Research Pro-life people partly motivated to prevent casual sex (data study)

[Syne]

You're so lacking in self-awareness that you don't even see the obvious fact that you are hypocritically condemning others for condemning... motivated by your own sense of right. You're just too obtuse to realize you are proving my point. And there's a difference between condemning a person and condemning behavior. Bad behavior leads to bad results. Not for the individuals, but collectively for society at large. But you don't about harm to society... so long as you can fuck without any commitment.

Again, gay man ain't gonna understand anything else.

[Magical Realist]

Tell me then, oh non-judgemental one, how fucking or how often you fuck causes bad results for society? As far as I'm concerned, people making consensual love to each other is a good and glorious thing, and only leads to a better society. Happy people make for a happier society.

Again, gay man ain't gonna understand anything else.

Understand what? How fucking causes the downfall of society? You're right. I don't understand that and personally do not believe it either. And it's not because I'm gay either. It's because that is a stupid thing to assert. It's simply your excuse to morally condemn people you don't even know for their own personal chosen lifestyle so you can feel superior to them. It's what all moralizing prigs who never get laid do.

[Syne]

Who said I was non-judgemental? Again, voices in your head?
Who said ANYTHING about frequency of sex? You do realize that committed couples can have sex just as frequently as anyone else, right? Or is that simple fact beyond your understanding?
I even misspoke before. Casual sex can even have bad results for the individual. Women can lose the ability to pair-bond, suffer depression from the men they want not committing, etc..
Again, your views on consensual sex are what motivates you to condemn others who don't agree. Hypocrite whining about what you're actively doing yourself.

Men can have more casual sex without suffering repercussions themselves. And you'd think gay men would be more so, except for drug abuse, HIV, etc.. It is because you're gay that you can't seem to understand the bad result, especially for woman, of casual sex. It's harm to pair-bonding, building families (which are the fundamental building blocks of a good society), mental health, etc..

It's all objective repercussions... if you bother to look.

[Magical Realist]

Casual sex can even have bad results for the individual.

Driving a car can have bad results for the individual too. But the benefits far outweigh to the risks..

Women can lose the ability to pair-bond,

Women who pair bond sexually lose the ability to pair bond? I don't think so. Many women in fact learn thru having multiple partners which she can bond better with. It's always a learning process. Women and men otoh who settle for and marry the first person they sleep with often doom themselves to a dead end marriage. That was my parents and probably many others of that generation. There's a tremendous advantage to experimenting around and finding out what type you are most compatible with.

suffer depression from the men they want not committing, etc..

Hence getting over it and finding someone new. That's the advantage of being sexually active and dating. You aren't bogged down by any one person in particular.

It's harm to pair-bonding, building families (which are the fundamental building blocks of a good society), mental health, etc..

I think pair-bonding is going on just fine with all the sex going on. What better way for a pair to bond than sexually? And how is "building families" harmed by people having multiple sex partners? People are getting married all the time after dating around and having lots of sex. Or perhaps staying single and having multiple partners. Happy single people are contributing members of society too.

Either way, family building isn't being harmed in any way. Mental health? How does having sex with multiple partners harm mental health? A healthy sex life is in fact a tremendous boost to mental health. It is contributive to self-esteem and to one's need for intimacy and one's overall sense of well being. Perhaps you have studies you can cite showing how sex with multiple partners harms mental health?

[Syne]

Casual sex can even have bad results for the individual.

Like I said, of course you don't care about other people or society in general. Just your own selfish desires.

Women can lose the ability to pair-bond,

Women who pair bond sexually lose the ability to pair bond? I don't think so. Many women in fact learn thru having multiple partners which she can bond better with. It's always a learning process. Women and men otoh who settle for and marry the first person they sleep with often doom themselves to a dead end marriage. That was my parents and probably many others of that generation. There's a tremendous advantage to experimenting around and finding out what type you are most compatible with.

Spoken like a gay man. See, you don't even understand that there's a significant difference between sexual bonding and pair-bnding. All women learn to do with more sexual partners is desensitize their pair-bonding, either out of self-protection or learning how to eject faster from ever smaller problems in relationships. Oh, I'm sure you "experimented" plenty, but men and women are different. Women generally want commitment. And when they fail to get it from the best guy they were with, they end up resenting that they had to settle.

suffer depression from the men they want not committing, etc..

Hence getting over it and finding someone new. That's the advantage of being sexually active and dating. You aren't bogged down by any one person in particular.

Are all gay men as ignorant of the fact that commitment is an innate evolutionary desire in most women? News flash, women aren't gay men, moron.

It's harm to pair-bonding, building families (which are the fundamental building blocks of a good society), mental health, etc..

I think pair-bonding is going on just fine with all the sex going on. What better way for a pair to bond than sexually? And how is "building families" harmed by people having multiple sex partners? People are getting married all the time after dating around and having lots of sex. Or perhaps staying single and having multiple partners. Happy single people are contributing members of society too.

