Hookup Culture Rightly Laid at Feminism’s Feet

The Good Men Project has been a real sh*tshow lately. The site’s founder, Tom Matlack, found himself labeled an ALLY FAIL by radical feminists the other day. They’ve been feasting at his blog for months, but they didn’t hesitate to devour the hand that feeds them …I imagine that by now Matlack looks like he submerged his arms in a tank of piranhas. 

Interesting “feedback.” I really thought the MRA guys were crazy until I engaged the wrath of the feminists. Insane.

Tom Matlack

I’ll dish up the dirt at the end of the post, but first I want to call your attention to Is Feminism to Blame for Hookup Culture?just published there by Neely Steinberg. It came out of this whole kerfuffle, and in it she offers a contrast of her views with the views of feminist Hugo Schwyzer.

I mentioned to Hugo that I was intrigued by our contrasting positions—his steadfast defense of feminism and critiquing of men versus my critiquing of feminism and steadfast defense of men—not because we disagree in the ideological sense, but because of our tendency to stray from defending our own gender. 
Hugo went first. Choice bits:
 …My views about pleasure-centered sex education are very much rooted in what I’ve lived through and what I’ve seen.
 
I’ve been married to four women, been “in love” with twice that many, and for a brief but intense period in my 20s and early 30s, I was very promiscuous. I now live very happily in a monogamous marriage. I’m not haunted by what I did, nor did the tremendous variety of experiences I had when I was younger spoil any opportunity for fulfillment with just one partner in an enduring relationship. Without compromising her privacy, I can say that my current (and last) wife’s life prior to our marriage was not dissimilar to my own. The intimacy we have today is at least partly a consequence of our experiences with other people, not in spite of them.
 
…Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners. They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older.
 
…I do regret the pain I caused other people. Rightly so. But what my life has taught me is that insight and compassion are rooted in experience; you can’t advise about what you don’t understand. My own ability to be a patient father, a faithful husband, a decent teacher and mentor isn’t in spite of my wild sexual choices when I was younger—it’s in large part because of them, and the lessons I learned.
 
…I want to equip young people to discover their own sexuality and to make informed, pleasure-centered, empathy-centered decisions based on what they discover. I want them to know that they have the inner resilience to recover from the “silly” and “vapid” decisions they may make.
 
Here’s Neely:
I happen to think most women aren’t all that interested in having a lot of [casual sex] for purely sexual reasons, with multiple partners no less. And I’ve come to believe that feminism’s inability, and at times refusal, to acknowledge differences between the sexes has been disingenuous and has gravely backfired on women, leaving them ill-equipped to discover what really feels good and right to them.
 
…I was told, by the 10% of women who are capable of effectively and consistently compartmentalizing their emotions when it comes to no-strings attached sex, that emotions were overrated, anathema even, and could easily be separated from sexual acts with another human being, to unapologetically unleash my inner slut (there’s that word again). It was our right (rite?) as women, our responsibility as sexual creatures, to show the world we can fuck like men do, have instantaneous orgasms, and feel faaaabulous while doing it in our 4-inch Manolo Blahniks. Countless women bought into this lie, only to realize years later that it doesn’t, in fact, feel so great most of the time, and that actually, there’s nothing all that empowering and liberating about spreading your legs with wild abandon.
 
On her years in the hook-up scene:
 
It’s as if I needed the crutch of Vodka to tell me what I was doing was an awesome idea, because without it I’d know better. I wasn’t alone. It was happening all around me. My friends, female acquaintances, countless women I’d met briefly over the years—we were all in the same boat. Post-college, we could pursue our careers and hobbies and passions full-force but were unable to form lasting attachments, to believe that a man wanted us for anything more than a quick hook-up, to understand what real intimacy was about.
 
…If feminism’s goal was to eradicate the falsehood that a woman’s worth is tied to her sexuality, it has failed on many accounts. All I learned from drunken, fleeting hook-ups over the course of a decade was how much I was being viewed as a sexual object by men, as a vagina who happens to think and feel, rather than a thinking, feeling human being who also happens to have a vagina.
 
And finally on the feminist movement itself:
I understand everyone’s journey is unique, but I think young women today are looking for different, more tempered voices other than the I-am-woman-hear-me-roar variety, for tangible, strategic dating advice (such as, if you want a relationship try developing emotional, spiritual, and mental bonds with a man you like or just started dating by delaying sexual gratification—yours and his).
 
The always insightful Stuart Schneiderman had this to say about the article:
 
Very few men openly identify themselves as feminists. Still, many men happily mouth the basic tenets of the feminist credo. They may not understand what they are saying, but they support the cause because they feel grateful for what feminism has done for them.
 
Take Hugo Schwyzer. He has been married four times. He has had countless casual sexual encounters and no small number of relationships. Manifestly, he feels grateful and perhaps endebted to feminism for having provided him with so much free love.
 
So, he defends the feminist party line.
 
In debating Neely Steinberg Schwyzer does not dispute that feminism, especially sex-positive feminism, has helped create the hookup culture.
 
Yet, Schwyzer thinks it’s a good thing, for him, for his fourth wife, and for everyone who wants to learn from experience. Being anything but a gentleman Schwyzer lets on that his fourth wife can match him hookup for hookup.
 …As it happens, Steinberg is far more cogent and thoughtful than Schwyzer. In truth, Schwyzer doesn’t seem to be thinking at all.
He wants young women to see their hookups as learning experiences. It’s amusing to see an ideological zealot defending the value of experience. What would Schwyzer say if experience taught people that feminism is exploiting young women to advance its ideological agenda?

I thank Neely for bringing these opposing views into the open where they may be examined and discussed. Neely’s post came out of a furious Twitter squabble when Tom Matlack pissed off the radfems by objecting to Schwyzer’s post In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent, and then by daring to suggest this:

Men and women are different. Quite different in fact. But women would really like men to be more like them.

I can’t imagine Neely’s article is going to help Matlack get back into the Piranhas’ good graces, but if he continues to speak out against man hating and female supremacy the Good Men Project will be a much better blog. Voices like Neely Steinberg’s need and deserve to be heard.

By the way, for my view on whether feminism is to blame for hookup culture, see How Feminism Got Drunk and Hooked Up With a Loser. Shoot, does the title give it away?

 

5 Pingbacks/Trackbacks

  • Ted D

    I had to stop visiting the Good Men Project because everytime went there and started reading, my blood pressure soared to dangerous levels. I have zero respect for Hugo based on what I’ve seen there, and what I’ve read about him from other places, HUS included.

    He has another article up there now about “rape culture” and how all men should just accept “being innocent until proven guilty”. What a load of crap. I don’t know how he can sleep at night!

  • http://rivelinoinspain.wordpress.com/ Rivelino

    this looks really good.

    but does it mean we are done with the other post?

  • BSD

    I’m always so confused about the word hookup and what it means, because to each person, it means something so different.

    When I went to college, coming from a big city, I thought it meant sex. I got offended when my friends said, after finding out I went on a few dates with someone and he gave me a goodnight kiss,”Oh, you guys hooked up!” Then I found out from people that hooking up was everything from kissing to grinding on the dancefloor to fullblown sex, to all those things ONLY if you met them that same night, to all those things EVEN if you were in a relationship.

    This doesn’t have much to do with the post but I think the definition of hooking up was watered down to make it seem like the girls who stop at first base are the same as the girls who let strange guys make home runs on them night after night. “No one can be shamed, because we all hookup!” The fact that people would go out of their way to do this means that there IS something shameful about sex with randos.

    And while, on some level, maybe men can handle it better than women, I think men are affected as well. I know a guy who is well into the double digits who confides in me that he wishes he made different choices; he’s now a few years out of college and struggling to just bond with people, and the women he attracts have had similar histories to him, and don’t want to bond. I have a male friend who lies about his partnercount because he doesn’t want to be shamed and made fun of, and also partially because he feels so guilty; he’s a Christian and is always asking God to forgive him for his lustful actions, but doesn’t get his crap together and just stop. We’re a society that has valued at least the illusion of monogamy for centuries. That is what we are based on. And when it’s broken men and women suffer.

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

      @BSD

      Great and thoughtful comment there. The vagueness of the term hooking up does a few things. It provides plausible deniability – women can admit to hooking up but claim they didn’t have sex. Men can swear they only went with the ugly chick because they were so drunk. The term itself is very impersonal, so there’s little accountability attached to it. I don’t know who started using it first – I wonder if I can find out.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    This doesn’t have much to do with the post but I think the definition of hooking up was watered down to make it seem like the girls who stop at first base are the same as the girls who let strange guys make home runs on them night after night. “No one can be shamed, because we all hookup!” The fact that people would go out of their way to do this means that there IS something shameful about sex with randos.

    This is a fascinating perspective that I’ve never thought of. I’ve made many conversations about “what does the term ‘hookup’ really mean?” But I’ve never examined it in the context of feminism.

    The REALLY interesting part is that one time, the shaming got turned on its head. This girl basically told me I didn’t belong in conversations between her and another friend because I was a virgin, that my makeout “hookups” weren’t real. Once you lump everything in to one pile, it’s easy to turn things around and shame the virgins while praising the sluts.

  • JimKhan

    Ugh…terrible stuff from Hugo and the rest. Reading the GMP site was like listening to Socialists during the Cold War talk about the benefits of collective ownership after the Soviets had invaded another country. I’ll be damned if I’m going to take advice on relationships from a four-time marriage loser like Hugo.

  • http://aplace-formythoughts.blogspot.com/ Renee

    Rivelino,
    neely sounds sharp

    She does. If this is the same Neely that I used to see on Roissy’s website, then she really is sharp. I hated how the guys over there gave her a hard time for nothing. She stood her ground though. It came to a point that Roissy was getting complaints from other guys about her commenting “too many times” (as if there’s some type of quota).

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    I liked Neely here.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    The Good Mangina Project is just a sick joke anyway, a pretend ‘men’s’ site run by feminists whose idea of progress is to continue to shame men & advocate discriminatory misandrist policies. It’s entire purpose is to distract & confuse men who are out there knowing that something is wrong but not knowing what.

    I would much rather listen to an excellent new commentator I’ve just discovered who goes by the name of ‘Girl Writes What’. This video of hers in particular has impressed me greatly:

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

      @Byron

      In the twitter battle there were these men, calling themselves Feminist Father and such, who were totally obsequious. They assured Marcotte that many men look up to her, and one even suggested they should write a manual of stuff men should never say. All this because Tom Matlack, who has a high tolerance for man shaming, had finally had enough.

  • Stingray

    Renee,

    That was Neecy on the Chateau blog.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    That sounds heinous, Susan, I don’t know if I have the stomach to go expose myself to such hellish realms any more. Maybe I’m getting old.

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

      @Byron

      That sounds heinous, Susan, I don’t know if I have the stomach to go expose myself to such hellish realms any more. Maybe I’m getting old.

      I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.

  • Isabel

    …I want to equip young people to discover their own sexuality and to make informed, pleasure-centered, empathy-centered decisions based on what they discover. I want them to know that they have the inner resilience to recover from the “silly” and “vapid” decisions they may make.

    In other words: remove the stigma attached to being an impulsive, slutty dolt. Awesome.

    Why the hell does casual sex qualify as a legitimate form of introspection anyway? Introspection requires brutal honesty, and gender feminism is, by definition, insincere.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    I’m sorry to hear that Susan. It’ll pass though, remember.

  • Mike M.

    Cheer up, Susan. You’re at the cutting edge…Girl Game.

    Which consists in part of encouraging young women to stop thinking with their hormones and grow up.

  • http://flyfreshandyoung.wordpress.com flyfreshandyoung

    His demons are many, and the idea that a guy like him can even begin to represent men, or anyone else for that matter, is ridiculous.

    Hugo Shizer has been on a decades long self-flagellation journey in order to get the approval of feminists. He will say anything he can in order to get his token pat on the head. Every time I read his garbage I have no problem imagining him looking back over his shoulder at his doms like Marcotte like hey look! I wrote something else you will really like! Please, tell me I’m a good boy again! I am a good boy, right???

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.

    You’re doing an amazing thing on this blog. It’s really one of a kind. Don’t let the haters get you down.

  • Candide

    I love the way Americans blame or declare wars on various things, from inanimate objects to abstract concepts, but never people.

  • Abbot

    “Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners”

    Reassurance from whom exactly? Whom would women want to hear that reassurance from the most? What group of folks needs to be “turned around” regarding their universal manner of thinking? Who exactly are sex pozzies taking aim at?

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

      @Abbot

      Reassurance from whom exactly?

      I just want to say welcome back, I figured this post would bring you out of the shadows…:)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Hugo is so self-absorbed. Does he realize how many cats are homeless right now because he married his similarly experienced wife?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Abbot,

    Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners.

    LOL I really liked this one too. Women can get reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sex partners by…. looking for sex partners to get reassurance of their worth? For real, a few of my friends had lists they’d brag about.

  • Abbot

    “The term itself is very impersonal, so there’s little accountability attached to it. I don’t know who started using it first – I wonder if I can find out.”

    Its got to be the same people who invented and constantly spout plausibly deniable disgustingly cutesy terms like:

    know her body
    explore her sexuality
    discover her boundaries

    Its the people who are attempting, albeit failing, to relabel “fucking”

    Do men EVER explore their sexuality? Really?

    Find the people who contrived those meaningless terms and you would then find the first people to hide behind, and continue to hide behind the “hookup” shield

    Nothing but a bunch of fuckers who dont want to face what they really are, especially when its time to get someone to commit to them.

    .

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    I cannot imagine any man wanting his SO to use a 4 inch Manolo Blahnik while she was with him, but that’s just me.

    Remember “baby with the bathwater”? Do you remember my earlier “blame it on the Boomers”post? Ok kids, gather ’round and let Uncle Tom go over this again.

    First off, there’s a lot of overstatement above, but, like the pea that the princess slept on, there’s some truth. The confining Puritan-lite ethics prevailing in the 50s inspired the reaction first described in “The Feamle Eunuch”. Boomers started with the idea that women were being exploited and the “equal pay” position was actually the one that go tseriou attention. Sure there was a lot of bullshit about bras burnign etc. but the impetus was in the rigth direction, focus on the $.

    Now I was there when women first hit the professions and businessin a serious way. In 1981, there were no women judges, partners, CEOs, execs, physicians represented in the generation ahead of us. That’s roughly when it started. It was a good thing.

    But something else started, not such a good thing. May have cropped up i Women’s Studies or Radical Fem college courses. No one’s finger prints were on it. The economic push for equality ., same pay for same work. conflated into men and women are the same.

    Men=Women=same; NO ONE ADMITS TO CREATING, ADVOCATING, PROSELYTIZING, OR EVEN THINKING THIS. Like the “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” mutant virus, it came; it’s still here.

    Meditate upon that. I’ll be back later-I’m going into my decompression chamber to ruminate.

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

      @Munson

      I remember the advent of gender equity the same way. I can recall my father encouraging me to succeed in a man’s world. But he sure didn’t think men and women were the same. Now we’ve got the full-blown “gender is a social construct.” Not only that, but you’re a pig if you think there are two genders, when in fact there are an infinite number of possibilities.

  • Abbot

    “a few of my friends had lists they’d brag about.”

    that is akin to unearned bragging by an alcoholic who is surrounded by effortless access to all the cheap, abundant and easy to acquire booze available every city block

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Abbot,
    Yeah no kidding. I hope the lurkers are listening. 100+ makeout partners/30+ sex partners is not something to brag about.

  • Sassy6519

    I had an interesting conversation with someone that relates to this article. I was talking to a male acquaintance today about my last relationship. He asked me how long it had been since we broke up. I told him that 4 months have passed. He told me that I should go to a bar/club, find a guy, and sleep with him. He said I should start looking for a relationship again after having a few ONS. He told me that by having ONS, it will take the “edge” off and desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men. Seriously, wtf?

    That was a case of not understanding the differences between men and women for sure. Just because that technique might work for men does not mean that it will work for me. If I followed his advice, not to mention Hugo’s, I’d end up worse for wear.

  • Abbot

    “30+ sex partners is not something to brag about”

    Unless getting laid is the only goal…and will become the ongoing default limitation as a consequence well before that number is reached

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Sassy

    He told me that by having ONS, it will take the “edge” off and desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men.

    Seriously? He’s talking through his hat, Sassy. Time takes “the edge” off a dead relationship, IF it was a real relationship to begin with. And even then, it takes LOTS of time.

    I don’t think there’s a substitute for that.

  • Abbot

    “having ONS, it will take the “edge” off and desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men”

    Not bad advice if you are ok with a very limited set of future suitors

  • Chris_in_CA

    @Sassy

    Pretty sure I’m stepping into a snake pit, but here goes…

    We men are problem solvers. Tell us a problem, we will try to ascertain a solution. We don’t “just talk” about things. (Which is also a difference between men and women, hmmm…)

    Your friend here gave what he thought was a possible solution. I don’t know everything said of course, and the suggestion comes off as dumb in this context.

    But his reasoning holds one useful point. “Desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men.”

    In this respect I can speak for a large group of men, due to personal consensus – a desperate woman freaks us out!

    There’s many reasons for a woman appearing desperate. Biological clock ticking, financial trouble, poor self-worth, masochistic tendencies, etc. etc. Alert! Bad things with this one. Eject! Eject!

    Long time periods between relationships is a red flag for such. We tend to think you’re driving other men away, and we’d rather not find out why! (Even if it’s a perfectly legitimate reason.)

    So, you’ve clearly decided to ignore the advice. All well & good. But note that he wasn’t trying to hurt you with it – quite possibly, he was trying to help you with presentation toward future men.

  • SayWhaat

    I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.

    Eh? Since when do we care about the bottom 20%?

    All kidding aside, I think that you really are at the brink of developing Girl Game. That’s going to be invaluable in the coming years. :)

  • SayWhaat

    Long time periods between relationships is a red flag for such. We tend to think you’re driving other men away, and we’d rather not find out why! (Even if it’s a perfectly legitimate reason.)

    Is this true for other male commenters? If so, I find it worrisome… :(

  • Richard Aubrey

    At GMP, there is a piece on letting boys be girls. The comments point out that the implication is that boys being boys–trained to not be compassionate, for example–is bad and having them be like girls is the cure.
    I wonder about GMP. Is it guys trying to get the approval of women in general or feminists in particular? Is it a bunch of folks who mine their navels and think the result applies to all of us? Is it a bunch of folks who just love having their name on a piece published on the ‘net? (full disclosure. I’ve been published in small tech mags, the first half dozen times for free and made a couple of hundred bucks thereafter and it’s a HUGE ego boost.) And if you want contiuing exposure, maybe making plausible mountains out of molehills is the only thing you can think of.
    The pieces about being better men almost without exception begin by pointing out a flaw in men’s character that is either extraordinarily rare or completely irrelevant, or merely different from the writer’s view, and tells us we have “hard work” to do to fix whateverthehellitis.
    I kind of like pointing such nonsense out. I’m laid up due to a detached retina and some of heavier work around here is on hold. So there’s the GMP to keep me amused.

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

      @Richard Aubrey

      Sorry you are off your feet, that sounds terrible! I hope you recover quickly.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Girl Game? Please tell us what in the world for!

    And seriously, please think about that. If you can put to words a cogent explanation of what it is that “girl game” might bring to the lives of young women, what it might bring to couples and how those benefits would come about, then you too will have made an invaluable contribution, SayWhaat.

    But a word of caution. If what it brings is merely attention, then chalk it up as a failure, for nothing will come of it.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Chris_in_CA

    Thanks for the feedback. I know he wasn’t trying to hurt me with his advice. I am aware, however, that his particular advice (having lots of ONS) would do me more harm than good.

    I don’t think I interact with men in a desperate fashion. I’m not really high strung and hell bent on finding a guy by any means necessary. I would like to have a good man in my life, but I don’t think having a bunch of ONS is going to lead me any closer to finding him. As Abbot said above, having lots of casual sex is going to limit the pool of available men who will be attracted to me on that principle.

    He was seriously projecting what would be best for a man onto me, which doesn’t work. I could see how having sex with a woman or two would take the edge off for men, but that doesn’t apply to women. Men having casual sex, to a certain extent, doesn’t hurt their value to future suitors. It does for women. If I hopped on the carousel, I know I would be pissing off and turning off the men who value a non-promiscuous woman. How is limiting the available pool of men even further a good strategy to finding a man from a mathematical standpoint?

  • jess

    groan…this stuff again!

    i had a few flings when younger- thoroughly enjoyed them!

    now in a great LTR with children.

    MOST of my peers had a few finds too. some crappy but most enjoyable.

    provided its safe, in moderation and without the use of drugs/alcohol I can’t see the issue.

    Having a few flings taught me about what i did and didn’t like- how guys can vary and true compatibility.

    My SO and I have histories which involve some very good memories- its part of who we are. He is cool enough not to care about it and likewise true for me. We choose each other when we both had many other options- why? cos we were crazy about each other.

    I can’t emphasise enough how alarmist and misleading all this stuff is. The idea that women are ‘tainted’ if they have a bit of sexual experimentation in their youth. Its so silly in this day and age. I just hope younger girls can treat this stuff with the contempt it deserves.

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

      @Jess

      You are particularly focused on justifying casual sex as a choice. That is not what this article at GMP was about. Both Neely and Hugo acknowledge that feminism ended dating and made casual sex pretty much the only dish on the menu. Both acknowledge that women are miserable as a result. Hugo’s answer is to tell women to cheer up, it’s all part of the beautiful person that you are (which is what you said too). Neely says, “If it feels like crap stop doing it.” Neely’s right – 90% of women don’t thrive on a diet of casual sex. You’re in the 10% – and you can thank feminism for making it so easy for you to get NSA sex and a pat on the back.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Joe:

    But a word of caution. If what it brings is merely attention, then chalk it up as a failure, for nothing will come of it.

    No, Girl Game has little to do with attracting a man, and more to do with KEEPING him. Attracting men is the easy part. Flipping him into wanting a relationship with YOU is considerably more difficult.

  • Chris_in_CA

    @SayWhaat

    Obviously I’m not other male commenters (and I would like to hear from others!). But, consider the following.

    Let’s say we have a female 8 at, say, 25. She hasn’t had a relationship for 4 years. This is by choice, as she focused on school & work. I’ll even say she didn’t hook up in that time.

    Goes on a date. Tells the guy she hasn’t dated in years. Guy naturally asks her why not.

    Our 8 says something like, “Oh, no time for it. Besides, hadn’t met the right guy.”

    This woman is very attractive. She can hold a conversation. She comes across dozens of men every week who’d gladly take her out and/or bang her senseless.

    Guy she’s talking to knows this. So what’s his first thought?

    “She’s either bullshitting me or she’s bats*@! crazy. Otherwise she’d have had plenty of dates in the past 4 years. Something’s wrong.”

    Neither of these are positive impressions of the woman. Both however are derived from the current SMP, feminism’s outreach and the alpha bang/beta pay dynamic. So it’s not an unreasonable assessment to make.

  • Chris_in_CA

    Also, are Joe and I the only ones who think we need LESS gaming from women, not more?

  • Abbot

    Jessica Valenti laments:

    “Women cannot continue to be the markers by which men measure their manliness. And while the myth of sexual purity is primarily about women, its impossible to dismantle that womens worth is connected to their sexuality without also dismantling a conception of masculinity that is reinforced so fully by that myth. We’re only as pure or impure as men deem us to be – they’re the ones with the power to define and control”

    The universal male way of thinking is not a myth. Wish Jessica luck in her “dismantling” project. Same goes for the balance redressers here attempting to glorify “a few flings” as some sort of marriage preparation.

  • Kathy

    “I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.”

    Ah, Suse, you are damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

    Easy for me to say don’t worry about it, but, take heart in the fact that those who deride you have either not read your blog at all , or
    are at the very VERY low end of the intelligence distribution on the bell curve. :D

    For some reason, Dalrock’s has attracted many bitter ex spearhead commenters lately, who seem to be claiming the site as their own.

    They are not interested in rational debate or solutions but only derision and retribution.. sigh..

    It’s a damn shame really, because Dalrock posts some very good stuff.

  • SayWhaat

    @Chris_in_CA:

    Haha, depends. Are you a relationship-guy or a PUA-type?

    “She’s either bullshitting me or she’s bats*@! crazy. Otherwise she’d have had plenty of dates in the past 4 years. Something’s wrong.”

    What if she’s had plenty of dates, but none of them were the right guy?

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Chris, I hear ya. And I was trying to be polite as possible when I implied just that. The hookup culture seems to be both sides playing Guy Game. If you’re not an Alpha, the girls always win.

    But SayWhaat answered the point well. Girl Game would be, apparently, not about the same thing as Guy Game. Different goals, different strengths, different approaches and philosophies. That is as it should be.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    If a girl told me she hasn’t dated in years, I would try to feel it out. Does it mean she hasn’t hooked up or just hasn’t formally dated? But if it were neither, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.

    In fact, I’d feel like a million bucks being the one who broke the dry spell.

  • Isabel

    Sassy,

    How is limiting the available pool of men even further a good strategy to finding a man from a mathematical standpoint?

    Don’t focus on the literal advice but the intended meaning behind it. I think Chris explained it quite well. It’s possible that he wanted you to to adopt a more effective frame, but basically just messed up the delivery. To guys, casual sex = being loved, desired and/or successful = improved self-esteem = frame of abundance. So maybe he just wanted you to get a positive source of validation? A happy woman is probably a woman with improved odds.

    (Wait. Does that mean guys can sense a long-term single woman the way women women can sense desperation? What sort of intuitions do men have? :| )

  • Sassy6519

    This woman is very attractive. She can hold a conversation. She comes across dozens of men every week who’d gladly take her out and/or bang her senseless.

    Guy she’s talking to knows this. So what’s his first thought?

    “She’s either bullshitting me or she’s bats*@! crazy. Otherwise she’d have had plenty of dates in the past 4 years. Something’s wrong.”

    I’ve heard many variants of this thought process. If I had a nickel for every man or woman who has asked me “Why is a girl like you still single?”, I’d have a crap ton of nickels.

    Guys tend to like non-promiscuous and discerning women, but being those two things limit the amount of men a woman is involved with. If I’m not cavorting about with every Tom, Dick, and Harry, I have essentially cut out a huge portion of my dating pool. I’m not dating/hanging out with nearly as many men as a promiscuous girl would, so I appear weird as a result. What’s a girl to do?

  • SayWhaat

    Does that mean guys can sense a long-term single woman the way women women can sense desperation? What sort of intuitions do men have?

    I would like to know this as well, thanks.

  • Chris_in_CA

    @SayWhaat

    Neither. In the past I was a relationship guy. Nobody wants to hear the story, so I’ll skip it and say I’m MGTOW. I’m learning a little Game when I feel like reading up. No end goal to it, though.

