it's just an object. doesn't mean what you think

busydreamingaboutboys  asked:

When Kelso loses his virginity he teases the gang by saying it would be hard to explain 'you kids who've never had sex' and Hyde doesn't object and appears to be included in this, so does this mean his first time was with the biker chick? I assumed he'd have been a fair bit younger when he 'did it' for the first time? He just seems like the sort who despite secretly thinking it's a big deal, gets taken advantage of because he wants to seem like he doesn't care about it? Idk.

I have talked about this before, a few months ago… And I can’t find it, kill me.

EDIT: Found it! Here!

Basically what I told the asker in it is that I agree with you, I don’t think Hyde lost his virginity to Chrissy but canon-show seems to indicate otherwise. Season 1 didn’t stablished fates and characterization, constantly changed things to fit the joke of the day in every episode, while season 2 and 3 finally builded the characters.

Hyde is the most experienced of his friends, and I believe he lost his viriginity younger than the rest of his friends as mentioned in the linked post. Another thing to take from your question that I never thought before, is that maybe the reason why he didn’t object to Kelso’s bullshit, was because Kelso was embarrassing the hell out of Jackie.

One thing is to be in constant antagonism with her, another is to openly disrespect her, a girl that probably had a terrible experience, in front of a bunch of assholes that see her as a sex object, boyfriend included, or the devil (Eric). Not to mention, in his point of view, to brag about that is just– not worth it. Let the moron have this.

Besides, I doubt his first experience was exactly the best. Now, I don’t think he was taken adventage of, to be honest. He just got the chance and took it. And I also don’t think he believes is a big deal. Sex didn’t mean much to him, it was just sex. He had toooons of partners because he likes it, the only person he ever dated and, for what is told that they didn’t ‘do it’ in the summer, waited to have sex with, is Jackie.

Hell, we even had this super sexist and disgusitng episode of Hyde saying he was dating some Jill girl just because she didn’t opened her legs and he wanted to fuck her. He broke up with her he realized she wasn’t giving in. I take this episode as terrible out of character a not canon, but it kinda helps my point in a way: It’s just sex to him, it only started to matter when it was ‘with Jackie’.

anonymous asked:

There is nothing dehumanizing about being quantified. The aversion to being reduced to "numbers and statistics." is purely the result of old assumptions about what it is to be a person. Just because you can be analyzed and out into numbers doesn't mean your experiences and perspective is less valid. Just because you are the sum of your parts doesn't somehow make that sum less grand. Determinism isn't nearly as bad as you think it is. It's not fatalism, it's just perspective.

quantification makes sense if you’re an anthropologist or historian, or if you have a specific disorder and objectivity helps you (though I’m told the MBTI is academically unreliable anyway).

But the land of personality type self-diagnosis for the masses is just hokey navel-gazing and I don’t think it’s a healthy or accurate way to view yourself.

It’s like turning on the radio in the middle of Hey Ya and deciding it’s a song about Polaroids. You’re missing so much.

edit: I’m not sniping anyone for taking these tests for fun or having an interest in them. There are entire forum and communities and tumblrs quite seriously dedicated to MBTI and labeling everything and everyone, and that’s what I find frustrating.