that I'm wrong, it shouldn't be hard to put into words: if the value of sex is judged based on intimacy and intense emotion, shouldn't sex when you're high on psychoactive drugs be "worth more" than sober sex?

>>18200742
>Do you at least enjoy the feeling at the end when you're finally done?
Not really. I enjoy looking good, but not the stuff I have to do to get there.

>>18200473
the second anon who responded said, youre fucking retarded

>You opened yourself up freely to the possibility of getting an STD or pregnant with 23 men.
>or pregnant
>PREGNANT
that possibility literally exists every time you have sex you idiot, even if youre married. the fact that she went through 24 dicks without incident actually helps her perspective, not hurt it

>>18200744
>shouldn't sex when you're high on psychoactive drugs be "worth more" than sober sex?
No? It should be completely worthless.

>>18200750
Why? Those drugs dramatically increase feelings of intimacy and pleasurable emotion, so wouldn't that just enhance it?

>>18200748
>that she went through 24 dicks without incident actually helps her perspective
>implying it doesn't just mean she gave 23 guys herpes

>>18200732

>Can you imagine if society had arbitrarily decided that eating or sleeping was a sacred activity that must always be undertaken with your loved ones, and must always be given the proper sincerity and emotion?

Totally different. Eating and sleeping is required to survive. You literally can not survive without it. And before you say "without sex the world would end". That's only true to a point. The world would end if everyone stopped reproducing. But having sex just to have sex without reproducing is not a requirement to survive. Nobody is going to die because they didn't get their dick or pussy sucked off

>>18200752
>implying it does mean she gave 23 guys herpes
making stuff up is fun huh?

>>18200754
Okay, but you're kind of dodging the point here, and that point is that adding weird and arbitrary rules to how you're allowed to fulfill one of your normal, healthy human needs is stupid.

The way I've been reading people's logic in the thread thus far has basically been:
>Why do we put sex on a pedestal?
>Because it's sex!
Okay, great, but that doesn't help me understand your thoughts here.

>>18200751
>>18200750
>>18200744
>>18200734
>>18200722
This is actually a really interesting point. If we're judging sex's value based on how intimate it is, it kind of makes sense that sex on psychoactives would be the "best" and "most valuable".

>>18200751
It's not just "you feel an emotion about it, so it's valuable". It's about the context. A random stranger when you're both high and have no real idea what you're doing vs two people in a deep relationship combining emotional and physical intimacy.

Again, no one is saying that you're actually "wrong", just that there's at least two philosophies about this. It's almost like different people enjoy different things!

>>18200765
Except it's still pure opinion. We just have people clashing at each other saying "your view on this subjective thing is wrong because my subjective view is different". You could argue that sex is "best" if you wear purple morphsuits while having it, but it's still not going to get to any sort of objective truth about sex.

>>18200766
I don't know man, I want to ask more questions, but I think at this point people would just think I'm taking the piss. I don't get where you people are coming from, and it seems arbitrary as fuck, these rules.

If you aren't sick of the questions, if you used some science fiction computer to implant two people that have never met before with memories about having been deeply in love for years, and then they fuck, is their sex at that point "valuable"? So those two are 100% certain that they've been together for years, they feel true love, all the neurochemicals are in place, is that fuck okay then? Is this just about how the people feel and how much they love each other, or does there have to be a specific amount of time and a formal relationship beforehand?

>>18200766
This "DIFFERENT VIEWS" approach is so lazy. Can you really not explain why you view a basic human need in such a convoluted light?

>>18200760

Well. Sex isn't a need. It's a want or a desire. Like I said, you're not going to die from not getting laid.

But the reason sex is suppose to be special, is because you're literally meshing your body into someone else's. exchanging fluids, and close and personal as anybody could ever physically get to another human. That's an intense thing. So, if someone goes around and does that exact same thing with 50 people. How are you still going to share that with your new partner who's only been with 1 person? It will be very different to both people. For one, it might be as normal as brushing your teeth because of the frequency of having sex. But to the other, it might be the craziest thing they've ever done

>>18200769
I really hate people like you. An interesting discussion is going on between two parties that are happily participating, then some douchebag feels the need to jump in and tell them both that, "It's just your opinions guys, let it go, it's okay, you don't need to argue."

