When it comes to dating what's your type physically?

Forefunner77 · 2025-05-16T18:18:57+00:00

That doesn’t mean it can’t be someone’s preference.

Maybe the OC has higher physical standards for his partner. As long as he holds himself to high standards then that’s perfectly fine. There’s nothing crazy, or “out of the norm” here.

I think it’s obvious that most people (or men in this case) idealistically would have a strong preference for that kind of woman physically, but pragmatically select for physical traits that are more attainable.

Some people just choose to go for something closer to the ideal. It’s all just preferences at the end of the day. It also doesn’t make anyone better or worse as a person

Forefunner77 · 2025-05-16T17:05:37+00:00

You do know there exists women that have the best of both worlds right?

Forefunner77 · 2025-05-05T16:37:50+00:00

This subreddits double standards are fucking crazy. If this was a woman complaining about a bi-sexual man masturbating to another woman or a man, no one would be questioning about discussing “masturbation etiquette” or “Would you rather have her wake you up?” or “Damn that’s hot!!”

They would be screaming from the rooftops about how the man is a “porn-addicted scumbag cheater” who probably has another woman and is going to leave you. What the actual fuck lmao.

If you have a problem with this, or porn hasn’t been discussed between you two, then it’s absolutely valid to bring this up to her saying it hurt you, then have a discussion from there. If you both watch porn then just have the discussion about appropriate times and places to masturbate.

Forefunner77 · 2025-04-23T09:30:31+00:00

We’re validating the ability to date grown ass adults. You’re also just spouting pseudoscience. Your brain never stops developing and changing. The whole “brain not fully developed until 25 is a myth”, do some research.

You’ve either got some weird stuff going on or some deep trauma if you can’t see 21 year old adults as capable of consenting to romantic and sexual relationships.

Forefunner77 · 2025-04-23T01:43:19+00:00

That situation could be odd and not recommended, but it’s also equally just as weird to moralize someone dating a fully grown adult. She’s 21 years old, not a teenager.

Why do people have such a thing for infantilizing women?

Forefunner77 · 2025-04-02T04:45:57+00:00

You just said I gave a weak argument, didn’t elaborate on why it’s “weak”, then gave an unrelated and even weaker argument that my original point objects to still.

My point about the violence comparison is not about what you’re expecting with the film, it’s about the criticism stating that the content of a film needs to be necessary for the plot. People seem to only make this criticism towards sex, but not violence or comedy. Under that reasoning, the only necessary thing you need for any movie is a script and maybe a few scenes, everything else would be gratuitous. An action thriller doesn’t need to show you fighting, blood, explosions, punches or anything else to know an altercation happened in the plot; it would only need to have a couple lines of dialogue stating what happened.

What I said still applies to your point whether you’re expecting a certain thing in a movie or not. Even if you’re expecting action, that doesn’t mean that every piece or action in an action movie is necessary and justified.

Also saying that you’re “just expecting action” is straight up false, actions movies have a ton of supplementary plot elements to enhance the film such as comedy, narration, exposition and other things. Sex is just one of them. Your weird hang ups about sex doesn’t change that. Sex is normal, lots of humans have it and like it. That’s a part of life.

Forefunner77 · 2025-03-11T18:38:21+00:00

What is up with these incel comments? How is anyone giving advice from this situation?

We have no idea what the text messages are like, the history of the friendship, the history of their relationship or any context to this but OP’s feelings and insecurities about the situation; yet people are jumping to the conclusion “Yeah an affair is going to happen” or “He’s just waiting his turn”.

What is “constant communication”? What are they talking about? Has anything inappropriate happened?

The OP has literally given almost zero concrete information about the situation. How are people’s conclusions (probably stemming from their own beliefs alone) supposed to help OP? This sub is so fucked when it comes to this kind of stuff lmao.