    As you say, if none were the right guy – entirely possible. But statistically unlikely for women above say, a 7. If they had no relationship whatsoever for years, the common perceptions are not favorable. Pick any:
    -Carousel rider
    -Bats@#! crazy
    -Too busy for a relationship

    By the way, that example came from real life. Former roommate of mine. Turns out she was BPD and attacked him two weeks after the date with some gardening tool.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Does that mean guys can sense a long-term single woman the way women women can sense desperation? What sort of intuitions do men have?

    I would like to know this as well, thanks.

    We have intuitions, but they don’t usually work, for two reasons:

    1. Most guys are more desperate than you.
    2. Most guys who aren’t desperate at all are just patiently waiting for you to shut up so they can take you home and try to have sex with you.

    The rest of us can be pretty intuitive.

  • Abbot

    “Think of the last time a guy asked you “how many people have you had sex with?…the answer is heavily factored by many men in determining whether you are girlfriend, wifey or wife material.”

    Heavily factored! Many men!

    http://www.vibevixen.com/2011/12/the-purity-myth/#comment-3289

    FINALLY! A feminist admits – Its about what and how men universally think and how THEY determine what qualifies as “wife material.”

    And what is the sex poz and feminist solution? Telling women to fuck more, have flings, learn about men via genitalia variety, get pumped and dumped to men’s advantage…. and that your future SO is just going to have to deal with it. Aint exactly working, is it?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I like Neely. Even if she was hooking up drunk on vodka in college. She’s brave to take on the whole sex positive movement as a woman.

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

      @Jesus

      I like Neely. Even if she was hooking up drunk on vodka in college. She’s brave to take on the whole sex positive movement as a woman.

      Neely has a special gift – she’s a diplomat. I know she shares my POV, yet she’s over there at GMP forcing Marcotte to take her seriously. She and Hugo are on great terms. Everyone likes her, she’s not divisive. The blogosphere needs more writers like her – I’m certainly not one of them.

      She is also remarkably honest and objective about her own experiences. She’s mid-30s, I think, in a serious relationship but never married. Yet she communicates no defensiveness or personal agenda. She isn’t seeking validation for her past choices. She holds herself accountable and is open about her mistakes.

      I like her enormously, and she’s so smart, it’s a joy to read her.

  • sweetsue

    Feminism in it’s current form has become as restrictive, rigid an punitive to women as the patriarchy it originally sought to overthrow; yet it continues to blame the patriarchy for ills of the world. Way to give women choices and equal rights (NOT). Rights come with responsibilities, accountability and require discernment and critical thinking. Rad feminism leaves no room for the moderate woman or man and refuses to take any responsibility for the role the movements collective actions had have in creating the current sorry state of affairs. Having the legal, social right to do something does not automatically make it mandatory behavior nor does it make it the most well advised behavior. Each person has to make that decision for themselves based on their truth, and values.
    Each individual should be accorded dignity, respect and accorded space for self actualization as long as it does not negatively impinge on others who may not agree or share the same values.

    Times have changed women have made great strides in terms of legal recognition. It is not ideal – inequality among people still exist – society has evolved but the feminist message still seems to be we are oppressed by men. It has not evolved to adapt to factor in the changes that have occurred in society. The movement appears to have married the message and the method to the detriment of achieving objectives and alienating and even harming by stepping on the rights and equality of other people in the process. In short in so many ways it has become that which it started out to change.

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

      @Sweetsue

      That’s a great summary of where feminism went wrong, and it’s encouraging to hear more women saying what you did. I too find many of its tenets alienating and harmful, not just to me, but to all women. I find is especially harmful to men. Feminism has become toxic, in tone and in practice.

  • Pingback: My Precious Girl, Not My Frail One: On Daughters and Hook-Up Culture | Hugo Schwyzer

  • Emily

    @ Susan

    IMO, the fact that you’ve managed to piss off both the feminists and the MRA types is a sure sign that you’re doing something right. :D

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s.”

    Eh. It’s just one guy, as far as I can tell.

  • Abbot

    “it continues to blame the patriarchy for ills of the world”

    Lately, the main focus of feminism is an obsession with how men universally place women in wife and non-wife piles if just one of the criteria for doing so is past sexual behavior. It drives feminists bat shit crazy.

    Why is that?

  • Amonymous
  • Odds

    A big portion of the angst women feel about hookups, I think, is the disconnect between ego and accomplishment, how good they think they should feel and how good they actually feel. Some women can handle it – good for them. But it’s not healthy to have too much of an ego relative to one’s actual capabilities and accomplishments.

    Deep down inside, a girl knows after a hookup that it wasn’t a big deal – that the guy would have banged just about any girl above a 3, and she was just the first one to say yes. She knows it’s not an accomplishment, she knows it doesn’t mean she’s hot stuff, and she knows that now she’s just a notch to him. Compare to the ten Facebook duckface-photos she took, the two hours she spent on her hair and makeup, the hundreds of dollars on her heels and outfit. Tremendous time, money, and effort spent on the outward trappings of confidence, then an entire night spent acting the part of the confident, outgoing girl – and when it’s over, there’s no substance to back it up.

    Is it any wonder most girls can’t handle repeated applications of this kind of night?

    Whereas the girl in the loving relationship has the full substance to go with her effort and demeanor. No disconnect.

    The gap between confidence and accomplishment is not a healthy one.

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

      @Odds

      That’s the best Cost/Benefit analysis of hooking up from a POV I’ve ever seen. A very low ROI!

      The gap between confidence and accomplishment is not a healthy one.

      Agreed, which is why college counseling centers are overrun with young women desperate to receive counseling directly related to hooking up.

  • Passer_By

    Ok, I read to the bottom – more like 3 guys. Oh, well.

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

      Thanks to all for the encouragement re my hurt feelings. I was feeling sorry for myself, but I’m over it. I respect Dalrock enormously, and I am flattered when he links to me – he’s very smart and discerning. I need to learn to resist the temptation to peek over there. I signed up for this gig, after all.

      One thing that always surprises me is how many of my haters readily quote comments from the threads. They’ve never left a comment here themselves, but they’re ready to cut and paste like crazy from some of the ridiculously long threads. These people must have a lot of time on their hands to read a blog they hate from cover to cover.

  • Passer_By

    @Abott

    “Lately, the main focus of feminism is an obsession with how men universally place women in wife and non-wife piles if just one of the criteria for doing so is past sexual behavior. It drives feminists bat shit crazy.”

    Do you have some examples (other than Tom, I guess)?

  • Abbot

    “Is it any wonder most girls can’t handle repeated applications of this kind of night?”

    Is it any wonder that a man would not willfully want to dedicate his life to a “repeated applications” girl?

    “The gap between confidence and accomplishment is not a healthy one.”

    When done assisting them with pseudo empowerment, weed out the unhealthy or avoid it altogether by going way way south or far far east.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    First of all, the fact that Hugo’s on his 4th(!) wife should totally invalidate anything he says regarding men, women, and relationships.

    Second of all, wtf is he blathering about?

    My own ability to be a patient father, a faithful husband, a decent teacher and mentor isn’t in spite of my wild sexual choices when I was younger—it’s in large part because of them, and the lessons I learned.

    I’m not a father, so maybe I just don’t get it, but how does having indiscriminate sex with dozens of partners, some of whom you barely know, prepare you for raising healthy, responsible, contributing members of society? I’d love it if Hugo could give some concrete examples of how a past sexual experience of his helped him as a father.

    But what my life has taught me is that insight and compassion are rooted in experience

    This is true, but the way he attempts to tie it to his sexual experience is utter crap. Experience of people as human beings with ideas, emotions, and needs all their own can awaken compassion and insight, but I hardly see how casual sex can lead to this type of experience. Nobody’s really opening up to their partner in a casual hook up. You’re acting like animals, not people, when you hook up.

    I want them to know that they have the inner resilience to recover from the “silly” and “vapid” decisions they may make.

    Is it just me, or wouldn’t it be better to teach them not to make silly and vapid decisions in the first place?

  • Abbot

    This Hugo, is he some sort of sex pozzy feminist icon? Seems like they would worship him as in a cult they would want all [desirable] men to join.

  • Stingray

    A selection of tweets from Amanda Marcotte:

    - Your view of men and women in this piece doesn’t reflect any men or women I know.

    - Would you say I’m a “dude”? I curse a lot and don’t like mommy telling me what to do, either.

    - For all men feel constrained, imagine what it’s like to be a woman, and the one expected to not even have those urges.

    - I’ve just honestly never had that sitcom existence where I’m like, “Gah! Why do they think sex is so great?” Uh….

    Wow. . . . just. . . .wow.

    I was going to comment on each one, but really, what’s the point?

  • Kathy

    “Ok, I read to the bottom – more like 3 guys. Oh, well.”

    There are also a few on the previous thread .

    Kudos to Rum for speaking up and supporting Susan.

    The main protagonist (and you would know to whom I am referring Susan ) is dumb as a bunch of rocks. I had the displeasure of engaging with him on the Eat Pray Cats thread.. Bad move. The guy is best ignored. The amusing thing is, that he thinks he is one helluva smart and funny guy..And it REALLY shows.

    A couple of losers showed up to get on the bandwagon. Including Hollenhund who was still going on about a comment I made on your blog six months ago, and he linked to it. *ROLLS EYES* I really think that some of these people just don’t have a life. Fancy H scrolling through all those comments just to locate a light hearted comment of mine in which I said that my daughter was a good looker, just so he could rehash his beef. Ha ha ha..

    Humorless, much?

    Truly, these dimwits crack me up. They are beginning to sound like cracked records. All water off a ducks back to me..

    I have to say though that as far as tolerating criticism and accepting opposing points of view you that you are very gracious Susan. Many other bloggers have a glass jaw and cannot put up with it.

    Obviously you cannot please everyone… Besides, you are a woman so you lose points on that score. :D

  • A.

    There was a post a while back about a survey of roughly 22 year olds on how many sexual partners they had, and the results seemed more believable than most other similar such surveys.

    It was pointed out that men and women’s “numbers” tracked each other. But a subtle point was that men were over represented among the less promiscuous.

    About (IIRC) 30% of males were virgins and about 30% had less than 5 partners (but more than zero). The numbers were similar for women, but slightly different. It was about 25% of women were virgins and 25% had less than 5 partners.

    The double standard really is a myth in several ways, among them that (all) men don’t easily have endless amounts of judgment-free casual sex (with 30% of them being virgins in their early to mid 20s). It’s also a myth in that it’s not really that, all other things being equal, women are judged more harshly for being promiscuous. What seems likely is that there is assertive mating, in that men and women with similar “numbers” end up together. That makes sense, right?

    The thing is, there are 60% of women with 5 or fewer partners and 50% of men with 5 or fewer partners. Similar to how 25% of college educated women will not be able to find college educated men to marry, about 10% of women will either not marry or marry a man who was much less promiscuous than she was.

    I think this corresponds to reality: People are still hooking up, people are still marrying, the world keeps turning. Women being judged as promiscuous (because they can’t find a man who was at least as equally promiscuous as they were) probably only has an effect on the margins.

  • jess

    kathy and A:

    awesome comments

    some of the guys here are very ‘fringe worthy’ (not to mention cringeworthy!)

  • Passer_By

    @jess

    I prefer to think of myself as “spongeworthy” :)

  • Tom (the ex-lurker)

    Hi Susan,

    Your quote:
    “I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh”

    From what I can tell it’s only 1 commenter who is trying to crucify you and Dragnet made a great defence of you there. Not to mention Dalrock’s post was basically agreeing and parrotting yours anyway. And you’re old enough to complete the saying:

    “Imitation is the purest form of f_____”

    I don’t think you can really claim crucified status for it.

  • Chris_in_CA

    Isn’t it interesting how, when feminism has holes poked in it during a discussion, women show up to downplay the issues & decry men…

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Isn’t it interesting how, when feminism has holes poked in it during a discussion, women show up to downplay the issues & decry men…

    No. To be honest, they’re right, bro. For most people, these issues are just passing concerns. They get on with their lives, get married, have families, or don’t, and never rant or rave.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    some of the guys here are very ‘fringe worthy’ (not to mention cringeworthy!)

    I’m not criticizing you personally, but you realize that most guys would cringe at the thought of a woman with 20 some-odd partners, right?

    Not to your face, but, yea….

  • Abbot

    “You are particularly focused on justifying casual sex as a choice. ”

    and all the unpredictable and for most women unpleasant outcomes that such a choice leads to. The female lurkers here, once again, are not buying the self serving bullshit.

    “you can thank feminism for making it so easy for you to get NSA sex and a pat on the back.”

    Feminism is contrived and unnatural and has therefore led to perversion and its nasty cousin, unhappiness. How many more years of this is necessary before the pain becomes overtly unbearable?

  • Abbot

    “most guys would cringe at the thought of a woman with 20 some-odd partners”

    Well, not when it comes to getting laid. That would be silly. Every woman serves some sort of purpose, as does every man.

  • Esau

    It’s a bit OT at first, but only a bit; it’s not directly connected to the promotion of hookup culture per se (at least, that I can see), but I think poisonous feminism is also greatly at fault for bringing on the betapocalypse of the last generation or two of men. The evidence is live before us.

    Linguists will tell you that words are defined against their opposites or compliments, and so those are always present even if unspoken; e.g. simply using the phrase “compassionate conservatism” silently implies the existence of an earlier kind of conservatism that was not compassionate. Similarly “the good men project” inevitably implies that men are not basically good by default, but work has to be put in to making them that way, or in finding the exceptions who are. This meshes perfectly with what I believe is common knowledge, that The Good Men Project is essentially feminist through and through — from what I can see, basically all the writers and topics are feminist-approved — because that’s been the armature of feminism in the US for the last 30 years: the idea that men are basically, essentially bad, born with some original sin, in a way that women are not. (I hope I don’t have to argue this point; anyone inclined to bleat NAFALT has already conceded the basic case IMO.)

    Now, it’s hard for anyone not there at the time, to describe how much legitimacy the feminist cause had in America circa 1980. To all appearances, they had fought for and won an historic advance in human culture: never again would it be acceptable in polite society even to suggest that women should not be able to get an education, to own property, to take professional jobs, or to run for office. But the movement had too much momentum to stop or reconsider, and so when it plunged onward from basic equality of citizenship to talking about the unmatched, unquenchable evils of patriarchy and rape culture — as we see at TGMP — that enormous legitimacy was spent in convincing the culture that men are essentially bad, and it is men’s uncorrected impulses that are the root and source of everything that is wrong in the world.

    Thus, the betapocalypse: several generations, now, of men being raised to internalize the idea that we are essentially bad, and so their first task becomes to apologize for their maleness and anything connected with it. And from this poisoned seedling we can see the whole wretchedly unattractive side of the beta cluster blooming forth: the posture of self-blaming, of hesitating and seeking approval, the reflex to ask for permission first, hiding and being ashamed of lustful feelings, the subconscious attitude that he is intrinsically unworthy until/unless he can first redeem the original sin — not an easy task, if you’ve never even been told what the sin exactly was! Think about it: the whole sorry spectacle of decrepit betatude is the song that rises from the staves of guilt for the new original sin.

    It used to be that only a handful of unlucky men, who had really toxic mothers, grew up with this kind of complex of feelings, and they were curiosity items for psychologists. But since some time around 1980 in the US poisonous feminism, through its hold on respectable, polite public discourse, became the toxic mother to at least two generations of men; and the consequences have been disastrous — for obvious reasons — for men and women both. The betapocalypse may or may not be directly related to the rise and promotion of hookup culture; but it’s certainly a disaster in itself that feminism needs to (but never will) answer for.

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

      @Esau

      It used to be that only a handful of unlucky men, who had really toxic mothers, grew up with this kind of complex of feelings, and they were curiosity items for psychologists. But since some time around 1980 in the US poisonous feminism, through its hold on respectable, polite public discourse, became the toxic mother to at least two generations of men; and the consequences have been disastrous — for obvious reasons — for men and women both. The betapocalypse may or may not be directly related to the rise and promotion of hookup culture; but it’s certainly a disaster in itself that feminism needs to (but never will) answer for.

      This rings so true it sent shivers up my spine. It does play out in the SMP but it goes much deeper than that. Feminism has been soul-destroying for men.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    A,

    About (IIRC) 30% of males were virgins and about 30% had less than 5 partners (but more than zero). The numbers were similar for women, but slightly different. It was about 25% of women were virgins and 25% had less than 5 partners.

    I always thought the 80/20 paradigm seemed exaggerated… this is the best hard evidence I’ve seen disproving it.

    I would also say that adding to the notion of this 80/20 idea is the concept of the carousel watcher: a girl who never really gets on the carousel but wishes she could, or tries but fails. I was no carousel rider in college, but I’ll admit that during my sophomore year, I was a carousel watcher. Went out with my friends regularly. Had some dance floor makeout hookups. I was still kind of a “prude” (losing my virginity was never an option in that setting), but I had the same mindset, kind of, as a carousel rider: I needed hookups (mostly just makeout hookups) for validation.

    I can see how that’s upsetting to men… that for every girl with over 10 partners, there might be 2 who are too shy or “prudish” but have the same mindset. Which is why Susan should do workshops at freshman orientations. :-)

  • WarmWoman

    Chris in CA-I can see why some men would think “She’s either bullshitting or she’s batshit crazy”, but here’s my explanation as to why I was single for awhile.

    Coming from an immigrant family, my mom only wanted me to date men from my culture. I got a lot of date offers from white men, but I turned them down out of fear of disproving my parents. Unfortunately, the men from my culture that I met didn’t interest me. Since I was living with my parents during college/graduate school (which is again expected in that culture), it wasn’t easy sneaking a white man behind my parents’ backs. So, I felt like I had no choice but to stay single. Once I moved out of my parents’ house, I was able to go out on a lot of dates and did get involved in a long-term relationship. Yeah, it’s kind of embarrassing to explain to that I was pleasing an overbearing and xenophobic mother, but oh well.

  • Abbot

    “counseling centers are overrun with young women desperate to receive counseling directly related to hooking up”

    Notwithstanding a certain “type” of woman, its not a woman’s game. 1948 = 2011. Deeply speaking, nothing has changed. Had enough, ladies?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Esau,
    Your entire post fascinates me and really makes me think about “betatude” and how it affects relationships and marriages. Question: do you think it’s possible that this “betatude” indoctrination, created and promoted by the feminists, is in part responsible for divorce rates?

    And, if so, how can women deal with the reality of this indoctrination if they want successful LTRs/marriages? It’s clear that it is ingrained in our society, that we can’t just reprogram millions of men and boys.

  • Odds

    @ Olive

    The 80/20 paradigm is alive and well. The basic premise, that 20% of guys have 80% of the sex, seems to stack up to reality just fine. Just using the two data points listed, you can’t prove much, but you can infer a lot from basic experience.

    30% of early-twenties guys are virgins. No need to get into that one.

    30% have had 5 or fewer partners. Of those 5 or fewer partners, likely 2 or 3 were hookups, likely one-time things. Even if they weren’t, how many of those 30% of guys are actually able to say they were with one girl for longer than a few months? Most of them, probably. And likely, they’ve had long dry spells in between. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a man who has had 5 sex partners has actually had a whole lot of sex.

    So 40% of men claim to have had 6 or more partners by their mid-twenties. That’s a lot of partners, in some cases – but how much sex does it translate to? An alpha male could pull a girl a week, get 52 notches in a year, but only have sex once a week during that time – not really a lot of sex for a year. A beta could have a steady girlfriend, get sexed twice a week for six months and think he’s in paradise, then once every two weeks for the next six months and consider it better than nothing – but that’s an average of only 1.25 times per week for a year. Not a lot (and not enough).

    Now, those are all hypothetical numbers – made ‘em up on the spot, don’t quote them, not trying to use them as “proof” of anything. I’m just saying that it’s well within the realm of possibility that, of the 40% of guys with 6 or more partners and 30% of guys with 5 or fewer, the actual amount of sex they are having might not be that high for a significant fraction of each group. I’d rather have sex a hundred times with one girl than one time each with ten girls – novelty is awesome, but dry spells suck.

    On a related note, for girls who like sex, you can have it a thousand times with one guy and it won’t be as damaging to your SMV as sex one time each with 10 guys. Just try to pick a guy who isn’t a scumbag; they’re not that hard to find.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Odds,
    It seems I have misinterpreted the 80/20 paradigm. I thought the premise was 80% of women are having sex with 20% of men? Apparently I was wrong-o. Oops.

  • Mike C

    Linguists will tell you that words are defined against their opposites or compliments, and so those are always present even if unspoken; e.g. simply using the phrase “compassionate conservatism” silently implies the existence of an earlier kind of conservatism that was not compassionate. ****Similarly “the good men project” inevitably implies that men are not basically good by default, but work has to be put in to making them that way,*****

    Esau, that is one hell of an astute observation. Regarding the “Good Man Project” everytime I hear that I want to throw up. Tom Matlack gets no sympathy from me. I have zero respect for sycophants. These guys who want to curry favor with the Amanda Marcotte’s of the world remind me of the parable of the scorpion and the frog:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

  • Mike C

    Your entire post fascinates me and really makes me think about “betatude” and how it affects relationships and marriages. Question: do you think it’s possible that this “betatude” indoctrination, created and promoted by the feminists, is in part responsible for divorce rates?

    Yes

    And, if so, how can women deal with the reality of this indoctrination if they want successful LTRs/marriages? It’s clear that it is ingrained in our society, that we can’t just reprogram millions of men and boys.

    Engage in the process of introspection and self-evaluation that you are doing. I saw you are blogging vis a vis Badger. If there is going to be substantial change it will be because many more women emulate the path you are going down.

  • http://goodmenproject.com Lisa Hickey

    Hey Susan,

    I’m publisher of The Good Men Project, and just wanted to say thanks for the shoutout, dirt and all. Tom’s arm is healing nicely from all those piranha bites. Let me know if you’d ever like to contribute or cross-link.

    Lisa

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

      @Lisa Hickey

      Thanks for stopping by! I’d be happy to write a piece at GMP. I can think of many topics, but none that wouldn’t drive the feminists into apoplexy. For example, I’d love to write a piece on traditional masculinity, and how the Women’s Movement made it shameful. Read Esau’s comment at 10:50 above to see what I mean. Are you interested? Feel free to shoot me an email at walsh.susan1@gmail.com.

  • Rum

    Susan
    I put in a timely good word for you at Dalrocks place. You may or may not like what I said, but I did feel that your intentions, at least, should not be dragged thru the mud by barely literate, nose-breathing wankers…without a reply.
    I mean, you mean well, in a sense that is rapidly fading from any existence in our feministic gynocracy.

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

      @Rum

      Thank you for your honest feedback. I appreciate it very much, and I don’t take issue with what you said. Actually, I’m glad I went back to Dalrock’s and read the thread. There were several interesting comments there, including some good constructive criticism. I find that helpful. There are some men I am never going to please, but I think I could do a better job sometimes getting the message out.

      For example, I’ve been seeing a lot of claims that I am pro-relationship only so that women can get what they want. That wouldn’t work – we all know that women cannot drag men into relationships against their will. I believe that the majority of men and women want relationships, and the majority (80%!) are struggling to find them in this SMP/hookup culture. I do care deeply about both men and women.

      Another frequent criticism is that I’m trying to keep men down by making them comfortable about being beta. The opposite is true. I firmly believe in the value of many of the traits we call beta. I firmly support less dominant guys ramping up their confidence and social dominance via game or any other kind of self-development that works for them.

      Finally, I’ve been accused of being anti-PUA and anti-MRA. In both cases, I recognize that incentives drive behavior. People have their reasons, and every right, for choosing how to spend their lives. I simply counsel women wanting relationships to avoid PUAs or players like the plague, just as I counsel men who want relationships to avoid psychos/bitches/sluts. As for MRAs, I’ll never please them, because like feminists, they do not seek equity. They seek acknowledged supremacy. I’m not down with that goal. And they tend to derail my comment threads, which is annoying.

  • GudEnuf

    The fact that Hugo Schwyzer has more fem cred than Tim Matlack shows that the feminist movement is more concerned with what you say than what you do.

    Hugo Schwyzer abused his teaching position by having sex with his students. There is nothing that Tim could possibly write on his blog that would disrespect women the way Hugo Schwyzer has. So are all the big-name feminist bloggers so cuddly with Hugo?

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

      @GudEnuf

      I linked to the Twitter squabble – you should check it out. The fawning and obsequiousness of the men sickened me. Tom Matlack got into bed with feminists and now he’s questioning how his blog turned into some crazy version of Occupy GMP. Hugo is a boot licker, plain and simple. And he has a platform.

  • Odds

    @ GoodEnuf

    Feminists found, in Hugo, a man who fully endorses a woman’s right to cuckold. This is literally too precious and rare a resource for them to give up. Are you surprised they would throw a few young female students under the bus if it served their purposes?

  • GudEnuf

    @ Odds: Must be.

    Hugo says he stayed in academia because his peers claimed he was doing too much good to leave. To me, that just shows how morally bankrupt academia must be. “Feminist” professors established a precedent of tolerating student abuse, in order to protect their buddy.

  • LeapofaBeta

    @ Susan
    Ugh. Rmaxd on Dalrock’s seems pretty dense. He seems to refuse to see the need for people to grow and change their opinions after seeing the shock of reality the SMP presents. You’re honest about your goals as you continue to search for solutions to meet them.

    Honestly I hate some of the ideas and language of the PUA and game communities. I connect with people that see it as tools but not a way of life. I understand MGTOW as people fed up with it and without the energy to try and find a solution, but opening using the same shame tactics they decry against you and the commenters here that are in pain and in search of a solution or lifestyle that makes them happy….. Ugh

    They be hatin’

  • LeapofaBeta

    I’m curious. I’ve been reading the articles posted and linked on and off as I find time. I see the stuff with Hugo and Neely, but I don’t see anything about this Matlock guy you reference in the first part of your blog.

    Where’s the article that got him deep in the shit show with the feminists? Am I just missing it somewhere?

    Love Neely’s thoughts. Never read her stuff before. She seems to approach things very practically and honestly. I’ll have to try and read more of her stuff.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Cheerful Sadist #73 85 88

    I need a good night sleep before I take on the Boomers, my fave group to bash. Maybe I’ll be so inspired that I’ll write something so great that the Millenials et al will rise up “Planet of the Apes” style and really start building the Boomer concentration camps (let’s keep the good thought!). As for haters, you can’t hate someone you don’t respect (fear is a sub branch of respect, its toxic cousin). It’s a price to be paid for having “edges”, and you (and me) are pretty edgy. Chin up. As for feminism doing a number on us guys, well, not me. I’ve never met a woman who identified up front as a “feminist” although have met many whose politics, social mores and overall worldview (ahh “Confederacy of Dunces”-great book; a pity) were consistent. As you can probably gather reading me, I’m not a shrinking violet so any real feminists would either recoil, adapt, ignore, or simply integrate my worldview which is not inconsistent with the feminism I knew. I did have a girl put a empty cheese container on my head during a anti-feminist rant I was doing. I was only half serious, but when she did that I walked out and thus lost my job. Guess what-we “hooked up” (we called it one night stands-oh yeah, you know) years later in law school.

