

A nice proletarian girl isn't supposed to sleep with a bourgeoise man, that makes her worse than a slut -- that makes her a traitor.
If she can get a bourgeoise man to marry her, good for her. But chances are she won't, and she will never tell the proletarian man she ends up marrying about her past with the bourgeoisie man. This causes the proletarian man to suffer increased health risks.
I'm somewhat surprised to find this attitude on the 'net in 2016.
This is liberal shaming language.
If she can get a bourgeoise man to marry her, good for her.
Heh. "My sister got lucky, married a yuppie..." :-) But the point is the whole framework where the important thing about the girl is that she's a proletarian and the about that man is that he's bourgeoisie.
This is liberal shaming language.
I do not intend to shame. How do you think I can express my surprise without you reading it as shaming?