*f-cking dead* Amber Rose Organizing "? Walk" Protest To Combat ? -Shaming
Options
Comments
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Knives Amilli wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't understand this ? . What is wrong with ? shaming? If you are a ? , you should be ashamed. People seem to think they have to be applauded for everything they do.
U have ur opinion, but I just don't see how discouraging women from expressing themselves and exploring their sexuality is healthy for anyone
She could be just doing this to market herself and her book ... But I like the thought
She does raise some interesting questions. Why is she, Amber Rose, the woman both of whom had serious relationships with, now this "? " or "thot" according to Wiz, Ye ... Is it because she has sexual agency and chooses not let the men in her life govern her actions?
Simply expressing and exploring sexuality does not make a chick a ? . Only the most conservative and prudish people claim that. ? whoever whenever with little to no discrimination makes a chick a ? and that's not good or healthy for anyone.
I don't know if she's a ? or thot or not, but she's embracing it. If she wasn't a ? , you'd think she'd make the argument that she's not, denounce actual sluttery, and stick up for what she actually considers herself to be. But again, she is embracing that term, so there it is.
Once again we gotta define ? and to take it further., you do know that term was invented to shame women from exploring their sexuality and also police their behavior? The term "? " has no merit in reality/
Responses like this are funny because the key issue is basically flying by you. The word "? " is not important. This issue is not about a word. What this is about is some women believing that they should be able to live promiscuous and sexually amoral lives and not be called out on it or thought poorly because of it. That's an unrealistic and frankly stupid expectation. If you want to live that lifestyle, that's fine. A woman has the right to do whatever she wants with her life just like a man. What you don't have the right to do is mandate that everyone else looks at the choices you make and applaud you for them.
Overly sexually promiscuous lives by both men and women are shameful and they absolutely do harm society. How do you think STDs manage to spread the way they do? How do you think all the illegitimate and poorly treated kids come to be? Again, there is nothing wrong with women exploring their sexuality, but ya'll are being silly if ya'll are acting like its praiseworthy for chicks (or dudes for that matter) to be out here ? like most people shake hands.
Good points -
desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't understand this ? . What is wrong with ? shaming? If you are a ? , you should be ashamed. People seem to think they have to be applauded for everything they do.
U have ur opinion, but I just don't see how discouraging women from expressing themselves and exploring their sexuality is healthy for anyone
She could be just doing this to market herself and her book ... But I like the thought
She does raise some interesting questions. Why is she, Amber Rose, the woman both of whom had serious relationships with, now this "? " or "thot" according to Wiz, Ye ... Is it because she has sexual agency and chooses not let the men in her life govern her actions?
Simply expressing and exploring sexuality does not make a chick a ? . Only the most conservative and prudish people claim that. ? whoever whenever with little to no discrimination makes a chick a ? and that's not good or healthy for anyone.
I don't know if she's a ? or thot or not, but she's embracing it. If she wasn't a ? , you'd think she'd make the argument that she's not, denounce actual sluttery, and stick up for what she actually considers herself to be. But again, she is embracing that term, so there it is.
As long as a woman or man is practing safe sex and getting reg check ups, I don't see how a woman exploring her sexuality with whomever she pleases, whenever she pleases is any a more a threat to public safety than when men does it
Yet men are encouraged to sleep with as many women as possible
That's the problemBlack_Samson wrote: »
Just cause it was serious for her dont mean it was.desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't understand this ? . What is wrong with ? shaming? If you are a ? , you should be ashamed. People seem to think they have to be applauded for everything they do.
U have ur opinion, but I just don't see how discouraging women from expressing themselves and exploring their sexuality is healthy for anyone
She could be just doing this to market herself and her book ... But I like the thought
She does raise some interesting questions. Why is she, Amber Rose, the woman both of whom had serious relationships with, now this "? " or "thot" according to Wiz, Ye ... Is it because she has sexual agency and chooses not let the men in her life govern her actions?
The fact that kanye treated her like community ? also takes away feom the point u are attemtpng to make.
With kim ye worships her like a lincoln continental with suicide doors.
With amber he was just showing off a 97 honda civic and the body kit he bought for it.