Yes, my good douchebag, we know we don't NEED to discuss it, but we obviously want to, or we wouldn't fucking be doing it, would we?

>>18200771
It's literally how people work. It's like saying tits are the most attractive part of a woman and then throwing a fit when someone says "i dunno, i'm kinda an ass man" because you're too autistic to see that there's no objective truth about some things, and if there is, it might not be yours.

>>18200774
>implying i'm not one of those guys discussing
But I'll stop now just so you can know you killed the discussion.

>>18200773
>But to the other, it might be the craziest thing they've ever done
Not if they already had it, no.

>>18200773
>But the reason sex is suppose to be special, is because you're literally meshing your body into someone else's. exchanging fluids, and close and personal as anybody could ever physically get to another human.
So wrestlers and organ donors should only be able to work with people they know and love?

Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about, did you even think about this?

>For one, it might be as normal as brushing your teeth
No, because brushing your teeth doesn't automatically flood your brain with a cocktail of pleasure and bonding chemicles.

What you people don't seem to realize is that what's happening in your brain when you've fucked someone once is very different from what's happening in your brain when you're fucking the same person for the 20th time. We don't bond the same way with a person we've slept with once compared to someone we spend a lot of time with and fuck on the daily.

>>18200777
It's not the search of objective truth that's the question but how you came to your conclusion.

>>18200777
>It's like saying tits are the most attractive part of a woman and then throwing a fit when someone says "i dunno, i'm kinda an ass man"
It's more like someone saying "tits are the best," and the next guy saying, "ass is the best IMO, why do you think tits are great," then the other guy says, "well as I see it, the merits of tits ar-" "IT'S JUST OPINIONS GUYS LET IT GO WE DON'T HAVE TO ARGUE,"

>>18200359
Is this seriously something you're unsure about? Of course it's too much

>>18200783
>So wrestlers and organ donors should only be able to work with people they know and love?
my fucking sides

I' m dying right now

Thinking about two guys getting into position across each other from the mat, looking super aggro and intense, staring each other down... Then they're staring too deep into each other's eyes because they love each other so damn much

>>18200359
If you're older than 30, congratsulations, you were born into the last generations to hold the dying belief that sex should be pure, marriage, muh jesus, etc. If you're younger than that, lucky you, you're fine.

>>18200786
For you.

File: 1490736483034.jpg (61KB, 540x353px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 540x353px

>>18200548
>Human beings aren't inherentely monogamous

Anthropologist here. You are incorrect.

>>18200810
>Anthropologist here. You are incorrect.
Really? Let's talk about the frequency of sex and the number of sexual partners common in hunter-gatherer societies. Since you know your shit so well obviously, I'm interested to hear where you're getting this conclusion.

>>18200640
If someone has been around a lot, to me it means they don't value what they have much, because they are willing to give it up often.

>>18200821
>If someone [plays baseball] a lot, to me it means they don't value [playing baseball] as much, because they are willing to [play baseball] often.

Ok.

>>18200828
That doesn't even make sense. If they changed baseball teams a lot, yes, that would mean they don't value what they have with their team.

>>18200839
I'm just saying that it's retarded to assume that because someone does something a lot they don't value it. Maybe, just maybe, they're doing it a lot because they really love it.

>>18200844
Your analogy is what makes no sense. If someone dates the same person a lot that's not what i was talking about at all. If someone dates hundresds of people, they don't value the people they are dating.

If someone plays baseball a lot, that's perfectly normal. If someone never plays on the same team twice, they don't value their teams.

>>18200854
>they don't value the people they are dating
No, it means they don't value most of the people they're dating, that's an important distinction to make. I don't really value most of the meals I eat, but I still have a favorite restaurant. Would I want to eat there all the time? Of course not, but I still love jt. BUT, if I was forced to eat there all the time, it wouldn't be my favorite for much longer, because you need variety. Ditto for people. You want to be with the same person all the time, that's fine, but the divorce rate being at 50% kind of indicates that there's something wrong with thise whole "pick one person to fuck forever" thing.

>>18200817
I'm going to bed, but I highly recommend you look into it. The whole "Humans are naturally inclined to polygamy" thing is a meme.

>http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/humans-evolved-monogamous-relationships-to-stop-men-killing-rivals-babies-says-study-8737095.html

>>18200862
>No, it means they don't value most of the people they're dating
That's exactly the issue, and you don't even see that. So if you date this person, there's a high chance they won't value you.

