Academic/hard working women less prone to promiscuity/early copulations?

English chavettess are often stereotyped as feckless promiscuous lard buckets so is it fair to say that hard working academic (often immigrant) women are generally chaste/celibates? I suppose they are so devoted to education/our economy that it is just another one of the sacrifices that have to be made.....

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

JoPearson89

Do you have a problem with promiscuous women? Otherwise, what difference does it make?

Reply 2

MoralInversion

Original post by JoPearson89

Do you have a problem with promiscuous women? Otherwise, what difference does it make?

I would have a problem with respected white collar professionals engaging in such behaviour, although I would predict it to be rare. If chavs/hairdressers and waitresses are ****s then its kind of to be expected but if hard working immigrants are...then well..thats problematic imo.

Reply 3

math42

Doubt it. I certainly know a few counterexamples

Reply 4

JoPearson89

Why would it be a problem either way? What's wrong with promiscuity? Why do you see it as disreputable?

Reply 5

Platopus

Original post by MoralInversion

They certainly have less time for it

Reply 6

MoralInversion

Original post by JoPearson89

Why would it be a problem either way? What's wrong with promiscuity? Why do you see it as disreputable?

Its time that should be spent bettering themselves and society. If you have worked hard all week then I see no problem with reading or walking in the country but hardcore ****ings/night clubs surely thats just the lifestyle of the proletariat?

Reply 7

math42

Original post by MoralInversion

Getting a bit classist now aren't we

Reply 8

JoPearson89

Original post by MoralInversion

I take it you're a collectivist then.

Also, why do you expect more from moral behaviour (for lack of a better term) from people with money as opposed to people without it?

Reply 9

MoralInversion

Original post by JoPearson89

I take it you're a collectivist then.

Also, why do you expect more from moral behaviour (for lack of a better term) from people with money as opposed to people without it?

Its not really to do with money, its do with aspiration and personality. It would be extremely odd and disturbing for say a Asian student/doctor to be highly religious, responsible and hard working while regularly being done up the bum by different blokes. But somehow it doesn't seem so distasteful for chavs and hairdressers from the north...dunno why that should be, its just the way it is

Reply 10

JoPearson89

Original post by MoralInversion

1) What does Mr. Asian Student/Doctor's sex life have to do with anything? :biggrin:

2) It isn't just the way it is. It's a false narrative. It's a message that lots of people in society have been unknowingly propagating for years: the idea that the poor are only poor because they are worse people with moral failings, so of course they didn't succeed. It's a convenient narrative because it allows the rich to dismiss the concerns of the poor as their own fault, whilst the rich can congratulate themselves for being so moral and upstanding... and of course they must be because they're rich. It's circular logic. It's an idea that's especially prevalent in puritanism, but it is also replicated in many cultures around the world.

But there's no real link between morality and wealth. The two are separate entities.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 11

MoralInversion

Original post by JoPearson89

1) What does Mr. Asian Student/Doctor's sex life have to do with anything? :biggrin:

2) It isn't just the way it is. It's a false narrative. It's a message that lots of people in society have been unknowingly propagating for years: the idea that the poor are only poor because they are worse people with moral failings, so of course they didn't succeed. It's a convenient narrative because it allows the rich to dismiss the concerns of the poor as their own fault, whilst the rich can congratulate themselves for being so moral and upstanding... because they're rich. It's an idea that's especially prevalent in puritanism, but it is also replicated in many cultures around the world. But there's no real link between morality and wealth. The two are separate entities.

As I say its not about money as some businessmen/women and traders can still have a working class cultural attitude despite having a lot of money while at the same time academics/medics from India/Nigeria often come here and live in ghettoes initially.

Reply 12

JoPearson89

Original post by MoralInversion

But it comes back to the idea that promiscuity is morally wrong in some way.

Why shouldn't people enjoy sex, **** whomever they want, form families with whomever they want in whichever arrangement they want?

Morality is usually tied up in whom or what is being harmed or threatened by a particular type of behaviour.

So who is being harmed by Mr/Mrs Asian Student/Doctor having sex with whomever? Why is that shameful?

Reply 13

MoralInversion

Original post by JoPearson89

Because it is time and resources being taken away from the pure in favour of the unpure activities. Professionals should play an active role in the positive moral and social fabric of their community; engaging in beastliness totally undermines this and they then cease to become role models. If they are found to be maritally and morally unscrupulous then it also quite likely that they are professionally, financially and ethically unscrupulous likewise.

Reply 14

username1177050

Most immigrant descendants are chaste as ****. However some native English academic high flyers are promiscuous as ****

Reply 15

fermat1324

Original post by neal95

Most immigrant descendants are chaste as ****. However some native English academic high flyers are promiscuous as ****

if you mean academic high flyer by the loose definition of passing exams well at uni level and beyond, you're right.

But are the examples of people making original contributions that are exceptional who are like this?

Timothy Gowers has had 2 marriages I think but idk...he said in his book the stereotype of the asexual weird mathematician is wrong as the weirdos get weeded out by the social stresses of academia.

Reply 16

fermat1324

Original post by JoPearson89

Do you have a problem with promiscuous women? Otherwise, what difference does it make?

shut up Jo nobody cares about your tired feminism

Reply 17

JoPearson89

Original post by MoralInversion

No offence, but I can tell you come from a fairly religious background. I'm getting flashbacks.

What makes non-marital sex "unpure"?

Unpure is a label ascribed by a religious text.

The bulk of this religious text as written in medieval or pre-medieval times, by people who didn't even have an understanding of how things like diseases worked on a basic level, yet claimed to have an understanding of the divine.

Their supposed understanding of a supreme being (which is apparently fascinated with all manner of human obscura) coincidentally *cough* gives them permission to tell people (mostly women) what they can and can't do with their bodies in a way that benefits these (overwhelmingly male) authority figures.

There's nothing wrong with sex outside of marriage. It's still sex, either way.

Some people don't like it, so they don't want others to do it, so they invent reasons for why it's wrong, rather than confront the fact that it's just their personal taste and that they have no right or just cause to look down on others for their sex lives.

Reply 18

JoPearson89

Original post by fermat1324

shut up Jo nobody cares about your tired feminism

shut up fermat nobody cares about your tired conservatism (or whatever)

Reply 19

fermat1324

Original post by JoPearson89

shut up fermat nobody cares about your tired conservatism (or whatever)

it's anti-tediousism you're saying the same **** every other feminist harps on about and there are millions of you.

as G.H. Hardy said, it's a waste of any quality person's time to express a popular opinion (or words to that effect)