If you go eat some delicious ice cream, do you then think about all the other times you had ice cream and compare them, or do you just enjoy the one you are having right now?Just because someone has already done something in the past does not mean doing it now is a contest with all the past experiences.
>>84835727The ice cream is not rating my performance in how I eat it in comparison to other men.
>>84835727Look I don't care about women's bodycount but you're analogy doesn't hold up.I'd prefer if the icecream hadn't had cock in it.
>>84835727>food analogywowee anon you sure showed me
I do compare ice cream i eat doe?If i eat slightly worse one or slightly better tasting i remember the ones i ate before How fat you have to be to turn off your brain just from seeing food lmao
this is the most retarded analogy I've ever seen
>>84835727it's melted ice cream with pubes and jizz and the ice cream resents me for not being chad
>>84835727I'd argue there's a meaningful difference between eating ice cream and having sex. It's not just how I view it, it's how people view it in general. For example, I wouldn't be upset if my girlfriend eats another ice cream. I would be mad if she fucks another guy. There are evolutionary reasons for it. So comparing them merely as analogous experiences in this context is inappropriate, since the two are inherently evaluated very differently on people's moral intuitions.
>>84835727Bitches aren't ice cream, dumbass.
>>84835727Women will always rate against the best they have had. My ex had bodycount of 32 by age 18. Crazy to use this image to imagine the line
>>84835727I haven't had ice cream in like a year or two
>>84835727 I wouldn't eat an ice-cream that 900 other men have licked, just saying. That would be a serious hygiene issue. I would rather just have an ice-cream which only my mouth has touched.
>>84835727You subconsciously compare them. A lot of the time you only want ice cream because you've had it before.
>>84835968Op's post is referring to a woman's past sexual history, not referring to cheating in a present relationshipHypothetical:A woman who has incredibly-frequently eaten icecream for a substantial amount of time, will unlikely value the experience as much as a man who only has only eaten it infrequently as a savoured, special treat.At that stage, the woman sees the icecream as just another foodstuff, rather than a delicacy, because the novelty and specialness of it has been eroded through overindulgence
>>84837899>Op's post is referring to a woman's past sexual history, not referring to cheating in a present relationshipBut that's not relevant to the point that's being made. The point is, that there's a relevant substantial way in which the two activities are different, such that the made analogy of them just being examples of experiences is inappropriate. There are entire moral schools of thought around sex. There isn't any around eating ice cream. It's as if someone tried to analogize the past experience of eating ice cream to the past experience of killing someone on the basis of the two activities being merely experiential and the way in which they could influence future appreciation. Such an analogy completely misses the fact that the act of killing carries substantially more moral weight on people's moral intuitions. Also notice, that I said "killing", not "murder", as murder is by definition an unjust killing, while killing on its own is morally ambiguous and situation-dependent, making it analogous to the way people view sex. This moral weight aspect breaks the analogy.
>>84838018>I would be mad if she fucks another guyTo clarify, this is present tense. You would be mad if she fucks another guy whilst in a relationship with you.But are you concerned with the other guys she has fucked *before* seeing you?OP >Just because someone has already done something in the past
>>84835727You wouldn't be that mad if I ate your ice cream without asking, so why is rape so bad? Like what's the difference, are you really that stupid ladies?
>>84835727I just had ice cream yesterday and while I was eating it I was thinking about how it was not as good as ice cream I've had before.
I agree, this is also a good analogy for murderers and criminals. Ban all prisons.
>>84835727>If you go eat some delicious ice cream, do you then think about all the other times you had ice cream and compare them, or do you just enjoy the one you are having right now?think about all the others times I had ice cream and compare them
>>84838018>past experience of killing someone vs past experience of eating ice cream> basis of the two activities being merely experiential and the way in which they could influence future appreciationThe extra meta information and context of "eating icecream" or "killing someone" (or comparing any two activities, really) is not relevant to the core abstraction being addressed here: "past experience of an activity influencing how the activity is perceived in the present"It could be any two activities compared. The finer specific details and differences between the activities is not what the point of "past influencing present" is trying to explore
>>84838224>To clarify, this is present tenseAnd I'm telling you, that this is irrelevant to the point that was made. It wasn't the same as the example in the OP, but the point wasn't even to draw and analogy to OP's point. It was to demonstrate a relevant factor, which OP's analogy abstracts out, and it's that the two activities carry completely different moral weight, as demonstrated by the fact that engaging in one *in the present* is completely banal and inconsequential, while the other constitutes a gross violation in the context of a present monogamous relationship. It's why I also used the example of past killing to demonstrate the same thing, that if someone treats it as an experience whose only relevant quality is the way it impact future enjoyment, then that's inappropriate, as the activity carries moral weight that extends beyond that.
>>84838336>not relevant to the core abstraction being addressed here: "past experience of an activity influencing how the activity is perceived in the present"But then you have to ask yourself what the point of the argument is. If the point is to convince people that a partner's past sexual experiences shouldn't influence your willingness to enter a relationship with them, then the argument doesn't work, as it doesn't account for morally significant intuitions related to sex, which aren't present around eating ice cream. But if the only point of the argument is that simply experiencing something (anything, not even sex specifically) in the past doesn't mean you can't enjoy it in the future, then that's a rather trivial and inconsequential question that I would concede. You can get into the minutia of the experience of novelty and how much you value that in different circumstances, but I would agree, that other present qualities may theoretically compensate for it.
>>84838378>OP's analogy abstracts out that the two activities carry completely different moral weightI can't quite discern whether i'm talking to an LLM,or a wizard-level ashkenazi autistIts been entertaining though, anon. TopKek, thanks