Can i be one of your partners? I have none and im 24 T.T

File: 17760192_1892637940957895_5231543103137307708_n.jpg (14KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 225x225px

>>18200862
>50%

Another meme, factoring out vegas marriages and insurance scams, as well as "she got pregnant so I had to" marriages, the failure rate is much closer to 25%.

I'd be willing to roll those dice

>>18200862
>>18200870
adding to this, the likelihood of a marriage failing directly correlates to the amount of sex partners each person has had prior to the marriage.

>>18200868
No, because you're confusing the issue. You fail to understand the difference between a hookup and dating. With a hookup you aren't taking the time to get to know someone, you're just fucking them, making small talk, then moving on. If you're dating that person, on the otherhand, you get to know them, get to care about them. It's two completely different interactions that just happen to share some similar elements.

If a girl has fucked a hundred guys and I fuck her, she might not remember me. If a girl has dated a hundred guys and I ask her out, we go on a few dates, then we commit to each other in a long term relationship, she *will* remember me, and care about me.

>>18200862
The divorce rate (in the US) for first marriages is between 20 and 30 percent and falling, and has never hit 50%. In fact, it hasn't even come close. That's a persistent myth.

The divorce rate is quite low for people who wait until after they're 25 or so to get married. The stats on 2nd marriages, and on people who get married very young, are not great, and pull the overall divorce rate up somewhat, though their stats are also not as gloomy as you probably believe they are, either.

I am not saying marriage is right for everybody or even that promiscuity is WRONG for everybody but you need to ditch some of those misconceptions you're carrying around, and that's not an insult.

>>18200873
Ye olde correlation =/= causation, anon. Nicholas cage movie releases correlate with drowning deaths, but there isn't a posse of lifeguards and grieving mothers hunting him down. Though that would probably make a good nicholas cage movie all on its own.

File: boards.4chan.org 1481664154507.png (144KB, 500x446px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 500x446px

Without reading the thread, I'm gonna assume the popular answer is "yes".

I disagree, though. To the average poster here, who I'll assume is between 18-20 and sexually inexperienced, 23 partners seems like a lot. To those of us who have sex, no, not really. That's not a "oh look we have more sex than you" jab, just do the math.

Let's assume you lost your virginity at 18, which is pretty conservative. That means you've accumulated 6 partners a year. That's sex one time, every other month. Literally anyone can do that. You there, reading this, sitting there complaining about not getting laid: literally anyone can have sex once every other month if you actively tried.

Convincing one dude once every two months to throw his dick in you for 20 minutes doesn't make you a slut.

File: 1486430428020.jpg (17KB, 262x319px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 262x319px

>>18200880
When break it down to terms of frequency like that, I just realized that I've literally had sex with hundreds of women and never noticed it because it just never occured to me to break it down. And I'm not even that good at getting laid, but when you spread out a few chicks a month over years and years...

>>18200878
I mean, what if he was causing those drownings? It would explain why he takes any role he is offered, he just wants to drown some peeps.

>>18200873
Correlation does not imply causation.

I had a stats prof who said it best. 95% of all US alcoholics own TVs. But that doesn't make TV responsible for alcoholism.

>>18200886
Yeah same, I just realised I've been with 50+ women, but it doesn't feel true. Surreal.

>>18200889
I mean, you could kind of argue it does to be fair.

>>18200874
That's just as bad and shallow if someone can become emotionally involved with another person and then give that up easily. Would you trust them to marry you and not bail at the first sign of real trouble?

>>18200889
Eh, I like the nicholas cage movies and drowning deaths one better.

>>18200893
What makes you think they'd give up the relationship easily? Seriously, how do you understand that a hookup and dating aren't the same thing? There's no deep emotional connection in a hookup, no ties of relationship to break, you just show up, say hi, make each other feel good, then leave. When you're dating someone, on the other hand, you DO care about them, and it DOES hurt if things fall apart. This is not a complex concept to understand. So yes, even if a girl had fucked 50 dudes before me, if, after dating her and getting to know her personality I still liked her, yes, I would trust her.

Now, if she'd DATED (note: actually dated, not just hooked up with) 50 dudes, we'd have to have a fucking talk, because anyone who's going through then losing that many relationships clearly has something up.

