I had a laptop disaster over the weekend (Mac says the crash was caused by old liquid damage, ouch. No more wine while writing.) Anyway, I got a brand new computer today, and am up and running once again. It’s good to be back and I learned something important during this period: I’m not indispensable! The discussions continued without me, which is so great. Let’s dig in.
Mating, romance, sex and love are inherently strategic. Our strategies are designed to solve particular problems for successful mating. Though modern conditions of mating differ from ancestral conditions, the same sexual strategies operate.
David Buss, Professor of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin
It didn’t surprise me when there was pushback from sex crazed feminists on last week’s post about Jaclyn Friedman seeking encounters on Craigslist. What did surprise me was the absolute tenacity with which Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon demanded to know how many sexual partners it takes to make a woman a slut. Like a dog with a bone, she growled and defended her turf, wary and distrustful of an interloper who dares to question, much less refute feminist orthodoxy.
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/AmandaMarcotte/status/20164716797"]
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/SusanAWalsh/status/20165520286"]
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/AmandaMarcotte/status/20164853176"]
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/AmandaMarcotte/status/20165429421"]
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/SusanAWalsh/status/20165715041"]
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/AmandaMarcotte/status/20246407239"]
She belabored the point again in her rebuttal:
We got into a Twitter battle over this, and I kept trying to get Susan to define a “slut” for me, based on the universally understood idea belief that you’re a slut once your Number gets over a certain point.
While I suspect that she was trying to bait a trap, so that she could proceed to deride my definition, she lent validation to the concept that sluthood can be achieved after one has climbed (or descended) a ladder of sorts. If sluthood is a good thing, a badge that feminist “badasses” proudly wear, then they must need a metric to know when a woman has met all of the requirements. She needs to have been sufficiently indiscriminate in her choice of sexual partners in order to claim membership in that hallowed sisterhood. When I suggested that for women who want relationships, casual sex may not be the best strategy, Marcotte replied:
[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/AmandaMarcotte/status/20168205799"]
Apparently in the femosphere, having a lot of casual sex is a way of communicating that you are confident, and sexy, and have no needs, or at least not any that might be fulfilled by a male. I believe there are less risky ways of getting that message across.
The Sexual Double Standard
Sexual promiscuity has always been a real issue for women. I’ve written about this previously, in The Sex Risk for Women That No One Likes to Talk About. Known as the double-standard, invented and perpetrated by patriarchy, feminists refuse to accept it, which is entirely their right. However, ignoring what is largely a matter of biology is erroneous. The double-standard has historically served a very important purpose in sexual relations, namely that of decreasing false paternity claims, which cost men dearly in emotional and physical resources. Indeed, jealousy is believed to have evolved as a means of discouraging cuckoldry:
“Jealousy, experts agree, is a survival mechanism, although what is most at stake is a matter of debate. The most destructive of passions—it is a leading cause of homicide—and the least studied, it is, like all emotions, born of necessity, with roots deep in our evolutionary past. Its purpose: to help maintain intimate relationships.”
This explains why men have always placed a premium on sexual inexperience when selecting for long-term mating. American men, in selecting among 67 desirable traits, ranked sexual faithfulness and loyalty #1. According to The Evolution of Desire (Buss, 1994):
“Studies demonstrate that women’s preferences for short-term mates include availability as a marriage partner. They strongly resemble their preferences for a husband: kind, romantic, understanding, exciting, stable, healthy, humorous, and generous with resources. In other words, women have high standards for both short-term and long-term relationships, or at least that’s how we’ve evolved thus far.
Conversely, men select for very different traits when seeking short-term sexual partners. Compared with their long-term preferences, men don’t want casual partners who are prudish, conservative or have a low sex drive. In contrast to standards for committed relationships, for short-term sex they want: sexual experience, including promiscuity, and a high sex drive.”
These evolved differences mean that historically, men have not been shamed for having many sexual partners, and indeed they benefit from social proof when women observe their success in attracting other women. In recent years, as the ratio of casual sex/relationship sex has increased dramatically on college campuses, there has been a backlash of sorts, with women indicating that they find extremely promiscuous males unattractive and unworthy. The study is explained more fully in my post It’s About Time: The New Reverse Double Standard.
Men’s natural preference for sexual faithfulness and loyalty in women means that many will reject women who exhibit behaviors that contraindicate for that. A woman’s sexual history serves as a proxy, or indicator of future behavior. It is not perfect, but men can and do make use of this information when selecting partners. This does not mean that a promiscuous woman cannot find a mate, but it does mean that the pool of men from which she may select has shrunk dramatically. A woman may say, “I would never want a guy who felt that way,” and that’s perfectly legitimate. Still, it’s important that she understand the effectiveness of various sexual strategies in mating so that she may make informed decisions.
It’s also true that a woman who is expending energy seeking and engaging in no-strings sex is not wholly available for a longer-term relationship. Halfwaying it always exacts an opportunity cost and distracts from the long-term objective.
Promiscuity is a poor strategy for women who seek a long-term relationship, or life partner.
Other Negative Characteristics of Sexual Promiscuity
Aside from evolved male preferences, there are other risks associated with promiscuous sexual behavior. Most of these apply to men as well.
1. Increased prevalence of STIs, compromised fertility.
2. Research shows that 20% of men and 41% of women strongly prefer dating to hooking up.
“Women more than men seem to want a relationship. They fear, both in dating and hooking up, that they will become emotionally attached to a partner who is not interested in them.
Men more than women seem to value independence. They fear that even in hooking up relationships, which are supposed to be free of commitments, a woman might seek to establish a relationship.”
When those hopes fail to materialize, there is often some degree of emotional distress. Over time, a repeated pattern of post-hookup avoidance makes young people cynical and jaded about relationships.
3. Research shows that children of divorce are more likely to engage in no-strings sex, and to avoid relationships. They hook up earlier, more frequently, and have sexual intercourse during hookups earlier.
4. Risky sexual behavior may reflect genetic personality traits, including a high degree of risk-seeking, high degree of extraversion, and high degree of neuroticism.
5. The use of copious amounts of alcohol before hooking up is commonplace. Indeed, both women and men indicate that they drink heavily in order to summon the courage to hook up. Alcohol use is also a primary factor in sexual assault.
6. Hookup sex is generally rated as lower in quality by participants than relationship sex, due to lack of intimacy and knowledge of one’s partner. This is more true for women, obviously, as men often express that “The sex wasn’t great, but there was lots of it!”
7. Marital stability is correlated with the number of pre-marital sexual partners:
“Consider the 2003 study of over 10,000 women which found that as the number of non-marital sexual partners went up, the probability of marital stability went down. For example, once a woman has had 5 sexual partners, the probability of pulling off an intact marriage dips under 30%; it is under 20% when the number of sexual partners reaches the upper teens.”
What is the Magic Number?
How many cupcakes can you eat without gaining weight? How many sick coworkers will it take to make you ill with the flu? How many drinks does it take to make an alcoholic?
It depends. It’s not an exact science. It’s not one-size-fits-all.
The right number of sexual partners for a woman will depend on a variety of factors, including:
- age
- personality traits
- family history
- relationship history
- relationship goals
- life goals
Some women feel badly about hitting double digits. Others celebrate with a round of tequila shots. Some women are embarrassed to be virgins, or to have had only 1-2 partners. Others love the dopamine high that comes with impulsive, risky, or even dangerous behavior.
Some men object to 5 partners. Men with a great deal of sexual experience themselves may consider 20 rounding error. Some men will judge sexual history depending on the nature of the relationships. As indicated above, men prefer promiscuous women with a high sex drive for short-term mating. If that’s your goal, you should have no difficulty in getting all the casual sex you can handle. If you hope to marry or cohabit and possibly have children, you should understand the tradeoffs so that you can make an informed decision about which strategy you wish to pursue.
In closing, I will share one last thought. This excerpt from the post Marcotte linked to really pissed her off and led her to call me a liar. It’s #15 of the 20 Reasons You Don’t Have a Boyfriend:
Your number is too high. OK, fine, you don’t want any guy who cares about how many people you’ve slept with. Problem is….that’s most guys. You don’t have to tell anyone your personal data. Just be aware that when you’re making the rounds within a certain community or group of friends, word gets out fast. I don’t think there has ever, ever been a guy who got laid and didn’t tell anyone about it afterwards. If your number is high and that fact is well known, you have every right to find a new pack of males and reinvent yourself.
I’ll stand by this. Your sexual history is your personal business. You are not obligated to share it with anyone. I’ll preempt the guys right here who claim they have a surefire list of “slut tells.” If you’re a woman who has been trolling for sex online, that’s bound to come across in a myriad of ways. But if you’re feeling regrets, or like you may have overindulged, there’s no reason you can’t change your behavior and change your life.
{ 986 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
As I said I prefer honesty. But I do make the point about societal pressure. I think 5 or 22 or 32 is trivial really but I’m aware that society still has bizarre pockets of hostility in this regard.
.
Boy oh boy…I’ve got that hamster running on hyperdrive.
.
“Society” is an abstraction. It is not an individual entity with a personality. It is certainly not capable of exercising “hostility” on something like private sexual conduct. Unless you go around broadcasting your private endeavors (which would be really stupid) how would any random member of society know your partner count (being gay is outwardly visible and obvious, partner count is not). When I am walking in the grocery store, and I see random women, I have no idea which ones have racked up 50 partners versus 5.
.
What you really mean is NOT society, but individual men who are prospective partners. LOL. So now we’ve come full circle as I catch you in complete contradiction/cognitive dissonance. You have maintained over and over that most men don’t care, and only ones you wouldn’t want anyways would. Now, you’ve completely changed your tune in that regard, in that lying may be justified for that “puritanical” partner who is “right” for you, but may “unjustifiably” have issues with your past behavior.
.
Honestly, what I find distasteful, is this playing both sides of the fence and the equivocating. If you honestly believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with femal promiscuity, then OWN IT. State it proudly. You should have no reluctance to tell a potential long-term male partner if asked, “Hey, I fucked alot of different guys, I don’t regret it, and if you have a problem with it, that is your problem”. “Take or leave it”. But what is troubling is this sort of rationalizing for sort of living two different lives, and not really wanting to own/embrace the first life and be deceitful about it.
.
Never heard of sperm competition? Never looked up the modern theories behind sexual selection, genital design, pride dynamics? Promoscuity is indeed hard wired whether you like it or not.
.
This is all explainable though from the male preference for promiscuity/variety. Tens of thousands of years ago, I highly doubt there were any “courtship” rituals with women exercising much choice in males.
.
To your comment about the insults, I’m not surprised. Abbott nailed it. I’m hitting a very raw nerve with my comments, because on some subconscious level you and those other women know I am right which is that many perfectly normal, high-quality men would in fact have issues with very high female promiscuity, and that if you don’t lie or distort it you do in fact remove a very large percentage of the male population as potential partners. You don’t like that. It offends your sense of what is “fair”.
.
Lastly, we keep referring to different things in terms of what constitutes promiscuity. I don’t think a 22-24 year old woman who has had a few flings is super promiscuous. Now 20-50 partners by college graduation is a different story, and is what I am referring to.
Bless.. There is always a degree of sadness when a guy pretends not to be angry but then words betray him.
Once again, if you don’t want to accept the science then argue with the university professors. I am sure you know better than them.