I dunno ...around the time of their "breakup" wasn't he on tour crying, talking about Amber? Lol
Now all the sudden she's this ? hoe
Wiz obviously is the biggest offender
I just find it funny how one minute she's rewarded by these men for her behavior, the next she's shamed
It's just so counterproductive and self serving
Women really need to get this idea of how men comment and view the actions of other men out their heads because 98% of the ? y'all think all men endorse is usually wrong ie. anytime somebody brings up IIl Pix as some sort of representation of literally everything all men want. Contrary to what a lot of women believe men actually will clown a dude if he spends too much energy, money or most importantly time (you can't get time back)chasing and trying to ? every woman he comes across. -
Feminism will be the downfall of western society.
You and darx should listen to Stephan Molyneux's thoughts on feminism. I think Has potential to be your guys least hated white person. -
desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't understand this ? . What is wrong with ? shaming? If you are a ? , you should be ashamed. People seem to think they have to be applauded for everything they do.
U have ur opinion, but I just don't see how discouraging women from expressing themselves and exploring their sexuality is healthy for anyone
She could be just doing this to market herself and her book ... But I like the thought
She does raise some interesting questions. Why is she, Amber Rose, the woman both of whom had serious relationships with, now this "? " or "thot" according to Wiz, Ye ... Is it because she has sexual agency and chooses not let the men in her life govern her actions?
Simply expressing and exploring sexuality does not make a chick a ? . Only the most conservative and prudish people claim that. ? whoever whenever with little to no discrimination makes a chick a ? and that's not good or healthy for anyone.
I don't know if she's a ? or thot or not, but she's embracing it. If she wasn't a ? , you'd think she'd make the argument that she's not, denounce actual sluttery, and stick up for what she actually considers herself to be. But again, she is embracing that term, so there it is.
As long as a woman or man is practing safe sex and getting reg check ups, I don't see how a woman exploring her sexuality with whomever she pleases, whenever she pleases is any a more a threat to public safety than when men does it
Yet men are encouraged to sleep with as many women as possible
That's the problemBlack_Samson wrote: »
Just cause it was serious for her dont mean it was.desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't understand this ? . What is wrong with ? shaming? If you are a ? , you should be ashamed. People seem to think they have to be applauded for everything they do.
U have ur opinion, but I just don't see how discouraging women from expressing themselves and exploring their sexuality is healthy for anyone
She could be just doing this to market herself and her book ... But I like the thought
She does raise some interesting questions. Why is she, Amber Rose, the woman both of whom had serious relationships with, now this "? " or "thot" according to Wiz, Ye ... Is it because she has sexual agency and chooses not let the men in her life govern her actions?
The fact that kanye treated her like community ? also takes away feom the point u are attemtpng to make.
With kim ye worships her like a lincoln continental with suicide doors.
With amber he was just showing off a 97 honda civic and the body kit he bought for it.
I dunno ...around the time of their "breakup" wasn't he on tour crying, talking about Amber? Lol
Now all the sudden she's this ? hoe
Wiz obviously is the biggest offender
I just find it funny how one minute she's rewarded by these men for her behavior, the next she's shamed
It's just so counterproductive and self serving
Women really need to get this idea of how men comment and view the actions of other men out their heads because 98% of the ? y'all think all men endorse is usually wrong ie. anytime somebody brings up IIl Pix as some sort of representation of literally everything all men want. Contrary to what a lot of women believe men actually will clown a dude if he spends too much energy, money or most importantly time (you can't get time back)chasing and trying to ? every woman he comes across.
Thank you. It trips me out how women like to take wrong information and run with it. desertrain really seems to think that men just walk around all day making sure other men are reaching their ? quotas for the week. -
? will support her just cause shes lightskin
Na ? gonna support her cause they wanna be apart of something, but gone be thinking about twerking online and doing ? a 1/2 mile until the finish line -
These ? walks are old though. Every year they happen a bunch of articles pop up about if they're a sign of immorality or women "taking back control"
-
Man Get This ? The ? Outra Here Cuhz....Lmao
I pray for any man letting his lady bring their daughter to a "? walk" -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »
So we don't live in a culture where young men are encouraged to "sow their wild oats", men who sleep with a lot of women are celebrated as "playas", and male virgins are chastised
While women are expected to keep their legs closed and "act like a lady"... Otherwise she's a "hoe","? ", "thot", etc
Ur being disingenuous
That's not what I said. Men are expected to go out and get the promiscuity out of their systems in hopes that when they do settle down they won't have that urge anymore. That is not the same thing as saying that men are encouraged to go out and ? any and everything. Again, whether its men or women, simply having premarital sex does not make you a ? .
I've explained the "playa" thing a ton of times on here and why it's stupid that women constantly bring that up as a so called double standard. I can explain it again if you want, but to keep this present titangraph reasonable I'll skip it.
