A poll (but no buttons, sorry)

[kareina]

This afternoon someone I know referred to me as "promiscuous". This is not a word with which I have ever self-identified, and even if it had applied at some other time (which I don't think it did), it really doesn't sound, to me, like an appropriate description of the current phase of my life. Therefore, either he was mistaken, or, the word doesn't mean what I think it means.

I ask you all:

Would you count someone as promiscuous if, over the course of the past six years there have been only three indivuduals with whom they have become close enough friends to share "proper" kisses?

A) yes
B) no
C) that depends

Would you count someone as promiscuous if, over the course of the past six years there have only been two individuals with whom they shared a sufficent level of mutual love/trust to become lovers?

A) yes
B) no
C) that depends

Does your answer change for different gendered "someones" as used in the questions?

Feel free to elaborate on what factors would make a difference if you select "that depends".

Alas, on my level of free account, I can't create an automatic poll, but I'm good with a spreadsheet, so will tally the answers (if I get any) and post the numbers later...

Comments

[greatsword.livejournal.com]

I started out in the "no, no, no" camp, but had to change my first two answers to "that depends."

If someone's "sufficient level of trust" was essentially zero, but they were so coyote ugly that they couldn't get a date to save their life? Maybe a yes. (And I'm not thinking of my own adolescence at all in that definition. Honest.) Gender doesn't have anything to do with it, just discrimination.

I can't see that ever having applied to you, though.