Sleeping around

Socksandsocks01

I'm only stating values which I live by. If others wish to sleep around that's up to them male or female. Yes I'd describe it as cheap or easy. I couldn't care a less what others think of me. I think enough of myself not to drop my knickers for fun. End of. Is that making me a hypocrite? I dont think so. Carry on.

There is nothing hypocritical in living according to your own standards of behaviour. On the contrary. So, no, it doesn't make you a hypocrite - because you are not preaching one thing and doing another..

But you are being extremely judgmental about people who don't subscribe to your values.

It should be remembered as well that one reason the standard of morality was imposed on women was because once they had property men wanted to make sure it went to their own children and no one else's So women were told it was unacceptable for them to have sex with anyone except the man they married. Of course some of them realised this was just nonsense and enjoyed themselves whilst others believed it. It seems this is stil the case.

I don't care what people do. But I do care when unwanted children are brought into the world as a consequence of careless actions.

I try not to judge others. Though I just can't get my head around it. I feel sorry for those who when looking for love and commitment think that the answer is casual sex. But I'm no therapist either. I'd be horrified if my sons were promiscuous. People get hurt. Not everyone thinks along the same lines. I'd stay well clear of a "jack the lad" that's my stance.

trisher

Wow. Young women enjoy sex with men. I thought we got over that hurdle a long time ago.

trisher I couldn't have put my feelings on this better than you just did.

Dickens

Socksandsocks01

I'm only stating values which I live by. If others wish to sleep around that's up to them male or female. Yes I'd describe it as cheap or easy. I couldn't care a less what others think of me. I think enough of myself not to drop my knickers for fun. End of. Is that making me a hypocrite? I dont think so. Carry on.

There is nothing hypocritical in living according to your own standards of behaviour. On the contrary. So, no, it doesn't make you a hypocrite - because you are not preaching one thing and doing another..

But you are being extremely judgmental about people who don't subscribe to your values.

Dickens extremely well said.

trisher

It should be remembered as well that one reason the standard of morality was imposed on women was because once they had property men wanted to make sure it went to their own children and no one else's So women were told it was unacceptable for them to have sex with anyone except the man they married. Of course some of them realised this was just nonsense and enjoyed themselves whilst others believed it. It seems this is stil the case.

... good point @trisher! - I'd forgotten about that aspect. I suppose it was part of the whole culture of male control of women's sexuality. And now that women have autonomy over their own fertility, some of these same types of men want to remove that right.

the original post wasn't about within marriage though or even within a relationship, just the number of sexual partners

Socksandsocks01

I try not to judge others. Though I just can't get my head around it. I feel sorry for those who when looking for love and commitment think that the answer is casual sex. But I'm no therapist either. I'd be horrified if my sons were promiscuous. People get hurt. Not everyone thinks along the same lines. I'd stay well clear of a "jack the lad" that's my stance.

Well if a woman is looking for love / commitment - then I doubt casual sex is the right road to go down to find it. But, for various reasons, not all women are looking for that.

Of course there was a time when it was in women's best interests to look for it - when they had little economic power, education opportunities and civil rights. But that's no longer the case, so women are free to explore their own sexuality on their own terms. And I think it's rather sad that some will judge them as having no self-respect or morals because they choose to do this. Women will make mistakes, choosing the wrong mate / partner / whatever, and get hurt / dumped or, sometimes, even abused. But these things also happen within committed relationships - and they also happen to men..

I have to say I'd also steer clear of "Jack The Lad", too.

JaneJudge

the original post wasn't about within marriage though or even within a relationship, just the number of sexual partners

... the theme - like 'Topsy' in "Uncle Tom's Cabin - just growed

Blondiescot

JaneJudge

This thread is full of sexism and misogyny. I understand attitudes were ingrained but surely that was partly due to a lack of contraception? Women (and men) NOW HAVE ACCESS TO CONTRACEPTION oops to keep themselves sexually well and there are laws concerning consent that are much more robust than in years previously. It really is nobody else's business. No one is bringing shame to themselves or their family.