>>18200886
So here's a little anecdotal evidence.

I lost my virginity to, and dated a girl, for 4 years. We had sex hundreds, /HUNDREDS/ of times.

After we broke up, I had sex with maybe 20 girls or so, over the course of 5 years.

That's 20 (or so) instances of penetrative sex, one time, with 20 (or so) different girls. When you stretch that over the course of several years, that isn't shit, especially when you're closing 30 like me.

I used to really dig that "master key, shitty lock" thing, too. but the fact of the matter is that people are way more complicated than that. You wanna know what makes a girl, beyond how many inches of dick she's had in her? Who her father was. How much money she had growing up. Who her best friends were. Whoever broke her heart.

There is only the individual.

>>18200880
>To the average poster here, who I'll assume is between 18-20 and sexually inexperienced, 23 partners seems like a lot.
I don't fall into that demographic and I'm not offended, but I don't think that assumption is right. Maybe it would have been a few years ago before this site went mainstream. My impression is that most /adv/ posters are between 20-30 and have pretty normal sex/love lives.

>Let's assume you lost your virginity at 18, which is pretty conservative. That means you've accumulated 6 partners a year. That's sex one time, every other month. Literally anyone can do that.
Literally anyone can do that -- if they never once have a relationship that lasts longer than a few months before they're 24. What do you think most of the people on here would say about somebody who found a new partner every other month and had never had a lasting relationship?

Regardless of whether they're right or wrong, 23 partners by age 24 is well above average.

>>18200901
The fact that you cannot even see sex as an emotionally intimate act anymore proves the point that you don't value it the same way most people do. Most people would be weary about investing in someone who has had 30 boyfriends or 30 hookups. Either one is a red flag.

>>18200594
>having a system that rewards alpha chads who create single mothers and not betas who will stay with the mother

this is how the roman empire fell. also single mothers are increasing the welfare spending. this sexual liberated system is a ticking time bomb.

>>18200359
It's obvious because I know your ass is big enough to justify that.

In which case, lemme smash and be the 24th. pls.

>>18200912
>who create single mothers
Outside of America people do know about condoms in the Western countries.

>>18200909
>The fact that you cannot even see sex as an emotionally intimate act anymore
You assume. I can see it as an emotionally intimate act, but it isn't always. Your entire argument is based off assumptions and weak logic. Just try applying this to other aspects of relationships. Does having a lot of roomates in the past mean you'll value living with your wife less? Does having a strong connection with your best friends mean you'll value emotional intimacy with your girl less? Fuck no, of course not. You only hold these ideas because you don't actually hang around with many people who live that way, you don't see that they're perfectly capable of having happy, committed relationships, that they don't just fall pussy first onto any dick that walks buy, that they don't jump ship first sign of trouble. Your perspective is based on assumption and ignorance.

>>18200908
>My impression is that most /adv/ posters are between 20-30 and have pretty normal sex/love lives.
On /adv/, yeah. I'd say that this board in particular is split down the middle. Though, my comments were directed at the younger side of the spectrum, who I imagine are much more motivated by this topic than us older gents.
>23 partners by age 24 is well above average
Sure, all I wanted to do was illustrate that "above average" is colloquial and more a matter of perspective than anything.

>>18200918
women crave the good genetic material of alpha chads they are not going to make him wear a condom and lie about being on the pill. also thanks to the welfare sate and child support they get to live like queens and kings at the expense of men because men pay the most taxes.

>>18200548
Maybe you don't know this but......

Mist mammals have actual bones in their penis. This is so they can keep the spot occupied so their sperm can do it's magic so no rival male can try and get his guys in to compete.

The reason it has evolved out of humans is because of monogamy. Guys didn't have to keep her vagina occupied so that a rival male would come and try and get her pregnant with his.

>>18200605
don't trust any of them not worth a permanent STD.

>>18200937
Citation needed.

>>18200640
>being scientifically illiterate

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16084184

(possible in human not taking any risks)
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141001090238.htm

>>18200937
I hate this pseudoscience shit, any dude who took a high school biology course thinks he has the de facto answers for the extremely complicated map that is the human mind.

The entire fucking point of being a sapient species is that we're capable of thinking in our best interests, which are not always in-line with our primal directive.

