Posted on 06/20/2019 10:03:45 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
“My boyfriend can’t get over how many people I’ve slept with. I shouldn’t have told him, but he pressed me for the info. He was 'nerdy’ for most of high school and college, and just started coming into his own in his mid to late 20s. I have been dating consistently for years, and have had my fair share of hookups and relationships. And while I don’t think my number is crazy at all, he can’t deal with the discrepancy. We’ve been dating for two years and we’re serious. I don’t want to break up. How can I handle this?”
I agree that you probably shouldn’t have told him, but lots of people fall into the trap of discussing their sexual history with their current partner, and I get it. If you trust someone, it’s natural to want to talk about what you’ve learned from past relationships and sexual experiences. That said, numbers really aren’t necessary, and rarely do anything aside from making one person feel bad.
But you can’t go back, and his reaction may have provoked an important conversation. After all (and as you well know), this isn’t an issue of who has slept with more people. It’s about his comfort with his past, and it’s about both of you establishing that your needs are being met by this relationship.
First, you have to figure out the problem you’re tackling, because it will change the course of action.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
The person making a claim of a crime is the one required to provide evidence of a crime. I’ve already provided two major examples of fraud in this case - the UVA Frat case and the Duke Lacross case. Also, the 25% of women were raped in college study has been debunked many, many times.
Doubt it. My husband’s intelligence level is really high.
There is DNA now.
What does that have to do with our conversation? I never said a word about women being raped in college. And I never made a claim about domestic violence being prevalent. I have no idea how prevalent it was and don't particularly care. It was never my point at all.
My point was that if a woman does not have access to education, credit, property rights, and employment, she will end up dependent on a man and unable to leave him even if he beats her. That remark is in no way a claim about the probability or frequency of men beating women. We all know it happens, but no one knows how often. And I am not concerned with how often, because my priority is making sure women are not in the position to be helpless in the first place.
You are the one who has tried to redirect my point from women being financially independent to whether or not they need to be, and your stance seems to be that if they are not being beaten then they don't need to have legal or financial rights on par with men's.
If that is not your stance, please provide clarity as to what your stance is. But quit lying about what I've said, and quit demanding I prove peripheral things that a.) have little bearing on my actual point and b.) you have already indicated you will not believe anyway because anyone who would bother scouring old police reports for evidence of domestic abuse automatically becomes disqualified in your eyes, because they are either female or liberal.
Average human being probably doesn’t think 30 days ahead and instead obeys the whimsical commands of their own flesh.
what difference does it make how old I am??
Your comment about old people having sex makes me assume you’re under 40 or so, and think old people don’t have sex, or that if they do, it’s gross. Forgive me if I guessed wrong.
I’m sure that’s true of many.
you guessed wrong but no offense taken.
You demand statistics, but all you offer is anecdotes.
Two friends? Sure, some men are accused falsely of abuse and they leave the house. But some women are actually abused and they leave the house. As I said earlier, the nicer person usually gets the shaft in divorce.
But, if you want anecdotes, I know people, too. I know many women who ended up in financial ruin due to their husbands' infidelities. Some of those women were the breadwinners. And, of the multiple divorces I know about, in at least half of those cases, the women were ordered to pay alimony.
And it’s generally expected for the man to leave (sleep in the sofa, in a more, whatever)
You think women never have to sleep on the sofa? Sometimes cheating husbands refuse to leave.
keep ignoring what men are saying
You're ignoring what women are saying. You complain about feminazis, but your group is just as bad, whining about men being victims.
Btw, just because a man is ordered to pay alimony does not mean he actually pays it.
and watch the marriage rate which has already dropped
So what if the marriage rate dropped? That's not the problem. The problem is that too many people jump into marriage with no intention of honoring their vows. Maybe too many people marry, and the marriage rate should drop.
Btw, I'm a divorced mom of sons. I tell them to respect women, and I hope they each settle down with a nice woman. But I also tell them to get a prenup. NOT because I think women can't be trusted, but because NICE people sometimes get the shaft.
What an amusing charge, coming from such a shameless "passive-assault" monger!
I asked for nothing but credible evidence, and YOU accuse ME of avoiding "anything specific" by way of doctrinaire speculation about "why" something gets made illegal; like you've never heard of "hate crimes."
This exchange with you has forced me to consider revising one of my homegrown aphorisms. It would seem "The only difference between liberal women and conservative women is their political party."
And when asked to provide evidence of women being denied any of those things, the best you can do is tell us when it was made illegal to deny them.
Oh, and excuses for not accessing the same things as their own daughters: can't forget that part
Because the only people who cared enough to publish material on those events are feminist and liberal scholars, whom conservative men simply dismiss as liars. You're right about one thing: I am not spending any time searching the internet for material that you will just say doesn't count because you don't like the source.
So what if the marriage rate dropped? That's not the problem.
I completely disagree. Strong marriages with kids growing up with 2 parents has been the bedrock of Western society for 600 years. In the last 60 years we've seen kids born out of wedlock go from 10% to nearly 50% and rising rapidly with whites catching up to blacks and Hispanics (both over 50% already). Kids born out of wedlock do significantly worse than those born in wedlock. Combine that with the fact that the birth rate has also plummeted for much of the same reasons, and we are in a massive path of decline in the west and one of the reasons socialism plays so well these days.
You are by far and away the worst at straw-man arguments on this thread out of any poster. I actually have absolutely zero problem with the things you mentioned and have never indicated that I had a problem with them. I have major problems with divorce laws and (selective) application of such laws in the US. My point was all of those laws (the ones you mentioned, plus current divorce and alimony laws) were done based off, in my opinion, propaganda.
Thank goodness there is DNA and other proof available today that wasn’t in the past or the entire country would still believe all of the UVA (and other) frats were gang raping women and that men’s sports teams like Duke Lacross were raping women as well.
High intelligence is wonderful. I was blessed to be born with a 140 IQ. I’m glad to hear you married well.
And all I did was ask for proof to support that opinion.
The lack of any evidence that it was a problem is the evidence. You must not be aware of the logical fallacy of trying to prove a negative.
There is plenty of evidence, but it’s published by women, who are then automatically discounted by you as a source.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.