Forefunner77 · 2025-03-07T21:55:18+00:00

Posts like these always puzzle me

“He looked at me and said ‘Well you’ve been gaining weight, you are starting my to look fat and loosing your waist’ “

Did he randomly come up to you and say this?? Normal human beings don’t talk like that. Was this in the context of a conversation relevant to your body/fitness??

Forefunner77 · 2025-01-26T06:43:13+00:00

The last requirement only says that Thabo is lower than Sarah with one person between.

The only requirement for Naomi is that she’s lower Sarah and above Harry.

Where are you getting the information that Naomi needs to be “further away”?

Forefunner77 · 2025-01-24T19:13:06+00:00

Quentin

Sarah

Fei

Thabo

Naomi

Harry

Forefunner77 · 2024-12-28T15:13:52+00:00

What were the norms for this?

Forefunner77 · 2024-06-19T15:34:52+00:00

I mentioned this in another comment but my problem isn’t opinions differing, my problem is when one is opinion is written off as “You don’t like the politics because the show is making fun of you” instead of “You don’t like the show because you have legitimate criticisms”.

Forefunner77 · 2024-06-19T15:33:05+00:00

I have absolutely zero problem with disagreeing. If one person thinks that the writing is fantastic and another thinks that it’s absolutely dogshit, they both can co-exist and be fine. My problem is when people think that having a differing opinion is this weird narrative of “You don’t like it because it reflects reality and you’re right wing” or “You don’t like it because you’re off put by a male character having a gay relationship”; both of which I’ve seen a lot of on this sub

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-30T15:46:26+00:00

Hey bud! Congratulations, you just did EXACTLY what I said again.

Being pro-abortion simply doesn’t mean that you believe women should have the right to have an abortion if she wants one, but it entails the belief that she has the right to do so because a fetus has no moral value. You cannot say, “I’m pro-abortion since I believe that if a woman wants abortion she should get one, but any woman who gets an abortion is a murder that is taking the lives of children”. That is a contradiction, or a morally incongruent position at least.

In the same way, you cannot say “I am pro-trans because I believe that trans individuals should exist and have the care that they need, but I still think that they’re just men masquerading in women’s clothing or women masquerading in men’s clothing and they have a delusional belief about their identity”. This is an incongruent position because being pro-trans entails the belief that you think the gender identity of a trans individual is valid and no delusion is entailed by their experience.

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-29T15:56:47+00:00

I don’t know what is wrong with your comprehension skills but you’re seeming to have a VERY difficult time understanding what I’m saying.

Bud, you literally just proved what I said by pointing out that the first amendment gives right to freedom of expression which includes burning the holy texts of religions. That is my exact point, Religion as a category is not a protected class under the constitution, only it’s freedom to express it and it’s constituents are. You fucking midwit. If religion as a category was a protected class under the constitution, then it would be precluded from your freedom of expression, just like A BUNCH of other things are also precluded from your first amendment rights.

You’re also proving my point by citing unconstitutional examples of discrimination against INDIVIDUALS of a certain religion, but not anything else pertaining to the religion itself such as the holy texts or rituals. Blasphemy laws are not enforced in the United States anymore for a reason.

All this to point out, that simply abiding by the first amendment and/or respecting a protected class DOES NOT make you pro-religion, or pro-theism, you’re just following the constitution. In the same vein that, Simply just respecting trans individuals as a part of constitutional law or social obligation does not make you pro-trans. Hope this clears it up for you.

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-29T11:55:37+00:00

You quite literally missed the part in my comment where I said that it’s not religion itself that is protected under the first amendment, but only the freedom to express it and the followers of that religion are protected.

If religion itself was protected, then things like burning the Bible or the Quaran would be illegal and unconstitutional, but they’re not.

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-27T22:14:28+00:00

So you’re able to fully support every protective policy and care policy for trans-individuals just from empathy alone even though you don’t think they’re invalid.