Furthermore, I fucking guarantee that everyone spouting off about genetic superiority is incapable of killing game, insulating shit, growing shit, or any other extremely basic necessities. If you had your electricity taken away, you'd shrivel and die way faster than the women you complain about.

>>18200958
Ironically, the genetic imperatives people so laud are really, really terrible at keeping us alive when compared to our intellectual prowess and accumulated knowledge. Those instincts are adequate, certainly, but just that, and becoming increasingly vestigial and antiquated.

>>18200928
/thread

>>18200359
I wouldnt date a girl with more than 4 partners. 3 really. 4 is kinda like I'll give you a small chance but you are out the door first sign of something I don't like. No workign it out. You need to be perfect.
At 23 unless you were raped no way.

>>18200976
I mean, it's not like anyone is denying that our biological programming makes up a great deal of our decision making. But, that doesn't make it /right/. The worst part is, a huge fraction spouting this also hold transhumanism ideals.

We live in an age where everyone has an opinion and nobody reads books.

>>18200992
>The worst part is, a huge fraction spouting this also hold transhumanism ideals
How does that even work?

>>18200985
That's crazy dude. I dated 4 different girls before I was even out of highschool, so 4 partners in your entire life seems extreme, bordering on puritanical.

>>18200995
Because cognitive dissonance is hip, and I bet 4/5 people reading this just googled what cognitive dissonance is.

>>18201000
I'm the dude who did all the slutmath above, and I don't think it's unreasonable. It all depends on the individual, some people do better in long term relationships, others perform better in short ones. It might say something about their character, but that doesn't mean it's /wrong/.

We're all just people, maaaaan~

>>18200928
That's ridiculous. What is to say your perspective is based on any less assumption or ignorance than mine?

>You only hold these ideas because you don't actually hang around with many people who live that way, you don't see that they're perfectly capable of having happy, committed relationships
That's a completely baseless assumption, for example.

There are going to be a lot of people who don't take you as seriously if you've slept with, or dated a lot of people, and even if that makes you mad on the internet, you'll never gain that value back. You can argue all you want about whether or not it should diminish your value to potential romantic interests, but that changes nothing. You don't see it the way they do, and they don't have to see it the way you do.

>>18201027
>my reasoning is blatantly ignorant and I don't want to face that, so I guess I'll just fall back on ye olde "it's just opinions bro"

>>18200514
and right here you could see the common slut, raging at strangers trying to help her on the internet, take notes boys.

>>18201027
What this translates to:

>You shouldn't assume I know nothing about this just because I clearly know nothing about this.
Followed by
>That's just my opinion man.

I love how you were perfectly willing to reason and debate until I actually started to buckle down and address it seriously, at which point you were suddenly more interested in living and letting live.

>>18201040
Could you not?

>>18201045
I mean, let's be real here, "why have sex a lot?" is a question that really only has 1 answer.

>>18201040
My very first post indicated it was my opinion.
>to me it means they don't value what they have much

Are you done? Because you've been outdone.

>>18201061
Hey man I'm pretty neutral in this thing you two have going on, but it's a little early to be declaring checkmate.

>>18201057
nope, wrong
there's many reasons to have sex, sometimes multipile reasons
it could be sex to reproduce (most common reason), sex out of a certain insecurity, sex because of a certain fetish, sex because you were molested as a child, sex because you need money, sex because you want to make up for something, sex because it just feels damn good, many reasons different people have sex, his question was a legit question and this hoe just dissin' like hoes often do.

>>18201061
But by definition you can't hold an opinion about a factual matter, because you can't have an incorrect opinion. Or to set aside the semantics, it might be your opinion that dogs are felines, but it's factually incorrect. In a situation where something can be proven or disproven, opinions aren't really relevent. In this case, if you actually spent time with lots of people who get laid a lot, you could see that most of them are perfectly capable of having normal, healthy relationships, and value them just as much, but you obviously haven't. It's not that we're both seeing the same thing and disagreeing on the conclusion to draw from it, it's that one of us is actually seeing it whereas the other is turning away without looking, covering his ears, and shouting "it's just my opinion."

>>18201068
>it could be sex to reproduce (most common reason)
That's not true and you fucking know it. Most people don't expect to make an actual baby when they fuck.