I quite happy with my use of the word society and I employ it in it’s usual way. I myself don’t mean men I know because I didn’t know any with the sentiments you expouse. But I know of some women who have used slut shaming. I have seen it in the media, by preists, the odd family member, by men on this blog etc etc. Does that define society enough for you? You will also understand that the shaming used is often hostile too? ‘You ugly slag’ is not generally a term of endearment.
In terms of what I choose to own publically I shall do as I see fit.
I happen to think anal sex is fine but I’m not going to ‘own it’ if that’s ok with you.
In case you are confused I did say I advise and observe honesty in relationships including numbers talk.
I think it’s fine for girls to have a blast at uni if that’s their preference but to use condoms and not get too wasted or drunk. I think 20 guys over 3 years is about 2 per term so no big deal but would advise against much more than that because of STD risk increasing. But if a girl has 1 parnter over 3 years and had a great time then that’s great too.
“What you really mean is NOT society, but individual men who are prospective partners.”
.
This is why there is such a huge response to this topic, over other what would seem to be more pressing concerns like world hunger, etc – which actually is a societal issue. Because it hits close to home. Its deeply personal. The females are saying – WTF, I can’t believe we are being evaluated this way, our unprecedented behavior is getting such an unprecedented response. The initial reaction is knee jerk, and that is normal. Some would go on to lie about their other life, some would go on to write blogs to denigrate men in a futile attempt to change their way of thinking. But at some point, some, if not many, are going to avoid living two lives altogether and modify their behavior early on. Of course that is only if men continue to have the option to avoid marriage to promiscuous women. Now, that is the ultimate coming full circle.
“the shaming used is often hostile”
.
How does that have anything to do with men who quietly and respectfully choose to avoid relationships with certain women?
.
“I think it’s fine for girls to have a blast”
.
Me too! Who here stated that it was not fine for them to behave as they wish? The future consequences be damned!
@ Mike
Tit for tat….You said,
I’m kind of wondering what your agenda is as well on this. You are playing fast and loose with the science/biology. The science clearly shows women are hypergamous and naturally SERIALLY MONOGAMOUS, not polygamous. Women are wired to bond with one man, want one man sexually, and eventually switch to a new guy down the road
Oh Really?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5213956/Men-are-no-more-promiscuous-than-women-survey-finds.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/sep/03/anthonybrowne.theobserver
These studies suggest otherwise.
LOL at you all who think I am a woman…too funny
Mike you said,”When I am walking in the grocery store, and I see random women, I have no idea which ones have racked up 50 partners versus 5.
Thank you… And if you got to know them, you wouldnt be able to tell either. The only place it matters is in your own mind. Why? insecurity!. A good person is a good person, no matter their sexual history.
Jess…… Dont waist your breath on these locker room mentality “men”.. The stereo typing here just blows me away…
I am really surprised at Susan. In her profile she admits she “enjoyed” her sexual freedoms. So she has had at least a “few” by her own admission. So is she not worthy of a good man?
Ofcourse she is. It doesmt matter what the actual number is. Doing 5 isnt much different than doing 25, especially where a longer time frame is involved.
But it does matter to the closed minded men who judge a womans worth solely on her past.
I really have to laugh at the ignorance and stereo typing going on here.
LOL at the “agenda” questions.
.
There is always a degree of sadness when a guy pretends not to be angry but then words betray him.
FWIW, I’m not angry…a bit annoyed yes because I do realize I am probably wasting my time trying to get you to address the contradiction of your position which you still are dancing around/dodging. I’m past debating this part:
I think it’s fine for girls to have a blast at uni if that’s their preference but to use condoms and not get too wasted or drunk. I think 20 guys over 3 years is about 2 per term ******so no big deal*****but would advise against much more than that because of STD risk increasing. But if a girl has 1 parnter over 3 years and had a great time then that’s great too.
OK, I’m with you. Not going to argue this. But….but….if it is “no big deal” then it is no big deal. It is no big deal what I ate for lunch. If someone asks me what I ate for lunch I am not going to lie about because it is “no big deal”. So if you’ve been dating a guy 6 months, and he asks “I’m just curious, how many people have you been with”. IF IT REALLY TRULY is no big deal and you really honestly believe that, then you should have no reluctance about being 100% candid about it. What I am trying probably in futility to get you to see is the absurdity of that position.
.
I quite happy with my use of the word society and I employ it in it’s usual way.
.
Not sure how to respond to this except simply to note you have completely 100% avoided addressing my specific poin as I raised it. This is a non-sequitur. I used to read a few of the feminist type blogs long ago but no longer do, but one thing I’ve noticed about much of feminist discussion is the inability to directly address a point as asked. There are a lot of what I would call “non-answer answers”. Again, unless you go around shouting your private sexual behavior from rooftops, there is no way for “society” to know what you are doing, and thus no way for hostility to be exercised.
.
In terms of what I choose to own publically I shall do as I see fit.
.
I’m not saying you go around telling everyone “Hey, I am a proud promiscuous women”. I’m not saying you have to have a parade like “Gay Pride”. When I say “own it”, I am specifically referring to being forthright with someone you have a close personal relationship with.
.
In case you are confused I did say I advise and observe honesty in relationships including numbers talk.
.
“I prefer total honesty in life but i do get the rationale here. What if I fell passionately in love with a puritan and I knew he would be scared by my 22 exes.? Big temptation to fib. How would he ever find out? I would like to think I would be honest and let the chips fall where they may.”
.
I dunno, that sounds pretty ambivalent/ambiguous to me. Sounds to me like you “prefer” honesty, but it is OK to be dishonest where “justified”. Very Clintonesque. We are venturing into silliness here about what the definition of “is” is.
.
I just don’t get the equivocating. Either it is a big deal or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then lying makes no sense. And either lying is OK or morally unacceptable. Really, what I’m hoping for in vain is to get you to actually commit to a solid position rather then dance around all the lines here. I can respect differing views, but it is hard to respect equivocation.
I agree women should not lie about their number if the topic comes up. I also think it is a shame they feel they have to lie, because of some mens attitudes towards sex. It is just sex. Not all women who have multple partners are these low self esteem types who turn out to be half pysco.By contrast, they are not the sex fiends with excess testosterone either. (yes both cases do exist) Many if not most are very normal women , who for what ever reason are not ready to setter down yet.What are they supposed to do, learn to knit? Men sure have no problems seeking out women to have sex with, now do they? Do they expect to be judged for it?
The articles you linked are mixing concepts. Neither human male nor human female are wired for lifelong monogamy. What the articles are calling “female promiscuity” is what is already well known and been discussed and I totally agree with which is that females are hardwired to seek out a beta provider and cheat and get impregnated by an alpha.
So is she not worthy of a good man?
Men don’t talk/write like this. I’d still bet you are a woman.
here is my email mike ekabo@aol.com
Email me and I will give you my facebook account. LOL at me being a woman
Not all women who have multple partners are these low self esteem types who turn out to be half pysco.
.
Earlier in the thread:
“If you think it is just high testosterone women who are promiscuous, you are crazy. Many women are of low self esteem and are looking for validation.
.
Whoosh. I’m having a hard time keeping up with what you actually believe as your position is ever-shifting. Yes, these statements are not mutually exclusive/100% contradictory, but to read one after the other is funny.
.
who for what ever reason are not ready to setter down yet.What are they supposed to do, learn to knit?
.
Settle?
.
What does this mean? Are you saying that once a woman decides she is ready to “settle down” that she is entitled to a “worthy” man for a long-term relationship? Is that your position?
.
Men sure have no problems seeking out women to have sex with, now do they? Do they expect to be judged for it?
.
Probably not. Frankly, they should be as well, but as anyone who has studied Game knows “preselection” is a powerful attractor, not a repeller. That said, there is a threshold where it appears to turn off many women as well. And for the record, I think men should be truthful as well. Guy at work (today is a total slow day hence my posting) just told me about #200.
Non-sequitur?
Is that something that doesn’t cut bushes?
.
A big round of applause for all these posh words please….
.
In regards to mikes question I thought I had been candid. I (personally) advise and observe honesty, specifically with relation to numbers.
I however do understand why a girl may lie about her numbers due to societal pressure. As to it’s ethics it’s a grey area. Some might argue it’s unethical to fib full stop whilst others may argue we all have things in our past and the guy has no right to ask. For me, I say tell the truth girls. If he dumps you then consider it a close but lucky escape.
Sorry forgot to reply to the science bit. No mike has the wrong idea again. Women didn’t just want one alpa male for reproduction they wanted multiple alpha males which may explain the shape of the male glans and female capacity for multiple orgasms.
In any case, regular consecutive monogamous relationships isn’t a huge difference to simultaneous multiple partners (well not in the same evening obviously)
Non-sequitur?
Is that something that doesn’t cut bushes?
.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Jzp&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:non+sequitur&sa=X&ei=RIoTTc-KGMbinQeRyunLDg&ved=0CBMQkAE
# a reply that has no relevance to what preceded it
# (logic) a conclusion that does not follow from the premises
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
# A non sequitur is a conversational and literary device, often used for comedic purposes. It is a comment which, due to its apparent lack of meaning relative to what it follows, seems absurd to the point of being humorous or confusing, as in the following
Well done mike. I’m sure we are all impressed and humbled in equal measure.
“Women didn’t just want one alpa male for reproduction they wanted multiple alpha males”
.
Well, that seems to explain why there are so many frustrated single women out there. Perhaps more than the current tiny percentage of women should act out their natural tendencies. But alas, they do not. It sure has been fun reading about the defensive posture and transparent bitterness exhibited by the ones who do.
Mike you really do have reading comprehension problems. If you have been reading all along, here is my position on promiscuous women and their qualification for a LTR.
It may shock you, but these types of women might or might not be promiscuous, so that is why one must choose wisely.
High testosterone woman who normally has a high libido.
Low self esteem woman who needs validation.
a normal woman who chooses not to be in a relationship at the present.
Combinations of the above.
You even said you could see women at the store and have no idea of their number. My point is, even after meeting them you STILL wouldnt have an idea. Why? Because many pomiscuous women are very normal and undamaged by their sexapades. One could have a good opinion of a woman. She is successful, nice, polite, admired, bright, funny. Then the immature guy (most men with inflated egos) hears her number.. All of a sudden she is no longer the same woman, she is a tramp….VERY logical thinking….LOL…not!
I am not saying men do not have the right to think what they want. But being a man, I see more value to a woman other than some fun she might have had in the past. If she is this really cool, together woman, she must be the sum of her total experiences, right?
.
Sources please? Everything I’ve read supports the notion that women are naturally promiscuous, as Jess mentioned with the latest research on sperm competition. New research supports the idea that even vocalizations during sex are really just a mating call for nearby males to take their turn.
.
Personal experience is that I’m pretty happy with one man most of the time. But during ovulation I’ve been known to walk around thinking to myself…”Hey, he has a penis. Hey, I’ll bet that guy has one too! Oooh! Look over there!” It is merely impulse control that keeps me from following any of those ideas.
.
Further…there is no such magical notion of “pair-bonding” in woman any more than there is in men. All LTRs take commitment and work, whether with a virgin or slut. A rank beta or super-alpha.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Are+Women+Naturally+Monogamous%3F+Asks+%27Women%27s+Infidelity%27+Author…-a0133273597
Here would be my question. For women who are cheating on husbands/boyfriends, how many are cheating/having an affair with a single man. Not multiple men/penises in a compressed time frame. On the flip side, for men who are cheating, how many are cheating with perhaps multiple different women.
