Quote:
Originally Posted by HPLovecraft
But if you can't understand why someone may choose to do this with someone else, then, meh, I guess. It'll all go over your head anyways.
|
I understand it perfectly, which is why I think it's dumb. See, if you argue something from fallacious premises, it doesn't matter if someone else makes the same argument and thus agrees with you. You're both... still.... wrong.
In this case, one of the the underlying premises is that sex is something that gets better when you don't do it for 3 months, when in truth, it gets better with practice, just like everything else. Do you end up being a better hockey player by not playing hockey for 3 months? Are you smarter by not studying for 3 months? A better chef by not cooking for 3 months? By this "theory", your peak sexual performance is at virginity's loss, and it's all downhill from there.
The other premise is that abstaining from sex proves your commitment to your partner. No, not having sex with *other people* proves your commitment - not having sex with your partner just adds them to that list of people with whom you are not having sex. Abstention proves something about your willpower, but it has NOTHING to do with commitment. There's women I've slept with but feel no commitment towards, and there are women I've not slept with but would never betray. The concepts have nothing to do with one another.
Now back to the much more entertaining thread derailment.