Who’s Really Having Sex in College?

We talk an awful lot here about numbers. How many women are promiscuous, what percentage of women go for jerks, and whether there is a significant percentage of women exercising impulse control on college campuses, or even just avoiding the hookup scene altogether.

What percentage of guys get laid in college? Are 20% of them getting all the spoils, while 80% starve? How many man whores are there, really? Are all guys are only interested in casual sex? Or do some prefer relationship sex?

I’ve long hypothesized that there’s a group of highly promiscuous males roughly the same size as the group of highly promiscuous females. They represent a highly visible and socially active minority, and are considered to be “successful” with the opposite sex. A large majority of males and females has a much lower number of sexual partners, though not necessarily much less sex, and almost certainly not worse sex (if we define bad sex as excluding orgasm).

Gucci Little Piggy has a post up revealing data I haven’t seen before, taken from a 2007 study on sexual assault commissioned by the Justice Department. The study randomly selected students at two large state universities – one in the south, and one in the midwest. It was a web-based survey that subjects accessed with a link, but it was anonymous and the students were guaranteed total privacy. The survey collected data about all aspects of college life, but for our purposes the data about socializing and sexual behavior is what’s really interesting.

 

Social Habits of College Students

Female % Male %
Heterosexual 95.6 94.5
Athlete 16.0 21.4
Greek membership 14.7 15.8
Attend 1+ frat parties/month 26.3 28.1
Visit bars 1+ times/month 44.4 44.7
Drunk/high 1+ times/month 44.0 54.1
Drunk/high during sex 1+ times/month 20.7 21.5

 

Distribution of Sexual Intercourse Partners
Female % Male %
0 37.2 42.8
1-5 54.1 49.4
6-10 5.7 5.6
11-25 2.0 0.9
26+ 1.1 1.3

 

Distribution of Dating Partners
Female % Male %
0 22.6 23.8
1-5 69.2 68.4
6-10 5.6 5.9
11-25 2.3 1.2
26+ 0.3 0.7

 

Note:

  • The researchers felt that a limitation of the study was a low response rate among males. N = 6,800; 5,466F, 1,375M
  • They cited the anonymity of the survey as a strength which provided more accurate reporting of sensitive behavior.
  • The subjects were distributed roughly equally across grades, with slightly higher representation among freshmen and seniors.

What does the data reveal about social habits?

1. Half the students drink to intoxication on a regular basis. Bars are the most  popular venue, followed by frat parties, which are attended frequently by non-Greeks.

I am surprised that half of all students drink little or not at all.

2. Only a fifth of students habitually have sex while drunk.

This calls into question that claim that students drink primarily in order to lose enough inhibition to hook up.

3. While slightly more males than females get drunk, the social habits of men and women are very similar.

 

What does the data reveal about sexual partners?

1. There are more male virgins than female virgins in college. The number of virgins in this study was higher than is normally estimated for college populations, which is 33% at freshman year, 12% by senior year.

The number of male virgins is actually proportionally higher due to the disproportionate enrollment of females (55% and 58% at the subject schools).

Recent research indicates that the number of virgins in college is rising, though that does not explain this 2007 finding.

2. The pattern of women having slightly more sexual partners than men is consistent throughout.

3. Approximately 92% of both men and women have had five partners or less in college.

The vast majority of college students are not promiscuous, and there is no difference between the sexes.

4. Only 3% of women and 2% of men have had eleven or more sexual partners.

This implies that the number of true “players” in college is extremely small, as is the number of highly promiscuous women.

5. Overall, the sexes show very little difference in the number of sexual partners. This would seem to confirm the hypothesis that a small percentage of promiscuous students are engaging in casual sex with one another, while a much larger group has a few partners during college, and well over a third of students have no sex at all.

 

What does the data reveal about dating partners?

1. Approximately 15% of females and 19% of males have had a dating relationship that did not include sexual intercourse.

2. More than two-thirds of both sexes have had 1-5 relationships in college. Again, 15-20% of these relationships appear to exclude sexual intercourse.

3. Three percent of women and two percent of men have had 11 or more dating relationships.

This takes serial monogamy to an extreme. (See Haley’s excellent graphic depiction of one of these women.)

 

In short, this is a very different story than college students often informally report here and on other blogs. Why is that? Some possible explanations:

  • The grass is always greener. College students regularly assume that others have it way better than they do.
  • The culture rewards casual sex, so that the most promiscuous students have outsized visibility in the population.
  • Popularity and peer approval rest on tales of exploits, which may lead students to fabricate or exaggerate sexual conquests.

I’m certain that some of you will immediately point out that in sex surveys women underreport and men overreport. Of course, that is always possible, but I doubt that explains this data for several reasons:

  • That trope goes back to the Kinsey research, when women were shamed for premarital sex. If anything, that trend has been reversed.
  • The setup of this experiment provided observable, complete anonymity.
  • The subjects were open about participating in social behaviors frequently looked down upon among undergraduates, including illegal underage drinking and drug use.

What does this mean for the SMP?

If this data is accurate, there are a lot of people in college in exactly the same boat. They are not having rampant casual sex. A small minority of promiscuous men and women are “servicing” each other while most limit their sexual activity to committed relationships. This means that there is an enormous untapped reservoir of relationship-oriented people.

This is only one study. We need more information about the sexual habits of students to draw any real conclusions. It would appear, though, that there is very little evidence that 80% of college women are chasing 20% of college men for no-strings sex. Perhaps today’s Indexed cartoon will resonate:

You Can’t Use Logic Against Belief

5 Pingbacks/Trackbacks

  • Wild Cougar

    I still say most US women will never be fully honest about their sexual experiences. It doesn’t matter if promiscuity seems to be the norm. Slut shaming is still on volume 11, not in society at large, but on a personal, one-on-one level where it makes the most impact. Women have no incentive to be honest and too many disincentives. I cannot trust any study that involves women self reporting on sexual behavior.

  • http://theprivateman.wordpress.com/ The Private Man

    Overall, the sexes show very little difference in the number of sexual partners. This would seem to confirm the hypothesis that a small percentage of promiscuous students are engaging in casual sex with one another, while a much larger group has a few partners during college, and well over a third of students have no sex at all.

    And here we have an example of how research can fly in the face of personal experience. I try to keep an open mind about such things and would very much like to see more studies on this matter.

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    @Private Man
    Me too. We need much more data to understand what’s really going on. TBH, I am surprised by how clearcut this data is, which is why I thought it worth sharing. This isn’t the be-all and end-all, but it’s another point of reference as we try to decipher the ever-changing SMP.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hi Ms. Walsh,
    I kinda figured you’d pick up on Chuck’s recent post; and since you have, please allow me to present to you and your readers, my take on same:

    Era Of The De Facto Eunuch
    http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com/entry/66130

    A brief excerpt:

    “As I am sure you are aware, quite a few Game writers have suggested, that while Game itself presents tremendous opportunities for change and growth on the individual (and some even argue on the wider societal – that remains to be seen, though certainly not implausible) level for Men, the actual likelihood of this happening in a broad based way is low. Commonly held reasons for this seem to center on Mens’ refusal to take the socalled “red pill” of Reality, or of being lax and lazy with regard to making the requisite changes to their personality and habits that Game so often calls for. And to be sure, these are legitimate theories. Of course, by now you know that I have a differing – and for this audience, a much more controversial – reason as to why most of the 60% won’t “get” Game:

    And that’s because, by and large, they CAN’T.”

    Of course, Chuck and his readers really couldn’t deal with what I actually said, and so had to resort to all manner of diversionary tactics, with Chuck in particular stooping to personally attacking me and Ms. Brown Sugah, LOL. All of which only confirms the validity of my argument(s) made therein.

    Perhaps you and/or readers can do better!

    Holla back

    O.

  • http://haleyshalo.wordpress.com Aunt Haley

    Thanks for the link, Susan.

    I always thought in college that both more people were having sex than assumed and fewer people were having sex than people assumed.

  • Höllenhund
  • Stephenie Rowling

    Commenters flipping their shit on 3…2…1

  • Workshy Joe

    42.8 % of male college students have NO SEXUAL PARTNERS. Ouch!

    Is that three years of college in the USA?

    Wow. Talk about a dry spell. That’s actually worse than I thought. I thought the “no sex at all” constituency would be ALOT smaller than that. America has a very sexualised culture so I am shocked at these statistics.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hollenhund,
    Just saw your comments, and have to say that I don’t necessarily disagree with them; indeed, they align quite a bit with what I’ve been saying in my post referenced above, and previous writings by me on the topic. Would like very much to get your opinion and feedback on all of that. Holla back.

    O.

  • Höllenhund

    This is largely a non-issue, Obsidian. The commonly accepted wisdom on Roissy’s blog and other similar websites is that most betas won’t be able to master Game.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hollenhund,
    Please read the whole post/comment I made. I am making a much broader (and admittedly, provocative) argument than what you summarised above. And get back to me.

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    It should also be noted as well Hollehund, that Chuck vehemently disagrees with Roissy on a number of points: one being the above that you spoke to, and secondly Roissy’s assertion(s) that Single White Females had sociosexual attraction towards Barak Obama in the last presidential elections.

    Comments?

    O.

  • Christin

    I also think it totally depends on the college we’re talking about- this study represents one school with a certain population. I’m sure the percentages of promiscuity would greatly increase for a larger or more stereotypically known “party school”. The typical student population of a given college greatly varies due to its location and tuition- I’d like to see the numbers for Arizona State and UC Santa Barbara versus SUNY Purchase or MIT

  • Christin

    and by one school, I meant two. Although this study was taken from large universities in the south and midwest, there are definitely a distinct group of schools that would be linked to more partying and promiscuity

  • Höllenhund

    This post isn’t about GLP or Roissy. Maybe I’ll respond on your blog after others have chimed in as well.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hollenhund
      As you will recall, after I looked at the 80/20 idea in detail, I too suspected that talking about sexual frequency was more accurate than talking about the number of partners. It’s entirely possible that this data shows that very, very few men have the options allowing them to reject dating in favor of frequent sex with a variety of partners.

      Thinking about it 2% sounds like a very low number of men who might be real players, but if you take a school with 5,000 undergrads, that is 100 guys. And that’s not a large school. So on a mid-size campus you’ve got 100 guys who have 11+ partners halfway through college, on average. Those guys are obviously going to be very high profile at their school – that’s the social proof that got them into that group in the first place. I would think that 100 players active in the social scene would get the attention of the corresponding 150 girls, making it seem as if a much larger percentage of guys is getting the attention of all the hot girls. When you break it down, you see that it’s only 2-3% overall.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hollenhund,
    True, Ms. Walsh’s post isn’t about Roissy, but her post IS about a post done up by Chuck, and MY post is a reaction to Chuck’s post, therefore it’s fair game, and I’m really interested in pushing the idea that my post centers in on into a wider, read, Whiter, sphere. So if you don’t mind, come on with what you have to say – after all, you’ve never been bashful before. Why start now?

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Christin,
    As I recall, studies taken at schools like MIT and Princeton and so forth, had results showing high numbers of White Male virgins nerd types. I think the percentage was higher than the White Female students at these schools. Now keep in mind that I saw these studies online some years back – but if they are anywhere near accurate, it points emphatically to my post referenced above, and the period of reckoning we as a society will have to grapple with along these lines: what are we gonna do with a bunch of de facto eunuchs?

    O.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      As I recall, studies taken at schools like MIT and Princeton and so forth, had results showing high numbers of White Male virgins nerd types.

      A couple of years ago, someone gathered data on the number of sexual partners at MIT, Harvard, Yale and Princeton. This data had all been collected independently by the schools for various reasons, so it wasn’t entirely compatible. However, I recall that MIT actually had the highest number of sexual partners (1-2) and that Princeton accused Yale of inflating their numbers, just like they do their grades, lol.

      As for white nerds, all the best schools have lots of very smart guys, many of whom are white. Since high T is associated negatively to intelligence, it makes sense that the numbers would be smaller at the Ivies than say, Shitkicker U.

  • Höllenhund

    I’m busy these days, Obs.

  • Christin

    O- I totally agree and I can attest that from what I’ve seen, most stereotypes are still true. I teach dance classes at MIT and the majority of my students are extremely awkward males and have trouble even asking me questions. Same goes for other schools- I hear stories upon stories of slut-town USA over at Arizona State. Not to say I have anything against either of these schools, but it’s just from my personal experience.

    Wild Cougar- I agree with you. What I consider typical college female behavior shocks my boyfriend’s view. Many women hide their sexual excursions (or only speak to their close girlfriends about it) in order to still gain appeal towards potential boyfriends.

  • Höllenhund

    True, Ms. Walsh’s post isn’t about Roissy, but her post IS about a post done up by Chuck

    It’s about the data in a study cited by GLP.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hollenhund,
    I am sure you are.

    Ms. Walsh was impressed not only with the data that formed the backbone of Chuck’s post but also with the post – Chuck’s actual writing – itself. We’re still on track here.

    Rest assured.

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    WC,
    Ms. Walsh has written quite a bit about the notion of “slut shaming” and we’ve come to the conclusion that there is no such thing obtaining in our time now. If anything, and indeed, Women on a whole are decidedly LESS discreet than they are now, and in fact – again, Ms. Walsh can attest to this given her many previous postings on the topic – Women are penalized by both her peers and the general society for NOT being a slut. So, I think that the old timey studies of the past, like Masters and Johnson etc, might have fallen under the rubric you speak of in your comment, I think such surveys today are much more likely to be accurate. At least insofar as Women are concerned.

    Men now, that’s another matter…

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Christin,
    As you can see in my article that I referenced above, we as a society are fast coming to a point where, as a result of technologically and sociologically-assisted hypergamy insofar as Women are concerned, we are going to have to grapple with a sizable portion of Men who are de facto eunuchs – and that to date, there is no discourse dealing with any of that.

    What’s your thoughts?

    O.

  • Abbot

    Many women hide their sexual excursions (or only speak to their close girlfriends about it) in order to still gain appeal towards potential boyfriends.
    .
    Meaning women are fully aware of the nature of men and pander to their needs. As “slut profiling” increases on social media, lots of jaws will drop and even more panties will stay on.

  • http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/ Hambydammit

    This would seem to confirm the hypothesis that a small percentage of promiscuous students are engaging in casual sex with one another

    I don’t think this is a valid conclusion. Women generally have one or two more sexual partners than men, and there are a small number of men who have had lots and lots of partners. This seems to imply that a small number of men are a lot of non-promiscuous women’s “one mistake.”

    This is compatible with a group of highly promiscuous males and females all making the in-group rounds, and better explains why females manage to have a couple more partners across the board.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hambydammit

      This seems to imply that a small number of men are a lot of non-promiscuous women’s “one mistake.”

      Good catch, I think that makes total sense, and it also rings true based on what I’ve heard from women. Many have been burned by a cad or two.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    WC and Obsidian

    I think both are right to a point women will lie about their sexual history, but no all the time only when they have something to gain. Most sluts are not stupid they know very well that when they decide to “settle” displaying pride on a promiscuous past will decrease their pool of males interested on settling and have them expose to the “pump and dump” types that could pretend to be willing to settle just to have her and leave her, thus wasting their time, so the lie like a cheap rug.

    But in an anonymous pool on college, they had nothing to lose or gain and they are not on settling mode so I think this is probably very accurate and no have the undereport issues other types of studies will get, YMMV.

  • Christin

    O- Although I agree with you that there isn’t really slut-shaming anymore, and that girls are praised for hooking up with randoms between their friends, I disagree with your statement that they aren’t penalized. Men will hook up with whoever- slut or not, but it is rare that a man will want a relationship with someone that exhibits slut behavior. In the relationship world, I still think the same standard stands true- women will not necessarily turn a man away from relationship potential if he’s slept with girls (because that’s standard) but men absolutely turn a woman away from relationship potential if she’s slept with a lot of guys. This is not to say that a woman who has slept around will not get a relationship- but a woman that frequently sleeps around probably sleeps with a man the first night she meets him. I don’t know anyone that has turned a first-night-hook-up into a relationship (unless it’s fuck-buddies).

  • Abbot

    What’s your thoughts?
    .
    http://aforeignaffair.com/

  • http://glpiggy.net Chuck

    Susan,

    Thanks for the link.

    I too want to reiterate your point that we are still a long way from having enough data to fully understand the SMP. But you’re also right that this data provides a pretty clear-cut snapshot of the actual sexual habits of college students.

    Definitely not the end all and be all of it.

    But part of the reason that the stats drew my attention is because, when I thought about it, I realized that a lot of the college men that I know actually aren’t having as much sex as we’ve been taught to think that they are getting. As I wrote, we’ve come to think that guys are getting laid left and right. And it would make intuitive sense that they were given that the sex ratio on college campuses is so low.

    But for all of the hard-partying alphas that you think about when you think of college, there are the guys in the library or lining the walls of those same parties that you easily forget about.

    Maybe this isn’t new; it just ran counter to what I thought were the prevailing ideas pertaining to college life today.

    To sum it up: sometimes I find myself thinking that young people today are having a lot of sex and that the girls are really slutty, but sometimes I think to myself that young people today aren’t having sex at all and that they are all prude.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    @Abbott,
    LOL! Yea, that’s kinda become the pat answer in the Manosphere. Problem is this, there’s IMBRA to contend with, and for my part I’m not sold entirely on this strategy. Not for anything personal on my part – personally I could care less as to how Man and Woman come together. Rather, my thinking is this: if you were lame in your home country, you’re gonna be lame wherever you go. And I get this sense that a portion of guys DON’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING TOWARDS SELF-IMPROVEMENT, and so try to go the route of least resistence, ie, mail order brides and the like. Of course, life for these Women is often rough and desperate, and I can’t speak for anyone else, but I take great pride in the fact that I can do very well for myself in the heart of the world’s Feminist Citadel, armed only with GAME. And there’s a part of me that says that guys going the mail order bride route are tacitly admitting defeat, much like the single ladies who avail themselves of the turkey baster – I mean, if you couldn’t get a Man to tap it for free, that really says something about YOU, ultimately.

    O.

  • http://glpiggy.net Chuck

    Also,

    I don’t think that men and women so much multiply or divide, respectively, their notch counts by 3 or some figure that is often cited by movies like American Pie, but something similar occurs.

    When a sexual encounter involves grey area – where the woman made the man stop a few seconds into the encounter etc. – a woman is more likely to not add that to her number compared to the guy.

    I’ll give a personal example from a girl I know. She had sex with a guy and made him stop 3 pumps in. He was the fourth person that she technically had sex with, but she either doesn’t count him or she considers him #3.5. But rest assured that he counts her in his lay number.

    So it may not be that these types of studies are worrisome because the participants are flat-out lying about their numbers – it’s just that, just as the consideration of when a rape actually occurred is sometimes hazy, both sides have different definitions of when sex occurred. This would be reflected in the statistics.

  • Christin

    O- I like the article/video clip. Susan has tapped into something similar before- men and women look for very different things in their potential significant other. Men first look to beauty and then later intelligence, etc. Women on the other hand, look for their ideal supporter/protector with a laundry list of qualities that they started at age 8. I am a huge fan of “He’s Just Not That Into You” (book and movie)- and one major problem I have is that I still make up excuses for my friends as to why their situations didn’t work out. I asked my boyfriend to give my friend advice one day on finding a guy, and he just plain out said “FIND A NICE GUY, THAT’S IT.”

    I think some women realize this after striving for the perfect guy (probably because the man they drew out on paper doesn’t exist or they end up changing their view of the “perfect” guy).

    I also think there’s a substantial population of women who could be categorized in the same social circle as your de facto eunichs- they tend to hide and get lost in the cracks.

  • Mike C

    5. Overall, the sexes show very little difference in the number of sexual partners. This would seem to confirm the hypothesis that a small percentage of promiscuous students are engaging in casual sex with one another,
    .
    The data is the data is the data is the data. I’d be irrational if I didn’t follow through to the conclusion the data supports. That said:
    .
    1. I’d echo Hollenhund’s comments on the other thread. We know women underreport. Susan, you yourself once commented about the young woman who subtracted out all those that “didn’t count” like sex with a gay guy. I don’t think it takes a conspiracy nut to be skeptical about the integrity/accuracy of the data.
    .
    2. Based on #1 above, we really would need to see this study replicated across a number of universities to see the consistency and dispersion of results. Not that that is probably going to happen.
    .
    3. 3 points on the numbers
    .
    91% of men are below 5. If this is correct, this completely supports the idea there is a very small minority of alpha men attractive enough to get women for casual sex. It appears to be even more skewed than I thought…not being 80/20 but 90/10. All other guys are either getting no sex or only relationship sex. It also confirms that highly promiscuous women are still highly selective
    .
    Only 3% of women are above 11. Susan, seriously, does this really ring true based on your college age focus groups. Really? I could be misremembering here, but I do recall a number of occasions where the implication or statement was that many of your focus group members were at 20+. Please correct me if I am wrong, but if I am not, how would you explain the discrepancy? Is the 3% over 11 a garbage number, or are your focus groups just much more promiscuous than the average college girl. I’m sure you’ve discussed this subject with your daughter. Does 3% at 11+ ring true with her friends and girls she knew? I’m just really skeptical of this number. I acknowledge I might be biased but it doesn’t pass the smell test.
    .
    The 11-25 group is 2% women versus 1% men. Two different ways to look at that. As only a 1% difference, or as the only subgroup where the percentage is radicallly different (100% difference). I’m reaching here, but this could support my basic idea that there is a segment of women who I wouldn’t characterize as “slutty” but who take advantage of and experiment a little with the fact that they have sexual access to higher status men (but nothing more). They engage a bit in it, realize they are being used as pieces of meat, and settle down which is why they don’t make it to the 25+ group. Whether that activity affects their ability to bond and form a quality relationship with a lesser status man is something we could debate until the cows come home.
    .
    One point of optimism on the data. There are PLENTY of non-promiscuous girls available for relationships who haven’t ridden the “cock carousel” even if you bump up the 11and up percentage by 10-20%.
    .
    Amusing observation on my part. The data says 91% are 5 or under. Yet, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read something from a FEMALE commenter acting INCREDULOUS that a 22, 24, 25-year old could have only a handful of partners. How does one square that circle, and what does that say about these commenters versus the average woman (if the data is correct)?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C
      Agreed, the data is surprising. Definitely not something to take to the bank, but still, conducted by highly reputable academics who found the results publishable. So it cannot be dismissed out of hand.

      There’s no question that women try to downplay their number, we have seen examples of it here and elsewhere. But, as I said in another comment, 3% of college women is actually a large number. And those very promiscuous women will be front and center on every campus. They’re the ones who dance on top of tables at parties or bars, so it makes sense to me that their influence might be “larger than life.”

      Your 10% alpha number seems valid, but it means we have to redefine alpha. Would you say that a guy who’s had 6 partners in college is in the top 10% of guys? That is not the impression I’ve had based on the reports of people like college slacker, Athlone, Vincent I, for example. I would have guessed that the top 10% of college males would have an average of 25 partners, at least. So I’m surprised that it may be more like less than 1%.

      OK, re my focus groups:

      They’re all over the place. Of the 20 or so, 2 are virgins. After that, I’d say about 5 have a partner count of 2. Quite a few in the 5-10 range. And definitely some in the 20+ range. The funny thing is, they’re all friends, it’s a real mix. Two best friends have a count of 3 and 25, respectively. The girl with 3 laughs and teases about how slutty her BFF is. And the other one calls her a prude. This is further proof that there is no slut shaming, btw.

      I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read something from a FEMALE commenter acting INCREDULOUS that a 22, 24, 25-year old could have only a handful of partners. How does one square that circle, and what does that say about these commenters versus the average woman (if the data is correct)?

      That’s a good question. I think one thing we need to do is ask “who comments on blogs?” SayWhaat is a virgin and there have been others before her (remember Verie44?) There are also women who stop by and argue that having a high number is not a problem, or shouldn’t be. Tom is on here constantly promoting promiscuous women because he has fallen in love with one. We all have our reasons.

      BTW, the sex-pos feminists that I’ve written about? The ones who troll for partners on Craigslist? I think we’re talking .01% there – hundreds of partners, most likely. No wonder they don’t want to talk about STDs beforehand.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hi Chuck,
    Glad to see you here! OK, let’s have at it:

    I don’t think we NEED all manner of peer reviewed longitudinal studies to see what’s going on here, and in fact there have been quite a few writers who have more or less predicted all of this, Tiger among them in his The Decline of Males. Again: human history has always recorded more Male sexual losers than Women; the two big differences in our time is that said losers are living longer and safer than at any other point in history; and that said losers are able to be heard and to link up together with like minds. Hence to (virtually all White) Manosphere.

    What’s missing from all of this is the “now what?” conversation that needs to be had at5 this point. Admittedly this is difficult to do, in part because of the way we human beings are wired, but also because of the American ethos to not only exalt the winners, but to believe that we all can be one. And there is perhaps nothing lower, than a Male sexual loser. Even Women who make use of the turkey baster, are seen as such.

    Holla back

    O.

  • Abbot

    “IMBRA also requires background checks before communication is permitted between United States clients and foreign national clients of dating services deemed to be marriage brokers.”
    .
    Seems like the iron curtain of communication set up by feminists. For feminists.
    .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Marriage_Broker_Regulation_Act

  • http://glpiggy.net Chuck

    Obsidian,

    “And I get this sense that a portion of guys DON’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING TOWARDS SELF-IMPROVEMENT”

    This is one of the few points that you and I can agree on.

  • Christin

    Mike C- you make a good point. My comments are based solely on personal experience. I was/am in Susan’s focus group- recently graduated from BU, mid-20s. It is possible that my friends, and people I meet associated with my friends, would not necessarily produce results of that similar to the “average woman.” This very well may be why the numbers seem skewed.

  • Mike C

    Many women hide their sexual excursions (or only speak to their close girlfriends about it) in order to still gain appeal towards potential boyfriends.
    .
    Here’s the part I don’t get about that. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read a comment where a woman says she wouldn’t want a guy who judges her sexual past anyways. How do you explain the apparent contradiction?
    .
    And I’ll admit, to me, this is the crux of the issue. BOTH parties are entitled to know any information they think is relevant. I’m not a theologian but I believe many religions actually allow for annulment in the case of deception going into the marriage. And to me this goes both ways. I watch Real World, and one of the guys did gay porn, and the girl was like when would he have told me, after getting married, after kids. She had a right to know..
    .
    And ultimately that is the bottom line. I am NOT an advocate of slut “shaming” and if a woman wants to be highly promiscuous I fully support that lifestyle choice. But I think it is morally repugnant to deceive someone who is entering into a committed relationship with you. Ultimately, I think it comes down to the fact that most women know in the recesses of their mind even if they vocally disagree, that they are SUBSTANTIALLY reducing the pool of guys who would voluntarily make a serious committment. You see it the comments on these threads. You’ve got 2 guys saying it doesn’t matter, Tom and GudEnuf, and I’m not sure either is really a guy, versus all the other guys who would pass.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I watch Real World, and one of the guys did gay porn, and the girl was like when would he have told me, after getting married, after kids. She had a right to know.

      OMG, that sends chills down my spine. I’ve actually read that a lot of the actors in gay porn are straight, doing it for the $. Well, obviously they must be bi if they get it up for a dude. Some say that we are all bisexual to some degree, it’s a spectrum. Haha, way OT here.

  • Höllenhund

    Male expatriation from the US seems to be a win-win for all involved. The expats will find more potential mates, foreign women in poorer lands get access to relatively higher-status mates who can satisfy their hypergamy, and there will be fewer men in the US whom the local women dismiss as bothersome beta chumps.

  • Christin

    Mike C-
    Many women hide their sexual excursions (or only speak to their close girlfriends about it) in order to still gain appeal towards potential boyfriends.

    I originally referred to this in the sense that many men openly talk about their random sexual encounters with a co-ed crowd, whereas women tend to only speak about this with their girlfriends. I don’t think it’s right to lie about the number of people you have slept with. I also don’t think it’s necessary to talk about your sexual past in a new relationship. However, if the relationship lasts, it’s bound to come out and be talked about at some point or another. Honesty is always the best policy if you want a legitimate relationship.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “Male expatriation from the US seems to be a win-win for all involved. The expats will find more potential mates, foreign women in poorer lands get access to relatively higher-status mates who can satisfy their hypergamy, and there will be fewer men in the US whom the local women dismiss as bothersome beta chumps.”

    As a foreign bride I most admit that I won a lot of catty remarks for country women when I got married to my American husband, women with money,cars and no lack of male attention. They actually accused me of using vudu magic or something like that because they couldn’t see “what my husband saw on me”. Is contrasting to when my husband tells me that in here was invisible to many women.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “This is one of the few points that you and I can agree on.”

    O: And to be sure, I am most pleased that we do agree on something, LOL. But now, let me press my luck a bit:

    Would you agree with me, that this view, is pervasive throughout the (virtually all White) Manosphere, Chuck – including Roissy’s forum? If so/not, why?

    Your response?

    O.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “Here’s the part I don’t get about that. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read a comment where a woman says she wouldn’t want a guy who judges her sexual past anyways. How do you explain the apparent contradiction?”

    I agree with that. True sluts don’t care and don’t lie about things they did proudly and with total knowledge of the consequences.

  • Christin

    Stephenie-

    Because you can’t be a slut when you’re in a relationship. The game changes when you’re trying to settle down.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Christin
      Hey, girl, good to see you on this thread! You may be right about these schools not being representative, I can’t say. They’re not identified, though all but one of the study authors are at University of North Carolina – Chapel HIll, so I’m betting that is the large state school in the south. That’s a hard school, so even if kids there work hard and play hard, it’s not going to be a constant party scene across the board, and the population is self-selected in that way.

      I guess what struck me was that the percentage of kids having sex as a percentage of kids getting drunk was very low. Also the percentage of kids having sex while drunk. I recall that Keith Richards said in his biography that he didn’t have sober sex for the first 15 years, and that’s sort of the way I’ve always viewed college guys.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Moreover let me add, that while it is viewed as something like the Hoy Grail in the (virutally 100% all-White) Manosphere, in truth I think most guys won’t expat or otherwise go overseas to get themselves a mail order bride. My guess is that we might not see much higher than 10% of Men doing this overall. For the rest of the guys, they’re gonna be screwed if they can’t do something to change their situation. I think a particular cohort in that population CAN’T LEARN GAME. HBD is quite consistent on this note. And, it is my opinion that we need to have an honest discussion about this. My personal recommendation, among many, is that we should be steering these Men towards the preisthood and being monks.

    O.

  • Höllenhund

    It’s useful to cite Brendan here:

    I don’t expect that this will be reversed, really. I don’t think most men have much to offer women today — in that I agree with Obsidian. I disagree that this means these men will lead miserable lives, because I think there are many ways men can and do lead lives that are satisfying for them even if others don’t/can’t conceive of this. But I don’t see the economic prospects of men turning anytime soon, or the motivation to be “driven”, if you will.

    I honestly don’t think it’s worthwhile any longer for most guys to push themselves to excel — it’s mostly diminishing returns and a recipe for an unhappy life for many men. If “excelling” means working for someone else, it’s probably going to suck, big-time. You get no respect from anyone, not least of which from most women, who see you as another corporate drone. It doesn’t really matter how much money you make, really, because you don’t really *need* that much money in life unless you are exceedingly materialistic or have other obligations (i.e. family life).

    The main exception to this, from my perspective, is if you have a true entrepreneurial drive and vision — if you can create a business around an idea and grow it and so on. If you have this, you can be a great success in life in material terms while still not having to deal with being a corporate drone. So, if you have this kind of thing going on, go for it. Otherwise, not so much.

    http://traditionalcatholicism.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/why-young-men-dont-marry-climbing-out-of-poverty/#comment-6933

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “My personal recommendation, among many, is that we should be steering these Men towards the preisthood and being monks.”

    You keep saying that and I would agree on my country or any other place with strong religious tradition. But this is godless land. Only people with strong religious families truly have faith and they will more likely find wives (unless they are part of those extreme Mormons groups that expel the boys) because that is part of the church’s job and this women’s hipergamy is regulated by a lot of different social triggers and part of the doctrine is that the man is the head of the house so they are already solving a lot of the issue the current SMP has. So most average men won’t see this is a valid way of life or are you planning a religion that can accommodate the unbelievers somehow?

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    @Christin
    You’ve made a lot of good points.

    I recently graduated from one of the top party schools in the nation, and that obviously affects how I view the college experience. Maybe it’s part of the reason Susan & I have different views on this topic. And re: Arizona State… that place is as good as advertised.

    You also share my view on the hookup/relationship dichotomy. I don’t really get all the slut hatred. Most of the sluts I’ve known have been generally fun people that really know how to party. But would I ever seriously date any of them them? HELL NO.

  • http://glpiggy.net Chuck

    “Would you agree with me, that this view, is pervasive throughout the (virtually all White) Manosphere, Chuck – including Roissy’s forum? If so/not, why?”

    I think it is pervasive. You have to demarcate between the Roissy set and the MRA set. There is overlap between, but on the issue of Game and the SMP they are worlds apart.

    Roissy and Roosh are about men taking the initiative to do for themselves. So I think that the pervasive attitude, at least among the bloggers and the more noteworthy commenters is that Game is good and that men should take it upon themselves to improve their lot. I rarely, rarely see men around here adopt an entitlement attitude towards sex. You might disagree on that, and you may even think that I do that – but I don’t think that I do and I don’t think that men around here do either to any large degree.

    But that’s far and away different also than saying that guys in the Sphere *can’t* learn Game even if they tried. The two things that are holding white guys back from being successful is a.) fear of judgment – by their friends or by the women they approach and b.) an ingrained pedestalization of women. If white guys got over those two hurdles (I’m not saying they should demean women; just not regard them all as goddesses a propos of nothing) they’d do a lot to improve their so-called Game deficiency.

