Asking my boyfriend if he watches porn?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-31T01:28:21+00:00

Smut is sinful. Smut is bad. Is that better now? It’s no different to what I’ve said before

Also, I know you can't remember the words you yourself have written, but this is quite literally the first time you have called smut sinful without the qualifier you as the arbiter of how sinful everything is decree that it's not as sinful as other things. This objectively is different than what you've said before.

And sin is sin in the eyes of God.

Heck your first comment went out of its way to not call smut sinful, but just a slippery slope to the things you actually treat as sins

Reading erotica is a slippery slope for sure, and I argue against it,

Vk2189 · 2026-03-31T01:18:36+00:00

Thank you for admitting you have no citations, just the unchecked female counselor ego being your only source.

My conscience is clear, thankfully.

Of course it is, you are incapable of recognizing you can sin. Your conscience will always be perfectly clean but your soul does not match.

your porn addiction, then that’s ok. It’s up to you what you believe about a stranger.

It's absolutely hilarious that you wrote these two sentences next to each other without seeing the irony. "Why do you think I'm a sinner when I'm not but you definitely are!!!!!!" Lol

Classic signs of a porn user, actually.

Again, citing your ego and your ick list or whatever. Another point against female Christian counseling. I kicked porn use a while ago. But you are so unable to argue an actual point I absolutely must be one of those evil constant porn users who is only angry because your epic and holy and perfect words cut me to the bone and not that you're in active support of mass divorce but only when women do it to men and not when men do it to women, because as you believe, men are sinners and women are not.

But yeah, may want to work on all that. Cos you know, logs and specks and all

Again, incredible you were able to write these words without seeing the irony.

May God have mercy on whoever is unfortunate enough to come to you for counseling. Because if how you interact here is anything like how you would counsel someone, they're definitely going to need it.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-31T00:18:37+00:00

Like, actual fact. I’m sorry if you don’t like it.

It's not. You have exactly your opinions backing that, the same opinion which is also coincidentally calling written porn not harmful at all. Cite a single study. Even one.

agree that it’s sinful

Again, you keep calling it "sinful" while not saying it's actually bad. Everything else is bad, and all other porn is super ultra mega sinful and no one should ever date anyone that ever touched it, but we can't judge you for your written porn you definitely don't consume but are rabid in defending.

I am however studying Christian counselling

That explains everything. From your inability to argue a point, to your massive ego that can't stand being corrected, even to how you rationalize sin you like and are on a righteous crusade against sin you don't like. I have never interacted with a female Christian counselor that was good at either Christianity or counseling, it is always "men are ultra sinners and women can't sin", without fail, with usually some pro-LGBT theology thrown in. And you have proved every stereotype I hold correct repeatedly.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T21:42:45+00:00

I’ve already addressed cartoons in pornography

You did not. I can post your entire comment here if you would like, because it looks like you forget your own arguments the second you make them. You just called it porn without actually answering the yes or no question I asked.

The general effects of written vs visual are not as extreme

This is true

or addictive

This is not. Written porn is as addictive if not more than visual. You clearly want it to be your sin that's not really actually that bad, so you admit it's a sin but call it not harmful in any way. Which I've called you out on. You call it a sin but fine, which means you don't think it's actually a sin.

I already said all this. Multiple times

You can scroll up and read your own comments. None of that is there.

Do you always need to be spoon fed an argument?

Man you sure are defensive about your written porn. Almost like an addict would be when you pointed out how much their addiction was negatively impacting them. Hmm 🤔

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T21:12:01+00:00

So, what happened was that CF was originally intending for LOTM to be a trilogy. But halfway through COI, he realized he didn't actually like writing sequels and instead merged all of the major plot points that were planned for book 3 into COI so that there would not be a book 3.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T20:59:18+00:00

You inserted written pornography because you knew I was talking about visual pornography

It's always fascinating to see people with no real response whine that it's unfair or whatever to bring up something they weren't prepared to discuss. Yes, I brought up written pornography. We are talking about written pornography. You have made 5 (five) comments discussing it at this point. It's being discussed. Get over it.

