When people (men and women) seek out casual sex, sometimes it does come from an unhealthy place, but sometimes it does not. It does involve some risk, emotiona

When people (men and women) seek out casual sex, sometimes it does come from an unhealthy place, but sometimes it does not. It does involve some risk, emotional and physical, but that risk can be fairly small. These facts differ a bit by gender but not nearly as much as many people assume. So, let's stipulate that someone is looking for casual sexual encounters. Wouldn't it be counterproductive for her to not have sex on the first and only date? If she's obligate-kinky, do you think it would be healthier for her casual encounters to consist of vanilla sex she doesn't enjoy? What would you do at a sex party --- only have sex with people you'd kissed at the previous one? Or do you think going to sex parties in the first place is a "red flag"? As for the tacit implication you identified that "kinky acts with a girl on a first date" is an achievement, I also found that framing a little offputting. The article contains a peculiar mix of exploitative pickup-artist memes ("SMV", "negging", "easy-mode levers like money", "hitting a bodycount", casual dating as a way to develop serious-relationship skills, "hoe phase") with explicit rejection of them ("honesty", "vulnerability", "is it alright if I kiss you?", "Sex isn't something you 'get' from women—it's something you create together", "trust is necessary if you want to have great sex", "other people who play games, a perfect little soup of toxicity", "Be honest, be present, be genuinely interested in your partner's pleasure".) I'm not really sure what's going on there. Is he incoherent, is he trying to phrase his radical message in redpill language so he can deprogram the redpillers, or are we maybe just misinterpreting him?