  • OffTheCuff

    TBH, I am surprised by how clearcut this data is, which is why I thought it worth sharing.

    Actually, it’s not terribly clear. Let’s describe two college people, OTC (moi) and my friend T:

    – We both have a partner count of 2. Me, I had an ONS, and then my senior found a girlfriend. That’s 3 lonely years.
    – T, a muscular hockey player, had a girlfriend and a mistress all four years.

    Lo and behold, we’re both not “promiscuous” but I can tell you the girls were ALL over T (“chasing”, if not having) and he resisted them, well most of the time. Seriously. He could snap his finger and the girls were there.

    The whole 20% thing isn’t partner count, it’s a rough estimation of how many of the guys you know have female company at any point.

    Postscript: I met up with him a few months back. He was complaining about how little his wife wants sex. He’s still in great shape, too. I told him I don’t have that problem. Maybe I’m in the 20% now…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC
      T needs to buy Athol’s book.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “Because you can’t be a slut when you’re in a relationship. The game changes when you’re trying to settle down.”

    Well I would think that a slut that is trying to settle down can be honest about her past and wait for a guy that accepts it, even if they are on the minority they obviously exist, all rules have exception. Or they can be slut wives with hubbies that get off on that. Look at Jenna Jameson, Deep Sabrina and the likes they are married and their husbands adore their sluttiness and film it so honestly can indeed work better than plain lies, YMMV.

  • bsg

    1-5 is a pretty wide range. 5 may not be a “big” number, to somebody at 0 or 1 it sure is. its too bad the numbers aren’t broken down any further.

  • Abbot

    “Here’s the part I don’t get about that. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read a comment where a woman says she wouldn’t want a guy who judges her sexual past anyways. How do you explain the apparent contradiction?”
    .
    Why take a chance with honesty if she does not have to. Not like he can run her name through a public database anyway [YET]. Typical American women defining her morality by whatever puts her in the best light. She hid her behavior from daddy. Certainly, she can hide it from a potential life mate.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Chuck,
    I think it’s fair to say that the numbers of guys who visit Roissy’s NOT to self-improve, but to rail against the world about how said world did them wrong, is much higher. The Manosphere isn’t much different in this regard, if the Spearhead and In Mala Fide are anything to go by. And that’s just for starters.

    And I think part of the reason why there’s so much gnashing of teeth, is because a goodly portion of these guys know and understand that in the Brave New World that is the SMP, they CAN’T compete in it. Sure, what you said is certainly in play, and I freely admit that. But there’s also a portion that I am talking about; guys that might have been able to play in the CBA or the ABA, but not today’s NBA, if you will. And instead of looking at these things rationally, of course we have all this squawking about it.

    O.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Obsidian, @Chuck
      First, I don’t think the data points to men being eunuchs, or failures, at all. Or at least it suggests that’s true for both sexes. That’s really the point of the post – in general we are probably overestimating the amount of sex that’s happening on campus. That is at odds with portrayals in the popular culture, the media, etc. And of course, I too am guilty of often featuring the sensational stories, the Karen Owens’ of the college world. I agree with Chuck that the years after college are a critical time when many start really dating, and perhaps it will help if we let kids know that while lack of sex in college may suck, at least it’s the common condition for most people.

      There’s something else that occurs to me – one reason I often see cited for the popularity of hookups is that kids today are under so much stress re academics, career prep, finding jobs, applying to grad school, etc. I wonder if this data doesn’t hint at the same thing – maybe a significant population is holed up in the library. Still, I find interesting that the number of virgins is so high in a population getting hammered on a regular basis. Frankly, I’m not sure what to make of it.

  • modernguy

    Some people here seem to think that this situation where men can live minimally satisfying lives with their low wage jobs and porn is somehow sustainable. Or that otherwise they can all just join the priesthood. If we aren’t forming resilient families and producing the next generation everything will take care of itself and there won’t be any self righteous women around to be empowered. Women have a choice to make: if you want grandchildren you can either forget about busting balls in the corporate rate race and form a traditional family with a bread winning husband, or you can ignore attractiveness and marry what in your eyes would be a limp dicked corporate drone.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    I should also add another point… while I and most guys I know don’t share the slut hatred that I see from a lot of posters online, I can’t think of a guy I know (including me) that doesn’t have genuine contempt and hatred for the sluts that present themselves as relationship-quality good girls.

    Personally, I think the most important part of learning “game” or “taking the red pill” for guys is learning how to identify these kinds of girls.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I can’t think of a guy I know (including me) that doesn’t have genuine contempt and hatred for the sluts that present themselves as relationship-quality good girls.

      This fear of being duped comes up again and again. It is very understandable in light of the importance men attach to this issue. FWIW, it’s also very frustrating for the relationship-quality girls, because a slutty girl pretending to be inexperienced is probably going to know how to push a guy’s buttons just the right way to get him interested. As long as she feigns inexperience during sex, he can be fooled for a while, at least.

  • Abbot

    genuine contempt and hatred for the sluts that present themselves as relationship-quality good girls.
    .
    Some girls are really in trouble for impersonating wife material. They should know about this. Its akin to fraud and should be treated as such.
    .
    learning how to identify these kinds of girls.
    .
    Demand for an online identification manual and slut tracking system is increasing

  • Confidunce

    I remember feeling miserable in college based on the countless nights I went home without sex while *someone else* went home and had sex. Only in retrospect did I realize that “someone else” was rarely the same person more than once.

  • Mike C

    Mike C-

    I originally referred to this in the sense that many men openly talk about their random sexual encounters with a co-ed crowd, whereas women tend to only speak about this with their girlfriends. I don’t think it’s right to lie about the number of people you have slept with. I also don’t think it’s necessary to talk about your sexual past in a new relationship. However, if the relationship lasts, it’s bound to come out and be talked about at some point or another. Honesty is always the best policy if you want a legitimate relationship.

    Christin,

    First, welcome…always good to get another female perspective.

    I absolutely agree with you here. It is really refreshing to hear what you are saying here, especially the part about it being wrong to lie. Your point about honesty being the best policy for a legitimate relationship is right on target. I wonder how many women share your view on this. In my opinion, intentional deception calls into question whether someone really loves and respects the person they are with.

    Just curious, as a woman who believes in being honest and not lying if and when it comes up, what are your thoughts on women who deceive their boyfriends on their sexual histories? I’ll add that you are right that I don’t think it is necessary to ask although one person might bring it up. Definitely not date 1, 2, or 3 material…but something further down the road before the relationship gets “serious”.
    .
    You sort of mentioned it, but do you think this data is correct? I’m guessing not from this statement:

    What I consider typical college female behavior shocks my boyfriend’s view.

  • Abbot

    intentional deception calls into question whether someone really loves and respects the person they are with.
    .
    But does not call into question whether someone is desperate.
    .
    The deception is popular in certain circles because she herself cannot believe the number and feels self deprecation NOT empowerment. Empowerment is akin to taking control of your life and then accomplishing something that boost self worth. What she did represents a loss of control, no accomplishment and zero contribution to self worth. To make matters worse, now she is faced with coming up with an explanation script as to why she did it with full awareness that a good man is going to wretch with deep disappointment. All this is a lot for a woman to have to reckon with so most feel its best to avoid the whole thing. Cant blame them. Dont marry them either.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Ms. Walsh,
    From my post which also concerns itself with Chuck’s post, I quote the following for your reaction and comment:

    “Of course, no discussion along these lines, is complete without the following observation: that the photo that accompanies your post today, had no Black Males in it, and only one Asian Male, a rather out of the ordinary looking one at that. Of course, on the former point, it could be argued that the pic is only “keepin’ it real” – after all, it is well known that Black Male attendance and participation in education is spotty at best, at all levels of the US educational system, so them not being in the frame makes sense. And as for the Asian guy, sure he’s a heck of a lot more buff than the norm for such guys, but at least he’s more representative of what you’re likely to find on campus these days, right? The White guys in the pic speak for itself. No explanation needed.

    The problem with this whole thing is that we know, from CDC and NIH data, that comparitively speaking, Black Males get sex far and away more than do White and Asian Males, quite possibly combined.”Well Obsidian, Black guys will screw anything that moves!”, may be your reply, and to be sure, one can and will always be able to find anecdotal evidence to backup the point, so no argument there. But even in acknowledging this (supposedly apparent) fact, the fact remains that it is the Women who are still choosing, regardless as to their own looks. Sure, it’s one thing for a guy to say who he would or wouldn’t shag, but that’s only one part – a rather small one at that, if you have any understanding of Game – of the story. At least as equally, and I’d say much more important, is whether the Women in question are choosing said dude for a roll in the hay to begin with. As you said yourself Chuck in your college “study”, the data seems fairly clear that Women seem to prefer sleeping with Men from the upper classes – say, juniors and above, on average. And as Satoshi Kanazawaa points out in his writings for Psychology Today, the vast majority of guys don’t turn down offers for sex, no matter how much smack they may talk online (after all, even Tucker Max smashed a chubby gal).”

    Your response?

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Also, Ms. Walsh,
    HBD blogger Half Sigma has discovered, that the demographic most likely to make use of hookers and the like, are the White Nerdy Male cohort.

    O.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Let’s go easy on nerdy white males. Everyone here knows I married one and have a soft spot for them :)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Obs, I think the whole nerdy thing is a red herring for this post. If the data showed that 20% of guys were white virgins in the hard sciences, I’d say OK, you have a point. Instead, the data shows that most guys don’t have too many partners. And most guys are willing to commit to get sex. A surprising number date without getting sex! 98% of the men in college are not players, Obs.

  • Höllenhund

    I think you’ve done enough blog-pimping in this thread, Obs.

  • jess

    dear Susan,
    Interesting research.
    It kinda squares with what I was told recently by younger colleagues that said college is roughly divided into 3 thirds of players, daters and the celibate.
    .
    Your study agrees on the number of celibates but expands the daters and reduces the players.
    .
    Me, I have no idea. Its 20 years since I started college and I had only one partner throughout. I would have thought anonymous reporting would be accurate but I suppose one never knows for sure.

  • http://collegeslacker.wordpress.com collegeslacker

    Stop trying to hijack the thread Obsidian.

    Anyway, this data is pretty on par with what I’ve observed. Hell, with these numbers it coulda been my school for all I know.

    One thing to keep in mind, however, is that it’s not the same 3% of girls that are hooking up with the same 3% of dudes. There isn’t some exclusive slut group out there that is only girls who hook up while every other girl doesn’t. Me and the crew pull ONS from the whole spectrum of girls, from the near virgins to the hardcore cock eaters. It all depends on how tight your game is.

    And yeah, there are tons and tons of dudes who rarely, if ever, go home with girls at all. College isn’t a bonanza for you unless you got looks, greek letters on your shirt, a jersey, or game. A lot of dudes around here get a girl, if they can, and hang onto her for as long as possible.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @collegeslacker
      Interesting! I thought for sure you’d say “no way this data is terrible.” I guess I should congratulate you on being top 2%. Is it too much to hope that your GPA is up there as well?

      You pulling ONS from the near virgins would confirm hambydammit’s observation, I guess – that the extra 1% for the women may be explained by inexperienced women who got pumped and dumped by a cad.

  • Mike C

    One thing to keep in mind, however, is that it’s not the same 3% of girls that are hooking up with the same 3% of dudes. There isn’t some exclusive slut group out there that is only girls who hook up while every other girl doesn’t. Me and the crew pull ONS from the whole spectrum of girls, from the near virgins to the hardcore cock eaters. It all depends on how tight your game is.
    .
    “Hardcore cock eaters”. That had me burst out into laughter. Good thing no one still here in the office. In terms of that say 5-10 number there is more going on there I think then just matching up guys and girls 1 for 1. As you allude to here, I think the majority of college girls have at least 1-2 or a few casual encounters with alpha types along with boyfriend sex. That isn’t going to put them into that 11+ group. In contrast, the average, typical beta guy probably has 0 casual sex encounters. It just makes sense. Men pursue, women choose. Guys with looks, tight game, status are going to be able to get a few typical girls to spreadem right away even if they aren’t normally promiscuous. The guy without those won’t. Now probably a good chunk of those girls realize they were used as a semen receptacle and don’t keep repeating that over and over again, and then as the data suggests a small minority go down that path.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Now probably a good chunk of those girls realize they were used as a semen receptacle and don’t keep repeating that over and over again, and then as the data suggests a small minority go down that path.

      Thankfully. I’m pretty sure that good chunk is my readership, btw.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Collegeslacker says:

    “Stop trying to hijack the thread Obsidian.”

    O: Backoff, bucky, you get in where you fit in. If what you’re bringing is compelling, people can and will vibe to that; if not, they won’t. Stop hatin’.

    Now, where were we? Ah yes, we were talking about the growing cohort of Male sexual losers in our modern SMP.

    Comments?

    O.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Backoff, bucky, you get in where you fit in. If what you’re bringing is compelling, people can and will vibe to that; if not, they won’t. Stop hatin’.

      I have to admit, this is some tingly dominant stuff. I love watching the guys establish the pecking order.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “I think you’ve done enough blog-pimping in this thread, Obs.”

    O: Wait, I thought you were so terribly busy, Hollenhund? LOL

    You were saying in response to my earlier questions?

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “It kinda squares with what I was told recently by younger colleagues that said college is roughly divided into 3 thirds of players, daters and the celibate.”

    O: Yea, but here’s the thing: how many among the “celibate” are in fact choosing that? I say they’re there because they have no other choice but to be there, for the most part and insofar as the Men are concerned. Involuntary celibacy is a fate worse than death for most Men.

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “Let’s go easy on nerdy white males. Everyone here knows I married one and have a soft spot for them”

    O: Nothing personal here, Ms. Walsh, just laying all the cards on the table. It is, what it is, and by all accounts things look to intensify along these lines in the coming years. We need to be talking about ways to help this cohort cope.

    O.

  • Mike C

    We need to be talking about ways to help this cohort cope.
    .
    You’ve repeatedly said this now. Why is that so important to you?

  • Mike C

    So it cannot be dismissed out of hand.
    .
    Agreed. I just wouldn’t take it as gospel unless there were a number of confirming studies all showing the same results, and as I think I’ve pointed out, and Hamby pointed out and a few others, I think there can be more to the numbers then just matching up partner counts with the percentages.
    .
    Your 10% alpha number seems valid, but it means we have to redefine alpha. Would you say that a guy who’s had 6 partners in college is in the top 10% of guys? That is not the impression I’ve had based on the reports of people like college slacker, Athlone, Vincent I, for example. I would have guessed that the top 10% of college males would have an average of 25 partners, at least. So I’m surprised that it may be more like less than 1%.
    .
    I’m not sure I’m following you here. I guess what the data shows is it is even more skewed then we ever imagined with really only a super small minority of guys having the attraction level to get the girls who are easy. I’m actually very surprised that only 2% are at 11+.

    They’re all over the place. Of the 20 or so, 2 are virgins. After that, I’d say about 5 have a partner count of 2. Quite a few in the 5-10 range. And definitely some in the 20+ range.
    .
    I would simply note this isn’t consistent with the data above. The data above says 6% for 6-10 while “quite a few” would imply significantly more then 6% of the sample size. Only 1% at 26+ in the data. Not sure how big your focus group sample is, but at that percentage, your sample probably should only have 1 or even 0. Which is why those numbers didn’t ring accurate to me.

    Of course, a sample isn’t necessarily representative of the population, but if they are way apart then you have to wonder what is up. Presumably, you know your sample data is 100% correct.
    .
    The girl with 3 laughs and teases about how slutty her BFF is. And the other one calls her a prude. This is further proof that there is no slut shaming, btw.
    .
    Yes, which is why in the past I’ve said any calls for “slut shaming” is a lost cause and makes no sense. Friendship trumps any abstract principle.
    .
    At the end of the day, I really believe a woman should pursue whatever sexual lifestyle she desires. Its a free country, and thank God for that. I think to hate a promiscuous women is just utterly stupid. She’s not hurting your life. The only place I sort of draw the line is that I think any guy who is considering making the ultimate commitment in this day and age under this system is entitled to know a woman’s true sexual history before making that decision. If you are woman, and you are concerned about the repercussions of that down the road, then don’t live a promiscuous lifestyle. It really is that simple. I agree with Jimmy that there is something contemptible about trying to pass yourself off as having limited sexual partners when that is completely false. And I’m glad that one of the women who commented agreed with that (Christin).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C
      Admittedly, my sample is anything but random. The first group, my daughter and her classmates, all attended an all-girls high school, class size 60. From there they went to a variety of colleges – some went crazy, others did not. My daughter’s college friends are all in her sorority – and similarly, all over the map. That might surprise some people, but it’s one of the reasons I know that you can’t judge people by their appearance or friends. This group has some very hot blondes who are chaste, or nearly so.

      The BU crew is a bit different – it includes the daughter of my oldest friend in the world, and her friends. They are very attractive, urban, worldly. Some of them are in serious relationships, others not. This alone accounts for considerable variation in the number, as might be expected.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “You’ve repeatedly said this now. Why is that so important to you?”

    O: Because no one else does. That’s why. You could say that I specialize in the road less traveled. Makes life that much more interesting. Besides, it’s what amateur social scientist rabble rousers do!

    O.

  • Mike C

    And most guys are willing to commit to get sex. A surprising number date without getting sex! 98% of the men in college are not players,
    .
    This would seem to call into question though the thesis that college age women can’t get boyfriends because guys only want casual hook-up sex.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      This would seem to call into question though the thesis that college age women can’t get boyfriends because guys only want casual hook-up sex.

      Yes it sure does! And I have a very keen interest in understanding that. I know that this blog is needed, b/c it has grown steadily these last two years. But it’s really important that I understand what is needed.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “Obs, I think the whole nerdy thing is a red herring for this post. If the data showed that 20% of guys were white virgins in the hard sciences, I’d say OK, you have a point. Instead, the data shows that most guys don’t have too many partners. And most guys are willing to commit to get sex. A surprising number date without getting sex! 98% of the men in college are not players, Obs.”

    O: Agreed, but then I don’t think I ever made such a case; red herrings, anyone? ;)
    What is important here, is that Chuck/your post shows, that Women are indeed outclassing Men in more ways than just one. The growing cohort of what I call de facto eunuchs is just that – a growing one. And no amount of sticking our heads into the sand is gonna change or alleviate that. China may be forced to deal with its de facto eunuch situation soon enough; we here in the States should be much more forward leaning in the effort.

    Back to you…

    O.

  • modernguy

    Susan, you’ve described your husband as sort of a nerdy beta. You’ve also said you had 10+ partners before him. So, ironically, aren’t you the kind of girl that guys gripe about in the current SMP? I’m not talking about being an all out slut and riding the “carousel”, but the other kind of girl that’s more common, and in a way more insidious because it’s much more accepted. I mean the kind of girl Haley just posted about and you linked to. The kind of girl who goes through serial “monogamy”. Having relationships of convenience and moving on when you’re done having fun, and when you’re “ready” (meaning getting old) you settle down with a guy who’s maybe not all that objectively attractive but a good provider. His numbers probably aren’t up to yours, how do you think he would feel about it?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      For modernguy, a modern beta love story:

      I’ll tell you how it was. At 25, I had been with 6 guys. Two guys in college, three men I dated in my 20s, and a reunion with a high school boy I’d never had sex with during our relationship. (I should mention that I started college at 16.) Honestly, all of that sex was meaningful to me, none of it was casual. I then went to grad school, and had 3-4 flings my first semester. Just kind of went crazy as an “empowered and independent woman” – it was a cliche, the way I went for the alphas in the bunch. A former Israeli air pilot, the son of a Mexican tycoon, a French banker, an Australian student from the dental school who crashed the MBA Happy Hour. The guys were hot, and the sex was bad. I knew I’d gone seriously awry, and I decided to stop. I didn’t care one bit about any one of those guys, I was just trying to act like a dude.

      In truth, I had seen and been attracted to my husband the first day, but he barely knew I existed. We ran in the same crowd, and I had a serious crush on him. Eventually, we became friends and I hid my real feelings.

      He went to an engineering college, and was 27 when he went to business school. I don’t know his number, I think it was about the same as mine at that point. As an MBA student, and an attractive guy, he did pretty well with the local undergrads, something I found very annoying. My roommate and I once ran into him doing the walk of shame on a Sunday morning – so he had come into his own by then, as many betas do after college. I was very attracted to him.

      One night we were hanging out, listening to music and he kissed me, out of the blue. I was stunned, and my stomach flipped over in a roller coaster way. That was a ONS. Of course, I was totally in love with him at that point. We had great pillow talk in the morning, that was a Friday. I waited to hear from him all weekend, but not a word. The next Tuesday, I saw him walking towards me on campus. It was inevitable that we would stop and chat. He was very awkward. My heart was pounding but I told him that I wanted to spend time with him, that I wanted to be together again. He looked incredibly pained, but he looked me in the eye and said, “I don’t think so.” I swallowed, said, “OK, I understand” and walked calmly away. When I got back to my room I wept.

      Soon we were in midterms, and then we had spring break. I was stressed and strung out, so I went to a B&B in Maine by myself. I brought good books and loved the solitude and did a bit of wallowing in self-pity. When I returned, I saw him at a party, and he greeted me with, “How was your sad and lonely vacation?” So I guess that was a neg! What an asshole, negging the girl he’d rejected!

      I resolved to be a big girl and move on with my life. I didn’t hook up with anyone else, and I knew he didn’t like me. Summer came, and I headed to NYC where I had a sweet banking internship. He stayed in Philly to work for the mayor. In July I received a typed postcard in the mail (who does that?). He wrote, “I’ve been trying to reach you and you’re never there. It’s driving me crazy. What would you think if I came to NY for a weekend?” And the rest is history.

      Epilogue: It wasn’t easy starting a relationship this way. In particular, I wanted an explanation for why he had not been attracted to me, then kissed me, then not liked me, then changed his mind. At the time he said, “It was pretty clear to me you weren’t looking for a relationship. You really dug those foreign guys.” Of course, now I know that he was freaked out by my slutty behavior that first semester. I’ve never learned what made him change his mind. He missed me, I guess, and he decided to take a chance. Once we were together, he was HOH (head over heels) and I never had reason to doubt his affection. And I never gave him reason to doubt either. That was the summer of 82. We married in 84. And I still have the hots for him!

  • Mike C

    O: Because no one else does. That’s why. You could say that I specialize in the road less traveled. Makes life that much more interesting.
    .
    Well…I guess my thought is who cares. I see no major problem. They’ll play video games, jack-off to porn, or go to hookers. Every once in a really long time, maybe you get a George Sodini type who loses it, but that would be a extreme rarity. There is no “problem” to “solve”.
    .
    My belief is most people are lazy and undisciplined. That’s why most people fail diets, can’t quit smoking, don’t save money, etc. Learning Game/attracting women is no different. A small minority of guys will be committed enough to really learn and practice. Most will give up. It is what it is.

  • Mike C

    The growing cohort of what I call de facto eunuchs is just that – a growing one. And no amount of sticking our heads into the sand is gonna change or alleviate that. China may be forced to deal with its de facto eunuch situation soon enough; we here in the States should be much more forward leaning in the effort.
    .
    Are they going to riot in the streets, hold marches with protest signs demanding pussy? Should I be afraid in my apartment of the omega/lower beta who isn’t getting laid?

  • jess

    still sounding like the victorian grandma
    .
    “you will get a reputation m dear- no white wedding dress for you- you will besmirch your reputation Moll”
    .
    Again, we wind up with ‘how many makes a slut?’
    .
    And who decides upon level of information release? Does a women have to list age of virginity loss on the first date, a rape event?, her 1st kiss?, does she own a sex aid?, does she read racy novels?
    .
    And of the man? Does he have to disclose masturbation frequency? Perhaps a list of all the websites hes visited in the last 12 months? make that 36 months? Every used a prostitute? How about an STD free certificate?
    .
    When I last circulated a similar thread on this topic from this blog to bunch of my work friends they all thought you guys were bonkers- or from another era.

  • GudEnuf

    I have to admit, this is some tingly dominant stuff. I love watching the guys establish the pecking order.

    That’s kind of sick. This “tingly dominant stuff” is probably the biggest cause of male suffering today. It would be like me saying I like watching anorexic women starve themselves.

  • Mike C

    That’s kind of sick. This “tingly dominant stuff” is probably the biggest cause of male suffering today. It would be like me saying I like watching anorexic women starve themselves.

    Jeez…relax. Don’t take shit so seriously. A little bantering with humor isn’t the cause of suffering.

  • Mike C

    Yes it sure does! And I have a very keen interest in understanding that.
    .
    I think we sort of know the answer to that already though, don’t we? :)
    .
    Do we need to dig up that Casey thread? :)
    .
    I wonder if Florence ditched that good guy engineer after a few dates?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C
      Since Florence has been MIA, I suspect that she ditched him. Re Casey, I’ve never heard from her again, and who could blame her? Man, that thread lives on in infamy!

  • jess

    modern guy,
    Whilst susan is more than capable of standing up for herself, I hope she will forgive me if I suggest you are making uncalled for assumptions- which in fact, if you read the blog fuller, simply are not true.
    .
    Apart from the fact that sometimes you have to kiss a few frogs to get a prince there is nothing wrong in enjoying life whilst you can.
    .
    A few parties, a bit of flirtation, the odd slow dance is not soddom and gomorrahh.
    .
    Susan is arguing for females to curb casual sex for long term benefit to themselves and society. I dont agree particularly but she not being hypocritical.
    .
    As for numbers the chances of a couple having identical numbers is a long shot. People have to adult about these things. Not cry into their soup cos ‘he/she had more sex than me before we met.
    .
    Most women do factor in status/wealth/health etc but you what… attraction, kindness and sense of humour are what women like in a LTR. And if 10 yrs earlier she had a fling with a tall ‘player’ as a life experience so the hell what? She will barely even remember the experience.
    What matters is sexual, emotional and intellectual cmpatitibiltiy.
    Numbers, skin colour, age, background or religion shouldn’t matter one jot.

  • OffTheCuff

    T needs to buy Athol’s book.

    Quite probably. That was about a year ago, which is well before my intro to the manosphere, but after I discovered some truths myself and amped up the sex from biweeky to daily. At the time I thought to myself “dude, what’s wrong, you were THE man in college”, but I didn’t as had no explanation why — I just had a wife who is up for anything. Maybe now I can.

    Of course, part of me just wants to keep this secret to myself.

    And who decides upon level of information release? Does a women have to list age of virginity loss on the first date, a rape event?, her 1st kiss?, does she own a sex aid?, does she read racy novels?

    Wow, so hostile. For us, the topic naturally came up at some point early in the relationship, where we both briefly described our pasts, and that was about it for years. You make it sound like a hostile interrogation. Neither of us had anything to hide. Eventually, months later, she described some abuse she had as a kid, as her depression episodes from it become apparent. Other details fill in randomly over the years, as we recount past experiences in other contexts. One ex-boyfriend tried to pursue her after marriage, and I stomped on it hard. Another time we talk about our first kiss. And so on. These open, incidental exchanges of history are a big part of having a loving relationship. I find it honestly ridiculous that you’d lock part of yourself up in a box, never to talk about it again with your spouse… unless its something emotionally scarring.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      These open, incidental exchanges of history are a big part of having a loving relationship.

      I agree, part of loving someone is learning their history and how they feel about it. Some of that information may be difficult to hear, or even dampen attraction temporarily, but it’s inevitably part of the deal in a loving relationship. There is something wonderful about knowing that you aren’t fooling your partner – they know it all, and they still love you. That’s a huge relief.

  • Mike C

    I’m probably an idiot for even responding to you
    .
    Again, we wind up with ‘how many makes a slut?’
    .
    Who cares? Why do we have to have number X = slut. It is up to each individual guy to determine what he considers slutty for his own personal relationships. But yes, I know, that is the part you don’t like. You don’t want guys having passive veto power by being able to take a pass on someone they deem slutty. I don’t think any guy out there except for a few kooks is looking to brand women with a scarlet S for public consumption.
    .
    And who decides upon level of information release?
    .
    Seriously, this is such a stupid f*cking response. What do you mean “who decides”. I ask you a question. You answer it honestly. If you don’t want to answer, then you say “That is none of your damn business”. If you don’t like that the question was asked, you don’t have to interact with that person again.
    .
    And of the man? Does he have to disclose masturbation frequency?
    .
    I guess if the woman wants to disclose her mastubation frequency. Why would you care what the masturbation frequency is? But if you asked, sure I’ll respond I rub one out X times.

  • modernguy

    When people say that there’s nothing wrong with promiscuity and sex is just for fun, I feel like they’re talking out of one side of their mouth. There’s something that keeps forming and breaking inside us with relationships that sex consummates, and promiscuity breaks that sensitivity. Girls break it more easily because their pre-existing state is one of hope and possibility while men have to create the possibility, so losing it can be dreadful.

  • Mike C

    I really am an idiot as I am breaking my commitment not to engage you:

    Most women do factor in status/wealth/health etc but you what… attraction, kindness and sense of humour are what women like in a LTR. And if 10 yrs earlier she had a fling with a tall ‘player’ as a life experience so the hell what? She will barely even remember the experience.
    What matters is sexual, emotional and intellectual cmpatitibiltiy.
    Numbers, skin colour, age, background or religion shouldn’t matter one jot.

    .
    Here is the thing which you don’t or cannot seem to understand. You get to decide FOR YOU what matters. You completely 100% have that right to prioritize whatever you think. What you don’t get to do is decide for another human being WHAT MATTERS TO THEM. They get to decide that for themself. If I only want to marry a woman who is a PhD astrophysicist and speaks 20 languages that is my prerogative. That is stupid, and I will probably never get married but that is my right.
    .
    Seriously, what I really find disgusting is the clear implication that you are entitled to lie or hide information because you deem that it doesn’t matter.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      I really am an idiot as I am breaking my commitment not to engage you:

      Haha, low impulse control!

  • modernguy

    Jess your opinions are not only typically female (“I can do whatever I want!) but also typically oblivious of the male point of view. From the male point of view you absolutely can’t do whatever you want, and life is not just about having fun.

  • Mike C

    Jess,

    Here is your homework assignment. Go back to several posts and read all of the comments by Stephenie Rowling. She is a stellar example of how you build rational, cogent arguments point by point instead of inane snark like this:

    “And who decides upon level of information release? Does a women have to list age of virginity loss on the first date, a rape event?, her 1st kiss?, does she own a sex aid?, does she read racy novels?”

  • Abbot

    You don’t want guys having passive veto power by being able to take a pass on someone they deem slutty.
    .
    They would not mind so much if few men exercised that veto power. The fact that they do mind is a clear indication that most guys do. But suggest that fewer men would do that if women would change their behavior and their little brains fry.
    ,
    promiscuity breaks that sensitivity
    .
    Is that why its so much easier to fall hard for girls who are not promiscuous?

  • Abbot

    Numbers, skin colour, age, background or religion shouldn’t matter one jot.
    .
    So, if that were true, how would that change things for the better for men and women?

  • jess

    to mike c,
    the bit you keep forgetting is that you are telling women in general to limit their sexual experiences before an LTR.
    .
    If so, then isnt it a fair question to ask “ok, what am I allowed to have?”
    .
    We all get that it might vary from guy to guy and context. But a ball park figure at least?
    .
    I would have hoped you would have realised my made up ‘disclosure’ conversations were designed to illustrate how silly this all is.
    .
    I should mention that with the exception of some odd balls (ie no friends and disliked by colleagues/peers) all the people, of both genders, just dont go along with this purity nonsense.
    .
    No women or man wants their significant other to have had 100’s of partners.
    But 10?, 20? 30 even? Certainly cant be an issue if you are in your 30’s or 40’s?
    .
    It shouldnt be as important as a whole bunch of other issues.
    If a daughter of mine, in the future, had say, 6 flings at uni and them got engaged I would be astonished if she was jilted by a fiance on discovering her terrible ‘secret’. If he did, then better now than later she should discover he was a jerk.
    .
    And the ‘lie’ thing- mmmm- I wonder how honest people are in relationships sometimes. I know a few guys (good guys) who had a quick drunken mini snog at the Xmas party. Im guessing they havent felt the need to share that with their wives.
    .
    Oh wait- hang on- its ok isnt it? – they have to spread their seed dont they- sorry- forgot that

  • Abbot

    if 10 yrs earlier she had a fling with a tall ‘player’ as a life experience so the hell what? She will barely even remember the experience.
    .
    She should of at least remembered his name and especially his number. Could give her that chance to get married.
    .
    my work friends they all thought you guys were bonkers- or from another era.
    .
    Oh, its this era alright. The feminists aren’t all on the defensive for no reason.

  • MRKTGNS

    I disagree that nerds have less or less satisfactory sex than non-nerds.

    Or that high intelligence is linked to misunderstanding and failure with the opposite sex.

    The high T aggressive male attempts to achieve sexual access via multiple interactions using physical dominance and displays of selected.

    Meanwhile, his nerd male counterpart is fondling and making-out with the key club president under an oak tree next to a flowing river.

    After the aggressive male has exhausted his non-verbal mating strategy in the presence of an intelligent female, with limited success, he reveals his IQ by opening his mouth and losing her.

    And the nerd is successfully seducing his girlfriend, serenading her with his intellectual prowess and captivating demeanor, arousing her passions through physical and mental stimulation.

    The female audience is not aware of the power the disciplined and intelligent male has over himself and her when she enthralled and sustained in arousal, primed for multiple orgasms.