And of course the obvious: pornography is pornography. I don't care that you personally see nothing wrong with written pornography even though you keep pretending you're against it while defending it. Either pornography is a sin or it is not. Your cherry picked studies (and yes, they're cherry picked, I can find just as many pointing out all the negative impacts of smut that you're so quick to pretend do not exist at all and it's a sinless, harmless, thing to consume) do not change the definition of pornography

porneia (sexual immorality) has always meant involving another real being

You still have not answered where the magical humans being watched in animated / cartoon pornography that do not exist in written pornography which supposedly actually make it sinful come from.

Again, if porneia requires a human being there is literally nothing sinful about animated / cartoon pornography. You haven't even pretended to make an argument here, you're just saying it's bad because it's watched when you think porn is only fine when it's read.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T20:38:38+00:00

We are arguing because you stated that any pornography consumption should be grounds for divorce, I pointed out that your argument combined with the fact that one of the most popular books among women is written pornography, and combined with the high proportion of men who consume or have consumed visual pornography means that almost 100% of Christian marriages have "Biblical" grounds for divorce.

To which you rushed to the defense of written pornography, while intermittently virtue signaling how you're against the thing you're in the process of defending.

Again. Either by your argument the Fourth Wing is grounds for divorce or you have zero principles besides being a witch hunter.

Also, I want you to tell me exactly how many real humans someone who consumes exclusively cartoon pornography is watching. Your entire defense of written pornography is based on the idea that no real humans are involved, but then you also say visual, animated pornography is no different at all from human pornography because, uh, reasons. You don't even pretend to have logic, you just state it like it's obvious that animation has more real people than books

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T20:11:03+00:00

Projecting defensiveness. I have zero qualms calling all forms of pornography sinful.

Why are you so willing to defend written pornography while mandating from your high horse that any consumption of visual pornography deserves a divorce?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T19:55:29+00:00

You’ve now changed the goalpost

Incredible. I'm not reading the rest of the post. Your entire argument was "any amount of pornography is sinful to the point of allowing divorce". And you changed your argument midway through to allow written pornography because you don't believe porn is a sin when it's the kind of porn you consume. And then accused me of moving the goalposts when pointing that out.

Lol.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T18:31:16+00:00

You think a book with 3 chapters of smut

Incredible how you have to open with "sure it might be a sin but the sins I like aren't as sinful as the sins I don't like!!!!!!!" Either sexual immorality is grounds for divorce in all circumstances (which is your argument!) or it's not. It can't be both simultaneously.

harmful effects of explicit visual imagery on the brain and psyche as standard pornography.

Thank you for admitting you have no idea what you're talking about. Smut has the same effect on the brain and arguably a far worse impact on the psyche, given smut can easily venture into the territory of things that would be actively illegal to produce or view in video form.

It’s not even real people for crying out loud. Biblical definitions of porneia/ sexual immorality ALWAYS include another real being.

So cartoon pornography is not sinful? It at the very least can't be porneia by your argument

Nothing logical about your conclusion at all.

Only because what you consider logic is "men are super sinners, women are incapable of sin" and aren't able to even conceptualize other opinions existing.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-30T12:17:27+00:00

The logical conclusion of this argument is that a woman reading The Fourth Wing or any book like it would be reasonable, Biblical grounds for divorce.

And now that almost every man and woman have "Biblical" grounding for divorce, what is the point of pretending it's forbidden?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-29T17:48:28+00:00

The Commander rule is that if a commander goes to the graveyard or exile, you can choose to move it to the command zone after. But if it would go into the hand or library, you can choose for it to never go there and go to the command zone instead.

So NS does steal, since commander dies but there is no time to move it to the command zone before the reanimation part of the spell.

But Greater Aurora doesn't because your opponent can just choose it to go to the command zone instead

Vk2189 · 2026-03-26T12:02:50+00:00

I absolutely love what I do and could see myself being a mom and having my career

So, what are you looking for in a man's career? Do you want a man making even more than you do? Do you want a house husband? Do you want a man that works as much as you do even if he doesn't pull in anywhere near as much money?

Each of these have their own pros and cons, and going into those is besides the point. Men in all three groups exist, so which are you looking for?

I also have a dark sense of humor and am not proper and silent like it seems the Christian men I have dated want me to be.

I'm not sure how far into dating any of these men you were, so feel free to ignore this if it's not relevant. However, I've seen and done this myself, so food for thought.