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

      @Munson

      It’s a price to be paid for having “edges”, and you (and me) are pretty edgy.

      Funny, I never have thought of myself as edgy before – I’m pretty much the opposite in my personality. And I feel HUS is hardly extreme – I think I’m saying what most of us feel. I’m speaking for a HUGE silent majority here, or trying to. Yet, you’re right, my motives are suspect by those to the right and left. I guess that makes me an outlier, when I thought I was smack in the middle.

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

    From Olive:
    “Question: do you think it’s possible that this “betatude” indoctrination, created and promoted by the feminists, is in part responsible for divorce rates?”

    Yes. Because men were given this advice: “Be nice, be yourself”:
    http://theprivateman.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/mom-was-wrong-a-personal-narrative/

    A generation of men have been trained to be beta but with women still wanting alpha characteristics. That’s a recipe for failure.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “Does that mean guys can sense a long-term single woman the way women women can sense desperation? What sort of intuitions do men have?”

    I don’t know about a sixth sense, but there are some women you just get the idea they are single for a reason – the reason being a malignant personal or strategic factor like offering easy sex for commitment, being too picky, being too proud about being “awesome,” too proud to give a little, rejecting too many prospects “as if,” you get the idea. There’s just a sort of personality that exudes most of those traits, and that personality happens to be actively repulsive to most men.

    Women who have busy but non-superficial work and personal lives and just haven’t prioritized dating don’t fall into that category for me.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    On social constructs:

    Roosh had a line in one of his books where he said “Usually feminists are
    extremely easy because they don’t believe in “social constructs” like “whore,” “slut,” and “cum dumpster.””

  • mark

    Susan wrote:

    “I can’t imagine Neely’s article is going to help Matlack get back into the Piranhas’ good graces, but if he continues to speak out against man hating and female supremacy the Good Men Project will be a much better blog.”

    Maybe Matlack could just start deleting the posts of the radical feminists and others he disagrees with like other bloggers do.

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

      @Mark

      Maybe Matlack could just start deleting the posts of the radical feminists and others he disagrees with like other bloggers do.

      Yeah, I’m not sure. He says the blog has a woman CEO, and Lisa Hickey commented here saying she is the publisher (maybe they’re the same person?). So it’s not clear to me how much control Matlack has over the blog. Given how much the blog has deviated from his own vision for it, and how unhappy he is about that, I’d say he lost or ceded control somewhere along the way.

  • Jhane Sez

    So 40% of men claim to have had 6 or more partners by their mid-twenties. That’s a lot of partners, in some cases – but how much sex does it translate to? An alpha male could pull a girl a week, get 52 notches in a year, but only have sex once a week during that time – not really a lot of sex for a year. A beta could have a steady girlfriend, get sexed twice a week for six months and think he’s in paradise, then once every two weeks for the next six months and consider it better than nothing – but that’s an average of only 1.25 times per week for a year. Not a lot (and not enough).

    @Odds…

    This reminds me of an episode of Will and Grace… Grace is dating Woody Harleson and they are discussing sex numbers, and Grace doesn’t want Woody to be intimidated because she has a high number lets just say 30… Woody says that it doesn’t bother him and reveals that his number is 5.

    He defends his number by saying that with those 5 women he had A LOT of sex… so they add up the number of times they had sex with these partners Grace is at 250 and Woody is at 3,856.

    The moral of this story is that quality mate selection with get you quantity sex ~JS

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    The main warning sign men get from long-single women is the same women get from men – bitterness coupled with desperation. When women are younger, men will sleep with them despite their personality flaws, but as they get older & their looks fade, men will tend to steer clear of women with mean faces & obvious issues. And, for women who already blame men for everything wrong in their world, this of course just adds to their baggage. If you don’t like ‘Men’, after all, why should men like you? And vice versa, of course.

    A woman happy being alone for awhile is actually a good sign for girlfriend material, my present GF had spent a year on her own before I came along, just getting herself together, working on herself. That only made her more attractive to me.

  • Abbot

    “Usually feminists are extremely easy because they don’t believe in “social constructs” like “whore,” “slut,” and “cum dumpster.””

    Years of pre-spinsterhood male servicing begins immediately after that first non-accomplishment easy to get penis, pill and self-worth cocktail.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Jhane,

    this has been gone over here much more thoroughly before but it really doesn’t work like that for men : on a purely biological level, the goal is to be with as many partners as possible, so the promise of ‘regular sex’ is really quite a dull proposition to most men. I mean, if you fall in love it’s great to be with that special person, but to dangle that like a carrot in front of the male population will probably not get you the results you want.

    Will & Grace was a show made entirely for a gay & female audience, I wouldn’t take any cues from it in its depictions of the realities of heterosexual relationships, & especially not second-guessing the reactions of men.

  • Jhane Sez

    “this has been gone over here much more thoroughly before but it really doesn’t work like that for men : on a purely biological level, the goal is to be with as many partners as possible, so the promise of ‘regular sex’ is really quite a dull proposition to most men. I mean, if you fall in love it’s great to be with that special person, but to dangle that like a carrot in front of the male population will probably not get you the results you want.”

    @Byron…

    I was simply responding to Odds post, in part motivated by the response from Megaman to my tongue in cheek comment “the boys love variety”… he emphatically stated that he did not.

    In real life the dudes I know fall squarely into two camps those that want and desire sex with as many women as possible, they argue that monogamy isn’t natural nature of men.

    The other camp belongs to what Significant Other calls “The Woman Conversation”… it is when you meet Woman and your only desire is to hit her over the head drag her back to your cave and sex her frequently in many, many different ways. These men claim that this is the natural nature of men and all the other banging is just a hunt for Woman.

    I don’t have any proof but I think both sides speak the truth and from a primitive place… I truly believe their could be an evolutionary divide.

    Just as there are some women who follow the biological directive that says she needs to sleep around to assure she has a provider for her offspring leading to hyergamous behavior

    And other women who are wired to bond with one mate at a time regardless of the risk of her offspring may face if he doesn’t return from the hunt.

    It makes sense that if behaviors are genetically encoded that risk takers and those more attracted to them would be more inclined to take the route of having multiple partners.

    Where as the more cerebral, and risk adverse would be more inclined towards monogamy because they were more interested in building and growing from a foundation.

    This is just a personal theory based upon observation and the divergence in evolutionary mating behaviors that I have read over the years ~JS

  • Jhane Sez

    “I would also say that adding to the notion of this 80/20 idea is the concept of the carousel watcher: a girl who never really gets on the carousel but wishes she could, or tries but fails. I was no carousel rider in college, but I’ll admit that during my sophomore year, I was a carousel watcher. Went out with my friends regularly. Had some dance floor makeout hookups. I was still kind of a “prude” (losing my virginity was never an option in that setting), but I had the same mindset, kind of, as a carousel rider: I needed hookups (mostly just makeout hookups) for validation.”

    @Olive…

    We used to call these “the girls who watch the coats and hold the purses”… except the goal was getting guys to ask you to dance, buy you drinks, and call you for a date, not hooking up in any form

    Even making out in the club with the hottest of guys was given the side eye and met with a suggestion that you stop drinking and get something to eat, preferably at home.

    I noticed that these girls went one of three ways… they got a boyfriend and stopped going out, they made improvements to their appearance that got them more attention from men, or they became sexually aggressive and promiscuous.

    The funny thing is that when I was in college the girls who wanted boyfriends or had a more feminine appearance or tried to make improvements to attract men were the ones who were shamed.

    I broke with the women’s studies crowd because I was tired of being criticized for dating, wearing lipstick and mini skirts… basing my appearance on sexist patriarchal standards.

    What was interesting was that neglecting your appearance and having sex like a man was considered accepting yourself without artifice and exploring your sexuality without shame.

    Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that promiscuity would become the predominate goal of the SMP.

    When we went to see Reality Bites in 1994 no one wanted to be Vicky ((Janeane Garofalo’s character) she was her early 20’s with a 40+ body count and a HIV scare when one of her hook ups tested positive.

    We rooted for Ethan Hawke and Winona Ryder to get together, and they did. We wanted to see the sequel with them married, successful in their careers and making babies… and to see all that goes into making that work.

    While I am still on the fence about slut shaming, I have to acknowledge that the female heard mentality can go in either direction depending on the goals of the heard.

    The best advice I can offer to young women trying to negoticate today’s SMP is to align with other young women who share your values and goals ~JS

  • Tom

    Susan, this is the best artical to date. Should be a real eye opener. I would agree only maybe 10% of women can have sex like a man, with zero strings. That is still a very large number of women. More importantly it explains very well what many women go thru, who have a fair amont of partners. Instead of them feeling good about themselves, they actually start feeling used and cheap after some time. The smart ones break the cycle and find a better way to a relationship. I think it is a hard cycle to break, however. Normally the woman has to sink pretty low to want to change. For many women sex is like a drug. They feel lonely, they have sex to get their fix and it works, temporarily Then they sink a little lower and need the fix again. It is self medicating. It becomes a way of life for some women. Tough road to hoe (no pun intended.)
    Also congrats on the new site. It is VERY easy to navigate thru now.

  • Jhane Sez

    ““She’s either bullshitting me or she’s bats*@! crazy. Otherwise she’d have had plenty of dates in the past 4 years. Something’s wrong.”
    Neither of these are positive impressions of the woman. Both however are derived from the current SMP, feminism’s outreach and the alpha bang/beta pay dynamic. So it’s not an unreasonable assessment to make.”

    @Chris in CA…

    The problem is that when I read mansphere blogs they describe that an 8+ non carosel rider is the ideal girlfriend and has the most wife potential.

    But based on your comments and those of other men they either don’t believe she exist or is trying to ‘game’ them.

    Isn’t ironic, don’t you think… a little too ironic, I really do think.

    Real talk how is this any different than the women who say that all men aren’t sh*t regardless of their demonstrated behavior.

    I also wanted to add because you profess to be MGTOW… you guys need to be mindful of what you prescribe for your younger brothers of the struggle.

    My daughter broke up with her last boyfriend because he would do things like tells her he was almost at her front door and he would leave her waiting downstairs for 45 minutes because in truth he hadn’t left the house.

    He would tell her that he was attending classes (at a community college) and getting good grades he just wasn’t sure what he wanted to do with his life.

    When the truth was that he had dropped half of his classes and was getting lousy grades because he wanted to spend the day playing video games.

    The final straw occurred over the summer when he told her that he had decided to become more involved with the Boy Scouts and become a conselor at a Cub Scout summer camp and was going to pursue a forestry degree and she was over the moon proud. That is until she found out that he was late filing out the paper work for a camp conselor and his dad had to pull strings to get him a dish washing job at the camp which he lost because he, even though he was staying at the camp site, couldn’t make it to work on time.

    She confided in me recently that the reason she wouldn’t invite him to her birthday party was even though she was trying to be cool with him is that he accused her of some horrible things and called her some nasty names over text.

    He accused her of being a hypergamous carousel rider… even though he did not spell it correctly … I have seen the saved text on her phone.

    She also showed me that he was MGTOW posting the stuff all over facebook and never getting married because of what she put him through.

    So his life since last summer has involved him moving into the basement, barely going to school and playing video games until he goes to work with his mom at his part time job at a furniture store… he has an older brother on a similar path.

    If this is the path that you are advocating that young men follow I would offer that you advise better… because at this rate he won’t be able to attain basic survival or be able to maintain a internet bill on his own much less rent and other basic utilities.

    I feel like my daughter doged a bullet, but I feel really sorry for this boy.

    So if you are going to advocate MGTOW I would suggest that you give them a better blueprint or these young men will end up more screwed up that the feminist have made women ~JS

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

      @Jhane Sez

      He accused her of being a hypergamous carousel rider… even though he did not spell it correctly … I have seen the saved text on her phone.

      She also showed me that he was MGTOW posting the stuff all over facebook and never getting married because of what she put him through.

      I guess Roissy and Roosh really do have incredible reach.

  • jess

    Susan Walsh said: @Jess
    “You are particularly focused on justifying casual sex as a choice. That is not what this article at GMP was about. Both Neely and Hugo acknowledge that feminism ended dating and made casual sex pretty much the only dish on the menu. Both acknowledge that women are miserable as a result. Hugo’s answer is to tell women to cheer up, it’s all part of the beautiful person that you are (which is what you said too). Neely says, “If it feels like crap stop doing it.” Neely’s right – 90% of women don’t thrive on a diet of casual sex. You’re in the 10% – and you can thank feminism for making it so easy for you to get NSA sex and a pat on the back.”
    ———-
    To be honest I hardly think it needs a justification. Life is for living and enjoying- and people enjoy sex very much. Yes, some people are not that great at sex or are incompatible but my peers and I had some great instances of NSA sex. Its not as good as LTR sex granted but it can still be pretty damn good.
    Having said that I have always promoted moderation and safety and I wouldn’t support utter hedonism.
    But the odd slice of cake now again is good for you.
    My main point here is the absurd hint that women are somehow ‘tainted’ due to prior experience. Its a crock- and it bears repeating (apparently).
    I agree with ‘if it feels crap stop doing it’, and thats the point- sometimes it can be orgasmic, life affirming and a blast. Oh yeah and ‘empowering’. Especially when on a rebound or simply a particular time of the month.
    Am I the 10%? well I have been out of the game a while now- but – Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?. Virtually all will go onto to LTRs and kids. So gonna have to agree to differ on that one.

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

      @Jess

      My main point here is the absurd hint that women are somehow ‘tainted’ due to prior experience. Its a crock- and it bears repeating (apparently).

      But the post didn’t say that. Hugo actually suggested that a lot of casual experience has made him a better man. Neely spoke for herself, saying she felt tainted by the experience. She described her friends as feeling the same way. You’re arguing against a point that was never made.

  • Jhane Sez

    “This doesn’t have much to do with the post but I think the definition of hooking up was watered down to make it seem like the girls who stop at first base are the same as the girls who let strange guys make home runs on them night after night. “No one can be shamed, because we all hookup!” The fact that people would go out of their way to do this means that there IS something shameful about sex with randos.”

    @BSD…

    This sh*t right here… YES!

    Your entire commentary was so brilliant and insightful I truly wish that I had written it myself.

    In part because it contains many observations that I have made and discussed with my older peer group… you have given me hope, because if you ‘see’ it and get it then it is possible for others.

    Viva monogamy revolution!

    I am in total agreement that the whole hooking up meme was started to water down promiscuity and make dating obsolete.

    I think hooking up is like crack… the first hit is free but the other hits will cost you dearly… girls you better watch out.

    And with a New Jack drug we need some New Jack cops to bust the peddlers.

    Brava girl… keeping speaking to reach those I can’t ~JS

  • Emily

    >>Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?

    Having NSA sex isn’t the same thing as enjoying NSA sex.

  • Escoffier

    “They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older”

    This is great.

    Here’s what I need to hear: “Eating caviar, truffles & foie every day and quaffing Chateaux Margaux like water will not make you fat nor have any adverse impact on your health or finances.

    I really need to hear that. Will someone please say it to me?

    thx

  • Jhane Sez

    “Am I the 10%? well I have been out of the game a while now- but – Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?.”

    @Jess…

    Just stop because you know you are dirty… playing at being provocative.

    Stop it because you know that this is a lie… and it the worst form of female bitchassedness hating.

    YOU KNOW most chicks aren’t even going to orgasm in this scenario… let alone the relationships and bonding that they are desperate for.

    But chicks like you want to perpetuate the lie to validate your own decisions…

    Stop it.

    You have been out of the game for a while now so why don’t you give peace a chance and give these other girls an honest shot that you never got or chose.

    Why lie

    Cause if you are as grown as I think you are, you know that once you have seen certain things you can’t unsee them and you just have to deal with them…

    You just have to cope.

    I ask you, on a human level… to stop.

    The pretense and lying that you have done to make it possible to deal with what you see in the mirror in your own head, when you are alone and lonely.

    Bullshit your mom, family, girls, co-workers, lovers… do what you gotta do to live with yourself and survive.

    But don’t deliberately mislead the young girls who have a chance that you didn’t have to find love and have a moment of special

    Just stop and let them go…

    Pretty please ~JS

  • Ted D

    @ Jess – You Said: “Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?. Virtually all will go onto to LTRs and kids.”

    Not with my son if I have anything to say about it. ;)

    And I highly doubt 70% of young women are enjoying NSA sex. Of course, I guess that depends on your definition of enjoy. Since it has been shown that women do not usually have orgasms from NSA/ONS type sex, I guess it must be the wonderful mind-altering experience of being used as a sex toy they enjoy so much…

    I can’t prove you are wrong, but unless you have links to studies, you can’t prove you are right.

  • http://natewinchester.wordpress.com/ Nate Winchester

    I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.

    WHAT???? And I was wondering why he wasn’t on your blogroll any more.

    That’s just… :(

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

      WHAT???? And I was wondering why he wasn’t on your blogroll any more.

      When I took a good hard look at my mission I decided to remove all links that were incompatible with it. Dalrock is not, but his readers hate on me quite a bit, so that’s no good.

  • jess

    JS- what a truly bizarre comment!
    Well assuming you are serious in your views….

    i dont think it is a lie to say the majority of young (uk) girls are having non LTR sex.
    I accept that actually TOO much is happening and this is evident in the STD epidemic london has.
    This not mean to say that NSA sex is the root of all evil- I am happy to support digital sex as an alternative, a bit of moderation in frequency and moderation in drink/drugs which can lead to risky behaviour.
    I certainly don’t subscribe to name calling like loser, slag, virgin, slut, fatso etc
    Women do orgasm with NSA’s though not nearly as much as with LTRs. This doesnt stop them from being fun- thats why its so damn hard trying to stop STD’s
    I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.
    by the way- I am in an LTR with children…you appear to have missed that.
    ps. nearly all my peers have sexual histories and guess what…. they also are in LTRs with kids…. all very conventional now you see.

  • jess

    Ted,
    well there probably is some research out there on the topic but I daresay we could find links supporting each others stance.

    I would agree that orgasms are much rarer than in NSA’s than LTRs- no argument there.

    But with the right guy/gal NSAs can be very exciting and enjoyable. And I had a bunch of wonderful flings when younger- as did a whole bunch of my peers. I have friends who said the best sex they ever had was during a fling- so I’m sorry but it does happen.

    Also you said ‘used’ but I regard sex as a mutual endeavour. I don’t regard girls as orifices that are used by guys. you have this ancient concept in your head which explains your antagonism on the issue- its just not necessary.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Here’s what I need to hear: “Eating caviar, truffles & foie every day and quaffing Chateaux Margaux like water will not make you fat nor have any adverse impact on your health or finances.
    I really need to hear that. Will someone please say it to me?”

    @Escoffer… +1

    And can you add… trader joe’s cookie butter(peanut butter with crushed up ginger cookies) topped Elvis brownies (made with bacon, bananas and peanut butter), rib eye steaks and bourbon to the list.

    If I can I will have a REAL happy holiday.

    I’ve been really, really good this year ~JS

  • Guestopher

    TMatlack may be taking a step in the right direction, but there’s still this:

    “@TheRealRoseanne MRA is for men’s rights and the fringe is pretty crazy about how men have been mistreated in divorce and elsewhere” -TMatlack

    No, the average college dropout can see that there is no gender equity/equality in divorce. It’s unfair to target the fringe group’s interpretation when non-fringe people are making rational arguments. Sort of like when mainstream feminists have to explain that Andrea Dworkin is not the current president of feminism.

    I’m starting to wonder why people encourage NSA sex. What purpose does it really serve? Encouraging it is not the same as refraining from discouraging it. It takes encouragement for women to keep engaging in it even if they need to a ton of vodka to participate.

    On the other hand, the increased frequency of NSA sex could lead to a society where beta types are no longer left fighting for scraps at the edge of the sexual marketplace.

  • Mike M.

    Susan, I don’t think you really appreciate how cutting-edge you are.

    Game is undergoing a schism. There’s PUA Game on the one side, Courtship/Marriage (CM) Game on the other. Similar methods, but very different goals. PUA Game being purely about sex, CM Game being focused on solid long-term relationships.

    But you’re introducing something new. Girl Game. Which is CM Game…for women. A hard-headed realization that the current culture hurts women in the long term, and should be dumped. It demands that the user toss out the feminist misandry and develop some intelligence, good manners, and the sort of common sense their great-grandmothers had; but the rewards in upgrading Marriage Market Value are considerable.

    Its the Red Pill For Women. And will probably have a bigger impact than the Red Pill For Men

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

      @Mike M.

      Thanks for that view, I’ve not considered it.

      Its the Red Pill For Women. And will probably have a bigger impact than the Red Pill For Men

      Only if I can get them to swallow it. Thanks for the vote of confidence, though.

  • LeapofaBeta

    @Jess
    “i dont think it is a lie to say the majority of young (uk) girls are having non LTR sex.”

    Its a lie to say that most enjoy it. There are studies that say its a lie. Until you find studies, back off or be labeled a hack trying to feel better about your own mistakes.

    Great for you if you can enjoy NSA sex. Go away and stop advocating that everyone MUST enjoy it. You’re ruining the lives of men and women by doing so and only making PUA’s happy.

  • deti

    Hugo Sc hwyzer: “…Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners. They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older.”

    But a woman’s number of sex partners can affect her (self-)worth. Maybe not for every woman but it does for some. And her partner count, depending on the number, will probably make her unacceptable as a wife to many men. And her partner count DOES make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships when she’s older, because it makes it harder for her to bond to one man. I can testify first hand to that. Women ignore this at their peril.

  • Ted D

    @ Jess – “I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.”

    Well your life experience doesn’t jive with most of the published studies I’ve seen regarding women and casual sex. Most don’t enjoy it, and many end up with diminished capacity to form good long-term bonds with men later in life. Its great that casual sex “worked” for you, but that doesn’t mean it will work for all. We here at HUS tend to call bullshit when we see it, and just like a few men here trying to promote open relationships, what I see you posting is indeed a load of fertilizer.

    And being married with kids now proves nothing. The real proof will be if you are still married in 25 years…

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

      @Ted D

      Jess is not married. She’s cohabitating with two kids.

  • Jhane Sez

    jess December 20, 2011 at 9:43 am
    “JS- what a truly bizarre comment!
    Well assuming you are serious in your views….
    i dont think it is a lie to say the majority of young (uk) girls are having non LTR sex.
    I accept that actually TOO much is happening and this is evident in the STD epidemic london has.”

    Jess… bizarre is relative… you are advocating that these girls continue to ride a slippery slope even thought the consequences are obvious with the STD epidemic you are experiencing.

    “This not mean to say that NSA sex is the root of all evil- I am happy to support digital sex as an alternative, a bit of moderation in frequency and moderation in drink/drugs which can lead to risky behaviour.”

    Once again advocating the slippery slope when you have experience in where that ride ends.

    Honestly if these girls go digital with the current mores makes it more difficult to moderate drink/drugs because that is something that takes maturity and maturity takes time.

    So why encourage them to do what doesn’t work.

    No shots fired at your lifestyle… but you have a child in a LTR as do I and I wouldn’t advocate this path even though I have faired better than 99% of the women who have made similar choices.

    No judgement just facts.

    “I certainly don’t subscribe to name calling like loser, slag, virgin, slut, fatso etc”

    I don’t advocate name calling, slut shaming but let’s be honest… it is much harder to participate in promiscuous activities when you don’t think everyone is doing it.

    “Women do orgasm with NSA’s though not nearly as much as with LTRs. This doesnt stop them from being fun- thats why its so damn hard trying to stop STD’s”

    This is untrue…because most men who are down for NSA are NOT concerned with providing the woman with a pleasurable experience… this is what we call across the pond a ‘pump and dump’.
    I was told by a male friend with my best interest at heart that for men the need for sex is like going to the bathroom… they are grateful that the bathroom is there when they are in need but they don’t want to spend the night let alone have a relationship with the room of requirement.

    “I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.”

    No girlfriend you aren’t exposing me… because I have been where you are trying to go… and not to brag but by most standards I have been EXTREMELY successful in the face of adverse circumstances…

    In the words of MC Hammer “you can’t touch this”… really you can’t.

    And even with my ‘success’ I am here to tell you that most don’t want to tread my path… because real talk they couldn’t.

    So if you have a conscience then you should tell these young girl to run, don’t walk in the other direction.

    And if you don’t I will proudly call bullshit… and call you out as a liar.

    Because 99.99% of the time NSA and ONS will not net a positive result for women… anyone who survives is an exception.

    “by the way- I am in an LTR with children…you appear to have missed that.
    ps. nearly all my peers have sexual histories and guess what…. they also are in LTRs with kids…. all very conventional now you see.”

    You know what, so am I… but you know what I have that you don’t… title to property, a retirement package and a trust fund for my kid… who just turned 18 and has college/university paid for.

    You are not married and I guarantee that you haven’t negotiated nearly as well… because you brought no other value than sex and reproduction and you couldn’t negotiate marriage… if not for yourself than for your child.

    How do I know…

    Because you are still telling other girls that slutting around is okay.

    So you and your girls don’t still don’t know what you are in for.

    Let me know how that works for you~JS

  • jess

    leapobeta,
    its not a lie- you are just overstating a particular dynamic.

    Do I know women who have woken up in the morning and regretted the drunken and poor quality sex of the previous night- YES
    Do I know women who found casual sex unsatisfying- YES
    Do I know women who have gone on to marry their ONS- YES
    Do I know women who had a month long, erotic, wonderful fling after a ONS- YES
    Do I know women who think LTR sex is superior to ONS sex- YES
    Do I know women who thought the ONS sex was so-so but enjoyed the overall seductive experience – YES
    Do I know women who’s best ever sexual experiences were on a ONS- YES, though in a minority

    All of the above is factual. If you to visit ‘Psychology Today’ you will find one article that says 50% of guys enjoy ONS sex and 25% of women do. thats a figure I could buy. Its not completely clear though if they mean the actual sex or the overall event. They go onto explain that women’s enjoyment depends upon their comfort levels, their attraction to the guy and his skill level and physical compatibility. Amen to that.

    And again- what mistakes are you referring to? I have kids now and I look back on most of my flings with warmth and affection- with the exception of a few guys I had a great time. And even the ones I didnt really enjoy I dont actually regret as such- it taught me stuff.

    This seems like an important article of faith for you that girls cannot really enjoy NSA sex. Im sorry to burst your bubble but with the right guy, they really, really can.

    As to what I tell others- I have a simple mantra: try stuff in moderation and in safety and do things that YOU enjoy.

    If you hate the idea of NSA sex dont do it. If you enjoy it then fine. Neither choice is better than the other and they both have pros and cons.

  • Ted D

    Yep, just noticed that Susan.

    Jess – so, your not in a marriage, yet you claim success. Here at HUS, the end goal for women is to get married and stay that way. By those standards, you really haven’t done so well.

    To each their own. I won’t bash you for living how you want, but I personally don’t feel like your story is really one to use as an example of what young women should do. I hope it works out for you in the long run.