    Of course, sluts are not familiar with this by definition and/or because they ignore the nice guy/nerd.

    It just so happens that intelligent guys appear to suck in bed, just don’t get him alone with you, or your perception of him will remain that way.

  • Esau

    MRKTGNS, your comment reminded me strongly of this post, written (supposedly) by a young woman:

    http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com/2011/04/once-you-go-gamer-you-never-go-back.html

    Money quote: ” If sense ran the world, a guy with a six-year-long Mage: The Ascension campaign would have groupies and have to hire a service to clean all the pussy juice off his lawn.” Really, how can you top that?

  • jess

    did you mean ‘perception WONT remain that way’?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Are they going to riot in the streets, hold marches with protest signs demanding pussy? Should I be afraid in my apartment of the omega/lower beta who isn’t getting laid?

    You are being a little small picture on this. A society with a huge amount of member apathetic about it, no reproducing and not adding a meaningful part of the culture is not a functional society. Not sure if you plan to breed with your beloved, but if you do, your kids and grandchildren will need suitable partners, willingly to commit and marriage will become a luxury on a couple of generations and passing the grandfather test is the key to a society that will progress and flourish. And even though it sounds cliche the next Einstein might no be born. That is why we are should participate on correcting the current issues with the SMP, and not just assume we are free of the consequences, just because we managed one way or the other to escape it, YMMV as usual.

  • http://www.thoughtsfromtheboonies.blogspot.com Jason

    I would say nerds (defined as intellectual types with an obsessive habit of learning what they can) have a good chance of being good lovers. They’ll probably know as much about a woman as her gynaecologist after all. :)

    That said, without some ability to stand out from the herd they may not get the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge.

    I don’t think that the average man (especially based on these statistics) needs to know enough Game to keep an 8 strong harem. They just need enough to engage one woman, and avoid the pitfalls of becoming too beta for her.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jason

      I don’t think that the average man (especially based on these statistics) needs to know enough Game to keep an 8 strong harem. They just need enough to engage one woman, and avoid the pitfalls of becoming too beta for her.

      I think that’s a good example of the Pareto Principle. Learning 20% of Game can probably get you 80% of the results. Most guys really don’t even want to get to total player status, so why train for that?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “Here is your homework assignment. Go back to several posts and read all of the comments by Stephenie Rowling. She is a stellar example of how you build rational, cogent arguments point by point instead of inane snark like this”

    Thank you, I’m really speechless. More often than not I feel I’m talking to much…but then I’m a chatter box on real life is not like we can change our persona too much *virtual kiss on the cheek’ :)

  • modernguy

    Women shame men for lack of attractiveness, men shame women for lack of character. They are equivalent.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    MRKTGNS,

    I happen to agree with you, intelligence has always been a big turn on for me, and the few guys that I had been attracted to, usually screw it with one word or two.
    But then I really think that women are not gamed on the sense of tricked into it, but responding to some sort of mating dance they recognize, so a very drama filled woman will respond to the dark gamers and a less filled drama one probably can be satisfied with less game. But again I had said that American society despise good character traits: politeness and niceness or feminine traits and exalts the bad ones: rudeness and angriness. If you check the feminist icons more often than not are career women (like Scully) and/or kick ass women (like Xena) but you rarely see mothers or housewives respected or supported by this women (and although I love Xena and Scully I also love Mary Poppins and nice girls and housewives), so when a man display the “cool” traits many women respond to that and despise the others, add to that the entitlement complex, they are not getting anything special out of being treated nice you are just recognizing their superiority so the gesture is lost, YMMV.

    @Esau

    Err does she knows that Asian Nerds have groupies? Sense might no reign on her world but they do on other cultures were intelligence is appreciated.

  • jess

    modernguy,
    you jest yes?
    you dont really suggest that men dont judge women on their attractiveness do you?
    .
    and quality of character means different things to different people-
    there is nothing ethically wrong in responsible casual sex imo
    .
    and i know of a few chaste people that are of ‘poor’ character imo.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Susan
    That is a very nice story. :)
    You should totally add it as part of the books. It reads like a rom-com. But just don’t make it into a full motion picture. Sluts around the country will think that their true love will get over their first impression and they will hamsterwheel a full sped till they reach 50. Is like Jezebel you find 10 or 20 commenter that said that they found their love that didn’t judged their slutty ways and it does gives the appearance that it doesn’t matter till you read about 2000 commenters that can’t get laid are unmarried/separated/single/divorced or sharing a guy on an open relationship…Sadly feminists only hear the success stories not the other ones.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Stephenie
      After I wrote I Married a One-Night Stand, I had a loyal reader angrily tell me I was offering false hope to women and leave, never to be heard from again. Believe me, it’s not a strategy I recommend. My husband saw my good qualities and somehow knew that I was a good bet. I think if I had stumbled in the early days, or given any cause for doubt, he would have walked immediately. Fortunately, I was already in love with him, so that didn’t happen.

  • Esau

    Stephenie: Err does she knows that Asian Nerds have groupies?

    I recommend the Ozymandias blog. She wouldn’t be my type (!) but it’s a great read, and I think you in particular would appreciate that post, among others.

  • MRKTGNS

    Females disqualify in attempt to quantify.

    A 6’3” mesomorphic UFC champion athelete will be able to physically defend his female companion under the threat of attack or confrontation, he may even deter the event from his presence alone.

    However, a woman will underestimate the ‘power’ of the intellect with regard to his negotiating skill that may lead the release of hostages or psychologically disarming an assailant in close proximity.

    Both are effective. Both can build their physical strength.

    But who holds the power?

  • SadistfortheStupid

    Forget the relationship/sex blogs, where the heck does common sense come into play? Let’s get the view of the young person on the street, and stop wishing the world shared our individual (or even groupthink) opinion. See thenationalcampaign.org/resources/pdf/pubs/ThatsWhatHeSaid.pdf

    “Similarly, 53% of all guys surveyed (ages 15-22) say having lots of hook-ups makes them more popular while just one in four (24%) believe that lots of hook-ups make girls popular.”

    Is this survey of teenagers in the USA clear enough for you? Men are studs and women are duds when participating in the hookup culture.

    Also, the study which forms the basis for this blog post is, unsurprisingly for social science research, fundamentally flawed. Lack of honesty by respondents is just the start of the problems – the bias of the study’s authors, four female academicians and a lone male, also must be taken into account. How would the authors expect the government funded gravy train to continue running if they failed to support the victim/perpetrator, “woman good, man bad” world view to which acadmia is slavishly devoted? Just one example: the authors claim that 1% to 5% of rapes result in pregnancy, for a total of approximately 32,000 annual pregnancies. At a 1% “success” rate the total number of rapes is 3.2 million. At a 5% “success” rate the total number of rapes is 640,000. For the year 1996, which is the year of the study referenced by the authors in support of these numbers, the Department of Justice reports (rounded to the nearest thousand) 96,000 rapes, and for the publication year of their study, 2007, 90,000 rapes were reported. The authors wish us to believe that between 1 in 33 (3.2 million/96,00) or 1 in 7 rapes (640,000/96,000) goes unreported. Underreporting of actual rape versus women’s regret surrounding one or more dimensions of an unsatisfactory sexual experience will never be definitively resolved. The lack of definitive rape in comparison with substance abuse and regret issues regarding “unwanted” sex on college campuses drives these useful tools of the nonmeritocracy absolutely crazy. “It was crowded at the party and he rubbed against me on the way to the keg, so yeah, I’ve experienced sexual assault because I didn’t consent for him to touch me!” The authors and their colleagues massage the definition of sexual assault/rape until the results they desire are achieved, and yet actual criminal charges of rape are rare.

    The real data on hookup frequency in college is not going to be found as a tangential element of an academic study focusing on sexual assault. For something entirely more believable on hookup frequencies by gender see cambridgetab.co.uk/features/cambridges-love-survey, which states: “When it comes to sex, Cambridge’s girls are getting way more action than the boys. 32% of women claim to be having sex more than once a week, whereas 36% of men are having sex less than monthly.” The author of this column didn’t deliver her message very clearly, but I trust her overall conclusion that the girls are getting way more action than the boys – afterall, she saw the original survey data.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “I recommend the Ozymandias blog. She wouldn’t be my type (!) but it’s a great read, and I think you in particular would appreciate that post, among others.”

    I read it! Totally agree with her :), but then again I’m a nerd myself I married a WOW player and now I have a paladin and a blood elf and we do all the valentines day quests together. And of course we game on the bed a lot too. Perfect marriage IMO. :).

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Susan
    Good I didn’t knew you had already a book out *bad guest*.
    Maybe mention this that you got lucky but that also the image of the slut on your days was not the same.
    I really think part of the revulsion of sluts is that the images on the internet of women getting cum shots, half naked, half passed out between 4 or 5 frat boys that are taking turns at her, is the first thing a modern guy thinks once he finds out that a girl has a “slut phase” and that is hard to get over with. I mean Mike C tale of the women his friends beds are probably enough for any sensible guy to just stop dating altogether.

    I also think SadistfortheStupid, has a point you mentioned that the levels of drinking don’t match the hook up numbers and that is really an odd fact when we know how much alcohol is involved on hooking up, they might be indeed altering something or just counting P and V sex, and anything else: anal, blowjobs, no recalling the whole night so no admitting if it was consensual… could be counted out the question. Do we know the details of the survey?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Stephenie
      No that wasn’t a book, it was just one post, haha!

      The study report just says that they asked about sexual intercourse partners. For their purposes, they did ask re consensual and non-consensual sex. I assume they were looking for straight P in V data. It is possible, or course, that people have more hookup partners than sexual intercourse partners.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Most of the females in the campus want to bang these 1.3% dudes

  • Chico

    Great post, Susan! Always nice to see real statistical data instead of anecdotes and exaggerations getting passed around like a game of telephone.

    This…

    In short, this is a very different story than college students often informally report here and on other blogs. Why is that? Some possible explanations:

    •The grass is always greener. College students regularly assume that others have it way better than they do.
    •The culture rewards casual sex, so that the most promiscuous students have outsized visibility in the population.
    •Popularity and peer approval rest on tales of exploits, which may lead students to fabricate or exaggerate sexual conquests.

    …is great

    Especially the middle point. When you have movies like American Pie and the 40 Year Old Virgin, it’s easy to feel like a loser if you have few or no tales of conquest. After all, shouldn’t 90% of our value as human beings be based on how often we’re getting laid? *sarcasm*

    Now that I think about it, quite a large percentage of the people I knew in college were virgins or generally lacking in experience. Those that weren’t were in monogamous relationships for the most part. Then again, I went to a pretty STEM and foreign school, so the inexperience factor is probably even higher.

    I wonder how different this study’s results would look if the survey included young 20 somethings who didn’t pursue any post-secondary. All of the alpha/player types I know personally are part of this category.

  • Clarence

    Susan:

    Please remind me. What was the Casey thread?

  • Abbot

    once he finds out that a girl has a “slut phase” and that is hard to get over with
    .
    American women: you must consider it a favor that guys are doing their best to find a way to consider you for commitment. Given your behaviors, you understand that this is mighty hard. So, if they employ their option to pull the plug on the whole idea, know they tried and don’t hold it against them.

  • Christin

    I just got home and read a lot of the comments so I will try to respond efficiently and succinctly…

    – There is a difference between lying about yourself and placing yourself in the best possible light when you’re getting to know someone. As Mike C described, date 1 2 or 3 is not necessarily the best time to say “Hey, wanna talk about how many penises have been in here?!??”

    – We have also overused the term “slut”- for both male and females. There are some girls who actually are wife-material that have “slut” moments, or slip-ups. There are also the girls who have LTRS and in between each become sluts- some serial daters can fall in this category. There are girls who sleep around and love doing it, usually self-proclaimed sluts. What I hinted at before is that (from personal experience)- many guys are surprised at either a) how slutty a girl can actually be and b) how “normal” girls can have “slut” moments.

    -There are so many occasion when sex doesn’t actually happen, but there has been promiscuous behavior. Story #1- (names have been changed). Rich is a friend of my boyfriend’s and Susan (haha) is a friend of mine. We’re all out at a bar. Susan tells me she finds Rich attracted. Rich grunts and humps his way around Lansdowne Pub. Susan and Rich ferociously make out. Boyfriend and I go home. We get a call from Rich in the morning.

    “Yo”
    “Hey Rich…how’d it go?”
    “Yeah man, I don’t know, how do I get to your place?”
    “Where are you?”
    “Susan’s”
    “AHHH!! What happened?”
    “Nothing…we woke up fully clothed. I didn’t know where I was. How do I get home?”

    True story…anyway…

    @Mike C- Women who deceive their boyfriends- FAIL. It’ll come out eventually. As I’ve said, some men are unaware of how promiscuous females can be.

    @Abbot- The circle doesn’t matter. Girls’ sexual behavior is judged differently between their girlfriends and potential male suitors. A woman who sleeps around freely and knowingly is someone who is getting their immediate wants filled. Therefore, they can obviously alter any male-encounter to their favor, whether it be their perceived wife-ability.

    @collegeslacker

    College isn’t a bonanza for you unless you got looks, greek letters on your shirt, a jersey, or game.

    It’s true. Imagine this scenario of an alpha (I’m purposefully leaving out the gender):

    A “person” walks into the room with a group of friends. They are attractive and gregarious. Someone bumps into them- they either brush it off and start talking to the person or try to start a fight. Either way, dominant personality.

    This “person” approaches someone of the opposite sex.

    Drinking ensues. Some talking. Maybe making out. etc.

    AT THE END OF THE NIGHT:

    MOST OF THE TIME:

    If it’s a female that wants sex- she will have it. If it’s a male that wants sex, he still has a 50% chance of it not happening. It’s easier for females to be promiscuous because they are the choosier ones.

    @modernguy

    His numbers probably aren’t up to yours, how do you think he would feel about it?

    I know a few have touched on this, but I would like to reiterate:

    1. There is a difference in lifestyle change between being in college and out of college. 2. “Settling down” doesn’t mean settling for whatever’s left over. I am obviously female, but if I was a male that got around a bit in college, had no trouble getting girls, and then found a girl that made me want to settle down, I would think UPGRADE. Same goes for girls.

    @Jess- I’m just going to say YES because I agree with so many of your statements.

    -and lastly-

    I think there is a time and a place to talk about sexual pasts etc. Definitely not on the first few dates. As many of you have pointed out, more experiences are shared within an honest relationship. The only problem is- do you really want to imagine the person you love boning someone else? I say, if you want to know numbers, find out early in the relationship (but once it is an actual relationship) and then freely talk about your experiences as they pertain to your present life. We all have some stories we’re not proud of- sexually or not, but live in the present and don’t let details about your past life bog down your current relationships.

  • Abbot

    It’s easier for females to be promiscuous because they are the choosier ones.
    .
    Not exactly. It’s easier for females to be promiscuous because all they have to say is “yes” and men rarely turn them down. Thus no effort, no accomplishment, not rare and therefore cheap and easy.

  • Abbot

    they can obviously alter any male-encounter to their favor, whether it be their perceived wife-ability.
    .
    Yes, temporarily. But only a stupid foolish woman would live that lie into a marriage. We all know that they are not so stupid or corrupt or desperate, right?

  • Ted

    What does the data reveal about sexual partners?

    1. There are more male virgins than female virgins in college. The number of virgins in this study was higher than is normally estimated for college populations, which is 33% at freshman year, 12% by senior year.

    I find this very interesting considering that I’ve read studies claiming 60% of graduating high school seniors are virgins. Rather than half of those virgins getting it on in the summer before college, this suggests to me that these two schools, which are obviously not a random sample, are not really that representative of college populations.

    @ Workshy Joe

    42.8 % of male college students have NO SEXUAL PARTNERS. Ouch!

    Is that three years of college in the USA?

    Wow. Talk about a dry spell. That’s actually worse than I thought. I thought the “no sex at all” constituency would be ALOT smaller than that. America has a very sexualised culture so I am shocked at these statistics.

    You’d be surprised. I find (with guys at least) that it is always safer to assume that someone is not having sex, unless you know for sure that they are. That said, anyone who you know for sure is having sex is probably having as much as they can (and the type of person who can get any is often the type of person who can get a lot). Note that a lot does not necessarily mean > 11 partners they may have just a few, or just 1 (but be having sex with those partners very frequently).

    @Mike C

    Only 3% of women are above 11. Susan, seriously, does this really ring true based on your college age focus groups. Really?

    11 is A LOT. Women generally considered open to sex or promiscuous probably have more like 5 or 6 partners, not 11. I only know one girl that I can say has for sure had more than 10 partners (she’s still far from the 25+ bracket). And she didn’t break even that high until last semester.

    Ultimately, I think it comes down to the fact that most women know in the recesses of their mind even if they vocally disagree, that they are SUBSTANTIALLY reducing the pool of guys who would voluntarily make a serious committment. You see it the comments on these threads. You’ve got 2 guys saying it doesn’t matter, Tom and GudEnuf, and I’m not sure either is really a guy, versus all the other guys who would pass.

    While I don’t disregard her partner count, I honestly believe that if you like her enough it doesn’t matter. At that point the only concern is whether she is capable of committing to you if she wanted to, to which I’m generally inclined to grant the benefit of the doubt.

    @Susan

    There’s something else that occurs to me – one reason I often see cited for the popularity of hookups is that kids today are under so much stress re academics, career prep, finding jobs, applying to grad school, etc. I wonder if this data doesn’t hint at the same thing – maybe a significant population is holed up in the library. Still, I find interesting that the number of virgins is so high in a population getting hammered on a regular basis. Frankly, I’m not sure what to make of it.

    I would say you’re likely on to something, workdeath seriously limits the time a lot of us have to deal with this stuff. That said, getting drunk once a month is not the same as getting hammered on a regular basis (the latter is both more extreme and more frequent consumption of alcohol than the study suggests is common), on top of which I suspect drunk virgins don’t actually know how to turn their temporary confidence into actually getting laid. Hell, those of us who are sober have a hard enough time keeping bringing girl back to room with expectation on both sides that something is going to happen from turning into movie night where girl gets tired and goes home early.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ted

      I find this very interesting considering that I’ve read studies claiming 60% of graduating high school seniors are virgins. Rather than half of those virgins getting it on in the summer before college, this suggests to me that these two schools, which are obviously not a random sample, are not really that representative of college populations.

      Here’s the data I refer to:
      http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad362.pdf

      % Having experienced vaginal intercourse, by age, males:

      18: 62%
      19: 69%
      20-21: 85%
      22-24: 89%

      Females:

      18: 70%
      19: 77%
      20-21: 81%
      22-24: 92%

      Keep in mind this CDC data is for the whole population, not just college students.

  • AlphaRising

    I find it weird that anyone would think Suzanne’s story is a a good example of how hooking up can lead to marriage. It sounds to me like her brief period of sluttiness was almost a deal-breaker for the husband. Him deciding to send the postcard seemed like a lucky break which frankly, wouldn’t happen today.
    .
    “I wonder how different this study’s results would look if the survey included young 20 somethings who didn’t pursue any post-secondary. All of the alpha/player types I know personally are part of this category.”
    .
    True. There are tons of bouncer/bartender/drug-dealer/gym-nut type guys who never went to post-secondary who get laid FAR more than college “alphas”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @AlphaRising

      It sounds to me like her brief period of sluttiness was almost a deal-breaker for the husband. Him deciding to send the postcard seemed like a lucky break which frankly, wouldn’t happen today.

      I think you’re right, it probably wouldn’t. It’s necessary to keep in mind the culture at that time. In 1981, just before news of AIDS broke, we were really just post-Sexual Revolution. Those of us in our 20s had some of age in the era of “free love” and “if it feels good do it” and “make love not war.” Both men and women embraced the newfound sexual freedom. Women were generally not judged for some promiscuity, even by men, for the most part. As an example, I never heard a single person discuss “the number” until about 5 years ago. My husband has never asked, and I have no idea what his is. In fact, it’s probably fair to say that you know more about my sexual history than he does, yikes. I think he only knew about a couple of those b-school hookups, and only because I left a party with some guy. FWIW, most of the women I knew at school, also in their mid-20s, were having flings left and right. Some even with professors :-/

      I think a couple of things were going through his mind after we had the ONS. First, there was the promiscuity issue – despite what was politically correct, he was perhaps repelled by my willingness to go there. Second, I know from the comments he has made that he figured I wanted a real alpha type – that was who I’d gone with on those couple of occasions. So there was some discomfort/insecurity on his part as well. Over time, he reconciled those concerns, obviously. And to be honest, I quickly learned that the promise of sexual empowerment was a scam – the sex was meh, I felt nothing for those men, and I didn’t like running into them afterwards. I stopped hooking up because it was incongruent with my nature.

      Interestingly, he is quite frank with our daughter in admonishing her about men and how they think about female sexuality. So I guess it’s fair to say he doesn’t want her to turn out like me :( (in that way)

  • Workshy Joe

    Susan writes:

    @collegeslacker
    Interesting! I thought for sure you’d say “no way this data is terrible.” I guess I should congratulate you on being top 2%. Is it too much to hope that your GPA is up there as well?

    If women got wet for guys with good grades instead of good game then we’d all be academic geniuses.

    Its the same principle out in the world of work. If I was career-oriented, I might get to live like…my late father. God bless him. If I was lucky.

    No thanks!

  • Höllenhund

    Yes it sure does! And I have a very keen interest in understanding that.

    It’s nice to see you acknowledge this.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      It’s nice to see you acknowledge this.

      If I’ve got it wrong, it’s important that I know that asap, because I’m giving women specific advice every day on these matters. I have no interest in building a house of cards. We all benefit from knowledge, even if it doesn’t confirm our hypotheses. That’s why I have zero patience for feminist reworking of study results. It’s shabby work that sullies the whole field of social science research.

  • Höllenhund

    I think a particular cohort in that population CAN’T LEARN GAME. HBD is quite consistent on this note. And, it is my opinion that we need to have an honest discussion about this.[…]

    And no amount of sticking our heads into the sand is gonna change or alleviate that. China may be forced to deal with its de facto eunuch situation soon enough; we here in the States should be much more forward leaning in the effort

    True, Obs. However, whe definitely shouldn’t seriously entertain the notion that such a honest discussion about the growing % of sexual and economic male losers, even if it actually takes place and gets attention from the MSM (not much of a chance of that happening IMO), will be followed by any sort of wide-range remedy that is politically/legally possible and feasible in the current political and cultural environment in the US or any other Western country. In other words, I don’t think that any of the potential social and political problems directly or indirectly stemming from increasing male sexual and economic underperformance will be pre-empted, so to speak.

  • Höllenhund

    I think it’s fair to say that the numbers of guys who visit Roissy’s NOT to self-improve, but to rail against the world about how said world did them wrong, is much higher.

    I don’t think you can judge any blog’s readership by its commenters. One general rule of blogging seems to be that the vast majority of readers never bother to comment. I’m sure Ms. Walsh agrees. The commenters are usually the shrill, outspoken ones who want to challenge others or simply vent or troll, or have time on their hands and thus don’t want to miss any opportunity to correct someone who they think is wrong on the Internet. I’m sure there are many, many guys who read Roissy, use his advice but never comment.

  • Höllenhund

    And I think part of the reason why there’s so much gnashing of teeth, is because a goodly portion of these guys know and understand that in the Brave New World that is the SMP, they CAN’T compete in it.

    IMO the palpable anger of some commenters of the Manosphere rather seems to be directed at a) all the people and media who lied and spread BS to them about female sexuality and the current SMP (this violates the value men attach to justice and clarity) b) women who used their legal entitlements to screw them over.

  • Wild Cougar

    Ms. Walsh, I wonder if you encountered “everything but” virgins in your focus group. This seems to be a relatively new phenomenon I am hearing about. Women who do everything but intercourse. And a whole lot of it. They believe they are saving themselves and don’t think they will be judged the same as “sluts”. One young woman commented on another site “it doesn’t matter how many dicks I suck, I am still a virgin”.

    My 20 something guy friends have run into several “everything but” virgins who are willing to service them, and don’t know that my guy friends see them as lower than the regular sluts.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Wild Cougar
      The “menu” for hooking up is long indeed, beginning with making out and going from there. I believe only around 40% of hookups overall include sexual intercourse. Most studies define that as P in V. There are certainly women who “hide” their experience by proclaiming their number is 3, while failing to mention they’ve given BJs to the varsity hockey team.

      I think what makes a woman seem “low” is lack of discernment. So a woman who services a bunch of guys, especially at once, is going to be disrespected even if she is still technically a virgin.

      As I’ve mentioned here several times, many young women who have taken the pledge of abstinence for religious reasons engage in anal sex. I forget the expression, something like “Saint up front, martyr behind.”

  • Wild Cougar

    “You want to believe that sluts all end up unhappy and alone with their cats? You’ll cling to every anecdote you can find of that and ignore blatant examples of sluts marrying quite well (some of them even remaining married and faithful.)”

    Ditto. Cosign. Well Said.

    (standing ovation)

  • Aldonza

    Here’s the thing…when people believe something, they automatically look for evidence to support that believe and will literally not see anything that refutes it. This is normal human nature and is well-known as Confirmation Bias.

    We need a certain amount of stability in our own minds to remain sane. But, the flipside of that, is when we believe something to be true, we automatically notice things that support that believe. You believe that frat rats get all the women? You’ll only notice guys at frat parties with a new girl every night. You won’t even see the women hanging out elsewhere on campus who’ve never even been to a frat party. (I went to a southern school with almost 50% greek participation and I’d never even been to a frat party.) You want to believe that sluts all end up unhappy and alone with their cats? You’ll cling to every anecdote you can find of that and ignore blatant examples of sluts marrying quite well (some of them even remaining married and faithful.)

    I know there are things I believe, things I want to believe, and things that make me squirm with discomfort when I’m forced to evaluate them against my belief matrix.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue, that’s a great story.

    It sounds to me like her brief period of sluttiness was almost a deal-breaker for the husband. Him deciding to send the postcard seemed like a lucky break which frankly, wouldn’t happen today.

    That’s exactly how I read it. Well, except for the last part. Breaks can and do happen, today. It’s just smart not to expect it.

    I find it weird that anyone would think Suzanne’s story is a a good example of how hooking up can lead to marriage.

    Sadly it’s not weird at all, and I can easily see how it could be spun in the exact opposite direction: “This is proof a liberated woman can have a character-building experience exploring her sexuality unrestrained, and can still get married to a great guy in the end! So delay marriage! Have more casual sex so you know what you really want! Mrs. HUS was clearly weak, and intimidated by Sue’s experience, and over time he realize how wrong he was, Manned Up, and did the right thing.”

    Totally incorrect, but not unexpected or weird. This perspective fails to recognize Mr. H as a human being who has his own needs and desires on par with a hers. This explanation reduces him to a robot, only good for servicing women.

    I’d put Mr. H at a greater beta, if he was good with women and stood up for himself. Well done. No wonder why your kids are so well-adjusted.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I’d put Mr. H at a greater beta, if he was good with women and stood up for himself.

      Yes, I think this is about right. Also, he had to knock down the early shit tests…which he did quite effectively. I also know how to make him putty in my hands, though. After 26 years we each have our tricks :)

  • Jess

    I think sw’s story is perfectly usual and can indeed be intrepereted many ways. For me, if the post card had not been sent, she still would have found happiness with someone else.
    .
    People meet in all sorts of ways.

  • Wild Cougar

    “I think what makes a woman seem “low” is lack of discernment. So a woman who services a bunch of guys, especially at once, is going to be disrespected even if she is still technically a virgin.”

    I was talking to a close male friend, who is an alpha. He tells me a lot about his sexual experiences. All the girls are after him, but he is pretty choosy about who he has sex with. He’s 21. He has met a number of young women who talk and behave like good girls. Some with religious backgrounds. They send him sexy pictures on his cell phone. He claims he didn’t ask for the pictures. He tells me about girls who give him bjs, but don’t go all the way or request reciprocal oral sex. He sees it as them giving him a service that a prostitute would give. Because it is not mutual. He feels it demeans the woman and he wouldn’t date them. He was considering it before they offered the services.

    That is just one guy, but I can certainly see why he would see it this way.

    Then I know another guy who is a player and has a “good girl” girlfriend. He claims the girlfriend knows that he sleeps around, but they choose not to talk about it. He’s also an alpha, 23. Once during an argument, the girlfriend let it slip that she had given bjs to two of his friends on the football team back in college. She previously would do a lot of “slut shaming” when talking about other women. She was very “holier than thou”. He got angry because he felt she was a fraud. She didn’t think bjs counted. They ended up staying together, but the dynamic of the relationship changed. She got snatched off her pedestal and now he’s up front about the other girls he’s having sex with. According to him, she’s having a lot of difficulty dealing with her new “slut” status.

  • jess

    Aldonza,
    I totally concur.
    As it happens all my college and post college friends that were ‘sluttier’ are now married with kids.
    .
    Its actually the more devout ones that have had problems. I know of one who cheated herself, two that had their husbands leave them, and one very devout girl whos husband turned out to be a pedophile. Although in the latter case I’m sure her loneliness for years lead her to say yes to the first weirdo that showed an interest.
    .
    But as you say, one cannot extrapolate from personal examples. People vary so much.

  • Abbot

    “a liberated woman can have a character-building experience exploring her sexuality unrestrained”
    .
    Does a man build character by “exploring his sexuality”, unrestrained or otherwise? What types of restraints are we talking about? Please be specific. Do the vast majority of women [the non-liberated] desire such a character building experience? Or they kinda have that already, ya know, from all those years spent with nurturing parents.
    .
    Is “exploring sexuality” a type of fucking? Does fucking build character or only this exploring thing? Or is it some sort of feel-good euphemism one uses in an attempt to feel better or put yourself in a better light about all the easy, no effort, just-saying-yes “achievement?” Are men getting a better character product in a woman who’s character is built by fucking [oh sorry, exploring sexually]? Are the men who are assisting and preparing for matrimony this character-needing woman just nameless stand-ins that get the job done and bolt off to the next character-building appointment? Heck, seems like a good gig for biker gang members, tattoo artists, bouncers and the like.
    .
    Feel better now?

  • Abbot

    “You want to believe that sluts all end up unhappy and alone with their cats?”
    .
    Why would any man waste brain cells even thinking about that? His only goal is to identify them and decide what’s best for him personally.

  • OffTheCuff

    Feel better now?

    Abbot, you are preaching to the choir. I am not making that argument, I’m providing an alternate feminist explanation of Sue’s story that I do NOT personally agree with. (See how good I am at putting myself in other people’s shoes?)

  • jess

    I absolutely love the idea that oral or even anal sex ‘dosnt count’- hilarious.
    .
    Didnt Bill Clinton use that as he ‘get out’ tactic when he lied to his public.
    .
    As far as I or any sanr person is concerned, snogging, hand jobs, phone sex, BJ, vaginal or anal counts as sex. And I’m sure any religious authority would agree with me.
    .
    “Well because he wore a condom it doesn count”
    “I didnt orgasm so it doesnt really count”
    “We only did it for 5 mins so it wasnt proper sex”
    .
    Total, total BS

  • Abbot

    See how good I am at putting myself in other people’s shoes?
    .
    Actually spot on. The feminists canned rhetoric is so mechanical and has no merit. Its amazing that people do exist who buy into it – those who need an excuse for their behaviors or want to shame others for considering such behaviors as criteria for a life partner.

  • jess

    Susan/Abbot
    Its an interesting thing about the ‘development through sex’ line.
    Thing is I believe sex can vary dramatically- compatibility is so important.
    If you marry the 1st guy who will have you that there is the risk that you are not compatible and then one or both of you wont know what you are missing.
    .
    Now its not the end of world if a person dies never having known the pleasures of home made benoffee pie. (tremendous though they indeed are).
    .
    But it seems to me a great shame that people can live and die and not have known one of lifes great emotional and physical pleasures that its possible for a human to enjoy.
    .
    In my view a bit of experience teaches you likes and dislikes, techniques and preferences. Two virgins might never get there despite all the books and advice out there.
    .
    also many women report wonderful sex on one night stands, but that wasnt Susans experience. Fair enough- perhaps she was unlucky with the guys she chose or perhaps it just isn’t her thing.
    .
    soem people just arent into sex much anyway- they have low libido naturally. Thats totally fine- I just think everyone should get the best they can out of life- and that certainly isnt unethical or shallow.

  • http://collegeslacker.wordpress.com collegeslacker

    Geeze I missed out on a lot last night you guys have been commenting hard.

    @Obsidian

    Few people care about what you have to say. You’ve already said it on thousands of other comment boards. Get a new shtick.

    @SW

    Haha I will admit my GPA has been sagging badly this year. Used to have a 3.8, but then again I also used to have a gf. On non-going out nights, I have two decisions to make: Homework or have a girl over. I rarely do homework.

    @Wild Cougar

    Great observation about “everything but” virgins. There are a lot of girls who will go right up to the brink of sex. Funny you brought this up, last night I went back with this girl who did just that. She wants to stay a virgin until marriage.

    @Ted

    I think you would be surprised at the numbers of some girls in college. A few girls I know easily got 50 beat.

  • Clarence

    Well, Susan, I feel special.

    Assuming those numbers are accurate I’m in the bottom eleven. I didn’t “go all the way” until I was 26. I had hit first and third a few times.

  • Wild Cougar

    “Now, for gals a bit longer in the tooth such as yourself, it may or may not make much of a difference; but in that few of you are seriously being considered on the LTR market anyway, it really doesn’t make any tactical difference”

    Tee Hee, @O. Longer in the tooth. I like you, I don’t care what they say about you. ;-) You’ve been reading manosphere stuff too long. There are a certain population of men who don’t consider long in the tooth women for LTR. But I am being bombarded with single men my age who REALLY, REALLY want a ltr, like yesterday.