.
There is that old expression. Follow the money. It doesn’t lie.
.
How big is the market for pornography? For men? For women? How about the strip club market? For men? For women? How about the high-priced escort/call-girl market? For men? For women?
Again, I think we don’t mean the same thing when we are talking “naturally promiscious”. There is a whole spectrum of behavior outside of “lifelong monogamy”. I don’t think women are biologically hardwired for lifelong monogamy, but I am skeptical of the assertion that they are hardwired to be gangbanged.
.
New research supports the idea that even vocalizations during sex are really just a mating call for nearby males to take their turn.
And just curious…is it damaged women who engage in lots of casual sex…or it’s the casual sex that irreparably damages otherwise healthy women?
Aldonza, please dont confuse them..lol
Aldonza,
One more thought for consideration in terms of what is “natural”.
.
Take gay men and lesbians. Gay men are gay but they are MEN. Obviously, lesbians are women. So simple logic would dictate that examining the typical sexual behavior of gay men would point in the direction of what men are “naturallly” disposed to, and examining the typical sexual behavior of lesbians would point in the direction of what women are “naturally” disposed to.
.
This is a good alternative sample to examine, because you are examining the same sex with simply a different sexual preference.
.
What conclusion would that point to?
And just curious…is it damaged women who engage in lots of casual sex…or it’s the casual sex that irreparably damages otherwise healthy women?
.
I’m assuming you are being sarcastic here, but I’ll treat it as a serious question.
.
First off, I hate the word “damaged” because it creates a caricature of the position. I don’t like the “damaged goods” concept. The more accurate point would be that lots of casual sex ***may***….may…not guaranteee…a woman with some negative personality characteristics such as self-esteem issues or predilection to cheat.
.
In any case, I think it could work either way. As Tom did point out, and I agree low-self esteem women with Daddy issues could engage in a lot of casual sex to try and deal with that. In that case, the problems lead to the casual sex.
.
On the flip side, take a 6-7 swinging way out of her weight class who gets serially pumped and dumped and never learns. Those experiences may make her cynical, jaded, guarded, skeptical, and less giving all because she has been burned so many times. In that case the casual sex leads to the personality issues.
.
All that said, I have no doubt many women can have plenty of casual sex and be completely well-adjusted, and be acting strictly out of pleasure and sexual desire and not any negative personality traits. Still, a wise guy in today’s society has to weigh her future infidelity risk as the behavior shows that pleasure supersedes impulse control.
I suppose mike has been around here for too long to suppose he is a troll but the latest posts do cause one to wonder.
.
I few things about female sexuality world wide:
Male strip routines are massive in the uk and have proven recession proof
Male escort workers have been established in australia for decades and the US series ‘hung’ portrays male escorts in the USA.
The vast majority of sex aids are bought by women in USA and uk
Female oriented porn has exploded including female directors (source my friends!- honest)
Let’s indeed look at the gay scene. It’s true that the male scene is highly promiscuous but so is the female one! It may not be AS promiscious but it’s still pretty full on.
Don’t forget women are conditioned from birth which would explain differences there anyway.
“is it damaged women who engage in lots of casual sex…or it’s the casual sex that irreparably damages otherwise healthy women?”
.
I do not know what the damage implies. But if a man from the outset prefers random fun sex not be a big part of his woman’s past then he needs to look for the markers to reduce the probability although there are never assurances of course. When he is ready to not be out for sex any longer, he should switch to a different profile of woman that does not include tattoos, smoking, swearing, a college degree, immodest clothing, non-ear piercings. It may be best to stick with woman who are shy, has always held strong convictions, religious-leaning, demur, deferential…well like the super majority of women on Earth.
.
So its not a damaged woman who has a higher probability of engaging in lots of casual sex. It is probably a character type or a certain personality and peer pressure could be thrown in the mix, depending on the culture she comes from. That is why its is more important to select among the right group rather than ask questions about her past. If there is a need to ask, you are fishing from the wrong place, as it were.
.
Actually, women are growing as a proportion of porn buyers. They may not be as high as men for the simple reason that most porn is aimed at men. And women don’t pay for sex for the simple reason that they don’t have to. A promiscuous woman has to merely post a message on Craigslist or any sex-site to have her pick of casual partners.
.
Be careful that you’re not mistaking women submitting to cultural pressures with natural inclinations. I submit as my counterpoint that women are promiscuous…this blog which attempts to persuade young women to be less casual about their sexual encounters.
.
I don’t think it’s the NSA one-nighters that make a woman cynical and jaded. It’s the pseudo-relationships and game-playing that some guys do to keep easy sex accessible that can do a number on a woman. I’d argue that a woman might be emotionally better off admitting that she just wants sex, getting it on her terms and walking away than she would by convincing herself of relationships that don’t exist and never will in order to justify having sex.
“A promiscuous woman has to merely post a message on Craigslist or any sex-site to have her pick of casual partners.”
.
What a great concept. Man gets to screw with no investment and add another woman to his no-marry list. All that is needed is for men to share their lists on a website.
Actually, women are growing as a proportion of porn buyers.
.
You are correct, but the percentages aren’t even in the same galaxies. My question would be what “drive” is creating that massive differential.
.
They may not be as high as men for the simple reason that most porn is aimed at men.
.
So you are saying that porn “aimed at women” would result in the same magnitude of sales? In business, you could have two different strategies, create the product and then use marketing “to create the need” or create the product to fulfill some previously unfulfilled need. Perhaps you are right, but I am skeptical that the right “type of porn” would fulfill some previously unfulfilled female drive. Actually, we already have that. They are called romance novels. What is the template for the typical romance novel? Is it one ravishing, dominant hunk or is it multiple men taking their turn?
.
And women don’t pay for sex for the simple reason that they don’t have to. A promiscuous woman has to merely post a message on Craigslist or any sex-site to have her pick of casual partners.
.
True enough. But if the drives were naturally similar, you’d think you see and hear about a robust market for 20-30 year old hunks to service older women, but you don’t. I don’t feel like going digging right now, but I suspect the market for male prostitutes for gay men is way bigger then women. That said, perhaps, this speaks more to the visual attractiveness angle then difference in preference for promiscuity.
.
Be careful that you’re not mistaking women submitting to cultural pressures with natural inclinations. I submit as my counterpoint that women are promiscuous…this blog which attempts to persuade young women to be less casual about their sexual encounters.
.
Perhaps. Could be. But Susan herself has said she thinks it is around 20%, and as I noted it was much less in the late 80s/early 90s. I would actually argue the exact opposite may be the case, that cultural pressures may be in fact increasing female promiscuity as it was the late 90s that really saw the hypersexualization of teen girls (Britney Spears/Christina Aguilera) and the whole Sex in the City effect.
.
Additionally, and again Susan could confirm or disconfirm this, but I believe she has indicated many young women are disatisfied, depressed, and unhappy about the current state of affairs. In other words, the higher casual promiscuous sex rate with multiple males is not being driven by some core biological drive that has been suppressed for ages and suddenly set free, but more likely due to extraneous factors such as competition for the top alpha males.
.
Anyways, good points, and you may be right on some of it. Complex issues. Some of the women commenters would do well to study your comments and Susan’s on how to actually construct a logical argument.
I’m not really sure how Jess and others can argue against the evidence that promiscuous women make extremely poor bets for marriage. They may or may not be “screwed up” — who isn’t, after all — but it does reflect the negative qualities I mentioned before: namely choosiness, perfectionism, irrational idealism and a preference for buying something new rather than repairing the old model. Studies on promiscuous women who go on to marry would appear to strongly corroborate such an assessment.
It’s also worth noting that marriage is not a trivial concern for any man today. I was naive when I was younger (I’m 21 now) and I did think of marriage to the right girl, but it sure as hell wouldn’t even be on my radar now. I’ve no intention to enter some bond of modern serfdom.
True, the promiscuous may or not be a good bet. Why chance it. Its sooo easy to avoid these women if you’re not a lazy guy and take some initiative. These women represent such a small minority – but they are so vocal that there numbers seem larger. Dont be fooled.
And again, the biological origin behind male jealousy (and hence the alleged double standard) is so obvious I don’t know how many times it bears repeating, or if slut champions just prefer to ignore it. Women are rarely, if ever, in doubt about the provenance of their offspring. Men have absolutely no guarantee bar placing a woman under 24/7 guard, hence the traditional institutions which amount to a less intense version of exactly that. It may not be pleasant, and it may conflict with a woman’s wishes, but that’s just how things are. The animal kingdom is seldom kind.
“Its sooo easy to avoid these women if you’re not a lazy guy and take some initiative.”
As I’ve said before, a lot of girls believe they’re capable of fooling their partners so that they never think of her as anything but chaste. I don’t doubt the female capacity for Machiavellian operations, but I do think they possibly overestimate their practical effectiveness. There are countless dozens of cues, many or even most of which are non-verbal, that tell a man just what kind of girl he’s dealing with. Roissy fatuously mentioned some in one of his posts (the more subtle yet more potent ones are not as shocking and make for less blog-worthy material). Even should a girl try and “pretend” or “disguise” her past, it has a way of coming out, and often in short time.
.
Honestly, I don’t know whether or not promiscuous women make bad marriage bets. The “evidence” I’ve seen posted here and other places has been less than overwhelming and the “studies” (if you can even call them that) are rife with inconsistencies, poor design and lack of oversight. Further, there are other studies out there with contradictory data, including one I’ve cited here where the happiest couples seem to be between partner-number parity couples. That is, sluts with alphas and prudes with betas.
.
I’d also never argue that men prefer women with lower numbers. They do. All things being equal, most men prefer lower partner numbers. But this is only *one* factor in choosing a mate. Not even the top factor for most men. This is why hot sluts still do pretty well even in the marriage market, while fat/ugly prudes end up cat ladies far more often than sluts.
Anyone who also believes promiscuous women are likely to change to some kind of paragon of moral virtue ought to read a bit of this thread.
http://www.secretsocietyofwomen.com/secrets/sex/forum/topic/christmas-party-secret%E2%80%A6/?topic_page=1&num=15
I’d argue that a woman might be emotionally better off admitting that she just wants sex, getting it on her terms and walking away than she would by convincing herself of relationships that don’t exist and never will in order to justify having sex.
Oh, so these women don’t actually want relationships, they are just pressured by society to, and that’s what causes their feelings? Apologies if I’m misinterpreting, but I just don’t buy it. I’ve tried the FwB thing with quite a few women now, and even when they go into it willingly saying it’s just about sex they’ve without fail developed feelings. I’m not saying this is a universal thing, but widely observable. I’ve seen it play out the same way again and again with my friends. The more self-aware, balanced female friends of mine have been honest about this as truth, it’s the deluded ones that seem to claim otherwise. I’m not a moron, I can pick a deluded, damaged girl out by talking to her.
.
No, women aren’t the same as men sexually. When a woman wants to have sex with me, I generally don’t worry about her not calling me back or losing interest. I don’t believe it’s society making her continue to want me. That’s why women are often projecting when they think sex—>feelings—>commitment. It just doesn’t work that way for men.