  • jess

    Jhane,
    congratulations- you have just anointed your self high priestess of utter BS.

    I have for a long time recommended moderation for all lifes guilty pleasures.

    And no matter what the government or pressure groups advise, some people will follow self destructive courses.

    the fact is nearly ALL my peers are married with kids. Nearly all of them ENJOYED NSA sex when younger.

    Im in the process of changing jobs and will be a leaving behind a pretty big team that I had gotten close to over the past few years. They represent a cross section of uk culture with different ages and backgrounds. They all have a pretty healthy attitude towards sex which completely embraces occasional casual safe sex. The older ones are in LTRs, the younger ones are either playing the field or have boyfriends/girlfriends. They all seem pretty sensible, decent folk to me.

    So your assertion that anyone surviving a ONS is an exception is self evident BS.

    And your stuff about my personal and financial arrangements? have you gone mad? apart from the fact you are wrong on nearly every count how would you possibly come to that information?

    Are you saying you know who I am perhaps? I prefer to keep myself anonymous on here but if you know my identity perhaps you can tell me the name of the company I work for?

  • Doug1

    Olive—

    Once you lump everything in to one pile, it’s easy to turn things around and shame the virgins while praising the sluts.

    The shaming of virgins or much less so near virgins is ENTIRELY the work of second wave feminism.

    Yeah there’s always been a contingent of men who whisper about what they’re missing, but that’s not shaming. It’s also historically been rather soto voce, except in the most ribald circles.

  • http://rationalmale.wordpress.com Rollo Tomassi

    I would be very interested to read what Schwizer and Neeley have to say about this development in the rad-fem movement:

    http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/radfem-hub-the-underbelly-of-a-hate-movement/

  • Pingback: The 1st Feline Batallion » Score One for Neely Steinberg

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    91% of female college students have had 0-5 partners.

    That’s probably subject to the usual distortion in these types of studies. That is they survey all college students, or actually most often freshmen mostly in large introduction to psychology or sociology classes, for ease and lower costs.

    Survey only the last semester of seniors and you’d get a significantly different answer is what I’m saying.

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

      @Doug

      They did survey all college students, but research shows that hooking up drops dramatically for women after freshmen year, and mostly stops after sophomore year. I think it’s a pretty good study. You can’t dismiss every piece of research that doesn’t support your notions. Every study is a piece of data, and this one was a Dept. of Justice study on sexual assault.

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

        @Doug1

        The 2007 Campus Sexual Assault Study (CSA) mentioned earlier was prepared for the Department of Justice and based on surveys of more than 6800 students. It likewise noted several substance-related traits that significantly raised the risk for assault. Among these were how often the women reported getting drunk, how often they had sex when drunk, and how often they attended fraternity parties. The CSA report also specifies that freshman and sophomore girls are at far greater risk than are older students–a fact not widely known and likely to be of keen interest to those with daughters in their first or second year of college.

        This was by Mary Eberstadt at the Hoover Institution. Unfortunately, I got a 404 on the link.

        I’ve seen this elsewhere too but don’t have time to hunt for more links right now.

  • Zach

    @Susan #75

    I wouldn’t say feminism and hu culture have ended dating. What I’d argue is that it’s created another option, or another “track”. The vast majority of my male friends, ranging from 10s to 3s, do BOTH dating and casual sex. And mostly the way they make the distinction is by deciding whether a girl is “date worthy”. If she’s not (not hot enough, not smart enough, etc), she gets put on the casual sex track, where it’s all booty calls. Somehow the girls who get put on said track have a hard time figuring out that’s what they’re on. Honestly, it’s not very hard when you only see a guy when he’s drunk, between 10 PM and 8 AM Friday-Sunday.

    However, the girls who are worth dating (fun, smart, attractive) almost always do get taken out on dates, because the guys consider them worth the time/money/effort. Mistakes get made (I once ended a date after 30 minutes because the girl was as dumb as a rock, and I’ve dated one or two HU girls), but generally that’s the pattern. I will admit that is far different than in college, where many of the girls I knew (even very attractive ones) had not been on a single date by graduation.

    I also had an interesting conversation with my friends’ coworker the other week which is a bit sad, but validates your work here. This girl is 25, very smart, successful (works at a BB bank in trading), and pretty cute (maybe a 7). She spent 30 minutes complaining to me how hard it was to have a relationship in NYC for a young woman of means/intelligence, and I had to agree with her. She told me her last boyfriend, who wasn’t as successful or as attractive as her, broke up with her because she made a “funny noise” when she slept, and because he didn’t like her cooking. The only reason a guy could possibly get away with that in this day and age is because there are a dozen other women lining up for him afterwards, which is sadly the case. The college-education gap that you’ve spoken about many times is already starting to have a big impact.

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

      @Zach

      When I say dating is dead, I generally am referring to college. I’m encouraged to hear you say it gets more common afterwards, though. I do hear a lot about online dating, and it’s interesting. Some of the guys want to go on one date and then prefer to move to “meeting up” and group “hangs” even when they like the girl. Others stay with more formal dating.

  • Doug1

    Hugo Schwyzer (how the hell do you pronounce that name, if there was an “a” between the “w” and “y” I could deal, but nope, I usually have to look his name back up again cause I can’t pronounce it, damn him) – is a massively feminism obsequious mangina. “He” himself proudly proclaimed that his second wife was an obligate, solely, lesbian, a fact that should have been obvious to him. She only allowed him totally just servicing her with oral sex when engaged and for two weeks back from their honeymoon, and then cut even that kind of sex from him off completely then, yet he remained in this marriage for 18 months. Plus he blames himself for going alcoholic on her largely as a result, and not her one smidgen. “He’s” a women’s studies prof at a third rate Cali college total joke.

    Over at the Good Man Project they disabled the voting yea or nea on comments a couple of months ago. Could that possibly because Hugo had a large tendency to be massively vote nea by the readers there???

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

      @Doug1

      She only allowed him totally just servicing her with oral sex when engaged and for two weeks back from their honeymoon,

      I don’t know why this makes me happy, but it does.

  • jess

    susan,
    the thread responses however do contain ‘tainting’ claims dont they? so i haven’t argued against non existent statements have I?

  • Höllenhund

    @Kathy

    “Fancy H scrolling through all those comments just to locate a light hearted comment of mine in which I said that my daughter was a good looker, just so he could rehash his beef.”

    I merely used Google, dear Kathy.

    “baseball bat” site:hookingupsmart.com

    Needless to say, I wasn’t rehashing any ‘beef’ – which did not exist in the first place -, I was merely citing you for other commenters at Dalrock’s blog as an example of the solipsism of tradcon women. I understand that parents are normally proud of their children and boast about their supposedly wonderful abilities to other relatives, acquitances etc. But to brag to complete strangers on the Internet about the sexual attractiveness of your jailbait daughter is bizarre. The fact that nobody besides me has found this odd is also bizarre.

  • Cynthia

    @ jess – If the older ones are in relationships it’s because of the moral vestiges of their parent’s generation and trust me for us millenials these vestiges are literally gone. We’re in wonderland with no-fault divorce, open relationships, promiscuity, extreme pornography, gender bending and other immoral habits promoted as the norm. I’m guessing you and your friends are in their 40′s and 50′s and are a huge minority (10-15% like Susan said). You probably had parents (or grandparents) together that didn’t divorce and didn’t like NSA sex. You’re probably also upper-class with the wealth insulating you from the catalysm happening for the middle and lower classes in the UK.

    the fact is nearly ALL my peers are married with kids. Nearly all of them ENJOYED NSA sex when younger.

    I doubt you’re surrounded by decent folk as you claimed. What you’re supporting is almost as repugnant as what feminists support at The Good Men Project.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    You can’t dismiss every piece of research that doesn’t support your notions. Every study is a piece of data, and this one was a Dept. of Justice study on sexual assault.

    I don’t. At all.

    There was a dept of justice FUNDED study by feminist advocates that was behind the infamous April 14 “Dear Colleagues” letter from the Department of Education’s Title IX branch, that required them to use a 50.1% standard of proof for claims of date rape on campus, or else forfeit any and all federal funding, which all but 2 colleges in the US get. Plus it required/urged lots of procedural changes that were greatly prejudical to the accused (man). A horror show. Based on the utterly bogus study that “showed” that 1 in 4.5 college women were raped or sexually assaulted by graduation time. (Only the women themselves didn’t think so.) Incredible selection bias in who their samples were, plus they counted tipsy enthusiastic sex as date rape, though the survey respondents didn’t, and so on.

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

      @Doug1

      For the record, I deplore the 50.1% standard of proof.

      What feminist advocates funded a govt study? That’s hard to credit.

  • Höllenhund

    The Good Men Project is just a lame attempt of third wave feminists and their lackeys to lure potential men’s rights activists away from the so-called Manosphere. That’s pretty much all you need to know about it. Everybody should quit reading it and encourage others to do the same.

  • Odds

    @ Byron

    I’d agree, variety is awesome, and there is a drive for that. As Stalin would say, quantity has a quality all it’s own. I alluded to that in the post Jhayne responded to. That’s why I made the comparison so vastly lopsided, comparing a whole lot of sex with one girl to a small amount of sex with many girls. Looking back, the point I tried to make but was not clear on was the difference between the example alpha and beta – the beta technically had more sex, but was clearly the less happy of the two – not least because in the end he was getting just enough to keep him around.

    Jhayne is right to say that there are a fraction of guys who would take the “lots of sex with one girl” option over the “small to moderate amounts of sex with lots of girls” option. I’m unwilling to estimate the percentage, since I have no studies to back it and my personal life has a heavily overrepresented nerd contingent (myself included). But I’d still pick the one girl over the many, assuming (and this is a hell of a leap) that she was a quality girl all-around. The red pill has thoroughly disabused me of any pedestalizing tendencies, though, so I’ve found without free passes, there aren’t a lot of girls my age who fit that bill. Closest one I can think of put on twenty pounds before I broke up with her. At this point it’s just about refining my Game and continually looking inward to make sure that the problem is actually in the girls, and not in my standards (last I checked, I think I’m being fairly reasonable).

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    They did survey all college students, but research shows that hooking up drops dramatically for women after freshmen year, and mostly stops after sophomore year.

    What research?? Links? That wasn’t my experience, and I was in college in an earlier semi hookup era.

  • jess

    susan,
    honestly its the intellectual dishonesty that rankles most.

    in March 2011 the Daily Mail On Line said 72% of both genders had at least 1 casual sex encounter whilst at college.

    so who’s delusional now? me? you? daily mail?

    are you seriously saying that only 9% of college girls are having casual sex?

    thats a seriously bold claim Susan- you quite sure about that?

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

      are you seriously saying that only 9% of college girls are having casual sex?

      thats a seriously bold claim Susan- you quite sure about that?

      I’m citing a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice. That’s a hell of a lot more credible than your source.

      FWIW, the UK sounds like some sort of casual sex horror show. I believe our SMP is quite different, though has trended generally in the same direction.

  • WarmWoman

    @Deti-” And her partner count DOES make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships when she’s older, because it makes it harder for her to bond to one man. ”

    I do agree with this that meanginless sex consecutively will make it hard to bond in a lasting relationship. I had an ex-boyfrend that wanted me to be his casual sex partner, but he had a very hard time understanding why I wanted to wait for someone that I loved. I’m not interested in taking that risk.

    @Jess and women enjoying casual sex with the right guy-

    Sure, but finding the right casual sex partner takes just as much time as finding the right boyfriend IMO. Maybe it’s just me, but picking up some random guy at the bar doesn’t do it. If I was looking for a casual sex partner, attractiveness, intelligence, chemistry and sexual compatibility have to be there. What if a ONS is with a person that doesn’t satisfy you? I would rather just wait for a long-term partner.

    Lastly, nobody seemed to respond to my immigrant parent that’s strict about dating or letting her adult daughter roam freely example as to why a pretty woman would be single fo a period of time. Any thoughts? Would any of you think that’s odd? I was also raised that it’s better to stay single for a long time than having multiple break-ups and jump from relationship to relationship. That’s just my background though.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    susan,
    honestly its the intellectual dishonesty that rankles most.

    in March 2011 the Daily Mail On Line said 72% of both genders had at least 1 casual sex encounter whilst at college.

    so who’s delusional now? me? you? daily mail?

    are you seriously saying that only 9% of college girls are having casual sex?

    thats a seriously bold claim Susan- you quite sure about that?

    Good lord Jess. Reread what Susan said. 91% of women in college claim to have had 0-5 casual sex/hookup partners. That means their number could be 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. The stat doesn’t say that 91% of women claim zero casual sex/hookup partners. It means the amount of casual sex partners/hookups a small spectrum for college women.

  • Doug1

    As I said Susan, in studies like your one finding that 90% of college women have 0-5 life time sexual partners, they usually only survey freshmen girls, because they’re herded together in large intro to psych and sociology classes and tend to be more compliant on doing what the prof wants, answer his or her survey. Also it’s not end of the second semester freshman girls either, but probably on average mid way through freshman year. That produces a huge downward bias on the percentage of college girls who when they graduate will have had 0-5 sex partners in their lives.

    As well it’s a bit hard to square with the CDC’s finding that 75% of college women when the graduate will have had the HPV virus (although almost but not entirely always, with no consequence). Since most people, men and women, develop antibodies to HPV strains within a year, killing it off and making it non contagous, that 75% figure suggests a good lot of fucking partners going on for college girls by the time they graduate.

  • jess

    cynthia,
    how charming- you are one warm and cuddly human being you know that?

    im not upper class- thats a very small and privedged and lineal section of uk society.

    I’m middle class (uk definition) but from a very traditional family (also middle class- possibly upper middle?)

    my ‘peer’ friends are teachers, doctors, lawyers etc

    my soon to be ex colleagues vary in background as i said

    I meet all sorts at the w/e at my sports work.

    I think I know a decent person when i see one. You know, law abiding, tax paying , responsible, caring, reasonable, charitable, reflective etc

    You dont sound all that nice if I’m honest but maybe you typed in haste.

  • Höllenhund

    “I would be very interested to read what Schwizer and Neeley have to say about this development in the rad-fem movement”

    The mere fact that such a website can even exist is further proof that Western civilization has passed its expiration date. There will be no dawn for a group of people who even tolerate such activity, much less support it. The current decline, as manifested in the disappearance of marriage and economic ruin, seems like Chinese water torture to me. Really, just get it over with already! Let the illegal immigrants, the Chinese, the Islamists, the Wall Street bankers or anyone else plunder it and pull it apart. It’s such a joke it’s almost not funny anymore.

  • Abbot

    “I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.”

    Yeah, because so-called pro-sex-positive feminists are not agenda-driven self-serving extremists, you see.

    .
    .
    “I’m starting to wonder why people encourage NSA sex. What purpose does it really serve? Encouraging it is not the same as refraining from discouraging it. It takes encouragement for women to keep engaging in it even if they need to a ton of vodka to participate.”

    These “people” are typically women who want to MEN to stop rating and comparing women based on past sexual behavior when its time to select a wife. Its been stated before but bears repeating [apparently]. Don’t be pestered by these go-nowhere balance redressers.

    .
    .

    “Great for you if you can enjoy NSA sex. Go away and stop advocating that everyone MUST enjoy it. You’re ruining the lives of men and women by doing so and only making PUA’s happy.”

    Nothing like breaking down the Patriarchy by sucking its cock. And promoting it. Repeatedly.
    .
    .

    “My main point here is the absurd hint that women are somehow ‘tainted’ due to prior experience. Its a crock- and it bears repeating (apparently). I agree with ‘if it feels crap stop doing it’, and thats the point- sometimes it can be orgasmic, life affirming and a blast. Oh yeah and ‘empowering’. Especially when on a rebound or simply a particular time of the month.”

    For many purposes, women are not tainted due to prior “experience” aka fucking. Lets dispel with the euphemisms for once, please. A man taking the first girl who says “yes” does not give a rats ass if she is “rebounding” “cycling” or seeks cock in order to form [empower] her obviously lacking character. So why this must be stated or is bothersome – how men view women sexually speaking – seems ridiculous. Just fuck and move on. Nobody cares!

    .

  • Isabel

    Byron,

    If you don’t like ‘Men’, after all, why should men like you? And vice versa, of course.

    True.

    Badger,

    I don’t know about a sixth sense, but there are some women you just get the idea they are single for a reason – the reason being a malignant personal or strategic factor like offering easy sex for commitment, being too picky, being too proud about being “awesome,” too proud to give a little, rejecting too many prospects “as if,” you get the idea. There’s just a sort of personality that exudes most of those traits, and that personality happens to be actively repulsive to most men.

    So , in short, the kind of women who say they’re “in a relationship with themselves”? I don’t have any of these attitudes ( to the best of my knowledge.) Except, perhaps, the “too proud to give a little ” bit but that’s more out of a wariness of vulnerability than *genuine* egotism, I think. Which, in turn, is a by-product of being taught to distrust any sentence that contains the words submit/follow/comply. But other than that I’m okay lol.

  • Odds

    @ Jess

    Don’t worry if anyone else is saying that there is a taint of hooking up, or if they’re just implying it – I’ll say it right out: “Too many sex partners, particularly casual sex partners, carries a high risk of damaging a woman’s ability to form long-term bonds with a decent man.”

    Doesn’t happen every time, or to every girl with a history. But it does happen, whatever your personal experiences – if you’ve escaped that, good for you, the world is a better place for having fewer screwed-up people.

    The Social Pathologist’s website has an article whose link I can’t find right now that makes it pretty clear. Remember, most women nod and agree when someone trots out the (completely accurate) data that people who marry under age 25 have something like a 10 or 12 percent higher likelihood of divorce, or how cohabiting first creates a similarly increased risk. Everyone sees those numbers and says, “that makes sense, I believe it.” But the moment someone can pull out data showing that going from one previous sex partner to two creates a 30% increased risk of divorce, or that having more than two partners prior to one’s husband puts her odds of divorce above 50%, no one buys it – not because it’s too big, or that it’s unsupported, but because it challenges their worldview and suggests that something they no longer have the power to change may affect them. People get scared when they realize that there is a very high chance (though not a certainty) that they are, in fact, damaged by their own hand and unable to form a proper bond.

    I’ll admit, there is a plausible alternate explanation: maybe too many sex partners damages a woman’s ability to identify a good man, rather than to bond with him. But I doubt that, given that the number of decent guys out there is certainly higher than 50% of us.

    If we want to throw in anecdotal evidence, do you really think it’s that hard to find women who feel used, cheapened, or dare I say damaged by their hookup experience? They exist, and there is good evidence they are the majority – the highest number I’ve seen who enjoy casual sex is the number you gave, 25%. Hardly a majority, and certainly not enough to justify telling every girl to go out and try for themselves. It’s irresponsible just for the damage it does to their feelings, never mind the reduced (though not eliminated) ability to find a quality man, or the potential harm to their future man’s feelings (which those men are entitled to, and which are every bit as valid as the woman’s feelings about her past).

    Really, don’t discount men’s feelings either: is it really so weird to be put off by the idea that a girl was willing to risk pregnancy or STDs with a dozen men whose names she did not even know? Or to wonder that, if she was unable or unwilling to commit to any of them, if she might be unwilling to commit to you? Or to worry that she may pine for one or more of the alphas in her past? It’s probably a side effect of the same pattern-seeking behavior that allowed men to codify math, physics, and zone defense, but we see patterns in a girl’s love life and draw conclusions along the same lines.

    I can’t think of a better word than “tainted” to describe a woman who feels regret and pain for her sexuality and has a harder time bonding with a decent man as a result. If a girl can live the promiscuous life without being tainted, good for her – I wish her and her future man nothing but happiness. But trying to tell girls to go out and live that life, when the majority will only be worse off for it, it irresponsible at best, outright malicious at worst.

  • jess

    sassy,
    if you read susan’s post she said i was delusional with my 70% comment. As you can see my comment is quite correct.

    doug,
    yes- excellent point.

    I still have friends who work in health care and say that the std epidemic is beyond control. The idea that only 9% of college girls are having sex is laughable. They would argue 70% of girls are having REGULAR casual sex. There is certainly lots of ‘friends with benefits’ going on.

    I would be surprised if the USA was that much different from the UK on that score.

  • Isabel

    Jess, the Daily Wail has pretty much zero journalistic integrity.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    My post to you was about the fact that you misinterpreted the stat Susan gave. Also, Susan and a few of the readers here thought your 70% stat was delusional because of the context. You said 70% of women enjoyed casual sex/ONS, which is simply false. Had you said that 70% of women have had a casual sex experience, there wouldn’t have been an issue. Implying the enjoyment of the casual sex is what makes your stat a bit delusional.

  • Abbot

    “Really, don’t discount men’s feelings either: is it really so weird to be put off by the idea that a girl was willing to risk pregnancy or STDs with a dozen men whose names she did not even know? Or to wonder that, if she was unable or unwilling to commit to any of them, if she might be unwilling to commit to you? Or to worry that she may pine for one or more of the alphas in her past? It’s probably a side effect of the same pattern-seeking behavior that allowed men to codify math, physics, and zone defense, but we see patterns in a girl’s love life and draw conclusions along the same lines.”

    The above are universal and global feelings of men. Feminists know that. Then why do they despise men for having these feelings? It would be like men despising women for having maternal feelings. This is why its such a blessing that feminists are a tiny minority of women on Earth.

  • jess

    Ted,
    We could have got married but I didn’t really like the idea- I used to be a hard line feminist- 80′s style. My SO wasn’t overly bothered- we are in love and thats what counts.

    But since then Ive mellowed and with my 2 kids and a catholic family- we may just get married somewhere down the line. I know his family would prefer it too- and I suspect our kids would too.

    But the fact remains that within my college peers (thus yes- limited to middle class parameters) are all luvved with kiddies. Yet in differing degrees they had casual sex and for the most part, thoroughly enjoyed it.

    I have asked people to furnish details of people they know who are childless and alone due to their sexual history – virtually none has been forthcoming.

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

      I have asked people to furnish details of people they know who are childless and alone due to their sexual history – virtually none has been forthcoming.

      All the spinster lit memorists, including your own Hepzibah Anderson, who wrote Chastened.

  • Doug1

    Jess—

    My main point here is the absurd hint that women are somehow ‘tainted’ due to prior experience. Its a crock- and it bears repeating (apparently).

    Most women ARE tainted and not in a “somehow”way by tons of casual sex. Not tainted for fling purposes, they’re often or usually the most sexually fun for that, not needing to be broken in and in early stages of my life, sometimes teaching me some stuff. Well except for the hardened variety, they’re not so much fun.

    However I’ve never had a slut fall deeply in love with me. Feel real affection for me, yeah, real deep sexual attraction to me such that she wants to hold on hard, yeah. But deep emotionally bonding love/adoration, never. With good girls, quite often. I work to try not to break their hearts and not go on too long if they look like they’re falling deep, and I’m not in return, actually.

    The meme that sluttery in women very most often for women to not be able to fall deeply in love, is not just a deeply ingrained male instinct, it’s also the truth.

    As well there’s this. About all promiscuous women who are cute 6’s and up have had several if not more full on alpha lovers for flings or ONS’s, almost always both. (The flings are often soft harem ones for him.) Betas of all stripes tend to fear, and be right in fearing, that they’ll have a hard time measuring up in sexual attractiveness to them, not only remotely and in imagination, but in actual in the bed practice. It’s not so much a matter of technique exactly or necessarily, but emotional impact.

    So yeah most men who aren’t immersed in believing feminist propaganda, especially but not only betas, don’t want to marry a “former” slut. I also imagine you understate your “experience” level around here.

    Btw, are both your kids by the guy you’re living with? You’ve not pressured him to marry you because you make more dosh, innit? You get the same child support=also stealth alimony regardless from him, but you don’t have to kick over any of your investments etc. to him if you two break up, right? I mean I’m the same way on that, but openly say so, unlike you.

  • Abbot

    “Too many sex partners, particularly casual sex partners, carries a high risk of damaging a woman’s ability to form long-term bonds with a decent man.”

    His wretch notwithstanding.

  • tom

    Jess don’t let the bitches get you down……we both know there ARE women who enjoy NSA sex and come out of it just fine…we both also know the opposite is true. Experience is a great teacher and some commentors here know not of what they speak. I know a ton of people who tested the sexual waters and went on to live conventional married lives as partners and parents. It is still my contention that a lot of women who do not handle their promiscuity welll had issues before hand. They probably should have avoided that lifestyle in the first place. For people to state that all or most women are tainted from the experience is hogwash. My life experience alone proves that to be false. People with a fear of heights. Should not rock climb. Women who hookup for the wrong reasons shouldn’t hook up. I admit some women do not handle it well while others do. Other people here need to face that reality. Also most promiscuous people DO find a mate.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I think there’s a cultural divide. Europe is the most open, then Australia, then America, then Asia, and finally the Middle East. Within regions there are local differences as well. It’s not just sex, but also intersexual interactions, ideas about touching, hugging, kissing, etc.

    When I was growing up, little girls and boys did not play together at all. I only interacted with other girls. In mixed-gender classroom settings, the teachers sat a boy and a girl together because they knew we wouldn’t mess with each other or talk to each other. It’s not quite the same as purdah but definitely a palpable barrier between girls and boys. Here in America, little kids play in mixed groups all the time and are quite friendly. My husband played with his father’s friend’s daughter starting from a toddler age.

    Between relatives I never remember much hugging, but family members here hug all the time. People kiss as a greeting in some parts of Europe, but I never saw kissing even on television when I was young. Pre-marital, public kissing would be seen as taboo in some parts of the world, while kissing is no big deal for most people while dating in America. The French kiss was considered tres scandalous when I was younger, too. I had a hard time imagining even kissing a guy I didn’t already have a lot of feelings for, so I couldn’t do dating or casual hooking up at all.

    Western third-wave feminism looks very different Eastern feminism in this regard. In Asia feminism is more about stopping female infanticide, homicide, trafficking, selling women as property, etc. I respect feminism more when it’s more about basic human rights issue, rather than the luxury and pleasure of sex. It’s like the obesity epidemic in the first world. There are lots of ills that come from too much pleasure, and saying “let’s just embrace the promiscuous behavior and accept all the fat people” sounds really… over-indulgent. That’s my personal perspective on this though.

  • jess

    sassy,
    if you read up i have repeatedly said that women tend to prefer LTR sex to ONS. I had also said that ONS sex can vary tremendously in quality.
    Of the 70% that are having NSA sex, its difficult to accurately say the percentage that disliked the ‘entire’ event against the % that that enjoyed just the sex itself. Perhaps they loved the flirting, the snog in the taxi, the ripping off of the clothes but not the drunken, inept sex that followed.

    Im saying that to claim just 10% of women ever enjoyed NSA sex is just untrue (see Psychology Today). its not delusional to say that. To say most women PREFER LTR sex is entirely fair however.

    Have none of your friends ever enjoyed a sexual act outside of an LTR? never ever?