    I’m not attracted to men my age, but these are guys who never married or are divorced and not getting any play from the younger women. They might have been alphas back in the day, but it didn’t pan out and now they are ordinary guys with ordinary jobs, receding hairlines and a gut. They are hounding me like a pack of…….hounds.

    So if I wanted to, I could have a husband.

  • Abbot

    a bit of experience teaches you likes and dislikes, techniques and preferences.
    .
    Does that mean it should be embraced by others?
    .
    “Bit” in fifty years ago is not “Bit” today. Bit today is the reason HUS exists today.
    .
    “Bit” today is why society is now graced with slut-majority-or-bust feminism, the rising number of women presenting with emotional strife over their own behaviors, increase in mens’ focus on a woman’s “bit of experience” and the desperate measures some women take to dupe integrity-superior men into bit-of-experience-unequal marriages with fakers.
    .
    also many women report wonderful sex on one night stands
    .
    Women should keep the names of those empowerment service providers [if available]. May come in handy one day – tick tock tick tock

  • Aldonza

    @Jess

    As far as I or any sanr person is concerned, snogging, hand jobs, phone sex, BJ, vaginal or anal counts as sex. And I’m sure any religious authority would agree with me.

    I thought snogging was kissing? As far as I’m concerned, if the genitals are involved, it’s sex. “Technical virgins” amuse me because I consider oral to be *more* intimate than intercourse.

    I think Wild Cougar had a point about guys who can sense girls who don’t respect themselves regardless of their hyman status. I’d respect a woman who consciously chose casual sex, was clear about what she wanted and expected in return (if anything), and owned her actions more than a technical virgin who blew every third guy in college, but married intact.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “@Obsidian

    Few people care about what you have to say. You’ve already said it on thousands of other comment boards. Get a new shtick.”

    O: Says you, young’un. When you can actually contribute something a bit more than driveby comments, holla back.

    O.

  • jess

    abbot- what does your girlfriend think about your views?

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    @WildCougar,
    What you just “reported” about the one youngbuck you know and his girlfriend that blew two of the guys on the football team really says it all: going the slut route is a BAD DEAL for the vast majority of Women out there. It. Just. Is.

    Now, for gals a bit longer in the tooth such as yourself, it may or may not make much of a difference; but in that few of you are seriously being considered on the LTR market anyway, it really doesn’t make any tactical difference.

    O.

  • Aldonza

    @jess

    also many women report wonderful sex on one night stands, but that wasnt Susans experience. Fair enough- perhaps she was unlucky with the guys she chose or perhaps it just isn’t her thing.

    Actually, at least in the college years, most women report ONSs as being much less than satisfying (Susan has a post about it.) Heck, even the guys reported ONSs as being less than satisfying more often than you’d think. It seems logical to me that a drunken hook-up would involve, at best, whiskey-dick (alcohol affects women’s arousal too), lack of adequate foreplay, and a partner who is not really invested in pleasing you. In my experience, mindblowing sex was the combination of having a partner who really *wanted* to please you along with adequate time together to learn just how to do that.

  • Wudang

    If you have been so slutty that you are probably going to be unable to stay entirely faithull a good idea would be to consider either swinging, a reltionship with a man that gets of on being cuckolded by his wife (a growing fetish) or some sort of polyamory arrangement. If you are bad at LTR because you have too much trouble handling not having some sex with others or not handling passion with your parnter bein gless than in the initiall phase etc. then choose one of these three. If you have your agreed upon outlet you might very well stay within those boundaries. Tehre are many men that would love to be in such reltionships. So if you partied to hard in your youth and noew need to settle you can find a nice upper beta (as much of her looks are probably still intact) and fuck a bunch of good looking betas and some alphas in your open sex lifestyle. I think swinging and cuckoldry can be quite stable and very fullfilling for hte couple. THe poly stuff I have more doubts about.

  • Wudang

    If a girl wants a LTR, haven`t found any good prospects and is desperate for some sexual release it might be a lot better to find a bicurious woman to have sex with. THe sex will probably be much better than a ons anyway, you will probably avoid getting romantically involved and most importantly no man in his right mind is going to judge you for having bee a bit slutty with other girls!! If anything it will make you more attractive to him.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Wudang,

    So if you want a LTR and dont find a prospect, go have gay casual sex? wtf.

  • jess

    i think blowing an entire football team is a bit yukky and would I would imagine disqualify her for an LTR within that small community.
    .
    I would always advise a girl not to provide oral sex to an entire team. I’m surprised this needs saying though.
    .
    But the girl who has a few flings at college? I wouldnt have thought it the slightest issue.
    .
    I think Mike C made a point about moderation and it applies here.
    Most girls dont blow entire squads so its pointless extropolating from them.

    ps Aldonza, yep- I have always though oral more intimate than vaginal.
    .
    pps I know some people dont classify fondling and deep kissing as sex but I think it can be more intimate than a 10 min bang.
    .
    ppps Abbott- please dont confuse stupidity, ignorance and sexual inadequacy with ‘integrity’- you sound like a politican.

  • jess

    Aldonza,
    Yep I agree that generally ONS sex can suck but I have heard many a women say they had a great one nighter. Men vary a lot in their abilities it seems.
    I myslef have some awesome one night stands but poor ‘longer’ flings.
    .
    but I have heard stories of drunken guys falling asleep during the act, of being sick all sorts of things. I think some of it is validation actually rather than the sex quality. I have also heard about some guys ‘rave’ about a particular girl too but kinda took it with a pinch of salt, guys being guys.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hi Mike C,
    Replies below:

    O: Because no one else does. That’s why. You could say that I specialize in the road less traveled. Makes life that much more interesting.
    .
    Well…I guess my thought is who cares. I see no major problem. They’ll play video games, jack-off to porn, or go to hookers. Every once in a really long time, maybe you get a George Sodini type who loses it, but that would be a extreme rarity. There is no “problem” to “solve”.
    .
    O: Well, right off the bat your response is what fascinates me. WHY don’t we care if guys are sexual losers? After all, we DO seem to care if Women are. For example, Ms. Walsh has featured Mary Pols and Lori Gottlieb on her blog here. In many ways, they too were “losers” in the sense that neither could secure a high investment Male; one resorted to a ONS hookup with a loser, the other having to resort to having a Test tube Baby. Last time I checked, neither are settled in with a Beta guy. Yet BOTH have been able to parlay their stories into bestselling books, tv shows, movies. On the Blackhand side, a Sista named Helena Andrews has done the same thing, first taking her stories of dating and relationship woes (all due to her vastly over-inflated sense of her SMV, I must add) and making it frontpage news in the Washington Post, to a full-fledged book in its own right, “Bitch is the New Black”, to now it becoming a movie. For some reason, WE CARE about the Female losers of the SMP.
    .
    So why DON’T we care, about the Male ones? As an amateur social scientist, that question fascinates me.
    .
    MC: My belief is most people are lazy and undisciplined. That’s why most people fail diets, can’t quit smoking, don’t save money, etc. Learning Game/attracting women is no different. A small minority of guys will be committed enough to really learn and practice. Most will give up. It is what it is.
    .
    O: I don’t disgree, but this is a bit deeper than a mere matter of shedding some pounds, LOL. We as a society have never really come to grips with the prospect of so many Men simply “dropping out”, and if the current MSM is any indication – what with Hymowitiz and Murray and the spate of “Spinster Lit” all hitting the media around the same time, it all speaks to our getting an inkling as to what all this will mean in societal terms. Plus, I am very interested in seeing that discussion taking place, because to be frank, it’s always female-friendly and tilted/slanted. And I think it WILL happen, if for no other reason than self-serving ones: many in that cohort will be the scions of Baby Boomer parents. They will NOT want to accept that their son is a dud, has a “failure to launch” and so forth. They’ll want answers. “Manning Up”, “Guyland” and more, are already out there, and more are to come. Stay tuned…
    Mike C says:
    April 28, 2011 at 7:50 pm
    “The growing cohort of what I call de facto eunuchs is just that – a growing one. And no amount of sticking our heads into the sand is gonna change or alleviate that. China may be forced to deal with its de facto eunuch situation soon enough; we here in the States should be much more forward leaning in the effort.”
    .
    MC: Are they going to riot in the streets, hold marches with protest signs demanding pussy? Should I be afraid in my apartment of the omega/lower beta who isn’t getting laid?
    .
    O: LOL, as funny and strange as that sounds, you cannot and should not rule out the possiblity. I don’t know if you know this or not, but China has been having a bear of a time keeping their Male surplus in check over the past few years. Of course because the media there is state run and controlled, very little of what goes on over there makes it to the general world public, but from what little that does leak out suggests that Chinese guys over there are PISSED OFF because they’re all dressed up on Saturday night with nowhere to go, if I may use a phrase. Of course, the reasons for their situation is completely different than ours, but the point is made: when you have a large, unattached cohort of Men in your society lying around idle, that’s NOT good.
    .
    Just ask the Middle East. ;)
    .
    We need to talk…
    .
    O.

  • http://collegeslacker.wordpress.com collegeslacker

    @Obsidian

    I say my piece, try to offer the college insights, answer any questions I think I can help with, and then I’m out. I got my own blog if I want to start going into stuff that the original post didn’t address at all.

  • Abbot

    please dont confuse stupidity, ignorance and sexual inadequacy with ‘integrity’
    .
    You’re right. silly me. The mostly-dismissed duper girl is going to take whatever is left to get – the stupid, ignorant…and whatever makes you feel good to assign. IOW, she gets what she deserves. I agree, a man with actual integrity would know better.

  • Wild Cougar

    I think its funny that you guys doubt me. The man I married is 11 years younger than I am. Maybe I am an outlier without a cause, but I live in the real world, not the manosphere. When I say I am hounded, I’m not talking about online. Anybody with a vagina will be hounded online. I’m talking about guys I meet at the grocery store, gym, happy hour, etc.

    At least in my area, there are a large number of late 30s early 40s who either never learned how to get women, or got old while playing a little too long. And they want a ltr. They might want a younger woman, but the younger women don’t want them.

    I also look early 30s and I’m in shape. I am engaging and I smile. That goes a very, very long way in my community. Puts me ahead of most women. But it doesn’t mean the older men are not looking for a woman their age to marry. They might wish for a twenty something woman, but if wishes were fishes….

  • Abbot

    “stories of drunken guys falling asleep during the act.”
    .
    Now that’s funny. Girl could humor a guy on a first date with that one! Years later they can laugh again about that “bit of experience” “character builder” “person former” that made her the wonderful wife and mother she is

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hollenhund says:
    “I don’t think you can judge any blog’s readership by its commenters. One general rule of blogging seems to be that the vast majority of readers never bother to comment. I’m sure Ms. Walsh agrees. The commenters are usually the shrill, outspoken ones who want to challenge others or simply vent or troll, or have time on their hands and thus don’t want to miss any opportunity to correct someone who they think is wrong on the Internet. I’m sure there are many, many guys who read Roissy, use his advice but never comment.”
    .
    O: Well Hollenhund, if we cannot make any assessments or judgments of a blog because of what you said about the commenters to “silent majority” ratio and so forth, then the same “rule” would apply wrt your parting shot: we simply have no way of knowing just how many, if any, “silent” readers of Roissy’s do indeed make good with the advice he doles out, now do we? I say that the voices, no matter how shrill, DO indeed repressent Roissy and to a goodly extent, the (White) Manosphere overall; there is a great deal of focus on being angry, aggrieved and so forth. Virtually NOTHING on the ideas of self-improvement, positivity and the like. I know that’s not something you particularly want to hear; but it is, what it is. And we need to drill down as to WHY that is. I posit that at least some of that “why” is because at least some of these guys know that they CAN’T compete in the SMP as we currently understand it…and that pisses them off.
    .
    H: IMO the palpable anger of some commenters of the Manosphere rather seems to be directed at a) all the people and media who lied and spread BS to them about female sexuality and the current SMP (this violates the value men attach to justice and clarity) b) women who used their legal entitlements to screw them over.
    .
    O: Two questions then: 1. The entire country has been lied to wrt this financial crisis – why haven’t these guys been up in arms about that? And 2. Are we to assume that all these guys were completely innocent victims? That what they did or didn’t do played absolutely no role whatsoever in what happened to them? where is the discussion about their own failings, where they went wrong? Where is the sense of personal agency, and personal responsibility (sound familar?)? From where I sit, there IS none – only hate, vitriol, bile, anger, bitterness, and so forth. I think that says something, gives powerful clues, as to WHY they’re in the spot they’re in to begin with. Don’t you?
    .
    Holla back
    .
    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “@Obsidian

    I say my piece, try to offer the college insights, answer any questions I think I can help with, and then I’m out. I got my own blog if I want to start going into stuff that the original post didn’t address at all.”

    O: Waaaaaaah! Waaaaaaaah! Obsidian’s punking me on Ms. Walsh’s blog! Waaaaaah!

    Do us both a fave, bucky – when I want your opinion, I’ll be keen to ask you for it. Until that great gettin’ up morn’ comes, put a sock in it and keep it to yourself, hmm? Grown folks talkin’ now.

    Now run along…

    O.

  • Abbot

    But the girl who has a few flings at college? I wouldnt have thought it the slightest issue.
    .
    Have any fling girls thought it the slightest issue? Keep those numbers handy.

  • Wild Cougar

    @O do you have any data on the prospects for a 38 year old man who never married and has an ordinary job and a receding hairline and a gut?

    Any surveys of 22 year olds that find think that guy is the best she can get? Who wouldn’t pass on him for an alpha who isn’t ready to commit?

    I will concede that the 22 year old man is not interested in marrying a 40 year old woman. If I wanted to marry them, that would be a problem for me.

    But if there is a study, I think it would say vice versa. Younger women aren’t looking for older men to marry. Unless they are wealthy.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “Tee Hee, @O. Longer in the tooth. I like you, I don’t care what they say about you. You’ve been reading manosphere stuff too long. There are a certain population of men who don’t consider long in the tooth women for LTR. But I am being bombarded with single men my age who REALLY, REALLY want a ltr, like yesterday.

    I’m not attracted to men my age, but these are guys who never married or are divorced and not getting any play from the younger women. They might have been alphas back in the day, but it didn’t pan out and now they are ordinary guys with ordinary jobs, receding hairlines and a gut. They are hounding me like a pack of…….hounds.

    So if I wanted to, I could have a husband.”

    O: LOL. I believe it is you who’ve been imbibing the (White) Manosphere stuff a bit too long, I’m afraid. If you know me as well as you say you’d know that I stick as much as possible to actual data, not my personal anecdotal experiences. What I’m saying here is a matter of documented fact. That YOU, may or may not be able to “get a husband” is IRRELEVANT in the overall scheme of things, and that’s what I am addressing; to be frank, I honestly couldn’t care less what you do or don’t do. Try OKCupid for starters – Women your age or older, is basically a nonstarter for the very younger Men you like to talk about, in aggregate. I get that you’re an Outlier Without A Cause, but in the end, you’re an outlier all the same, if we are to believe what you say, sight unseen. Cougars in general don’t have a very good track record or hit rate…to say nothing of shelf life.

    “Business, never personal”
    – EPMD

    Holla back

    O.

  • OffTheCuff

    They are hounding me like a pack of…….hounds. So if I wanted to, I could have a husband.

    This is hilarious. I don’t doubt you couldn’t have a husband, but this reasoning is bizarre. The fact that a bunch of dudes are trolling you for sex off a swinger site, means nothing in regards to marriage. Come back when a one puts a ring on your finger, and actually is ready to sign the dotted line so give you half all his stuff and future earnings.

  • Abbot

    ” this reasoning is bizarre”
    .
    But if it makes her feel good…better than nothing.

  • Wild Cougar

    This is all so flattering fellas. I didn’t even know who this Roissy person was until I heard about him on your blog, which I heard about on VSB, which I heard about from the black blogger story on The Root.

    I put up nice pics of ladies because most of my readers are men and they like visuals. I think the ladies look nice, too. If I were a man, I would probably post more objectifying, hardcore pictures. You don’t find a lot of men who post pics of just faces or who comment on how nice the shoes are.

    I use a cartoon avatar because I am telling all my business, so to speak. While I am not ashamed, I would not want close family, friends, and my sex partners to suffer because I like to tell all. My career would be affected as well, I imagine.

    If I gave you a picture, how could you know it was me?

    Hmmm. I’ve been accused of being a man before. How could I prove I’m a woman? Not that I need to, but I will take it under advisement. I think anyone who reads the site in depth would think I am definitely a woman. Or a very feminine gay man.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hi WC,
    Replies below:

    WC: @O do you have any data on the prospects for a 38 year old man who never married and has an ordinary job and a receding hairline and a gut?

    O: I’m afraid not; but I imagine it cannot be any worse than for the 38 year old Woman in America who’s average dress size is about 14 or so…?

    WC: Any surveys of 22 year olds that find think that guy is the best she can get? Who wouldn’t pass on him for an alpha who isn’t ready to commit?

    WC: I will concede that the 22 year old man is not interested in marrying a 40 year old woman. If I wanted to marry them, that would be a problem for me.

    O: I didn’t say anything about “marriage”; I was talking about OKCUPID, WHICH IS AN ONLINE DATING SITE. Younger Men DON’T want to date – DATE – older Women such as yourself. Fact. I need you to counter this with some definitive data of your own at this juncture in our debate – or otherwise concede the point. Personal anecdote, will NOT be allowed.

    *whispering* Wild Cougar, this is the part where you say something.

    WC: But if there is a study, I think it would say vice versa. Younger women aren’t looking for older men to marry. Unless they are wealthy.\

    O: False. Women generally marry guys about roughly 5 years older than themselves. I personally know MANY Women who have married or are otherwise attracted to Men much older than that. Try again.

    LOL

    O.

  • GudEnuf

    Why does Wild Cougar keep posting NSFW pictures of women on “her” blog? I think this is just a guy writing his fantasy.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Hi Again WC,
    More replies below:

    WC: I think its funny that you guys doubt me.

    O: Well, let’s face it – to the rest of us, you’re not even a face online, because you have a cartoon in place of where your face should be. We don’t know anything about you that we can independently verify. All we know is what you tell us, and as we all know, Women can and will ah. bend the truth just a bit when it suits them.

    WC: The man I married is 11 years younger than I am. Maybe I am an outlier without a cause, but I live in the real world, not the manosphere. When I say I am hounded, I’m not talking about online. Anybody with a vagina will be hounded online. I’m talking about guys I meet at the grocery store, gym, happy hour, etc.

    O: Yes, you ARE an outlier, and this is based on realworld data, not one some Manosphere stuff. Like I said, you can start with OKCupid, hardly a cat’s paw for the Manosphere, LOL. Your response?

    WC: At least in my area, there are a large number of late 30s early 40s who either never learned how to get women, or got old while playing a little too long. And they want a ltr. They might want a younger woman, but the younger women don’t want them.

    O: …Annnnd now I have reason to believe you aren’t who you say you are, BAG LADY. Why don’t you give it up already? I mean WOW – has Roissy/RooshV/Manosphere done that much of a head job on you, that you have to make up a gazillion online screenames and personas with which to razz all the rest of us? Get therapy. I mean it.

    WC: I also look early 30s and I’m in shape. I am engaging and I smile. That goes a very, very long way in my community. Puts me ahead of most women. But it doesn’t mean the older men are not looking for a woman their age to marry. They might wish for a twenty something woman, but if wishes were fishes….

    O: Pics, please? When we all see it, we’ll believe it. Otherwise Bag Lady, do us all a big favor, and give it a rest, huh?

    SMH

    O.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Esau– I’m not supposedly an anything. I’m nineteen and I’ve got a vagina. If I was a fake, I wouldn’t talk about my gross tongue diseases and weird nipple hairs. :) Thank you for saying nice things about me, though.

    Stephenie– D’awwwww.

    On topic: Jeez, half the guys in college are virgins? And here I thought my virgin streak was just me being both unlucky and nerdosexual.

    FWIW, I have had casual sex and always found it an enjoyable and life-affirming experience that did not impair my ability to find a boyfriend I am really in love with. However, ime, about half my (universally male) partners ended up regretting having sex without emotional attachment; my theory is that a only small percentage of people are emotionally capable of handling casual sex, and the whole “men like casual sex” thing is doing men a grave disservice by not encouraging them to really consider if casual sex is a healthy choice for them.

    Also, generally, it is a good idea to have casual sex sober, with someone you genuinely like as a friend and who cares about you getting off too.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ozymandias
      Thanks for stopping by! I’m glad Esau brought you over, your perspective is most welcome.

  • jlw

    I’m with Wild Cougar and O on this. At the very bottom of the human male hierarchy are the 5% who are “omega males.” People like myself who are the least sexually desirable males and therefore are the ones who are unable to find a women for a healthy normal relationship because our desirability is too low given the existence of less women than men, our own standards and, in some places, men marrying multiple women. (There are about 105 males born for every 100 females.)

    Some numbers from the US census bureau as quoted by Half Sigma: in 1970, non-Hispanic white people were much less likely to be in the never married category. In 1970, 6.9% of men aged 41-45 were never married, compared to 5.1% of women. This is not a very big difference, and can be entirely explained away if you believe that 2.6% of men are homosexual compared to only 1.1% for women.

    In 2006, 16.7% of men aged 41-45 were never married, compared to 10.6% of women. The unmarried gap has increased from 1.8 percentage points to 6.1 percentage points. This suggests to me that most omega males born between 1925 and 1930 were able to find wives. But omega males born between 1961 and 1976 wind up never being able to find a wife. In modern times, women would rather become the second trophy wife of an older alpha male or never
    marry at all, than settle for an omega male like me. I agree with Wild Cougar: there is huge pack of omega males with standards they can’t match who will be lonely and womanless their whole lives and who will crash and burn in the second half of their lives if they don’t accept their situation and try to get something else out of life beside a relationship with a MOTOS. That’s the real ‘red pill’ folks.

    I also agree with O. The losers and the failures grow in number every year. This will eventually play out negatively. No one cares about these guys and no one ever will. It’s the largest group of people that have ever been held as contemptable by society. What’s needed: self-help for the otherwise hopeless which recognizes and addresses that group of omegas who can’t or won’t do what is necessary and who need to look elsewhere, as best they can, for a fulfilling life. Like they used to say on Usenet: we’re losers, we’re failures…and we’re not going away.

  • Stephenie Rowling


    The study report just says that they asked about sexual intercourse partners. For their purposes, they did ask re consensual and non-consensual sex. I assume they were looking for straight P in V data. It is possible, or course, that people have more hookup partners than sexual intercourse partners.

    Yes could be

    And to be honest, I quickly learned that the promise of sexual empowerment was a scam – the sex was meh, I felt nothing for those men, and I didn’t like running into them afterwards. I stopped hooking up because it was incongruent with my nature.

    And this is were you are smarter than many many women. They don’t connect the dots like you did, they feel like crap, have post sexual depression and blame it on patriarchy and keep destroying themselves on the process, is insanity. True sluts enjoy sex, don’t need alcohol to engage on it and have no hangovers or regrets, any of this is a sign you are no wired to hook up and stop right there. But how often do they reach to this conclusion? and how long? I think many of them don’t even notice till its too late.
    I most add that lack of self awareness seems like a cultural thing. One of my husband’s friends got divorced because his wife “discovered” she was a lesbian 10 years into the marriage. I personally don’t believe her and think she decided to keep her preferences shut and try to make it work without informing her fiance, but given the report of many people about this happening to them I do wonder if there is some true to it, in my country we have some intolerance to gay people but even people that choose to hide it are aware of their preferences since they have memory, this discovering phenomenon is kind of a very first world thing, YMMV.

  • OffTheCuff

    I’m certain that some of you will immediately point out that in sex surveys women underreport and men overreport. Of course, that is always possible, but I doubt that explains this data for several reasons:

    * That trope goes back to the Kinsey research, when women were shamed for premarital sex. If anything, that trend has been reversed.
    * The setup of this experiment provided observable, complete anonymity.

    Care to explain this, then?

    Those women who thought they were being watched reported an average of 2.6 sex partners, compared with 3.4 in the anonymous group. Those who thought they were attached to a lie detector were still more forthcoming, giving an average of 4.4 partners. There was no such spread among the men. Except women have shown to lie more than men, even when anonymous.

    From: http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/sexsurv.htm

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OffTheCuff
      Interesting – it may be that women lie more than men no matter what, but at least they lie less when it is anonymous. This has long been the problem with sex survey data. In the statistic you provide, they underreported by roughly 20%. It’s possible that might be an appropriate bump here, impossible to say.

      You failed to mention the factor that I actually thought was most impressive – both men and women seemed very open about acknowledging their alcohol and drug use. Furthermore, unless they restricted their misreporting to sex only, they go to frat parties and get drunk, and most of the time, do not have sex afterwards. Or at least not with a new partner. That is the piece of this puzzle I am most interested in.

  • scoreboard

    Hey Obsidiot,go check out dat CDC HIV incidence rate for AA males….and then get back to me…….dawg.Lol..like jammin those needles in your arms to i see.

  • Mike C

    the bit you keep forgetting is that you are telling women in general to limit their sexual experiences before an LTR.
    .
    No, I’m not “telling” women to limit anything. That isn’t my place.
    .
    If so, then isnt it a fair question to ask “ok, what am I allowed to have?”
    .
    Again, I”m not saying anything about what is “allowed”. Who am I or anyone else to “allow” a grown adult to do anything.
    .
    It shouldnt be as important as a whole bunch of other issues.
    If a daughter of mine, in the future, had say, 6 flings at uni and them got engaged I would be astonished if she was jilted by a fiance on discovering her terrible ‘secret’. If he did, then better now than later she should discover he was a jerk.

    .
    And seriously this is where you get just stupid. Some women don’t want to extremely short men, especially if they are tall..say 5’10”. Does that make them a bitch? No, it is a personal preference.

  • Mike C

    I really think part of the revulsion of sluts is that the images on the internet of women getting cum shots, half naked, half passed out between 4 or 5 frat boys that are taking turns at her, is the first thing a modern guy thinks once he finds out that a girl has a “slut phase” and that is hard to get over with. I mean Mike C tale of the women his friends beds are probably enough for any sensible guy to just stop dating altogether.
    .
    Speaking of which…my co-worker/friend showed me a picture of his bedroom. FWIW, he has a stripper pole in his room and has a massive collection of womens’s panties hanging off the light fixture on the ceiling. No doubt any girl who voluntarily is down for that kind of environment is a future good wife and mother. LOL.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      he has a stripper pole in his room and has a massive collection of womens’s panties hanging off the light fixture on the ceiling.

      Ew. I know you are a finance professional, Mike, but I cannot even picture a guy in that industry having that kind of decor. It’s just super trashy – as are the women who stop in, obviously. I’m assuming he dates strippers rather than stockbrokers. It sounds even worse than Jersey Shore. Way worse.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “Hey Obsidiot,go check out dat CDC HIV incidence rate for AA males….and then get back to me…….dawg.Lol..like jammin those needles in your arms to i see.”

    O: Actually, you would right – partially. It seems that the HIV spread amongst African Americans is more attributable to sexual contact than to IV drug abuse.

    Fun question: can you count?

    O.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “No doubt any girl who voluntarily is down for that kind of environment is a future good wife and mother. LOL.”

    WOW! At least they cannot go and use the old one “I though he was different or that he was looking for a relationship with me” also Ewwww how can a woman see other’s woman panties and get her vagina drier than the Sahara if only because of health concerns?

    Also Mike C. do you admire your friend or this is something that makes you weep for humanity? I mean his feats are things you wish you were doing at any level?

  • http://www.thoughtsfromtheboonies.blogspot.com Jason

    @ozymandis

    my theory is that a only small percentage of people are emotionally capable of handling casual sex, and the whole “men like casual sex” thing is doing men a grave disservice by not encouraging them to really consider if casual sex is a healthy choice for them.

    For what it’s worth, I think you may have a point there.

  • Doug1

    Because all four years of college were sampled and it seems the average respondent was about half way through college or a bit less, one would expect the percentages in all the partner brackets to go a good lot if one wants to know what percentage have had the bracket number of partners by graduation. Perhaps those in each higher bracket might double more or less.

    As others have stated I imagine that there was significant female under reporting, as studies using methods such has fake lie detector tests have revealed tends to be the case when the lie detector isn’t thought to be present.

    The low percentage of response and esp. the low percentage of male response suggests to me that maybe it was a skewed sampling of male respondents. With yeah nerdy types in a sexual desert more likely to respond.

  • http://www.thoughtsfromtheboonies.blogspot.com Jason

    @Stephenie

    Also Mike C. do you admire your friend or this is something that makes you weep for humanity? I mean his feats are things you wish you were doing at any level?

    I think he uses him as an object lesson. I’ve found that you can like your friends, while still thinking they’re douchebags.

  • Tom

    Although I have no proof, I`d say these numbers would be pretty similar to when I was in school. Most people had sex, mostly relationship sex. There were the “wall flowers” who were very inactive or still virgins… You have a few people who had sex with a handful of others…Then there were the promiscuous few…Not much has changed.
    I`ve said this before, being an athlete, there were definately groupies. Some of those young women wre pretty skanky, but some were really cool. I knew of a few who did high numbers of athletes, most of those were skanky, not just from their activity but their attitudes and personnas. Some of the cool ones were very selective, and didnt do “all the guys”

    Actually these numbers might prove to separate the ho`s from the good guys even more….Because promiscuous women are not as common as most of us thought. It is one thing to compare high numbers (say 25/30) to a 22 year old, vs a 40 year old…….

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “I’ve found that you can like your friends, while still thinking they’re douchebags.”

    Heh I’m the queen of that situation. I’m just curious about something.

  • Abbot

    “it is a personal preference”
    .
    OK, now for those who missed that, and keep on missing it, I am going to force it on your denying little minds. Ready?
    .
    it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…it is a personal preference…
    .
    Now, you would think that any sane somewhat rational person reading that would say “yeah, ok, I get it. it is a personal preference.” But noooo. It gets all up in some people’s political shit. Its like “it is a personal preference” is just fine and none of my business UNLESS its a preference that I do not like, don’t agree with, makes me look bad, is a threat to society or my group or my freedom or my friend’s freedom. Or it reinforces oppression, patriarchy, sexism or something that I feel is holding me back as my great grandma was held back for the benefit of men. I am such a victim, I have to protest, complain, go on walks…So I got to try to change that preference by searching for all types of articles that show why the preference is not natural, not right, is learned, is ego driven, is shallow, is unfair, is stupid, is unpopular, is not the trend, is old fashioned, is puritanical, is not the common view, is not the global view. And although it is a minority view I still have to turn every last man around about this even if they are an endangered species who’s habitat is limited to this website, I have to ferret them out, try to put them on the spot, catch them off guard with my words, my tactics, debate skills and then bring my friends here as reinforcement to finally drive the point home and WIN.
    .

  • Mike C

    @Mike C
    Only 3% of women are above 11. Susan, seriously, does this really ring true based on your college age focus groups. Really?

    11 is A LOT. Women generally considered open to sex or promiscuous probably have more like 5 or 6 partners, not 11. I only know one girl that I can say has for sure had more than 10 partners (she’s still far from the 25+ bracket). And she didn’t break even that high until last semester.
    .
    Well…one of the things that hit me later is we are talking college students here so we are talking probably 22-23 max. So a girl who is already at 10, 20, 25 by 22-23 is on pace for hundreds if she keeps that pace up to say 30.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      So a girl who is already at 10, 20, 25 by 22-23 is on pace for hundreds if she keeps that pace up to say 30.

      Yes, I think it does make sense to extrapolate. Doug1 also makes a good point about the average age in this data sample – the numbers would likely change significantly if only seniors were surveyed. With an average of 17 years between the onset of menstruation and marriage, it’s going to be rare to find a virgin at 28. Obviously, then, the challenge for men is to discern the woman’s attitude toward sex, and how she has managed that part of her life. As many have said here, having sex with 1 guy hundreds of times is the polar opposite of having sex with hundreds of guys one time.

      Relationship sex and casual sex are very different, obviously, including the “toll” they take on a woman’s psyche. Lots of the former has a very positive effect, while lots of the latter is extremely detrimental, IME.

  • Doug1

    @collegeslacker–

    Yeah I thought you’d say the percentages are two low in the top too brackets for guys and girls too. You said to me on your blog that you thought about 30% of the 8s at your midwestern state uni were easy (for alphas) sluts/had high numbers by their senior year. I took that to mean more than 10 at least. Although admittedly you did say that hotness of girl probably hand the highest percentage of sluts.

  • Mike C

    Also Mike C. do you admire your friend or this is something that makes you weep for humanity? I mean his feats are things you wish you were doing at any level?
    .
    You’ve sort of got 3 questions there.