Besides, when you take the semantics out of it, most of those things boil down to "because it feels good"

File: 1481913891042.gif (294KB, 300x222px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 300x222px

>>18201068
>it could be sex to reproduce (most common reason)

>>18201068
No one has sex for the sole reason that they were molested as a child you drooling idiot. Being molested can increase your likelihood of having sex for other reasons, but no one ever says to themself, "well, daddy used to fuck me in the ass every night, guess I better suck this random guy's dick!"

>>18201106
Its a source for having sex, ofcourse no one admits it, but it could be one of the reasons OP or other people are having so much sex

>>18201057
>>18201068
I think once you boil things down, there are 5 reasons to have sex, all potentially overlapping: for reproduction, for pleasure, for bonding, for money, and coersion. From the context of the thread, we can exclude the first and last of those options as applied to the original question, "why did you sleep with those men?"

>>18201114
No. It isn't. No one in history has ever had sex solely because they were molested. It can be a contributing factor towards promiscuous behavior, but it's a contributing factor, not a source.

>>18201123
>there's many reasons to have sex, sometimes multipile reasons

>>18201129
Yes, and "daddy touched me," is never the only one.

>>18201093
You're just going in circles. We already went over this.
>No, it means they don't value most of the people they're dating
>That's exactly the issue

And I have spent time being close with several people who have had 20 and even 30 plus partners, and literally none of them have had lasting relationships.

Most of them have misconstrued perceptions of sex from being sexually abused, a history of drug addiction, or both.

>>18201135
good goin sherlock

>>18201144
Not him, but ever hear the old adage 'all apples are fruit, not all fruit are apples'?

I could throw my anecdotal evidence around about several of my close friends who have 30+ partners AND successful relationships, but what would that accomplish?

The point he's trying to make is that there is a rift in your logic that is only oblivious to you. The relationship between correlation and causation should be at the forefront of your mind whenever you form opinions about things like this.

>>18201144
When I said they don't value most of the people they're dating I was using your terminology, it was before it occurred to me that you weren't clear on the difference between dating and hookups.

>And I have spent time being close with several people who have had 20 and even 30 plus partners, and literally none of them have had lasting relationships.
Yeah, and I know a lot of losers who smoke pot, but that doesn't mean smoking pot made them losers, it just means that people who hold overly traditional values will assume that.

Getting back on topic, your average person involved in hookup culture isn't some sex crazed nymphomaniac, or someone who was molested, or an addict, or a sociopath, they're a collehe student in their early 20's who was smart enough to realize that instead of everybody masturbating to get off, you can just pair up for a little while, fuck, then go your seperate ways, both satisfied and free of strings.

>>18201151
I didn't bring up my personal experiences until now because it's completely irrelevant. Literally the only reason I did was becauss he kept pointing precisely to what he perceived as my lack of contact with these people as my reason for not understanding, which you rightly pointed out is stupid for seval reasons. So I say I do have experience, to show that it doesn't make a difference either way whether I do or not.

>>18201152
At no point in time was I ever confused about the difference betwen dating and hooking up. If you have done a lot of both, it's deplorable either way, but for different reasons.

>>18201144
>No, it means they don't value most of the people they're dating
Stop being dense, when he said that he was clearly talking about "most relationships" as being that majority of people they'd fuck once then never see again, it would be different with someone they're going to be with for a longer time. You could think of it this way: you probably remember the layouts of every house or apartment you ever lived in, but do you remember what every hotel or motel room you've ever stayed in for one night looked like?

>>18201152
>your average person involved in hookup culture isn't some sex crazed nymphomaniac, or someone who was molested, or an addict, or a sociopath, they're a collehe student in their early 20's who was smart enough to realize that instead of everybody masturbating to get off, you can just pair up for a little while, fuck, then go your seperate ways, both satisfied and free of strings
The part that brings the person's values into question is why they were either unable to, or chose not to just do this with a couple people they were into on an intimate level. Why, in your opinion, does it make someone smarter to have sex 100 times with 50 different people than to have sex 100 times with two different people?

File: bruh.jpg (37KB, 255x276px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 255x276px

>>18201160
So your entire argument boils down to, "people who sleep around too much can't form proper connections because I say so!" You're literally just basic moralfagging? Come on anon, did you really need to waste both of our time this much if there was never a conversation to be had?

