Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I'd pose virginity itself is not a construct. It's based in a fact; that you are someone who hasn't had sex yet.

But what is sex? Conceptions differ.

virginity, as in someone who has not engaged in intercourse with another member of the same species....

The social construct part does come into play if we wanted (I hope we dont) to discuss various orifices, masturbation and other actions which many would consider foreplay.

Things that are based in fact can still be social constructs.

Fact is, I stole a Mercedes. It has been determined by my society that stealing is bad. Laws are constructs. I'm still in prison though.

The social-constructedness of virginity is in play throughout.

For the record, I have never stolen a Mercedes, and I am not in prison. Also, I am not as opposed to talking orifices as the above poster.

Crystal-Maze wrote:
Also, I am not as opposed to talking orifices as the above poster.

Lol, I only put that there because this is a "PG-13 forum" and some subjects are probably best left undiscussed, even in OT.

Exactly. The fact that anyone gives a feth about whether someone is a virgin is a social construct.

Another social construct: In a true socialist society it is illegal to have a decent brew-up.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Exactly. The fact that anyone gives a feth about whether someone is a virgin is a social construct.

Another social construct: In a true socialist society it is illegal to have a decent brew-up.

You're going to have to elaborate a bit on the brew-up.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Exactly. The fact that anyone gives a feth about whether someone is a virgin is a social construct.

Another social construct: In a true socialist society it is illegal to have a decent brew-up.

In the US, you can make your own Brew (I hope you mean alcohol) and it is legal

Brew-up = making tea, and proper tea is theft.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
The most commonly held definition of virginity is one in which a person has not engaged in intercourse with another being.

I would strongly disagree with that. The whole "technical virgin" thing is something we laugh at, because we "know" that the hypothetical person isn't a virgin. And it's a joke that most people understand just fine. So I'd argue that the commonly-held definition includes at least some additional sex acts, with the exact list being up for debate.

Of course, where we get into the social construct part is if we begin discussing orifices used (please don't), masturbation and other sometimes frowned upon activities.

Exactly! The common use of the term includes at least some of those things, and turns it into a mess where you can no longer point to one specific physical state as defining virgin/non-virgin.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Brew-up = making tea, and proper tea is theft.

That was terrible.

I love it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
The most commonly held definition of virginity is one in which a person has not engaged in intercourse with another being.

I would strongly disagree with that. The whole "technical virgin" thing is something we laugh at, because we "know" that the hypothetical person isn't a virgin. And it's a joke that most people understand just fine. So I'd argue that the commonly-held definition includes at least some additional sex acts, with the exact list being up for debate.

Of course, where we get into the social construct part is if we begin discussing orifices used (please don't), masturbation and other sometimes frowned upon activities.

Exactly! The common use of the term includes at least some of those things, and turns it into a mess where you can no longer point to one specific physical state as defining virgin/non-virgin.

Am I wrong it is in the same vein as the social construct of a slut or a stud?

Being that it is constructed simply as a put down, and is seen as less than?

Because I know the pressure and societal want for people to express themselves sexually is a pretty abundant thing.

This thread has gotten weird.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Brew-up = making tea, and proper tea is theft.

Is that Earl Grey or RUssian tea?

 Frazzled wrote:
This thread has gotten weird.

I concur to that sentiment. Its weird but I find it fascinating.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:


Oh man, I'd love to talk about sneezing and the bizarre social requirement to acknowledge a sneeze; even for strangers. Typically that acknowledgment is in the form of saying "Bless You" but there are other variants too. What I find interesting is how upset people get if you don't say something after they sneeze. Again, even strangers.

I am familiar with why we say bless you, but I doubt most people who utter it reflexively when someone around them sneezes truly believe the superstitious elements that are embedded in the phrase.

But still, people get irritated if you don't say something after they blow mucus. Why we feel the need to elevate one gross bodily function over others is beyond me, but acknowledging a sneeze is definitely one social construct I'd like to see fade away.

There are a bunch of body things that I query occasionally.

Why do we care about other people's teeth? If they're not causing pain, I mean.
Why is it acceptable to see in someone ears, but not their mouth (yawning) or up their nose?
Why do we care about the weight of folk we don't personally know, outside of situations that affect us?

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
The most commonly held definition of virginity is one in which a person has not engaged in intercourse with another being.

I would strongly disagree with that. The whole "technical virgin" thing is something we laugh at, because we "know" that the hypothetical person isn't a virgin. And it's a joke that most people understand just fine. So I'd argue that the commonly-held definition includes at least some additional sex acts, with the exact list being up for debate.

Of course, where we get into the social construct part is if we begin discussing orifices used (please don't), masturbation and other sometimes frowned upon activities.

Exactly! The common use of the term includes at least some of those things, and turns it into a mess where you can no longer point to one specific physical state as defining virgin/non-virgin.

