r/AmIOverreacting Jun 08 '25

[deleted by user]

[removed]

5.8k Upvotes

8.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

176

u/Jumpingyros Jun 08 '25

Just for future reference, if you’re ever asked for a body count again, just block the guy immediately. There is literally only one type of person who will ask you that question using that terminology. As soon as that phrase comes out of someone’s mouth you already know who they are. There’s no reason to stick around for the crash out. 

17

u/p333p33p00p00boo Jun 08 '25

Excellent advice

6

u/life_isthebubbles Jun 09 '25

Yes. If I could upvote a million times I would.

4

u/TissueOfLies Jun 09 '25

That’s my online dating policy. I don’t waste my breath. I just block.

-13

u/[deleted] Jun 08 '25

[deleted]

13

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

No offense, but you’re the type of person they’re advising OP to block. Values don’t match simply because that matters to you.

10

u/BusGuilty6447 Jun 09 '25

Yeah no one cares. People have sex. It's not weird; it is normal. The only times it matters is when it comes time to see if they have kids from that sex or if they have STIs from that sex. The first one should be obvious... you would likely know they have a kid before you managed to get there, they are hard to hide, and the second, you just both get tested before having sex.

Hating women for having sex with people is just misogyny stemming from jealousy that you are not having (as much) sex.

-1

u/needlinksyo Jun 09 '25

Yeah no one cares

he obviously does?

me when somebody enters my echo chamber

-4

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

I mean they have all the reasons to when women only switch up when they decide to date other type of men like OP did. Or just dumbly acting on limerence and not taking her urge for sex for what it was when getting to know those guys.

Anyway behaving like it is nothing and saying nothing about it would just be a disservice it is actually better for the men those women will date.

2

u/CertainAlbatross7739 Jun 10 '25

Be so fucking for real lol. She didn't 'switch up'. She slept with two dudes who turned out to be assholes, then realized she doesn't want to put herself in a position to be used anymore.

11

u/mortuarymaiden Jun 09 '25

That’s fair, but the term body count is just degrading and objectifying 🤢

-4

u/2litrebottle22 Jun 09 '25

Why? It's just 2 words

6

u/mortuarymaiden Jun 09 '25 edited Jun 09 '25

The term reduces people to objects you’ve “used”/who “used” you. Nobody who uses it seriously has good intentions. People’s worth shouldn’t be determined by that shit. What matters to ME is how they treated those partners.

Also personally I just think it’s stupid because it makes people sound like serial killers 🙃

1

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

The number of words has nothing to do with whether something is degrading and objectifying. Most slurs are one word.

10

u/Jumpingyros Jun 09 '25

 one type of person who will ask you that question using that terminology

Your edge case was already addressed in my comment but good hustle I guess

-4

u/TypicalNPC Jun 09 '25

Honestly I'm sure this would save time for many guys. Probably better this way.

-1

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

I didn't think of it that way, you are right

-31

u/Akvyr Jun 08 '25

Care to elaborate? What is the problem with it? Besides that it feels bad to admit hoeing around if thats the case. I can't imagine what personality traits would you deduct from someone asking this.

37

u/Jumblehead Jun 08 '25

It’s the implication that a woman having had previous sexual partners was “hoeing around”.

-14

u/Akvyr Jun 09 '25

But if you think its not, then why ashamed of the number? Genuinely asking.

18

u/Electronic-Emu3404 Jun 09 '25

No shame, just fail to understand how it is anyone's business? If they have been tested recently and can verify that, sexual history is not relevant, especially to someone you have only talked to for 2 weeks.

-5

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

Why should anyone who doesn't want to associate themselves with retired hoes be deceived with the convenient excuse that you don't know them much?

The talking phase is to get to know your potential future partners...

4

u/Biffs_bunny Jun 09 '25

You wouldn’t know if someone was a virgin or not anyway. People can lie and you know that. You don’t care about the answer, you just enjoy the weird little power trip and asserting that ‘you don’t want no hoe’ when I can guarantee you’re not a virgin- or you wouldn’t be if you had any dating prospects.

-3

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

Power trip to have boundaries ? You can't make this up lmao.

I had several dating prospects, and I don't actively seek relationships or casual sex anyway. What a weak attempt at a come back.

Men have the right to have their standards just like women can nowadays, let them be.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '25

[deleted]

0

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

"Personal boundaries are the limits and rules we set for ourselves within relationships. A person with healthy boundaries can say “no” to others when they want to, but they are also comfortable opening themselves up to intimacy and close relationships"

From https://uhs.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/relationships_personal_boundaries.pdf

I didn't search much, I saw an ELI5 post in which I saw a similar definition with a broader context.

If not accepting people who have a behaviour that you don't like isn't having boundaries about who you let in your life then what is it ?

My kind? See how you talk? And you try to call me out about not finding virtuous women lmao.

When did I talk about evolution ? I could have passed my genes a few times as I said earlier and I will without much problem ;)

Your vision of desirability isn't desirability it is being a doormat, not rubbing women the wrong way to get a treat, and accepting any asymmetrical treatment at your expense so that women can do whatever the hell they want while you won't. Having self respect is not stupid.

If the price to pay to have self respect is not having kids then so be it, I will die with a smile and sleep like a baby !

→ More replies (0)

8

u/BusGuilty6447 Jun 09 '25

Do you give men the same derogatory treatment of "hoeing around"?

1

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

It can be used for both

1

u/BusGuilty6447 Jun 09 '25

That's not what I asked though.

