Mister Pink Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 How about losing your virginity to an AIDS person who happens to like de-virginising girls like in the movie Kids? Not embarrassing but tragic more like. ＲＵＢＢΣＲ░Ｊ♢ＨＮＮＹ （スオッ） Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K20 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 anyone who says being a virgin needs to be shot... hows that worse then having an STD... never to have kids, or cracking of the skin, or itching constantly down below... or worse.... getting a penis cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDANZ96 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 So you guys think that having a terrible STD that affects your life as whole, sometimes forever like AIDS, is better than being virgin? I don't know if its because you guys are immature enough to think like that, or because you care too much about other's opinions. But either way, its ridiculous how people think like that. You don't need to be a virgin forever, one day you will find someone and thats it, however regarding STDs... you will be more than just embarassed, you will be sick and ill, and no one likes to be ill. What a bunch of idiots we have in this forum, ain't I right ccrogers15? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Nixon Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 anyone who says being a virgin needs to be shot... hows that worse then having an STD... never to have kids, or cracking of the skin, or itching constantly down below... or worse.... getting a penis cut. So you guys think that having a terrible STD that affects your life as whole, sometimes forever like AIDS, is better than being virgin? I don't know if its because you guys are immature enough to think like that, or because you care too much about other's opinions. But either way, its ridiculous how people think like that. You don't need to be a virgin forever, one day you will find someone and thats it, however regarding STDs... you will be more than just embarassed, you will be sick and ill, and no one likes to be ill. What a bunch of idiots we have in this forum, ain't I right ccrogers15? Frustrated virgins detected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyper Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 (edited) This thread should be locked. Smells stupidity. It's like asking whenever it de facto is good or bad to like colour x. If you're ashamed of who you are, or what you think, that just shows that you are not very confident in yourself. If you fall to peer pressure, like the creator of this thread somehow have been affected by, then that is the question you should find an answer for. Because if you believe in yourself you don' have to ask other people such a stupid question. Besides, this is a internet forum. Pretty much tells it all. Edited February 12, 2013 by Cyper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ll rdny ll Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I'm sorry, but anyone who said being a virgin is more embarrassing are probably virgins. Knowing you're clean is worse than a drippy wank? That makes sense guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 (edited) Don't hate the player. Hate the game.... The vast majority of us American males lose our virginity on society's time instead of our own. In most cases, we do this because our culture has created a sexual landscape antagonistic of those who don't start having sex in high school. Everyone says "girls don't care"; but that's idealistic bullsh*t. Your average "nubile"/sexually cherished girl from an American male's perspective will be experienced enough by her lower 20s to have standards in the bedroom. As a male competing with others who are caring towards that girl as well as a good lover, we have to meet those standards through "early" experience. This is just a result of a culture that is relatively loose with teenage sex due to our media, "locker room talk/guy talk", natural male pride, the sexually-liberated generation before us, and many other factors. Being a virgin is all in one's head. Anyone can get pussy. It's the standards that trouble people. OT:This topic is far too vague for a consensus of any sort. It assumes that all types of STDs and all types of virgins carry the same labels. - Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and a few others are definitely worth catching if the sexual experience is enjoyable enough given that these STDs are very treatable with antibiotics. I personally know people who have contracted these 'diseases' and no longer have them. It just requires not having sex for a brief period - which virgins are doing anyway. It's logically justified to prefer STDs over being a virgin in this case. - Unless one is on their deathbed, HIV/AIDS, Herpes, HPV (only the strains that cause warts), Syphilis, the various Hepatitis conditions, and many other serious STDs are never worth it IMO. The label of being a virgin should be perceived differently with the circumstance - age, professional position, health, social class, etc. Dying a virgin is different territory than being a sexless young person. Going to the grave with no sex is obviously worse than any STD given that the consequences of the more serious STDs aren't even immediate. Edited February 12, 2013 by canttakemyid "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3niX Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Well... Going to the grave with no sex is obviously worse than any STD given that the consequences of the more serious STDs aren't even immediate. This strikes me as rather interesting. Care to explain a little further why you think never losing ones virginity is worse than the prospect of a grave illness (perhaps even the likelihood of death)? At first glance it strikes me as a social dogma. I can even see some sort of explanation why such a view is dominant (literal death is more favorable than a genetic death if it implies the chance of reproducing). But surely, such evolutionary mechanism in todays world is rather obsolete, considering how societal norms have changed the roles of men and women. So, rationally, I can't find a single justification for such a view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) Well... Going to the grave with no sex is obviously worse than any STD given that the consequences of the more serious STDs aren't even immediate. This strikes me as rather interesting. Care to explain a little further why you think never losing ones virginity is worse than the prospect of a grave illness (perhaps even the likelihood of death)? At first glance it strikes me as a social dogma. I can even see some sort of explanation why such a view is dominant (literal death is more favorable than a genetic death if it implies the chance of reproducing). But surely, such evolutionary mechanism in todays world is rather obsolete, considering how societal norms have changed the roles of men and women. So, rationally, I can't find a single justification for such a view. You obviously didn't read or understand my entire post because this is quoted out of context. I was pointing out how having good sex increases the overall pleasure involved in being a human. If you won't live to experience the subsequent downside anyway (being on your deathbed), then you have nothing but the upside to experience. Edited February 13, 2013 by canttakemyid "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryuclan Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Well... Going to the grave with no sex is obviously worse than any STD given that the consequences of the more serious STDs aren't