Am I wrong it is in the same vein as the social construct of a slut or a stud?

Being that it is constructed simply as a put down, and is seen as less than?

Because I know the pressure and societal want for people to express themselves sexually is a pretty abundant thing.

The constructedness of virginity is linked in with the stud/slut thing.

The woman who has a lot of sex is viewed as a slut (bad thing). The man who has a lot of sex is a stud (good thing).
So 'virgin' is less of a put-down in that context.

But the older the person gets, the more 'virgin' becomes a put down. This applies to both genders, but at different ages - C.F. 40-year-old virgin.

Different age groups will view virginity as a good thing in different contexts. Older people will continue to see it as a virtue in a young woman after her friends have begun to use it in a derogatory manner against her.

A father is more likely to view his son's virginity as unimportant (or even problematic) than his mother. The mother is less likely to see her daughter's loss of virginity as problematic than the father (see shotgun wedding tropes).

On the topic of social constructs: The idea of young vs old in relationships.

http://mic.com/articles/127215/daniel-craig-just-called-out-hollywoods-sexist-aging-double-standard#.VruT9pzB7

Found this article recently. Very interesting. Craig is supercool.

 Ashiraya wrote:
On the topic of social constructs: The idea of young vs old in relationships.

http://mic.com/articles/127215/daniel-craig-just-called-out-hollywoods-sexist-aging-double-standard#.VruT9pzB7

Found this article recently. Very interesting. Craig is supercool.

Very interesting

Yes age is a social construct espcially when it comes to how old people are pecieved as wiser or 'better' It is very common and actually pretty interesting how this mindset was started.

Though I do not study sociology. So I know very little on these types of subjects. But On psychology and why people think certain patterns or how to predict people or control people. (Indirect control through environment.

 Ashiraya wrote:
On the topic of social constructs: The idea of young vs old in relationships.

http://mic.com/articles/127215/daniel-craig-just-called-out-hollywoods-sexist-aging-double-standard#.VruT9pzB7

Found this article recently. Very interesting. Craig is supercool.

Wasn't there an astronomical level of jimmies rustled when Stephen Fry married someone younger than him?
I was bewildered then, as I am bewildered now.

Age is open to criticism from folk who would balk at commenting on race, gender, etc. for fear of repercussion. I was going to say "seemingly", but from an insider perspective, it absolutely is.

My partner is 25-26 years my senior. We get gak about this on a level you wouldn't believe. People in the street pointing if we hold hands, staff offering us fathers-day discounts in restaurants (you bet your ass we do that anyway), people feeling it's okay to openly comment on it in his work environment (very rare, but it happens). Can you imagine the HR hoo-haa if someone started digging about him being gay or black? Those things are not equatable with age. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we're still perfectly okay with treating people like gak over this one aspect.
I had a friend so vehemently against our dating that he drove home from work and threatened to beat my partner over it. I could understand if I was a 15 year old dating a coach, but I was a few days off turning 20 and had my own apartment.

I dunno if the current teen to twenties generation is a bit better about this? Thinking back, I didn't befriend him because he was "an older guy", we were just really close friends for a good while, and it seemed a natural escalation. Back then, both of us were crapping ourselves because of the age. I thought he would see it as some idol crush like a student gets on a teacher, and he thought I'd view him as a massive lech. In the end we just had a massive amount of shared views, loves, interests, and we gave it a go. Eight years on and I barely register the age gap. Until some clownboat drags it up for us.

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
On the topic of social constructs: The idea of young vs old in relationships.

http://mic.com/articles/127215/daniel-craig-just-called-out-hollywoods-sexist-aging-double-standard#.VruT9pzB7

Found this article recently. Very interesting. Craig is supercool.

Wasn't there an astronomical level of jimmies rustled when Stephen Fry married someone younger than him?
I was bewildered then, as I am bewildered now.

Age is open to criticism from folk who would balk at commenting on race, gender, etc. for fear of repercussion. I was going to say "seemingly", but from an insider perspective, it absolutely is.

My partner is 25-26 years my senior. We get gak about this on a level you wouldn't believe. People in the street pointing if we hold hands, staff offering us fathers-day discounts in restaurants (you bet your ass we do that anyway), people feeling it's okay to openly comment on it in his work environment (very rare, but it happens). Can you imagine the HR hoo-haa if someone started digging about him being gay or black? Those things are not equatable with age. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we're still perfectly okay with treating people like gak over this one aspect.
I had a friend so vehemently against our dating that he drove home from work and threatened to beat my partner over it. I could understand if I was a 15 year old dating a coach, but I was a few days off turning 20 and had my own apartment.

