Originally posted by: Ulfwald
True, most people's past is a good indicator of how their future will be. But, just because a lady is proud enough to show off what she has, does not mean she is a bed hopper. All you little boys want you girls to have no past, be a virgin when she marries you but most of you don't want to keep them that way, and if she looks at someone, you feel as if it is an insult to your manhood.
Well get over it already. Most ladies these days have had more than 1 partner, so have you so deal with it. So what if she shows off her boobs, at least she wasn't banging Ron Jeramy in a porn flick.
Women have needs and desires too. They fall in love and shre themselves with someone, so what.
Men sleep around=Stud Muffin
Women sleep around=whore.
Quit with the double standard. Either grow up and deal with it, or join a monestary.
How many of you would turn down a date with a Pl@yboy Plamate? What if became utterly infatuated with you (like that will ever happen to a bunch of geeks) She professed her undying love for you. You both enjoyed the same things, had a lot in common, she was profoundly dedicated to making the relationship between the 2 of you work. Would you say "No way, you posed nude in a porn mag!" Or would you accept her and hold your head high and everytime some man looked at her, you would just smile and say to yourself "Yeah, go home and wank itlittle man, she is mine because she loves me, and not yours." Could you have a relationship with a woman like that and not be so possesive that you smother her?
who here says that they want a girl w/ no past? nobody.
who here says that they want a virgin? nobody.
who here says that they're insulted when their girl checks out another guy? nobody.
women have needs and desires too. duh
i guess you're of the "older" crowd here, who has just recently come to grips with the reality of women's sexuality and you feel a need to proclaim your revelation. but realize that alot of us here are in our teens to early 20s. it's not uncommon for us (and our girlfriends) to have had sex since we were 15 or 16. this precludes any possibility of finding a virgin.
we check out girls, they check out guys (and other girls also

). we live in the age of girls gone wild, campus fantasies, etc. we know that women are sexual freaks.
and yes, it would be nice to boink a playboy model. but there's a difference witn respect to taste. i bet there are many guys out there that would date a playboy model, but wouldn't hold a hustler model to the same level. same thing goes for a girl that poses on the internet. it's not a black and white issue, where you can say "i accept women's openess and sexuality, so i'll date whoever." one might find that playboy is a more tasteful medium than the internet.
i wouldn't date a chick that poses on the web, and i'll tell you why. it has nothing to do with her sexuality. i love girls that are open and sexually aggressive. more fun and experience for me. then where's the problem, you say? here it is: there's something to be said about the decision making skills about a women that poses naked on the internet. she seems to disregard the fact that these pictures are long lasting. any number of people might see them in the future. her boss, her kids, other family members, her kids' friends, etc. you might not see a difference between posting a picture on the internet or having them published in playboy, but there is a clear distinction. the kick-me-in-the-ass-stupid-obvious one is that playboy models get to stroll around Heffner's million dollar mansion while internet "models" meet at shoddy hotels and b-rate picture studios. think hard enough and you're sure to find more.