Either way, family building isn't being harmed in any way. Mental health? How does having sex with multiple partners harm mental health? A healthy sex life is in fact a tremendous boost to mental health. It is contributive to self-esteem and to one's need for intimacy and one's overall sense of well being. Perhaps you have studies you can cite showing how sex with multiple partners harms mental health?

If pair-bonding were "just fine," you'd see more long term relationships and less "situationships," hookup culture, chronic singleness, etc..

Wow, you sound completely ignorant of what pair-bonding even means. Science has shown that the more sexual partners a woman has the less satisfied she will be in marriage and more likely to divorce early. "Happy single people" are the driver of population collapse and single-mother homes contributing to crime, drug abuse, mental illness, etc..
Apparently, you're completely unaware that a healthy sex life can occur within a committed relationship. And go ask any woman how their mental health is doing after being unable to get commitment from the scores of men they've slept with. Ask them how that boosted their self-esteem to only be good enough for sex.

Again, you're just continuing to prove my point that a gay man doesn't understand.

[Magical Realist]

Like I said, of course you don't care about other people or society in general. Just your own selfish desires.

How is affirming and accepting everyone's chosen sex life in any way selfish? There is nothing for me to gain from it personally. It is the most selfless attitude one can take towards it.

Spoken like a gay man. See, you don't even understand that there's a significant difference between sexual bonding and pair-bnding. All women learn to do with more sexual partners is desensitize their pair-bonding, either out of self-protection or learning how to eject faster from ever smaller problems in relationships.

How would you know that? Sounds like a lot of spurious and biased speculation from someone who has very little experience with women and in fact seeks only to stereotype them. Bonding while dating teaches women AND men, straight AND gay, all about how bonding works and what is involved with it. If it doesn't show them what they do want, it shows them what they don't want. Something is always learned from every experience.

Are all gay men as ignorant of the fact that commitment is an innate evolutionary desire in most women? News flash, women aren't gay men, moron.

Depends on the woman, her goals in life, and the time of her life. A woman in college earning a degree isn't looking for commitment like a woman in her 30's is who is ready to settle down. And girls in high school are certainly not concerned with commitment either. Everybody is different at different phases of their life.

Oh, I'm sure you "experimented" plenty, but men and women are different. Women generally want commitment. And when they fail to get it from the best guy they were with, they end up resenting that they had to settle.

Failing to get commitment from the best guy they were with? How is he the best guy if he wouldn't commit? Sounds like she made the right choice and moved on. Playing the field is the best thing she can do instead of sitting at home pining for Mr. Right.

If pair-bonding were "just fine," you'd see more long term relationships and less "situationships," hookup culture, chronic singleness, etc..

How do you know how many long term relationships we are seeing? Did you conduct a poll? Methinks you're just pulling data out of your ass.

Science has shown that the more sexual partners a woman has the less satisfied she will be in marriage and more likely to divorce early.

Oh? And who conducted this scientific study? The MAGA Institute for Promiscuous Sex Studies?
Cite your sources or admit you're just making shit up. Just like with men if a woman has sown her wild oats and had many partners in her younger days she will most likely be satisfied later on with one partner. It only makes sense. I myself am glad of all the partners I had in my 20's. I basically got it all out of my system.

[Syne]

"Selflessness" that affirms behaviors in others that you want mutually affirmed is not selflessness.
The repercussions of more sexual partners on marriage is well-established.
New Report Finds Link Between Strong Marriages and Sexual Restraint During the Dating Years
Re-Examining the Link Between Premarital Sex and Divorce
What it "sounds like," to a gay man with zero understanding of the evolutionary basis for pair-bonding, is meaningless. Pretending you have any clue is a joke.
But yes, reinforcing what you "don't want" does build a list of "deal breakers" and prompts more divorces. Repeatedly pulling the ripcord on relationships teaches the opposite of actually making them work long term. It creates a habit of focusing on the negatives instead of the positives, which should be obviously undesirable... in many aspects of life.
The vast majority of women eventually want a marriage and children. And harming the success of that eventuality is what is leading more and more women to being chronically single, childless, or divorced.
The best guy is the one they most want to be with. You know, as opposed to the schlub they settle for. It's really simple to understand... well, if you're not gay. A woman will always want the best looking, highest value man they dated. "Playing the field" means that bar gets set higher and higher, making any eventual husband look all the worse by comparison.

What a fucking joke that a gay man is trying to lecture anyone on what's best for heterosexual relationships.

[confused2]

If you want to avoid sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) you need to avoid folks with multiple partners .. certainly concurrent multiple partners. Even STDs that are relatively easily treatable carry the yuck factor which tends to end relationships even if all else appears perfect.

Aside from STDs I suspect the main reason for males trying to assert control over women's sexuality is .. just that. Once you've got a gal (sorry MR .. just trying to address the immediate problem) you can enslave her because your 'ethics' don't permit her to go off and find a better man.

Just seen ^^

A woman will always want the best looking, highest value man they dated. "Playing the field" means that bar gets set higher and higher, making any eventual husband look all the worse by comparison.