even immediate. This strikes me as rather interesting. Care to explain a little further why you think never losing ones virginity is worse than the prospect of a grave illness (perhaps even the likelihood of death)? At first glance it strikes me as a social dogma. I can even see some sort of explanation why such a view is dominant (literal death is more favorable than a genetic death if it implies the chance of reproducing). But surely, such evolutionary mechanism in todays world is rather obsolete, considering how societal norms have changed the roles of men and women. So, rationally, I can't find a single justification for such a view. You obviously didn't read or understand my entire post because this is quoted out of context. I was pointing out how having good sex increases the overall pleasure involved in being a human. If you won't live to experience the subsequent downside anyway (being on your deathbed), then you have nothing but the upside to experience. Yes, but if you're a virgin then you don't know what you're missing. So, why would that even matter in the least. We think sex improves our lives because we are told it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3niX Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Well... You obviously didn't read or understand my entire post because this is quoted out of context. I did read it all and tried to comprehend to the best of my ability. You pointed out that judging such an issue is futile but then went on to a rather absolute statement right in the end. Thats also the reason it struck me as interesting. I was pointing out how having good sex increases the overall pleasure involved in being a human. If you won't live to experience the subsequent downside anyway (being on your deathbed), then you have nothing but the upside to experience. Im not exactly sure how and where you pointed it out... but anyway. I could argue (if I understand the point you're making correctly) that being on the deathbed excludes you from other potential positive experiences which could outweigh this one particular one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Well... You obviously didn't read or understand my entire post because this is quoted out of context. I did read it all and tried to comprehend to the best of my ability. You pointed out that judging such an issue is futile but then went on to a rather absolute statement right in the end. Thats also the reason it struck me as interesting. I was pointing out how having good sex increases the overall pleasure involved in being a human. If you won't live to experience the subsequent downside anyway (being on your deathbed), then you have nothing but the upside to experience. Im not exactly sure how and where you pointed it out... but anyway. I could argue (if I understand the point you're making correctly) that being on the deathbed excludes you from other potential positive experiences which could outweigh this one particular one. Then forgive me for my brevity in the past post. To be clear, the general aim in life is to increase pleasure and satisfaction while decreasing the suffering. I'm looking at this from bio-chemical perspective. The chemicals in the brain control everything there is to the remainder of someone's emotional existence. The adult human body is genetically programmed to want sex because it results in a positive response from the brain. Why would someone on their deathbed avoid sex on a basis of avoiding life threatening STDs when they are to die anyway? As long as the symptoms aren't immediate, it would be in this person's best interest to have sex if they had even the slightest desire (with the right person). This is the case only because it chemically increases the pleasure netted from their human existence. @ryuclan Sex doesn't feel good because society tells us it feels good. It's inherently a pleasuring experience with the right person. The vast majority of virgins have been aroused before and/or masturbate so your claim that sex doesn't matter to virgins just because they don't have sexual experiences to go by is invalid. Sex brings pleasure in the same form that masturbation does (ejaculation) and then some - oxytocin, increased stimulation to the genitals, a fun workout, and socially bonding with another person. Not saying that any sex will do the trick; but in the grand scheme of things, sex it's much like eating sweet buttery desserts, drinking sweet drinks, and sleeping on soft surfaces in the sense that most people would rather engage in it than not for the sake of pleasure. "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryuclan Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 I'm not talking about the physical good feeling one has while having sex. I'm talking about feeling good about yourself because you are sexually active. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lock n' Stock Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 STDs, without a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 I'm not talking about the physical good feeling one has while having sex. I'm talking about feeling good about yourself because you are sexually active. I never said anything about sex being the be-all end-all route to happiness either. ALL rewarding behavior carries a corresponding risk. I'm just saying that it's worth having in life as with any other pleasure. "Feeling good about" oneself is a matter of self esteem. Of course unlucky people and bad decision makers won't benefit from having a sex life, but the vast majority of humans do benefit from it. There's no denying that. "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppelincheetah Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Which is more embarrassing? Depends on your age. Being a virgin at 30+ would likely make conversations about sex awkward. phew i'm only 28. Almost 29 though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwabs Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Which is more embarrassing? Depends on your age. Being a virgin at 30+ would likely make conversations about sex awkward. phew i'm only 28. Almost 29 though Then you better hurry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeppelincheetah Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Which is more embarrassing? Depends on your age. Being a virgin at 30+ would likely make conversations about sex awkward. phew i'm only 28. Almost 29 though Then you better hurry I'm not in a hurry though. I'm trying to find the right girl. I could've had sex two times but didn't do it because 1) the girls were sluts and 2) I wasn't attracted to them. I think if I find the right girl I can wing it and say I'm a Christian or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownBear Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Depends, I'd take a bit of chlamidiya if it meant not dying a virgin. However if anything's growing out, falling off or discharging then I'd rather die with concrete bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TellEmRye Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Neither of them are embarrassing, an STD you may look a bit irresponsible however, and people, especially boys, seem to look at virgins as if they're not a 'man' which i've never understood. I've never been the type of guy to show off about sex or anything, I just don't believe it in and feel that a real gentleman should never kiss and tell. Obviously I discuss my sex life with friends, but that's usually to close friends, i'm not one to boast at all I usually keep most of it between me and the lady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now