Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Somebody I know is 20 and has slept with over 200 guys Watch

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    So?

    Her life, her choice. You shouldn't be making judgements solely on the basis of how sexually active someone is
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by acupofgreentea)
    I want a daughter, first and foremost, who is safe and healthy. You seem to have disregarded my point on those I've talked to with HIV.

    A lack of sex education - which making sex a taboo topic can often create - is a breeding ground for STIs, not to mention teenage pregnancy. I would have thought - as a doctor - you'd be able to understand that viewpoint.

    As I said, she would most likely do it with or without my permission and you'd be naive to think otherwise.

    This is a view I've held for quite a while, especially having volunteered at a sexual health-related charity for more than two years. I thought this when you said I was "wonderful" and "sweet."

    It's a realistic view.
    Having sex with 200 guys in 4 years is wrong. Its highly pathological. Its not a question of being a parent that allows some freedom, its a question of being a parent that wants to raise a child that is doing something socially acceptable and reasonable.

    Everyone should be educated, you should have frank discussions about the topic but that doesn't mean its to sleep with 200 guys. Condoms reduce your risk of HIV by 10-fold. So thats the same as that person sleeping with 20 guys. This isn't really a discussion of sexual safety its more a discussion of morals and social acceptability.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    Having sex with 200 guys in 4 years is wrong. Its highly pathological. Its not a question of being a parent that allows some freedom, its a question of being a parent that wants to raise a child that is doing something socially acceptable and reasonable.

    Everyone should be educated, you should have frank discussions about the topic but that doesn't mean its to sleep with 200 guys. Condoms reduce your risk of HIV by 10-fold. So thats the same as that person sleeping with 20 guys. This isn't really a discussion of sexual safety its more a discussion of morals and social acceptability.
    I don't understand how it's pathological... Can you expand.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    I don't understand how it's pathological... Can you expand.
    Because really its only escorts and sex workers that would do so many numbers.

    Its a new sexual partner every single week for 200 weeks.

    There are some things where you can't use statistical information to back up your statements - there is just an obvious pathology that doesn't fall within normal social constructs.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    You have really fallen from grace if you want a daughter that shags 200 men before the age of 20. My goodness.
    4 years = 96 months = ~ 2 per month

    I mean if you're single that's actually not that much sex :emo: You have more sex than that in a relationship (well I did :rofl:)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    Having sex with 200 guys in 4 years is wrong. Its highly pathological. Its not a question of being a parent that allows some freedom, its a question of being a parent that wants to raise a child that is doing something socially acceptable and reasonable.

    Everyone should be educated, you should have frank discussions about the topic but that doesn't mean its to sleep with 200 guys. Condoms reduce your risk of HIV by 10-fold. So thats the same as that person sleeping with 20 guys. This isn't really a discussion of sexual safety its more a discussion of morals and social acceptability.
    My reply is stolen from Indeterminate:

    (Original post by Indeterminate)
    So?

    Her life, her choice. You shouldn't be making judgements solely on the basis of how sexually active someone is
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    OK good to hear
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    x
    Yes, but by shaming things like this, you risk creating an atmosphere in which your child feels like they can't come to you with any questions they may have in regards to sex.

    But if you want to argue morals, why is it wrong?

    Give me one reason it is wrong that can be applied to everyone in society, as you seem to feel you can dictate it's wrong for everyone. This means it can't be a reason related to religion as not everyone is religious and can't be related to your own views.

    Social acceptability is relative.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    Because really its only escorts and sex workers that would do so many numbers.

    Its a new sexual partner every single week for 200 weeks.

    There are some things where you can't use statistical information to back up your statements - there is just an obvious pathology that doesn't fall within normal social constructs.
    No, I don't think it is. At least, it isn't obvious to me. Why wouldn't that be fine as long as it was safe and consensual?

    And I knew two people who were edging 150 by 19, and neither of them appeared to be "pathological", so I think maybe you do need to try and back it up with statistical information because "societal constructs" contain too many grey areas.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ethereal World)
    4 years = 96 months = ~ 2 per month

    I mean if you're single that's actually not that much sex :emo: You have more sex than that in a relationship (well I did :rofl:)
    4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

    1 new sexual partner week

    We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

    Wrong on all fronts EW.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

    1 new sexual partner week

    We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

    Wrong on all fronts EW.
    Why is a new sexual partner different to having sex again with the same partner. Do you know for sure they're not having sex with a different partner? The disease risk is the same, and there's no necessary link with any level of attachment.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

    1 new sexual partner week

    We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

    Wrong on all fronts EW.
    Oh sh*t I multiplied by 2 at the end.... :facepalm2:

    But yeah, once a week....................:hmmm:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I don't respect nor disrespect that person because I simply don't care.

    Personally, in no feasible way could I date such person. Having slept with hundreds indicates massive psychological and possibly psychiatric issues, even if it is consensual. And if that person thinks it is normal, then I would not date them either because we have very different values.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Awesome Genius)
    4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

    1 new sexual partner week

    We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

    Wrong on all fronts EW.
    It is unrealistic that he/she had a new partner every week. So it must mean that on some occasions it must have been a few different blokes a week or even a few in one day. Pathological. Agree.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Ethereal World)
    My reply is stolen from Indeterminate:
    I appreciate your endorsement
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)

    :banana2:



    Spoiler:
    Show
    :jumphug:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by acupofgreentea)
    Yes, but by shaming things like this, you risk creating an atmosphere in which your child feels like they can't come to you with any questions they may have in regards to sex.

    But if you want to argue morals, why is it wrong?

    Give me one reason it is wrong that can be applied to everyone in society, as you seem to feel you can dictate it's wrong for everyone. This means it can't be a reason related to religion as not everyone is religious and can't be related to your own views.

    Social acceptability is relative.
    It's not what people from good families do.

    And if you stopped your children from burning down houses is that "shaming" them, no, it's discipline.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    It is insane and unnatural for a woman to sleep with that many men in her lifetime time
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    Why is a new sexual partner different to having sex again with the same partner. Do you know for sure they're not having sex with a different partner? The disease risk is the same, and there's no necessary link with any level of attachment.
    That's total nonsense. If you have a partner you can trust and they're not from the type of family that endorses their children to go out and do these ridiculous things (like some of the posters here) then your risk profile is totally and I mean totally different to sleeping with a new person each week that you have not had the time to know well. Saying that "oh well they are probably cheating on you" is not only statistically much less likely than having very loose individuals in these 200 but also quite cynical.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stefano865)
    :banana2:


    Spoiler:
    Show
    :jumphug:
    :hump:
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.