Well, no. Then you'd have to keep getting married and divorced unless you only wanted to have sex with one person for your entire life. I think most women would prefer unwanted advances that having that expectation on them. You know, because of the wanted ones. https://twitter.com/YeyoZa/status/953266858337144832 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
LOL. no. Women all over the western world are saying no to both lunch and sex quite unexceptionally. It's accepted as quite normal not to want to socialise with all women or have sex with all men.pic.twitter.com/B5vCjK1Cq3
4 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
This sounds more like a certain take on social networking. Which is fine if she's weighed up pros & cons & decided. However, I'm sure there are girls she doesn't have lunch with and men she doesn't have sex with. It will just be those she wants connections with.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
And it's a bit presumptuous to think the sex obligation needs fixing by restoring norms of no premarital sex if she sees it as the same as a boring lunch. No suggestion of setting up norms of no lunch to save her from making that decision to avoid awkwardness.
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
Whilst it is probably true that premarital sex becoming unexceptional leads to women who don't want to have it finding themselves asked to explain it more than when it was assumed good girls didn't, the solution is not to return to this understanding of morality.
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likesShow this thread
Women do have agency. They can explain things. Or decline to explain things and just state wishes. If this means that they lose a connection, it probably wasn't worth keeping. If they think sex is a fair enough price to pay for keeping it, they can decide that too.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.