My Mother was so Victorian that even now I don't like going to the Dr for personal matters. I really don't think these old fashioned attitudes and judgement help.

Absolutely agree with every word of that!

I agree too!
I went to a very strict convent school, hellfire and brimstone lectures featured regularly, zero sex education and also had very few friends who were boys.
My parents made it very clear that if I was found to be having sex, let alone pregnant, then I would be kicked out, stat. A friend got pregnant at 16 and my bigoted parents still banged on about ‘bringing disgrace to her family’ 50 years later ?
At least now sex and sexual health are taught in school from an early age and openly discussed just about anywhere, which can only be a good thing in my opinion.

“I feel sorry for those who when looking for live and commitment think casual sex is the answer”.

Me too.

But then I feel sorry for those who haven’t had the pleasure of sex without the burden of commitment and the demands of love.

Just enjoyed for itself.

Live and let live. No judging if at all possible.

Whether a woman has 2 partners or 102 it's not our business

And what parameters qualify to be a partner?
Full intercourse? Petting, heavy petting, kissing, etc.

Live and let live

Blondiescot

Dickens - agreed, there is an awful lot of hypocrisy and double standards in this thread.

Where?

Double standards? Untrue. Some people approve of people having a lot of sexual partners, some disapprove. Others say that once you choose to settle on one person as a partner for life, you should keep your promise to be faithful to that partner.

That isn't double standards.

No, hang on. Having a number of sexual partners in no way means that you won’t be faithful to the person you choose as your life partner.

That’s a judgement that’s unjustified.

I was really shocked, when I began teaching in FE, to hear the girls brag - about who they'd 'had'. That's equality though, I suppose.

Peasblossom

No, hang on. Having a number of sexual partners in no way means that you won’t be faithful to the person you choose as your life partner.

That’s a judgement that’s unjustified.

What do you define as being faithful to a spouse, then? The normal definition is not screwing someone else.

I am sure peasblossom can speak for herself but I interpreted it as if you have a number of partners whilst you are single this does not mean you cant be faithful in a marriage.

Elegran

Peasblossom

No, hang on. Having a number of sexual partners in no way means that you won’t be faithful to the person you choose as your life partner.

That’s a judgement that’s unjustified.

What do you define as being faithful to a spouse, then? The normal definition is not screwing someone else.

... why would you think Peasblossom means anything other than what is understood by the word 'faithful'?

That was the whole point of her comment, surely?

I had a number of sexual partners before I met the love of my life.

After that I never even set a foot upon a road that might lead to infidelity. One male friend said I gave off the strongest keep away signals he’d ever encountered ?

I stayed faithful to my vows when he became too disabled to make sex of any kind a possibility, though as I said before, there was still lovemaking, which is in no way the same as sex.

After he died, at a relatively early age, after a few years when I would have liked to die too, I discovered that there were many single men who, like me, enjoyed respectful, considerate, enjoyable sex without wanting the commitment of a relationship other than friendship.

Eventually I met the man I now live with, and we had the “exclusive” conversation fairly early on. We are good friends and compatible companions at this end of our lives, but not I would say, in love as we were with former partners. That doesn’t stop the sex from being amazing?

So go ahead and judge.

Peasblossom

No, hang on. Having a number of sexual partners in no way means that you won’t be faithful to the person you choose as your life partner.

That’s a judgement that’s unjustified.

quite

I think that all sounds fine peasblossom I have made the judgement that you are content and isn't that what most people want?

I googled mills and boon btw there was a book called the pregnant virgin

Dickens

Elegran

Peasblossom

No, hang on. Having a number of sexual partners in no way means that you won’t be faithful to the person you choose as your life partner.

That’s a judgement that’s unjustified.

What do you define as being faithful to a spouse, then? The normal definition is not screwing someone else.

... why would you think Peasblossom means anything other than what is understood by the word 'faithful'?

That was the whole point of her comment, surely?

So why is Peasblossom disagreeing with my " once you choose to settle on one person as a partner for life, you should keep your promise to be faithful to that partner." We both have said and mean the same thing.