I had a few pre-marital romances which failed .. I learned from them .. without them I wouldn't be as perfect (99%) as I am now. [<- this comment hasn't been reviewed by Mrs C2]

[Magical Realist]

"Selflessness" that affirms behaviors in others that you want mutually affirmed is not selflessness.

Sure it is. I have no agenda for other people's sex lives. They can do as they please and it bothers me not nor does it avail me in the least. Morally condemning others for their sex lives otoh IS selfish because it attempts to control and dominate others with one's own agenda of what a perfect society should be. As if everyone must conform to what you dictate to be right. They do not. They are in no way obligated to live in accord with your personal sexual standards, which I'm pretty sure amounts to having no sex at all.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases...02184.html

LOL Based on a study from Brigham Young University? The Mormons? Yeah..that sounds real scientific there..

What it "sounds like," to a gay man with zero understanding of the evolutionary basis for pair-bonding, is meaningless. Pretending you have any clue is a joke.

I am human and share in the human sexual and relationship experience. Being gay in no way disqualifies me from knowing how that all works and what is normal and healthy for all humans, both straight and gay. You're pathetic homophobia and hatred for all women notwithstanding..

But yes, reinforcing what you "don't want" does build a list of "deal breakers" and prompts more divorces.

Dating around doesn't "reinforce" what you don't want. It teaches you what you do want and the traits that you find most compatible in a partner. Marrying the first loser that comes along otoh sets you up with a life of unhappiness or divorce because you haven't learned who the best partner is for you. You remain naive and pining for the mailman or the fitness instructor trapped in a marriage that you wish you had never entered into.

Repeatedly pulling the ripcord on relationships teaches the opposite of actually making them work long term. It creates a habit of focusing on the negatives instead of the positives, which should be obviously undesirable... in many aspects of life.

No it doesn't. It shows you what to look for in a partner and what to avoid. Settling for the first man you sleep with otoh of enforces the myth of "true love" and of ignoring all the negatives and red flags you saw when you were dating. It basically means selling your soul for the ideal of the perfect husband and a house in the suburbs only to find out that was never your dream in the first place.

The vast majority of women eventually want a marriage and children. And harming the success of that eventuality is what is leading more and more women to being chronically single, childless, or divorced.

Even if that stat is true, that women aren't staying trapped inside lifelong marriages they hate and are even opting for the single life suggests to me the wearing thin of the whole true love myth. Women have become more savy and confident enough to seek out what they individually want and need, and that only happens by dating around, not by submitting to and never questioning what every good girl is taught to be by their mothers.

A woman will always want the best looking, highest value man they dated. "Playing the field" means that bar gets set higher and higher, making any eventual husband look all the worse by comparison.

Rich and good looking. Yeah..that's what all good girls are taught to look for. But then by dating around they discover other things about men they prefer more--their moral integrity, their sense of humor, their creativity, the sexual skills, or their openness to new things. Maybe they're no Brad Pitt. Or maybe they're not a millionaire. But they find they are in love with them and are loved by them. Hence they avoid the lie of the ideal man and have a more realistic understanding of men and what they can and can't provide for them in terms of lifelong happiness.

[Syne]

Wow, you really think simple criticism is some attempt to "control and dominate." Man, you try to control and dominate me all the time, hypocrite. So you're all for whatever sexual proclivities people may have, but god forbid anyone have any principles you disagree with. Yeah, that seems to track with being gay.
Again, are you really so unaware that people can have frequent and rewarding sex lives IN committed relationships? Did your parents' relationship really screw you up that bad?
Notice how you're so intellectually dishonest that you ignore the other link in favor of a genetic fallacy. When are you going to learn that I intentionally give you options like that to prove that you're a lazy moron?
Being gay means you do not interact in the evolutionary psychology of pair-bonding. And being a lazy moron means you can't be bothered to learn how men and women differ in sexual experience and long term relationships. Look up hypergamy.
You literally said, "it shows them what they don't want", and you just said "what to avoid," moron. Negative focus, dipshit.
Again, women are not men. They don't pine after the "mailman." They imprint on the highest evolutionary value man they sleep with and that keeps them from finding lasting happiness with a man that will commit to them long term... unless they don't have much sexual experience to compare him to, and can thus imprint on the man they marry. It's called sexual selection. Look it up.
Yes, we get that you're a gay man, who likely would prefer casual sex over long term commitment, as if you could get either. Young women are being duped by hookup culture, but older women are increasingly full of regret for the choices they've made and the lives they've ended up with. And women of all ages are much more depressed and taking antidepressants than ever before. Not a coincidence.
Women are actually much more flexible in their desires than men. Men see a woman (or man in your case) and we're either attracted or not. There isn't much that can change that. Most women don't find most men attractive by sight alone. There's a large mental/emotional factor for women. Are you even vaguely aware of this fundamental difference? Or does being gay just make it completely irrelevant to you?


Every post from you on this subject is the height of ultracrepidarianism.