[cb3]

that being promiscuous is intrinsically bad.

And why do you think that is? Maybe because it is intrinsically a bad thing to do. For civilization as we know it at least.

Better outcomes for children from 2 parent households have been established through scientific investigation.[1]

Why do you think a virgin bride is such a prized thing throughout cultures and ages?

Greater numbers of premarital sexual partners are associated with higher rates of divorce.[2]

It is kind of crazy how in a certain segment of the population's rush to rectify past wrongs they overlook the fact that maybe some things were as they were for sound reasons. You can even surmise that if there is any genetic component to the typical monogamous relationships of human societies then men have a genetically encoded aversion to sluts when seeking a mother for their children.

The normalization of sluttiness is always going to be a losing battle if our civilization is to survive and thrive.

What exactly is the improvement feminists think they are after by trying to normalize sluttiness?

So we've seen, on average two parent households produce "better" children, better children produce better societies, and a higher sexual partner count for a woman prior to marriage produces a higher incidence of divorce.

Anyone care to articulate any reasons why promoting sluttiness is beneficial for the future of humanity?

[1] "Children from two-parent families are better off emotionally, socially and economically"

http://archive.azcentral.com/families/articles/0913marriageh...

"divorce tends to double a child’s risk of a serious negative outcome."

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/07/singl...

[2] http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_R-WhB9g9eYk/TJDSr8V_ShI/AAAAAAAAAO...

http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-d...

And two articles from a site with 'hooking up' in the url.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/01/22/hookinguprealities/...

http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/01/29/hookinguprealities/...

[dalore]

Somebody think of the children!

How is being promiscuous bad? You've just talked about how it's bad for children to go through a divorce. Or are we talking about slutty children? What about male sluts? In fact who is talking about marriage at all?

Sounds like you have a preconceived notion and then try and justify it.

[thezilch]

If we remove children -- use contraceptives -- and marriage / divorce -- just fuck around -- from the equation, it's no longer promiscuity -- slutty?

[pavelrub]

You are confused. What is considered beneficial to society is individual freedom, not fascism.

[cb3]

To those of you downvoting the above post, thank you. I'm always happy to have my perceptions improved, and I take the downvotes to indicate that you have forthcoming a carefully citationed rebuttal, countering and demonstrating the falseness of the above post and therefore of it being worthy of downvoting.

I await the opportunity to learn something new.

[mercer]

While it's possible that you got downvoted for having a point of view that others disagree with, I like to think that you're downvoted mainly for bringing this up at exactly the wrong time.

Imagine you wanted to discuss, as objectively as possible, the role of clothing in relation to sexuality, and the different perspectives people have on that. It's quite possible that people would not downvote you for expressing that you think that, generally speaking, there's something to be said for modesty in clothing (unless of course it'd be just about women dressing down). Even if they disagreed.

But imagine posting that opinion in the context of a post on rape and sexual abuse. It would immediately be linked to the surprisingly and unfortunately wide-spread view that 'those women were asking for it by dressing like a slut'. Regardless of whether your points have merit or should be accepted, the context makes it unacceptable and, quite frankly, a bit suspect.

[dalore]

Hey I responded, but all I see is this whiney post trying to vindicate yourself.