.
And wtf? A growing porn market for women? OMG! The chains are finally being lifted! Give me a break, the smugness coming from some of you is nothing short of ridonculus. Women aren’t as visual as men. They aren’t turned on by watching sex as much as men are.
.
A women currently engaged in promiscuity is not attractive to a man in the present past a lay. A woman who WAS promiscuous becomes less attractive as a long-term partner. A promiscuous man is an entirely different story. How is this even up for debate? Why are the female posters consistently ignoring female mating preferences?
.
Oh, and the girls that can and do detach themselves from sex regularly? NO THANKS. That’s not a healthy girl, it’s a girl with HUGE issues. It’s more often than not a girl who admits to not being able to going more than a week without sex. A girl who NEEDS that. A girl who gets wasted regularly to facilitate said encounters. I don’t need to get sloshed to have sex. Most promiscuous girls do. You can claim otherwise how you want, I’ve been in the field, and I’ve seen it. There are shades of gray, but I’ll only tolerate so much of that gray in a potential life partner.
.
P.S. – tom’s clearly a woman. Susan, have you cross-referenced “his” IP?
.
Anecdotes, while more emotionally compelling, are not a substitute for data.
That’s quite rich coming from someone who’s posted nothing but anecdotes and disparaged data because a poor study is somehow inferior to vignettes from the life of an urban professional.
I don’t know what a woman’s natural tendencies are, however, they do seem to eventually prefer maximum investment from men. Marriage, which under the patriarchal system is meant to maximize male parental investment, has been undermined by large amounts of available casual sex. Thus, women live in an environment where men seek to minimize investment while acquiring easy sex for large portions of a woman’s prime productive years. I cannot believe this is what women want. Feminism, which taught women to maximize their sexual autonomy, thus comes at a cost. I think this is at the root of the “numbers” debate. Male investment is predicated upon the scarcity principle. The exchange is simple in traditional societies: the women exchanges free access to sex to one man for his material and familial investment. Society puts all kinds of restrictions on out-of-wedlock sex among eligible partners and pushes extramarital sex to the ineligible, mostly prostitutes. Its not elegant, but it works to ensure male parental investment. For women, the scarce resource appears to be male emotional investment. This is the case in all matriarchal societies. Biologically aware that a child from any union will be genetically hers, her greatest fear is that she would be abandoned. Humans operate on this “instinct” even if we rationalize it away. This, combined with natural hypergamy, leads most women to discount the number of partners, and focus on “love,” the emotional indicator of investment. Men and women will never see eye-to-eye on this. The more partners, the less scarce access becomes, the less worthy of his investment.
.
And I’ve known plenty of women who have successfully done FWB or had men fall for them. Personal experience, while interesting, proves little more than people believe what they see.
.
.
A lot of women do delude themselves about the sex->feelings->commitment thing. They also mistake sexual interest for emotional interest. A smart woman learns the difference. But most women don’t analyze it like that. The meet a man they like, sleep with him, and hope for more, usually in vain. Just like most men don’t analyze it when a beautiful woman is giving him attention for reasons other than her genuine interest in him as a person.
.
<blockquote.And wtf? A growing porn market for women? OMG! The chains are finally being lifted! Give me a break, the smugness coming from some of you is nothing short of ridonculus. Women aren’t as visual as men. They aren’t turned on by watching sex as much as men are.
Nielson has it at 1 in 3 porn viewers online are women.
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-07-24/living/o.women.watching.porn_1_arousal-candida-royalle-explicit-sexual-imagery?_s=PM:LIVING
.
And…turns out woman are pretty visual in what turns them on. When studies *asked* how turned on women were by porn, they answered differently than when devices actually measured their physical arousal.
.
“Or, better, it depends. In his landmark interview studies in the 1940s and ’50s, conducted with nearly 17,000 men and women, Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues found that 54 percent of men and only 12 percent of women reported being erotically aroused by seeing photographs, drawings, or paintings of nude people. Kinsey also found that during masturbation, men tend to fantasize visually while women generally don’t do so. This does not mean, however, that porn does not elicit sexual arousal in women. Laboratory studies have shown that women almost invariantly show physical signs of sexual excitement to porn movies, as indicated by increased vaginal blood flow. Interestingly, this can happen even when women don’t like the movies or when they experience negative emotions such as disgust or anger. And studies have also shown that women show stronger physical sexual responses to porn than to more romantic erotic stimuli. ”
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/special/why.html
.
.
Women don’t necessarily want a promiscuous man. Women want a man who has other options but chooses not to exercise them in favor of her. She settles for a promiscuous alpha man…just like men settle for sluts if they’re hot enough.
.
.
I heartily agree that if either side regularly needs alcohol to facilitate their encounters, that’s a clue that they aren’t completely comfortable with it. And why would a woman who can detach sex from love automatically have issues? If you ask me, there are enough issues among the women who can’t detach them.
djb, feminism had locked out women from having the power to choose their own partners — as in the ability to have any man at any time. This is why the chronology of marriage was rewritten so that it was some kind of historical slavery; a few of the more astute and mercurial women had desperate inclinations to sleep with the most attractive men, but they were bound by monogamy to serve in marriages that were often more practical than full of fireworks and lust. The emotional drive, the spirit behind feminism, was to crack the restraints on sexuality for both men and women that prevented the latter from access to a select amount of the former. Monogamy has and always will serve children over their parents, but women have a somewhat more acute disgust for it because of their higher value genetic material. It’s the equivalent to harnessing a jaguar.
.
Until recent times, the most attractive men of age were quickly taken off the market by marrying the most attractive women, and even by sleeping behind their wives’ backs, they could only service so many other wanting femmes. But feminism, accompanied by technologies that hypercharged the sentiment to strengths way beyond its past efforts (late Rome for instance) sufficed to sell a vision of ceaseless open sex to “men”; at least in the theoretical, it’s possible many women really believed this could come true. Instead, feminism represents the absolute apex of what amount of the female sexual ideal can be put into practice; she cannot get the most attractive man to commit to her alone, but she can prevent him from committing at all. It is a grave mistake to underestimate the power of the female sex drive, and as with the male, it clouds out many other seemingly important or even crucial considerations.
djb, monogamy had locked out*
I’m kind of surprised you’re having this discussion in the first place. Promiscuous women are viewed by men as worse LTR prospects than non-promiscuous ones because they are more likely to cheat and cuckold and less likely to be emotionally pair-bond with one man. Many women hate this because it means they cannot exactly have it all in life. It’s really that simple.
Good God, this thread is still going?
To aldonza,
Wonderful posts. Entertaining to see these guys fail to respond adequately. And I doff my cap at someone better able to articulate than myself.
.
To others,
.
Paternity confirmation……. Somebody tried to sneak this in.. It’s bullshit due to DNA tests. Men can now be sure of paternity.
.
Porn/sex drive. …. Anyone who has been to a male strip show can attest to aggressive female sexuality. A dash of alcohol can really set some girls free.
.
Numbers of girls With modern attitudes……. In the uk 45% of girls go to college. Those that don’t tend to party hard in town centres on fri and sat.
Most teenage pregnancy is by non college girls.
According to all our health agencies teen sex and stds are a pandemic.
.
I would say that combined about 75% of uk college and non college girls are having frequent sex by the age of 20. I don’t have any medical contacts in the USA so don’t know your figures.
.
I would also say that the 25% who don’t is because of religion, appearance or confidence.
.
Interesting. The number of girls with “modern” attitudes. What does that mean? So it is isolated to pockets in the UK and US. Does that leave the rest of the world with women who have “normal” attitudes. It would seem so. Well then, men in the US/UK would be well served with that knowledge. Thanks Jess
Bitterness accusation………well, who is bitter?. Susan? Me? Aldonza? Miley cyrus?
.
I am very happy with the freedoms I enjoyed and was lucky enough not to have awful experiences. I am very grateful to be born in this age. I would have been very bitter if I had been locked in an unhappy union for 30 years. I would not wish that on anyone.
.
I can imagine a cat woman (respect to aldonza-great line) being bitter but as it’s been pointed out the ugly/ fat girl is more likely to become one regardless of chastity. .
.
Whilst numbers may be a factor they play second fiddle to other qualities.
.
( my partner has just shouted out ‘like a tight ass!’ from the kitchen when I read this out to him-classy)
If I told my new partner that I had fallen in love with 100 women by the time I was 21, I wonder what her response would be? Would she be thinking wow, this man has great LTR potential, or would she be thinking there must be something a little off? It doesn’t mean he would be off the market entirely, but, come on, 100 women? Wouldn’t his love be, then, something a little less valuable? Remember, the fundamental exchange for most men is love for sex. There’s a reason more men watch porns than love RomComs.
Djb,
I think you have used a highly extreme example. 100 partners is a lot. To fall in love 100 times? That’s pathological.
But what if a 30 yo girl has had say, 24 exes over 12 years and been in love say 3 times.
What if a 40 yo girl has had say 44 exes and been in love 5 times?
What if this same girl was super hot? And loved you?
100 partners is a lot. To fall in love 100 times? That’s pathological.
.
But 100 partners would NOT be pathological?
.
LOL, it is funny to watch the hamster in action
Also you make a genralistaion about romcoms. I know men who like them and women who hate them. Its true that woman often Like emotional films. That’s got nothing to do with sex drive. Some men like gear boxes. Doesn’t harm their sex drive either.
.
Also people are complex. I like some romcoms if they are well made.
But other ‘female’ programs I hate:
.
Sex and city
Desperate housewives
Hung
Any British copy – there are loads
Mike c,
Your obsessing with rodents is charming. I did say 100 by 21 is a lot did I not?
I assume you would accept that sex and falling in love are usually not the same thing?
.
By 21 eh? Let’s assume that he started at 17. So 100 by 4 years is 25 a year or 2 escapades a month on average. For many guys that’s believable. A lot. I would advise a health check but hardly pathological.
.
But to actually fall in love twice a month, for 4 years? surely that’s a mental issue?
.
You know what mike, my dear, my friends and colleagues singled you out as either sexually inadequate or a wind up merchant and I can’t believe you meant your last post. So I will email a few medical friend and ge tbtheir view
I assume you would accept that sex and falling in love are usually not the same thing?
.
Yes
You know what mike, my dear, my friends and colleagues singled you out as either sexually inadequate or a wind up merchant and I can’t believe you meant your last post. So I will email a few medical friend and ge tbtheir view
I have no idea what a “wind up merchant” is. Must be some British slang.
.
LOL. Interesting how you resort to a sort of passive-aggressive insulting. This is typical feminist type tactics which is to move the debate to ad hominem. FWIW, my GF would disagree.
FWIW, I would absolutely agree that having 100 sex partners is NOT the same as “falling in love” 100 times.
Everyone who has posted here has clearly stated that numbers do matter. Now it comes down to leaving people along about the choices they make based on numbers. The only reason people are bothered by what other people decide is because it puts them at some disadvantage. That is true because people act in their self interest.
“Many women hate this because it means they cannot exactly have it all in life. It’s really that simple.”
.
That seems to be the undercurrent of all that is written about this topic: women who engage in casual sex want it all. As if it is some sort of right. However, repeatedly, it is stated as something that “should be” rather than as something that is simply just wanted. Men “should” have sex with us when we want and those same men “should” marry us despite our behavior. The truthful statement is: We want men to have sex with us when we want and we want those same men to marry us despite our behavior.