    1. Does it make me weep for humanity? No, and here is why. I really don’t worry too much about “humanity”. I worry about myself and the people I love and friends, etc. Not my job to solve the problems of the world. The older I’ve gotten the more indifferent I’ve become to things that don’t directly impact me. All that said, if I was going to weep for humanity there is stuff going on 100x worse then some slut who takes a load to the face and happily gets photographed.
    .
    2. Do I admire him? Yeah..kinda…sorta. I mean it certainly isn’t morally positive behavior but anytime a guy gets a girl it is an accomplishment because both effort and skill are required. Now getting down to brass tacks, I’ve seen A LOT of his pics, and he gets some pretty hot chicks, but he also scores some really low-hanging fruit. To pull a 8 is admirable, to SNL a 5 isn’t really that a big a deal. Beating Michael Jordan one on one is stupendous, beating a quadriplegic in a wheelchair isn’t something to admire. I’d bet just about all guys admire/respect players with super high numbers because all guys innately know there is an accomplishment aspect to it regardless of the morality. Unless the chick walks up to you and asks “wanna fuck” there is a successful approach involved, successful gaming, comfort building, and seduction. In contrast, with a woman there is nothing more involved then simply being willing and able.
    .
    3. Do I wish I was doing what he does on any level? Not really, because I know that lifestyle leads to an emptiness and I actually think that lifestyle affects guys as well. Personally, I think the average guy can have more casual sex than the average girl without it having negative ramifications for a whole host of reasons. That said, guys with super high numbers get imbued with a deep cynicism. Just today I was having a random conversation with him and he referred to some girl as “that slut”. They begin to see all women as sluts which incidentally is why I have to sort of laugh at some of these promiscuous women who are completely naive about how men view them.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      They begin to see all women as sluts which incidentally is why I have to sort of laugh at some of these promiscuous women who are completely naive about how men view them.

      I shared this story recently, so forgive the repetition if you caught it. It’s just a great example of what Mike is talking about here. A group of young women went on Spring Break this year and wound up running into a big group of frat guys from their university. They hung out quite a bit throughout the week. Eavesdropping, or even just being present when these guys spoke frankly, amazed these young women. The guys were referring to the most “popular” women on campus as holes, and various other disgusting names. It was a nice kind of validation for the girls on break, because they realized they had traded some degree of “popularity” to avoid being viewed that way. Of course, these guys made moves that week, and a couple of nice girls were taken in, and burned by cads within a few weeks. I can only hope they’ve learned their lesson.

  • Mike C

    I think Wild Cougar had a point about guys who can sense girls who don’t respect themselves regardless of their hyman status. I’d respect a woman who consciously chose casual sex, was clear about what she wanted and expected in return (if anything), and owned her actions more than a technical virgin who blew every third guy in college, but married intact.
    .
    Yes.

  • http://collegeslacker.wordpress.com collegeslacker

    @Obsidian

    Cool way to invoke my age, as if that has any bearing on how you have nothing original to offer. We’ve all seen you do the same thing on other blogs, and up til now I have refused to acknowledge your presence. I guess I was feeling different today, blame it on the hangover.

    The fact remains that you beat the same drum everywhere you go, and your pleas for comments at the end of everything you post is needy as fuck. Go write a book if you want attention.

    We get it, you’re the coolest person you know. But few things you have said on this thread have anything to do with who is really having sex in college. You love the sound of your own typing, and it seems you couldn’t resist jumping into the thread today. I’m not claiming to be Susan’s thread police whatsoever, I’m just saying what I know more than a few people think.

    If you have any insights about who is having sex in college and the stats Susan brought up, by all means share them.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      collegeslacker’s input here is crucial. Even if I cringe, it’s a field report from the trenches, and those are hard to come by. With all that college students have going on, finding a player who blogs is a goldmine. I appreciate his frank input – we all need the eyes and ears of kids his age to understand the SMP.

  • Jess

    Abbot,
    Absolutely it’s about personal preference and the right to do so without shaming or insults.
    I believe SWs blog is about offering advice and stimulating debate.
    If you get so angry at that then why come here?

  • OffTheCuff

    it may be that women lie more than men no matter what, but at least they lie less when it is anonymous. This has long been the problem with sex survey data. In the statistic you provide, they underreported by roughly 20%. It’s possible that might be an appropriate bump here, impossible to say.

    I’d bet you a box of donuts that it’s not the anonymity, but rather, the cost of telling the truth. Meaning, if her boyfriend, husband or father was giving the test, then the “lie factor” would be greater than the face-to-face stranger model. On the other hand, if we rounded up 6 of her partners and had those guys administer the test, it would be harder to lie and say “3”.

    Further, without the raw data, we don’t know if it’s a percentage increase, or a doubling, or if they subtract a fixed amount, or some other mathematical phenomena. It’s actually kind of disappointing they reduce down to a single number, but it does make the point.

    You failed to mention the factor that I actually thought was most impressive – both men and women seemed very open about acknowledging their alcohol and drug use.

    This isn’t surprising to me, in an anonymous form. Women’s SMV aren’t affected directly by sobriety.

    Furthermore, unless they restricted their misreporting to sex only, they go to frat parties and get drunk, and most of the time, do not have sex afterwards. Or at least not with a new partner. That is the piece of this puzzle I am most interested in.

    Again, not too surprising to me. Frat parties, at least in my day, many, if not most of them were *open* parties. I’d go there with a bunch of male and female and friends and usually not hook up. Girls included. Those type of parties really were the hookup crowd operating in parallel with the non-hookup crowd, and we got along just fine. Of course, the frats would poach the GDIs, but their success rate wasn’t so high that any woman had a huge chance… remember there are hundreds of people at the parties and only a few brothers living there. Maybe our Greek scene was tamer than others.

  • http://www.thoughtsfromtheboonies.blogspot.com Jason

    He’s not a kid anymore, he’s graduating. :)

  • http://collegeslacker.wordpress.com collegeslacker

    @SW

    Taking a quick timeout before the party gets going here at Fresh’s place.

    I’m glad you want the input. I only started commenting here to try and give some perspective from the male side of the college SMP and help your female readers. I really do appreciate what you’re doing and I like the frankness of your style. Despite my own way of operating, I do want men and women to be able to find someone they appreciate and want to be with and I try to help with anything I can.

    If I could say anything to your female college-aged readers about this post, those who are looking for meaningful relationships, it would be this:

    Most men are not hooking up in college on a regular basis. You do not need to have sex right away to get the attention of your man, being feminine, sweet, and not a bitch is usually a good starter. Most men, contrary to Hollywood, are looking for a special someone in college and most of them want the relationship to work and last for the long run. There are tons of dudes who want nothing more than a girl that will be with them. Be nice, don’t play games, and demonstrate your desire to commit early on.

    A few of my friends, who definitely have the capacity to be players, have chosen not to because their girlfriends follow these guidelines.

    If a dude is interested in you, and you are interested in him, be open, be forthcoming. A lot of dudes are reserved because they don’t know where you stand. Do not underestimate the power of a male’s attraction to you.

    And, lastly, if you are looking for a meaningful relationship, the last place you should probably look is dudes like me. We have options. We ignore you, we talk to other girls in front of you, make out with other girls in front of you, and generally consider being bunned up a huge loss. You will most likely not be able to get us to commit. It’s harsh, but it’s true. What you’re bringing is no different than any other hot girl. Do not complain about not getting a big shot to commit because, unless you are one of the hottest girls on campus, it isn’t going to happen.

    Don’t worry about your slut friends, we all look down on them. Be a good girl. You will win in the long run.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “You’ve sort of got 3 questions there”

    Heh the story of my life. :)

    “The older I’ve gotten the more indifferent I’ve become to things that don’t directly impact me. ”

    I really hope you plan to breed in the future. First I think you make a good father, you are observant and self aware and second once you invest in the future you probably care about the bigger picture more, not that I’m criticizing your position worrying about the world is a painful thankless hobbie, but I noticed that responsible parenthood is like alchemy, transforms people for the better, because its not about them anymore.

    “I’d bet just about all guys admire/respect players with super high numbers because all guys innately know there is an accomplishment aspect to it regardless of the morality.”

    Fair enough.

    “That said, guys with super high numbers get imbued with a deep cynicism. Just today I was having a random conversation with him and he referred to some girl as “that slut”. They begin to see all women as sluts which incidentally is why I have to sort of laugh at some of these promiscuous women who are completely naive about how men view them.”

    Whole hearty agree. Totally my experience, there is a point of no return that few, if any, notice.

    Thanks for answering my questions :) sorry I keep asking is on my nature.

  • jess

    just a thought for you Steph,
    Currently- of all your college and post college, friends how many are single still?
    and if you dont mind me asking, how old are they?
    .
    I’m in my 40’s and all my peers have partners with the exception of one friend and a few who have seperated in recent years.
    J

  • andros

    cf. Roger Devlin, as always a font of knowledge compared to Walsh and her cohorts:

    One occasionally hears of surveys reporting that men are happier with their “sex lives” than women. It has always struck me as ludicrous that anyone would take this at face value. First, women are more apt than men to complain about everything. But second, many men (especially young men) experience a powerful mauvaise honte when they are unsuccessful with women. They rarely compare notes with other men, and still more rarely do so honestly. Everyone puts up a brave front, however lonely he may actually be. Hence, men almost always imagine other men to have greater success with women than is actually the case. This situation has worsened since the nineteen-sixties, with the propagation of the illusion that there is “more sex” available to men than formerly.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @andros

      cf. Roger Devlin, as always a font of knowledge compared to Walsh and her cohorts:

      1. Go away and read Devlin.
      2. I’m all for constructive criticism, but this is a gratuitous cheap shot. Either state what your problem is or STFU.
      3. I have never read Devlin, so won’t comment on his writing. I will observe, however, that he is not a distinguished academic, and all his fans are from the seduction community.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Ahh, the self-professed Collegeslacker has returned!
    Let’s see what he can slur out, shall we?

    “Cool way to invoke my age, as if that has any bearing on how you have nothing original to offer. We’ve all seen you do the same thing on other blogs, and up til now I have refused to acknowledge your presence. I guess I was feeling different today, blame it on the hangover.”

    O: Don’t worry, son. It’s always like that when your first learning how to hold your liquor.

    “The fact remains that you beat the same drum everywhere you go, and your pleas for comments at the end of everything you post is needy as fuck. Go write a book if you want attention.”

    O: And, what, pray tell, might that “drum” be? Care to be a bit more precise, or are you still in need of a Bloody mary or two before you can get yourself together to put it all together?

    “We get it, you’re the coolest person you know. But few things you have said on this thread have anything to do with who is really having sex in college. You love the sound of your own typing, and it seems you couldn’t resist jumping into the thread today. I’m not claiming to be Susan’s thread police whatsoever, I’m just saying what I know more than a few people think.”

    O: In case you haven’t noticed, Junior, I like to use shit as jumping off points – go back to the idea of “stacking”, son – to foster greater conversation and debate. I know college campuses tend to have that “village” feel, and you might not have gotten the memo yet, but there is a big ole world beyond the campus, chief. I talk about that, because if you know Game as much as you think you do, you understand that the SMP is ever present and everywhere you go. So, while you’re content to stick to your little dorm room corner, I’m much more content to see how the SMP is work in all sectors. Can you wrap your Heineken-addled grey matter around that one or what?

    “If you have any insights about who is having sex in college and the stats Susan brought up, by all means share them.”

    O: I’ll pass. I don’t do baby food.

    Now run along back to the Kiddie Table…

    O.

  • Wudang

    YOHAMI:

    Uhm…yes. A lot of girls say that the big problem for them in holding out for a boyfriend is that every once in a while they need to have sex or else they become miserable. If you like or think you like having sex with women too then why not get your need for sex temporarily satisfied with another woman. MOst men will not see a woman having had casual sex with a few women as a sign of sluttiness as long as her number of men is low. Actually I think most, or at least a lot of, men will find it huge turn on. So yes, if you are concerned about your number, you feel you need to have a sexual outlet and there are no prospects for boyfreinds in site, go fuck another girl. Much less chance for emotional complications as well.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Wudang

      MOst men will not see a woman having had casual sex with a few women as a sign of sluttiness as long as her number of men is low.

      I’m with Yohami here. I would have thought this was an indication of more sluttiness, because it implies that she is a sort of sexual omnivore. Rather than wait, she’ll bang away at anything with a pulse. Also, while gay women certainly have some casual sex, they are far more likely to bond emotionally and couple up.

      As for becoming miserable without sex, that’s just stupid. I’m not buying it. An electronic boyfriend like the Rabbit is a far more reliable sex partner than some idiot with whiskey dick. People need to exercise more self-restraint, seriously.

  • Wudang

    Obsidian wrote:

    and to a goodly extent, the (White) Manosphere overall; there is a great deal of focus on being angry, aggrieved and so forth. Virtually NOTHING on the ideas of self-improvement, positivity and the like. I know that’s not something you particularly want to hear; but it is, what it is. And we need to drill down as to WHY that is. I posit that at least some of that “why” is because at least some of these guys know that they CAN’T compete in the SMP as we currently understand it…and that pisses them off.

    Amen to that O.

  • OffTheCuff

    I like both Obsidian’s and CS’s posts. Stick around, guys.

    Obsidian I think of sort of as hip-hop Founding Father, you see, speakin’ in poetic tones better than I ever could, I’m just sayin’. With a bit of Random capitalization Here and There like they did back in the day, it breaks up the Stodgy flow of all this Straight talk by white Men such as yours truly. So, yeah, while the total word count can get a bit high, and the stylized sign-off might be repetitive, and maybe a topic is touched on more than once, he has more interesting things to say than not, and has provided excellent insights, not to mention getting our host on board with the Truth of Game; and me being a Grown Up, and this and that and so on and so forth, I can read the points I like, and just slide over the rambling as needed, on a case-by-case basis, and not be all hatin’. So. Let. It. Slide.

    Sorry. Terrible impression, but it’s done out of respect.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Wudang,

    The bicurious* / bisexual chicks I have banged have also been the sluttier, and also the more emotionally conflicted. Being a slut isnt about a number but about how you filter and screen the people you have sex with. The more wide you have that door open, the sluttier.

    I think having gay sex to avoid being a slut is stupid. She´s just becoming a gay slut.

  • Bob

    I studied social science research methods in college back in the early ’80s. Since then I have lost much of my confidence in surveys in general and self reporting in particular.

    I have also become skeptical of the accuracy of people’s memories. “if you didn’t write it down, it didn’t happen.”

    With publish or perish and the bloating of academia a great deal of junk research gets published,

    Poll respondents may tailor their responses for reasons of their own. Pollsters are starting to recognize this.

    I would be much more comfortable with the results of studies of what people do, rather than of what they say they do.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Bob

      I would be much more comfortable with the results of studies of what people do, rather than of what they say they do.

      That’s pretty difficult to capture on film without invading privacy. :)

  • Wudang

    YOHAMI:

    I have seen the same in bisexual girls, meaning girls who falls in love with both genders, but I have not seen the same in girls who just like having sex with other girls but just fall in love with men. Actually, I have also seen statistics showing bisexual girls having twice as many partners as lesbians and also twice the level of depression and drug use. I think that comes from the conflict arround who they want as partner and problems with not being quite accepted by the lesbian crowd that often see claims of being bisexual as an excuse for not accepting that you are a lesbian. But that does not hold for the girls who just like sleeping wiht other girls.

    I am not saying you become less slutty by sleeping with girls in stead. This is not advice to BE less slutty. I am saying do it to be perceived as less slutty by a future boyfriend.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    Hilarious that the guy who admonishes “Grown folks are talkin” ends every post with “Holla back.” “Grown folks” don’t talk like that bro. 16 year old girls have better grammar. I’m just sayin’.

  • Blah

    I believe Obsidian Sharpton aka. race baiter has ABGS (angry black guy syndrome) Funny how its all these internet MLK’s who are usually the ones who bring up race even when the topic isn’t about race.He makes alot of ASSumptions and likes to hear himself talk.No surprise there.

  • GudEnuf

    All these men saying they won’t marry sluts are convincing me that sluts are a “good buy”. One of these days I’m gonna find me a cute, smart, hard-working slut that everyone is passing on only because she’s a slut. Meanwhile, you guys will either stay single forever or marry some boring virgin.

    Supply and demand people! If nobody else is buying something, then you can get a good deal!

  • ExNewYorker

    @GudEnuf
    Before you go for your “good buy” slut, you should probably read the following:
    .
    proverb-30-meat-market-economics
    .
    Explained there as only a lovable cad could…

  • Bob

    That’s pretty difficult to capture on film without invading privacy

    I think that real social science Is difficult.

    We can’t watch humans the way Jane Goodall watches chimps, though I think some people try. Monica Moore, of Webster University comes to mind. Our favorite measuring instruments seem to suffer from Heisenberg problems.

    I think to make real progress we need more indirect and nonintrusive methods.

    The researchers will need much better math backgrounds than the typical social scientist. I never got beyond beginner’s cookbook stats. My calculus wasn’t good enough.

  • AlphaRising

    @ Susan
    .
    “I think you’re right, it probably wouldn’t. It’s necessary to keep in mind the culture at that time. In 1981, just before news of AIDS broke, we were really just post-Sexual Revolution. Those of us in our 20s had some of age in the era of “free love” and “if it feels good do it” and “make love not war.” Both men and women embraced the newfound sexual freedom. Women were generally not judged for some promiscuity, even by men, for the most part.”
    .
    This squares with what my baby-boomer parents tell me about that time.
    I think the increasing harshness in judgement of “the number” also stems from the fact that women today are more narrow-minded in their pursuit of alphas and harsher in their rejection/manipulation of betas.
    .
    From what I gather about that time, although alphas still got laid more than betas, most betas could get a reasonable amount of sex and/or girlfriends most of the time, and women were not too full of themselves.
    .
    Now, it’s a lot easier for average beta (and some lower alpha) guys to criticize high partner counts when we know that these women (1) reveled in stringing along & harshly rejecting guys like us (2) fucking thuggish scumbags who they let treat them like shit while LJBF’ing much more deserving men (3) have huge attitudes.
    .
    I’d be far less judgmental -to a point- if I was certain that a women’s partner count was made of LTRs with decent guys, and if she didn’t display an over-inflated ego & manipulative behavior (which seems to go hand-in hand with a high alpha partner count)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @AlphaRising
      Great comment there – I think you’ve correctly nailed the origin of the focus on the number. Also, you are right that betas did just fine in many cases. I would estimate that in 1980, at least 50% of males were sexually satisfied – alpha naturals via a variety of partners, beta males via an LTR.

      Female narcissism has exploded, as you say, which is part of the reason for nuclear rejections – “How dare you think you have a shot with me?” And of course, the effect of 40+ years of unleashed female hypergamy added in means that some women reject most men. I don’t believe that it’s all women by a long shot, but it will be necessary for any guy to be on the lookout for red flags.

      If I were a guy I would only consider dating women with strong, intact families. I know that my husband and I have worked hard to raise our kids with our values. Even now there are plenty of teachable moments, and they respect our judgment. At the very least, a guy should avoid any woman whose mother is behaving in any way that is not mature and dignified.

  • modernguy

    @Susan

    Lol at “not a distinguished academic”. Women are so complacent about received wisdom, especially as it relates to status.

    If you haven’t read Devlin you should. His writings are freely available on the web and he fleshes out the general thoughts on the modern SMP that you read in the comments of your posts with more detail and nuance and more concisely.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @jess
    This is actually a very interesting question I will get back at you I want to be as much accurate as possible and I’m a bit busy so it will take me a couple of days. But I want to clarify must of my friends are not on the 40 yet,and the female ones married foreigners,so that will probably influence the numbers.

    As for becoming miserable without sex, that’s just stupid. I’m not buying it.

    When my players friends and I used to discuss their ways and I called them into their crap I usually told them. That I believe they are forced to lie to get laid the moment we have the first casualty of someone dying for lack of sex…still waiting.

  • Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Close-Up Edition()

  • Tom

    @ Susan

    Relationship sex and casual sex are very different, obviously, including the “toll” they take on a woman’s psyche. Lots of the former has a very positive effect, while lots of the latter is extremely detrimental, IME.
    _________________

    Susan how so? I think the damage was done earlier in life. Having a lot of casual sex doesnt cause future relationship problems, or mental prroblems or bad character. Those potential problems were already there well before most people start having sex. Like I have stated before, it isnt the active sexual behavior that causes problems down the road, it is bad character or already existing mental flaws.. That explains the other @50% of promiscuous women who go on to have successeful relationships.
    The people I have known over the years who were skanky were of questionable mental make up well before they started ho`n it up. This is where I think people get off track.There are studies I saw a while back that strongly suggest that. It wasnt the casual sex that made them impersonal and made relationship tough for them. No, it was the lack of those qualities to begin with, in the vast majority of cases. This is why I contend, a lot of experienced women are a good bet, but as a man you must be discriminating. The skanky one`s are pretty easy to spot, but the problem is most men think with the wrong head an ignore the signs. Therefore they end up in a relationship with the wrong type of woman. The problem is, even if this woman wasnt slutting it up, her character flaws would eventually have shown up in the relationship anyway. I do know of one problem I see that manifests in women. Many start to lose faith in men in general thinking most men are liars players, male ho`s etc. Many men are good at projecting they are a good guy with good intentions and will say and do anything to get into a womans pants. I guess that is where dark game comes into play.Must be a lot of that going on.

  • Höllenhund

    If you haven’t read Devlin you should. His writings are freely available on the web and he fleshes out the general thoughts on the modern SMP that you read in the comments of your posts with more detail and nuance and more concisely.

    I agree with modernguy on this. Devlin is one of the few people who examined the reality of female hypergamy and the current SMP. I find it strange that Ms. Walsh doesn’t read his writings (they aren’t even that long) but nevertheless keeps dismissing him as a charlatan and an unqualified scholar.

    Link:

    http://dontmarry.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/articles-by-f-roger-devlin/

  • Höllenhund

    Another article of his:

    http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/01/the_reafricaniz.php

    Yes, it appeared on American Renaissance, but it should be read it with an open mind anyway.

  • Höllenhund

    Are they going to riot in the streets, hold marches with protest signs demanding pussy? Should I be afraid in my apartment of the omega/lower beta who isn’t getting laid?

    You’re asking the wrong question. Enforced patriarchal monogamy had the effect of domesticating men. Married men on average are more likely to avoid high-risk behaviors and accept social norms than unmarried men due to their obligations and responsibilities to their families. They have something to protect, and are more likely to work hard and have future time orientation. Young single men who aren’t pressured or incentivized to accept this role are less invested in social stability and are more willing to engage in all sorts of high-risk behavior. Therefore they are easily recruited into criminal gangs, armed groups or extremist political mass movements. Moreover, their lack of investment in society also makes them indifferent. When a growing % of men behave this way, any small but dedicated armed/active minority can easily induce social change.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    AlphaRising..”and women were not too full of themselves”

    I was at the supermarket yesterday and notice a little girl–probably about 6–wearing a shirt that said “I don’t need your attitude–I’ve got plenty of my OWN.” She was there with her mother. White, and–judging from the demographics of the area and the SUV they were getting into–at least upper-middle-classs.

    What a charming friend/girlfriend/wife this girl is likely to be in 10 or 15 years. (And I’ve seen plenty of shirts of this general type that are much, much worse)

    Why on earth would any parent think it’s smart or funny to encourage this kind of thing? I think given the level of “be a bitch” propaganda that exists, it’s remarkable that there are as many nice, well-balanced women as there are.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    ExNewYorker: GudEnuf says that s/he’ll marry a slut, because everyone else seems to be ignoring them. You… respond with a statement that everyone else is ignoring sluts. Learn to logic, please?

    Tom: I agree, with the caveat that while many good girls are perfectly sweet girls who just don’t like non-relationship sex, many of them are manipulative, have hang-ups around sex, etc.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “You’re asking the wrong question. Enforced patriarchal monogamy had the effect of domesticating men. Married men on average are more likely to avoid high-risk behaviors and accept social norms than unmarried men due to their obligations and responsibilities to their families. They have something to protect, and are more likely to work hard and have future time orientation. Young single men who aren’t pressured or incentivized to accept this role are less invested in social stability and are more willing to engage in all sorts of high-risk behavior. Therefore they are easily recruited into criminal gangs, armed groups or extremist political mass movements. Moreover, their lack of investment in society also makes them indifferent. When a growing % of men behave this way, any small but dedicated armed/active minority can easily induce social change.”

    Hollenhund’s points above should not be taken lightly – Al Qaeda built it’s entire organization in this way, on the backs of the Male sexual losers of Middle Eastern/Islamic society (and NO, polygamy wasn’t the reason, but rather failed socialistic policies – to wit, Egypt, Iran, etc.). Am I saying that Al Qaeda will have a bonanza of such “talent” here? Not necessarily; but then again, it took less than 20 such Men to knockout America’s two front teeth – right?

    We need to be talking about this, and, in fits and starts, we will – again, I cite the works of Tiger, Hacker and Hymowitz, as evidence in this regard. Of course, none of them have really hit the mark that we in this part of the blogosphere has done – yet. I think the truth will be inevitable. And when it does, I wanna have a ringside seat…

    O.

  • Abbot

    “Those potential problems were already there before…already existing mental flaws.”
    .
    YES, promiscuity, like alcoholism, as a manifestation of mental issues is long established and a woman who is prolific in non-challenging east-to-get-gap casual sex [the Great American “SEX GAP”] offers up, in addition to visceral reactions, a host of “potential problem” markers.
    .
    “That explains the other @50% of promiscuous women who go on to have successeful relationships”
    .
    Well there you have it gentlemen. If you get past the wretch, you need not worry about the relationship itself. Throw your pre-existing mental flaw promiscuous women dice against the wall and you get snake eyes *only* 50% of the time. Nice to know that’s finally put to rest.
    .
    “a lot of experienced women are a good bet, but as a man you must be discriminating…they end up in a relationship with the wrong type of woman”
    .
    A lot of “former” alcoholics could be a good bet, but as a man you are not obligated to put in the EXTRA effort required to give women a break. Why would a man put in the extra work required to weed out 50% of them from a population that is very easy to avoid in the first place? His grandpa did not even face such a prospect, so why should he?

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    “I have never read Devlin, so won’t comment on his writing. I will observe, however, that he is not a distinguished academic, and all his fans are from the seduction community.”

    O: With all due respect Ms. Walsh, I’m afraid I’m with the fellas on this one – what Mr. Devlin’s background is or isn’t, or who reads him, is irrelevant. The question is, is what he’s written on-point, or not? And while I have no truck with his apparent cozying up to racists, I have to say, as someone who’s read just about everything he’s written along these lines, that’s I find it pretty hard to disagree with him. I don’t agree with EVERYTHING he says, but the overall point he makes is indeed legit. I think it behooves you to give him a read – at least that way, if you wanna discredit him you can do so from a more informed standpoint.

    I’m jus’ sayin’.

    O.

  • http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com Obsidian

    Now, having said all of that, and now turning to Hollehund…

    Hollenhund, wrt Devlin’s Summer, 2008 article for American Renaissance, where he argues that the West is being “reafricanized” (I never knew it was “Africanized” in the first place!), I must respectfully disagree with him and by extension, you, since you have gone on record a number of times in a number of places making essentially the same argument.

    First of all, the notions about “Africa” being this kind of sexual free for all and where kids are an after thought, gets a lot of boogeyman-type play in the Manosphere, but is woefully short on evidence. For one thing, modern day Africa – and by “modern day” I am talking about the Africa of the 20th century, in the main – is hardly rampantly polygamous. In other words, one is more likely to run into “Big Love” here than over there, due in the main to the influences of both Christianity AND Islam (contrary to popular – and highly ignorant – opinion here in the West, polygamy is rarely practiced in the Islamic world today; in fact, some Islamic countries even outlaw it). Although this is purely personal anecdote, I still feel compelled to report that I have known far and away MORE intact, Western-style familes hailing from parts of Africa like Ghana, Nigeria and the Congo, than both Black AND White families here, where divorce and out of wedlock births and the like are much more common here.

    I think the argument for the “breakdown” of familial life and the like in the West can be made on its own merits, without need or recourse to “Africa” and the like, because at its heart, and I’ve noted this above in my remarks on Devlin to Ms. Walsh, what it is are scare tactics in racemongering drag. It isn’t “Africa’s” fault that the West is where it is, and as I’ve said, most Blacks, either here in the West or in Africa itself, are far and away MORE “Western” than they are “tribal” and so forth. I think this is where Devlin shoots himself in the foot.

    Holla back

    O.

  • Abbot

    “How dare you think you have a shot with me?”
    .
    He gloats, as woman after woman casual-sex-gappers grovel for a husband.
    .
    “only consider dating women with strong, intact families”
    .
    To avoid socially pathological women who mindlessly need to build their character with a string of penises. And avoid – “daddy, mom is such an upstanding citizen. Well son, she spent a decade building up character in a very special way.” “But that’s our little secret so don’t go telling other people about that.” “yeah dad. Grandpa would think that is reaaaly weird”…”yes he would son, yes he would.”
    .
    “a guy should avoid any woman whose mother is behaving in any way that is not mature and dignified”
    .
    Its 1949 all over again

  • ExNewYorker

    “You… respond with a statement that everyone else is ignoring sluts. Learn to logic, please?” -Ozy
    .
    *Laugh*
    I guess I assumed Tom would “analyze” the Onion-esque response and the underlying premise, and go beyond the simple “analogy”. In essence, I figured he’d have a modicum of intelligence (and a sense of humor). I suppose that’s not something to be assumed with everyone, as you’ve so clearly shown :-)

  • ExNewYorker

    Oh, and for the logicians out there, read “GudEnuf” where I referred to “Tom”. I missed the mistake there, though I imagine Tom has a sense of humor about this :-)

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Call me stupid, but I’m missing something. The point of the piece is “lol, sluts want to be valued as if they were REAL women, lol, no one likes sluts for committed relationships, lol.”* GudEnuf was saying that, if what all the men said here was truel there was a high supply and low demand of sluts for committed relationships, so one could get in the market cheap and snap up some very good women at low prices. Therefore, the argument of that piece was actually a premise of GoodEnuf’s argument, and your response is invalid.

    Not to mention that “look at this cute analogy” is not actually proof of anything. Argument by analogy is a logical fallacy. Even anecdotal evidence is better.

    *Which is the dumbest thing ever anyway. In my experience, traits like romanticism, intelligence, kindness, shared interests, sexual compatibility and– yes– hotness rank much higher in the average straight man’s dating algorithm than “number of cocks sucked.” If someone sold filet mignon for cheap, I don’t think that would make anyone like filet mignon less.

  • GudEnuf

    GudEnuf was saying that, if what all the men said here was truel there was a high supply and low demand of sluts for committed relationships, so one could get in the market cheap and snap up some very good women at low prices. Therefore, the argument of that piece was actually a premise of GoodEnuf’s argument, and your response is invalid.

    Exactly. Raise your standards on things other people don’t care about, lower your standards on things other people care about. That’s good shopping.

  • GudEnuf

    Haha I just realized Ozymandias is the “crazy feminist” who analyzed Compliment and Cuddle. High five for pissing Roosh off.

  • Jess

    Abbot and modern guy,
    Tut, tut, such anger boys.
    .
    Have either of you found a virtous lady in your life?

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    GudEnuf: Thanks! :) I have to say Roosh was my favorite of the people I’ve pissed off. “You’re an ugly hairy slut! I can’t actually disprove your arguments, but you’re an ugly hairy slut!”

    modernguy: Sluts don’t necessarily cheat: the sluttiest women I know, including myself, all have ethical beliefs about being honest with our partners. Sluts won’t go to bed with everyone: I have never actually met a person who was like “do you have a cock? Good to go.” Some people are more likely to fuck the people they like in the bathroom of a nightclub, but no one will actively fuck people they don’t want.

    No one is suggesting that you should date sluts if you don’t want to; that’s just a personal preference, even if it’s a really silly personal preference that has no relationship to anything else about a person. Everyone has silly personal preferences: I won’t date punk fans, for instance. The only thing we’re suggesting is that, just like I’m not allowed to say “you better not like punk or no woman will ever marry you!” or insult people for wanting to fuck punk fans, you shouldn’t do the same thing to sluts.

    Also, nice drive-by anti-Semitism.

  • Abbot

    Tut, tut, such anger boys.
    .
    Goading feminists who cant get a leg up is admittedly a cheap shot, as evidenced by a lack of any constructive responses. OK you got me there. Guilty. We all know, as the evidence is crystal clear, that they are on the defensive over this entire topic as long as they remain in the minority. Having fun at their expense is wrong, but soooo hard to resist. For many its too late to go back and get another does of character building services though a boot is really needed.

  • Abbot

    that’s just a personal preference, even if it’s a really silly personal preference that has no relationship to anything else about a person. Everyone has silly personal preferences: I won’t date punk fans, for instance. The only thing we’re suggesting is that, just like I’m not allowed to say “you better not like punk or no woman will ever marry you!” or insult people for wanting to fuck punk fans, you shouldn’t do the same thing to sluts.
    .
    FINALLY. Non emotional rational statements. Just to be clear, although there may be a few idiots out there, and thats very few if any, guys are not telling woman not to be sluts. For any reason. That would be plain stupid. Yes, we ALL have personal preferences that appear silly to others and yet nobody denigrates them for it. A smirk, a chuckle is all you get. But, oh my, if your personal preference is to pass over sluts for marriage, its like a wall holding back pure shit just bursts all over you. WHY WHY WHY that one silly Personal preference that affects no one brings down this barrage of articles, blogs, rants, walks and on an on? Hitting a nerve is not a term that does it justice. I wold think that women who do this should feel childish, but maybe thats just natural for them so it feels right to attack men for be independent thinkers. Will someone finally explain whats going on here?
    .
    Now, thats being inquisitive. But its easier to say Im angry than actually admitting why they feel this way. Take the easy way, just like a….

