I think you'll find more sympathy on Tumblr. No one here cares about BS social justice.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh man, whenever stuff like this is voted down it blows my mind.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Whether or not you're a virgin is important to your doctors, future sexual partners... etc. Many things occur after lose of virginity... such as the possible breakage of the Hyman, and obviously the risk of STDs. The term 'virgin' in not a phrase coined to shame sluts, it's when we call someone who has had sex. Are you going to rant about how we call unattached people 'single?' I think not. Don't worry, you'll understand what's it's like to lose you're virginity some day. I probably won't. (cry2)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The OP is trying to say it shouldn't be an important distinction, it's an instinct, why do we find so much wrong with it? And you can get STDs and tear your hymen without being penetrated. Do we have a word for someone who hasn't been kissed, or hugged, or given head? I think that's all it's trying to say.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Whether or not you are sexually active is does impact your healthcare but I honestly don't think your doctor cares whether or not you have sex as long as they keep getting paid. The term virgin is a social construct, not a biological classification. You really can't deny that. I don't think the idea of virginity is inherently evil or oppressive. I don't think it's bad to believe that refraining from sex helps maintain your personal sense of spiritual purity. I don't agree with it, but theirs nothing wrong with having your own opinion about sex and spirituality. The idea of virginity can be (and often is) used for slut-shaming. It's sick that people judge smart healthy women simply because they choose to have sex and aren't "virgins". We shouldn't think of sexually active people as dirty, evil, or stupid. Some future sexual partners might care about your virginity if they subscribe to the whole no sex=spiritual purity doctrine but many people (like me) don't care about "virginity". If I really love a guy, I'd want to be with him regardless of what is sexual history was. STDs are an entirely different issue, however.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Also, hymens don't work like that. You can read about how hymens work here: http://www.scarleteen.com/article/body/my_corona_the_anatomy_formerly_known_as_the_hymen_the_myths_that_surround_it

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"non-virgin"

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Not being a virgin is nothing to be ashamed of. The only way you're a slut is if you're very promiscuous, so don't blame a word for a lifestyle.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Sadly, lots of intelligent kind people get labeled as slut simply because they choose to have a very active sex life. Besides, there's nothing wrong with being promiscuous so long as you make safe responsible choices. Being a virgin is certainly not something to be ashamed of, but it's also a really dumb thing to be proud of. If not having sex is the most amazing valuable thing you've every accomplished, you have a really sad life.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't think there's anything wrong with safe promiscuity :) It just seems like the OP is saying that if you're not a virgin, people will always automatically call you a slut, which isn't true because not being a virgin doesn't even necessarily mean you've slept with more than 1 person.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

This post is stupid I.m.o. You think that people who have had sex need a designated name? I might need further clarification. I don't quite understand...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

In my opionion the OP is saying it's weird that people who HAVEN'T had sex have a name, not that people who have sex should have one. I don't think that not having had sex makes you all that different from someone who has.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Alright I understand the post now. I agree in a way. Virgins, (given) aren't any more different or special than non-virgins. Or, people who have had sex.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

We have two word, 'sexually' and 'active'.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't know why this is so voted down. If you look at the historical reasons for creating the word, it was exactly to look down on (mostly) women who had had sex before they were married and were no longer "pure".

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Because a great number of people on this site are young virginal religious female pseudo feminists who think that being one kind of girl is okay, but not another.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yep, unfortunately. And god do I hate the word 'slut' because that was entirely made to look down on sexually active women. Why is there no derogatory word to look down on men who are promiscuous? Because it doesn't matter, so why should anyone care how many people someone has slept with. Blah it makes me angry.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Wow, I guess I was pretty angry when I wrote that last post, sorry guys. I guess you can call a guy a player, but to a guy it's almost a badge of honor. I just hate it when people think feminism means looking down at another female for being feminine or sexually active or having the audacity to be a stay at home mother, that is not feminism. And I'm not even a damn feminist.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The other fucked up thing is that to really call a guy out for being too promiscuous, all we have are words made for women with 'man' added as a prefix. Manwhore, manslut, etc. It's like the entire concept of sleeping around is a solely female thing.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Reminded me of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LpHfPOM6GQ&feature=relmfu

by Anonymous 12 years ago