I dunno if the current teen to twenties generation is a bit better about this? Thinking back, I didn't befriend him because he was "an older guy", we were just really close friends for a good while, and it seemed a natural escalation. Back then, both of us were crapping ourselves because of the age. I thought he would see it as some idol crush like a student gets on a teacher, and he thought I'd view him as a massive lech. In the end we just had a massive amount of shared views, loves, interests, and we gave it a go. Eight years on and I barely register the age gap. Until some clownboat drags it up for us.

Where I am from (Rich Area, I mean fething rich) They see that as a good thing, especially if the guy has money. The girls in my area are literally taught to marry older men especially if they have money :/

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
On the topic of social constructs: The idea of young vs old in relationships.

http://mic.com/articles/127215/daniel-craig-just-called-out-hollywoods-sexist-aging-double-standard#.VruT9pzB7

Found this article recently. Very interesting. Craig is supercool.

Wasn't there an astronomical level of jimmies rustled when Stephen Fry married someone younger than him?
I was bewildered then, as I am bewildered now.

Age is open to criticism from folk who would balk at commenting on race, gender, etc. for fear of repercussion. I was going to say "seemingly", but from an insider perspective, it absolutely is.

My partner is 25-26 years my senior. We get gak about this on a level you wouldn't believe. People in the street pointing if we hold hands, staff offering us fathers-day discounts in restaurants (you bet your ass we do that anyway), people feeling it's okay to openly comment on it in his work environment (very rare, but it happens). Can you imagine the HR hoo-haa if someone started digging about him being gay or black? Those things are not equatable with age. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we're still perfectly okay with treating people like gak over this one aspect.
I had a friend so vehemently against our dating that he drove home from work and threatened to beat my partner over it. I could understand if I was a 15 year old dating a coach, but I was a few days off turning 20 and had my own apartment.

I dunno if the current teen to twenties generation is a bit better about this? Thinking back, I didn't befriend him because he was "an older guy", we were just really close friends for a good while, and it seemed a natural escalation. Back then, both of us were crapping ourselves because of the age. I thought he would see it as some idol crush like a student gets on a teacher, and he thought I'd view him as a massive lech. In the end we just had a massive amount of shared views, loves, interests, and we gave it a go. Eight years on and I barely register the age gap. Until some clownboat drags it up for us.

Where I am from (Rich Area, I mean fething rich) They see that as a good thing, especially if the guy has money. The girls in my area are literally taught to marry older men especially if they have money :/

Same isn't usually taught to men looking for male partners, though.

Crystal-Maze wrote:

Same isn't usually taught to men looking for male partners, though.

No it is not! Its a very weird social construct.

I never really understood it. (as in terms of reality)

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

Age is open to criticism from folk who would balk at commenting on race, gender, etc. for fear of repercussion. I was going to say "seemingly", but from an insider perspective, it absolutely is.

And depending on where you are, race is still openly criticized as well.

I'm white and my wife is black, and we still frequently get reactions from people. It can be as obvious as people actually commenting that the races shouldn't mix, more subdued like people definitely staring with a disapproving look when a mixed couple holds hands in the street, and minor stuff like going to a restaurant and being asked "separate checks?" all the freaking time.

It's not just some isolated thing that we imagine. We have a lot of mixed couple friends (2x black/white, Hispanic/white, native/white, Asian/white) and they all frequently experience the same thing.

Just thought I'd put something in here... Warning, contains heresy by the bucket load. Couldn't get half way through the first paragraph without the urge to "do something really stupid"

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Feverywomanweekly.com%2Fhow-can-i-convince-my-3-year-old-theyre-transgender-go-ask-jane%2F&h=CAQEDUXK0

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Just thought I'd put something in here... Warning, contains heresy by the bucket load. Couldn't get half way through the first paragraph without the urge to "do something really stupid"

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Feverywomanweekly.com%2Fhow-can-i-convince-my-3-year-old-theyre-transgender-go-ask-jane%2F&h=CAQEDUXK0

I skipped straight to the response when I saw the headline... Ho-Leee Feth... seriously, wtf is wrong with people?

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Just thought I'd put something in here... Warning, contains heresy by the bucket load. Couldn't get half way through the first paragraph without the urge to "do something really stupid"

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Feverywomanweekly.com%2Fhow-can-i-convince-my-3-year-old-theyre-transgender-go-ask-jane%2F&h=CAQEDUXK0

I skipped straight to the response when I saw the headline... Ho-Leee Feth... seriously, wtf is wrong with people?

And Peregrine wonders why I call it heresy... this

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And Peregrine wonders why I call it heresy... this

I see. So your best argument is someone who is either part of an extreme and irrelevant minority or trolling (and it's a perfectly-crafted troll post IMO), ignoring the vast majority of transgender people who don't say stupid stuff like that, and label a whole group of people "heresy"?