  • Abbot

    “most men who aren’t immersed in believing feminist propaganda, especially but not only betas, don’t want to marry a “former” slut”

    If it was only a small minority of men, feminists would not be on the hissy fit warpath regarding this topic. The universalness is the real reason for all the angst, balance redressing, “exposing extremists” and on and on.

  • jess

    Doug1,
    sorry my dear but your post is apparently entirely imaginary.

    You see Susan maintains that you nor anyone else have never uttered such things.

    I am merely arguing against a figment of my imagination – so you have now just disappeared in a puff of logic…

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

      We have a whole new set of male commenters who get to learn how annoying it is to try and debate Jess :)

  • Abbot

    “most promiscuous people DO find a mate.”

    Since promiscuous women are in the minority, with enough effort and determination, absolutely. There are just enough men to go around for them

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Women do orgasm with NSA’s though not nearly as much as with LTRs. This doesnt stop them from being fun- thats why its so damn hard trying to stop STD’s

    Erm, because when you don’t orgasm, sex is awesome, especially when it’s with someone you don’t know!!!

    Jess, I don’t know, but it sounds like you’ve been out of college for a bit. It also sounds like you live in the UK… I don’t know much about the UK, but I know most of us are thinking of casual sex in the U.S. drunken frat house setting. I had ONE casual sex experience (oral, no P and V) and it was miserable. So miserable that I hoped never to see the dude again. And yet, the next day it was a brag-worthy moment. It’s brag-worthy because it’s not about the enjoyment of sex, it’s about intra-sexual competition and seeking validation, from men and from your friends. I guess the only enjoyable part may have been hearing my friends say “good for you!”

    Oh sure, I have friends who “enjoy” casual sex. As in, they spend their nights out scavenging for guys (like they’re on a treasure hunt), snatch up one or two, make sure they know about each other, pick one, and then pray he’s the one who wants a relationship. That has largely been the goal of casual sex, for all of my friends (even the ones with 30+ partners): get a relationship. If the guy isn’t relationship-worthy, he’s cast aside, but if he is, oh man. It’s a slew of phone calls and text messages. I even had one friend who threatened to report a guy for rape if he didn’t start responding to her online messages, and the sad thing is he would’ve been found guilty because she was blackout when it happened.

    I know that you want casual sex for women to be just like casual sex for men, but the reality is it’s not. I have tons of stories to prove it.

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

      That has largely been the goal of casual sex, for all of my friends (even the ones with 30+ partners): get a relationship. If the guy isn’t relationship-worthy, he’s cast aside, but if he is, oh man. It’s a slew of phone calls and text messages. I even had one friend who threatened to report a guy for rape if he didn’t start responding to her online messages, and the sad thing is he would’ve been found guilty because she was blackout when it happened.

      I’m not surprised, I’ve heard this before, but it’s still chilling.

  • Chris_in_CA

    @Jhane

    Oh, I would gladly offer advice on MGTOW. But it would derail the thread, and Susan’s already stated she doesn’t like hijacks. Maybe I’ll do a forum thread later.

    Someone posted earlier (Guestopher I think) about fringe elements and judgements on MRAs. I happen to agree. And I note that we’re once again back to decrying men when women make poor choices.

    Are young men screwing up? Yes. They’ve been told some pretty conflicting things in recent years. And oh look! They’re still being told them, by ridiculous farces like GMP. Some will end up losers. Some will have horrible lives with feminist women. Maybe a few will get lucky and come across a decent woman (and yes, that IS getting lucky).

    If you don’t like what I say? Don’t read it.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    Remember when you wrote this. This is the quote everyone had an issue with.

    Am I the 10%? well I have been out of the game a while now- but – Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?. Virtually all will go onto to LTRs and kids. So gonna have to agree to differ on that one.

    We then called you out on the inaccuracy of that statement. It was only then that you switched your tune. I call things as I see them. You made a claim. We all took issue with it, then you backpedaled and tried to rephrase your original statement.

    Have none of your friends ever enjoyed a sexual act outside of an LTR? never ever?

    I take pride in the type of people I call my friends. My friends and I have similar mindsets and pretty much avoided the carousel. All of my closest friends and I remained virgins until after college. Most of my friends have sexual partner counts of less than 5. I have a few acquaintances who I interact with occasionally who engage in casual sex, and they are train wrecks. They come to me with stories of guys who they claimed have hurt them in some way, but these women brought their pain upon themselves, for the most part, by sleeping with men first and asking questions later. The girls I know who have large partner counts aren’t happy at all.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Of the 70% that are having NSA sex, its difficult to accurately say the percentage that disliked the ‘entire’ event against the % that that enjoyed just the sex itself. Perhaps they loved the flirting, the snog in the taxi, the ripping off of the clothes but not the drunken, inept sex that followed.

    They loved it because it made them feel desired. That’s why LTR sex is so much better, because you KNOW the guy desires you. Let’s be honest, ONS sex is about guys getting variety, there’s no emotional attachment. Men compartmentalize. We can’t.

    Have none of your friends ever enjoyed a sexual act outside of an LTR? never ever?

    I know this was meant for Sassy, but my friends never enjoyed it in the physical sense. They enjoyed it in the “yay someone desires me!” sense.

    I remember hearing a story about one of my friends going at it for 2 hours, and finding this fact brag-worthy. I was a virgin at the time, so I didn’t understand that going at it for two hours sounds like running a marathon without drinking water. That’s just called bad sex.

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

      I remember hearing a story about one of my friends going at it for 2 hours, and finding this fact brag-worthy. I was a virgin at the time, so I didn’t understand that going at it for two hours sounds like running a marathon without drinking water. That’s just called bad sex.

      Olive, I thought it was funny that Rivelino was perturbed by our not wanting hours of thrusting, lol. I’ve been known to glance at the clock and exclaim that Lost was coming on soon.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    The girls I know who have large partner counts aren’t happy at all.

    Cosign. I know three. One probably has borderline personality disorder. One is rather insecure. The other is a snotty bitch who tries to be all “strong woman” but becomes totally helpless and clingy in relationships.

  • Doug1

    Olive—

    It seems I have misinterpreted the 80/20 paradigm. I thought the premise was 80% of women are having sex with 20% of men? Apparently I was wrong-o. Oops.

    The 80/20 meme aka the Pareto principle, as kinda been shoe horned into Roissy’s observation that about the hottest 40% of young women (cute 6’s and above) are the one’s having casual fling sex with only the top 15-20% of men in casual sex attractiveness (15% are some kind of alpha, but some greater beta’s sometimes get fling sex with 6’s as well).

    What might be true is that 80% of the cute and hot girls who sometimes go for casual sex are getting it one with 20% of men, mostly alphas but some greater betas as well. I’d guess the other 20% of cute and up girls that sometimes go for casual are at the time in a LTR with a guy their own sex rank or one above.

    As for what percentage of young and middle 20s girls sometimes go for casual, Susan really downplays that with I think probably cherry picked studies, but most anecdotal evidence indicates a lot more that she says. I haven’t cared enough to study the literature on that.

  • tom

    Abbott millions of former sluts are now married..do you deny that?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Doug,

    As for what percentage of young and middle 20s girls sometimes go for casual, Susan really downplays that with I think probably cherry picked studies, but most anecdotal evidence indicates a lot more that she says. I haven’t cared enough to study the literature on that.

    Thanks for the clarification. Maybe the girls who “sometimes go for casual” are actually the carousel watchers I mentioned above?

  • mark

    Susan,
    I want to send you a link by email. Somewhere on your site I saw a Gmail address but I can’t find it now.

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

      Mark,

      you can email me at walsh.susan1@gmail.com or use the form on the Contact page.

  • jess

    sassy,
    no i have maintained a consistent tune regarding casual sex and studs for years now- check back through older threads.

    i guessed at the 70% and then looked it up to finds its 72% (not such a bad guess eh?)

    Everyone I have spoken to on a personal level has a horror story of a guy who turned violent, or was impotent, or smelly, or premature or a nut job or whatever.

    But all also had some good experiences to report including orgasmic and/or exciting sex. They also spoke of excitement and passion and validation.

    Thats just the way it is. This is also reflected in reports I have had beyond that peer group.

    Also if you remained a virgin till after college you will have to accept you are in the minority whilst I am in the majority. Right or wrong thats just the way it is.

  • jess

    olive and sassy
    i also know a few highly promiscuous types that are ‘train wrecks’- so what?

    i also know a few ‘chaste’ women that are deeply deeply unhappy and lonely.

    does it follow that all chaste women will become so? Nope.

    this is why moderation is the key. A few flings on ones youth won’t do much harm.

    if you party hard 3 times a week and have unprotected sex with alcohol, and drugs all the time expect an early grave.

    So I suggest informed moderation is more desirable than abstinence or over indulgence.

  • jess

    correction to comment 187:

    i meant STD’s not studs!- honestly!

  • Doug1

    Tom–

    Abbott millions of former sluts are now married..do you deny that?

    They are. But how many of them ever adored their husbands? How many of them got the highest SMV husband they could have gotten if good girls who got married in their mid 20′s. How many of them end up cheating? How many of them are responsible for America’s 50% divorce rate?? How many of them exact horrific divorce theft on American men.

    It’s true that American feminism has propagandized a good proportion of men to suppress their natural instinct to not fall in love with or marry sluts. It’s true that’s propagandized a good proportion to not be too inquisitive or insistently so on such matters. To their eventual detriment.

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

      @Doug1

      Jess has shared that her own number is north of 25, and that she cheated on her first partner (husband? can’t remember), ending the relationship.

  • Ted D

    Jess – IMO it wouldn’t make a rats ass bit of difference if every women in the world LOVED casual sex, I would still pass on any woman with a high casual partner count for an LTR, and advice my son, and any other young man that would listen to do the same. I have NO desire to invest my time, money, and love into someone that spent so much time in the shallow pursuit of physical enjoyment over the possibility of a meaningful relationship, regardless of how old they were, how young and “stupid” they were behaving, or any other excuse paraded out to explain such self-centered and self-destructive behavior.

    I am glad you made it out “unscathed”, but that doesn’t change anything. I got a divorce and didn’t get reamed by my ex-wife in court, but that doesn’t mean most guys aren’t getting royally screwed by the U.S. family court system. I am the exception, how about you?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    Actually, I am in the majority. 91% or women report to having 0-5 casual sex partners in college.

    It’s really the women who are relatively promiscuous (more than 5 partners) who are in the minority.

    Care to state which group you were a part of in college? I think I already have an idea though, based on your promiscuous horn tooting.

  • BSD

    @Doug1:

    Susan is right about hooking up stopping after sophomore year. This isn’t the 70′s. Most people go crazy freshman year and then tone it down as they get older. My friends who are now mostly juniors and seniors are now in stable relationships, even the two girls I know who are in the double digits in terms of sex partners.

    It’s pretty normal for that to happen in college. It’s also not unusual to see people who got together even at graduation (despite not knowing eachother the previous four years) get married shortly thereafter. From what I’ve seen it seems like people get together at the end of college and if they can make it to the 24-27 age range and still be together, they get married.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    So now 95% of women have 0-5 parners by their mid twenties?

    And only 5% of women have more than 5 partners by their mid twenties?

    WTF is happening here. Wishful thinking denial agenda or just, WTF?

  • Emily

    I’m with Olive and Sassy.

    I have yet to meet a happy slut. In my experience, Samantha Jones does not exist. Or if she does, then she’s extremely rare.

  • BSD

    @Sassy5619:

    I’m not siding with Jess but I’ve witnessed girls lie about their numbers outright. Also a lot of girls do thinks like anal/oral sex and don’t count it. It’s not the most common, but I don’t think those girls constitute a minority as small as 9%. Though maybe now that I do the math in the head not even 9% of my friends has a partner count above 5. I don’t know. Hmm…

  • jess

    BSD- i find it hilarious that american girls and an ex president do not regard anal or oral congress a form of ‘sex’. wonderfully convenient denial.

    Sassy,
    I dont think I detected your response- do you accept that being a virgin at the end of college makes you a minority or not?

    As for my college history- i lost my virginity at 18 and was faithful throughout college. compared to the vast majority of my peers i was unusually chaste (with the exception of the Christian Union types)

    As to the survey Susan quoted its 37% i think that had 0 sex partners. the researchers confessed they had a low response rate and even if we assume girls didn’t ignore oral sex etc then 63% had between 1-26 partners at college. The figure suggests 54%+ had between 1-5 but I think thats very conservative for the reasons people have already pointed out.

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

      @Jess

      As to the survey Susan quoted its 37% i think that had 0 sex partners. the researchers confessed they had a low response rate and even if we assume girls didn’t ignore oral sex etc then 63% had between 1-26 partners at college.

      The researchers had a high response rate of females. You’re talking nonsense again….

      Sex was specified to include oral, anal and vaginal sex. I love how you lumped the high numbers in with those women who had one partner, lol. The percentage of women who had 11-25 partners? 2.3% 25+ partners? 0.3%

      Keep in mind, this is all sex, including relationship sex. This is not about casual sex per se, though it’s obviously implied at the upper end of the scale.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    BSD,

    I’m not siding with Jess but I’ve witnessed girls lie about their numbers outright. Also a lot of girls do thinks like anal/oral sex and don’t count it. It’s not the most common, but I don’t think those girls constitute a minority as small as 9%. Though maybe now that I do the math in the head not even 9% of my friends has a partner count above 5. I don’t know. Hmm…

    Yeah I agree with this. Girls do lie about their partner counts, or try to discount oral sex. I had friends who had separate “makeout” and “sex” lists, but oral sex didn’t even fall on the radar. That’s fascinating, actually. Like oral sex is something to be ashamed of in and of itself (and I have NO idea how many friends did anal. Something else that never came up).

    Anyway, if anything, the fact that girls lie about their partner count further indicates that they regret casual sex, or are ashamed of it. Even despite the virgin shaming and sensationalizing of hookup culture. That ought to tell you something.

  • jess

    emily,
    C’mon Samantha (indeed all the SATC) cast are ‘c***ts’.

    (sorry Susan- but I think you will agree there are times when even that horrible word is called for)

    nobody here is suggesting that women model themselves on revolting characters from poor quality sit coms.

    Myself, I am suggesting that indulging in a few flings at college is not such a terrible thing. (if thats what you fancy doing).

    that doesnt mean there is plenty wrong with an overly brutal and sexualised media and appalling conduct from college jocks etc.

    and dont get me started on paris hilton and their ilk.

    but the demonisation of casual sex as being the ‘slippery slope’ to sodom and the gnashing of teeth is silly.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    I dont think I detected your response- do you accept that being a virgin at the end of college makes you a minority or not?

    As for my college history- i lost my virginity at 18 and was faithful throughout college. compared to the vast majority of my peers i was unusually chaste (with the exception of the Christian Union types)

    As to the survey Susan quoted its 37% i think that had 0 sex partners. the researchers confessed they had a low response rate and even if we assume girls didn’t ignore oral sex etc then 63% had between 1-26 partners at college. The figure suggests 54%+ had between 1-5 but I think thats very conservative for the reasons people have already pointed out.

    I have already stated that women like me are in the majority. I classify this by saying that, according to the study, 91% of college women claimed 0-5 casual sex partners in college. I am a part of that majority. That small spectrum is what constitutes the 91% stat. Within that stat, a varying level of sexual experience is included (virgins to moderately experienced women).

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

      Watching Sassy try to respond to Jess is like watching someone trying to catch a fish with their bare hands.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    but the demonisation of casual sex as being the ‘slippery slope’ to sodom and the gnashing of teeth is silly.

    No one is suggesting that. But we are suggesting that women are encouraged, via the college female herd mentality, to engage in casual sex as a method to “explore their glorious sexuality” and we all believe it’s bullshit. I have done way more sexuality exploring in my current LTR than I ever did in my few casual hookups. I don’t see why the “casual flings” are necessary, and in fact, I suspect they are detrimental to the sense of self-worth of many women.

  • tom

    Doug or some guys understand that there are some wonderful women out there who are in fact not tainted and are mature enough and secure enough to approch the situation as an adult.
    As for women and divorce. I would think most women who want a divorce and have had a sexual past are probably a little more liberal so they are less apt to put up with their mans cheatin g or mental abuse….just saying.. I totally disagree that having multiple partners dimishises a womans capability to form long lasting bonds. BS in my view. Some yeah probably but tbose were most likely unbonding types to begin with

  • Ted D

    Tom – “I totally disagree that having multiple partners dimishises a womans capability to form long lasting bonds. BS in my view. Some yeah probably but tbose were most likely unbonding types to begin with”

    Then we will have to agree to disagree. I’ve seen enough evidence both personally and in numerous articles/studies that indicate lots of casual sex does in fact prohibit many people’s (men and women) ability to form and maintain a bond in an LTR. In essence, the more casual sex a person has, the less deeply they will feel love and devotion. There are certainly enough stats out there showing how the number of partners increases the chances of divorce. And even if it isn’t true 100% of the time, do you want to take the risk? I don’t, and I believe most men don’t, seeing as the laws are stacked against them when that formerly promiscuous woman decides she is bored/tired/not attracted to her husband and rolls out the door with half (or more) of his wealth.

    NOTE: I am not saying that conservative women do not get divorced, or that promiscuous behavior is the cause of all divorce. What I AM saying is: if your wife has slept around a lot prior to marrying you, she is MUCH more likely to divorce you and take half of your stuff. I’ve already dodged the divorce court bullet once, I am going to do my best to never have that gun pointed at my head again. And I WILL be telling young men to tread carefully on this hallowed ground. I want people to marry and live “happily ever after”, but I refuse to throw more young men under the bus to achieve that goal.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Wow, this was what it was like when I first came to HUS: the big ongoing slut debate.

    I don’t really care for statistics. What I do know is that I have many male friends, and none of them would knowingly commit to a formerly promiscuous woman. Unless that woman had undergone some serious changes. SERIOUS changes.

    Hugo wants us to reassure women that their worth has nothing to do with their sexual history. Newsflash: it’s not true. When you’re considering whether or not to commit your life to a woman in a loving, sexual relationship, then her sexual history is totally relevant. Does that mean that formerly promiscuous women will never be good partners? No, of course not. Sue, for example, seems like she has a wonderful marriage.

    It’s not a question of whether or not the promiscuous sex makes them damaged human beings, it’s a question of whether or not you trust this woman.

    Hugo Schwyzer has been married 4 fucking times. The dude has absolutely no clue about the value of commitment. He’s spouting bullshit about how his earlier sexual escapades has made him a better husband. But, reality check, a better husband wouldn’t be getting divorced three times! Schwyzer is actually exhibit A for why you don’t want to get involved with promiscuous people.

    Encouraging people not to involve themselves with casual sex is a good thing. What does one get from involvement–a few hot orgasms (maybe)? What kind of lasting benefit does fucking a stranger have?

    People get all up in arms about Sue, but really, they’re just trying to defend their personal choices. Former carousel riders WANT to believe that the experience was a positive one. Men who marry promiscuous women WANT to believe they’ve made the right choice.

    If you rode the cock carousel and went on to live a meaningful life, then good for you. If you married a former carousel rider and she turned out to be a good woman, then great. But don’t try to act like the carousel experience is full of meaningful life lessons in empathy and understanding. Fucking people you don’t know has nothing to do with empathy and understanding, and in fact, is really just an avoidance of it.

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

      @Jesus

      Wow, this was what it was like when I first came to HUS: the big ongoing slut debate.

      Haha, yeah, we needed a major break from that. When Neely wrote such a good piece, I had to share it. Funny how after all this time Jess and Tom are here as if they’d never left.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    “These people must have a lot of time on their hands to read a blog they hate from cover to cover.”

    Hating and trolling are first world problems as far as I’m concerned. Hugs over the issues at Dalrock.
    I had been busy so I haven’t had chance to comment be back with more time in a few days but I echo your welcome back Abbot! I truly missed him he at least is fair about hating on sluts without praising the mighty cheating penis. *kissinthecheek* to him :)

  • tom

    Hey Jess easy now I was a college jock….lol..but you know you make a valid point. It was ridiculous and almost childlike how many of those guys spoke about women in the locker room. I was not an angel and had my share of the groupies but I was never a kiss and brag type. These guys would go on endlessly about certain women what they did if they were good,easy,etc. NO repect for women at all…probably in some cases, well deserved. The locker room at a major college is like player central. Worse than most people imagine

  • jess

    olive “no-one is suggesting that” – yep they are- I actually stole their phrase.

    im not sure i would ‘encourage’ someone to do anything- if they fancy it give it a go but please be safe.

    if you dont fancy it- then one shouldn’t feel pressurised to do it. simples.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    if you dont fancy it- then one shouldn’t feel pressurised to do it. simples.

    And if you do fancy it, then go for it. Don’t let anybody stop you. Just don’t complain that a lot of men aren’t into marrying that type of woman.

  • Isabel

    Jess,

    Myself, I am suggesting that indulging in a few flings at college is not such a terrible thing. (if thats what you fancy doing).

    Respectfully, you don’t know what it’s like “in the trenches”. Your generation came from stable two-parent households, tried the whole sexual lib thing for lulz and then just got married (as expected) without a peep. There weren’t any consequences for you because you were protected by having full access to both cultures; you could hook up AND settle down. We don’t have that safety net any more because the Hugos and the Jaclyns of the world restricted our options in the name of freedom. So, it’s pretty irresponsible of you to suggest that a few flings won’t hurt, as if girls can just flit between the two systems. As if men don’t know.

  • Ted D

    I followed the link to Hugo’s page, and now I can hear my heartbeat in my ears. :P

    I’m seeing something here from Jess and from Hugo’s page that I think we need to address. This is about quantity.

    What I mean is, Jess and Hugo seem to be saying that a few casual encounters won’t ruin a woman for life. I don’t think anyone here would even argue that. (maybe Abbott! Missed you around here!) But there is a HUGE difference between a women that had a few casual experiences along the way, and a woman that spent years jumping from bed to bed with ONS/FWB/Hookups. The first I can totally understand, some people have to try something before they know if its right or not. In those cases, one or two casual encounters seems normal and healthy. But IMO, any woman that “enjoys” casual sex for any length of time is simply too much of a risk. If she likes it so much, how would I ever be able to trust her to NOT like it after she is with me? Will she be craving the kind of exciting sex she had before she “settled down”? Hell, did she “settle down” simply because she couldn’t get any of her manwhores to marry her?! Was I her plan B? (or C, D, E…) Having a relationship is hard enough, I don’t want to be competing with my wife’s past for the rest of my life. Especially when that past wasn’t encumbered with all the extra work that goes into a relationship. I’m sure the jock she screwed her senior year will look WAY more appealing than me when the roof springs a leak, or I get laid off. He didn’t have to deal with everyday shit. All he had to do was lay her like pipe and leave.

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

      But IMO, any woman that “enjoys” casual sex for any length of time is simply too much of a risk. If she likes it so much, how would I ever be able to trust her to NOT like it after she is with me?

      That’s it in a nutshell. Why would she stop liking it?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    tom,
    With all due respect, it sounds like you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you say this:

    I totally disagree that having multiple partners dimishises a womans capability to form long lasting bonds. BS in my view.

    Then this:

    These guys would go on endlessly about certain women what they did if they were good,easy,etc. NO repect for women at all…probably in some cases, well deserved.

    So, some women deserve to be discussed in the locker room, but it’s BS to assume that a woman cannot form long-lasting bonds if she’s ridden the carousel?

    Question for you: would you be interested in dating a carousel rider who deserves to be talked about in the locker room?

  • jess

    sassy,
    you can wriggle all you like- if you retained your virgnity whilst at college, then on the particular measurement of zero partners you ARE in a minority. As I only had one partner at college I too was in a minority for the particular specific measurement of 1 partner.

    If you are in a majority on ‘post college’ partner counts that happen to be in a range 1-5 you may well be right- i wasn’t disputing any of that.

    Personally I can attest that a string of sexual flings I had later in life were far, far more enjoyable than a safe but dull and suffocating relationship that had outgrown itself. My experiences taught me how good sex could be- beyond my wildest dreams. If you have had 4 partners (I’m guessing) then I suspect you may already be aware of how sex can vary. If someone isn’t that sexual then it may not matter a jot- but if they are then this self- knowledge may well be very important for their long term happiness, particularly if they want a happy and secure marriage with children.

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

      My experiences taught me how good sex could be- beyond my wildest dreams

      You must have a poor imagination and no Hitachi wand. :)

  • Ted D

    Jess – “Personally I can attest that a string of sexual flings I had later in life were far, far more enjoyable than a safe but dull and suffocating relationship that had outgrown itself. V

    I would counter that the sex in your “dull and suffocating” relationship was probably less than stellar because your relationship was “dull and suffocating”. I truly believe you can learn EVERYTHING you need to know about sex from ONE person. As long as you both are dedicated to meeting each others needs and desires in the bedroom (or wherever you are having sex…) there is no reason for the sex to be bad. There is plenty of info available about sex, and as long as both people are willing to experiment there is no reason for “dull” sex.

    The flip side to that is: if your relationship sucks, there is a damn good chance sex INSIDE that relationship will suck as well. Sex with my ex-wife was awesome early on, but by the time she decided it was over (because even though I was miserable I was willing to stay because I made the commitment) our sex life was so bad that we both gave up even trying. So obviously it wasn’t that we weren’t good sex partners, we just didn’t care enough about each other to put in the effort.

  • tom

    Ted no way to know if having a lot of sex partners damaged the woman for bonding or if a woman who would have trouble bonding had a lot of sex partners……a liberated type of woman probably will not stay in an unhappy marriage. Ms goody two shoes mary who would never rock the boat..don’t put all the blame on the woman. Some of us treat women like shit and deserve to be left. I still am surprised men still think once a woman has experienced variety she will some how become bored with you and divorce you. BS…there are a lot of reasons people divorce. That’s as much water as me saying goody two shoes leaves you because she never got to know another man sexually and the curiosity is killing her. Does THAT HAPPEN? Sure it does and so does the bored wife situation. But to say it is because she misses variety is probably false.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    if you dont fancy it- then one shouldn’t feel pressurised to do it. simples.

    Isabel is correct. You don’t understand the pressures to jump on the carousel because you aren’t part of my generation. My generation has taken the sexual lib. thing and run with it, and we are shamed if we don’t partake. Dunno if you come around a lot, but SayWhaat is having a hell of a time finding a guy who doesn’t mind that she’s a virgin. That’s preposterous, and probably never would’ve happened in the ’70s.

    But in my experience, it’s not pressure from the guys to jump on the carousel, it’s pressure from the girls. Did you not read my comment at the beginning of this post, when I said I’d been shamed by a girl because I was still a virgin? Literally, she told me I “wasn’t as good of a friend” because I didn’t share that common experience of riding the carousel. That only made me want to ride the carousel. Kind of. Watch, anyway.