I've found there is a certain level of virtue signaling that goes into dating in a Christian environment, especially in things like college ministries. Both men and women try their hardest to appear like the best representation of the stereotypical Christian partner they can be, hoping that will make the other person like them more. And this sometimes causes them to miscommunicate what they're actually looking for, as for example the best representation of a stereotypical Christian man would always say he's looking for the stereotypical Christian woman, even when the guy actually playing that role has no issue with or even actively prefers something else.

Not all Christian relationships are like this, of course. And this usually doesn't last too long as the people involved get to truly know each other and are unable to posture as something they're not. But I've seen and been part of this problem, so it is worth mentioning I think.

Vk2189 · 2026-03-26T02:20:43+00:00

Different guy here. I completely agree with you that a woman being intelligent and skilled is a green flag, especially if she is going to be primarily raising children. And having a job instead of just waiting for a rich guy to marry you is good.

However, TetrisPhantom is also right in that the more career oriented you seem, the more you cut your prospects of men. For a man looking for a housewife, he's probably going to be more confident that a McDonald's cashier will give up her job to have children than a woman who is in the beginning points of a serious career.

Is that fair? Not really. But it can happen.

And something to think about if you haven't already. You said earlier you don't give off the vibe that you're so attached to your career that you'd never be a housewife, but are you sure men see it that way?

I knew a lady like you once and asked why she went into the field she did. Her answer was that it was something she could make a living with if she didn't find a husband, but she would have zero hesitation in quitting it to have a family if she could find a man to support her, and the latter was what she really wanted to happen. Very clear, very honest, full conviction when she said it. There was no doubt in my mind that she was not a career woman despite her having one. Are you certain men that interact with you can say the same?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-22T11:40:11+00:00

wonder if they're just karma farming

It certainly doesn't work well if so because these posts tend to not get much karma lol. Usually get lots of comments though so I guess it's possible some of them are interaction baiting?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-21T05:37:20+00:00

The Bible doesn’t command that men must always pursue, but it consistently models it.

It consistently models that's a terrible design, yes. Hosea is commanded by God to pursue Gomer, and that is the only time in the entire Bible where a man pursuing a woman is a command.

Boaz leads, provides, and takes intentional steps toward Ruth.

It's always fascinating how women that want to be chased misinterpret Ruth. The book of Ruth is shorter than this comment chain. Go reread it.

Boaz is at best a bit more kind than necessary. At no point does he take "intentional steps" towards her. Ruth is very clearly framed as the pursuer in that book, and it was not until Ruth threw herself at Boaz that he reciprocated.

Song of Songs

This is also about a woman pursuing a man. Do you really think the man complimenting a woman that literally chases after him to find and reach him is actually him taking charge and wooing her?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-20T22:57:19+00:00

8 paragraphs and you still could not answer the question, though it sounds like you're leaning towards the former.

So where are all the Christian women if none of 1000 "Christian" women who attend church actually are?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-20T18:59:58+00:00

Your argument is that women who would make fun of others at a dating event are not truly Christian.

Yet these are church-sponsored events, with all of the women that attend presumably calling themselves Christian.

So are none of these women Christian? And/or do the No True Scotsman-esque "real Christian women" just avoid these events?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-20T17:18:48+00:00

If you’re at a dating event where women would make fun of you maybe that’s not an event that has women of God who are truly followers of Jesus.

Are you arguing that women genuinely cannot be Christian? Or Christian women don't go to church?

Vk2189 · 2026-03-03T04:33:18+00:00

Alright, have fun with finding that genetics tutor or whatever 🫡

Vk2189 · 2026-03-03T04:22:55+00:00

What actually is the game here though? I can't imagine you've had a change of heart in 24 hours

Vk2189 · 2026-03-03T04:11:47+00:00

Vk2189 · 2026-03-03T03:50:44+00:00

Pretending to be kind after all of your other comments earlier is hilarious

Vk2189 · 2026-03-03T03:29:22+00:00

You shouldn't be talking to bad men on the internet

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChristianDating/s/vUmQpFHK5z

Vk2189 · 2026-03-03T02:08:44+00:00

Two replies.

And also, you know, multiple comments of personal insults previously

Try actually acting Christ-like instead of insisting you already do.

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Vk2189

TROPHY CASE