Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rose]

* Japa is sort of a prude and is put off by women wearing skimpy clothes for the sake of fashion.

[Mindmaker]

All right.
What is inherently worse about a person who has safe sex with a number of different partners?

The topic has been discussed at length in the "Premartial sex thread" I believe.
I think we can end it here before I earn myself more insults 

* Japa is sort of a prude and is put off by women wearing skimpy clothes for the sake of fashion.

Same here.

[Pnx]

* Japa is sort of a prude and is put off by women wearing skimpy clothes for the sake of fashion.

Same here.

That's "skanky", and yeah, there is such a thing as good taste. I didn't say I'd be attracted to you because you're showing off. A bikini isn't exactly appropriate formal wear.

[scriver]

Words like these don't have that kind of exact definitions, pnx.

[Pnx]

Words like these don't have that kind of exact definitions, pnx.

They do for me.

[Rose]

the terms "Dressing like a slut" or "Dressing like a skank" don't imply that you are a person that sleeps around, but they do imply that you are dressing in such a way that suggests that you do.

And a great many people, myself included, see sleeping around as a negative character trait.

[Vector]

*shrug*

I guess it's a good thing none of you know me in real life, then.  I fear that my occasional wearing of skirts cut above the knee or low-cut blouses would turn you against me forever.

I guess at least on the internet you don't get to just assume and run?

[Siquo]

A great many people, myself included, think it's awesome. Up to a certain point, of course. I must admit I've got quite the moral dilemma about this issue right now.

[Rose]

*shrug*

I guess it's a good thing none of you know me in real life, then.  I fear that my occasional wearing of skirts cut above the knee or low-cut blouses would turn you against me forever.

I guess at least on the internet you don't get to just assume and run?

I doubt any of us are nearly that extreme.

personally, if I see a girl with a skirt short enough to expose the bottom of her ass, my first thought is "What the hell"

[Nadaka]

the terms "Dressing like a slut" or "Dressing like a skank" don't imply that you are a person that sleeps around, but they do imply that you are dressing in such a way that suggests that you do.

And a great many people, myself included, see sleeping around as a negative character trait.

Sex is a wonderful and beautiful thing, and as long as everyone involved is informed and consenting, to me it is never negative.

* Japa is sort of a prude and is put off by women wearing skimpy clothes for the sake of fashion.

Dressing in revealing clothes is liberating for many women as it allows them to express their acceptance of and embracing their own sexuality. Something that has long been denied to them.

[Rose]

What can I say, I'm conservative and backward.

[Mindmaker]

*shrug*

I guess it's a good thing none of you know me in real life, then.  I fear that my occasional wearing of skirts cut above the knee or low-cut blouses would turn you against me forever.

Not sure if you're serious or just sarcastic.

[Solifuge]

I see clothing as a functional object. If you're in a warm climate, dress for it, even if that means not dressing. Our bodies are these wonderful, complex, beautiful things... it isn't about sexuality or being a sexual creature, so much as just accepting our bodies as things that are.

That said, I always feel a slight twinge of awkwardness when not wearing a shirt in public, IE. when swimming or so on. I got used to full nudity fairly young, since traditional Finnish Saunas are always best when in the buff, and the one we frequented accommodated 15-20 people... but for some reason public shirtlessness makes me aware of how my body doesn't fit the masculine ideal.

[Siquo]

What can I say, I'm conservative and backward.

Conservative without pants? 

[MetalSlimeHunt]

As far as I know you can't, in fact, deny a lifesaving intervention.

Which is what the act is changing.

Although I really doubt any doctor would choose to exercise the act even in the impossible scenario of it passing. Especially if the baby's father is present.

Really, denying anyone any life-saving treatment while a family member is around or they themselves can still move is asking to be attacked with lethal force for being an unbelievable bastard.

That, and doctors tend to be smart people who like saving lives, hence their profession. While I personally maintain my seething hatred for doctors, they usually have that going for them at the very least.