At the end of the day traditional gender roles when it comes to sex probably do need to be redefined, and there is nothing wrong with women striving to do that. Here's my problem. There are two ways that women could combat the old ways. They could do their part to destroy those gender roles. That means instead of waiting for some dude to come along and pick them up. They can be more proactive in securing what they want. That gives them the power to choose what they want and to do what they want while also allowing them to not be seen as someone that just gives it up to anyone who asks. The other option is to maintain the status quo as far as the roles go but strive to get the poor behavior exhibited by some males to be seen equally acceptable for females. Everything you're arguing is in support of that second option, when I believe women as a whole would display much more class and character in going that first route.
Lol
Believe what u want
Fact remains a double standard exist
And I'm not totally getting how women becoming more "proactive with securing what they want" in the realm of love, sex and relationships would help change the minds of ppl who ? shame, subscribe to the double standard
What is comes down to is we live in a patriarchy. Men define what's acceptable or not.
Most guys grow up believing they are entitled to govern over women's bodies
? shaming is just a syptom of that
Things won't change until we as soceity begin to view women's sexuality in the same light as men's
It's funny how women are often (sometimes wrongfully) accused of being illogical and feminist arguments seem to have no logic to them.
You ask me how women being proactive will change minds. Well tell me, if people believe that ? are loose women who give it up to anyone, how could they possibly believe that if women start to exercise their own selectivity and therefore make the pool of sexual partners an exclusive group instead of any dude that comes along at the right time with the right lines?
How can a guy continue to believe they are entitled to govern a woman's body, if the only way he has access to that body is on a woman's terms?
How could this so-called double standard exist if women started to hold men to the same standards as women are held?
How is it that men are defining everything when women have all the power when it comes to sex?
The ? ya'll feminists say makes no sense. Why would you accept an oppressive gender role and protest the perceptions associated with that role instead of just throwing off the role altogether? lol That would have been like slaves choosing to be slaves as long as they were no longer called "? " instead of just fighting to no longer be slaves. Again, it's ridiculous.
1. A woman sleeping with whomever she's pleases even if that means sleeping with every suiter is her being proactive, practicing her free will
So how is that if women were to be appear to be more "selective" the solution, if I believe the problem with the double standard is that women are discouraged from exploring their sexuality any way they see fit? lol
Ur suggestion would be just another stipulation used to constrain women from enacting their sexual agency/practing their own free will lol
2. Obviously a woman has the choice to sleep with whomever she pleases
What I mean is that we live in a patriarchy. And the men with the influence to shape public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc have always sought to prevent women having complete agency of her own body, and have succeeded time and time again
In America, at one point not to long ago it was perfectly legal for a man to hospitalize a female kin because she didn't want to marry which was attributed to a form of hysteria by the male doctors
Today we have wealthy white men in congress trying to force women including ? victims to birth babies that they do not want
? shaming is just another way to police womens bodies
It's gotta to the point where woman dances inappropriately she's a "? ", a woman takes a semi nude picture on Instagram she is a "? " , she sleeps with a man too fast she's a "? "
-
Sexism and racism work together to create a hierarchical social structure where affluent white men are on top
And fosters an environment that is not only hostile for women but blks as well
You want equality well it's counterproductive to continue to to ? shame, subscribe to sexist double standards -
desertrain10 wrote: »Sexism and racism work together to create a hierarchical social structure where affluent white men are on top
And fosters an environment that is not only hostile for women but blks as well
You want equality well it's counterproductive to continue to to ? shame, subscribe to sexist double standards
Utter and total ? -
desertrain10 wrote: »
1. A woman sleeping with whomever she's pleases even if that means sleeping with every suiter is her being proactive, practicing her free will
So how is that if women were to be appear to be more "selective" the solution, if I believe the problem with the double standard is that women are discouraged from exploring their sexuality any way they see fit? lol
Ur suggestion would be just another stipulation used to constrain women from enacting their sexual agency/practing their own free will lol
2. Obviously a woman has the choice to sleep with whomever she pleases
What I mean is that we live in a patriarchy. And the men with the influence to shape public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc have always sought to prevent women having complete agency of her own body, and have succeeded time and time again
In America, at one point not to long ago it was perfectly legal for a man to hospitalize a female kin because she didn't want to marry which was attributed to a form of hysteria by the male doctors
Today we have wealthy white men in congress trying to force women including ? victims to birth babies that they do not want
? shaming is just another way to police womens bodies
It's gotta to the point where woman dances inappropriately she's a "? ", a woman takes a semi nude picture on Instagram she is a "? " , she sleeps with a man too fast she's a "? "
Are you being serious or starting to troll now?
