Hacker News Reader

Comment by xentronium | Hacker News Reader

    I am 25 years old, and I have had sex with 50 people.

Dunno, why, but I find that really, really amusing. Because, you know, men are filthy animals, right?

View on HN

I don't see how this is being upvoted. She said that she has had sex with 50 people, not that she has sexually assaulted 50 people. She never says anything bad about sexuality in general, only the unwillingly forced kind. There is no amusing irony or hypocrisy here unless your sense of morality doesn't differentiate between the two acts, which I thought we got over as a society quite a long time ago.

  I am 25 years old, and I have had sex with 50 people.

As an exercise for the men reading this, instead of imagining yourself in that situation, imagine that it's your wife or your girlfriend. Better yet, imagine it's your daughter.

I accidentally upvoted you. It goes without saying that the disgusting crap you wrote there should be downvoted.

(Edit: And now I don’t get why I’m being downvoted. What’s in any way amusing about having sex with 50 people? Sex is fun and sex is normal, why shouldn’t everyone have as much as he or she wants to? She never said that men are filthy animals if they have a lot of sex. She never said that she ever assaulted anyone – that’s what she criticizes, not sex. Sex is not the same as assault. I thought that was obvious.)

Even if you are the type who's fine with abortion, like me, trust me, I spent a good day and a half throwing up every 20 minutes while popping codeine while I experienced agonizing cramping as chunks of bloody goo were expelled from my crotch. (I recommend going the surgical route instead for anyone who's considering the medical abortion)

Well when you offset it with that statement, from her own blog it shows an utter lack of personal responsibility. Sex is fun it also has consequences. I am all for free love and lots of sex, but if you are going to chose a lifestyle with a high volume of partners, it needs to be offset with some level of personal responsibility, for the choices you make. I see it no different than drinking. You can choose to have sex or drink and no one should have any say in that choice, but if you take irresponsible action like driving drunk or having sex without the proper safeguards if pregnancy is not the intended goal, then you should take personal responsibility for your choice to drink and drive or have unprotected sex. When you don't it profoundly affect other peoples lives.

Some guys are serious to death.

First, I am not afraid to call a woman who sleeps with 50 men in ~5 years a slut. Even if it costs me karma on HN, lol.

Second, I dunno what happened there, and if there was an incident, the victim should have gone to police and that'd be it. She could have even written a post about how she made a stand for all the women rights. As of now, whole case looks like pure attention-whoring.

Third, I am not a goddamn rapist, and I am quite sure that we, men, should protect our women.

P.S. I found another gem:

    It hurts and is potentially embarrassing and SCARY,
    because it is a prelude to rape, which in turn is a 
    prelude to death and/or babies.

Wait, what? SCARY babies, oh my gosh.

Sorry, but, again, what’s wrong with sleeping with 50 people by 25? I don’t get it. Or is “slut” supposed to be a compliment? What do you mean when you call someone a “slut”?

(Oh, and let me hand over to you this toddler real quick since you are so damn fond of babies.)

And whole different matter is about babies. A healthy woman, who doesn't want babies because they'll make her fat, does not deserve to live. Her parents gave birth to a worthless creature. European and US people have total demographic disaster because of such women.

    Sorry, but, again, what’s wrong with sleeping with 50 
    people by 25

Honestly, I don't get it what's okay with that. How can I believe that my future wife won't cheat if she changes her partners every now and then? Are you going to tell your daughter "know what? it's not a big deal if you sleep with every stranger".

Since you asked for definition, I went to wikipedia and copied it:

    Slut or slattern is a pejorative term meaning an 
    individual who is sexually promiscuous. The term
    is generally applied to women and used as an insult
    or offensive term of disparagement, meaning "dirty 
    or slovenly."

And no, slut is in no way a compliment. I can't take a morality lecture from someone whose moral principles are far from ideal.

I’m sorry, but I really don’t know where you get the impression that she sleeps with random strangers. She didn’t say that.

I also don’t know how your personal preference for partners with few or no prior sexual partners comes into play here. You may like (just an example) long, monogamous, heterosexual relationships, other people may not, and that’s just fine.

With the numbers involved, it's almost impossible to not have sex with people that are essentially strangers. It's a new partner every month. Whether or not its fun or "moral" if you are having sex with that many people you are an STD vector, even moreso if you're not using protection as evidenced in her abortion comment.

    other people may not, and that’s just fine.

Here's my point. That's not fine. Promiscuity is not the same as polygamy and promiscuity is a thing that should not happen in a healthy society.

I'm not disgusted. The irony is that the essayist seems to be assuming all men are sex-hungry primitives, and 'keeping score' is exactly the sort of thing that makes male chauvinists so annoying. Although her points are completely legitimate, they're obscured by the generalizations and condescending tone.

For what it's worth, she goes on in the comments to point out that some significant number of those 50 were not men. Seeing that she consciously chose the inclusive '50 people' rather than '50 men', I think you may be reading something into the essay that was not intended.

I never assumed she was talking about 50 men, nor do I see what difference it would make. It's the scorekeeping style that struck me as absurd in this context.

My apologies then. I wasn't sure if your response was directed at the original or the edit, and apparently I was wrong. The original didn't strike me as focused on scorekeeping.

No need to apologize, everyone has a unique perspective on issues like these.

Uhm, where did she say that? I think your allegation deserves an exact citation.

> why I'm being downvoted

Your comment was at first a quick snipe, without any reason expressed in it. If you vote incorrectly, you should either leave it or explain your opinion properly, as you have now done. It looks like you've now been upvoted back.

Well, I kind of thought that is was obvious that sex does not equal assault and that I didn’t have to spell it out. I will be even more verbose in the future than I’m already used to be ;-)

That's obvious, but I don't think that's xentronium's point. It seems to be poking fun at the way the differences in the sexes now and through history that the post calls us to consider can be applied to that line. Something like that. I don't claim it to be particularly well thought out.

I really didn't understand why she felt the need to say that, I'm not really sure what the relevance was to sexual assault.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com