Edit: dear god, are you serious? Did you even spend 30 seconds looking at the site you were quoting from? The whole site is such a blatant parody I can't believe you would actually fall for it.

 d-usa wrote:
And depending on where you are, race is still openly criticized as well.

I'm white and my wife is black, and we still frequently get reactions from people. It can be as obvious as people actually commenting that the races shouldn't mix, more subdued like people definitely staring with a disapproving look when a mixed couple holds hands in the street, and minor stuff like going to a restaurant and being asked "separate checks?" all the freaking time.

It's not just some isolated thing that we imagine. We have a lot of mixed couple friends (2x black/white, Hispanic/white, native/white, Asian/white) and they all frequently experience the same thing.

I can't pretend I can imagine how that feels. That is hideous to read.
But I'm guessing we both understand how it feels to be so completely enamored with someone that you don't see those trivial differences, and the fething crash to Earth whenever it's pointed out for your benefit. It shouldn't hurt because it's their idiocy. it shouldn't affect my day because it's their idiocy. But perhaps because it's two of us, andI'm not shrugging for one, I'm shrugging for him as well, it sticks.

I wasn't trying to equate age, race, gender, and I hope that I didn't hurt anyone by seemingly doing so. I was trying to say that people who think of themselves as "too good" to be racist/etc, will happily gossip about this as though it's absolutely fine.

Got to admit I don't understand the "separate cheques" comment, though. Maybe that's me being slow. I have never ever had the waiter pass me the bill though, in 8 years. I'll hold up my card and there's the almost audible mental recalibration.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Where I am from (Rich Area, I mean fething rich) They see that as a good thing, especially if the guy has money. The girls in my area are literally taught to marry older men especially if they have money :/

Oh wow. I never thought it'd be viewed as positive anywhere. That's nuts, but I guess that's culture.

The responses I get, and I can detach enough to recant some, but others I can't give muscle-effort to typing:
- Are you in his will? / What's he dying from?
- How much does he earn? / Do you share a bank account?
- So which uncle/family friend got to you when you were a kid? / [General daddy issues comment]
- Are you doing this to piss off your parents? (Because me being a total fruit didn't potentially tick that box already)
- What is he paying you? / So what's your monthly allowance?
- The opposite of cradle snatcher is apparently "grave robber".

I'm not here to justify my relationship (I didn't have to post about it at all), I'm just saying these are things that people come out with upon meeting/seeing us. That they thing are acceptable.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And Peregrine wonders why I call it heresy... this

I see. So your best argument is someone who is either part of an extreme and irrelevant minority or trolling (and it's a perfectly-crafted troll post IMO), ignoring the vast majority of transgender people who don't say stupid stuff like that, and label a whole group of people "heresy"?

Edit: dear god, are you serious? Did you even spend 30 seconds looking at the site you were quoting from? The whole site is such a blatant parody I can't believe you would actually fall for it.

I was more implying feminism. I know... 4 transgender people... all are girls who think they are dudes and 3 of them have some type of disorder (Depression/anxiety, Sociopathy and what I am going to say is nymphomania) and the last one is just a to everyone...

Scratch that, I think theres a dude who thinks hes a girl but he scares the crap out of me.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I was more implying feminism. I know... 4 transgender people... all are girls who think they are dudes and 3 of them have some type of disorder (Depression/anxiety, Sociopathy and what I am going to say is nymphomania) and the last one is just a to everyone...

Scratch that, I think theres a dude who thinks hes a girl but he scares the crap out of me.

I'm really trying and failing to think of how you could possibly make this post more offensive without getting banned.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I was more implying feminism. I know... 4 transgender people... all are girls who think they are dudes and 3 of them have some type of disorder (Depression/anxiety, Sociopathy and what I am going to say is nymphomania) and the last one is just a to everyone...

Scratch that, I think theres a dude who thinks hes a girl but he scares the crap out of me.

I'm really trying and failing to think of how you could possibly make this post more offensive without getting banned.

I am stating my opinion on the matter. I never refer to any of the, by their preferred pronoun, but I never use the other pronoun. I always use their name when I take to them or about them. I don't try to hurt their feelings.

I dated the sociopath for a month and that was... well... difficult

Also, I didn't say, "Them filthy Transgenders! We should murder the lot of them and kick them out of our country!" because that is offensive and the only reason I don't like feminism is because my step-mom never wanted me and treated my little sister like a goddess and now my little sister is practically a clone of my hated step-mom. We all have reasons Peregrine

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I am stating my opinion on the matter.

No, you're being a tasteless bigot. Saying "theres a dude who thinks hes a girl" is not stating an opinion, it's hate speech.

I never refer to any of the, by their preferred pronoun, but I never use the other pronoun.

Which is blatantly offensive. If someone asks you to use a particular pronoun when talking about them then you're a rude if you ignore that request. At best. At worst you're a bigot.

At this point he is just a parody.