  • jess

    excess,you are right men can father babies at age 80+

    whereas women’s fertility takes a notable hit at 38 (uk nhs graph)

    but genetic disease rates do increase the older the man is (uk nhs site)

    but yes, overall, mother nature has been kinder to guys on this particular issue.

    luckily childbirth doesnt hurt at all so she’s been kind to us there eh?

  • jess

    olive- i was a student in the 80′s!

    i was slight and quite pretty- you dont think i had pressure to have sex!

    despite my unwashed jeans and jumper i was refusing guys every week. even the friends of my boyfriend tried it on.

    i always found it easy to refuse their advances – you dont have to accept drinks or get into taxi cabs or not leave the parties at 11pm.

    although i have never been a big drinker or drug user so that probably helped. I accept your point that the pressure is there though.

  • Sassy6519

    If someone isn’t that sexual then it may not matter a jot- but if they are then this self- knowledge may well be very important for their long term happiness, particularly if they want a happy and secure marriage with children.

    I am a very sexual person. I simply don’t engage in casual sex. I unleash my sexuality with a man I’m in a relationship with and only him. To say that sexual people need “self-knowledge” is iffy. I don’t see how going out and banging a bunch of dudes or having several flings teaches anyone anything even remotely related to a happy marriage with children. Having a good sex life is important in a marriage, but a woman does not have to ride the carousel to know what is enjoyable for her sexually.

  • jess

    olive
    oh and that friend of yours? she sounds like a bit of a dick- sorry about that.

  • Ted D

    Tom – statistics show that promiscuous people tend to divorce more. There was a link here to a study that showed the chances of a woman divorcing later in life increase as she adds partner count.

    Frankly I don’t care WHY a woman divorces a man. What I’m concerned with here is that the numbers don’t lie. And the numbers say women that have had a lot of sexual variety are more likely to divorce. So, when choosing a women to be a wife, it would be VERY wise for men to seek woman with low sexual partner counts.

    Does that make sense to you? It makes perfect sense to me.

  • jess

    sassy,
    well you may be right- its certainly an opinion I too once held.
    Experience did teach me otherwise but that doesnt mean that would be true of all people.
    Perhaps you found that the sex always was awesome with your LTRs and you have a very good intuitive self knowledge- thats totally cool.
    Some people prefer a bit of experimentation whilst young, and for me, if its safe and in moderation, thats cool too.
    I think there is space for both approaches in this world and as with most things they have their pros and cons.

  • jess

    ted,
    have you got those stats you mentioned to Tom?
    the last set of stats i saw showed only a marginal increase of divorce risk for high number count partners.
    J

  • Emily

    >> olive- i was a student in the 80′s!

    I’ve seen posters who were students in the 90′s claim that their experience was WAY different than the current hook-up culture. A lot can change after 20 years.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Jess,
    Alright that’s cool. Happy for you that you got offers. I rarely got offers. That’s the infuriating thing about this discussion… you don’t seem to understand that there are girls who would be really bad for the carousel lifestyle (most of them, IMO), but they try to ride it anyway, egged on by people who say “give it a go! A few flings would be good for you!” People like Hugo, who seem to think that the carousel will affirm for the girls that they need not worry that their worth is based on their number of sexual partners. Maybe Hugo’s goal is for women to realize that they can be worthy of love even if they have high number counts. In fact, he’s encouraging the reverse: girls think they aren’t worthy of love UNLESS they have high number counts. That is a huge friggin’ problem, because not only is it killing girls inside, it’s flat out wrong. You see this from the men: JM said he’s less likely to trust a girl who had been promiscuous in the past. Ted D said this as well.

  • jess

    Ted,
    also just saw your earlier post.
    looks like we have a small area of agreement then- that a few flings might even be ‘healthy’ (i really do think that actually).

    i also get your ‘boredom’ dynamic you mention. I have actually known a few girls that experienced that and its mentioned in a very underrated book by Michelle Langley about female adultery. So you have every right to factor it in BUT in my experience if a women loves a guy and they have kids, thats pretty much it for life, including those that had enjoyable flings earlier in life.

    If you married a girl you loved would you drop her like a hot stone if the sex got a bit boring or her breasts weren’t quite as big as that girl from the hilday of 96′? C’mon now.
    All relationships have their risks- keep your eyes open sure, but most people are not in it to fleece anyone.

    ps i should say that i have for a long time been against the anti-male divorce court bias in the UK and USA.

    pps I have seen this bias overstated/exaggerated from time to time, mind you.

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

      I want to apologize for Xcess’ remarks. What a disgusting man. I thought I had banned him, but he must have used a new IP. Why does the spam filter always catch the wrong people?

      Writing this blog has shown me that my notions that we were beyond race in this country were terribly naive.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Xcess, and anyone else who feels like insulting Sassy’s pic for no good reason,

    Please go away, as you are not adding to the discussion. Kthanksbye.

  • tom

    Olive how is that talking out of both sides of my mouth? I do not believe in most cases women can not have the desire to bond fucked out of them unless there are special circumstances. I do think many damaged women become promiscuous and the damage was already there, in most cases…….what that has to do. with “boys” in the locker room I have no clue. You may have misunderstood me.. I was saying some of the women they talked about deserved no respect, not that they deserved to be talked about. My advice to young men is to select a mate very carefully, promiscuous or not. There are a lot of damaged women who are NOT promiscuous just as there are some promiscuous women who are not damaged. I have carefully selected a former promiscuous woman and am engaged. She is successful in business, a great mom, funny, intelligent, confident,sexy,high libido,decent golfer. I’m a lucky guy… I doubt she would have been of football locker room fodder because she was choosey in who she slept with.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Xcess

    Judging by your picture … we really dont want to know if you’re a sexual person or not…

    Now if you were a hot blond fire away … or put on a wig & contacts …

    btw i’ve blocked your pic using ad-block in mozilla … i advise anyone else offended by her pic to do the same …

    Awwww, aren’t you adorable. This is how many fucks I give about your comment……………….0

    I don’t care if you blocked my photo. Do what you want to do.

    As for the blonde comment, I have no desire to be blonde. I’m very proud of being African-American and the way I look. Nothing you say is going to change that.

    @ Olive

    I know right? Thanks Olive. What’s up with some of the people commenting on my photo as of recent? Did I offend someone that I’m not aware of or something? Funny how these same people never post photos of themselves on here. My guess is that they are hardly noteworthy in the looks department.

  • Ted D

    Jess – I’ll try to dig up the posts here later regarding partner count and divorce rate, its here somewhere. :P

    “If you married a girl you loved would you drop her like a hot stone if the sex got a bit boring or her breasts weren’t quite as big as that girl from the hilday of 96′? C’mon now.”

    Of course I wouldn’t. However, if my ability to “love” was diminished by spending years having casual sex, yeah I might. And although I agree that most women do not get married hoping to “fleece” their new husbands, that is exactly what they do when 5-10 years after the wedding they find themselves bored and the “I love you but I’m not IN love with you” comes out. The sad part is, in at least some of these cases, the woman probably only married the guy because she wanted to “settle down”, or wanted her “special day”, or maybe she just wanted some extra financial security, but love probably had very little to do with it at all. I believe those women tend to be the ones that had their “fun” when they were young, and once they realize they can’t get those guys to commit, or that they want to have kids, they stop looking for guys they find attractive and look for guys that can keep them comfortable financially, and then get bored with them and bolt later, taking much of the man’s hard work with her.

    Again, I’m not saying all of this is because of casual sex. But if casual sex increases the likelihood of this happening, wouldn’t you steer WAY clear of promiscuous women?

  • jess

    emily,
    there was so much sex going on in the 80′s I cannot really see how they could have had more sex. Orgies in your local TESCO maybe?

    We had to have a massive uk safe sex campaign cos of the ‘new’ AIDS thing.

    Olive,
    I hated the attention- still do. It was mostly jerks that tried it on.
    Yeah, I guess its annoying if people are bugging you to do things you don’t feel happy with. To be fair, this is the message the uk government is always saying- ‘never feel pestered to do x, y, z’. We have a big TV campaign at the moment on it.
    As to wether guys get turned off by something you did or didn’t do you cannot win.
    Somee guys dont like chaste girls, some dont like experienced girls.
    So you may as well do whatever makes you happy- within reason.

    ps please believe me when i say the guys on here do not hold majority opinion. and for heavens sake dont go to the other ‘extreme male’ sites- you will get one twisted take on humanity!.
    Most guys put ‘number count’ way down their list of qualities.
    They may have their preferences but its not a deal breaker for most.
    If you have any male friends why not ask them?
    Would they reject their soul mate because she had 11 partners at college etc ? that kinda thing?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Xcess

    Awwww, aren’t you adorable. This is how many shits I give about your comment –> 0

    As for the blonde thing, I have no desire to be blonde. I’m very proud of being African-American and the way I look. Nothing you say is going to change that.

    @ Olive

    I know right? Thanks Olive.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Having a good sex life is important in a marriage, but a woman does not have to ride the carousel to know what is enjoyable for her sexually.

    I agree. When I was a virgin, carousel riders used to tell me that I should definitely sleep with more than one person, as I won’t know what I like until I experience a variety. And I believed them.

    Since then, I’ve come to realize that sex takes practice, and that two people have to really care about each other and be interested in pleasing each other to make it work. I mean yeah, the first few times I had sex it was miserable and awkward, but it didn’t set the tone for the rest of my sex life.

    I’m probably not a good judge of this since I’ve only had sex with one person, but it seems like the “sexual incompatibility” junk is a story people tell girls to scare them away from sticking with one partner, or waiting til marriage/engagement. It might also be a story carousel riders tell each other to make themselves feel better about riding the carousel. I could be totally wrong about that though.

  • Ted D

    Xcess – I’m not sure what you are attempting to do by picking on someone’s avatar picture, but other than showing your maturity (or lack thereof) it doesn’t help your cause.

    I for one think Sassy appears attractive. I can’t say if she is “hot or not” as the picture is small and only a portrait. But I can say that based on that picture and what I know of her from her posts here, I think she is a very attractive young woman and I believe the difficulty she and other young women here are having finding a relationship are perfect examples of how screwed up things are in the SMP.

    To each their own. Its cool you found a way to block it. I’m sure everyone here would miss your witty posts and deep intellect here. *rolls eyes*

  • jess

    Xcess,
    i dont know if you were joking- but your ‘sassy’ comment appears completely unacceptable.

    Susan- forgive me, I may have misread things, but perhaps his post should be deleted?

  • Emily

    @ Xcess (re: your comments about Sassy)

    Dude, is that really necessary???? (Although I should probably know better than to feed the troll…)

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Jess,
    My BF actually told me he’s glad I never had sex with anyone else so he could have me all to himself. He’s a pretty laid back guy and I can’t picture him reading any MRA sites and agreeing with their positions, but it seems that he, too, prefers a woman with a low number count. He was a virgin too, so that’s significant. And also something I was happy with when we first started dating.

    But maybe I’ll take a poll of brother’s friends during Xmas break lol. On second thought, they might think I’m trying to hit on them, so maybe not.

  • Doug1

    Olive—

    Anyway, if anything, the fact that girls lie about their partner count further indicates that they regret casual sex, or are ashamed of it. Even despite the virgin shaming and sensationalizing of hookup culture. That ought to tell you something.

    I don’t think most of them are ashamed of it exactly. They have feminist memes in their heads to insulate themselves from that, but some are defensive, yeah. They know good girls like you won’t like and may try to shame high numbers. What’s mostly going on is they know there’s a good chance that highish numbers being generally known about them will disqualify them for LTR seeking guys, and they usually want that with a hot enough guy, kidding themselves on what level will commit to them. So most girls with high numbers lie their numbers down or avoid talking about it or are indignant about being asked about it. I think girls tend to lie numbers down even in their own heads. E.g. they don’t count lousy ONS sex, they don’t count oral as others have said, they forget about ONS’s easily and maybe kinda on purpose and don’t count them, they don’t count “was never gonna go anywhere and no one will know” vacation sex, and so on.

  • Ted D

    Jess “Most guys put ‘number count’ way down their list of qualities.
    They may have their preferences but its not a deal breaker for most.
    If you have any male friends why not ask them?
    Would they reject their soul mate because she had 11 partners at college etc ? that kinda thing?”

    Well, I WILL tell you that any woman that told me she had a high partner count wouldn’t make it that far. “soul mate” is a term I used to believe in, but it comes with so much baggage that I cannot put faith in it. Soul Mate implies that there is only one person in the world that is perfect for you. As much as I believed it in my youth, I know beyond all doubt that it is untrue.

    So, no I wouldn’t leave my “soul mate” because she used to be a slut. I would stop dating a woman because she used to be a slut, WAY before it got that serious.

    Of the men I know (who are admittedly in their 30′s and later) partner count does indeed matter. It is right up there with how many failed relationships/divorces they’ve had as well. I won’t say it is primary focus, but I would say that it is top 5 in all cases, and I know of at least one other guy in my circle that has walked away from women because of their promiscuous past.

    It isn’t the number so much as how they got the number, however. For me, a woman with 10 past sexual partners with only 2 or 3 being casual and the rest being LTRs is acceptable where a woman with say 6 but all or most were casual is not. Its the mentality of casual sex that I find repulsive. I value my body and my sexuality too much to waste it on someone that doesn’t value it at all.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Xcess

    Uh huh (Yawn).

    To all those who are coming to my defense, thank you. I really do appreciate it. I’m starting to get the feeling that comments like these are more about my race than my looks. The best way to insult me, they think, is to try to insult how I look instead of saying, “I don’t like black people” or “I don’t find black women attractive, as a whole”. I’d much rather they be upfront about that than to take a jab at my appearance instead.

    I make it a point not to play the “race card”, but I’m starting to think it’s accurate in this sense.

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

      @Sassy

      It is not about your looks, it is entirely about your being black. There are parts of the manosphere – the HBD crowd – where some real racists hang out. I don’t want them here, and I’m just sorry I was away for several hours this afternoon while that comment sat here.

      If it’s any consolation, he wasn’t very nice about me either..Carousel Rider Walsh, haha.

  • jess

    olive,
    its true that mutual discovery in a LTR is a wonderful and erotic thing.

    but honestly, sexual compatibility HAS to be there to some degree.

    Just because you didn’t experience a problem it doesnt mean others haven’t.

    Some of my lesbian friends said they didn’t even know for sure they were gay till they kissed their 1st girl in their 20s.

    i know of several women who married very young as virgins and found themselves completely sexually incompatible with their husbands- one of which was impotent. He has specifically sought her out because of this issue. As they were catholic she had the marriage annulled but nonetheless not a good situation.

    There is an old saying of ‘try before you buy’- it may not be appropriate for all, but I would wager its wise advice for most.

  • Ted D

    “My BF actually told me he’s glad I never had sex with anyone else so he could have me all to himself. ”

    Cosign. I’m not that hard core about it, but I have to say there is something unsettling about knowing a bunch of other men have “enjoyed” your GF/Wife. I’m good with it if it was LTR based, but if it was casual it just feels dirty. Here I am looking at a woman I love, that I think is a wonderful person with so many great qualities, and out there are a bunch of guys that think she was a great piece of ass. Unattractive on SO many levels!

  • jess

    sassy,
    yeah i got the race vibe too- i would like to think i was mistaken.

    my SO & I both think you are very pretty btw.

  • Ted D

    Meh, race issue or just an asshat. I don’t care either way, it still says a lot about his character. And what it says isn’t good…

  • Malia

    I have already stated that women like me are in the majority. I classify this by saying that, according to the study, 91% of college women claimed 0-5 casual sex partners in college. I am a part of that majority. That small spectrum is what constitutes the 91% stat. Within that stat, a varying level of sexual experience is included (virgins to moderately experienced women).

    Wrong.

    http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/resources/FAQ.html#Age

    I don’t know if anyone else has posted this (haven’t finished reading yet), but your interpretation of the statistics is inaccurate.

  • tom

    Ted having sex with several people doesn’t have to limit your ability to love deeply. It might, the already damaged perso,n but for a healthy minded person I just can’t fathom it. That’s like saying too much mastujrbating will make you go blind.

    Olive every generation thinks they invented sex..my mother told me it wasn’t called the roaring twenties for nothing..lol. I was in college in the hippy era.you knowthe “love the one you’re with” orgies. Free love..we had as much sex as any generation, the numbers show that..that generation hasn’t fared well but I don’t believe it was the sex. The war was stopped by our protesting (something this generation is clueless about being the sheeple they are) technology was just taking hold and we werfe one of the first spoiled generations. Not near as bad as this one however.

  • Doug1

    Xcess—

    Although women become less likely to conceive as they age, men can become fathers well into middle age despite drops in their sperm counts, according to researchers.

    It’s not just ability to conceive that goes down fairly rapidly after 30 and very rapidly after 35, especially for first births, these also a much greater risk of significant birth defects like Down’s syndrome as women’s fertility declines. Women should aim to have their first kid in their late 20’s.

    To me the following life pattern makes a lot of sense for college women. Graduate from college, find a non advanced degree job in a big city, look to have a LTR not necessarily for marriage yet but bear that in mind, another ltr more hoping it’s gonna turn into marriage, be seriously looking for a husband by 24, aim to get married between then and 26-7, pop out the first kid right away, then a year or so later get preggers again, stay home until youngest is in nursery school or kindergraden, then perhaps a period of a part time job, then when the kids are staying longer in school get an MA in a good jobs prospect field that interests her, then go into that field. Voila.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Malia

    How is what I said incorrect? I was referencing the quote Susan made early on in the post below.

    The stats show very clearly that only a small percentage of women pursue regular NSA sex in college. Jess is delusional. 91% of female college students have had 0-5 partners.

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/04/28/hookinguprealities/whos-really-having-sex-in-college/

  • Doug1

    Ted D—

    Frankly I don’t care WHY a woman divorces a man. What I’m concerned with here is that the numbers don’t lie. And the numbers say women that have had a lot of sexual variety are more likely to divorce. So, when choosing a women to be a wife, it would be VERY wise for men to seek woman with low sexual partner counts.

    Agree. I’d never marry or for that matter let myself fall in love with a high numbers girl. I don’t tell them that however.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    tom,
    That’s cool about your SO, it sounds like you trust her so more power to you. You’re right, I did sort of misunderstand what you said above, so I apologize. I still don’t know that most men would be down with dating/marrying a former carousel rider, but Jess has proposed that the views of men around here aren’t the same as men in real life. Like I said, will have to poll my brother’s friends during Xmas, he has about 9 guys who regularly come to the house.

  • Malia

    To all those who are coming to my defense, thank you. I really do appreciate it. I’m starting to get the feeling that comments like these are more about my race than my looks.

    It’s not about your race. Bellita is brown though I don’t know what ethnicity she is.

    It’s because you constantly go on about “being attractive” and when you write about yourself you do write as though it’s an advertisement or at best, marketing copywriting.

    —–

    As to how you are wrong, you were a virgin until graduation, I just showed the stat that you are not in the majority by a long shot. Secondly, knowing that >90% of women report 0-5 partners, does not tell you the distribution of those numbers. Even without data, once could simply use a bell curve and deduce that the majority would be in the middle 2-4. There’s no way reasonable for you to deduce you were in the majority, when you were clearly at zero.

    It’s not even a logical assumption based on the limited data you DID have.

    I’m not even on Jess’ side with the entire argument, I just don’t know why people like to constantly twist numbers to make themselves seem more common when they aren’t (and this goes for both sides).

    jess- outlier
    sassy- outlier

  • Doug1

    Xcess–

    I agree that your post at 230 to sassy is pretty personal and offensive. People are attracted to different things. Girls hate that sort of thing and this is supposed to be a girl friendly place.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    its true that mutual discovery in a LTR is a wonderful and erotic thing.

    but honestly, sexual compatibility HAS to be there to some degree.

    Just because you didn’t experience a problem it doesnt mean others haven’t.

    Some of my lesbian friends said they didn’t even know for sure they were gay till they kissed their 1st girl in their 20s.

    Interesting stuff. Sassy, I’d be interested in your take on this, since you’re not a casual sex girl, but I believe you’ve had more than 1 partner?

    i know of several women who married very young as virgins and found themselves completely sexually incompatible with their husbands- one of which was impotent. He has specifically sought her out because of this issue. As they were catholic she had the marriage annulled but nonetheless not a good situation.

    Now THAT is a sucky situation. A good reason to not wait til marriage (I used to be on that bandwagon but I jumped off it a couple years ago).

  • tom

    Ted so what if there are guys who think my lady was a great piece of ass..She is. It was before she knew me, loved me, accepted me. Sex is VERY SPECIAL between us because we both know we have had others, could get others but we both choose to keep the sex special just for each other. I am secure in knowing that she loves me and has all the qualities I want in a woman. Any idea why it would bother you so much…btw I would be more wary of a woman who has had 8 relationships..might mean she isn’t good at them.

  • Doug1

    Jess–

    but genetic disease rates do increase the older the man is (uk nhs site)

    A little bit, as men age past their 40′s and 50′s. Not nearly as much as women aging through their thirties increase it though.

    Husband ten years older than wife works in lots of ways. Well 7-10.

  • Doug1

    Tom–

    She is successful in business, a great mom, funny, intelligent, confident,sexy,high libido,decent golfer.

    Your an alpha and married a promiscuous single mother??

  • Malia

    Ooh, I am going to correct myself. That post says that 37.2 have 0 sexual partners and another 54.1% are 0-5 so THAT is clearly the majority. Although we don’t know the distribution within 1-5, we most definitely know it at 0.

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/04/28/hookinguprealities/whos-really-having-sex-in-college/

  • Malia

    — correction again— another 54.1% are 0-5 so—

    another 54.1% are 1-5 so

    I just need to stop typing

  • Doug1

    Sassy–

    The stats show very clearly that only a small percentage of women pursue regular NSA sex in college. Jess is delusional. 91% of female college students have had 0-5 partners.

    ONE study probably of college freshmen girls (easy to survey in large groups in large into to psych or sociology classes) midway through that year, SAY that’s how many men they’ve slept with in their life. I think that’s a cherry picked study and frankly can’t believe the true numbers are anything like that upon graduation. There’s far too much, vastly much, anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

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

      @Doug1

      Stop discrediting the study, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Read the damn post.

      ONE study probably of college freshmen girls (easy to survey in large groups in large into to psych or sociology classes) midway through that year,

      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.

      The anonymity was granted with an online survey, access granted with a randomly generated one-time PIN.

      I believe your anecdotal evidence is coming from a rather narrowly defined group. :)

  • tom

    Yup sexual non compatability is not a myth. Lots of cases where long time partners have split up only to find a whole nother sexual world out there with another person

  • dragnet

    @ Susan

    “It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s.”

    You can’t really think that—it’s just a few of the guys.

    In any case, here’s a link to my limited defense–and critique–of your efforts:

    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/committed-to-the-trail/#comment-25383

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

      @dragnet

      Thanks, I saw your comment, both yesterday and a few weeks ago as well. I appreciate your honesty and don’t disagree with your characterization of me or HUS. That’s what I’m about. I am an ally to men, I have a plan, a strategy, and I’m not going to let these very unpleasant people derail it. Interestingly, it was the Kate Bolick article, and my mention of the apex fallacy that got people really riled up. Rmaxd started a thread at Roosh’s accusing me of stealing game concepts for my own benefit. I’d like to think I’m sharing real information about the SMP to break the feminist narrative, thereby benefiting both men and women.

      It is true that I am no particular friend to men who eschew relationships in favor of casual sex. Nor to women who do so.

      You’re a tough customer – your support means a lot to me.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Malia

    I have said from the beginning that I was in the majority percentile of that stat based on the range (0-5, note how the zero is included in that range). I never said virgins were the majority at college, not even once. I only said the majority of women have 0-5 partners in college, which includes me. I don’t understand what’s confusing about that.

    Ooh, I am going to correct myself. That post says that 37.2 have 0 sexual partners and another 54.1% are 0-5 so THAT is clearly the majority. Although we don’t know the distribution within 1-5, we most definitely know it at 0.

    Notice how the 37.2% in addition to the 54.1% equals 91.3%? That’s the stat I’ve been talking about. 91% of college girls claim, in that study, that they have had 0-5 sexual partners.

    I also haven’t been going on and on about my looks in this thread. I have mentioned it from time to time in other threads, but not ad nausea and not in this thread.

  • tom

    Yes doug I did. We actually met as a one nighter. There was something different about her. We kept seeing eachother and after a few months fell in love…her kid is a non issue.. he is a gfrat kid and a very good athlete..we relate well

  • Malia

    Notice how the 37.2% in addition to the 54.1% equals 91.3%? That’s the stat I’ve been talking about. 91% of college girls claim, in that study, that they have had 0-5 sexual partners.

    Oh I get it. It’s not that. YOUR situation was clearly broken out- 0 partners at 37.2%, yet you continued to lump it in with others to say “the majority of women are like me”.

    No, they are not.

    Even if you add the 0 stat to the 1-5 stat, that still does not mean the majority of women are LIKE YOU. 5 is way different than 0, wouldn’t you agree?

    THAT is what I’m talking about. Trying to broaden the range of how something is defined to make your group seem more common.

    It’s no different than Jess talking about 70 something % of women enjoy casual sex. NOTHING in the data points to that. You BOTH are drawing broad boundaries, and merging groups and fuddling numbers to avoid the truth that your collegiate behavior and her post collegiate behavior makes BOTH of you OUTLIERS.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Malia,
    At the risk of pissing you off, I’m going to respond to these comments, because IMO they were uncalled for.

    It’s not about your race. Bellita is brown though I don’t know what ethnicity she is.

    We have this habit, at least in the U.S., of throwing all people belonging to racial minorities in the same category. In reality, the experiences of an Asian, for example, might be very different from the experiences of an African American, and there are different stereotypes for each. It’s true that Bellita doesn’t discuss her SMV, but it’s not fair to throw her and Sassy into the same category in terms of racial minority status.

    It’s because you constantly go on about “being attractive” and when you write about yourself you do write as though it’s an advertisement or at best, marketing copywriting.

    And that’s rather catty. Hardly anyone around here complains about Sassy discussing her own SMV, which, for the purposes of her situation in the SMP, is completely relevant to some of the points she makes. Often, she just wants to make it clear that the SMP is really rough for a pretty girl who gets approached by many guys, because the guys often approach her just for casual sex purposes (the most shocking one was when she got asked to have a threesome with a dude and his gf?? That would never happen to me!).

    I’m probably a 6 and I take no issue with Sassy discussing her SMV. I think it’s relevant, and I don’t think it sounds like she’s advertising herself.

    P.S. Anna described herself as a 9 in the forum and no one gave her shit about it. She’s blonde. My guess is if people couldn’t see Sassy’s pic, they would take what she says at face value. So I, too, think Xcess’s comments were racist in nature.

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

      I’m probably a 6 and I take no issue with Sassy discussing her SMV. I think it’s relevant, and I don’t think it sounds like she’s advertising herself.

