3 ms·
>This tacitly implies that women are sex objects and that men only seek them out as such. I find that offensive, but more so than that, sad. Extremely attracti
by xor1 9y ago
>This tacitly implies that women are sex objects and that men only seek them out as such. I find that offensive, but more so than that, sad.
Extremely attractive people belonging to either sex, of all sexual orientations, do this. Extremely attractive men treat women on dating apps as sex objects. Extremely attractive women treat men on dating apps as sex objects. Happens with same-sex pairings too. Not sure why everyone is focusing on gender when it's really looks that matter the most when it comes to behavior and options.
- matt4077 9y agoThey're objecting to the idea that there is no reason, never, for anyone good-looking to commit to anyone. See again the original sentence: "top percentage [get] frequent sex with no reason to commit". That sentence is simply too strong to be true. Nobody is denying that the possibility of easily finding someone for casual may cause some people to hesitate before entering committed relationships. But as it is written, it denies the existence of reasons for commitment other than to secure frequent sex. There must be at least some people who, despite their excellent looks, top IQ, huge penis, and high political office still found a reason to commit to a partner. The previous US president comes to mind...
- xor1 9y agoI think what they really meant was "no expectation to commit". Or "no need to commit". Hopefully that poster returns to clarify.
- eecc 9y agoIn another reply to an indignant comment I suggested that “whith” just adds qualitative description to the first sentence, not implication. Had it been “therefore” it would be a different matter.