  • Jess

    Oh contraire, mein friend,
    .
    Our attitudes are not the minority. I mean are the girls in ‘friends’ sluts and whores?
    .
    Or any other main stream show for that matter.
    .
    No defensiveness on our part.
    .
    By the way- you seem to be avoiding the girlfriend question

  • Abbot

    Or any other main stream show for that matter.
    .
    So its not a myth that Western women get their marching orders from television show writers who know they can pull it off as women were poorly raised and looking for direction or character building exercises. Its like a competition for commands from TV and feminists. Good parents limit kids exposure to those sugary cereal commercials. Women should have blockers so they cant watch certain shows in a campaign to get them to be the independent thinkers they aggressively claim to be.
    .
    Person information? Oh how perfectly consistent. Get all up in a mans personal business. Well, that really drives the point home. I was not expecting an answer as to why women get all up in a mans business when using personal preferences for passing over sluts for marriage. Its only like the twentieth time I asked. and all I get is a request for personal information. Its time for your television mind control show about now, no? Yes it is. I command you to go watch your commands. But I can tell you one personal thing that could help explain a lot to you – I have no antenna or cable so I do not watch TV. Just an occasional movie on disk. So maybe thats why I am so confused by all these things women are doing and supporting. Like kids eating sugary cereal. Just like the kids. Thanks, now I really am learning and understanding a lot.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Abbot, dude, I’m a feminist and I don’t watch TV.

    And the reason that we have blog posts and marches and rants is that slut shaming is not a “silly personal preference that affects no one”. Teenage girls are bullied for being sluts, ruining their self-esteem for years. A woman’s promiscuity can make her accusations of being raped or harassed less “believable.” Men are shamed for falling in love with a woman who’s had casual sex (if you don’t believe me, look at this very comment thread). Sex-positive feminists don’t want you to be slutty, they don’t want you to start dating sluts, they want you to stop treating women crappily for having had casual sex.

  • modernguy

    @ozymandius

    Your whole argument is that you and the sluts you know don’t cheat. Who cares? The simple fact is that you give your body over to be plundered by whoever is the flavor of the day. Maybe its one dude for a while now and it’ll be someone else later. The discussion is really about the difference between that and the ideal romantic relationship – two people together for life. The way you live is an affront to that and you want to make it seem normal. Screw the entire city you live in if you want, nobody here cares, just stop acting like it’s the right thing to do. Do what you want and accept the label you’re given – slut. You want to do everything a slut does but you don’t want to be called a slut or you want the word to have a positive connotation. But it has a negative connotation for good reasons, built up over millenia. The behavior is destructive, personally and for society. A healthy society shuns promiscuity, when it doesn’t it is in decline. Your personal progressive politics don’t matter in changing that fact, they only make it more apparent when we implement them. For the record, you may know some good sluts, I know some good men and none of them would marry a slut.

  • GudEnuf

    modernguy:

    The simple fact is that you give your body over to be plundered by whoever is the flavor of the day.

    Nobody ever blames slutty men for letting random women hook up with them.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Nobody ever blames slutty men for letting random women hook up with them.

    I actually did and still do. Women choose not to take this in account, but is a personal choice they make (probably by preselection) but is not enforced by anyone for themselves.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    First of all: people, my name is Ozymandias. OzymandiAs. The same way it’s spelled in the poem. Okay? :) You can call me ozy or O or oz or whatever if it’s too long to type, but I like to be spelled correctly.

    Let me be clear: I think that casual sex is unhealthy for many, perhaps most, people (of whatever gender). Successful casual sex requires the ability to separate sex and love, comfort with your own and others’ sexuality, communication skills, etc. However, I also trust people to be mature enough to realize that, if casual sex makes them unhappy, they should not do it. I also believe that casual sex, and sex in general, is value-neutral: if it makes the people involved happy, it’s good, if it makes the people involved depressed or self-hating or whatever, then it’s bad. If someone wants to have casual sex, or a monogamous romantic relationship, or no sex at all, I support their decision, as long as it makes them happy (and the sex is safe, honest and consensual, of course).

    The problem is that our society sets up a lot of shit for people who want to get in touch with their sexuality. If you have to deal with “will casual sex make me cool?” and “will casual sex make me an unmarriageable slut?”, then you don’t get to the real question of “will casual sex make me happy?” The same thing occurs with men: if you are busy thinking “does my virginity mean that I’m a loser pussy?” then you don’t get to deal with the question “am I actually ready to have sex?”

    Also, I would like to point out that I chose my words carefully; I don’t know any cheaters, but I do know several non-monogamous people, including my roommate, who is one of the most well-adjusted and happy people I know.

    I am glad the good men are in touch with their sexuality and know they don’t want sluts. I’m with a good man who loves me despite my sluthood. :)

    I am unclear about how casual sex destroys society. Could you elaborate please?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Oz

      Let me be clear: I think that casual sex is unhealthy for many, perhaps most, people (of whatever gender). Successful casual sex requires the ability to separate sex and love, comfort with your own and others’ sexuality, communication skills, etc.

      I agree with this statement, though I don’t think it’s the same for both genders. Men are generally much more able to compartmentalize this way. A few women also can, but it’s a small minority.

      However, I also trust people to be mature enough to realize that, if casual sex makes them unhappy, they should not do it.

      Why do you trust people to make good decisions? Human history is filled with exactly the opposite. Both men and women are affected by the culture at both the macro level – the mainstream media, movies, music, etc. – and the micro level – your city, particular campus, set of friends, etc. Many people make terrible decisions because they are influenced heavily by the culture. Others are unable to delay gratification.

      Finally, I would point out that there is a strong element of proselytizing in sex-pos feminism. It’s a political cause, and is argued and lobbied for by its believers. It’s another cultural influence that undoubtedly sways some women into seeking the “empowerment” of casual sex, including the many, or most people who will not benefit from the experience.

      If someone wants to have casual sex, or a monogamous romantic relationship, or no sex at all, I support their decision, as long as it makes them happy (and the sex is safe, honest and consensual, of course).

      I feel the same way. I have no ideology I’m trying to push here, I am not interested in defining morality. Nor do I have any use for women who are invested in getting others to have casual sex. You may not have that agenda, but many of your feminist brethren do. The desired end is the reeducation of men, and you acknowledge that this is pointless. Men have always cared about promiscuity in women – at this point it is genetic. Any shift in that attitude will require an evolution, which can occur only if female promiscuity is advantageous for the species. That seems unlikely, since even in our time the most promiscuous women tend not to reproduce.

  • modernguy

    @gudenuf

    I knew that retarded retort would come up. It’s the juvenile complaint of seeing someone else with something you can’t have and wanting it too, even if it’s bad for them.

    Traditionally male promiscuity was frowned upon as well. It’s an ironic anachronism that Prince William just got married. Logically, if sex was him aim he’d have no reason to, he could bang as many women as he wanted to. In this case the aristocracy is setting an example for the rest of chav-infested Britain, unwittingly. While good for nothing chav trash screw and breed like wild animals, living on welfare in informal relationships, the guy with the most to lose in the SMP by marrying is getting married (and a 30-something woman at that, obviously he’s not reading the “manosphere”). Because traditionally men were expected to marry and provide for their families. Perpetual bachelors were looked down upon. Since the age of do-whatever-you-want began a negative feedback loop has taken hold. Loose women who let themselves be pounded by the alpha of the moment look around and see him banging their friends too and see the other guys look up to him. Meanwhile the feminists on the sidelines are prodding them to slut it up like the alpha men to serve their own agendas. People are just confused.

  • modernguy

    “Our attitudes are not the minority. I mean are the girls in ‘friends’ sluts and whores?”

    Is Rambo a cold blooded killer? Wasn’t he psychologically damaged by torture in Vietnam?

    Hello, these are fictional characters. Do not attempt to live by their example.

  • Jason

    And the reason that we have blog posts and marches and rants is that slut shaming is not a “silly personal preference that affects no one”. Teenage girls are bullied for being sluts, ruining their self-esteem for years. A woman’s promiscuity can make her accusations of being raped or harassed less “believable.” Men are shamed for falling in love with a woman who’s had casual sex (if you don’t believe me, look at this very comment thread).

    If only that were actually the case in the real word. Join us here in it, for a minute.

    Do you think that the SMP would be so fucked up if it were? The sex positive movement and feminism in general is fucking poison and we could do without both.

  • Mike C

    Most men are not hooking up in college on a regular basis. You do not need to have sex right away to get the attention of your man, being feminine, sweet, and not a bitch is usually a good starter. Most men, contrary to Hollywood, are looking for a special someone in college and most of them want the relationship to work and last for the long run. There are tons of dudes who want nothing more than a girl that will be with them. Be nice, don’t play games, and demonstrate your desire to commit early on.

    A few of my friends, who definitely have the capacity to be players, have chosen not to because their girlfriends follow these guidelines.

    If a dude is interested in you, and you are interested in him, be open, be forthcoming. A lot of dudes are reserved because they don’t know where you stand. Do not underestimate the power of a male’s attraction to you.

    And, lastly, if you are looking for a meaningful relationship, the last place you should probably look is dudes like me. We have options. We ignore you, we talk to other girls in front of you, make out with other girls in front of you, and generally consider being bunned up a huge loss. You will most likely not be able to get us to commit. It’s harsh, but it’s true.
    .
    Just wanted to highlight ALL of this. What collegeslacker says here seems to indicate there are plenty of potential boyfriend/relationships guys there.

  • Mike C

    Young single men who aren’t pressured or incentivized to accept this role are less invested in social stability and are more willing to engage in all sorts of high-risk behavior. Therefore they are easily recruited into criminal gangs, armed groups or extremist political mass movements. Moreover, their lack of investment in society also makes them indifferent. When a growing % of men behave this way, any small but dedicated armed/active minority can easily induce social change.
    .
    I agree with you to an extent, but I think in our society there are plenty of activities and other distractions to keep single uninvested men from becoming “jihadists”. I agree about the indifference part but we’ve got bigger fish to fry than guys who aren’t getting laid. As just one example, most people are oblivious to role oil plays in modern society and economies and the impact of Peak Oil. That is 100x more critical over the next 5-20 years then young guys not getting pussy.

  • Höllenhund

    Mike C,

    I think you’re still approaching this from the wrong angle. This isn’t mainly about the threat of terrorism. (Jihad is a peculiar Muslim phenomenon anyway.) We need to keep in mind when assessing this problem is that the entire economic and social system of the US and other Western countries is based on the premise that the maximum amount of social investment can be extracted from men. In other words, we take it for granted that great majority young men will work as hard as they can (because they have all the incentives and reasons to do so) and will also marry.

    This is the only way to maintain permanent economic growth and continued prosperity, which is a promise that underpins social stability. If male economic underperformance continues to worsen, not only will economic growth stop, but a prolonged recession won’t be avoided either. The status quo is much more vulnerable to both external and internal changes than most people realize.

    All in all, it’s true that many young men are kept distracted and sedated by free porn, video games, PS3 etc., but that’s only contributing to the problem. I might add that women are complaining about this more and more (especially when it’s high-status “eligible” men who do this and refuse to marry).

    This cannot be compared to Peak Oil. It’s still a matter of debate how serious that threat really is, but at least there’s a lively debate about it taking place. In contrast, there’s practically zero social awareness or discussion about male economic and sexual underperformance.

  • Abbot

    Oz –
    .
    You wrote this:
    .
    “that’s just a personal preference, even if it’s a really silly personal preference that has no relationship to anything else about a person. Everyone has silly personal preferences”
    .
    Then you wrote this:
    .
    “And the reason that we have blog posts and marches and rants is that slut shaming is not a “silly personal preference that affects no one”. …. Sex-positive feminists don’t want you to be slutty, they don’t want you to start dating sluts, they want you to stop treating women crappily for having had casual sex.”
    .
    The Topic here the QUIET dismissing of a slut for marriage. Is that:
    .
    1] just a personal preference, even if it’s a really silly personal preference that has no relationship to anything else about a person. Everyone has silly personal preferences
    .
    -OR-
    .
    2] slut shaming and not a “silly personal preference that affects no one”
    .
    Your answer will FINALLY solve this mystery.
    .
    This question has been asked in numerous variations for weeks but certain people do not want to acknowledge the impact a man can have on women just by his thought process/inaction and not his actions or what he says

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Abbott: Because they are two completely different issues. I think of sluthood as a trait about a person, like having brown hair or liking bad music. I don’t care if you, Abbott, don’t want to marry brunettes, but if you start talking about how “all men don’t like brunettes, unless they are Not Real Men” that is (a) factually wrong and (b) trying to convince women not to be brunettes (because they want love too) and men not to want brunettes (because they want to be Real Men).

    Jason: Would you like my citations?

    Susan: I’ve met more women who are capable of compartmentalizing than men, but that might be because most of the people I’ve talked to about the issue are nerds, and nerdy men tend to be hopeless romantics, I’ve found. I think it’s important to note that many men suffer from the social pressure to be promiscuous and may not admit it if they feel empty afterward.

    Hmm, perhaps I framed that wrong. I think that, in aggregate, people will be more likely to know what makes them happy than social pressure does, which means both the social pressure to be promiscuous and the social pressure to not have sex– both ends of the Madonna/Whore spectrum. Therefore, we should work to get rid of social pressure around sexuality, except of course for things like “use condoms” and “don’t rape people” that are actually pretty much 100% good ideas.

    Most of the self-identified sex-positive feminists I know are in long-term romantic relationships; I read several asexual sex-positive feminists and both a Christian and a Muslim who are abstinent until marriage. Admittedly there’s a certain degree of selection bias in Who Ozy Blogstalks, but it’s just inaccurate to think that all sex-positive feminists are trying to get women to have casual sex. They are trying to get women to have casual sex if they want to have casual sex. Subtle but important distinction here.

    I don’t think that the evidence is in for the proposition “men have always cared about promiscuity in a woman.” Even today, many men enjoy cuckold porn, swinging and polyamory. Have you read Sex at Dawn? It’s pop anthropology, but it provides some very interesting evidence that monogamy is not natural to the human species.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    I just realized that my last paragraph might be misunderstood. Just because monogamy may not be natural, does not mean that monogamy isn’t good. Many people, including my parents, are truly happy in long-term monogamous romantic relationships. Other people might prefer polyamory, monogamy with an acceptance of occasional one-night stands for both partners, celibacy, etc.

  • Abbot

    “sluthood as a trait about a person, like having brown hair”
    .
    Yes genetic. And can signal a marker to a man. Nature provides a service. But why is there such strong howling protest against men who choose to avoid women with the sluthood trait and not the brown hair trait?
    .
    “trying to convince women not to be brunettes (because they want love too) and men not to want brunettes (because they want to be Real Men).”
    .
    There is not an effort to convince women to not want to do what they feel like doing. There is discussion about letting women know that there may consequences to their actions that they may not be aware of. Better informed consent is a good thing. The only discussion about what defines a “real man” comes from “Tom” so maybe that’s where you’re getting that. If a man wants a woman with a particular trait that other or most men shun, he is not being told or convinced otherwise but he may be aware that other men would not prefer it. The inaction/thought process of men does seem to have an impact on others, especially women, no?
    .
    There IS an effort to convince women to stop denigrating and shaming men who QUIETLY dismiss women who have that promiscuity trait. But if it were over brown hair you would not hear a peep out of these annoying denigrators. WHY is this storm of protest over the slut trait and not the other?

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Because slut shaming is not about that, Abbott. Slut shaming is about the Toronto cop who said “don’t dress like a slut if you don’t want to be raped”; slut shaming is about police officers continuing to arrest women for prostitution in New York City despite the serial killer targeting them; slut shaming is about women being fired or not hired, despite their qualifications, because their sexual pasts are on the Internet; slut shaming is about the fourteen-year-old girl bullied for being a “slut” because she has large breasts; slut shaming is about rape survivors being disbelieved because they had casual sex before; slut shaming is about men being shamed because their girlfriend was a slut before she dated them; slut shaming is about a whole lot of fucking things that have absolutely nothing to do with where you, personally, Abbott, stick your cock.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Slut shaming is about the Toronto cop who said “don’t dress like a slut if you don’t want to be raped”

    I agree “shaming” shouldnt exist, still, “the dont get in your pants into a thug neighborhood” is pure common sense, specially coming from a cop.

    So the slut walk is pretty stupid for missing that.

  • Abbot

    “Because slut shaming is not about that”
    .
    Well then, there we have it. Women do no consider men to be slut shaming if they merely dismiss a woman for marriage due to her being a slut. We are not slut shamers for having done that. Whewww!
    .
    Well, all those folks who take part in the myriad of shaming tactics as described above may be on some other blogs where you can go and stick it to them. I mean, now that we all here don’t qualify as shamers who cause problems for women.

  • Abbot

    So the slut walk is pretty stupid for missing that.
    .
    assuming it was missed. Its not about slut shaming although its wrong to shame anyone, especially strangers. This is a knee-jerk reaction that just needed one thing to set off years of pent up frustration. In their minds, it should be legal, accepted and celebrated for a woman to walk nude in any neighborhood and its men who need to learn to control their behaviors. Dontchyaknow

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    YOHAMI: If I am capable of controlling myself and not raping the sexy shirtless guy in a collar and nail polish, men can learn to be capable of controlling themselves and not raping the lady in the fishnets and corset. Not to mention that that is a completely inaccurate model of how rape occurs: rape is a crime of power, not sex, and most rape is performed by someone the victim knows, not people in “thug neighborhoods.”

    Abbot: Dammit, you are missing subtle distinctions again. If you, personally, Abbot, don’t want to marry a slut, more power to you. But it is inaccurate to generalize from that to All Men Ever, given the minority of men who prefer sluts and the majority of men who don’t really care, it suggests that your motivation is not a personal preference against women who’ve had sex but the belief that sluts are inherently bad because they’ve had sex, which is slut shaming.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    YOHAMI: If I am capable of controlling myself and not raping the sexy shirtless guy in a collar and nail polish, men can learn to be capable of controlling themselves and not raping the lady in the fishnets and corset. Not to mention that that is a completely inaccurate model of how rape occurs: rape is a crime of power, not sex, and most rape is performed by someone the victim knows, not people in “thug neighborhoods.”

    I dont need to “control” myself because I dont have any rape urges, but congrats if you can control yours. Men dont have rape urges. Rapists do. Rapists are criminals. Men are not.

    rape is a crime of power, not sex

    Wrong.

  • modernguy

    There are a minority of people doing all kinds of things that are destructive to them or to society.
    Nobody said doing the right thing was “natural”. That doesn’t mean we stop “shaming” people for doing destructive or negative things or discouraging that type of behavior, either through shaming or through force. Sorry, just the fact that you breathe air doesn’t mean you have a right to be happy. If you don’t want to be judged, don’t do shameful things. Trying to convince everyone that white is black is foolish, it will either fail, or if it succeeds, it will be destructive.

  • Abbot

    “you are missing subtle distinctions”
    .
    Yes yes, must be why they get missed – they are so subtle. So subtle that maybe next week a new commenter will come here with a whole different distinction based on whatever feels best.
    .
    “it is inaccurate to generalize”
    .
    It is inaccurate to generalize
    .
    “given the minority of men who prefer sluts and the majority of men who don’t really care”
    .
    It is inaccurate to generalize
    .
    “it suggests that your motivation is not a personal preference against women who’ve had sex”
    .
    Correct, it is not a personal preference against women who’ve had sex. It is a personal preference to not commit to a slut. A “subtle distinction” easily missed when viewed through an emotional lens.
    .
    ” but the belief that sluts are inherently bad because they’ve had sex, which is slut shaming.”
    .
    Then, a person CAN shame another merely by having a belief. All it takes is a belief, and you’re branded as a shamer. Man sitting quietly outside approached by a gaggle of careerist women: “Hey bucko, we see that belief! stop it you slut shamer! You’re making us feel bad about ourselves and your beliefs could cause us to be raped, harassed, denied jobs and other connections du jour”
    .
    There may a whole host of reason why a man prefers to not commit to a slut. Obviously, if not for the prolific sex part, she would not be a slut. They may or may not be considered “bad” for the sex but clearly she is “bad” for the commitment part. Another one of those annoying “subtle distinctions”
    .

  • GudEnuf

    Is there any evidence that rapists discriminate based on sluttiness?

    “I’m gonna rape you!”
    “But I’m still a virgin.”
    “Oh, sorry. Do you know where there are any sluts I can rape?”

    All of us should excessive prudence to avoid being victims, but there comes a point when excessive emphasis on prudence disrespects the victim. In general, people are far more likely to blame rape victims than they are to blame, say, pickpocketing or arson victims.

    There’s also too much tolerance of rape in male circles. I read in the paper about a woman who was fingered by a stranger when she was passed out drunk. Afterwards, her rapist said he didn’t think it counted as long he didn’t put his penis inside…

    Fortunately my friends have never said anything about raping, but if they did I would turn them in a heartbeat.

  • modernguy

    Lol, well if it’s “not really sex”, you can’t blame the guy for taking it to it’s logical conclusion. If they want to claim rape, then the same act should count towards a woman’s number when done consentually. Of course as always women want to have it both ways, like little children.

  • GudEnuf

    Lol, well if [fingering is] “not really sex”, you can’t blame the guy for taking it to it’s logical conclusion

    Except it is. Women who say it’s not are wrong.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Except it is. Women who say it’s not are wrong.

      No woman who gets fingered is going to say she had sex with that guy. Fingering is petting. The truth is, most women will not count blowjobs as sex either. Yes, these are sexual acts. But when it comes to tracking, and telling, the number = P in V. And I think a logical argument can be made for that. If you want to know specific information, you’ll have to ask specific questions.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    YOHAMI: I’m glad we agree that most people are not rapists. Do you have some manner of evidence that suggests that the current sociological consensus on the causes of rape is inaccurate?

    Abbot: Well… yeah. For instance, the belief “black people are inherently stupider than white people” can make black people feel worse about themselves, and can cause black people to be harassed, denied jobs and other connections du jour. Or to pick another example probably closer ot your heart, the belief “men are all rapists” can lead to shaming of male sexuality. I… didn’t think this was a controversial thought?

    Again: I don’t care if you prefer not to commit to a slut. I care if you think sluts are worse people because they are sluts. This is not that hard to understand.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Do you have some manner of evidence that suggests that the current sociological consensus on the causes of rape is inaccurate?

    Whats the consensus of the causes of rape, and what sociological proof do they have?

  • jess

    yuk,
    Susan do you really condone modernguys take on criminal sexual assault?

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    My definition of sex is “the reasonable effort by at least one person to consensually cause an orgasm in another.” My roommate and I once spent several hours hashing this out. :) Of course, this doesn’t change the issue of whether non-consensual fingering is rape (yes).

    YOHAMI: Predator theory.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Oz

      My definition of sex is “the reasonable effort by at least one person to consensually cause an orgasm in another.”

      I’m not sure I’m reading this correctly. Surely casual hookups, with orgasm frequency of 44% for men and 19% for women involve very little effort to get anyone off but oneself. Sexually satisfying casual experiences are the exception, not the norm. Much research has been done on this.

  • Aldonza

    @Oz

    My definition of sex is “the reasonable effort by at least one person to consensually cause an orgasm in another.”

    So I guess lap dances count then…depending on how hard the girl was working it. ;-)

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    ozymandias, thanks for the link and the long read. And your point is?

  • Tom

    Abbott
    The only discussion about what defines a “real man” comes from “Tom” so maybe that’s where you’re getting that.
    ________________
    I NEVER said anything about what a real man does or thinks..I have tried to shed some light behind why a lot of men do not want an experienced woman. They can make all the excuses they want, but it still boils down to security, or lack of it. If a guys thinks an experienced woman will cheat on him, ok more power to him. But in the majority of cases that isnt why, you and I both know that.

  • GudEnuf

    Aldonza:

    So I guess lap dances count then…depending on how hard the girl was working it.

    I would argue that a non-consensual lap dance should count as rape.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @GudEnuf

      I would argue that a non-consensual lap dance should count as rape.

      I can’t always tell when you are joking. What is a non-consensual lap dance? One where there is a gun to the woman’s head? In any case, that is sexual assault, not rape. Most sexual assault counselors feel that it is very important to reserve the word rape to refer to penetration. Obviously, this is a gray area, i.e. broomsticks count, but it’s a word that has become overused. Some women complain of “eye rape.”

  • Stephenie Rowling

    My definition of sex is “the reasonable effort by at least one person to consensually cause an orgasm in another.”

    That guy on the 40 days or 40 nights lost the bet in the middle of the movie
    Damn flower! :)

  • Abbot

    “why a lot of men do not want an experienced woman…still boils down to security”
    .
    If that is true, then what exactly is the problem and how does that in any way harm women or make their lives worse? If that is true, then what a great weeder outer for a woman who does not want an insecure man. So its actually a huge benefit for women. But its a guaranteed certainty that if nearly all women were prolific multi-man “experienced” it would not matter if a man was insecure, disgusted, disconcerted, or discombobulated because then it would be akin to dismissing a woman because her nails were painted. And the poor guy would end up with no woman.
    .

  • Abbot

    “the belief “black people are inherently stupider than white people” can make black people feel worse about themselves”
    .
    Well, so far, men who prefer not to consider sluts for marriage have not caused women to feel worse about themselves. Assuming women even knew that was going on, why would they feel worse about themselves? Its been said by women many times that they would not want a man like that anyway. There may very will be a lot of men who don’t want a slut because they believe sluts are stupid or whatever bad thing. There are many people in general who have all sorts of negative beliefs about other people. For the most part, no action is taken, nothing is said, nothing happens and nobody is shamed.

  • Höllenhund

    Hollenhund’s points above should not be taken lightly – Al Qaeda built it’s entire organization in this way, on the backs of the Male sexual losers of Middle Eastern/Islamic society

    If I may quote War Nerd from The Exiled:

    But look back with a good cold eye at what Al Qaeda was and you see they only recruited well in one demographic: Middle/Upper-Class, Not-That-Bright, Middle Eastern Surplus Young Men. There are a lot of those around, thanks to oil money and high birth rates, and they bounce. That’s what they do: they bounce from prostitutes and cognac in Paris to cults in Denmark to one after another school, pretending to be “studying” to become whatever lame childish job takes their fancy and spends their stipends without asking too much. They’re “going to become” lawyers or doctors or work for the UN or they’ve developed a perpetual motion machine or they’re going to bring Islam to the spiritually starved masses of Warsaw—every dumb-ass project a bunch of pampered hicks can come up with. Just imagine an Islamic Jethro from Beverly Hillbillies going down the list with dad’s money: “Ah’m gonna be a doctor, Grannie! …A preacher! …A Inventor!” And every time, it’s slapstick failure. And the older and more annoyed he gets at the way the world won’t let him play the hero, Jethro moves down the list to: “Ah’m gonna be a martyr, Granny!”

    Why not? People go back to their roots. Here just as much as there. How many hippies mutated back to real-estate agents in California? How many cokeheads are fulltime Christians now? You warp back to your Granny’s dreams when you’ve shot your own bolt.

    And there you are: Mohammed Atta and his overpriced friends with one last chance to show how important they are.

    http://exiledonline.com/wn-37-is-there-an-al-qaeda/

  • jess

    digitally penetrating an unconscious, unconsenting person, male or female, is serious sexual assault at least and in the uk would mean a custodial sentence and placement upon a lifelong sexual offenders register.
    .
    I’m not quite sure that it qualifies as ‘rape’ as most people think of P in V for that.
    I think orgasm attempt, successful or otherwise has nothing to do with anything in terms of description of act and I’m pretty sure the law says so too.
    .
    Abbot: you keep banging the drum about why people are complaining about slut shaming and its because of the vile and disrespectful language you employ and the attitude you present. And its so transparent it leads me and surely others to assume you are attempting to wind people up. I know that goes on a lot on the web but I’m surprised you havent got bored of it by now.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    digitally penetrating an unconscious, unconsenting person

    Digitally, like in photoshop?

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Jess, do you love womanizers? Abbot contempt for sluts is similar to the overall female contempt for womanizers. You take his posture like he was committing hate crime, but his resentment makes perfect sense. You (feminism, actually, not you in particular) are putting something down his throat that tastes bad to him. You do it in the name of tolerance but you are not tolerating him. Very, very one-sided of yours.

    But if you do love womanizers, then you love me, so more power to you.

  • Doug1

    Susan w.

    Obviously, this is a gray area, i.e. broomsticks count, but it’s a word that has become overused.

    For rape? I don’t agree. I think there has to a risk of pregnancy, or at the very least a serious risk STD’s (no I don’t like the PC STI) for it to rape rather than sexual assault. Broomsticks therefore don’t count as rape. Forced oral doesn’t either. Forced anal i’m iffy on. Yeah, could be. Not gonna fight that. Forced vaginal, definitely.

  • Doug1

    Getting back to the theme of the post, I have a very hard time believing this unique study is representative.

    There’s a hell of a lot of anecdotal evidence of the prevalence of hookup culture on Uni campuses in America these days and for a number of years now. All over the place in the press. About no one in college disagrees that I’ve seen.

    I’m not saying the anecdotal or other evidence indicates in reality, despite some journalism to the contrary, that MOST college girls or guys participate heavily in hook up sex. But rather that it’s very common among the “sexual elite”, who don’t seem to be any 2-3%. More like 20% or at least 10%. I’d guess the former for girls and the later for guys.

    More studies needed. One funded with a feminist mandate (sexual abuse on campuses) isn’t a priori likely to give the most reliable results.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    The “well, if he just sticks his finger in, it’s not REALLY rape” line of thought grosses me out. If the sexual assault leaves a woman with PTSD, unable to engage in intimate sexual contact without flashbacks, having nightmares, etc., I don’t know if it’s meaningful to say “well, it’s not really rape.” This is particularly because I’m kinky, so “sex” for me may mean a flogging or other activity that the mainstream would not recognize as sex; that doesn’t mean that someone flogging me without my consent wouldn’t be damaging.

    Not to mention that men can get raped (a hard penis is not a sign of consent!), and women can be rapists; to define rape as “forced vaginal penetration” leaves out a whole area of

    Susan: Yep, that was one of the edge cases we considered. We decided that since most sex acts are more likely to get one partner off than the other (blowjobs and vaginal for men, cunnilingus for women) it still counted. Also that most hookup sex is Bad Sex and that one should not have casual sex drunk, but that’s neither here nor there.

    Yohami: Short version: the current consensus on rape is that it is performed by a few highly misogynist men as a means of expressing their hatred for women.

    Also, I like womanizers for sex, assuming they’re otherwise decent people and good in bed. Seducing male virgins is hard work and they always end up falling in love with you. :) Outside of the bedroom, I don’t give a fuck about other people’s bedroom habits; it doesn’t change my opinion of them one way or the other.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Yohami: Short version: the current consensus on rape is that it is performed by a few highly misogynist men as a means of expressing their hatred for women.

    Which makes sense. Thieves “hate” rich people too, still, stealing is about getting the goods and not about power, even when power is involved. Rape is about sex and is done by criminals. Not just done by “men against women”, which only fuels discrimination about the majority of men who are more than happy to combat those crimes.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Exactly! Rape of women by men is performed by A FEW very misogynist men; the vast majority of men do not rape.

    I don’t think you’re quite understanding my point. Most rapists are capable of obtaining consensual sex; they rape in order to prove they have power over women, whom they despise. It is not about the orgasm; if it was about orgasms, they would hire prostitutes (illegal, but so’s rape) or masturbate.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Ozy, no, these rapists would not have consensual sex with the woman they desire

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Ozy, so I just read a bunch of stuff from Kimmel, superficially. He clicks a lot of issues, but from the wrong perspective. So, simply put, he is wrong.

    He paints masculinity like he was an alien who didnt know what he is talking about, like human culture invented genre. Genre comes from the animal kingdom and all of the explanations are there. We just added make up and keep finding variants to play the same parts.

    So fuck Kimmel and his anti male thesis

  • GudEnuf

    Thieves “hate” rich people too, still, stealing is about getting the goods and not about power, even when power is involved. Rape is about sex and is done by criminals.

    Rich people steal as much, if not more than poor people.

    I know it’s not a popular thesis, but pretty much anyone can get laid if they’re desperate enough. Even men. No one needs to rape for an orgasm.

  • Abbot

    Why have feminists always been so hung up on convincing people that rape is about power over women and not about wanting sex?

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Why have feminists always been so hung up on convincing people that rape is about power over women and not about wanting sex?

    Im not sure. I think

    1) for women sex comes granted, so they dont understand nor the male sex drive, nor the frustration/rage that comes when you are sexually aroused/manipulated

    2) labeling rape about “power” fits the Feminism views better

    3) once the crime was translated to be about “power”, then they dissolute the meaning and say rape is everywhere, in many shapes and color, so every guy is a rapists

    4) it becomes another weapon to denigrate men and use men whiteknight instincts to make men work on removing themselves from the equation

    5) they get to make healthy male sexual arousal equivalent to harassment / rape, shaming men for having sexual drive. this while freeing the female sexual drive

    6) maybe they are just a bunch of deviant / lesbians? they want a society of castrated men and gay women? or?

    I wonder how can the same person root for the self steem of a 14 years old female “slut”, and at the same time shame a 14 years old boy by saying his masculinity is a social construct that, like a sickness has to be removed from him to make him “free”

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    GudEnuf,

    pretty much anyone can get laid if they’re desperate enough. Even men. No one needs to rape for an orgasm.

    Where did you get this from? its a dirty piece of misinformative sexist crap.

  • Clarence

    Again and again this meme that rape is ONLY about power and never sex!

    It is surprisingly resistant to facts such as the fact that most rapes are of women in their 20’s and to such an extent that a 25 year old woman is literally dozens if not hundreds of times more likely to be raped than an 80 year or a 5 year old for that matter. It ignores that rapists seem to have different reasons for rape, if you ASK them. Books have been written asking rapists why they rape, after all.

    It’s just like the 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 memes that never go away and have been around since the early 70’s transmuting as needed depending on the needs and ignorance of the feminists who employ them.