1. I specifically said proactive as in going out and selectively finding and choosing the right guys for them and not just having sex with any and everybody that comes along. So I'm not understanding why you even made this point. Yes, having sex with any and everybody is exercising free will. It's also slutty behavior regardless if it's practiced by a man or woman. Again, you seem to want frivolous and dangerous behavior to be applauded, and that is stupid.
2. You're just making excuses and throwing blame again. It's not about patriarchy. Men typically don't want to wife ? . I don't think most men want virgins, but they do want women who have maintained some sort of exclusivity with regards to who they've given themselves to. Can you name one partriarchy produced public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc... that prevents women from holding men to that same standard? If a man doesn't want to marry a chick with a huge body count, that is not a matter of trying to police her body. That's just a man exercising his preference, and women are completely free to do that.
You say ? shaming is another way to police women's bodies. I say people actually believe slutty behavior is shameful and are vocal about that opinion. -
If the black community were more patriarchal we would be doing better. If you look at the other minorities in America they are doing better economically in many ways and they are even more patriarchal than we are.
And listen you black feminist and black people in general need to snap into reality. The whites will be on top for a long time they are the single biggest population group and this is an capitalist nation. The virtues of patriarchy are better suited to a capitalist society. -
-
desertrain10 wrote: »Sexism and racism work together to create a hierarchical social structure where affluent white men are on top
And fosters an environment that is not only hostile for women but blks as well
You want equality well it's counterproductive to continue to to ? shame, subscribe to sexist double standards
silliest ? Ive read all week -
lol@equating slutiness with being an empowered woman.
-
desertrain10 wrote: »Sexism and racism work together to create a hierarchical social structure where affluent white men are on top
And fosters an environment that is not only hostile for women but blks as well
You want equality well it's counterproductive to continue to to ? shame, subscribe to sexist double standards
silliest ? Ive read all week
How so? I imagine its kind of a problem when oppressed people subscribe to thought patterns that encourage double standards or yknow, oppression. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Knives Amilli wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I don't understand this ? . What is wrong with ? shaming? If you are a ? , you should be ashamed. People seem to think they have to be applauded for everything they do.
U have ur opinion, but I just don't see how discouraging women from expressing themselves and exploring their sexuality is healthy for anyone
She could be just doing this to market herself and her book ... But I like the thought
She does raise some interesting questions. Why is she, Amber Rose, the woman both of whom had serious relationships with, now this "? " or "thot" according to Wiz, Ye ... Is it because she has sexual agency and chooses not let the men in her life govern her actions?
Simply expressing and exploring sexuality does not make a chick a ? . Only the most conservative and prudish people claim that. ? whoever whenever with little to no discrimination makes a chick a ? and that's not good or healthy for anyone.
I don't know if she's a ? or thot or not, but she's embracing it. If she wasn't a ? , you'd think she'd make the argument that she's not, denounce actual sluttery, and stick up for what she actually considers herself to be. But again, she is embracing that term, so there it is.
Once again we gotta define ? and to take it further., you do know that term was invented to shame women from exploring their sexuality and also police their behavior? The term "? " has no merit in reality/
Responses like this are funny because the key issue is basically flying by you. The word "? " is not important. This issue is not about a word. What this is about is some women believing that they should be able to live promiscuous and sexually amoral lives and not be called out on it or thought poorly because of it. That's an unrealistic and frankly stupid expectation. If you want to live that lifestyle, that's fine. A woman has the right to do whatever she wants with her life just like a man. What you don't have the right to do is mandate that everyone else looks at the choices you make and applaud you for them.
Overly sexually promiscuous lives by both men and women are shameful and they absolutely do harm society. How do you think STDs manage to spread the way they do? How do you think all the illegitimate and poorly treated kids come to be? Again, there is nothing wrong with women exploring their sexuality, but ya'll are being silly if ya'll are acting like its praiseworthy for chicks (or dudes for that matter) to be out here ? like most people shake hands.
LOL FOH man.
This is complete ? .
IN all phases of life every guy I know that has slept with a lotta women is a ? hero. An idol even.
Even on this very website.... Go to any thread about Trey Songz or Drake even and I bet you there's a great deal of pontificating an bigging up done over how many women they've potentially slept with and how *easy* it is for them to bed women.