.
Women do not make the statement that this what they want. If they did, their want could be denied by, gasp, men! If they did, they could be seen as needy, frustrated, immature. If they did, they could be viewed as sex crazed whores. Remember Jaclyn Friedman. So rather than stick their necks out and state what they want and then ask for what they want, they choose to denigrate men as a way to achieve some sort of submission fantasy. Blame men for creating and maintaining the situation. Label men who refuse to acquiesce as hypocrites, weak, unfair, misogynists, insecure and hope that shames them into giving in.
“Many women hate this because it means they cannot exactly have it all in life. It’s really that simple.”
.
That seems to be the undercurrent of all that is written about this topic: women who engage in casual sex want it all.
They want it all as if it is some sort of right. However, repeatedly, it is stated as something that “should be” rather than as something that is simply just wanted. Men “should” have sex with us when we want and those same men “should” marry us despite our behavior. The truthful statement is: We want men to have sex with us when we want and we want those same men to marry us despite our behavior.
Women do not make the statement that this what they want. If they did, their want could be denied by, gasp, men! If they did, they could be seen as needy, frustrated, immature. If they did, they could be viewed as sex crazed whores. Remember the martyr Jaclyn Friedman. So rather than stick their necks out and state what they want and then ask for what they want, they choose to denigrate men as a way to achieve some sort of submission fantasy. Blame men for creating and maintaining the situation. Label men who refuse to acquiesce as hypocrites, weak, unfair, misogynists, insecure and hope that shames them into giving in.
Women do not make the statement that this what they want. If they did, their want could be denied by, gasp, men! If they did, they could be seen as needy, frustrated, immature. If they did, they could be viewed as sex crazed. Remember the martyr Jaclyn Friedman. So rather than stick their necks out and state what they want and then ask for what they want, they choose to denigrate men as a way to achieve some sort of submission fantasy. Blame men for creating and maintaining the situation. Label men who refuse to acquiesce as hypocrites, weak, unfair, misogynists, insecure and hope that shames them into giving in.
This “want it all” attitude regarding sex was hijacked from feminism. But unlike actual legitimate feminist campaigns, this was not about equality in economics or politics; it was about maximizing unequal easy access to physical pleasure and not being held accountable for reducing the rank of husband to the level of other men a woman decides to have sex with.
.
But if a man simply decides to avoid promiscuous women, here is the worn out shaming-attempt stump speech you will always hear from insecure nervous angry bitter women and their feminist supporters:
.
A man who prefers to not consider or rescue a promiscuous woman for marriage is at the very best an insecure man who cannot handle comparison, or at the very worst a controlling possessive misogynist who felt the need to control his wife’s body and sexuality even before they met. Marriage is a pact for the future, not for the past. The need for loyalty and commitment within the present relationship does not necessitate the ridiculous assumption that you should have a say in the past choices of your significant other. That is simply a sign of possessiveness, insecurity, and a chauvinistic desire for the territorial ownership of women and their bodies.
.
Stated another way:
“Many women hate this because it means they cannot exactly have it all in life. It’s really that simple.”
Label men who refuse to acquiesce as hypocrites, weak, unfair, misogynists, insecure and hope that shames them into giving in.
.
Absolutely. Study Jess’s comments and see the recurring theme. The vast majority of the comments attempt to poke at some sort of insecurity. That is the male weak spot. Last one, I was “sexually inadequate”.
Here is the thing with all the shaming nonsense. The ball is in your court AS A MAN whether you choose to allow it to influence you, your behavior, your communication, how you interact. Most men capitulate, they allow themselves to be played like puppets. It is like the Matrix though, “There is no spoon”. Once you clearly demonstrate that you won’t allow yourself to be verbally manipulated and shamed, the jig is up. It is all about frame control.
.
One of the things I think is happening, not sure on what scale, but guys are waking up one by one, being unplugged, and realizing much of what they were taught is complete bullshit, and to realize their innate instincts are not wrong. Follow your instincts, and ignore the societal programming. It is always interesting to me to see some of these male commenters who are 20 or 21, or 26 or whatever. It took me until my early to mid 30s to unplug.
A plausible reason as to why men are being shamed: because the sex-on-demand women or SOD’s feel that they are being shamed by men. But the men are NOT shaming them. They are getting laid and then merely detouring around them, if they can. The women are personally offended and act like little children because mature men with conviction do have alternatives and are not ashamed to acquire them. Proud hypocrites can’t lose these days.
“Paternity confirmation……. Somebody tried to sneak this in.. It’s bullshit due to DNA tests. Men can now be sure of paternity.”
.
First of all, paternity tests are an extremely recent invention, and they’ve been around for comparatively an insignificant sliver of human history. Our hardwired evolutionary instincts do not change over the course of ten or twenty years. Neither you nor aldonza has provided absolutely any empirical evidence to the contrary, while — as with the odds of marrying a harlot — there’s a great deal of empirical evidence to prove that nothing much has changed. We are still effectively governed by animal instincts. If we weren’t, fathers wouldn’t bother risking their lives for their children.
.
“But what if a 30 yo girl has had say, 24 exes over 12 years and been in love say 3 times.”
.
As I’ve posted before, these thought experiments are almost insane when it comes to their parameters. 24? In 12 years? She had sex without love with 21 people, and there was an average of two per year? Exactly what does “love” mean to such a creature?
“I am very happy with the freedoms I enjoyed and was lucky enough not to have awful experiences. I am very grateful to be born in this age. I would have been very bitter if I had been locked in an unhappy union for 30 years.”
.
Readers would do well to pay extremely close attention to Jess’ justifications and compare them with my post on feminism.
” It’s bullshit due to DNA tests. Men can now be sure of paternity.”
That’s completely beside the point, Jess. A married man in the US has no legal protection from his wife whatsoever if she cuckolds him. If he files for divorce, he will lose custody, his wealth and can easily be forced to pay child support for a kid that provably isn’t his. What kind of idiot would sign up for something like that?
“Wonderful posts. Entertaining to see these guys fail to respond adequately.”
ROFL! Dream on, Jess.
Terre,
I’m sorry but you are mistaken. DNA tests have been around for nearly 20 years.
We are talking about contemporary society are we not.
And you can’t argue the ancient biology on this:
According to many, men have a desire to spread their seed.
This is a calling from 40,000 years plus
Ie before child support was invented.
So the ‘fear of cuckolding’ has to be a modern-ish issue no?
In any case I spoke to a family lawyer last month on this.
Whilst there are grey areas in different countries and different states, if a guy defaults on a support payment and it’s then proved he is not the father then it’s nigh on impossible for a court to force him to pay. (although compensation or fraud claims are unlikely to ever work out)
Instead they have to force the mom to tell the court the identity of the real father or the state pays.
If a guy is worried about false paternity just do a hair DNA test in the 1st month.
So issue dealt with chaps.
To Abbott et al,
Despite the accusations of anger and vitriol you and others aim at the sex positive fems, I can only see anger from the guys here. ( well at least in this thread anyhow).
I just don’t see women complaining as such. There are plenty of attractive guys who don’t appear to care about this ( very much).
It is perhaps true that women want their cake and to eat it to….
But dont guys want that? …. A bit of fun and then a family?
.
Personally I would not like to have an LTR with a virgin guy. They might not know themselves or even their true preferences. But if a man does want to have an LTR with a virgin then fine. Each to thier own.
.
But if you call humans ‘creatures’ or ‘ whores’ or ‘ slags’ etc expect others to call you few names back.
.
And on such a holier than thou note may I wish everyone a merry christmas and a happy new year. X.
It’s also worth noting that paternity means nothing in a divorce court. As Hollenhund said, you can indeed end up paying child support for a child that isn’t yours. It’s probably not terribly common, but that’s only as things stand, and as with marrying loose women, I’d rather opt out than take the bet, thanks.
2 consecutive posts have vanished. They were accepted for a while.
@ mike…………..You are correct, but the percentages aren’t even in the same galaxies. My question would be what “drive” is creating that massive differential.
Not true, women are seen as the new costomer..
http://www.humanismbyjoe.com/women_&_porn.htm
.
Well, post them again then, Jess. I’m sure you remember what you wrote.
Tbh H I’m not too sure I can recall them. They were both medium sized posts.
I’d rather not bother till I know they will be saved safely. I’m sure Susan will sort it out after the holiday break.
J x
Happy New Year to all.
Here is my take on this subject.
We all know many men out there look down on an “experienced” woman. They want nothing to do with her as far as a long term relationship goes. Many would still have a one nighter with her, which is sooo hypocritical, in my opinion.
We also know there are men who do not judge a woman because of her past, as long as she is a good person today. Some people are enlightened enough to understand there are many paths people take and experience to find themselves.
We also know there are many reasons, both men and women experience and enjoy variety.Like wise there are many reasons why they want to give up being single and settle down.
My take is the attitude many men have towards promiscuous women is mostly social conditioning. They compare a living, breathing, generally good person to funiture. (It`s been used, therefore it is no longer worthy)
If these men examined their attitude, they would find it seeded in insecurity. They are insecure as to their ability to hold on to such a woman, they are insecure as to the health of the woman, they are insecure as to her knowledge of other men and how “I” might compare to the others. Self-confidence is lacking in this holier- than- thou attitude, and testing is the answer to the health question.
Someone earlier posted a comment that went something like this,” why would a woman who has been with 25 men want to project that type of jealously on a new man.” LOL , I rest my case.
You are right Jess:
“But dont guys want that? …. A bit of fun and then a family?”
.
But I see, from just reading this site, that is not where the discomfort comes from. Its from the fact that, as shown by many stats in the web, that women have on average more sex mates then men do. So her “bit” is not a bit at all. Plus as proven over and over, a man’s bit of fun is not so much fun as it takes much effort and he therefore places value on what takes effort. If she had her fun with sex, then what is supposed to do with now? The man settles down because it was not so much fun…the woman, well because she cant attract that fun anymore. So if your speaking of equality, well it is not equal and comparing to men is misleading. Comparing to men is a cheap shot and baseless. Men are justified to see woman differently than they see themselves, in the West anyway.
@ abbot.
Even if a man has to work a little harder at getting laid, they succeed just about as often as women. This “value” you speak of is total BS. There is a lot more to a person than the number of times they get laid or how easy it was to do so…. That is a pretty shallow premise.
You said,
” a man’s bit of fun is not so much fun as it takes much effort and he therefore places value on what takes effort. LOL @ that BS. There are many women who will make it easy for a man to get laid. Men do not hold the only ,”willingness to get you laid card.”
I just cant get over the hypoctitical attitude of people of my own gender. Honestly, it is ok for a man to go out and get laid over and over, but not ok for a woman? LOL ..Quit being sheeple and start thinking for yourself.
There are a lot of wonderful women out there who, for one reason or another, has had a lot of sex with different guys. Now, they are to be judged by the holier- than- thou club who do the exact same thing…..
We live in modern times, in a modern society. Rational thinking men are not out trying to ,”spread their seed” or are too worried about whether or not they are the father of a child. There are tests for that situation. It really boils down to men, not accepting women as sexual beings too and then making excuses to cover their own insecurities.
@ abbot
you said, “If she had her fun with sex, then what is supposed to do with now? The man settles down because it was not so much fun…the woman, well because she cant attract that fun anymore.”
