3 ms·

Wouldn’t this mean that promiscuity was increasing? Do you have an evidence that it is?

TZubiri 2y ago
"Wouldn’t this mean that promiscuity was increasing?" Maybe it would mean that? I see the logic, we have more vaccines and cures now so to reach the same risk there would need to be more sex, according to the theory. But it doesn't mean it is increasing now or that it generally increases over time. As the risk of stds fluctuate, so would promiscuity, albeit with a time displacement and inversely of course. So that's what the hypothesis would predict. A steep decrease in promiscuity following a pandemic, and then a gradual growth as a cure for it or vaccine is found. Regarding the present time. I think we would be in a promiscuous phase, yes, the std risks are quite low. Evidence? How about dropping marriage and increasing divorce rates? Divorces even peak in the aids pandemic. The effect of cures for gonorrhea ,clam etc.. I don't know exact dates, but generally it does coincide that we've been curing them for the past century and marriage is becoming less prevalent.
- lostlogin 2y ago
  I don’t think that marriage indicates a lack of promiscuity.
  - TZubiri 2y ago
    It's literally a vow to monogamy. Maybe you can argue that married people are as promiscuous as single people, but at that point the onus is back on you.
    - kelseyfrog 2y ago
      Ah, to live in a world where people say what they mean and mean what they say
    - lostlogin 2y ago
      To be clear, I asked if you had any evidence of the increased promiscuity you claim exists. Any onus is on you.
      - TZubiri 2y ago
        I offered marriage data, you rejected that, what is your threshold of evidence, do you want me to install cctvs and record people fucking? You tell me what type of evidence would satisfy you?
        lostlogin 2y ago
        > You tell me what type of evidence would satisfy you? Maybe some data or a study. You offered opinion on marriages collapsing. That’s not evidence of promiscuity.

"Wouldn’t this mean that promiscuity was increasing?" Maybe it would mean that? I see the logic, we have more vaccines and cures now so to reach the same risk there would need to be more sex, according to the theory. But it doesn't mean it is increasing now or that it generally increases over time. As the risk of stds fluctuate, so would promiscuity, albeit with a time displacement and inversely of course. So that's what the hypothesis would predict. A steep decrease in promiscuity following a pandemic, and then a gradual growth as a cure for it or vaccine is found. Regarding the present time. I think we would be in a promiscuous phase, yes, the std risks are quite low. Evidence? How about dropping marriage and increasing divorce rates? Divorces even peak in the aids pandemic. The effect of cures for gonorrhea ,clam etc.. I don't know exact dates, but generally it does coincide that we've been curing them for the past century and marriage is becoming less prevalent.

lostlogin 2y ago
I don’t think that marriage indicates a lack of promiscuity.
- TZubiri 2y ago
  It's literally a vow to monogamy. Maybe you can argue that married people are as promiscuous as single people, but at that point the onus is back on you.
  - kelseyfrog 2y ago
    Ah, to live in a world where people say what they mean and mean what they say
  - lostlogin 2y ago
    To be clear, I asked if you had any evidence of the increased promiscuity you claim exists. Any onus is on you.
    - TZubiri 2y ago
      I offered marriage data, you rejected that, what is your threshold of evidence, do you want me to install cctvs and record people fucking? You tell me what type of evidence would satisfy you?
      - lostlogin 2y ago
        > You tell me what type of evidence would satisfy you? Maybe some data or a study. You offered opinion on marriages collapsing. That’s not evidence of promiscuity.