And in those same threads I bet not one ? person brings up how unsafe multiple sexual partners are or how "immoral" it is.
But when women are publicly displaying the same flippancy about sex, its now immoral and dangerous.
Ok. Makes sense. -
Knives Amilli wrote: »
LOL FOH man.
This is complete ? .
IN all phases of life every guy I know that has slept with a lotta women is a ? hero. An idol even.
Even on this very website.... Go to any thread about Trey Songz or Drake even and I bet you there's a great deal of pontificating an bigging up done over how many women they've potentially slept with and how *easy* it is for them to bed women.
And in those same threads I bet not one ? person brings up how unsafe multiple sexual partners are or how "immoral" it is.
But when women are publicly displaying the same flippancy about sex, its now immoral and dangerous.
Ok. Makes sense.
I don't know what kind of lames you hang with, but I've never been anywhere where simply ? a lot of chicks makes you a hero. lol It sounds stupid to even say that ? . You of you ? man. lol The only ? that put that much praise into ? a lot of women are the ones that don't get any at all.
And yeah, I'm sure there are threads where people comment on how many women Trey or Drake have, but nobody puts them on a pedestal for that. They are celebrities for goodness sake. Getting women is part of the process in that lifestyle, so it doesn't even make sense to be impressed by that.
And I'm pretty sure I've said in every post that the lack of morality and the dangers present in gross sexual promiscuity are present for both men and women, but I understand you had to ignore that to make your point whatever the hell that actually is. I can't really even tell at this point. -
Knives Amilli wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »Sexism and racism work together to create a hierarchical social structure where affluent white men are on top
And fosters an environment that is not only hostile for women but blks as well
You want equality well it's counterproductive to continue to to ? shame, subscribe to sexist double standards
silliest ? Ive read all week
How so? I imagine its kind of a problem when oppressed people subscribe to thought patterns that encourage double standards or yknow, oppression.
Right
They sleep bruh
-
desertrain10 wrote: »Sexism and racism work together to create a hierarchical social structure where affluent white men are on top
And fosters an environment that is not only hostile for women but blks as well
You want equality well it's counterproductive to continue to to ? shame, subscribe to sexist double standards
Utter and total ?
Expound -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Knives Amilli wrote: »
LOL FOH man.
This is complete ? .
IN all phases of life every guy I know that has slept with a lotta women is a ? hero. An idol even.
Even on this very website.... Go to any thread about Trey Songz or Drake even and I bet you there's a great deal of pontificating an bigging up done over how many women they've potentially slept with and how *easy* it is for them to bed women.
And in those same threads I bet not one ? person brings up how unsafe multiple sexual partners are or how "immoral" it is.
But when women are publicly displaying the same flippancy about sex, its now immoral and dangerous.
Ok. Makes sense.
I don't know what kind of lames you hang with, but I've never been anywhere where simply ? a lot of chicks makes you a hero. lol It sounds stupid to even say that ? . You of you ? man. lol The only ? that put that much praise into ? a lot of women are the ones that don't get any at all.
And yeah, I'm sure there are threads where people comment on how many women Trey or Drake have, but nobody puts them on a pedestal for that. They are celebrities for goodness sake. Getting women is part of the process in that lifestyle, so it doesn't even make sense to be impressed by that.
And I'm pretty sure I've said in every post that the lack of morality and the dangers present in gross sexual promiscuity are present for both men and women, but I understand you had to ignore that to make your point whatever the hell that actually is. I can't really even tell at this point.
And I say to that: if you're gonna act willfully ignorant to the praise, admiration, envy that our society gives to men who bed a lot of women, then we're just have to agree to disagree. -
lol Let me ask ya'll a couple questions about this so-called double standard. Women who sleep around get called ? . Men who sleep around don't. That's about the gist of it right.
What gender do you think does the most ? shaming?
What gender chooses not to criticize men for the same poor behavior?
My personal opinion is that the answer to the first question is women. That's supported by the fact that this topic exists because a group of women were supposedly ? shaming Amber Rose.
The answer to the second question is definitely women.