Where do you get this garbage?.. A woman has fun with sex, and that means she will not have fun pleasurable sex with her significant other????
A man settles down because going out and finding a sex partner isnt fun anymore, but a woman stops because she can not attract that fun anymore????
How about they both tired of the single life, and want something more in their life and are ready to commit to one person.
“it is ok for a man to go out and get laid over and over, but not ok for a woman?”
.
It is ok for a man or a woman, of course. I do not see on this site anyone stating it is no ok. Thats just silly. People can do what they want.
.
And if men or women are not comfortable with someone who did, for whatever reason they are not comfortable, why is it ok to denigrate them or shame them or accuse them of being something they may or may not be?
.
If a person is rejected for something they did in the past – well, that harms no one. There is no crime, there is no detriment to society, there is no damage. So again, why is the name calling used over and over? Can it now stop please? Is that ok? Let people make their decisions in peace no matter what reasons you assume they make them for.
@ abbot
you said,
“it is ok for a man to go out and get laid over and over, but not ok for a woman?”
.
It is ok for a man or a woman, of course. I do not see on this site anyone stating it is no ok. Thats just silly. People can do what they want.
.
_________________________
According to the majority of men here, it is NOT ok for women to sleep around if the women want to settle down with them for a long term relationship.
All I have done is point out the reasons behind that attitude, and the excuses men make to avoid an experienced woman. I am not saying men do not have that choice, obviously they do, no matter how shallow the decision leading to that choice may be.
Correct – it is not ok for them PERSONALLY and only in the case of settling down. The reason behind it are speculative unless of course you have a personal conversation with someone and they tell you about their reasoning and even then it should not be projected on men as a group. Short of that it is generalization and stereotype.
.
It seems that women do not like that men have this choice. I do not know why. My read on Jaclyn Friedman is that she does not like it too. There is something more to this than a man making a quiet..harmless…inconsequential…personal choice. There is something bugging theses folks about it and that is why name calling is resorted too.
It is the old double standard that drives women crazy. Men can sleep around and that is somehow ok and they EXPECT women to forgive their past and settle down with them anyway.
However if a woman does the same thing, they are no longer LTR material.
There ARE some women who will judge a man because of his past, it is just a small minority. However men are much more quick to judge. I guess women would rather judge a man on his qualities that make him a good person, where some mens egos get in the way of their judgement. They cant get past the sex thing and see the true qualities of that woman.
It probably only drives a certain group of women crazy. I suppose its because they have a good reason to feel that way. I wonder what that reason is.
“Men can sleep around and that is somehow ok and they EXPECT women to forgive their past and settle down with them anyway.”
.
Who? I’ve never even met a girl who’s cared that I’m promiscuous. If anything, it makes them keener.
@ terre
Who? I’ve never even met a girl who’s cared that I’m promiscuous. If anything, it makes them keener.
Their egos do not get in the way, I guess they are better men than most of the men here…lol
They judge you on you and not something so unimportant as sex.
“
Maybe its so unimportant to them because its so easy to get so in their mind, its no big deal, just like shaking hands. And therefore they assume it should be no big deal in the man’s mind too. But really, how others think should be respected – not denigrated.
Sorry I dont respect people who will judge people based on emotion and not logic. I am not saying if a guy doesnt want to be with an experienced woman for a longterm he can not. I am just bringing to light the reasons many men feel this way.
This is being discussed on Answerology.com, and trust me, the men there have a completely different attitude than the men here. Most admit it is an ego problem, nothing more in the vast majority of cases.
It seems that everything regarding feelings of attachment is not based on logic. At least for humans. And as I said for more than once, none of this is a problem. But if it is a problem, It has not been explained what the problem is.
“Their egos do not get in the way, I guess they are better men than most of the men here…lol
They judge you on you and not something so unimportant as sex.”
.
You’re not really listening to what I’m saying. They are judging me on it; it’s just that they’re judging me favorably.
@ terre
No I got what you were saying. They like that you are experienced.
However, they are ignoring the negative aspect of sexual experience, because they know there are more important things to judge a person for. I doubt they like you ONLY because you are sexually experienced, but there are men who still judge a women badly for her experience.
…and therefore they expect you to judge them favorably as well, or neutral at best. If not, well that drives them crazy. Based on logic? None of this has a logic basis.
.
The woman is respected for her view. The man should be respected for his. This is some logic but not the case.
Is there a negative aspect of sexual experience that requires ignoring? Maybe ignoring is the way to go.
They like that you are experienced.
Nope. Fail. Do not pass go.
It is the preselection effect, not some conscious analysis that the guy brings “experience” to the table. Any guy who has studied Game is well aware of the preselection effect.
“Tom”, when are you finally going to come out. It is almost getting silly. I’m not the only guy who has noticed.
mmmm…. a man does not have an expectation that a woman needs to consider forgiving his past. Women do not know that he has no such expectation. So what man would state that men do have this expectation?
Mike when are you going to get on your knees and ………me
Just because I am not an insecue macho man like you mike, doesnt make me any less “a man” I understand there is more to a woman than how many people she has slept with. Unlike your immature , insecure rear. Men like you hide their opinions behind biology and million year old actions.
Forget religious upbringings, personal experience, social conditioning and tramatic happenings.
Its all about science and people can not help themselves.. All BS sir.
truth be known the biggest morons are the guys, after charishing their woman for years, finally asks the question about her number, and then feaks out because she is now a slut in his eyes.
Only the smart guys who have self confidense are aware that a good woman is a good woman, no matter her past.
It is the insecure that fear these women of experience. period. I can share with you other forums where my opinion is the norm, and the men there are not the judgemental ,insecure, hypoctritical, misinformed, puratanical jerks we have seen here in this forum.
Mike you are so full of BS it must be oosing from your ears. I would love fo you to “call me out” in person, you`d be chitting a brick, you computer screen tough guy.
“It is the insecure that fear these women of experience. period. I can share with you other forums where my opinion is the norm, and the men there are not the judgemental ,insecure, hypoctritical, misinformed, puratanical jerks we have seen here in this forum.”
.
I can share with you forums where adult human beings dress in diapers and act like babies for sexual pleasure. What difference does it make?
Since this defined group of so-called “women of experience” are seemingly not disadvantaged or unable to achieve their life goals in any way whatsoever due to the existence of so-called “fearful, judgemental ,insecure, hypoctritical, misinformed, puratanical jerks” then, once again:
.
What is the problem????
I can’t speak for all women but I actually don’t think there is a huge problem with this.
.
Obviously this blog indicates some people think there are problems.
.
To anyone, of either gender or persuasion, go and use a dating site, brush your teeth, be yourself, don’t be too choosy whilst still being sure you fancy and like someone.
.
There is somebody for everyone.
I cannot imagine there is any problem. So why is there so much denigration language aimed at men who choose wives outside the small group who are happily promiscuous?
truth be known the biggest morons are the guys, after charishing their woman for years, finally asks the question about her number, and then feaks out because she is now a slut in his eyes.
Only the smart guys who have self confidense are aware that a good woman is a good woman, no matter her past.
.
“Tom”, I understand that you are upset about the guy who rejected you and freaked out about your number despite you being a good woman. Don’t worry, I’m sure there is a good guy out there who won’t have an issue with it.
@Mike C
I think you’re right about this, and it actually kind of breaks my heart. I think there are many women in this position, feeling like no one ever told them it would be a problem. The feminists said there was no more double standard, and readily dismiss any man who has a problem with that. A woman with a history of promiscuity can either:
1. Take refuge in the feminist community, which doesn’t warm the bed at night
2. Lie about her number
3. Search for a man who doesn’t mind
.
It’s a tough row to hoe.
I think you have it the wrong way around.
Women would mind their own business but they feel compelled to respond if called names or criticised.
.
So if for example Susan created a thread called ‘Ginger people are evil’ I suppose many people would argue against her. Ginger people included.
.
Don’t forget people often have strong convictions about fairness and equality and acceptance.
Did you know only a fraction of the worlds female population have equal rights to their male peers?
Now if that was the other way around, as a man, how do you think you would feel?
There is option 4 as well which is a guy who “sorta minds” but get deal with and accept it. As I said earlier in this thread, I don’t think it is a dealbreaker issue.
.
To use an extreme example, take a 9-10 in looks with a sweet/pleasant demeanor who has a lot of common interests and is a great cook, but just so happens to have banged 50 guys. A guy might have to do some inner mental wrenching, but be able to work through it, especially if he can believe she’ll be sexually faithful.
.
So it isn’t the “end of the world” in terms of being able to land a guy for a LTR. It just isn’t binary. All else being equal though, it is value reducing.
And only a fraction of the world’s female population is promiscuous. Men are merely acting on their feelings and their awareness of available options when avoiding them and that has nothing to so with equal rights. Acceptance yes, and that perhaps is the crux of all the negative reaction. Most men in the world refuse to accept but there are enough who do so that the the promiscuous fraction can find someone.
Mike it is value reducing in YOUR eyes and other insecure men like you…
LOL @ you thinking I am a woman….You want my email? I will then send you my facebook. you will see there is nothing lady like about me.
Susan you are blowing this “problem” way out of proportion. Men are much more accepting of womens sexuallity than they used to be. Even mike admits it may not be a deal breaker.. There is hope for the world.
I am not saying all promiscous woman are good relationship material, just as not all virgins are good relationship material. And certainly not all men promiscous or not are good relationship material.
There are players in both genders. I`d like to hear the biological reasons for players. I guess they just have the primal urge to “spread” their seed…lol
“There are players in both genders. I`d like to hear the biological reasons for players. I guess they just have the primal urge to “spread” their seed…lol”
.
You do realize that for every extra seed a player spreads, there was a woman who willingly took it, right?
yes good point, and shame on them both…lol
How many sexual partners in the same night qualify a woman as a slut? I know a woman who boasts of routinely screwing 3 guys, sometimes more in a night, usually in the ladies room of the night club she frequents. She also states, matter of factly, that she’s screwed upwards of 350 guys. She’s 24.
There is some really great stuff on here. Please let me contribute a little about the DOUBLE STANDARD. I had a very rocky relationship which ended last week. One topic we discussed in detail was the “double standard” which my gf used to justify her promiscuity. She was raised in a very conservative home and by all means, should know that her prom would/could have neg impacts for her.
My interpretation of the double standard is that men and women are wired differently biologically, obvious enough? Men are more likely to sleep with anyone and everyone they can, NOT that this is a good thing or makes it healthy. Women are generally more likely to resist casual sex advances for other reasons i will not get into yet. WHEN a woman really enjoys casual sex or goes after it, she can easily achieve it. This can be easily shown by walking into any bar or singles joint across the country and finding far more men than women present. Look on craigs list. You will likely find 20-25 males adds for every female add. A man probably cannot go out and get laid on a boring monday night. A woman probably can. Take that as you will, but to impose a “single standard” is to stereotype further and deny the truth of what many others have said here.
As to my situation. I have baggage froma relationship about 3 years ago that really tore me up. I was dating a girl who was using the web to hook up all the time. The more i got to know her, the more i realized she had some real emotional issues. She lied about nearly everything to me.
