Exactly, if she's mature enough to sleep in the same bed with a guy after 3 weeks she should be mature enough to take a joke about getting pregnant. (and no, i'm not implying sex and no I'm not implying that 3 weeks is too soon or too late to be in a bed with your boyfriend.)

I really hope you're not referring to my comment. If you are, then you misunderstood my point. If you're not, then I'm sorry I assumed you were.

It is pretty fair to call someone a prude if they think everyone should have the same conservative views on sex as them actually.

^ this. also, who said "Twinklestar, you're wrong because I believe everyone should believe what I do"? No one. So, according to your logic, no one's a prude. thanks for playing.

DncrHap FOR THE ******* WIN.

I've basically read most of the twinklestar debacle and I have to say that I agree with Maddoctor, DncrHap, and the like and I do also agree that it is a personal choice on waiting or not waiting. But I'm pretty sure the people I agree with agreed on the waiting or not. I hope that made sense. Early on in the argument, twinklestar said some things that I pretty much completely disagree with. First off, you said that "saying everyone who has sex should be ready for pregnancy is stupid." The reason for sex is to make babies, plain and simple. You mentioned birth control. Well, contraception isn't 100% effective, just saying. Yes, it comes close to 100%, but there -are- "oops" babies. Secondly, your analogy to the car accident and getting pregnant doesn't really make much sense to me. It may be the way I'm reading it, but I'm going to assume that it's not. Those driving rules are there to lower the risk of an accident, but a seatbelt is there to protect people from crashing through the windshield in the event of an accident (have you -seen- zombieland?). Now, like I said before, it's very possible I'm not reading your analogy the way you intended it, so don't get angry at me. You also seem to be the kind of person that likes to be right all the time. I'm not trying to hate on you because I'm like that too. But, it would be nice for you to just have an open mind about what all these people have to say and not be rude in your replies. I'm not looking to pick a fight or anything but I just wanted to get my opinions out there. I think we all realize that no matter how much we talk about this subject, we will never see eye to eye.

Synchro, it's not necessary to call the OP a hoe or a ***** or imply that she has loose morals for her personal choices either, and yet you're upset about me calling the people that would prudish when they think their personal views should be followed by everyone. I'm not quite sure if your comment is hypocrisy or just narrow minded stupidity. What do you think? cherry blossom, there's a far higher rate of car accidents effecting drivers who are following the road rules than there are pregnancies occuring when using contraception properly. The rate of pregnancies occuring while using an IUD for example are 99.8%, while the chances of being involved in a car accident while following the road rules(this includes wearing a seatbelt) at some point in your life are much, much higher. On top of that, there are options should pregnancy occur while there aren't for those in car accidents. I'm sorry if that analogy isn't clear to you. Seat belts and following road rules are the equivalent of contraception in the analogy. Accidents the equivilent of pregnancy. Road accident victims however don't have options like abortion. It would be silly to say you should be prepared for the consequences of a car accident every time you get in a car and follow the road rules, and seeing as the chances of that happening are higher than pregnancy occuring when using contraception properly, it's a stupid thing to say that when you have sex in a relationship you should be considering and prepared for that unlikely outcome when you don't apply the same statements to more likely occurences. I don't really think it's considered open minded to agree with someone who thinks they have the right to judge the personal choices someone else makes when those choices don't effect anyone else, and it's pretty ridiculous to say it is.

Dncr, you have fairly awful interpretation skills if you think that comment is in anyway valid. No, no one said those exact words but I think when you say things along the lines of "If she's OK with sleeping with him after only three weeks, then she should be OK with suffering the consequences ... Plain and simple: YDI, OP" "you're not ashamed of calling people like him "boyfriend"? and you sleep together after a 3 week relationship? god." "It's a little thing called morals and self respect. You don't go hopping into bed with everyone you happen to date for more then a week... Then again, society and it's lack of morals are a little more excepting of single parents and deadbeats now a days." "Don't date (and **** after already three weeks) freaks. YDI" "youve only been dating three weeks??? and ur sleeping with him... can u say ho" (and those are only the ones that weren't moderated) it's very strongly implied. I suggest you finish your English homework and work on your basic reading comprehension before coming online.