  • Tom

    @Abbot,

    “If that is true, then what exactly is the problem and how does that in any way harm women or make their lives worse? If that is true, then what a great weeder outer for a woman who does not want an insecure man. So its actually a huge benefit for women. But its a guaranteed certainty that if nearly all women were prolific multi-man “experienced” it would not matter if a man was insecure, disgusted, disconcerted, or discombobulated because then it would be akin to dismissing a woman because her nails were painted. And the poor guy would end up with no woman.
    __________________
    Abott, I question, sometimes, your reading comprehension. I never said it harms women or makes their lives worse. The problm is actually not the womans problem. The probleem is solely a male problem. Many times it is a hypocritcal one at that. Too bad, however, the mast majority of men who have this prejudice against women of experience use excuses for their “preference.” You say they are entitled to their preference, and I agree. I`m just suggesting the “reason” behind their preference.

  • Tom

    @ Susan,
    My definition of sex is “the reasonable effort by at least one person to consensually cause an orgasm in another.”

    I’m not sure I’m reading this correctly. Surely casual hookups, with orgasm frequency of 44% for men and 19% for women involve very little effort to get anyone off but oneself. Sexually satisfying casual experiences are the exception, not the norm. Much research has been done on this.

    _______________________
    I would imagine not all hookups are intercourse only. Certainly oral sex fits into her definition of sex.. I think she may have been including oral or manual sex as defnitions of sex.

  • Tom

    @ Abbot,
    There may a whole host of reason why a man prefers to not commit to a slut. Obviously, if not for the prolific sex part, she would not be a slut. They may or may not be considered “bad” for the sex but clearly she is “bad” for the commitment part. Another one of those annoying “subtle distinctions”
    .
    _______________________
    In your own words, it is innaccurate to generalize. .. “But clearly she is bad for relationships”…Should read, but clearly SOME sluts may be bad for reelationships.” Clearily not all sluts are bad for relationships.

  • Tom

    @ Abbot
    “That explains the other @50% of promiscuous women who go on to have successeful relationships”
    .
    Well there you have it gentlemen. If you get past the wretch, you need not worry about the relationship itself. Throw your pre-existing mental flaw promiscuous women dice against the wall and you get snake eyes *only* 50% of the time. Nice to know that’s finally put to rest.
    .
    “a lot of experienced women are a good bet, but as a man you must be discriminating…they end up in a relationship with the wrong type of woman”
    .
    A lot of “former” alcoholics could be a good bet, but as a man you are not obligated to put in the EXTRA effort required to give women a break. Why would a man put in the extra work required to weed out 50% of them from a population that is very easy to avoid in the first place? His grandpa did not even face such a prospect, so why should he?
    ____________________
    I think in ALL potential relationship evaluations, a man or woman needs to evaluate the other persons character before entering into a relationship. Now if you are the narrow minded type of person who thinks ALL people of experience are of bad character, then you are mistaken. Your virgin bride could be a closet klepto, who knows. Once you are satisfied your crush passes the character test, it then, shouldnt matter.

  • Tom

    @GudEnuf
    Before you go for your “good buy” slut, you should probably read the following:
    .
    proverb-30-meat-market-economics
    __________________
    what a sad commentary from that link…. To think people ACTUALLY see others as only a piece of meat. Honestly it is sad.

  • Tom

    @ David Foster

    I was at the supermarket yesterday and notice a little girl–probably about 6–wearing a shirt that said “I don’t need your attitude–I’ve got plenty of my OWN.” She was there with her mother. White, and–judging from the demographics of the area and the SUV they were getting into–at least upper-middle-classs.

    What a charming friend/girlfriend/wife this girl is likely to be in 10 or 15 years. (And I’ve seen plenty of shirts of this general type that are much, much worse)

    Why on earth would any parent think it’s smart or funny to encourage this kind of thing? I think given the level of “be a bitch” propaganda that exists, it’s remarkable that there are as many nice, well-balanced women as there are.
    _______________________
    My daughter who played softball at the division one level had a tee shirt I bought her at a tournament when she was 14.
    It read on the front, “Throw like a girl”..However on the back it read, “doesn`t mean what it used to.” I guess a man`s man would not see the message there, only contempt for a young woman . I really see a lot of men here who honestly think they are better than women.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    YOHAMI: That is not what feminists actually believe. Feminists believe that the vast majority of men are not rapists; many feminists believe that most people (of both genders) participate in rape culture, which is a complex of beliefs and behaviors that encourages sexual violence– this concept is where you might have gotten confused.

    Sex-positive feminists believe in the liberation of all sexuality. This liberation means that each person should be free to make their own sexual choices and encouraged to make healthy decisions; simultaneously, it holds that people should only perform sexual behavior with enthusiastically consenting partners (which in some circumstances may mean asking if your partner wants sex), should not sexually harass people and generally should not treat other people as primarily objects for their sexual gratification. But all of this holds true equally for men and women; I’m not allowed to make my boyfriend have sex he doesn’t want to have either.

    Feminists believe that rape is about power because rape IS about power. No one wants to have sex with someone who isn’t enjoying themselves; given that, and the correlations between, y’know, being a rapist and hating women, the conclusion is fairly obvious.

    Also, everyone can get laid with low enough standards. There’s Craigslist, sex workers, etc.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Ozy, we agree on pretty much everything except this

    rape IS about power. No one wants to have sex with someone who isn’t enjoying themselves

    No one, really? do you mean one person rapes another person to keep them down, and not to get sexual pleasure?

    Also, everyone can get laid with low enough standards.

    Not sure whats the point about this, please elaborate.

  • OffTheCuff

    This thread has jumped the shark.

  • Abbot

    I never said it harms women or makes their lives worse.

    Well, there you have it. It does not. Now we can put that to rest.
    .
    The probleem is solely a male problem. Many times it is a hypocritcal one at that./em>
    .
    What exactly is the “problem” defined as something that is in need of a solution? Is it something that harms men or makes their lives worse? Or is it something else? Should a woman avoid a man who selects her based on hypocritical thinking. Will it wreck their marriage?
    .
    Too bad, however, the mast majority of men who have this prejudice against Women Of Experience use excuses for their “preference.”
    .
    If true, why is that too bad? Do they really need to have an excuse to not prefer WOE’s? That’s giving men way too much credit – like they actually think about this. Do they need an excuse because they have to answer to someone who is berating them for their motives? Is there a WOE Nanny who goes around shaming men, making them feel like they have to explain their choices? Seems like there really is, yes?
    .
    I`m just suggesting the “reason” behind their preference.
    .
    WHY?

  • Abbot

    Feminists believe that rape is about power because rape IS about power.
    .
    Most people, nearly all people, do not hold that cult in high regard so what they believe does not mean much. However, assuming that is true, then it must be about power over women in their twenties as that seems to be the majority of those who are raped, as noted above. Women at that age are also the most sought after for sex. MUST be just a coincidence.
    .
    It might be useful to ask rapists why they raped. But feminists hate getting mud on their faces.
    .
    and boy did they run off, tail between legs after this ad was run and the mud on their faces was real thick. They got duped on purpose in order to embarrass them, and it worked! Did not hear a peep out of them after that. No apology, no “we were wrong”. IOW no decency. That is why folks don’t listen to them.
    .
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020102067.html

  • Stephenie Rowling

    2) labeling rape about “power” fits the Feminism views better

    I think this is probably the most important reason.
    Feminism decided to liberate female sexuality by making it about power, having promiscuous sex is empowering and an important part of maturing. If they wouldn’t had added an abstract concept like power to sex, they will advocating for people to embrace their animal side and just have sex because “you are horny” and that would had condoned men’s sexuality (ogling,preferring hot younger women, cat calling…) because they were acting out of their animal impulse as much as women did.
    By making it about power you can say that once you ogle a woman you are objectifying her and sexualizing her, taking away her power over her sexuality. So is easier to use the double standard because women are always victims, no matter what they do their position in society doesn’t allow them to objectify men so they ogling hot men on billboards or TV is empowering because they are learning to “embrace their long repressed sexuality” while if a man does it he is “abusing his privilege” and taking away women’s power. Like you can see making sex about power is the best way to keep their cake eating.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @ozymandias
    Feminism on paper does express all this things, but in the real world feminists are not male’s sexuality friendly.

  • Abbot

    having promiscuous sex is empowering and an important part of maturing
    .
    Feminists need not wonder why they have lost all credibility. Although there was never that much to begin with after 1959. Assuming that they are correct, there must have been a lot of women rejected by men for being immature during the past few centuries.
    .
    “Hey Bob, Mabel there sure is nice but she’s seems too innocent. Could use a bit more pummeling. Throw her back in for a while for some more pre-marriage break in and you’ll have quite a WOE there to brag about”

  • Abbot

    they will advocating for people to embrace their animal side and just have sex because “you are horny”
    .
    That is EXACTLY how men and most people see the feminist line. The feminists really shot their foot with this. Its so easy to now point to them as being agents of depravity and that needs to be pushed on them more as its great propaganda to bury their cause.
    .
    learning to “embrace their long repressed sexuality”
    .
    Proof that feminists dont like a challenge as its easy to get the low hanging fruit so there is nothing to learn. Well, their next move assuredly will attempt to teach women how to secure a husband after all that “embracing.” But that is a MUCH harder course to teach and even harder to put into practice. After all, its always easy to find a home for a young pussy…but the whole woman years later, not so much.

  • Tom

    I`m just suggesting the “reason” behind their preference.
    .
    WHY?
    ________________
    WHY NOT? I dont like excuses.
    Men have to spread their seed (no they dont). Men are naturally more promiscuous (no they arn`t) Men are studs, women are sluts (no they aren`t) I dont want an experienced woman, they are of bad character (no, not all of them) Women who are experienced will cheat( not the ones of good character) I dont want an experienced woman, just because( because you are insecure and dont want to be compared) a woman who is less experienced has more value (Really, guess what, pussy`s are like side walks, they dont wear out.As long as they are disease free they are good to go.)

  • Tom

    “Hey Bob, Mabel there sure is nice but she’s seems too innocent. Could use a bit more pummeling. Throw her back in for a while for some more pre-marriage break in and you’ll have quite a WOE there to brag about”
    ______________
    has not that been mens philosophy for along time? Fuck any and everything that walks, because we all know, “one cant have enough “stud” in them.” He sure will know how to show her the ropes when HE gets married…..

  • Tom

    Rape is certainly about both sex and power. He has the power to humiliate her while leaving his load behind as a reminder he had his fun, whether she wanted him to or not…. see pretty damn simple.

  • Abbot

    “has not that been mens philosophy for along time?”
    .
    Well, there you have it. All the reasoning you need. Who knew that’s how women really think about their “self-guided” behaviors; they are not really their own but mere facsimiles of the “best practices” of others. A real character former, yes-sir-ee. Better not to rein men in; just do what they do, or really just put into practice their “philosophy” with select empowerment agents and hope a few remain to catch the WOE balls.

  • Aldonza

    I was going to weigh in on the rape is sex, rape is power argument, but then I found this and it explained my position better than I could: http://scienceblogs.com/thusspakezuska/2010/06/isnt_rape_really_just_all_abou.php

    As it turns out there are 4 main rapist profiles in use by law enforcement and criminologists today: http://www1.csbsju.edu/uspp/CrimPsych/CPSG-5.htm. It seems the first one is mostly about sex. The other three have little to do with sex. There is also a fifth one that nobody mentions called “Opportunistic Rapist”, someone who rapes in the course of committing another crime. I’d put war crimes in this category, although I’m sure there is plenty of over-lap between the types and motivations involved in any single crime and criminal.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Aldonza,

    I could get a clear position from that link, other than this

    We define [rape, murder, and war] by their properties and their effects, not their causes, and there’s no reason to think that acts that share an effect also share a cause…[A]ll homicides share the same effect…but they don’t all have the same cause…Seeking the cause of murder, war, or rape may be a fundamental mistake, like asking for the cause of things that weigh 10 pounds.

    Which is the same as saying: I dont care about the causes of rape?

    Then skimmed through this http://www1.csbsju.edu/uspp/CrimPsych/CPSG-5.htm. and all types have “sex” on it? which ones do you say have little to do with sex?

    Back to the question, why would rape not be about sex? deviant, malign, pervert, criminal, abusive, violent, sex. Why remove sex with “power”? theres something missing and funky in that position that doesnt match reality – at least the reality I observe.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    *couldnt get a clear position from the first link

  • Tom

    Abott, I never said it was right, just making the connection. Most men do not like the fact women now “enjoy” the same freedoms men have had. That doesnt make it right or wrong. That depends on who is doing the judging

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    I found some jewels in the comments from the first link that at least are articulate about its point of view. I find the point of view flawed, but hey, at least its clear and not a bunch of garble. This is good:

    comment 15

    The whole sexual desire as a motivation for rape is so freakin’ ridiculous. Come on, fellas. We can all agree that rape involves physical pain and emotional trauma. Yes? Now, if a person can still achieve “sexual desire” while hurting someone then it’s no longer just about the desire for sex. It’s about the desire to hurt someone. It’s about confusing the desire for sex with the desire to hurt someone.

    Inserting the “empathy impaired” angle into the argument is just more distraction. Yes, psychopaths tend to be empathy impaired. Is this the bar we judge the rest of us by?

    I am convinced that the rape apologists’ “argument” contorts into a mental shell game because they are trying to trick themselves into believing that rape and the oppression of women through violence is “natural.” It’s not natural. It’s unnatural. It is man-made and it can be man-unmade if only the rape apologists would stop grasping at excuses for terrorizing and dehumanizing half the population.

    comment 18

    If you’re used to thinking in terms of how to “get” a partner to want sex, whether through buying dinner or whining that it’s been X days or whatever, you’re already thinking in terms of your partner being someone who isn’t going to choose sex with you freely. From there, coercion just looks like a matter of degree, and we get the tools showing up splitting hairs about just how much pressure they’re allowed before it’s rape. These guys can believe rape is about sex because it hasn’t occurred to them that sex without the coercive aspect is even an option.

    comment 24 “rape culture”

    We live in a rape culture where women can be raped and not realize what happened to them was rape. Men live in a culture where a lack of a ‘no’ is all it takes for them to think that they are getting consensual sex, no matter how unwilling or uncomfortable their partner seems. Sex itself is made into dominance and power for men. Sex is a thing that they have to obtain rather than something two people do together. I think sex in general is about power and dominance to most men in this toxic environment, and that it is really hard to find a man who hasn’t internalized this bullshit so strongly that they get confused about the difference between dominating a woman and having sex with her. All the guys saying that it is *really* about sex are saying the same thing as those saying it is about power- if they can keep their sexual interest in a woman they are traumatizing (or if they can’t be bothered to find out if they are), then sex is about power over another human being to them. The power imbalance is sexy to them. If it was as grotesque as it should be to commit sexual violence then there wouldn’t be an issue.

    Aldoza, thanks for the link, I gained some insight

    That point of view, however, hints that any attempt to rationalize, explain or find the truth other than saying “rape is power” is like throwing a granade on their faces. Very dogmatic in my book. So I ask, why? These patterns dont match reality guys. In order to make reality fit into your *ism, you are leaving a big chunk of everything out.

    I could talk forever in depth and learn a lot of things. Its sad some people only want to stand for the academy / trends / isms, whatever these happen to be.

  • Abbot

    “I never said it was right”
    .
    Therefore any so-called “character building” propaganda based on this behavior is flawed. Any person who relies on such activity as character forming is using a euphemism to make themselves feel better or to sadistically hook others into such activities. Or they really believe it in which case they remain in a state of delusion about who they are. Yep, that makes for a great spouse. Be. Very. Scared.
    .
    “Most men do not like the fact women now “enjoy” the same freedoms men have had”
    .
    Well, that’s a lot of men or at least more than half of them. It assumes men enjoy something that women would enjoy also. In general, that is not the case. Many, if not most things men do, whether or not enjoyed, are not given the same or any affinity by women. A heterosexual man typically avoids women with certain traits that are the same as his because that is not someone who would be a compliment for him. There are some men who are quite happy that there are now some women who have collected certain traits, character builders or otherwise. That is, there is more choice today for men in the variety of women available. So, what’s not to like?

  • jess

    Indeed, there is something for everyone.
    Traditionalists and modernists can get along fine and no need to shame or insult anyone or use ‘loaded’ phrases.
    .
    Yohami: Of course I dislike Abbotts bile. In the same way I would dislike a racist. You asking me to ‘tolerate his intolerance’ is daft. Anyway I take the view he is being mischievous.
    .
    I have dealt with a few rape victims in previous jobs. Some died from their injuries. Some had further violence directed at them after the rape was committed. I have always felt power and violence were ahead of the sex. However to have the erection to rape does suggest sex is part of it of course.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Jess, if you are to chime in please answer my question about loving womanizers

  • Abbot

    I dont like excuses.
    .
    They will disappear when the plethora of options do. A WOE’s dream.

  • jess

    Yohami,
    Sorry, didnt mean to ignore the question.
    .
    Umm, not sure, I have had a few moments with womanizers and enjoyed myself but generally they havent been my type. My SO is a soft cuddly guy with some elements of alpha and beta and a tad of ‘player’ in him.
    .
    I guess I’m not too keen on the idea of them. I dont like the idea of them breaking lots of girls hearts for sure and I would imagine they contribute to the STD epidemic.
    .
    I have often thought that a serial womanizer might be damaged and is trying to prove something by banging lots of girls.
    I think a guy to have 20-30 girls is ‘spreading the seed’ but if he started doing 100’s I would imagine hes a bit jaded/desensitized/cynical etc.
    Then of course there are issues of deception, safe sex, etc. Context is important. I suppose I have similar feelings towards promiscious girls?

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Jess, all valid points. Now if a friend of your was to marry a guy you dont know personally, but you happen to know he is a heavy womanizer (200+ partners), would you be happy or worried for your friend?

  • jess

    Depends on freindship. If she wasnt close I would shut the hell up.
    .
    It would depend on details. If he was a reformed character and was plausible I might be cool with it.
    .
    But as you are probably suggesting shes close to me and hes clealry a nasty rogue then I would strive to convince my friend to rethink.
    .
    I mean 200? Have an STI check for a start…..

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Hum, but dont you think you are discriminating the guy? all these IFs and tests and you mentioned he might be jaded? whats that about?

    So how if there´s a womanizer epidemy and a huge lot of guys are getting 200+ parners? reinforced by tv, ads, shows, etc?

    Something to worry about or celebrate?

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    and did you say “reformed” ? so he cant be happy with his 200+ count? whos gonna “reform” the guy and based on what standards, and which what purpose?

  • Mike C

    This:
    .
    I have often thought that a serial womanizer *might be damaged* and is trying to prove something by banging lots of girls.
    .
    And this:
    .
    If he was a *reformed character* and was plausible I might be cool with it.
    .
    The sheer, unadulterated absurdity of these statements sends the mind reeling. This….coming from the same person prattling on about the benefits of women having flings, and how a woman couldn’t possibly be “damaged” by promiscous sexual behavior.
    .
    Beyond surreal.

  • Mike C

    Feminism decided to liberate female sexuality by making it about power, having promiscuous sex is empowering and an important part of maturing. If they wouldn’t had added an abstract concept like power to sex, they will advocating for people to embrace their animal side and just have sex because “you are horny” and that would had condoned men’s sexuality (ogling,preferring hot younger women, cat calling…) because they were acting out of their animal impulse as much as women did.
    By making it about power you can say that once you ogle a woman you are objectifying her and sexualizing her, taking away her power over her sexuality. So is easier to use the double standard because women are always victims, no matter what they do their position in society doesn’t allow them to objectify men so they ogling hot men on billboards or TV is empowering because they are learning to “embrace their long repressed sexuality” while if a man does it he is “abusing his privilege” and taking away women’s power.

    .
    I just have to say this is excellent, perceptive analysis. I never thought of the issue and how it is framed exactly like this, but you are spot on correct.

  • Abbot

    benefits of women having flings
    .
    Well, for the woman having them, they must seem beneficial, at least at the moment.

  • Höllenhund
  • jess

    Yohami,
    ,
    Well you painted an extreme and I gave you an honest answer.
    Discrimination has to rear its head at some point in sexual/LTR selection.
    .
    But if I decided for myself or for a friend that a guy who has 2500 women behind him that he wasnt a bet its a polite decline.
    .
    I wouldnt start a vitriolic tirade against him or his kind. Why would I?
    .
    As for culture, it DOES currently celebrate and reward male promiscuity. I think its irresponsible and I would argue for desexualisation of western cultures for everyones sake.
    .
    Some guys need seriouAMeducation on STD’s so the situation you describe is actually here to some extent and I am worried about it. Absent fathers, poor parenting etc, its all connected.
    .
    But that doesnt mean I am anti sex, just pro ‘responsible fun sex’. Preferably after 18 and fully informed.

  • Abbot

    this is excellent, perceptive analysis
    .
    agreed. It also sort of assumes that feminists think that men derive their power from the act of sex but sex is for reproduction. So is reproduction about power? All that we do – eat, work, sleep, – is geared to reproduction. So is all that we do then about power? If that is true, then why is the focus so much on sex as its the end product?

  • jess

    mike C,
    .
    My comments are not contradictory at all. As i dont wish to waste anyones time explaining the obvious it may be worthwhile you asking a patient friend to explain to you what I wrote.
    From your surrealist co-poster

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Jess, please respond these too:

    Hum, but dont you think you are discriminating the guy? all these IFs and tests and you mentioned he might be jaded? whats that about?

    So how if there´s a womanizer epidemy and a huge lot of guys are getting 200+ parners? reinforced by tv, ads, shows, etc?

    Something to worry about or celebrate?

    And did you say “reformed” ? so he cant be happy with his 200+ count? whos gonna “reform” the guy and based on what standards, and which what purpose?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I just have to say this is excellent, perceptive analysis. I never thought of the issue and how it is framed exactly like this, but you are spot on correct.

    Thank you. Actually I didn’t though of it till I typed it either. I’m very good at making sense of things but I need to get challenged, share and debate the ideas with other people so my brain can connect the dots. But indeed it makes sense. I do wonder if feminists ever think about it this way…unlikely. Feminists don’t question feminism neither make revisions of it. Which is the reason it has become corrupt and damaging, IMO.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Jess
    You are making a mess of your argument. If you think promiscuous sex is healthy and it doesn’t damage people then the number shouldn’t matter. You are saying that Abbot is using an argument akin to racism. To use your analogy you are saying that a man that hates pure black people is a racist, but if he decides that a person that is only 1/8 black is cool and he can love then he is not? Does that makes any sense?

  • Abbot

    You are making a mess of your argument
    .
    Feminists rarely if ever enter into debates for this very reason. This is evident on their blogs where dissenters are usually banned. Its either because the cult attracts the irrational or because the arguments themselves are based on fantasy. Or some combination. However, they are quite good at shaming law makers into codifying their demands. IMBRA as an example.

  • Tom

    I dont like excuses.
    .
    They will disappear when the plethora of options do. A WOE’s dream.

    ___________________
    Well at least you admit men make excusses to cover their insecurities

  • Abbot

    Well at least you admit men make excusses to cover their insecurities
    .
    Why would anyone even waste their time thinking about ways to cover insecurities? In the real world, people do not think about this stuff, especially if there is absolutely no reason to do so. Also, if a woman for any reason makes a man feel uncomfortable, he should, quite simply, find another woman. That is good for both and is much better than making excuses. No?

  • Tom

    @ steph
    You are making a mess of your argument. If you think promiscuous sex is healthy and it doesn’t damage people then the number shouldn’t matter.
    ____________________________________ I would wager, if a person, male or female, has sex with 200+ people, there were already underlying issues and problems with that person to begin with. In my opinion, there is a HUGE difference between a person who has 30 partners and a person who is a serial sexer with 200. The vast majority of people who`s number is, say, @ 40 or 50, are probably, in most cases, not the same personality type as the serial person who has 200. But to say having sex is, in itself, damaging, is a stretch. I will admit some women start to think most men are liars and players, while most players start to think of all women as sluts. However that is a minor opinion, which is easily changed when they finally do fall in love. This damage you all speak of is already there before they even start to have sex. A nut is already a nut, a callous person was already a callous person, a person who tends to look badly on the opposite sex, already did, a player who is dishonest with their hookup was already dishonest, an insecure person was already insecure. Sex may help indentify the flaws already there, but rest assured, the flaws were pre-existing sex. Ever think that some people, who DO use some sort of discretion, might just think, having sex with a few different people, just might be fun? I mean sex, for the most part IS an enjoyable experience, is it not? Heaven forbid a mans current mate may have enjoyed sex (one of the most common activities on the planet) with a few others than himself.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    I would wager, if a person, male or female, has sex with 200+

    Dont fall in the number trap. The only reason Im saying 200+ is so we can all agree this man is a womanizer. If you feel like jumping on the discussion, please address the same questions I asked to Jess. This isnt about the number but about embracing “womanizers” or not.

  • Abbot

    few (fy)
    adj. few·er, few·est
    1. Amounting to or consisting of a small number: one of my few bad habits.
    2. Being more than one but indefinitely small in number: bowled a few strings.
    n. (used with a pl. verb)
    1. An indefinitely small number of persons or things: A few of the books have torn jackets.
    2. An exclusive or limited number: the discerning few; the fortunate few.
    pron. (used with a pl. verb)
    A small number of persons or things: “For many are called, but few are chosen” (Matthew 22:14)

  • Tom

    Abott,
    Why would anyone even waste their time thinking about ways to cover insecurities
    _______________
    Gee I dont know Abott, but they sure do. I guess they ask themselvs the question, ” What is it I dont like about “Sally” having prior sexual experience” They dont like their honest answer, so they conjuror up some nonsense like,”well men are supposed to spread their seed and women are supposed to be chaste, so therefore, its ok I have fucked many women, but she is no longer pure, so I`ll dump her.” I can live with an experiencd man admiting it bothers him that she is experienced, I can buy that. At least he is honest.

  • Tom

    Yohami,
    I`m pretty indifferent where players, sluts, manwhores, womanizers etc are conecrned. There are varing degrees of that behavior. It isnt the amount sex they have that bothers me, per say. It is the character flaws of “some” of those types that concern me as relationship material.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    It is the character flaws of “some” of those types that concern me as relationship material.

    Same here, but we can find character flaws in everybody, regardless of their number. So, there might be a relation between promiscuity and character flaws? maybe. The question is not if you embrace character flaws, but if you embrace heavy womanizers or not.

  • Mike C

    The question is not if you embrace character flaws, but if you embrace heavy womanizers or not.

    Yohami,

    Promiscuous women enjoying flings and “empowering” themselves = GOOD
    Promiscuous men “womanizers” “objectifying” women = BAD

    I’m pretty sure that is a concise summary of the position of a few of our commenters.

  • Abbot

    I can live with an experiencd man admiting it bothers him that she is experienced
    .
    Well then you shall live long knowing that men are being very selective, discriminating and careful…because,well, they can and should be. Good for you.
    .
    “What is it I dont like about “Sally”
    .
    um…that there are not nearly enough Sully’s in the world?

  • Tom

    I guess it is how you define a womamnizer. A guy that is honest with all the women he has sex with, practices safer sex, doesnt go around crushing womens emotions, and is in general a pretty decent guy, I dont care how many women he is with.
    Now if he lies to women to get them into bed, likes to get them to fall for him, only to crush them, is lacks on safer sex, you know the typical player, then no I dispise that guy.
    By the same token, I dispise the women who will sleep with just about any cock that will have her, isnt practicing safer sex, potrays her self in a demeaning manner, and really could give two shits what anyone thinks.
    However, if she is discrete in her actions, deliberate and discriminate in her men selection, isnt needing validation ordesparate for attention, I will probably give her a pass on her past.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    I dispise the women who will sleep with just about any cock that will have her, isnt practicing safer sex, potrays her self in a demeaning manner, and really could give two shits what anyone thinks.

    Which sound like the regular slut

    However, if she is discrete in her actions, deliberate and discriminate in her men selection, isnt needing validation ordesparate for attention, I will probably give her a pass on her past.

    Which sounds like good character, this person is not likely to be a slut

    So you are discriminating sluts, but based on character and not in notches number. Thing is, when speaking statistically, they are more or less the same thing. Highly promiscuous people tend to have character flaws and problems.

    If you say “yes you go slut” to the poblation, you are directly increasing the character flaws in the poblation. Same with womanizers.

    I have a high notch rank, probably above 200+. and Im not a manipulator / lier, yet, I KNOW that players do the stuff wrong.

    The double face thing is absurd. If you want to embrace sluts you have to embrace womanizers, or who are going the sluts to have sex with? the regular folks that will fall in love and get destroyed their character flaws?

    For every slut positive diatribe, feminism has to compensate with a womanizer positive one. If this is about sex positive it has to work for both genders. Not just “empowering” women while attempting to castrate and regulate men sexuality.

    Jess called Abbot racist for disliking sluts, but Jess is also having a hard time getting around my womanizer questions. And at the end, you despise sluts too.

    At least I embrace sluts.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    The vast majority of people who`s number is, say, @ 40 or 50, are probably, in most cases, not the same personality type as the serial person who has 200.

    According to he arguments here it only means that they have more fun with sex. I mean there is no difference in your culture about a person that smoke one cigarette a day and a person that smokes 3 packages both are label smokers and shamed for it. Same principle. This is another “cake eating situation” you can’t go around and say that triple digits is your limit and criticize that double digits is mine’s or any of the other guys and we are wrong for it is a personal preference.

    I particularly don’t see why any true slut will care. When I was dating I placed on my profile that I was black/dark skinned very obviously because I look tan on the pictures (I’m Snooky’s color more or less) to avoid having a poor bastard making a huge trip for nothing because he personally wouldn’t want a mixed bride. I also got rejected by guys over me being a virgin out of many prejudices some guys have (boring, clingy, needy, frigid, something is wrong with her…and so on)
    Did I spent my free time thinking about all the men that rejected me? Not at all.
    We all have our standards, that is the nature of dating if that wasn’t the case we will ask our parents to pick a bride or a groom and be done with it. Again why do you or any other woman here taking this so personally is beyond me.

    The mating dance is hard for all of us, one has to pick a sexual strategy and stick to it, for good or bad, ideally we will have someone older and wiser telling us the pros and cons before we make our pick, I picked mine out of personal wiring but also seeing that the most happiest and successful couples (20 years and more of satisfying marriage which is my personal definition of romantic success) I knew had virgin brides on it and men with low numbers and no “breaking a sex record attitude”, while sluts (male and female) rarely ever formed stable homes.
    Mainstream feminism is advocating that promiscuous sex is a rainbow walk with no ill consequences and no weight on the dating market, Susan and the women and men like her are just trying to shed some light on the cons, why is that so wrong is again beyond me, for every man that rejects a virgin there is at least one that rejects a slut and that is the truth and every should be aware of that.

    Unless you are a solid 10 no woman can just say. “I want to get married to this guy” and make it happen the same way unless you are a solid Alpha you cannot just say “I want to have sex with this woman” and make it happen.
    Life is about winning and losing, there is no such a thing as a perfect life, or perfect sex life or marriage, and anyone that is acting on the frame that all their choices will end up with cake and ice cream is in for a nasty surprise, YMMV.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    *poblation = population

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Mike C,

    Promiscuous women enjoying flings and “empowering” themselves = GOOD
    Promiscuous men “womanizers” “objectifying” women = BAD

    It looks like it, so Im seeing if I can get the feminists to say that out loud, so at least its an open / honest / clear posture.

    There are people with strong biases, say, for example, racism. Where you accept that white people can do a large number of things, but get really shocked when a non white person does the same thing. And the same happens in classes, rich vs poor, ethnicity, etc. For me its clear that feminism is pro women while being anti male, but they dont “seem” to realize it. Its the blind spot. They dont like to perceive themselves as being discriminative, but as being the focus of the discrimination.

    So I ask the questions. If they get to speak their doctrine and the bias is exposed, maybe some of them will realize the mistake and work something that works for both genders. Or maybe Im wrong and feminism is humanism = they love womanizers? that works too. Or maybe they can just confirm their bias and expose a clear discrimination issue they are guilty of. Either case, I vote for clarity.

  • Jess

    Steph . At 12.15
    .
    I agree with a lot of what you said Let people follow their preferences and hold fire on the insults and slurs.
    .
    Virgins and promiscuous people should, within reason do as they wish and not face ridicule. If they were to ask my advice I would say that being a virgin is a waste of your youth and super promiscuity can literally kiLl you.

  • Tom

    For every slut positive diatribe, feminism has to compensate with a womanizer positive one. If this is about sex positive it has to work for both genders………………….” Not just “empowering” women while attempting to castrate and regulate men sexuality. ”

    ________________________________
    This reminds me of title 9 (for equality for female athletes)…The law states that in schools, whether it be high school or college, the facilities for the boys and girls need to be equal in quality. Also for every number of sports for boys, there has to be the same number of sports for girls at that school.
    When the law was passed, normally the boys had a lot better ball fields, locker rooms etc. So in many schools where money was a factor, there were boys sport cut from the programs to make room for the girls sports. As an example, I know of a high school wrestling program discontinued so the school could add a girls softball team. Well as you can imagine the chit hit the fan.. Over time it all worked itself out and now the sexes are pretty equal sports wise. I can see the same thing happening already with men and women. Women now vote, serve in combat, equal pay for equal work,are CEO`s, and men, to a point, have had to make consessions to make room for female “equality.” It will also come to pass in other arenas too.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Over time it all worked itself out and now the sexes are pretty equal sports wise.

      Except that no one comes to watch women play sports (except their families). The teams have equal resources, but do not generate equal enthusiasm or alumnae support. It’s a handout to women’s athletics. Title IX is socialism.