      One thing that I really like about HUS is that people are surprisingly up front about their looks. Some say they’re hot, and they have experiences that back it up. They also have their own share of issues. Others say they’re not gorgeous, yet they have found love. The truth is that the SMP affects all of us, regardless of looks. We all struggle to find love. That was true in my day and it’s even truer now. The key thing is to be realistic about what you have to offer, just so that you don’t waste a lot of time trying to score out of your league.

      The great thing about discussing this stuff online is that Beauty and the Beast get the same level of attention. What distinguishes people here is the quality of their commentary.

  • Doug1

    Jess—

    US state levels of child support=also stealth alimony particularly for high earning men in high tax states appear to be 50% or somewhat more than that higher than British levels.

    Also I really think alimony is hard to justify in this day and age, certainly for more than say 3 years is she wasn’t working and isn’t getting child support=also stealth alimony. I say that really as a compromise. I can’t really see why any alimony is necessary.

  • Malia

    We have this habit, at least in the U.S., of throwing all people belonging to racial minorities in the same category.

    First, I brought up Bellita because she is clearly not white and she also has her photo in her avatar and no one has made a remark like that about her looks.

    Secondly, no one has COMPLAINED about Sassy, but it’s not the first time a commenter has taken a dig at her writing about herself in such a way.

    I think it’s relevant, and I don’t think it sounds like she’s advertising herself.

    We don’t agree, but that doesn’t make me wrong.

    Hardly anyone around here complains about Sassy discussing her own SMV, which, for the purposes of her situation in the SMP, is completely relevant to some of the points she makes.

    Actually, it’s not because Sassy’s discussion of her SMV is her OWN evaluation of her SMV.

  • tom

    Doug not married yet but engaged

  • Sassy6519

    @ Olive

    I have a different take on things than Jess does. I agree in the importance of sexual compatibility, but we disagree on how to go about finding a compatible partner.

    I fully support a man and a woman exploring each other sexually while in a relationship. I don’t understand the desire to explore a person sexually that you barely know or aren’t in a relationship with. A lot of the potential for a woman to be satisfied during sex stems from the overall trust and security she feels for a man. A part of the love making process for a woman involves letting down her mental guards enough to relax and enjoy the experience to the fullest extent. It explains a lot why most women report not having orgasms during ONS. There is very little trust and security in those situations, so they can’t relax enough to achieve orgasm.

    It’s like expecting to get a good night sleep when you know a tiger is sleeping in the same bed with you. The on edge instinct humans have when they aren’t in a completely safe environment is natural. Whether women are willing to admit it or not, having sex with a stranger or random person subconsciously triggers that instinct. Your body and mind can’t fully relax when the hindbrain signals danger.

  • jess

    according to the student beans.com 2011 survey of 2200 students across the uk:

    54% have used the morning after pill
    61% have had 5+ partners at college
    the average number of partners across the country was 6.

    the brits count fingering/oral/anal activity as sex unlike the americans

    i suspect this is a more accurate picture

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

      British women sound really slutty! Just kidding.

      Fingering is not sex. Seriously, that is ridiculous.

  • Doug1

    Bellita I believe said she was from the Philippines. Been there. They vary a good bit in hue.

  • tom

    Wow..all I can say is wow. Xass is a moron. Sassy I like your attitude

  • Sassy6519

    @ Malia

    The original intent of Susan citing that stat was to show men here (and Jess) that most women are not extremely sexually promiscuous in college or enjoying it. Lots of men are under the assumption that most to all college women are slutting it up big time in college, when that isn’t the case in the study. In comparison to the percentage of women who had more than 5 sexual partners in college (9%), the less promiscuous percentage of women (91%) was by far the majority.

  • Doug1

    I referred to this fake lie detector study to determine whether and how much women lie down their number of sex partners, yesterday I believe it was. It’s relevant to today’s discussion.

    Women change their answers depending on whether or not they believe they will be caught out not telling the truth, the researchers found. The number of sexual partners a woman reported nearly doubled when women thought they were hooked up to a lie detector machine.

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3936-fake-liedetector-reveals-womens-sex-lies.html

    Susan said she thought the numbers only went from 3.5 to 4 or thereabout. Doubling is big.

    I simply do not believe that only 9% of women have had more than five lifetime sex partners by the time the graduate college, what with the CDC saying that 75% of women have contracted the HPV virus by then, usually harmlessly, but from sex.

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

      @Doug1

      The polygraph study is interesting and it doesn’t surprise me at all. We all know that women are likely to fudge the number, owing to the sexual double standard.

      However, it only included 100 women, a very small sample. The number of reported partners went from 3.4 when women thought it was anonymous to 4.4 when they thought they were hooked up to a polygraph. Oddly, women who were told their answers might be read gave an even lower number than the anonymous one, 2.6. I think the relevant comparison is between anonymous and polygraph.

  • Malia

    And that’s rather catty.

    Pot… kettle. Do you even read how you write about other women? That was way tame compared to what you write.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    “75% of women have contracted the HPV virus by then, usually harmlessly, but from sex.”

    Maybe they all fucked the same janitor.

  • Malia

    @Sassy 280

    My point still remains and is still validated by data.

    Having said that… (i.e. moving on to another point)

    As much as I hate to agree with Jess and Doug, that particular study had too small a sample size to be consistently used for data points, and when compared to other data (actual real studies) it doesn’t seem as reliable of an indicator of how the numbers actually pan out.

    That doesn’t mean that it’s not an indicator of behaviors, just that those numbers cannot be used in an absolute sense. I.e. those numbers do indicate that most women are not having lots of casual sex PARTNERS in college, but that doesn’t mean that their actual numbers can be taken as statistically valid fact.

    And data coming from campus health centers, etc, is most definitely going to trump that data.

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

      @Malia

      The truth is, we’ve known since Kinsey that sexual data is never “clean.” And no one has found a way around that. In the DOJ study, anonymity was guaranteed, that was not considered a limitation of the study. 5000+ women participated, it was not a small sample at all.

      Interestingly, the prevalence of hookup culture has probably made women less ashamed re the number of partners. We’re probably getting better data today than ever before. When Kate Bolick asked the women in my focus group for their number, they didn’t hesitate to give it, and I knew they were honest. Their numbers ranged from 2-35. The only one who was self-conscious was the girl with 2, as she was clearly an outlier.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Secondly, no one has COMPLAINED about Sassy, but it’s not the first time a commenter has taken a dig at her writing about herself in such a way.

    Yeah but actually I think it might be the same commenter. I remember comments of a similar nature awhile ago, and they were along the same lines, written by a dude. Some guy used the word “butterface.” Even if they were different commenters, the comments were written by men, were offensive in the same way, and were low blows and didn’t contribute to the discussion. In any case, who the hell can actually see Sassy’s face in her thumbnail picture? I can’t.

    I brought up Bellita because she is clearly not white and she also has her photo in her avatar and no one has made a remark like that about her looks.

    Right, but do you think people would take digs at Bellita for discussing her SMV? I can’t picture that. Besides, no one took digs at Anna for discussing her SMV.

    Actually, it’s not because Sassy’s discussion of her SMV is her OWN evaluation of her SMV.

    She evaluates her SMV based on the attention she gets from guys. Guys don’t stare at me in the street, so I’m pretty sure I’m not an 8. In any case, I don’t know why you’re taking digs at her for it. Just the other day you had some comment about women being down on other women around here, and how you thought it had to do with intra-sexual competition. IDK, after that comment this seems especially ironic. This is the first time I’ve seen a woman weigh in negatively on Sassy’s evaluation of her own SMV.

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh–

    Was that the same department of Justice commissioned but not conducted study (conducted by feminist advocates) which “found” that one in 4.5 college women have been raped by the time they graduated, all by far most of those being classified as sexually assaulted or raped didn’t see it that way themselves?? It egregiously used the rad feminist currently being pushed for definition of rape to one including tipsy consensual sex she regrets in the morning. The advocacy piece study also did wretchedly bad sampling that was full of selection bias, it was online by invitation at a number of colleges and got only low percentage response rates from the colleges they survey. Utter garbage and mere propaganda in other words.

    But it this piece of garbage was sited by the Department of Education’s civil rights side as a major reason for their infamous April 14 letter to all US colleges that if they wanted to keep on getting any federal money, they’d better under Title IX lower the level of proof for date rape and sexual assault in campus disciplinary hearings (with expulsion being the ultimate sanction) to 50.1% more likely it did rather than didn’t.

    Crimey, girl makes an accusation now at college for any reason (and there are a lot of false rape claims), guys likely to be toast since there’s a tendency to believe her in this atmosphere at least a little more than him in a he said she said. If sex did happen, and he can’t prove he was elsewhere at the time, finished. Turns American justice on it’s head in a feminist misandrous hysteria about non existing levels of rape on campus.

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

      @Doug1

      I got into a big argument re false rape claims over lunch today, with my friend who is the Doc at Tufts Student Health Services. My argument is that if you’re going to say a woman cannot consent when drunk because she has lost her ability to reason, then you can’t hold men responsible for their inability to reason under the same condition. Most of these rape claims never involve the use of the word no. It’s all very murky. The worst thing, true at Tufts, and Duke, and probably lots of other schools, is that a third party can file a rape accusation. So let’s say a woman returns to her room, telling her Gender Studies major roommate that she had sex but doesn’t remember it. That third party can go to the disciplinary board of the university to file a rape charge against the man who participated, even if her roommate does not want to press charges. It’s outrageous.

      The Duke 88 was led by Women’s Studies professors. They should have all gotten fired.

      I don’t know if this DOJ study was the same one or not. I will have to look into that.

  • Malia

    She evaluates her SMV based on the attention she gets from guys.

    Still not a reliable indicator.

    This is the first time I’ve seen a woman weigh in negatively on Sassy’s evaluation of her own SMV.

    You know, I really don’t care how she evaluates her SMV. I did notice the “I’m attractive and…” and “I’m attractive, but…” and maybe literally a day or two before the first person went in on her, I remarked (offline) to Jhane Sez that I wondered how long it would be before someone started taking shots.

    I honestly do not feel that the shots taken are because she’s black, but rather because she can be a bit obnoxious about the whole thing. So THAT is why I don’t think it’s about race.

    And that’s JMO. You guys see it another way, it’s all good.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    Other way around. In the study I talked about just above Justice funded them.

  • Sassy6519

    I don’t know why I failed to notice this before.

    Now if you were a hot blond fire away … or put on a wig & contacts …

    He doesn’t have a problem with my facial features. He has a problem with the fact that I don’t have blond hair or blue eyes. That must be the epitome of attractiveness to him.

    Does anyone have a spare blonde wig lying around and an extra pair of blue colored contacts? I will look like a Frankenstein Beyonce with that crap, but I aim to please (barf).

  • @peace

    Neely is stating honest, consequential realities while Hugo is merely trying to justify his irresponsible and ill-informed choices. Hugo touches on some of the consequences of his own actions but doesn’t skip a beat in glossing over them with further justifications as follows:

    “I do regret the pain I caused other people. Rightly so. But what my life has taught me is that insight and compassion are rooted in experience; you can’t advise about what you don’t understand.”

    So, causing other people unnecessary pain is a small price to pay for pure, selfish indulgence? Hey, you might learn something! That women actually have *hearts*! And ‘Lo! And behold!’ they *don’t* want a man to treat them like a used condom! That is some groundbreaking stuff right there! No man could *ever* be expected to know such a deep and profound truth without years of experience in indulging their selfish whims and desires! Ok, I’ll quit the irony now.

    Feminism, like so many other movements had noble intentions but was misguided and the proof is now in the pudding. The fact is, men and women are slightly different in every way and always will be (a fact any child knows without having to think about it for a second). However, they are nowhere near as different as many would have us believe who wish to disavow any real responsibility toward the opposite sex. Any horrible behavior can be so easily brushed aside by, “You just can’t understand me, just as I can never really understand you.”

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

      @peace

      The fact is, men and women are slightly different in every way and always will be (a fact any child knows without having to think about it for a second). However, they are nowhere near as different as many would have us believe who wish to disavow any real responsibility toward the opposite sex.

      That’s a really important distinction. There are things that are true of all human beings, including the way we desire respect, trust, empathy, love. Every person wants these things, whether they pursue them or not.

  • Richard Aubrey

    A year or so back, a Duke student published her sexual activities, including grading her partners.
    What is interesting is not merely that the guys treated her like dirt–they were pigs–but that they expected to. They expected to be able to treat a woman like dirt and have nothing to pay for it. In other words, either she’ll be back for more, or there is a more than sufficient supply of women will be just as willing.
    How did the pig-men learn this?
    Experience is my guess. Plenty of women willing to be treated like dirt by guys known to treat women like dirt, which, after a while, seems like a pretty convenient situation for the guys.
    What would one of these women do if they met a really good guy?
    I”d be interested–come to think of it, not really–how many of the NSA/ONS incidents were similar. What percentage, I guess, would be interesting. If it’s high enough, it’s training a certain class of guy that he can be a pig and still do just fine.

  • Ted D

    Tom – masterbating may not make you blind, but there is some indication that too kuch porn + jerking off CAN greatly decrease a man’s ability to get off with his mate.

    I don’t think it’s a coincidence. Seems like the flip side of the casual sex is bad for women issue to me.

  • Doug1

    Malia–

    I don’t think whites tend to be very good at judging the attractiveness of black women to black men, except at the extremes. Whites can tell that Haley Barry and Thandy Newton are real attractive, and that Oprah isn’t, but in between?

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    Not really it didn’t. He said he wanted full sex. It was more his self flagellation at the alter of feminist women I think. Proving himself a “good man”.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Pot… kettle. Do you even read how you write about other women? That was way tame compared to what you write.

    Yeah, because I always specifically take digs at people for discussing their looks around here. ::rolls eyes:: Actually I happen to like most of the women commenters here. I like Jess even though I don’t agree with her, I appreciate her tone. I like Sassy too, and I haven’t always agreed with her either.

    And yeah I know your post the other day about female intra-sexual competition was aimed at me. I don’t get what your beef is with me, to be honest, but you could’ve just said you had a problem with me, instead of sneaking it in. I know I’m not perfect, and I’ve done a lot of introspection since coming to HUS. My goal here is to be honest about myself and to learn. I bring baggage, including a long history of being excluded and antagonized by girls and women. You probably bring baggage too. It’s not my business to try to analyze that, or to call you out on it, and if you feel that I have done so in any way, I apologize. But I do think you specifically took digs at Sassy in this case, and it’s honorable of Sassy to ignore it. But in light of your comment about taking digs at women, I thought it only fair to call you out. If you have anything else you wanted to say, I’d appreciate it if you e-mail me, not post little comments that you think I might not read. My e-mail is on my blog.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Everyone

    Uncle Tom here. You will recall in our last discussion that I was suggesting to you that the Boomers are largely responsible for conflating “women deserve equal rights with men” into “women and men are the same”. Before I explore that, let’s pause and reflect; actually, lets decide what we agree on. Do we agree that hook up sex is, on balance, a good deal for the guy, not such a good deal for the gal? Do we agree that treating sex as sneezing, something that comes on somewhat uncontrollably, provides a brief instant of intensity in elimination, followed by satiation,unconnected to anything else, satisfies practically every major need the male has and almost none of the females’? Because if that’s wrong, if chicks are just like guys and want and need the same things in the same way at the same time, then well hell go at it, recreate something akin to the gay community mid-70s/early 80s, anonymous couples having at it in the parking lot or similar, returning to club or similar, thence back with someone else, on and on until some vagrant mutant variant of an obscure strain of DNA issues forth to kill millions but, failing that, you can continue off in to the (black and) blue horizon.

    Excuse that digression. But if we have an issue, and we have to for me to have a point, then we need to start from some basic premises. My basic premise is that the anwer to both of those questions is yes. If you don’t agree, stop reading; there is nothing here for you. I especially mean certain of you manosphere types; you know who you are. You are tiresome; if you wrote well, you’d at least be provocative, but you don’t, and aren’t. Your writing is turgid, flabby. Your thinking is at least marginally clear, but what you think is horseshit. You’d have a better time puffing each other up, indulging in the fantasy that you have something approaching rapier wit (you don’t), that you display it with laser-like precision (you can’t), to a group of equally talented raconteurs (they aren’t, you aren’t).
    So go to it.

    If we do agree that women and men aren’t the same, and that at least some part of the current malaise is attributable to a failure to recognize the same, some of you may ask:where did that idea come from? In an earlier post I laid out the initial background which Susan rightly noted was called “gender equity” i e the idea of equal pay for equal work. Now, you have to recall that the template for the women’s movement, as for practically all movements post WWII , was the black civil rights struggle. In that very time, or not too long before, there had been a big set to over “separate but equal”. The idea was we’ll give blacks equal facilities, education, etc. but separate ones. Total crap. Supreme Court weighed in that separate was inherently unequal and that was that. If you adjust the dial just a tad, you can see how separate can be replaced with “different”. Different is inherently unequal. If women are entitled to the same rights i e are not to be treated differently, shouldn’t we also see them as the same as men?

    I think somewhere in there there is an analogy to the green monkey virus that made the jump to AIDS. It percolated in women’s studies programs (I’ll study you; bend over-SEXIST!) where makeup-less humorless unironic hairy-legged women’s field hockey/softball type bowl-haircuts lipless colorless odorless non-caloric pigment free massively-upper-armed chunky black-or-rimless-glasses-wearing butt-hair-thicker-than-a-shelter-collie theoretically-arch-interpersonally-acidic more-butch-than-the-Dallas-Cowboys bull-dykes (I could have just said bull-dykes but I decided to be peremptory) who busy themselves concocting hot-house flower nonsense which they know will never last 2 blocks away from the campus upon which the barricade themselves against a world which supports, but has no use for, them, they being content to snear at the same while they await tenure so they can really take the lid off their smoke-tossing self-reflective nowhere navel-gazing bombastic claptrap.

    Like I said, I don’t think the idea was explicit. I think if you said to one of the above “Are women and men the same?” she’d have said “no” inwardly thinking “women have pussies, and, like potato chips, I’m not going to eat just one or 2″. It germinated though, the logical conclusion to a whole series of thought-exercises, nudged along by the laplickers, and the damn thing broke out, carried off campus by innocent young women who maybe took a class or 2 (DANGEROUS: every lesbian believes that a straight woman is just 3 drinks away from a gay “fling” if not more; title of my next article) and, as they approached the job market, took this germ with them.

    I saw the first wave I still remember this weird outfit they wore: converted a men’s jacket to a woman’s, white blouse, some sort of red neck thing that resembled a tie, dark blue Puritan-style pleated skirt-it was sort of like taking the man’s blue suit, white shirt, regimental tie and having Ben & Jerry make an ice cream out of it. Harrison Ford described it best: “What a woman thinks a man would wear if he was a woman.” These be the Boomers, and I think that germ was in there too. And now we’re stuck with it.

    Class is over. Leave your papers on my desk. Ladies, be sure to take advantage of Prof. Munson’s specila private tutorials.

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

      @Munson

      I wore that Ben & Jerry suit. You forgot the shoes for the commute: white Nikes, into which we slipped our L’eggs pantyhose-clad feet and walked to work on Wall St. Do you recall the William Agee – Mary Cunningham romance? It was such a scandal! She wore that suit perfectly. Once I was sitting in a conference room, a junior strategist nevertheless sitting in on a meeting with the CFO. Something moved in my peripheral vision – I looked down, and under the boardroom table he had his shoes off and was playing footsie with the L’eggs clad new hire of the HBS class of 1984.

      You know what? You remind me a bit of Tom Wolfe. Your description of Women’s Studies profs was right out of Charlotte Simmons.

  • Malia

    @doug

    Not sure what your point is but it should be painfully obvious that sassy doesn’t date black men exclusively.

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

      Not sure what your point is but it should be painfully obvious that sassy doesn’t date black men exclusively.

      I really am naive. I hardly know who is what race, who’s dating what race, who is attracted to what race, or anything! Some commenters, like Jhane Sez and PVW have been open about their racial identity. Bellita and Sassy share their photos. Furthermore, I don’t see why it matters.

      One of my favorite films, Bulworth, featured this quote by Warren Beatty:

      All we need is a voluntary, free-spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction. Everybody just gotta keep fuckin’ everybody ’til they’re all the same color.

      That’s my philosophy about race. It won’t happen in my lifetime, but if the species lives another 500 years, I bet that’s what we’ll look like.

  • Emily

    @ Richard

    Haha I remember the Duke Sex List. Over at Jezebel they LOVED it! But then it came out that all of the guys were douchebag dude-bro jocks who had girlfriends. …and then Roissy pointed out that she basically gave points based on whether or not they were willing to cuddle with her. (Some of them finished in minutes, and then walked right out.)

    How empowering.

  • Malia

    @olive:

    I’m not going to email you about it, it’s really not that serious.

    Or in other words I really don’t care enough about it to write more than I write here.

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

      Malia, you’re being kinda bitchy right now. What’s the problem?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Malia

    Awww, I thought we were close after agreeing a lot on the thread that shall not be named. I must have been mistaken.

    My appraisal of my SMV probably seems annoying to you and a few other people because I am one of the few women on here that doesn’t subscribe to self-deprecating tactics. I know a good chuck of women in real life who go around saying “I’m not pretty”, “I’m a 6″, or “I’m fat”, hoping that other women will chime in with the obligatory “You are pretty” or “Don’t say that, you aren’t fat”.

    Fishing for compliments is not attractive and I have never fished for a compliment on here. A woman could say she is intelligent until she is blue in the face and not catch any flack for it. What’s the difference with looks.

  • Sassy6519

    Not sure what your point is but it should be painfully obvious that sassy doesn’t date black men exclusively.

    Is that a bad thing?

  • Doug1

    Oh I misread me for him somehow.

  • Doug1

    Susan—

    This was penned by rather your kind of feminist, Cathy Young (she’s probably about your age too):

    Like many such campaigns, the administration’s new push for a more aggressive approach to sexual assault complaints relies on claims that sexual violence on college campuses exists in epidemic proportions. The OCR letter cites a recent study showing that one in five female college students (and six percent of the men) experience a completed or attempted sexual assault during their school years. This data comes from the Campus Sexual Assault Study commissioned by the National Institute of Justice and conducted in 2005-2007.

    However, a close look at the CSA Study’s findings raises some serious questions about its reliability. First of all, the vast majority of the incidents it uncovered involved what the study termed “incapacitation” by alcohol (or, rarely, drugs): 14 percent of female respondents reported such an experience while in college, compared to six percent who reported sexual assault by physical force.
    Yet the question measuring incapacitation was framed ambiguously enough that it could have netted many “gray area” cases: “Has someone had sexual contact with you when you were unable to provide consent or stop what was happening because you were passed out, drugged, drunk, incapacitated, or asleep?” Does “unable to provide consent or stop” refer to actual incapacitation – given as only one option in the question – or impaired judgment? An alleged assailant would be unlikely to get a break by claiming he was unable to stop because he was drunk.

    Not surprisingly, three-quarters of the female students in this category did not label their experience as rape. (Even when penetration was involved, only 37 percent of the women the study classified as victims of rape by incapacitation believed they had been raped.) Two-thirds said they did not report the incident to the authorities because they didn’t think it was serious enough. Interestingly, only two percent reported having suffered emotional or psychological injury – a figure so low that the authors felt compelled to include a footnote asserting that the actual incidence of such trauma was undoubtedly far higher.

    The CSA Study’s estimate of sexual assault by physical force is somewhat problematic as well – particularly for attempted sexual assaults, which account for nearly two-thirds of the total. Women were asked if anyone had ever had or attempted to have sexual contact with them by using force or threat, defined as “someone holding you down with his or her body weight, pinning your arms, hitting or kicking you, or using or threatening to use a weapon.” Suppose that, during a make-out session, the man tries to initiate sex by rolling on top of the woman, with his weight keeping her from moving away – but once she tells him to stop, he complies. Would this count as attempted sexual assault?

    http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2011/04/_by_cathy_young_1.html

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

      @Doug

      Thanks for the Cathy Young link. You’re right, she is my kind of feminist – I love her. She was once a local columnist at the Boston Globe, and I loved her then. Must be 15 years ago now.

  • Malia

    A woman could say she is intelligent until she is blue in the face and not catch any flack for it. What’s the difference with looks.

    Doug has gone on and on about being an alpha of a certain caliber and after a while, a couple commenters here went in on his “alpha status”. You go on and on about being attractive and frankly, it was only a matter of time before someone started doing that. I just do not think it is a factor of you being black, that’s all.

    In general, to be perfectly honest with you, it’s widely not considered a likable quality in women (regardless of the accuracy of it), just like it’s not considered a likable quality in men to go on and on about being “alpha”.

    I just don’t think the negative response to it was because of race.

    Doesn’t mean you have to be self-deprecating, there’s many shades of gray between self-deprecating and arrogant, with humble being one of them.

  • Malia

    Is that a bad thing?

    Not at all.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Malia,

    I’m not going to email you about it, it’s really not that serious.

    Or in other words I really don’t care enough about it to write more than I write here.

    Alright cool. Then I’m asking you to not bring it up again. I’m the type of girl who appreciates honesty, and I’ve dealt with too many people who make snide comments to the side about me when I’m not looking, which is kind of what you did the other day, then ignored my response. Don’t feel like putting up with it on a blog, for goodness sakes. My offer stands. I will gladly discuss it with you elsewhere, but here it’s just going to piss me off, and I will make that very clear in my responses.

    Susan,

    Olive, I thought it was funny that Rivelino was perturbed by our not wanting hours of thrusting, lol. I’ve been known to glance at the clock and exclaim that Lost was coming on soon.

    Yeah that was hilarious lol. I mean I definitely don’t have a low sex drive, but I’d much prefer 4 20-minute sessions to 1 2-hour session. My vagina cringes at the thought.

  • Doug1

    The press and people in college of both sexes wouldn’t be going on and on about the hookup culture there if only 9% of of graduating seniors had more than 5 lifetime sex partners.

    First of all girls lie down their numbers, that polygraph study I linked demonstrated by a factor of 2. I think it’s more like a factor of 3, since girls genuinely forget a certain number of cases that weren’t good or emotionally significant to them, particularly if they have fairly high numbers. Second of all it was probably done on freshman, and at the end of that year either. Third of all it’s one study – are there no others or does Susan not want to tell us about others?

    And finally college guys and girls wouldn’t talk about it so much to themselves and the media if only 9% of girls have more than 5 lifetime partners by the time the graduate college.

    I flat out don’t believe that 9% is even close to accurate. At all.

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

      @Doug1

      I think it’s really important to get at the real number of people having NSA sex in college, if possible. Because if, as I claim, it’s a minority of about 20% of each sex, then that means massive pluralistic ignorance. The culture is the script that dominates, setting expectations, when in fact, a majority of both sexes is on the sidelines.

      I remain open-minded about this. I do not ignore any data or study. At the same time, I recognize that any one study is just one point of data. Many more are needed.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    It felt that way for sure.

  • Malia

    @ olive

    There are HUNDREDS of comments on these posts I don’t read them all and as far as you not looking, its on the Internet.