And if you had read my comment you would see that I hadn't said you called the OP anything. I said people had and my reply was to them. It's pretty stupid to jump in and argue with someone who is making a valid point against what others have said and then claim "but I didn't say that" when no one said you had. I haven't used any hateful or negative language, unlike the comments I've been replying to. You might notice that is why a large number of the comments I replied to are moderated, while none of mine are. Basically, I have said it's prudish to think your conservative personal views on sex should apply to everyone, and by very definition, it is. "Prude" is certainly not considered "hateful" language and it's certainly not a negative or hateful opinion to say everyone is entitled to making their own personal choices when it effects no one else. What is considered hateful language however are things like "*****", "ho", "****", "bitch" and "i hope you die". These are all words used by the people arguing(and these are only the un-moderated comments I can be bothered recalling) with me when I say this. And you're most offended by the word "prude"??? I honestly think you need to get your priorities in order because I think even you'll have to admit that it's pretty ridiculous to find "prude" hateful and negative, while taking no real offense to the far, far more aggressive, hateful, inappropriate, damaging and even violent language in the comments I was replying to. My one use of the word prude was directed at people thinking everyone should share their views, not at someone expressing their own personal view for themselves, because as I've made perfectly clear, I really don't care what someone's personal choice is. Again, the maturity and respect comment is pretty ridiculous given the nature of the opposing comments and the fact that mine are pretty reasonable. More people have agreed with me than disagreed with me. It's just they don't seem to share the aggressive nature of those who would want to argue with my pretty neutral view of the OP being entitled to making her own choices, and launch into long rants filled with expletives that have often been so vile as to have been moderated. In fact, even some of the people disagreeing with me have reached a middle ground, and been more than polite, as I have been in exchange, as you can see in one of the first comment exchanges near the top of the page. So no.. I wouldn't say I am not being perceived in a way beneficial to me, and nor would anyone agreeing with me, nor the moderators, nor even a couple of people who originally disagreed with me. I suggest you stop being ridiculous, purposely misreading fairly straight forward comments and exaggerating, and put things in perspective.

Twinklestar, you're absolutely ridiculous. None of those people EVER said anything like "and you should think the same way I do." Yeah, they expressed they're opinions, just like you and I are doing, but they never once said (or implied, since you seem to think implications are more important) that others should believe the way they do. my reading comprehension is just peachy, it's you that's reading extra into what people are typing. so, once again, thanks for playing. you still fail. and you need to learn to NOT read into everything, because that's what causes you to look silly and preachy.

If you don't think the numerous comments that are along the lines of "Don't date (and **** after already three weeks) freaks. YDI" aren't pretty blatantly implying they think the OP should follow their beliefs then sorry, but your reading comprehension isn't "just peachy" and saying "thanks for playing" won't do anything to change that.

hahaha, apparently smugness is a pet peeve. sorry, i'll try to work on that for you. (: anyway, you are legit doing the /exact/ same thing by calling people prudes for having their own personal beliefs about sex (oh, heaven forbid!). still, i feel as though i'm right in this situation. there's a difference between rudely stating one's beliefs ("******* after three weeks? ho." and blah blah blah), and trying to get others to believe it as well. unless they're debating, or writing out reasons why they are correct, i feel as though stating an opinion is not the same as trying to convince others that you're right. if anyone's doing that, it's you.

I'm not calling anyone a prude for having a personal belief about sex. I'm saying it's prudish to think your personal beliefs should apply to others, and it is. I'm not giving reasons for or against why people should or shouldn't wait, so no, I'm not doing that. I'm only saying if you don't accept your personal beliefs are exactly that, personal, then it's prudish. And yeah, quite a few people have written out reasons why they think everyone should wait, although I'm pretty sure that's not really any worse than expecting people to follow your beliefs with reason...

glarg. agree to disagree?

That was one incredibly protracted debate. How about you do just agree to disagree (and not get in each other's throat)? It doesn't seem worth fighting over opinions like this.

it was, wasn't it? c: i'd like to think we weren't exactly at each other's throats. i mean, although it was somewhat... intense and a little rough at some points (due to both of our frustrations), it was just nice debating with someone who actually has a brain. unfortunately, i don't get a lot of that where i am, so the internet's the next best. (:

Anything you say Sirin. Truce Dncr.