We Had Icebreaker Questions About Who Our Personal Heroes Are And If I Wouldn’t Get Kicked Out And

9 out of 10 times ejaculating in a woman will throw her pH off for a few weeks if not months. BV and yeast infections are wildly common in women who let their partners ejaculate in them. A lot of women endure this issue for life and are blamed for having “smelly vaginas” when the root cause is semen disrupting the microbiome. That article you cited is questionable for sure and we shouldnt refer to women as cum brained, but semen disrupts vaginal health the majority of the time. Its why so many women get yeast infections attempting to conceive.

Alrighty, lets dissect this.

Yes: semen is alkaline — its PH is usually around 7.1 to 8. The vagina, on the other hand, is naturally acidic with a PH around 3.8 to 4.5. That acidity is what keeps the vaginal microbiome healthy, especially the dominance of lactobacillus bacteria, which help fight off infections.

So yes, ejaculation can temporarily raise the vaginal pH. But to say it “throws off the PH for weeks or months” in 90% of cases? This is not backed by science. At all.

The vagina is designed to rebalance itself. It has a robust ability to restore its normal pH after mild disruptions.

Women don’t get an infection every time they have unprotected sex with a man. If that were true, literally millions of women that are engaging in sexually active relationships would be living in constant infection mode — and we’re just not seeing that reflected in population health studies.

What is true:

BV and yeast infections are super common

They can be triggered by PH disruption — from semen, yes, but also periods, antibiotics, scented soaps, douching, new partners, stress, diet, etc.

Some women are more prone to an imbalance than others (immune stuff, genetics, hormones, etc.)

But that doesn’t mean semen is toxic waste. Again, we have debunked that made up 9/10 number.

Also, the broad statement that women “endure this for life” is wrong. Recurrent infections in women prone to them suck but they’re perfectly treatable and preventative measures can be taken. Don’t shame women with fear-based stats.

Really tired of people on this hellsite acting like being gay comes with political obligations

Homosexuality is apolitical. Sexuality doesn’t come with a set of beliefs or rules.

Gay people belong to a diverse array of beliefs, religions, and communities and yes that includes ones you disagree with or dislike.

Stop saying shit like “terfs can’t be lesbians” “so and so isn’t allowed to be a lesbian because of xyz” “he’s not actually gay because he is of a/b political group”

It makes it clear you think being gay is a choice and that it comes with a set of rules you need to follow to be ‘validated’.

Gay people are gay even if you don’t like them. Shut up.

Pedro pascal calling JK Rowling a loser fucking pissed me off so bad and people were praising him (majority women!!!!!). I hate that dude so bad, he's only at this level of fame because he's a man.

I AGREE ‼️‼️🔥🔥🗣🗣🗣

Men have to do the barest minimum of "oho yes people I ALSO think bad thing of the month is bad ☝️" and men as a whole will get the benefit of women screaming and crying and saying he's just so smol and squishable and matureeee (read: father figure).

Honestly whenever a man leans into his public image of being... all of that, I get suspicious 😒 genuinely never failed me yet.

My kofi ♡

I guy in my fyp said today

“Actions taken by men are favors and actions taken by woman are duties”

And I have been just sitting staring into space for about an hour now.

Because this applies to every aspect of woman’s life. Every single one.

I knew this. I just hadn’t given it the proper sentence.

"But some women fantasise about sexy priests!"

Those women imagine attractive men wearing ordinary priest clothes. There isn't some obvious and acceptable g-string with a priest's collar around it swapped in. The fantasised priests are just... attractive, romanticised priests.

The whole point of nuns being sexualised, as far as I understand it, is the transgressing of boundaries (as above), the male obsession with owning and touching and fucking an underlined-capitalised-bolded virgin, and/or their need to fantasise that those pious nuns will take one look at that one specific man and suddenly turn into a nymphomaniac for him.

Maybe the message was "Ha, I'm not straight like religion tells me I should be! This is me being sexy and breaking free!" but it just underlines what men want anyway and upholds that the likes of nuns are some minor, sexy taboo for men.

Nothing is or can be subverted when it's sexualised, because the only message that men understand is I can jerk off to this.

Re: Chappell Roan’s nun stuff and the sexualization of nuns

I do not think a religion itself is owed any kindness or respect. I don’t think the misogynistic practices of these religions are sacred or deserve to be treated as though they’re immune from criticism and mockery.

However, I also do understand that nuns and similar religious roles are held by women who don the outfit and play the role because they have a commitment to their religion that includes sexual purity (whether brainwashed or not… though probably brainwashed a bit). I think the sexual mockery of a woman or a group of women who indicate their desire to not be seen sexually is weird. I believe even religious women are owed respect for their sexual boundaries. And the main fetish surrounding sexualizing nuns is that it is a clear violation of sexual boundaries and consent. That is the part that needs to be understood. The sexualization of nuns is because it is enticing to cross the set sexual boundaries of a woman. And the woman being religious can either add to the fetish (in the eyes of men) or it can be a defense against criticism, i.e. “I thought we hated Christianity but nuns are somehow off-limits?” (‘Religion-critical’ leftists).