Enter rjp last summer. On our first date, i let out what i was after: a best friend who was honest. I told her about my baggage and how honesty and integrity were very important for me. rjp went out and had a one night stand the following weekend. She is 36. Well we hit it off and i really fell for her. I asked her the # question, because it was important for me to never repeat my previous mistake. She lied to me about it and i found out about the ONS and that she had been very promiscuous, many 3-soms, lots of cocaine, and things such as walking into a party and having a 3-som with strange guys (says that only happened once). I found out that she had sex with 3 other guys in the month prior to having sex with me (on our 2nd date). Hear the bell going off? Unfortunately, she really liked me and was lying to me until i was in too deep to be more objective and healthy about the realtionship.
Long of the short, she really did love me and i sure fell for her but i was still getting over her actions. SHe lied to me about many things and tells me she has had sex with only 32 other men. Can i believe that after the other lies? When i know she had sex with 4 guys in a month, can she have only slept with 32 guys? These questions are tough, and i was working through them, trying to see the future and not the past. Unfortunately, the grief of all this was too fresh when yet another lie popped up. I lost my temper and called her a “lying slut”. I shouted it. I lost my head entirely and that really hurt her.
For you ladies out there: past behavior predicts future behavior. That simple. People can change, but only a few do.
I really do love her and all of the other goals in life are perfect. I hope she can work past the painful truth i yelled at her and forgive me. Should i keep trying on this woman or is it time to move on in a world that is hard and lonely?
I`d rather be lonely than to be worrying all the time about my partners fidelity and honestly…But that is just me.
Torn, what you’ve described is a woman who took advantage of easy low hanging fruit pleasure…only because she could and she lives in a culture that does not consider the male opinion about such matters. Although it involves men. And then she wants a man. Its an irony in the extreme. Its an American nightmare, not a dream and paints the view of American women globally, and perhaps deservedly so. Got a passport?
@torn
Only 32 other guys? Are you being serious right now? Do you understand that that puts her in the most promiscuous 1% of women in America? I say run, don’t walk away from this woman. She has displayed her poor character many times over with her lying. A world in which you are single has got to be better than being with a woman like this. You can surely do better than this.
@Torn
I beleive that if the sleeping around didn’t bothered you the lies should. If she was willing to lie to get with you and she got away with it then she will be willing to lie to keep you, if she runs into an ex and decides to have one more roll for old times sake. Unless you are considering an open relationship with her know for sure that you will never be able to fullfill the sexual appetite for someone that is willing to have a threesome, specially with strangers. So think LONG and HARD about sharing your life with her after all this “red flags” I know is hard because you are already emotionally involved (something she allowed un purpose) and that you don’t know how long are you going to connect with someone again. But really consider all you will have to deal and if things progress more and you want to have babies with her, you might as well end too deep to leave her if she goes back to her old ways.
My prayers for you.
not wishing to be flippant but my partner & i may have had the odd chuckle at your ‘long and hard’ comment.
.
but yeah, serial liars of that scale are are surely a high risk for a LTR
@Jess
Is okay it does looks “odd” if you don’t know the context. Heh.
Of course, I cannot provied all the details here of what happened. When i say ONLY 32, i am indicating that i believe there may be many more than that. She is beautiful, has a very successful career and holds most of her goals in common with mine…..she has everything i would have ever dreamed of….except intimacy.
I live in a very rural area. I do not have many choices of people to date, and have not been an angel myself. The difference is that I got serious about BEING the kind of person i would like to meet a long time ago. She still has difficulty seeing anything wrong with her promiscuity even after long conversations and the obvious results of our failure. She was still an active player when we met, despite her telling me that she was looking for an LTR. She says I have “anger” issues and I may well have them after all of this.
Thanks for your comments, keep them coming and ask me anything…i have had lots of time for perspectives and experiences.
I know this type of girl Torn…
.
at 32 she should be ready to settle down and if she isnt by now….she probably will never be.
.
whether she lives to regret it…only time will tell
.
she is likely to end up as the cougar type or the Samantha from SATC.
im sure the sex is awesome but you are going to get hurt.
you owe it to yourself to move on, however hard that is.
@torn
Thanks for being so open and honest with us. I am pleased to see so many regular commenters pitching in too. It’s clear she is not taking responsibility, but trying to put the blame on your for taking her behavior in stride. She does not sound like she is giving – no wonder you feel angry.
This is mature and shows integrity. Not many people make the effort to live up to their own standards for finding a mate.
What is too many? That number is in the different for everyone. What is definitive is that if the pesron you are dating or would like to date thinks it’s too many, IT’S TOO MANY.
@Mutable
Good point. That’s really the only measurement that matters. That’s why I urge women to be conservative – you won’t get kicked to the curb for having too few partners.
I am coming to this conversation late. I study this issue and listen to the two polar views and the thing I see missing in this debate is so glaringly obvious that I can’t believe nobody brings it up. What about the woman who simply enjoys sex? A woman with a high libido who has sex with men she is attracted to and genuinely likes. Because she wants to do it. And for no other reason.
Is it possible she does not have low self esteem? Is it possible that she doesn’t feel used? Is it possible that she could have a healthy perspective wrt the possibility of a future relationship with the man? She knows it possible but not probable. She also knows that she may not want a relationship with him and she will make that decision in due time. On a case by case basis.
What about the women who don’t feel empty after? They had orgasms with men they like and it doesn’t have a negative effect on their self worth. Its all a matter of perspective, really.
I truly don’t get why these debates don’t take into consideration a middle ground promiscuous woman. One who is not having an emotionless feminist sex tantrum to prove how empowered she is. Nor is she being used and fooled. She’s having sex because she likes it and believes there is a man out there who will not equate her value with her number. She’s willing to wait for him.
This woman is me
What about the woman who simply enjoys sex? A woman with a high libido who has sex with men she is attracted to and genuinely likes. Because she wants to do it. And for no other reason.
Wild Cougar,
See my comment here:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/04/18/whatguyswant/is-feminism-desires-kryptonite/#comment-38597
.
No doubt, there is certain percentage of women (not sure what the exact number is) who are simply really horny, like good sex alot, are capable of no strings sex with guys they find attractive, no emotional attachment, etc.
.
Ideal woman for a casual fling or playmate. If I were single and not interested in a relationship, the exact type of woman to seek out.
.
As I state in my comment, and the evidence seems to back up though, this type of woman is “high risk” for wife material. The discriminating, choosy guy WITH OPTIONS will, and in fact rules out this type of woman for that purpose.
.
That is the simple reality and which is why women who play that game inevitably settle for the dupe they do not find attractive (see the article of the woman who didn’t take her husband on her honeymoon to pick up other guys, and the article that 30% of women regret marrying their husband).
.
How many times does this have to be stated? It must be a denial thing. Or just such an intense disbelief that men think this way. But they do and they should not be judged or denigrated for it. Just like women should not be judged or denigrated for prolific sexual adventures. That is equality and women are all for that, right? The “sex positive” feminists know men think this way and it drives them bat shit crazy because in their minds, men have no right to decide what’s right for themselves IF those decisions disrupt a woman’s sexual choices currently and marriage choices in the future.
How many times does this have to be stated? It must be a denial thing.
.
Well…it isn’t denial. Denial is the wrong word. We know women underreport their sexual histories. We also know women often go to great lengths to hide their histories or flat out lie even to the guy they might be marrying. So on some level I think most women aren’t in denial about this. They know it is the case. That said, I recall previous discussions where some women will relay the sentiment “I wouldn’t want to be with any guy who would judge that”, and I’d bet in many cases that is the same woman lying. I think this subject….their sexual histories and men’s perception of it sends the hamster into a sort of schizophrenic cognitive dissonance.
.
The “sex positive” feminists know men think this way and it drives them bat shit crazy because in their minds, men have no right to decide what’s right for themselves
.
To their credit, the one thing I think about “sex positive feminists” is that they do seem to “embrace their sluthood” which I think is admirable and respectable. I mean if you are going to engage in certain behavior then be honest and open about it. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen them advocate lying or misrepresenting, so as a guy you know exactly what you are getting and as they say they wouldn’t want you anyways so it is all good.
.
What I do find objectionable though is trying to sell yourself as a 3 year old car with zero past car problems when the reality is you’ve been rolled the odometer back 100,000 miles and have been taken for multiple joyrides that banged the car up. The buyer has a right to know exactly what they are buying. And this equally applies to man-whores.
And this equally applies to man-whores.
Heh cosigning this
.
@Wild Cougar
I often refer to the idea of slut and fake sluts. Most women are fake sluts they have sex with men for a lot of stupid reasons and then get sad when he doesn’t call and he doesn’t remember their name and other signs that show that she really is not having sex for the joy of sex, but because they wanted a relationship. If you are a true slut, congrats! You are at least a genuine person. But if you seek a monogamous relationship at any point of your life, your Romantic Resume would show that you have no experience on the job. Now would you ever approve of hiring a candidate with no experience on a high paying job? Just out of his/her honest desire to do his/her best?
Call me a bitch, but I wouldn’t and I didn’t.
I totally support your right to fill your life with whatever gives you pleasure but like with my dick with legs friends I wouldn’t introduce you to anyone seeking for a serious monogamous relationship and that is something you need to know many, many, many other people agree, YMMV.
.
Then it is the natural selection criteria of men that causes some women who engage in certain behaviors to live this tortured existence. The only difference between say 1955 and today is that there are more of these types of women and therefore more of them are running into “any guy who would judge that” which are just about all guys.
.
Its easy enough to weed them out early on by merely asking if people should be concerned about a potential life mates past sexual history from a future fidelity perspective. If she says no, or its none of their business or similar response or she gets fidgety or appears nervous then go have fun with her. And then move on. Women reveal what they ordinarily wouldn’t when they don’t know your angle.
It would be beneath me to respond to the name calling and cheap shots, so I won’t
I think the thing that all of you are overlooking is the element of agency and choice. The easy for one=easy for all and the converse hard for one=hard for all belief is myth. Just because I choose more sexual partners than another woman does not make me unfit for a long term relationship. It doesn’t mean I don’t have long term fulfilling relationships. It doesn’t mean I won’t be faithful. It also doesn’t mean that I will never find a husband or boyfriend who knows about my history and doesn’t judge me for that. And I don’t have to “reform” or become “enlightened”.
Because guess what? I have had several long term monogamous fulfilling relationships with men who knew everything about me. I married one of them. He had total faith in me and never doubted my fidelity. I never cheated on him. Our marriage didn’t last, but the end of the marriage had nothing to do with my history, it had to do with money issues and his reaction to the death of several close family members in a short period of time.
There is conventional wisdom and there is reality. They are not always the same thing. Women make choices every day about who they have sex with. Promiscuity or lack thereof is a predictor of nothing. In the real world, women who are not normally promiscuous have one-night stands and casual affairs. They also cheat on their spouses and boyfriends. In the real world, promiscuous women find boyfriends and husbands. I would venture to say at the same rate as the non promiscuous women.
People who don’t acknowledge this reality I think make the mistake of believing men make sexual choices for women and not women themselves. Its like, if that many men can talk you into sex, then you will sleep with every man who tries. The fact of that a promiscuous woman chooses one man and not another doesn’t compute.
This is precisely the reason why I would never choose to be in a relationship with a man like that. Because he only sees men as agents. And women as objects acted upon. There are PLENTY of men who can mentally process the human being that exists apart from the genitalia. I prefer relationships with them.