    And no I’m not going to discuss it via email because I do not care about it. The hell I look like going back and forth with you over email?

  • jess

    Malia,
    Am I an outlier?- the data below says I am in a minority as I have had 22 sexual partners.
    Bear in mind that I count sexual touching and snogging someone as them being a sexual partner.
    If I used the American definition my number is I dunno, about 15 I guess?
    So I am either 8 or 9% respectively. I think mathematically Sassy and I represent a small minority rather than being ‘outliers’.
    Perhaps I’m splitting hairs here- anyhow- I reckon most uk girls have say 8 flings and 2 LTRs by the time they consider marriage.
    Some of my peers had more experience than me, but most a little less.
    But for work and personal reasons I deliberately put off having a major LTR- so that has to be factored in. If I had met my guy at 18 my number would be ’1′.

    “Observer sex poll 2002 (2000 people surveyed)

    How would you define your sexuality?
    Heterosexual: 93%
    Homosexual: 3%
    Bisexual: 3%
    Don’t know: 1%

    At what age did you lose your virginity?
    Under 12 1%
    12-13 8%
    14-15 23%
    16-18 40%
    19-20 13%
    21-24 10%
    25-30 2%
    Never had sex 3%

    How many sexual partners have you had?
    None 3%
    1 15%
    2 11%
    3 10%
    4 9%
    5 9%
    6-10 20%
    11-15 8%
    16-20 6%
    20+ 9%

    The average Briton has had 10 sexual partners”

  • Hope

    Yeah Susan, this thread is a major deja vu from early HUS days. I don’t have the energy for it, but it’s quite funny in many ways. :P

  • Doug1

    From the Cathy Young piece I drew the long quote from—

    Women were asked if anyone had ever had or attempted to have sexual contact with them by using force or threat, defined as “someone holding you down with his or her body weight, pinning your arms, …

    I’ve pinned the arms above her head against a wall who I was first picking up and getting lots of IOI’s from more than a few times. Tends to really turn girls on all the more, if they’re already attracted to you.

    Yet that would count as “attempted sexual assault” in that bogus survey behind the meme that one in four or five college women are raped or sexually assaulted or that was attempted against them.

    The study is garbage but the Obama administration has made every college in the country use a 50.1% standard of proof for date rape accusations.

  • Malia

    Perhaps I’m splitting hairs here- anyhow- I reckon most uk girls have say 8 flings and 2 LTRs by the time they consider marriage.
    Some of my peers had more experience than me, but most a little less.
    But for work and personal reasons I deliberately put off having a major LTR- so that has to be factored in. If I had met my guy at 18 my number would be ’1′.

    Yeah, you’re splitting hairs.

    Listen, you make two points and let me separate them:

    1- you’re not a dried up hoebag if you’ve engaged in whatever. Despite what a lot of the online guys want to dictate as the new reality, you are right, there are men who don’t agree, enough for women to mate with.

    HOWEVER

    I wouldn’t advise that strategy because it’s like rolling a rock uphill. It’s not a winning strategy because you’re stacking the deck against you.

    Having said that, being a low number girl is also not necessarily stacking the deck in your favor, to the extent these guys would have women believe.While theoretically, it SHOULD, when you read the accounts of women here, it’s clear that it doesn’t necessarily produce the results one would expect.

    Having said that, it still makes sense for MOST people to play the odds that are in their favor, therefore, me personally, I don’t find it sensible to advocate the “do whatever” lifestyle because of the two, that is the one with the least likelihood of success.

  • jess

    “The researchers had a high response rate of females. You’re talking nonsense again….”

    no Susan, the researchers themselves said their findings were limited due to lower response rates. its true that its males that had lower response rates. i said nothing wrong though (again)

    plus others have mentioned why underreporting could have occurred- for the females. i.e. did some ‘delete’ certain acts- regardless of the researchers criteria.

    it is also rather at odds with the STD stats others have mentioned- dont you think? unless these girls are getting their viruses from their computers?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Malia,
    I meant don’t bring it up on a post where I haven’t been commenting in the last few hours, not citing my name, and hoping I don’t read it. Something like that. If you want to take digs at me, then do it directly, in a place where I will definitely see it, or don’t do it at all. If you can’t do that, then you’re no better, in my book, than the bitchy women I write about who have stabbed me in the back numerous times when I wasn’t looking. I don’t pretend to know about your life situation, and you don’t know anything about my life situation either. So please know that from now on, if you antagonize me, I will deliberately antagonize you too.

  • Malia

    Fingering is not sex. Seriously, that is ridiculous.

    Yet it’s relevant.

    Which is better: fingered by 20 sex with none
    Sex with 2?

    I’m sorry but this anything but P in V sexuality is just distorting everything.

    Fingering counts. That’s how you get “vaginal penetration virgins” that have done oral, anal, and everything in between. Sometimes I wish people would say “I haven’t had vaginal intercourse” because that’s really different than someone who has had no genital interaction .

    If you’re going to judge people’s mate-worthiness based on sexual encounters, their ENTIRE sexual behavior is relevant.

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

      @Malia

      Which is better: fingered by 20 sex with none
      Sex with 2?

      Obviously, it depends on the circumstances.

      I keep saying this:

      Today we have an average of 17 years between menses onset and marriage. That is unprecedented in history. Fingering has been a way that people have gotten intimate and gotten off before they were ready for intercourse. Because intercourse is special. Do I think women should get fingered by strangers? No. But I think it’s a good way for teenage couples to be sexy before they’re ready for full-on sex. And when a man asks a woman of 25 how many sexual partners she’s had, I don’t think he’s wondering how many men have fingered her. He wants to know how many penises she’s had inside her. That’s what “the number” means.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Susan,

    The great thing about discussing this stuff online is that Beauty and the Beast get the same level of attention. What distinguishes people here is the quality of their commentary.

    I love this. I often wonder what would happen if you held some sort of conference and invited all your regular commenters. It would be fascinating to see the social dynamic, to see if online alliances hold, or new ones form based on appearances. One of the main reasons I’ve been drawn to online communities, lately and in the past, is that as a short average-looking girl, I don’t hold a lot of sway in social situations. People don’t listen to me when I walk in a room. I’m definitely not an alpha male. :-P It’s fun to have people “get to know me” based on what I say, not on my tone of voice or body language or strange mannerisms that I’m not even aware of. I have great conversations here that I could not possibly have in real life.

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

      @Olive

      I’ll confess something. I fantasize about writing a screenplay, a sort of HUS Big Chill. We all meet up for a weekend, and explore exactly what you describe. I think it would be absolutely fascinating. This group of commenters is amazing – getting all these brilliant people in one place would be a dream for me. I know people are protective of their identities – it could probably never work. But I love the idea.

  • jess

    ok susan,
    forgive the explicitness….

    a girl gives a hand job to a guy for 10 mins resulting in ejaculation.
    a girl has a guys unit in her mouth for 3 seconds before they are interrupted. they hurriedly dress and part company.
    a girl is fingered by a guy for 15 mins resulting in orgasm.

    now which counts as sex? a,b or c?

    which is more intimate a, b or c?

    seriously, after seeing Clinton’s behaviour I have no idea how Americans gauge these things…

  • jess

    also susan,
    how many women were in your focus group and how many had over 15 partners?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    I don’t want them here, and I’m just sorry I was away for several hours this afternoon while that comment sat here.If it’s any consolation, he wasn’t very nice about me either..Carousel Rider Walsh, haha.

    It’s no problem. As soon as he made the comment about the blonde wig and colored contacts, I knew his issue was that he doesn’t find black women attractive as a whole, not just me. I wouldn’t be able to change his opinion of that no matter how much I tried.

  • sweetsue

    @Abbot December 19, 2011 at 8:33 pm
    “it continues to blame the patriarchy for ills of the world”
    Lately, the main focus of feminism is an obsession with how men universally place women in wife and non-wife piles if just one of the criteria for doing so is past sexual behavior. It drives feminists bat shit crazy.
    Why is that?”
    Thought provoking question – FWIW consider the following:

    Accepting the assertion that – Women have the same right as men to engage in NSA encounters – fair enough. Two consenting individuals – not a problem. Rad/rabid feminists assert that they enjoy exercising this right; because it feels good – it is empowering – it is liberating.

    Ok fine taking that at face value it would seem that these women would be other than angry; about what other people think or how other people react. Exercising free will and freely making personal choices – feels good if they are consistent with what is of value to the person making the choice.

    This is most likely why feminists go bat$&)^ crazy when it turns out that exercising that right comes with responses that they did not anticipate and or dislike. Some of these empowered women are exercising a right that may not resonate with what they want internally, did not produce the feelings or response they wanted. So they feel cheated because the promised empowerment of exercising their rights did not come. Instead of feeling good they feel conflicted, used, betrayed by their own emotions, the movement that told them almost ordered/forced/coerced them to exercise their right and by society that does not approve. They are confused as to why men did not follow the established pattern of marrying them. They did not expect the rules to change- other than their gaining the right to assert their free will to engage in NSA encounters.

    Funny thing about free will – just like they have the right to change other people do to. People are not static. Given that some women in order to exercise this right have to imbibe sometimes large amounts of controlled substances it does not appear to be an informed choice, intellectually, psychologically or emotionally honest clear eyed choice that is made freely. Given all of this the women who react badly when the reality check comes due the morning after have a lot to deal with.

    It appears that some of these same women have self esteem issues i.e. are 1) seeking acceptance and engage in NSA encounters as a way to be a part of something bigger then themselves – the feminist movement the sisterhood as it were 2) need external approval to make themselves feel better 3) are not willing to think for themselves and own the choices that make sense for them from start to finish including the consequences that come as part of the outcome and risk not having everyone’s approval and or acceptance for the choices they make.

    It would seem that if a person made a choice they honestly believed was in their best interest consistent with what matters to them if they were happy the approval of others would not matter. Conversely if the outcome was not as they expected – they would accept that they are mature individuals who did what they believed was best at the time. The outcome was not as expected – people lied, they underestimated their ability to engage in NSA encounters – accept they have value and worth as a person – learn from the choice and evaluate the process used to make decisions and how to alter their course in the future to change the outcome and move on rather than lashing out.

    NSA encounters have never held any appeal personally because engaging in intimate behavior with someone who is not wanted as a friend or actually a respected and trusted friend seems empty and pointless. A choice based on personal truths, based on personal hopes, dreams and what personally matters.

  • Malia

    I meant don’t bring it up on a post where I haven’t been commenting in the last few hours, not citing my name, and hoping I don’t read it.

    You take yourself way too seriously. I don’t give a damn when your last comment was and when you read or when you didn’t. I don’t even consider stuff like that when I write because, check this out, I.DON’T.CARE. I didn’t hope you didn’t read it, IDGAF.

    then you’re no better, in my book, than

    the ones who talk about you behind your back then you come online and talk about them. Girl please. You wanna get buck? Go confront those chicks in real life.

    And lastly, nothing you write is going to change my posting behavior. I’ll write what I want, when I want, how I want. Don’t like it, I don’t care.

    and you don’t know anything about my life situation either.

    I don’t GAD about your life situation, boo. Seriously, you think I care? You write, I respond. That’s about it.

    This sh!t really isn’t all that serious.

  • Malia

    Furthermore, I don’t see why it matters.

    Because Doug made a comment about white people being bad judges of what black men find attractive (i.e. no ability to rate the SMV of black women because he doesn’t know what black men find attractive) and I pointed out that Sassy doesn’t date black men exclusively (meaning, that what black men find attractive isn’t all that matters).

    That’s my point.

    I don’t think that many black women who date black men exclusively would find this to be the environment within which to discuss details of the SMP, therefore, I would think that a lot of people would deduce that non-white people who engage here are either more involved in, or interested in, interracial relationships since the demo of this site is more oriented towards caucasians.

    THAT is the point that I was making.

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

      @Malia

      Huh. OK. I guess it makes sense that women dating interracially are here. Now that you mention it, I think Jhane Sez said her partner is white, and PVW may also have said the same about her husband.

      I assume, based on your being here, that you also date men outside your race?

      I like having a blog where people cross over!

  • jess

    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3027198.html

    this link says that by age 20, 31% of girls have had sex with 6+ partners

    but i still say my student survey link was more plausible (and recent)

    something has to explain the STD issue here (uk) and in the usa.

  • jess

    “All we need is a voluntary, free-spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction. Everybody just gotta keep fuckin’ everybody ’til they’re all the same color.

    That’s my philosophy about race. It won’t happen in my lifetime, but if the species lives another 500 years, I bet that’s what we’ll look like.”
    —-
    accept the gingers of course……. surely no-one else is gonna fuck them?
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    I’m totally joking! I stole an old Frank Boyle joke- and I have the ginger gene in my own beloved family!

    (we keep them hidden in a remote farm-house- Joking! joking!)

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh–

    I think the relevant comparison is between anonymous and polygraph.

    Perhaps with respect to surveys. Not with respect to what girls tell others, and in the case the other wasn’t a part of her social group, there was no rational fear of word getting round, only of being judged. So in her social circle that would be way more lied down most likely that 2x.

    As well even on surveys there’s still the girls not remembering guys because the don’t want to subconscious factor.
    It’s still a 30%

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Malia,

    Girl please. You wanna get buck? Go confront those chicks in real life.

    This is exactly what I’m talking about. You pretending to know shit about my life. In case you were wondering, I already did. Not that you care, since you claim to not care about my life, even though you make inferences about it (like clearly you think I’m whining about my personal life online when I could do something about it IRL. Heh).

    Anyway, it’s cool. You have now made it clear you will continue to antagonize me when you want to. I try to be nice to people around here, but I’m done trying to be nice to you. Have a nice day!

  • Doug1

    Susan—

    My argument is that if you’re going to say a woman cannot consent when drunk because she has lost her ability to reason, then you can’t hold men responsible for their inability to reason under the same condition. Most of these rape claims never involve the use of the word no. It’s all very murky

    Yeah that is really bad.

    Hell people get tipsy in order to have their inhibitions lower, girls as well as guys. I think the legal standard should be the campus standard. If she’s not too drunk to be able to say no, basically if she can walk and talk, it’s not date rape. Just because she’s tipsy enough to not WANT to say no, when she probably would have (says her) had she not be tipsy, that’s on her, and not date rape.

    I saw over at the False Rape Society that some guy who was kicked out of college for having dunken/tipsy sex with a girl when he was also tipsy, has filed suit against the uni on the following proposition. If he’s guilty of date rape because she was drunk, then why isn’t she guilty of it too because he was as well? Why don’t the two cancel each other out, or why wasn’t she kicked out too. Sex discrimination. I like it.

    What I really want though is to drop this drunk sex business when she’s not passed out or incoherent.

  • jess

    -sex assault-

    on the face of it the usa courts are guilty of straight forward sexual discrimination – I just don’t get it.

    and why do some women (the professors as Susan mentioned) wish to support this culture?

    Do they not see that it undermines genuine victims of actual rape?

    This gives feminism a bad name in my view and i speak as someone who has worked with the uk police and rape victims in a prior career.

  • Doug1

    Susan—

    The worst thing, true at Tufts, and Duke, and probably lots of other schools, is that a third party can file a rape accusation. So let’s say a woman returns to her room, telling her Gender Studies major roommate that she had sex but doesn’t remember it. That third party can go to the disciplinary board of the university to file a rape charge against the man who participated, even if her roommate does not want to press charges. It’s outrageous.

    Yeah that is one the worst things and it is outrageous. All in all though I think we’ll find the 50.1% standard combined with tipsy being campus date rape if she say it is, while she might have any number of reasons.

    Also at Stanford to my chagrin they instruct the student disciplinary panel with stuff that tells them to regard him innocent until proven guilty with high prejudicial stuff about date rapists “almost never look the type” , and being very careful about believing him saying he’s been falsely accused because most, though not all, such accusations are true.

  • WarmWoman

    There are too many posts, but is Jesus Mahoney implying that Susan Walsh was a formerly promiscuous woman?

    As for the person who said that girls don’t count oral/anal/fingering encounters, most of the guys on here and elsewhere agree that it DOES count. You’re still sharing intimate parts of your body with someone.

    “Some commenters, like Jhane Sez and PVW have been open about their racial identity. ”

    I’m East Indian, and when I talk about casual sex or perceived promiscuity..I’m talking about the perspective from the Indian community. Most non-Indian men see my sexual past as normal, whereas an Indian man might be judgmental.

  • Sox

    yikes

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

      @Sox

      yikes

      haha, are you pressed for time? I want to tell you something – I LOVE it that you make the time to visit now and then. I know you’re super busy being a navy pilot and all.

  • WarmWoman

    @Jesus again

    “I don’t really care for statistics. What I do know is that I have many male friends, and none of them would knowingly commit to a formerly promiscuous woman. Unless that woman had undergone some serious changes. SERIOUS changes.”

    I hope I’m not being too personal or making you uncomfortable, but you saying that you’re also a child abuse survivor…What’s your opinion on female abuse survivors that become promiscuous ,but then completely change after healing past trauma?

  • jess

    “Jess has shared that her own number is north of 25, and that she cheated on her first partner (husband? can’t remember), ending the relationship.”
    …..
    excuse me, you tried this kind of misinformation before on a thread about 3 months ago.

    I corrected you then and its tiresome to have to correct you once again- lets make it the last time shall we?

    After a proper audit my number is 22. This includes ANYTHING that could be construed as sexual contact.

    I was not married to my 1st partner and we had no children. I had a single act of unfaithfulness LONG AFTER (years in fact) the relationship had died. I broke up with him officially immediately after.

    It was the 1st and last act of unfaithfulness I have ever committed or will commit- I treat trust and faithfulness as very important.

    Now is there any further clarity you would wish for? lest there be any more mischievous repetitions of semi-falsehoods…

  • Sox

    “There are too many posts, but is Jesus Mahoney implying that Susan Walsh was a formerly promiscuous woman?”

    Most of these debates are pointless as jess and tom create strawmen – few, if anyone here ever suggests that women with ANY casual sex in their history are somehow tainted.

    I think you two need to try to grok the type of personality we’re talking about. The impulsive, insecure, validation-seeking girl that is neither introspective nor truly independent no matter how much she tries to tell everyone she is. These girls are considered a joke by the guys they want, destroy the guys they can get, and end up with a slew of emotional issues by the time they’re in their mid-late twenties.

    You may say that these types of people aren’t that prevalent in the SMP, and I’d tell you that based on my own experience, you’re wrong. There’s more and more being created every day because of our fucked-up society.

  • Sox

    “After a proper audit my number is 22. This includes ANYTHING that could be construed as sexual contact.”

    Jess, like I said before, I really don’t even think 22′s a lot. That’s getting to be fairly common among girls in their 20′s now. I know some here will disagree, and I wonder if it’s just different circumstances or what. I’ve lived in a lot of places and hung out with all kinds of people, and as far as your average attractive American girl is concerned, I’d say 20 by 25-28 would be possible for say, 30-35% (just my opinion).

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

      @Sox

      as far as your average attractive American girl is concerned, I’d say 20 by 25-28 would be possible for say, 30-35% (just my opinion).

      I think this sounds about right.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Malia, you’re being kinda bitchy right now. What’s the problem?

    As far as I can tell, she thinks I’m a world class bitch for coming here and using examples from real life to illustrate the SMP. And she’s pissed I called her out for being catty to Sassy, even though the other day, she called me out for being a world class bitch, except she didn’t use my name, she just said “some female commenters on here.”

    She also thinks I’m hypocritical because I talk about other girls here online, when really she has no idea what kinds of interactions I’ve had with them IRL, and she has no idea whether or not I’ve confronted them, nor does she know about the outcomes of the confrontations. Basically she’s pretending to know shit about my life when really she’s never met me.

    Sorry kids. My inner bitch has been unleashed. I don’t take kindly to personal attacks that don’t point to specific instances in which I was at fault.

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

      @Olive

      As far as I can tell, she thinks I’m a world class bitch for coming here and using examples from real life to illustrate the SMP.

      Isn’t that what we all do? Isn’t that what we should do to understand it better? It’s the only alternative to studies, and we know that data is iffy in many cases.

      I love it when people come here and share their hopes, dreams, vulnerabilities, and failures in the SMP. And when a good thing happens, we can all cheer one another.

      I don’t like infighting. I feel like I’m telling my kids to knock it off.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    Stop discrediting the study, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Read the damn post.

    I simply don’t believe it’s an accurate reflection of how many senior college have had more than 5 partners in college and high school. 9%. Nahh. The whole country is talking about college hook up culture and almost no college girls have hooked up more than three of four times, allowing for LTR’s.

    Not.Credible.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    Their numbers ranged from 2-35. The only one who was self-conscious was the girl with 2, as she was clearly an outlier.

    That too suggests the the only 9% of college girls have had more than 5 partners is bogus as well.

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

      @Doug

      That too suggests the the only 9% of college girls have had more than 5 partners is bogus as well.

      Like I said, I’m not wedded to the idea. I’m always on the lookout for more information. This is very, very hard to get a handle on, I’ve found. I’ve been trying for three years.

      I will say, of the two dozen or so women in my focus groups, way more than 9% have had more than five partners.

  • Sassy6519

    If it ever happened, I would totally attend a HUS bonanza. Meeting everyone here in person would be fun. That’s how I imagine it would be anyway.

  • Malia

    @Olive,

    I’m more than capable of writing exactly what I want to say.

    And when a man asks a woman of 25 how many sexual partners she’s had, I don’t think he’s wondering how many men have fingered her.

    I’m strongly disagree with this and state the following:

    any guy that finds it important to ask a woman’s number is looking for a more holistic view of her sexual experience and would consider fingering, oral, and other non penis in vagina interaction, even if they wouldn’t necessarily count that towards “her number”.

    It is my opinion, even stronger after my interactions on this site, that the guys who are hung up on “the number” are more likely to be more judgmental of female sexuality, therefore her other interactions are important TO HIM.

    The way guys talk about it, on this site (and others), you’d think it’s on the “getting to know you checklist”. When I kept reading it, I had to do a quick survey of my friends to see who had this experience and they all looked at me crazy when I asked about it. In no way is my anecdotal experience indicative of the norm, except to say that a lot of conversations about sex are NOT being had, the way these guys make it seem.

    And as a result, that has been added to my list of red flags.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Warm Woman,

    I wasn’t trying to insult Sue or cast aspersions on her at all. I was pointing out that a girl can participate in casual, promiscuous sex and still go on to be a terrific wife and mother–but, that it’s still a riskier proposition for men than a woman who hasn’t participated in casual, promiscuous sex.

    Sue’s number is, in fact, lower than my own at the moment, but it’s because I’ve spent the summer being promiscuous. Poor choice on my part, but what’s done is done. Anyway, I love Sue and what she’s doing, and I have a lot of respect for her. Was just using her history as an example.

    As for a woman who acted promiscuously after abuse, I think she would need to fall into the group of women who’ve made major changes. In order for me to be willing to take the risk on such a woman, I’d have to feel comfortable that she wouldn’t fall back into those destructive patterns. If I were, then she would fall into the category of women who’ve made serious changes.

    I think that sex should happen between people who care about each other. I want a woman who feels the same.

  • Malia

    Fingering has been a way that people have gotten intimate and gotten off before they were ready for intercourse. Because intercourse is special.

    I still disagree.

    Even if I flipped this up: A guy saying he has had no sexual interaction in 7 months is entirely different (t0 most women) than a guy who has not had sexual intercourse but gets BJs weekly. Furthermore, a guy who has had sex with 2 women in 7 months is entirely different than a guy getting a BJ every week by a different chick and you know it.

  • jess

    Dear Sox,
    Thanks- I would agree I’ve never really considered myself an unusually promiscuous person at all. I only felt to be in the minority when I was the ‘lowest numbers’ girl in my peer group. This was the case till I was 30!

    Anyhow- the numbers are difficult. Susan may have a point about the culture- maybe usa TV and film suggest everyone is bed hopping when in fact only a minority are.

    But the std figures and the other links I have seen do suggest that there is more sex going on in colleges than that one survey says. (and has anyone noticed the figures dont add up for the f/m N numbers?)

    As to straw men there have been some (not all) coming out with some really extreme statements – and not all by Abbot either- so there was no need to misrepresent anyone- its all here in the threads.

    I do agree that a women or guy on a completely hedonistic road of continuous sex and/or drugs is gonna come to sticky end.

    and yes, i know some extremely promiscuous women who indeed are ‘train wrecks’.

    and i am totally opposed to the over sexualised media- have you seen the latest GAGa videos. I feel dirty just watching them.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    But I think it’s [fingering] a good way for teenage couples to be sexy before they’re ready for full-on sex. And when a man asks a woman of 25 how many sexual partners she’s had, I don’t think he’s wondering how many men have fingered her. He wants to know how many penises she’s had inside her. That’s what “the number” means.

    I don’t even think oral sex counts in her number to tell you the truth. A little bit maybe. I mean if she’s willing to give out oral sex to lots and lots of guys that’s being pretty slutty. Probably in an approval and attention seeking sort of way. I don’t know, this is kinda conceptual to me. I wasn’t a teenager at a time when very many girls would give you oral sex but not full on sex. I had only one girl willing to go oral but not further. She was a gf for a little while in high school, then I got sick of that. Rather beautiful though.

    I sort of think of the number count as involving bonding opportunities – though not necessarily bonding. I think bonding only happens from good p in v sex. Possibly it might through him giving oral only but again I really wouldn’t know cause I can’t think of a single girl I’ve give oral to and not had intercourse with her as well. No Hugo Swayzer here. If it’s only that that feels rather supplicating to me and that it couldn’t cause her bonding. If girls have many p in v bonding opportunities that don’t turn into bonding cause he doesn’t stick around, or do bond but he breaks her heart by not sticking around long, and either or both happen repeatedly, I think it tends to cause girls to be rather inured to deep bonding from good sex after awhile.

  • Passer_By

    @Olive

    For what it’s worth, I always assumed you look pretty much like Popeye’s girlfriend.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Cheerful Sadist

    You forget; I live in Boise. I not only heard of Agee/Cunningham,but my dad was on a local tv show with him (she was off camera; she told my mom that Bill and Ted (my dad) got along so well because they thought alike (probably not good). I never met him, but knew plenty about him MK was one of our big success stories; took him around 4 years to destroy it. Pretty clear she was the reason Bendix(?) went to a white knight-everyone hated her. He had his middle name changed to Joseph so they could be Mary and Joseph. She tried to have the Boise River blocked off because she didn’t like floaters portaging across her riparian area. They actually started the project-one of the contractors looked into a permit and that closed it down. This is appropriate: MK announced this massive, hurtful layoff-and then threw a Christmas party for the survivors less than a week later!(it was also a miserably cheap affair and our local tv station made damn sure everyone knew it).

    As for commute shoes, I don’t recall seeing them, but I’m a guy-we don’t do shoes. I vaguely vaguely recall seeing some in Nikes, but women here don’t have that far so this was not you new First Wave Fems on the Line, it was secretaries. