• One night stands, acceptable for women to do so?

    1288882587
    strawberry90 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Officer Cadet
    • Posts: 2
    • Joined: 4 Nov 2010

    I want to know your views on the idea that women are allowed to sleep around nowadays, do you think the rise in STD's has something to do towards girls becoming more promiscious, and because it is becoming acceptable, such as allowing young girls to go on the pill, it just encourages it?

    Tell me what you think!

    1288884109
    Ecksvie [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 1173
    • Joined: 11 Jun 2009

    Depends what you mean by acceptable. Acceptable to me or acceptable to society. In a sexual context, I find acceptable to be anything where all involved consent, are doing it safely and nobody else is getting hurt because of it.

    As to young girls having the pill, I think many of the people opposed to it don't realise that many girls aren't going to be stopped from having sex. Better to have them fully prepared and sensible then.

    1288886237
    suze9 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 371
    • Joined: 5 Feb 2009

    Personally I think it has a lot to do with what sex education that both girls and boys have access to. Untill something major happens then nothing much will change. Mobile units going round schools with confident and informed people in an informal setting could make a huge difference. Teaching needs to be more than mechanics of sex or risks of unprotected sex as there is the whole relationship/peer pressure thing than needs to be delt with too.

    Why ask about being acceptable for girls but not boys? Its the old slut/stud thing there, as a female having a one night stand I would be a viewed unfavourably but if it was my OH he would be getting a pat on the back from his buddys for his notches. Sorry but that has always annoyed me.

    I dont see why a young girl who has the common sence to get herself down to the Dr's for the pill should be viewed in a negative way as it is better than an unwanted pregnancy. Fine the pill will not protect from STI's but is it not a step in the right direction and I'm sure the Dr will not hand out the pill without telling the young girl that doubling up would be the safest thing to do.

    1288886260
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6178
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    If I'm completely honest I don't give a tiddles about others sex lives as long as no one is hurt.

    I do have certain uneasy feelings about people sleeping around out of insecurities or for popularity, it's just not healthy. On the whole though I don't care and find it equally as acceptable if some one can deal with the consequences of the action then why not.

    1288887110
    SueVanDouser [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Lieutenant
    • Posts: 30
    • Joined: 31 Jul 2010

    It's perfectly acceptable.

    Anyone that goes on the pill and doesn't use a condom with a new partner is just asking for trouble though.

    1288888792
    BashfulBabe [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 716
    • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

    I'm always a little suspicious of the 'shocking' numbers saying how much STDs are rising by. Remember, population numbers are rising, too, so I'd be more interested to see the infected to uninfected ratio than a flat "X more than last year!" that doesn't account for more people overall equalling more sexual encounters even if all else stayed the same.

    Then there's the fact that with a larger number of the population infected at the start of this year to the start of last - allowing for the spread of infections during the previous year even by a small percentage of the originally infected - means that there are more potentially infected partners out there in any given year than in the previous, so even at the same rate of infection-spreading, a larger number of new infections will obviously show up than the previous year.

    I'm quite cynical when it comes to statistics and funky graphs that hide more than they show.

    But yeah, as far as I've seen (prepared to be corrected though!) there's nothing to definitively say that there has been in recent years any increase in new infections beyond what can be accounted for by higher overall population numbers and higher numbers of infection-bearing members of the same.

    Or what about the growing acceptance of admitting to an infection and getting tested? Who is to say that there weren't always this number of new cases, but they went unreported out of a lack of knowledge or embarassment? And that would also artificially inflate current numbers, as cases that should have been counted in years passed are only being diagnosed today, so despite it not being a new infection, it's being counted 'today', and each case like this not only adds a false positive to the current running total, but also has not been counted in the year it occurred in, meaning it's throwing the relative numbers out doubley! All very confusing.

    So, now I've made the statisticians cry: one night stands. Well, I think it is just as acceptable for women as men, and from my experience it is socially now. There's still more concern, but that's based on a very real increased danger for women, as if she gets pregnant, she's kind of stuck with the decision, whereas the guy can run, or may even not get the chance to know if there was no exchange of details. For him, not leaving the girl his full name or number means he walks out with only whatever's stuck to his penis, whereas she gets a whole new risk on top of the STDs. Contraceptive methods like the pill or IUDs do level the playing field in that respect, since at least both now only have the same risks if they choose to not use anything more.

    I don't think things like allowing girls go on the pill encourages it, unless they're given it along with zero information so that they now think they're invulnerable. And as long as doctors take the time to explain how STDs are still a real risk and so forth as they're doling them out, then hell, the girls are now more informed than the guys, and thus logically better able to have responsable sex, so surely it;s the boys who dance into someone's pants with no more information than what he read in his dad's Playboy and what his mate who has never even seen real boobs said who are the real danger, and in danger themselves, and not the girls who have gone out, seen to at least some of the precautions necessary, and heard genuine information from a reliable source.

    1288888863
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6178
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    WandA wrote:

    If I'm completely honest I don't give a tiddles about others sex lives as long as no one is hurt.

    I do have certain uneasy feelings about people sleeping around out of insecurities or for popularity, it's just not healthy. On the whole though I don't care and find it equally as acceptable if some one can deal with the consequences of the action then why not.

    Sorry, I should make this clear.

    This wasn't a judgement on the pill bit of the OP, just on the acceptability of one night stands.

    1288889221
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3406
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    I have to agree with what has been said already - BB great post on the pitfalls of statistics!!

    As for promiscuity - as long as a person is safe and not harming anyone, what they do with their sex life it upto them. If responsible people choose to have sex with someone once and never again, in a safe way then that's their choice.

    As WandA said - if they're doing it because they're insecure or are not being safe in some way or another then that's a different issue but it has little to do with it being more acceptable today, People who risk themselves in sex, will risk themselves in other ways too and people who are insecure will often do things they don't want to because of those insecurities - we can't just blame sex being more acceptable today.

    Sex is a recreational activity - just like smoking they both have their risks - the only difference is, one *will* kill you and the other merely *can* if you don't practise it safely. Yet one is more "ok"?

    Adx

    1288889347
    BashfulBabe [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 716
    • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

    No one can do a tangent quite like me.

    And I assume sex is worse because the government can't tax it (yet!).

    1288889384
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3406
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    Oh and promoting safe sex isn't the same as promoting sex - I genuinely don't have an issue with young girls going on the pill - I was one of them so it'd be hypocritical to judge. At 15, I went on the pill for endometriosis *and* because I was in a long term relationship and sex was likely to happen in the next year or so (I did have sex, 2 months after my 16th birthday and we're still together) - some kids are irresponsible, some are responsible but at least if they go on the pill they're exposing themselves to another responsible adult (doctor) who can explain the risks of sex *and* they're taking *some* responsibility so I don't have an issue.

    Adx

    1288889471
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3406
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    BashfulBabe wrote:

    No one can do a tangent quite like me.

    And I assume sex is worse because the government can't tax it (yet!).

    Haha don't be so cynical

    Adx

    1288890004
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6178
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    BashfulBabe wrote:

    No one can do a tangent quite like me.

    And I assume sex is worse because the government can't tax it (yet!).

    They let you off with the tax on sex in the hope you get preggers and create another worker drone to tax and fuel the perpetual cycle.

    1288890566
    Lovehoney - Alice [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1327
    • Joined: 19 Jul 2010

    I'm sure I've also heard recent statistics that there are booms in sexually transmitted infections in nearly all age groups - 40+, 65+ and even 85+ which have been put down to flings after marriages have ended and hook-ups in nursing homes!

    1288890739
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3406
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    LoveHoney - Alice wrote:

    I'm sure I've also heard recent statistics that there are booms in sexually transmitted infections in nearly all age groups - 40+, 65+ and even 85+ which have been put down to flings after marriages have ended and hook-ups in nursing homes!

    Exactly!

    I do feel the young are demonised in the media - we're not all as bad as the minority examples given in the Mail would lead you to believe!

    Adx

    1288907820
    strawberry90 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Officer Cadet
    • Posts: 2
    • Joined: 4 Nov 2010

    Bashful Babe and Alicia D'more, your replies were really interesting!

    I was wondering whether you could help me, Im currently writing a feature for one of my projects at Southampton Solent Uni, and part of the requirements is having full names, ages and locations of potential quotes I can use!

    My feature is surrounding the topics we've discussed! It will be confidential, no one will see this other than the lecturer, but needs to be legit for him!

    Could you girlies help me? My email is strawberryedgar@yahoo.co.uk if you dont want to say your names here!

    thanks :-) x

    1288910661
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 528
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    perfectly fine, although you got to rember, if your drunk you legaly cant consent to sex. But as long as a condom is used (not the pill, risk of STIs is too high) then i don't see anything wrong with it. Plus they can be good fun

    1288911072
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 528
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    Loves huni wrote:

    well my oh's response was

    "if a key opens every lock - its a master key, if a lock is opened by any key, its just a shitty lock!"

    not at all sexist that one , although why is it if a guy sleeps with a new woman every week hes a "lad" if a girl sleeps with 3 different guys a year she is a slut??

    1288913022
    Lou232 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Lieutenant Colonel
    • Posts: 38
    • Joined: 22 Sep 2008

    It's the whole idea about female "purity". Interesting how the thread is specifically about women, no? To be honest, it depends on the viewpoint. Personally, I think it's just as good (or bad) for a woman as it is for a man...good in the consensual safe sex bit, bad if there is no safe sex anywhere. I'm not even going near consent there, as that's waaaay off the scale of bad and the topic seems to be assuming consent on some level.

    Trouble is, there's still the idea floating around that women should be pure and "whole" / untouched etc. There are a surprising number of people out there who are unable to grasp the idea of female pleasure during sex - look at the recent comments by a famous Twitterer to see this.

    For myself, I don't really see the thing with ONS partly due to the fact I get more than enough loving from the OH, but also because I find that sex and trust are so close for me, I can't separate them. However, I know men who feel exactly the same as me and women who feel exactly the opposite, it's just the stereotype that a man who goes out and sleeps around is a "lad" or whatever while the woman is a slut.Sadly, we still have the Victorian mentality about female sexuality, which is the root of the issue...at least the OA knows about the Gspot and orgasms. Yay! Lxx

    1288913516
    Lou232 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Lieutenant Colonel
    • Posts: 38
    • Joined: 22 Sep 2008

    By the way, reading my post back it seems a bit derogatory to people who like ONS, sorry. I have nothing against anyone who has an ONS, good on you! I'd rather people played safe, but that's their decision.

    1288914023
    Despina Rose [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2582
    • Joined: 18 Apr 2010

    I think ONS are up to the people involved, if both parties are happy with no strings sex and they use protection then thats great. As for what is 'acceptable' and what is not is up to the people involved and not for others to judge.

    A lot of young girls have the stigma of being 'sluts' and getting pregnant because a few people do it then a lot of stigma is attached. Most young people that do have sex are sensible and safe with it, its the few that arent that the stigmas is from.

    Where stds and young people are concerned, part of the high statistics in young people are to do with the fact that they are much more likely to get tested that older generations.

    I hate that when a woman has ONS she is considered a slut but when a man does it he is considered a stud. As the thread title is labelled.

    Thread closed

    This thread is closed, so no new messages can be posted.