U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:00 PM
 
12,033 posts, read 9,814,334 times
Reputation: 15628

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
People can have multiple partners and not have ONS's. I don't know why folk here assume ONS's are the only way to have multiple partners.
I am not sure who is assuming that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:09 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,832,557 times
Reputation: 13432
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew View Post
Why would an ONS assume that you don't know the person?

Choosing not to have sex with someone you don't know well enough to know that they aren't going to bad mouth you or have contracted STDs are whatever is just smart. Basing a "standard" on an objective reason as I mentioned above. Choosing not to have sex with someone only one time is arbitrary.

Most of those things have a reason, a root objective to them.
That is my assumption. Although, perhaps that's not what people mean when they mention ONS's. Sleeping with your best friend(s) once or twice is not what I was thinking when considering ONSs. That's a different thing all together imo. Bad mouthing isn't something that ever came to mind, but STDs are.

I am curious, do you guys think of ONS's as occurrences that happen with people you know and care about or with people you don't know?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:12 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,832,557 times
Reputation: 13432
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew View Post
I am not sure who is assuming that.
Read my posts that are being responded to. I'm talking about ONS's and people are responding to that with multiple partner comments. Now I'm being redundant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:18 PM
 
12,033 posts, read 9,814,334 times
Reputation: 15628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
That is my assumption. Although, perhaps that's not what people mean when they mention ONS's. Sleeping with your best friend(s) once or twice is not what I was thinking when considering ONSs. That's a different thing all together imo. Bad mouthing isn't something that ever came to mind, but STDs are.

I am curious, do you guys think of ONS's as occurrences that happen with people you know and care about or with people you don't know?
You added the care. I don't think that care is necessary. Yes I think that ONS happen between people who know each other. I can think of several (rocking good) times in my life.

But I think that misses the Main Point. I am going to raise kids to apply critical thinking to their choices, not apply arbitrary standards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:27 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,832,557 times
Reputation: 13432
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew View Post
You added the care. Yes I think that ONS happen between people who know each other. I can think of several (rocking good) times in my life.

But I think that misses the Main Point. I am going to raise kids to apply critical thinking to their choices, not apply arbitrary standards.
Sure I added the care. The people we have in our lives are usually there because we care about them. I suppose there are acquaintances who we don't care about like our dentist or the bouncer at the club if that's what you mean. Of course what's rocking good for one person isn't going to be rocking good for another. That's individual. I suppose what's considered arbitrary is going to vary as well. I bet taste comes into play. Go figure.

I forgot to mention, when I did a quick google I found that I was not the only person who assumes ONS's are about engaging strangers. For example "Maybe you just got dumped, haven't had sex in longer than you'd like to admit or are just really horny. Whatever the reason, a one-night stand could be the cure. However, if you're new to sex with strangers, you might be a little leery."
Just some random blog
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:32 PM
 
Location: North America
14,210 posts, read 10,070,151 times
Reputation: 5546
[quote=Knight2009;30990688]Are we born that way though; i.e., wanting "no-strings" relations, from time to time? Or is that something that is culturally-acquired, over time? In other words, left to their own devices and without any other issues impeding being able to successfully enter into a long-term, committed and devoted relationship, do you think most people would want that, or would instead decline it?
[/qoute]

No, because monogamy was an evolution rather than something we always had as humans. True social monogamy didn't really begin until the neolithic, when farming came about. And even then it was not an instant change in behavior. Because of the length of time required to be pregnant, and the high infant mortality rates then, there was a benefit to spreading the seed around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knight2009 View Post
Please see my previous post directly preceding this one, for additional thoughts on your selected portions above...yes I do understand that these are the social norms and protocols today that we have now, in the present. The question is though, have these new social norms of "college/career first before love" actually helped or hurt young people? Please understand, I am in no way advocating for or saying that young women should not have viable career options, and I also do not agree that young women not being able to have good career options is a good thing. Not at all. I'm just saying, why not pursue college *and* career *and* long-term love together, all at the same time? Why does it have to be mutually-exclusive, and sequential in that order...why not parallel-track everything, together all simultaneously?
Because people don't desire to settle down right away is all. You have a certain degree of freedom as a young 20 something year old with a bf/gf, that you lack as 1/2 of a married couple. The level of responsibility isn't nearly the same in the former situation. You tend to still put yourself first when just dating, whereas you put your mate first in marriage. Also for the first time in your life you have financial independence, along with the social independence you gained in college. I don't see how the lack of marriage at that age is harming anyone really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knight2009 View Post
You are correct, but since more young people also married younger at that point in time also, isn't it also possible that there were statistically also more happy, fulfilled marriages back then as well? Because much fewer young people get married today vs. on the scale they used to, isn't the modern data skewed negatively against the past number of happy marriages, in addition to unhappy marriages?
Why would marrying young increase the statistic for happy marriages?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:33 PM
 
Location: North America
14,210 posts, read 10,070,151 times
Reputation: 5546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
People can have multiple partners and not have ONS's. I don't know why folk here assume ONS's are the only way to have multiple partners.
Never said it was . ONS are far from the norm with most people I have found. And no one has ever been wowed by one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:34 PM
 
Location: North America
14,210 posts, read 10,070,151 times
Reputation: 5546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
That is my assumption. Although, perhaps that's not what people mean when they mention ONS's. Sleeping with your best friend(s) once or twice is not what I was thinking when considering ONSs. That's a different thing all together imo. Bad mouthing isn't something that ever came to mind, but STDs are.

I am curious, do you guys think of ONS's as occurrences that happen with people you know and care about or with people you don't know?
I think of a one night stand as some person you find to have sex with, and never contact again. One time sex with a friend is just that, one time sex with a friend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:36 PM
 
Location: North America
14,210 posts, read 10,070,151 times
Reputation: 5546
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew View Post
You added the care. I don't think that care is necessary. Yes I think that ONS happen between people who know each other. I can think of several (rocking good) times in my life.

But I think that misses the Main Point. I am going to raise kids to apply critical thinking to their choices, not apply arbitrary standards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2013, 12:36 PM
 
12,033 posts, read 9,814,334 times
Reputation: 15628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Sure I added the care. The people we have in our lives are usually there because we care about them. I suppose there are acquaintances who we don't care about like our dentist or the bouncer at the club if that's what you mean. Of course what's rocking good for one person isn't going to be rocking good for another. That's individual. I suppose what's considered arbitrary is going to vary as well. I bet taste comes into play. Go figure.

You are just not understanding what I mean by arbitrary. You don't see to understand the difference between an objective outcome and arbitrary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:21 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top