“The discriminating, choosy guy WITH OPTIONS will, and in fact rules out this type of woman for that purpose.
.
That is the simple reality and which is why women who play that game inevitably settle for the dupe they do not find attractive (see the article of the woman who didn’t take her husband on her honeymoon to pick up other guys, and the article that 30% of women regret marrying their husband).”
I wonder what evidence you have that promiscuous women settle for a dupe they don’t find attractive. Or that men who have options would not choose a promiscuous woman. I understand it is your opinion, but my experience says otherwise. But I could be unique, so I would love to see some evidence to back up that claim.
@Wild Cougar
That’s a very honest comment, and it sounds like you know exactly what you want. You recognize that for many men the number is a real concern, but you’re willing to wait for a man who is the exception. I wish you the best of luck!
The plural of anecdote is not data.
I think the thing that all of you are overlooking is the element of agency and choice. The easy for one=easy for all and the converse hard for one=hard for all belief is myth.
.
No one was making that point that easy for one=easy for all. In fact, I know you are absolutely right. Even the most promiscuous of women are still selective about who they have sex with.
Just because I choose more sexual partners than another woman does not make me unfit for a long term relationship. It doesn’t mean I don’t have long term fulfilling relationships. It doesn’t mean I won’t be faithful. It also doesn’t mean that I will never find a husband or boyfriend who knows about my history and doesn’t judge me for that. And I don’t have to “reform” or become “enlightened”.
.
This may very well all be true. The thing is….and I say this as a trader who brings that perspective to all areas of life…life is about probabilities and risk management. One could run across a busy interstate blindfolded and survive but that wouldn’t make is a smart thing to do. Statistics show something like 50-60% of women now cheat in marriage. Would you bet your life savings that previous sexual history has a ZERO correlation with rates of cheating?
.
This is precisely the reason why I would never choose to be in a relationship with a man like that. Because he only sees men as agents. And women as objects acted upon. There are PLENTY of men who can mentally process the human being that exists apart from the genitalia. I prefer relationships with them.
.
This was highly predictable as I noted previously. All that said, I agree with Susan. You sound like you know what you want, and if you are happy, best to you and good luck. I’m not trying to “reform” you or “enlighten” you. If you are living life the way you want and getting what you want, who am I to say any different. Like I said, if I were single and just looking for some no-strings fun, I’d hope I meet a woman like you.
Its easy enough to weed them out early on by merely asking if people should be concerned about a potential life mates past sexual history from a future fidelity perspective. If she says no, or its none of their business or similar response or she gets fidgety or appears nervous then go have fun with her. And then move on. Women reveal what they ordinarily wouldn’t when they don’t know your angle
.
“The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that you’ve got it made.”
The key to getting someone to be very open is to be sympathetic and non-judgemental. They don’t have to know what is really going on inside your head.
I have had several long term monogamous fulfilling relationships with men who knew everything about me.
.
That is actually refreshing compared to a woman who attempts to reinvent herself out of fear of losing a man. Tell the truth and then let the man decide if its right for him, no different than telling a man you have a child or that you need to yodel once a month from your roof. But most women are not honest about the sex partner criteria because they know the nature of men – not to judge, but to feel uncomfortable about all those years of no-challenge easy access to male genitalia. This will not change as long as promiscuous women are a minority in the world.
@ Wild Cougar,
I don’t want to beat a dead horse here but thought this was worth linking to. This ***woman’s*** experience seems at odds with your experience:
.
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/last-one-down-the-aisle-wins-part-1/#comment-7136
.
“The ex-slut post-30 woman has been exposed to HPV and other STDS, possibly had one or several abortions, and has adjusted to alpha sexual relationships to the extent that the typical beta marrying type will not satisfy their need to be used and abused…has only distorted their persona through indulgence in vice rather than learn to understand themselves.
I know many for whom late-in-life marriage worked out for and I know many whose late-in-life marriage resulted in great dissatisfaction on the part of the female. Living fast and free is a hard habit to break.“
.
Not totally at odds as she says she has seen it play out both ways. The operative question though from the guy’s perspective is what is amount of risk you are willing to take on someone?
“Tell the truth and then let the man decide if its right for him, no different than telling a man you have a child or that you need to yodel once a month from your roof.”
Although I believe in honesty, I don’t think the number of sexual partners I have had is the same as having a child or needing to yodel.” My number is not relevent to the relationship. So I don’t announce it, not because I need to hide it, but because its not relevant. It has no bearing on the way I treat the man. Or how we relate to each other.
“um, like the one on top of you right now? So if he is “good enough” to be so deeply intimate and personal with you, why not just marry him?”
I don’t marry people just because I feel like having sex with them. They need to have many other qualities other than being sexually attractive and good company. They need to have honesty, integrity. Need to be hard working and ambitious. They need to be able to hold a good conversation and make me laugh. etc. etc. I slept with whoever I wanted and married the man who had the qualities that made him good enough for me.
Why is that difficult to understand?
@Mike C, there are many men who think like you, but there are many who do not. I won’t even sleep with men who think like you. And you can pretty much tell by their approach.
@ wild couger
I truly don’t get why these debates don’t take into consideration a middle ground promiscuous woman. One who is not having an emotionless feminist sex tantrum to prove how empowered she is. Nor is she being used and fooled. She’s having sex because she likes it and believes there is a man out there who will not equate her value with her number. She’s willing to wait for him.
This woman is me
____________________________
Wild C. Dont waste your breath here. To these people here there is no difference. A number is a number no matter how it was achieved. They seem to think all exprienced women are the same. They even accused me of being a woman in disquise here eecause I can see past the sex a person has had, and I evaluate the woman behind the pussy. You , of course are right. Not all women are the same when it comes to their “number”
I just don’t understand how people don’t see that loyalty and commitment come from a totally different place than one’s willingness to have sex.
They are not mutually exclusive. A promiscuous woman is not less likely to be faithful. Men who think they are often end up with a really good liar.
@Abbot. What ‘”character” trait are you referring to, exactly?
Sex can be very intimate and sacred and it can be purely physical. Even within the confines of a marriage.
This is another “everybody knows that” reality that I am having a problem understand why people choose to ignore with these slut judgments. Just like the reality that good girls cheat.
But I can tell now that Tom is correct. This is not the place to have a rational discussion. I was hoping it was, but, alas, I shall keep looking.
No, its not the judgmental approach, its the “I’m not sure my ( ) is good enough” look they have. Because that is where the madonna/whore complex really comes from.
Because I am researching the issue for a book. I don’t need validation and certainly not from online strangers. But thanks for your time. I’ve gotten a few good quotes out of it.
“She’s willing to wait for him.”
.
But that is not what she is doing. The man currently rubbing genitals with her certainly does not care about the number so why not just marry him?
.
“there is a man out there who will not equate her value with her number.”
.
um, like the one on top of you right now? So if he is “good enough” to be so deeply intimate and personal with you, why not just marry him?
.
“value with her number”
.
a red herring. If that were true, than a woman would be valued for that in all aspects of life and that is not true. The number should not matter according to folks who can’t mind their own business or do not respect how a man thinks. Ok, that’s just how it is. Accepted. But when a man is considering marriage remember that THIS IS THE U.S. where marriage for a man is already extremely risky and its proven fact the courts are very biased. You’re asking way too much from a man to tack on one more risk whether perceived or real.
@Abbot, I put my website on all my comments and used the avatar and name from that blog. But you posted it as if it were a deep dark secret I was trying to hide. That makes it sound so much more exciting. I’m sure a guy like you would enjoy reading about my adventures very much. Thanks for the ad.
“They need to have honesty, integrity.”
.
But not for letting someone get that intimate with you brings your character into question by any man considering committing his life to you. As does your website:
.
http://wildcougarconfessions.tumblr.com/post/4899094451
@Mike C, there are many men who think like you, but there are many who do not. I won’t even sleep with men who think like you. And you can pretty much tell by their approach.
.
LOL. This response is hilarious in its naivete. I have to admit this sort of response amuses me., especially when it comes from an older woman instead of a 19-22-year old.
.
I worked as a bouncer for a year some years back. Worked with and associated with a lot of alpha, bad-boy, sexually attractive guys that got more ass than a toilet seat. You know how many guys would bang some random slut, and come back and talk about it just like that. You think the women had any idea what they really thought of her from his “approach”? Hahahahahahaha. Don’t kid yourself.
.
Many guys aren’t as stupid as you seem to think they are. Every guy who knows Game knows one of the cardinal principles is don’t appear judgmental. You’d have no idea what “I think like” if I decided I wanted to approach and pursue you strictly for sex, and believe me a lot of guys know how to play the game. How many times do you hear a woman say “he won’t commit”? Now there are a lot of reasons that is the case, but one often is he just sees you as easy p**** on tap although he’ll never admit it.
.
I wish some guys like collegeslacker or Athol would chime on this. I’m sure they would confirm exactly what I am saying.
But I can tell now that Tom is correct. This is not the place to have a rational discussion. I was hoping it was, but, alas, I shall keep looking.
.
Just curious, why are you “hoping” for a “rational discussion”. If you are “doing your thing” and happy shouldn’t need the validation from anyone else’s rational discussion.
Promiscuous does not equal careless. It does not equal reckless or stupid or an addiction to orgasm. Or irresponsible. Or lack of self control. It can be a sign of these things, but not necessarily. And not in my case.
But I should really stop wasting my time because it will be difficult to explain it to you all in a way that you would understand.
Ok, scratch what I just said. I think I am starting to understand what you mean, Abbot. You believe that if a woman has had many lovers, she will find it harder to stick with one man because the experience of many lovers will make her want to continue that path.
I think that is a logical belief. And I would say that is likely when you are talking about men who are naturally inclined to want to spread their seed around. However, women have a natural inclination to find a mate and make a stable home for children. So you can have a woman who is promiscuous but who doesn’t have a problem being faithful to her boyfriend or husband. The “nest making” part of her nature then comes into play. At least in my life, when I have a committed relationship, I am in love and I no longer feel attracted to other men. I take pride giving myself to my man and only him. So the promiscuous behavior with men I would not choose for the long term and fidelity with the man I do choose are not a contradiction. Its never been a problem. I didn’t even start having sex again until I was separated over a year because I was still committed in my mind and heart.
I don’t think this is rare or strange. But since men aren’t wired this way, I can understand why they would think promiscuous women would not be able to be faithful.
Yes, and here are those good quotes:
.
“She’s willing to wait for him.” – yeah, explain to him that you waited.
.
“They need to have honesty, integrity.” – just tell one lie bucko and I am jumping right back into the pile of crooks and thugs. Nice.
.
Well that should be a doozy of a book. One of hundreds that have been spewed out to counter men who make personal decisions that negatively effect women.
.
“the madonna/whore complex”
.
In certain US cities, its just a whore/whore complex. But that just makes things easier for men to decide on the extent of the “relationship”
.
“A promiscuous woman is not less likely to be faithful.”
.
Perhaps. But why should a man chance it in a highly biased legal system? Especially when there are so many non-promiscuous foreign women who have no need to lie about it. You’re asking for way too much. Go change the laws. We would appreciate it.
.
“I’m not sure my ( ) is good enough look they have”
.
Why does it always debase to that level of character among female writers?
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
{ 10 trackbacks }