I just don’t agree with the premise. I truly do think it’d be a whole different scenario if it were a religious role being sexualized that wasn’t about sexual purity. If that makes sense. Like the issue with the nun sexualization is that the whole fetish surrounding sexy nuns is that it is sexualizing a woman who doesn’t want to be sexualized. If it wasn’t a nun, but it was a random female celebrity who was being highly sexualized after she made it clear she didn’t want to be sexualized, I’d say the same thing.

Does this make sense? I’m at urgent care rn and im struggling to focus

I think that's incredibly interesting, but it's also worth noting that the reason that those people feel that way is because they've been trained to see the world that way.

When friends, social media, charities, celebrities and even governments push the idea that a person's identity is a set of tangible things that can be seen and touched and bought, from hairstyles to clothing, then to flag pins and phone covers and stickers, then to be without that is to be without an identity. Without those gender identities, then they're ostracised from their friends and peers indulging in the same thing. Are they even real people at all?

I think it's less that it's a deliberate bridge to cross a social gap, and more a way for them to cling to something tangible that they can then point to in their own minds and say that is why I feel so different and ironically, that is why I feel so alone. Then, they can connect with others that feel just as alone, which whips the social contagion frenzy even higher.

The world right now is one that pushes the idea that to fix something, you need to buy something else. Actual, helpful introspection, figuring out what their hopes, dreams and even hobbies are to connect with others ends up becoming too daunting.

If you're afraid, why on earth would you go out of your way to risk being ignored or hurt or laughed at by someone in the real world, when you can safely buy things and slap flags and different pronouns onto a social media account? Why risk engaging offline with anyone when the online world has a safe echo chamber that tells you how good and valid and perfect you are, and underlines that everything that feels difficult or hurts you is because of others not understanding you? Is it not comforting to have such a strict set of rules to follow and lines to regurgitate, when, if left alone to think for yourself, you might be wrong and end up upsetting someone else and then ending up even more alone? Does it not feel good to be given permission to lash out and hate everyone and cut out everyone that tells you a harsh truth? Isn't it cathartic to tear apart others, just the way that the bullies at home or at school tore you apart?

It taps in perfectly to the stereotypical teenage angst, and it's addictive, too. There is nothing more addictive in this world than the taste of righteous anger and even more righteous hatred - directed, of course, towards the safe (and encouraged) target of women that see through it and just won't play along.

why do you people like gender so much? it's annoying

National Biways (Aug/Sep, 1994)

It might sound strange, but peaking about gender helped me to accept my bisexuality, understand feminism and start me on a real path to understand that I'm a person whose actual consent matters.

When I was younger and unsure (and quite hateful about) my bisexuality, and thoughtlessly repeated some feminist talking points, I ignored all of my doubts because they know better. At first, I didn't know why I was uncomfortable and upset about the push for bisexual women to accept being in sapphic relationships with males. Or why it was transphobic for a bisexual woman to not date/have sex with a TIM. Etc etc etc.

I doubted myself and my upset until I saw the sexual harassment of lesbians, and others that were much more intelligent and switched on than myself pointing out the lesbophobia and rape promotion and apologism, as well as the repeated, underlined anger about sexuality and consent.

It was first my outrage about lesbians (and, to a much lesser extent, gay men) that made me realise, wow, my sexuality doesn't implicitly suggest consent, which then made me sit back and actually consider how other women were fawning to avoid the rage and lesbophobia and biphobia and doxxing and rape and death threats, which then spread further to understanding my existence as a woman.

There's a stereotypical and misogynistic point that men bring up about how feminists are always miserable and obsessed about oppression, as if it ruins us somehow, but it absolutely does feel more grounding.

You spend your whole life isolated and only allowed crumbs of sanitised and safe "feminism," to the point where you dismiss every slight and every harm, from the mansplaining to the assaults as random or bad luck or whatever else, and then suddenly, you're not crazy or oversensitive anymore, you're able to understand it.

As twisted as it sounds, it's grounding and peaceful, too. If you can break free and question the so-called holy right of males taking everything female for themselves, when family members, friends, the media, charities and even governments promote it all as progressive, then you can question everything, and there's no more empowering start to a journey than that.

Does anyone else feel more grounded since becoming gc. I'm no longer being asked to ignore my instincts, my emotions, and the reality around me in favour of a constant "religious" trial. I used to be so disassociated, but now I can just point out the obvious and not feel like I'm going to burn in hell for it lmao. Lots of religious words in here but you get it. I mean it when I say tras are spiritual. You have to be to ignore reality that much. And it feels just as good when you deconvert.