>>18201172
>The part that brings the person's values into question is why they were either unable to, or chose not to just do this with a couple people they were into on an intimate level.
This presupposes that it's immoral to have sex with someone outside of an intimate relationship.

>Why, in your opinion, does it make someone smarter to have sex 100 times with 50 different people than to have sex 100 times with two different people?
I don't think it makes them any smarter, in fact it might be dumber, considering that it increases your odds of getting an STD very slightly. I think it's dumb for two horny people who are attracted to each other to be masturbating if they'd rather fuck, but that's irrelevant, as I don't take issue with someone calling it risky or even foolish, I take issue with people calling it immoral.

>>18200729

So what you're actually bothered by is the potential competition. The idea that one of her previous partners was hotter or made her cum harder than you did.

You know that could happen even if she had a really low number of sexual partners, right? In fact it's probably more likely that she'd hold a torch for an ex if she'd only had a few because she would romanticize it, rather than hold it as an experience.

Also, people tend to enjoy these experiences at the time (in most cases) but rarely refer back to them even for comparison. I've had a few casual relationships just to see if it was for me (it wasn't) and I can honestly say that I can't remember the intimate details and other than thinking about them for my anecdote, cannot remember a single thing about them.

I think my current partner is wonderful, the best person I've ever known and absolutely nobody could compare to him. I think this because I'm in love with him, but this is probably how most people feel about their partners. It doesn't matter to me how people he has slept with either, as what matters is us.

Although I completely understand why some people prefer to avoid those who have had casual relationships, I think doing so because you're worried someone may have made them happier in bed is a bit short sighted.

>>18201200
>you're bothered by the potential competition
There's a lot of that here.

>>18201191
I don't think it's immoral to have sex with a lot of different people. I think you should question why your partner has done this before investing yourself in a serious relationship though, and ask what they value in a relationship.

>>18200368
Fucking someone doesn't constitute a relationship.

>>18201213
3 relationships and no hookups.

>>18201211
I can agree with that sentiment, I just think you overestimate the likelihood of sluts being damaged goods. A lot of people *want* to sleep around, but back in the day there was societal pressure not to do so, so only the freaks and rebels who couldn't or wouldn't control themselves slept around, so promiscuity correlated highly with damaged goods. Nowadays, as sex becomes more and more accepted, you're starting to see lots of normal, healthy people who get around. This isn't meant as an argument or a challenge, merely an observation.

>>18200729
> It would really fucking hurt me if I really thought our sex meant everything, just to learn that to her, it isn't that great because she's had better

And there you go. The true heart of the problem. You're insecure with your own sexual prowess and worried that someone is going to be better in bed than you.

You realize how shitty that is right?

>>18201233
Being worried about attibutes of another man's physicality and experience doesn't make you shitty, it just makes you insecure.

>>18201224
I think people should be careful about what they allow themselves to do, because it's easy to get used to something.

>>18201238
No, but wanting to trick your partner into thinking you're a stud in bed because they have no reference point to the contrary, does make you shitty.

It doesn't actually make you good in bed. It doesn't mean other guys don't have bigger dicks, last longer, can actually give your woman an orgasm, or whatever your personal hang up is. It just means you want to hide that fact from your partner so she'll never know, which is dishonest as fuck.

>>18200359
too much to have a relationship with a averagely vagina slimed guy who would realistically want a mono relationship, YES IT'S TOO MUCH

Too much for more ONS, nope

Too much for manwhores and sex addicts who fuck prostitutes. Nah

Just be happy with men who are fucked up the same as you.

No shiny new un-crazy cock for you.

>>18201292
>No shiny new un-crazy cock for you.

It's cute that you think you're not crazy.

>>18201292
Anyone who thinks that's actually how you should write and spell is clearly not right in the head somewhere.

>>18201310
Yeah in the spelling and writing part had to do 2nd grade twice cuz of it.

>>18201301
I wasn't offering or withholding my own cock, just advocating for the cocks of others.

I don't think your grammar will help you with your GIANT CESSPOOL VAGINA though.

I'm a 26 f and I've only been with one person.

>>18201328
I don't have to worry about my vagina because I don't have one you dumb shit. I just don't appreciate a whack job like you speaking for my dick.

>>18201383
And...?

>>18201251
>because it's easy to get used to something.
Doesn't mean you value it less, not sure where you're getting that idea.