So if women are the ones bashing women who adhere to low standards and aren't holding men to higher standards. Isn't this an internal female problem? And isn't this so-called double standard against women being largely perpetuated by the actions of women? -
I don't like Amber one bit, but I like what she's doing here.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »
1. A woman sleeping with whomever she's pleases even if that means sleeping with every suiter is her being proactive, practicing her free will
So how is that if women were to be appear to be more "selective" the solution, if I believe the problem with the double standard is that women are discouraged from exploring their sexuality any way they see fit? lol
Ur suggestion would be just another stipulation used to constrain women from enacting their sexual agency/practing their own free will lol
2. Obviously a woman has the choice to sleep with whomever she pleases
What I mean is that we live in a patriarchy. And the men with the influence to shape public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc have always sought to prevent women having complete agency of her own body, and have succeeded time and time again
In America, at one point not to long ago it was perfectly legal for a man to hospitalize a female kin because she didn't want to marry which was attributed to a form of hysteria by the male doctors
Today we have wealthy white men in congress trying to force women including ? victims to birth babies that they do not want
? shaming is just another way to police womens bodies
It's gotta to the point where woman dances inappropriately she's a "? ", a woman takes a semi nude picture on Instagram she is a "? " , she sleeps with a man too fast she's a "? "
Are you being serious or starting to troll now?
1. I specifically said proactive as in going out and selectively finding and choosing the right guys for them and not just having sex with any and everybody that comes along. So I'm not understanding why you even made this point. Yes, having sex with any and everybody is exercising free will. It's also slutty behavior regardless if it's practiced by a man or woman. Again, you seem to want frivolous and dangerous behavior to be applauded, and that is stupid.
2. You're just making excuses and throwing blame again. It's not about patriarchy. Men typically don't want to wife ? . I don't think most men want virgins, but they do want women who have maintained some sort of exclusivity with regards to who they've given themselves to. Can you name one partriarchy produced public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc... that prevents women from holding men to that same standard? If a man doesn't want to marry a chick with a huge body count, that is not a matter of trying to police her body. That's just a man exercising his preference, and women are completely free to do that.
You say ? shaming is another way to police women's bodies. I say people actually believe slutty behavior is shameful and are vocal about that opinion.
Me the troll? Lol
The way u are stubbornly trying to make it seem as though no double standard exist, and male and female promiscuity are viewed by soceity in the same light leads me to believe u are the troll
As I already stated fact is guys who sleep around are perceived differently than women who do the same
It's undeniable
That's why I believe it's about policing womens bodies
If you can't even come to terms with that, we have nothing further to discuss
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »
1. A woman sleeping with whomever she's pleases even if that means sleeping with every suiter is her being proactive, practicing her free will
So how is that if women were to be appear to be more "selective" the solution, if I believe the problem with the double standard is that women are discouraged from exploring their sexuality any way they see fit? lol
Ur suggestion would be just another stipulation used to constrain women from enacting their sexual agency/practing their own free will lol
2. Obviously a woman has the choice to sleep with whomever she pleases
What I mean is that we live in a patriarchy. And the men with the influence to shape public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc have always sought to prevent women having complete agency of her own body, and have succeeded time and time again
In America, at one point not to long ago it was perfectly legal for a man to hospitalize a female kin because she didn't want to marry which was attributed to a form of hysteria by the male doctors
Today we have wealthy white men in congress trying to force women including ? victims to birth babies that they do not want
? shaming is just another way to police womens bodies
It's gotta to the point where woman dances inappropriately she's a "? ", a woman takes a semi nude picture on Instagram she is a "? " , she sleeps with a man too fast she's a "? "
Are you being serious or starting to troll now?
1. I specifically said proactive as in going out and selectively finding and choosing the right guys for them and not just having sex with any and everybody that comes along. So I'm not understanding why you even made this point. Yes, having sex with any and everybody is exercising free will. It's also slutty behavior regardless if it's practiced by a man or woman. Again, you seem to want frivolous and dangerous behavior to be applauded, and that is stupid.
2. You're just making excuses and throwing blame again. It's not about patriarchy. Men typically don't want to wife ? . I don't think most men want virgins, but they do want women who have maintained some sort of exclusivity with regards to who they've given themselves to. Can you name one partriarchy produced public policy, social structure, public opinion, etc... that prevents women from holding men to that same standard? If a man doesn't want to marry a chick with a huge body count, that is not a matter of trying to police her body. That's just a man exercising his preference, and women are completely free to do that.
You say ? shaming is another way to police women's bodies. I say people actually believe slutty behavior is shameful and are vocal about that opinion.
You're coming off as a square.
Oh yeah side note where's that pic of me in the ? pic thread? I wanna put that as my sig.
https://youtu.be/AZb9GLUYp2k
https://youtu.be/4ND9F0k4q-I