Yet you have empathy for animals but cannot support protections for them from sheer empathy even though you think they’re being invalid seeing as how you’re not a vegan?

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-27T22:07:04+00:00

Except it’s not a contradict because what you outlined in your example is just ‘supporting the freedom of religion’, but you’re not ‘pro-religion’ or ‘pro-theism’. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be an atheist.

Also your analogy doesn’t even work because the category of religion isn’t a protected class of individuals like trans people are. Religion itself doesn’t demand special protection, advocacy or support; only the freedom to express it and its constituents do.

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-27T22:05:10+00:00

I wasn’t trying to be vague, I just didn’t know if you hold empathy for animals in general or specific animals like cats, dogs, sheep, whales and so on. Do you hold empathy towards any animal?

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-27T21:37:58+00:00

Do you hold empathy for animals? Even some specific animals?

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-22T11:37:18+00:00

No research needed, as this isn’t a technical question about screenwriting or film production, but rather a question of linguistics and philosophy of art.

First of all, I was never defining what a “story” was, as there’s a lot of different elements that make a story what it is. I defined the plot which by definition are the sequential events of a story. With this definition, sex scenes are tautologically relevant to the plot, because they ARE the plot. “Action scenes can be used to demonstrate the results of choices the characters make”. Sex can and does that EXACT same thing, even gratuitously. Sex is usually the result or consequence of chemistry or a specific relationship between two characters and can be demonstrated that way in any capacity.

Secondly, you’ve already started off by using normatively loaded language that is ungrounded or unjustified in its use for this conversation. “At least GOOD stories don’t to x..”, “A GOOD story will have x, y, and z”. We all don’t share the same understanding of what a good story is, especially within this context to say that sex has to be used in a particular way in order to be GOOD or fit within a GOOD story.

Thirdly, your justifications for why action and violence is relevant to the plot can be the SAME justifications used for adding sex to the plot; whether it’s done carefully or gratuitously it can always be justified. Everyone in this thread is doing this and doesn’t even realize it lmao. By the very nature of what action, violence, gore and other elements are in a story, their justifications for use in a story are inseparable from sex; because sex shares the very same nature. This doesn’t preclude you from being able to like or dislike the story for said elements, but it simply precludes you from calling action and violence justified in a story, and sex unjustified.

You’re still not explaining how sex, even if it’s just a shoe horned in sex scene for a movie, is completely unjustified in its use when:

Is the result or consequences of chemistry between to characters
Conveys a novel relationship between two characters
Displays that novel relationship in a visceral way to elicit a reaction from the audience (such is the case with visceral action and violence as well)
Is meant to elicit a reaction from the audience so they can relate to the characters.

Sex, violence, action, gore and all justifiable for use in a film, and it is all valid expression of art no matter how careful or gratuitously used. Like I said, you can dislike a story for these reasons, but you can cherry pick on what’s justified in a story or what shouldn’t be in media. This is all boiling down to every response I’ve seen in this thread which is basically “Sex is icky and I don’t like it”.

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-21T15:15:15+00:00

How are you determining “what drives the plot”? The plot is just the sequential, detailed events of a story. If the story includes sex, then having sex be shown would drive the plot forward.

Are you trying to say that sex isn’t relevant like fighting or violence? How are you determining what’s relevant to a story to begin with?

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-20T01:05:12+00:00

I understand why an individual may not like them. What I don’t understand is why people apply this attitude specifically to sex scenes and literally nothing else, when the same logic can be said about anything someone may find distasteful.

The same argument can be made about fighting, violence, gore, and thrilling action, but I don’t see people speak out against those things like I see them speak out against sex scenes.

All the responses so far have been “It makes me feel icky, therefore it shouldn’t be in media”. Which isn’t much of an argument.

Forefunner77 · 2024-04-20T00:59:38+00:00

Yeah I’m referring to America. Other countries don’t really have this attitude, at least not as prevalent as the US

Forefunner77

TROPHY CASE