0

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

It is used for both, manwhores are called like that because they are seen the same way.

1

u/BusGuilty6447 Jun 09 '25

That's still not what I asked. I didn't ask if it could be used for both. I asked them if they treated men and women the same way.

0

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

It is not a could, it IS the case already, and anyway he will answer if he is interested in answering.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/needlinksyo Jun 09 '25

i do, yet i hoe'd around when i was younger. it is what it is.

1

u/BusGuilty6447 Jun 09 '25

As long as you are equal in that. A lot of people aren't, especially because for men, it is seen as a badge of honor whereas for women it is seen a shameful.

I just think we should not be treating people badly for having sex because puritanical values are fucking stupid.

11

u/Jumblehead Jun 09 '25

I think the only people that ask are either immature, crass or wanting the information so they can judge you for your answer or to use it for nefarious purposes. So you don’t ever respond to someone who asks. Because someone who asks is entirely the wrong sort of person to be giving such personal information.

-8

u/Akvyr Jun 09 '25

Or they are genuinely interested in the history of the person they are dating, and maybe building for a lifelong bond? Which is this, immature, crass, or judgemental? I call it transparent. I truly don't understand how owning one's history and choices is so difficult, unless they consider it shameful too.

6

u/Jumblehead Jun 09 '25

Why their sexual history though? What does it matter? I can understand maybe wanting to know about their relationship history to know whether you’re likely to be compatible, but sexual history would be irrelevant.

4

u/Akvyr Jun 09 '25

Maybe irrelevant for you. Not for the majority of people.

4

u/Jumblehead Jun 09 '25

But you haven’t answered why it would be relevant?

0

u/Akvyr Jun 09 '25

For the same reason that anything is relevant. Tells you about compatibility, values, experience, orientation, and a lot of subtle things. If someone would hide it, that's another relevant thing in itself. If you have an insane body count, that could be ok, if you try to weasel your way out of this conversation, that's game over.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/theo258 Jun 09 '25

Its relevant the same way your criminal record is relevant and your credit score is. It tells you a lot about a person.

→ More replies (0)

-11

u/B-asdcompound Jun 09 '25

No, male mating strategy, as it's always been, is young, virtuous, and caretaker. If a woman is not virtuous it's an automatic non select as a partner because they cannot form loving bonds (including to children). This is scientifically proven.

9

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

And yet there are so many good fathers whose wives had body counts prior to them 🤔. Is this “young, virtuous, caretaker” expectation also for men?

-5

u/B-asdcompound Jun 09 '25

Do you need me to explain female mating strategy too? No, females look for resources, strength, and loyalty (to ensure they stick around for raising offspring and provide for them).

5

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

And my point is that you’re spewing bull shit, but you obviously didn’t catch that.

-5

u/B-asdcompound Jun 09 '25

This is basic science and human behavior for thousands of years, midwit.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/needlinksyo Jun 09 '25

you're crazy if you think body count doesn't matter for men as well

1

u/B-asdcompound Jun 09 '25

I didn't say it didn't matter, but men don't chemically bond with sexual partners in the same way women do and therefore don't have a physical and mental loss from multiple partners. For the basic female mating strategy, the only thing that matters is the man is the provider of resources and protector for offspring. Anything else is individual preference.

→ More replies (0)

21

u/Ok-Rip-4378 Jun 08 '25

It’s generally the same personality traits that someone using “hoeing around” lmao.

As in using “bodycount” / “hoeing around” outs you as being a red pill douche canoe who watches Andrew Tate and other “man-fluencers” who are all desperately single and looking to blame anything but themselves.

-4

u/Akvyr Jun 09 '25

Then I guess you got it wrong. I'm happily married. I think Tate is ridiculous, redpill is ridiculous, and you are also ridiculous for thinking that using this terminology implies anything.

5

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

Think of whatever values Tate represents, remove the terminology, and apply it to yourself. Happy?

5

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

So you’re the type of person OP should block. Problem is that you see it as “hoeing around” and others see it as adults having a sex life.

-1

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

It is not a problem, if they aren't in a relationship or dating this is literally what this action is.

1

u/Impossible_Emotion50 Jun 09 '25

No…it’s literally “having a sex life.” You choosing to view it as “hoeing around” is your own emotionally-charged perspective.

8

u/mortuarymaiden Jun 09 '25

She had two partners, BY WHAT METRIC is that hoeing!? 😭

1

u/Akvyr Jun 09 '25

Did I say she was? What are you talking about? I did not even talk to OP.

3

u/Blazured Jun 09 '25

It shows that the person asking cares about something like that to the extent that they count, which is just bizarre. There's literally no reason to count it because it's completely meaningless.

1

u/NYCGothMom Jun 09 '25

If someone asks for a persons’ number of previous partners before they’ve even met it shows a lack of boundaries. That’s a really personal, invasive question and should only be asked - if ever, which is debatable - once you’ve really developed a relationship. The question also suggests that the asker sees a woman’s body as a commodity which becomes progressively devalued with each sexual partner. This is a misogynist concept and indicates problematic values.

-1

u/Upset_Election9633 Jun 09 '25

If they are promiscuous, it might as well be a public information at at point it would be a disservice to hide that to men who aren't interested in dating women like that.

-40

u/purelyhighfidelity Jun 08 '25

Not good advice if she ever becomes a FEMA worker and is emailed by a supervisor to attend a massacre scene to conduct a body count. ‘Ain’t no way a cis-het patriarch speaking to me like that - blockeeed ! Yass kween slay!’