  • Tom

    @ Yohami,
    And at the end, you despise sluts too.
    __________________-
    Dispise may be too strong of a word….. I find people of bad character distasteful. However you and I disagree on the mental makeup of people who sleep around. I discribed the typical slut, and I discribed the woman who enjoys sex, but is not ready for a relationship, doesnt sleep with a different man at every opportunity, is safe and discriminating. Sorry your highness, but there is a BIG differnce in these two types of women who are into promiscuity. Just as there is a difference between the types of men who are promiscous.
    I could really care less if any man would enter into a relationship with an experienced woman, but to lump all promiscuous women into the same group is just asinine. It is exactly the same as saying all black men are thugs… not so.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    No, because there you are grabbing stuff by the end result. Like saying that for every girl with 10 sex partners we have to grab a guy and have him have 10 partners too.

    People have to be FREE of getting the end result they want. Be it become athletes, CEOs, nurses, doctors, miners, presidents, whatever. People have to be FREE, have the RIGHT and the SUPPORT to become any of those things.

    But then, the end result is up to each one. Or you are going to be forcing people into roles just to have an apparent uniformity. So for every black ceo you will find some chinesse to fit a CEO role and have equality. Wont work.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    Dispise may be too strong of a word…..

    Its the word you used

    you and I disagree on the mental makeup of people who sleep around. I discribed the typical slut, and I discribed the woman who enjoys sex, but is not ready for a relationship, doesnt sleep with a different man at every opportunity, is safe and discriminating.

    I said that person has a good character, how are we disagreeing?

    When I prompted the womanizer question, you made it about character flaws, you you are linking character flaws with promiscuity.

    You said the regular player has character flaws, and I agree completely. Do you agree the regular slut has character flaws as well?

  • Abbot

    make consessions to make room for female “equality.” It will also come to pass in other arenas too.
    .
    True, because its not equal. Women do have more multi partner sex then men [in the West]. Must be a mighty big room. So then, what concessions need to be made to make room for female “equality?”

  • Jess

    … But people have the right to do as they wish which involves right or left Wing politics and religious interest. Only if they seriously impair others human rights should we get angry.
    .
    I don’t really subscribe to hard feminism so don’t often get angry often. I do get amused when people write tosh though. In turn my office find these threads a hoot. We have a racist MP over here who appeared on tv recently and was owned by a black professor. The anger when presented with evidence was satisfying and highly amusing. They did badly in the following elections. So reasoning and evidence can have an impact for the better

  • Abbot

    I don’t really subscribe to hard feminism so don’t often get angry often.
    .
    Hard feminist anger is fun. Yeah, its a cheap shot being they’re so easy to goad.

  • Tom

    You said the regular player has character flaws, and I agree completely. Do you agree the regular slut has character flaws as well?

    ______________________
    Your everyday run of the mill slut, yes, more than likely has some character flaws.

    You also said,

    “I said that person has a good character, how are we disagreeing?”

    But then you said,”””””So you are discriminating sluts, but based on character and not in notches number…….. Thing is, when speaking statistically, they are more or less the same thing. Highly promiscuous people tend to have character flaws and problems.”””””” What number do you hang on the word “highly”? you are the one who said it is not the number that counts….
    I do not think the stats show the discriminating “slut” has flaws. Remember 50% of sluts do not cheat in relationships (or what ever that % is) Those are the ones who did sleep around, but did not have the flaws the hardcore slut has.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    Your everyday run of the mill slut, yes, more than likely has some character flaws.

    Well, If you see a multiplication of sluts, doesnt that mean a multiplication of character flaws as well?

    What number do you hang on the word “highly”? you are the one who said it is not the number that counts…

    The number is more or less irrelevant, because chances are the character flaws were there BEFORE the sex occurred. There is a link, but I dont see the character flaws happening BECAUSE of sex, but maybe increased by the nature of hookup: quick cheap impersonal and often bad. So a person having a LOT of that probably has issues. How much is a lot? that depends on the culture, and theres a whole psicology of causes and effects of sex that really dont matter for the point I wanted to discuss.

    The point is: are you feminists embracing sluts while rejecting womanizers? Do you feminists think its wrong to reject sluts, but also think its right to reject womanizers? do you feminists feel at ease with sluts but at unease with womanizers? do you think theres danger in a guy having sex with a huge amount of women, but no danger in a woman having sex with a huge amount of men? do you think its wrong to “shame” on woman having sex, while thinking its right to “shame” men having sex?

    Because when I read the attacks made to Abbot, who is clearly anti slut, its clear that feminist dont consider the share of pain Abbot feels towards sluts. But its also clear that feminists do feel a share of pain about womanizers. So. Put it in simple words, the feminist intransigent posture is made of bullshit.

  • Tom

    I`m neither pro or con feminist. I shy away from people of bad character, wheather they be male or female, slut or womanizer. My point is, I am smart enough to understand …
    all sluts are promiscuous, but not all promiscuous women are sluts….
    All womanizers are promiscuous but not all promiscuous men are womanizers.
    There are people here on this site who disagree.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    Yeah, character, maturity, traits, responsibility, that is what the focus should be about.

  • Tom

    Yohami

    I think we are on the same page most of the time.

  • Abbot

    the feminist intransigent posture is made of bullshit.
    .
    Well, of course. What really is perplexing is why they even bother to tackle this subject and I bet they don’t even know from a logic point of view. Women are emotional about this topic while men are logical. The men are merely attempting to steer clear of the wrong person without nanny staters sticking their emotional tirades where they don’t belong. But they just Will. Not. Stop.

  • jess

    “Women are emotional about this topic while men are logical”
    .
    quite the statement!- not a hint if mysogeny or ignorance then. Women are incapable of logic you see.
    .
    tut… no wonder it was so hard for women to get the vote back in the day, what with their illogical, unintelligent brains and all….

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Jess, you are ignoring my logic questions, yet answering to emotional attacks.

  • jess

    SW, common now, you are a mum yourself with a son and daughter- you think your daughter should have reduced fun and opportunities cos its not as popular????
    .
    Hell lets ban the womens 100m at the Olympics- it doesn’t generate as much commercial revenue.
    .
    You wouldnt have these vews about disadvantaged children or special needs students would you? Everyone deserves a fair crack of the whip.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jess

      SW, common now, you are a mum yourself with a son and daughter- you think your daughter should have reduced fun and opportunities cos its not as popular????

      I think if a sport can’t sustain itself, it shouldn’t drain the resources of the institution. Do you know how much it costs per player for some teams that have no spectators? If a woman wants to play a sport, and a school doesn’t offer it, she can:

      1. choose a different sport
      2. choose a different school
      3. find another venue to play that sport

      Same goes for males. Whether a school offers a sport should reflect the demand for that sport, from both players and spectators, including alums. I’m all about efficiency in the markets, not coddling the few who fence, or play badminton, or whatever.

  • Abbot

    Women are emotional about *this topic*
    .
    Women want a relationship with a particular man – that is an emotional topic
    Men want a relationship with a particular woman – that is also an emotional topic
    .
    Woman shuns a man without feeling – that is logic. Man is hurt – emotion
    Man shuns a woman – same thing, logic. Woman is hurt – emotion
    .
    It depends on what direction you’re going. Men shun sluts a lot more than women shun players. Therefore, men are being logical more often as it regards *this topic*
    .
    Now have a seat and relax
    .
    Ya know, its no surprise that “patriarchy” has worked for so long and just keeps on ticking. There’s going to be quite a vacuum if it ever goes away

  • Stephenie Rowling

    SW, common now, you are a mum yourself with a son and daughter- you think your daughter should have reduced fun and opportunities cos its not as popular????

    But what you are advocating is no fair is privilegde. Male sport team that are not popular or watched get shot down. They are supporting the women in spite of this logical rule. Kids can have fun in million other ways that don’t bend the rules for women ONLY.

    Obviously your sense of justice is biased. FAIR = Whatever gives advantages to women.
    I mean I don’t really mind but please just own it, all your arguments boil down to: Women deserve ALL the choices and the social perks and no consequences or drawbacks no matter what.
    I think people here will respect you more if you just admit it to yourself and us.

  • Abbot

    Everyone deserves a fair crack of the whip.
    .
    There is no opinion that there should not be a fair crack and that a lack of popularity means it should not exist. Its not even implied. The facts are stated. If you dont like those facts, maybe we can find some others.

  • jess

    yohami- sorry i’m multi tasking a lot- its not on purpose i assure you.
    ——————-
    -Hum, but dont you think you are discriminating the guy? all these IFs and tests and you mentioned he might be jaded? whats that about?
    .
    So how if there´s a womanizer epidemy and a huge lot of guys are getting 200+ parners? reinforced by tv, ads, shows, etc?
    Something to worry about or celebrate?
    .
    And did you say “reformed” ? so he cant be happy with his 200+ count? whos gonna “reform” the guy and based on what standards, and which what purpose?
    ———————–
    We all discriminate to some degree and its multi factorial. But rejection doesnt mean humilation or a supeiority complex for the rejector. Im entitled to be concerned about my sexual health. If a guy with only 3 different partners wanted unprotected sex that would be a major flag for me. But a guy with 20 exes who was fun, down to earth and was only up for protected sex then he would seem a mature, well adjusted guy. A guy with 200- it would take a lot to trust him for me personally.
    .
    I am already worred about our over sexualised culture. Damages kids, underage sex, STD- not good. But im not a puritan either. Everything age appropraiate and in moderation. So a womanizer epidemic is a bad thing but SW says its quite a small batch of guys doing that. I have no idea what the truth is there.
    .
    When i said ‘reformed’ I guess i meant a guy who had grown out of that phase of his life and truly wanted to settle down. And a recent sex test certificate!! If over an extended time period he showed himself trustwortthy, decnt and cool and I was very attracted to him and we were compatibale then I guess why not? But he would have to work so hard to prove himself. If my SO had had that number count it would have difficult to swallow but I so adore him I cant imagine ever saying no to him. Nor can I imagine either of us cheating- we trust each other completley.

  • jess

    Steph,
    No- really not the case at all- I would be appalled if the reverse were true.
    Eg, If there were some academic subjects that girls traditionally excel in, that were denied to boys that would be unacceptable too.
    .
    You know maybe its a cultural thing- in the UK you would NEVER get away with boys having more sports facilities than girls- it would be totally unacceptable. The Equal Opportunities Commission would have a field day. (joke intended)
    .
    Its not about being being blindly pro women or anti- men or wishing life was perfect. Its simply a case of correcting overtly unfair practice.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Jess,

    I see your worries about womanizers valid and on point. Do you understand men share the same worries about sluts?

    Lets revert this logic

    A guy with 200- it would take a lot to trust him for me

    It would take a lot for a man to trust a slut

    I am already worred about our over sexualised culture. Damages kids, underage sex, STD- not good.

    Which applies to sluts too

    a womanizer epidemic is a bad thing

    So is a slut epidemic

    When i said ‘reformed’ I guess i meant a guy who had grown out of that phase of his life and truly wanted to settle down.

    Same requirement for a slut, she should be “reformed” and have grown out of that phase

    And a recent sex test certificate!!

    Every reformed slut should carry a recent STD test certificate

    he would have to work so hard to prove himself.

    The former slut would have to work so hard to prove herself.

    So, summing all of this. Im not going to call you “racist” for putting womanizers in the undesired category. I guess if I organized a march, a big walk of womanizers and wanted the press and everyone to defend my right to bang as many women as I please, you are going to feel at unease: my behavior, if extended, uniformed, its going to cause repercussions you dont want to deal with in your life. Maybe your friends will get affected, maybe yourself, maybe someone you love.

    So you would protest against my will to talk the streets and say “hey I came this world to bang women”?

    Im sure you would. And with rights.

    So how come you get all cornered and root for the slut “rights”, or, more specifically, why is that it aint obvious WHY some people is against the slutting it up culture? Its not about “repressing” women, its about the very same issues you pointed about womanizers.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Its simply a case of correcting overtly unfair practice.

    So if a boys sport teams get shut down due to lack of attendance you would protest for them to be kept right?

  • Mike C

    Jess,

    I see your worries about womanizers valid and on point. Do you understand men share the same worries about sluts?

    …………….

    Yohami + 1,000,000,000.

    This thread and the back and forth has truly been surreal. For eons and eons, Jess and “Tom” have been singing the praises and virtues of the “experienced” woman, and now that an “experienced” man enters the discussion, they are pointing out their reservations and concerns about the experienced man.

    Just unreal.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Yohami + 1,000,000,000.

      Ha, too bad he can’t take that to the bank!

  • jess

    Steph- as it happens absolutley!!! I have co-raised to keep 4 local london sports centres open primarily used by black boys over the past 10 years or so. Its great for reducing crime and giving these students a way to let off stream and enjoy themselves. And under the new tory government cutbacks I am likely to be volunteering to run either the local pool or childrens park.
    oh, and at primary school i was the schools 100m champ! (well it might have been 60m- I must dig up the medal)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I have co-raised to keep 4 local london sports centres open primarily used by black boys over the past 10 years or so. Its great for reducing crime and giving these students a way to let off stream and enjoy themselves.

      That’s a whole different case study. There society is investing in its youth, not bankrolling sports as a college activity. Title IX refers specifically to college level sports in the U.S.

      oh, and at primary school i was the schools 100m champ! (well it might have been 60m- I must dig up the medal)

      My daughter is also a runner. The beauty of that sport is that it costs little. Even if it doesn’t have a large fan base, it is self-sustaining. As are the Olympics by the way – cities bid aggressively for that privilege – and none of the sports or athletes is supposed to earn its own way.

  • jess

    yohami- i never called you racist.
    I said somebody hurling insults at experienced women are similar to those making racial jibes.
    .
    I never said that men cannot see excessive history as an issue or problem. 200 is rather extreme. If a young male relative was about to marry a girl with 200 exes then I would hope he has thought things through but I wouldnt care a hoot if she had 20 exes.
    .
    I certianly dont think that women enjoying a few flings when young damages anyone including society.
    .
    I agree its difficult putting a number on such things but I know for me zero is too low and say, 50 is way too high. But would I look down on girl or boy who had 60? Nope, unless they were a jackass. Its the least interesting thing about them on a friend or social level. If you look back at older threads you will see I have said all this stuff before.
    .
    A sudden thought- I know some gay guys who are just adorable and some of them have very high counts indeed. Two of which I count as very close friends and have highly responsible jobs. Maybe I am too harsh on higher counters after all!

  • jess

    mike c
    love the playground taunts- quality stuff

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Steph- as it happens absolutley!!! I have co-raised to keep 4 local london sports centres open primarily used by black boys over the past 10 years or so. Its great for reducing crime and giving these students a way to let off stream and enjoy themselves. And under the new tory government cutbacks I am likely to be volunteering to run either the local pool or childrens park.
    oh, and at primary school i was the schools 100m champ! (well it might have been 60m- I must dig up the medal)

    Fair enough, then.

  • jess

    I wouldnt expect a school or college to indulge one protesting girl but if 20 girls say please can we do sports?. Well then it seems reasonable. I can see why Tom’s institution might have decided to do what they did. If you just use income and audience figures then womens sport might dry up altogether thus denying access to girls. That seems unfair to me.
    .
    Very few poeple watch the paraolympics but I wouldnt want it banned on grounds of inefficency.
    .
    Title IX? is that professional then? ie paid? if so then it changes things a bit but by supporting the cause in time, they might get the fan base and be commercial. Sorry Im not familiar with USA sports scene.
    .
    Actually all sports have hidden costs- running needs space, and decent track to avoid injury and running shoes and weight training regimes and it goes on.
    And please dont speak to me about the olympics- its gonna be hell over here- we just are not designed to cope with our tiny london roads. And not to mention the likely huge financial hit we are going to suffer in common with previous host cities.

  • Abbot

    enjoying a few flings
    .
    few (fy)
    adj. few·er, few·est
    1. Amounting to or consisting of a small number: one of my few bad habits.
    2. Being more than one but indefinitely small in number: bowled a few strings.
    n. (used with a pl. verb)
    1. An indefinitely small number of persons or things: A few of the books have torn jackets.
    2. An exclusive or limited number: the discerning few; the fortunate few.
    pron. (used with a pl. verb)
    A small number of persons or things: “For many are called, but few are chosen” (Matthew 22:14).

  • Abbot

    now that an “experienced” man enters the discussion, they are pointing out their reservations and concerns about the experienced man.
    .
    Numbers matter. Case Closed. Sort of makes you feel a bit less special when your mind begins to boggle at all those bodies over someone you are about to take into YOUR life. Past a certain point, its not comprehensible. Humans have thresholds for lots of things. Most people cant remember more than a certain amount of items on a list when its read to them and its remarkably the same for everyone. Our minds have these limits. It is not cultural of course. Its very hard to get comfortable with something that you cannot reckon with or cannot put into perspective. To expect someone to do that is to expect a non human. Its not how we are wired. Only an inconsiderate insular pompous self serving ass would ask or expect a person to put aside the inability to gain perspective. Thankfully nobody is doing that.

  • Abbot

    “I certianly dont think that women enjoying a few flings when young damages anyone including society.”
    .
    Well there you have it. A woman is NOT damaged and then neither is a man who dismisses her for marriage. That’s equality, no? Society is salvaged as the man WILL find another who he personally and privately considers more comfortably suitable based on his feminist-untouchable criteria. NO damage…so yes, by all means, you now have permission to fling yourself into oblivion.
    .

  • jess

    abbott,
    what does your wife say about all this?

  • http://www.thoughtsfromtheboonies.blogspot.com Jason

    Irrelevancy.

    I would say the main reason that female sports get less support than male is because it’s far less interesting.

    There’s a reason why they don’t pit women against men in most sports. Men are much stronger and faster, and consequently the sport is far more exciting to watch. Excitement equals seat sales.

    On the other hand, women being more fragile means that medical costs attached to the sport will be higher for women. Lower returns and higher costs means less attraction for investors.

    Like many situations when the government intervenes in the market, the taxpayer ends up supporting something they’ll lose money on.

  • Aldonza

    @Susan Walsh

    I think if a sport can’t sustain itself, it shouldn’t drain the resources of the institution.

    If that’s the rule, then a lot of schools will have nothing more than football…or maybe basketball. Those two sports pretty much fund everything else in the athletic department…and even then sometimes those sports lose money.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Aldonza
      It’s in the best interest of schools to offer a robust athletic program, both to attract talented students and build alumnae loyalty. So a school may find that lacrosse is “profitable” even if it has few spectators. On the other hand, fencing requires a lot of resources but its only ROI is the personal growth and satisfaction of a couple of dozen students. Each institution should formulate its own strategy. The truth is, Title IX has promoted “personal growth and satisfaction” athletic programs at the expense of “attract leaders and build loyalty” programs. What I object to is the legislation. I don’t believe that any group should have the “right” to be participate in athletics in college. By the way, Ultimate Frisbee is an example of a very popular sport that is not funded as part of athletic programs, but played at the intramural or club level. Most schools have many such options – why should excellent Frisbee throwers be “entitled” to Division I competition?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    In my country we had a lot of institutions that will support sports and/or teams as a “social cause” even if they don’t make money for them. Of course they only cover the basics, like uniforms, trips and meals.But if is for fun and to make the kids avoid crime is more than enough. The government also has programs for this.
    Of course that probably won’t work on the first world, just saying.

  • Abbot

    Those two sports pretty much fund everything else
    .
    …Therefore, those running the sports that fund other sports should decide where the money goes, not some social marxists

  • Aldonza

    @Susan Walsh
    You said that only programs that were self-funding should be allowed. Now you’re waffling on that and picking on fencing as a “personal growth and satisfaction” sport. Funny you should pick that one because I was a fencer in college. The resources required for fencing are minimal. Most of us bought our own equipment and meets were held in multi-purpose rooms. We had some electronic scoring machines and an elderly fencing coach who was perverted and charming in that way that only old french men can be. That was it for “resources”. Further, the students on the fencing team were almost unilaterally academic “beta” types. We had 4 engineers, 3 pre-med, 2 pre-law, 2 computer science and 1 goofy Communications student (me). Of those kids, half of them went on to get advanced degrees from Ivy League schools (not me).

    Meanwhile we also had a powerhouse football team who got the best of the best in facilities, housing, food, chose their classes before even the honor students and were given all manner of special treats from boosters and cheerleaders alike. How else do you explain a poor kid (but excellent running back) from Louisiana driving around in a BMW? It was the original “old boys” network.

    I also find it intriguing that you specifically mention “alpha” sports to the detriment of “beta” sports and even use subtly shaming language in reference to “personal growth and satisfaction” vs the almost militaristic slogan of “leaders and loyalty”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Aldonza

      You said that only programs that were self-funding should be allowed. Now you’re waffling on that

      I actually said that sports should be able to sustain themselves, in terms of ROI to the institution. Let the free market, i.e. school decide. It’s the same with majors – schools have complete discretion over what majors they offer, and what they specialize in. MIT will attract a handful of English majors, no more. Many schools don’t offer engineering.

      Many companies, and schools, have loss leaders – products that are not profitable per se but drive sales in another area. In the case of colleges, having a certain sport may be deemed desirable in attracting the best students overall, or being able to say they have a full roster if DI sports, for example. What I object to is the legislation.

      picking on fencing as a “personal growth and satisfaction” sport. Funny you should pick that one because I was a fencer in college.

      I’m sorry I offended you. My best friend’s daughter made herself a fencing bassoonist in high school and rode those interests into a nice college admission. Nothing wrong with that. If the institution offers it, more power to you if you fence and enjoy it. My point is that a particular women’s sport is not a “right.”

      I also find it intriguing that you specifically mention “alpha” sports to the detriment of “beta” sports and even use subtly shaming language in reference to “personal growth and satisfaction” vs the almost militaristic slogan of “leaders and loyalty”.

      Eh, not really. I mentioned Ultimate Frisbee, a sport enjoyed by several of my favorite young beta males.

      My intention was not to slight personal growth and satisfaction – a basic human need well worth pursuing. I just wish to point out that a college doesn’t owe you that. If you want to fence, choose a college that offers it. Why should every school offer every sport for women, when they don’t offer every imaginable choice in other areas? Should schools be legally required to offer vegan cuisine? I believe that a lot of schools will offer it because vegan students are more likely to go there if they do.

      I don’t agree that the terms leadership and loyalty are militaristic. Those were key concepts in my undergraduate sorority. Leadership is the #1 attribute college select for, and couch their qualifications in that concept. Academic leadership, student leadership, athletic leadership, community service leadership, etc.

  • Tom

    Except that no one comes to watch women play sports (except their families). The teams have equal resources, but do not generate equal enthusiasm or alumnae support. It’s a handout to women’s athletics. Title IX is socialism.

    ______________________
    The girls who play for Ohio St must have a lot of family, I have been there when there is 1,500 fans watching a softball game.
    Socialism is a stretch….How about the “boys” club wouldnt bend on the issue, so the “people” (both men and women) had to get a law passed. Typical attitude of how men really think of the female gender. Weak, soft, non-aggressive, not worthy. I`d bet my deed my daughter is tougher than the guys here, and could strike them all out….lol

  • Tom

    @Steph
    But what you are advocating is no fair is privilegde. Male sport team that are not popular or watched get shot down. They are supporting the women in spite of this logical rule. Kids can have fun in million other ways that don’t bend the rules for women ONLY.
    ________________-

    Bend the rules for women ONLY??? You realise that boys have been playing sports in school for over a hundred years, but girls just got that privledge only about 30 years ago?… It NEVER has been fair for girls. So how is THAT fair?

  • Tom

    Steph
    I mean I don’t really mind but please just own it, all your arguments boil down to: Women deserve ALL the choices and the social perks and no consequences or drawbacks no matter what.
    I think people here will respect you more if you just admit it to yourself and us.
    ________________
    Im glad you are happy being barefoot and prego Steph, but I am for EQUAL rights for both men and women. That is what I will admit to.

  • Tom

    Mike

    This thread and the back and forth has truly been surreal. For eons and eons, Jess and “Tom” have been singing the praises and virtues of the “experienced” woman, and now that an “experienced” man enters the discussion, they are pointing out their reservations and concerns about the experienced man.

    Just unreal.
    ____________________
    That is so not true… I have ALWAYS tried to point out to the misinformed people like you Mike that not all promiscuous women are sluts and that discression must be used when evaluating any person for a relationship. What is unreal is men like you who fail to understand, not all women of expeience fuck every swinging dick she meets. Not all promiscupous women are sluts. Listening to you, one would think so, however.

  • Abbot

    “not all promiscuous women are sluts and that discression must be used when evaluating any person for a relationship”
    .
    In the course of using discretion, does the typical man today need to put in more effort than his grandpa did in order to identify promiscuous women such that he can avoid the ones that are sluts? If so, why was grandpa so much luckier? If grandpa did not encounter any WOE’s, then was grandma unembraced, unempowered and unexpressed? Too bad for grandma. But fortunately, she did have loads of wifely character because she got a huge dose of it during crucial formative years before the age of 17 rather than from a mixture of disinterested men and alcohol, which don’t seem quite the same.
    .
    “not all women of expeience fuck every swinging dick she meets”
    .
    True, a few WOE’s don’t fuck every swinging dick. Any volunteers want to take the time to tell them apart? Should we do them a favor and put in the effort? Grandpa just told me that only if you’re crazy, stupid or desperate.

  • Jess

    I wonder if the sports facilities available on average across the USA is similar for men and women.
    I wonder if educational facilities available, on average across the USA is similar for black people compared to whites

  • Jess

    I could ask similar questions based on disability.
    .
    I dont think anyone is suggesting that all institutions offer every concievable sport of hobby on earth. That’s impossible. But broadly speaking there should be a rough equivalence of opportunity.
    .
    Hence legislation.
    .
    To say the state has no role in that is quite a right wing stance, surely, even in the USA

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jess
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_IX

      The regulations implementing Title IX require all universities receiving federal funds to perform self-evaluations of whether they offer equal opportunities based on sex[15] and to provide written assurances to the Dept. of Education that the institution is in compliance for the period that the federally funded equipment or facilities remain in use.[16] With respect to athletic programs, the Dept. of Education evaluates the following factors in determining whether equal treatment exists:[17]
      Whether the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes
      The provision of equipment and supplies;
      Scheduling of games and practice time;
      Travel and per diem allowance;
      Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring on mathematics only;
      Assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors;
      Provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities;
      Provision of medical and training facilities and services;
      Provision of housing and dining facilities and services;
      Publicity.
      Unequal aggregate expenditures for members of each sex or unequal expenditures for male and female teams if a recipient operates or sponsors separate teams will not constitute noncompliance with this section, but the Assistant Secretary [of Education for Civil Rights] may consider the failure to provide necessary funds for teams for one sex in assessing equality of opportunity for members of each sex.

      Bottom line:
      Schools have to the spend the exact same $ on men’s sports and women’s sports. For gridiron schools (huge football programs) this has been very difficult. At many schools, football programs have been cut entirely in order to bring the two into line. At other schools, dramatic increases in offerings for women have led to an embarrassment of riches for females at the expense of male athletics.

      We’re really into the weeds now, so I’ll leave it there. Suffice to say Title IX is highly controversial in the U.S.

  • Abbot

    To say the state has no role in that is quite a right wing stance
    .
    The “state” IS the people. If the state “says” this or that, its the people, the public speaking. Its the people who are saying that they, with their work, their effort, the fruits of their labor do or do not want to contribute for others. That is not “right” or “left” up, down, sideways or whatever. Its people deciding for themselves what they would rather not pay for.
    .
    Unfortunately, the state attracts the least motivated and the most incompetent as there is no competition and therefore no striving toward excellence. Agenda driven activist with thorns up their asses and scores to settle get in. They lack the natural aptitude to get ahead in the private sector. They want to get that public money and give it away to the self-oppressed for personal reasons and to buy votes. They want to take from people who actually work hard and are the ONLY producers.

  • jess

    when i said ‘state’ i meant central government.
    .
    i once met a red neck in usa who said the ‘state’ had no right meddling in local town affairs and thought ‘tax’ was a form of theft. I recall he was pro Irish terrorism and wasnt all that keen on the ‘gays’ either.
    .
    I assume then Abbot you tend toward the republican hue..

  • Abbot

    State is the federal government and state government. They both attract the least employable except at the very top and even then its questionable. THAT is a fact. That has nothing to do with party affiliation. Who is for self-serving personal-agenda based usually wasteful spending administered by un-accountables and unfirables should they form a union to bargain against taxpayers? Who? Well, its not an intelligent person, that’s for sure. The gov. is a bloated belly with thousands of nipples being sucked on. Where you going to run when 49% support the 51?

  • Abbot

    football programs have been cut entirely in order to bring the two into line
    .
    That is akin to men cutting back on the hours or days they work in order to receive less money as a means to achieve “equal earnings.” That is actually how it will be played out. And will be so worth it if for nothing else than stopping all that infernal confounded whining.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Bend the rules for women ONLY??? You realise that boys have been playing sports in school for over a hundred years, but girls just got that privledge only about 30 years ago?… It NEVER has been fair for girls. So how is THAT fair?

    Do you know about something called offer and demand?

    … I am for EQUAL rights for both men and women. That is what I will admit to.

    Nope you are for women getting all the privileges and no the consequences. The audience for female sports is significatively shorter than for male sports in what universe makes sense for both to get the same amount of funding? That is privilegde.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Okay for the gender fairness challenged

    Let’s take a look at an area where things are reversed. The fashion world.
    Most female models and top models are women, they are the ones that sign big contracts with sponsors and gain fame and crapton of money. Now why is that?
    Now why there is no a program to allow of the males and boys that dream of making money modeling people’s clothing to make it fair and gender balanced? Really, think it a little is not that hard to figure it out.

  • Mike C

    Okay for the gender fairness challenged

    Let’s take a look at an area where things are reversed. The fashion world.
    Most female models and top models are women, they are the ones that sign big contracts with sponsors and gain fame and crapton of money. Now why is that?
    Now why there is no a program to allow of the males and boys that dream of making money modeling people’s clothing to make it fair and gender balanced? Really, think it a little is not that hard to figure it out.

    .
    “Common sense is not so common.”
    Voltaire

  • Jess

    To Susan,
    The document you quoted seems fair enough.
    I wouldn’t mind if it was 55/45 in favour of guys to give a nod towards supply and demand but they have gone for 50/50 down the line thats their pref. As as its not 80/20 in favour guys would be my beef. You cannot purely go on supply and demand, not in a civilised, fair society IMO.
    .
    But as you say, if a guy can’t do a sport cos a college has had to close it down then he can choose a different college.

  • tito

    @SusanWalsh

    susan said:
    “Let’s go easy on nerdy white males. Everyone here knows I married one and have a soft spot for them”

    if i could be one i would. they should be honored. us cool types only serve to fuck everything up and come up with nothing but excuses. that is what happens when you exalt inferiority. the the nerdy white male must reproduce at all cost or else it’s over. 3rd world over.

    i hope susan had many nerdy kids with this guy. i myself have, on occasion, yielded a girl or two to nerdy white males. they must be pumped up if we are to have a future folks. cool people need to recognize their proper place or get out of the way. civilization is more important than us.

  • van Rooinek

    Since the USA is the most religious country in the industrialized world, we must consider that a LOT of the college celibates, are not sexual failures, but instead are simply saving themselves for marriage.

    The same would be true, even more so, for the substantial number of students who have dating relationships that exclude sex….in my experience that’s ALWAYS religiously driven. (I was one myself, in fact.)

    Of course, being a nerd, I probably would have failed even if I DID try. But I didn’t try.

  • Anonymous

    What happened to being abstinent and saving yourself for marriage?! Kind of sad in my opinion to see people just having sex so much. To know that there was someone else there before…

  • PS

    Susan, I appreciate your intellectual honesty here, but there is a major problem.  The fact is that we can never know the real number of sexual partners that students are having.

    Here’s the key study: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3936-fake-liedetector-reveals-womens-sex-lies.html  … It’s been shown that women lie about their number of sex partners (bc they have more to lose, of course), but men hardly at all.  The threat of a polygraph showed that.

    While that’s the key point, I actually believe that women often convince themselves of things that are untrue.  Women lying to themselves is a common cliche in the manosphere, and all my experience confirms it.  Most amazingly, one woman actually gave me her list of sexual partners, and had apparently repressed her memory of our own liaisons.  She really seemed to have no memory of it, although she acknowledged that it made sense.  That’s uncensored human nature, right there.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @PS
      It is a problem, I agree. It always has been, going back to the Kinsey research. In this study, extra care was taken to guarantee anonymity, and the researchers believed this had a significant effect. Also, there is not as much shame re hooking up and casual sex as there once was, so women presumably have less incentive to lie. Certainly, the data is not perfect, but as always when studying sexual behaviors, it is probably better than nothing.

  • TylerSteel

    “2. Only a fifth of students habitually have sex while drunk.

    This calls into question that claim that students drink primarily in order to lose enough inhibition to hook up.”

    Maybe…. or maybe most students getting drunk with the intention of losing inhibitions simply fail to get laid anyway!

  • Pingback: The 1st Feline Batallion » Stunning News()

  • Pingback: How does one initiate a relationship? (first thoughts) « The personal weblog of Adam Isom()

  • Pingback: Hos Gone Be Hos | Honest Introspection()

  • http://www.boytoystory.com Boy Toy

    There are more male virgins than female virgins, because the girls generally tend to have their first sexual experience earlier than boys :-)

  • Tim

    ” A small minority of promiscuous men and women are “servicing” each other while most limit their sexual activity to committed relationships.”

    Correction : Most men don’t limit their sexual activity to committed relationships, due to lack of casual sex options..not out of choice.

    Women limit themselves almost always, out of choice

  • Pingback: Breasts are beautiful | Philosophies of a Disenchanted Scholar()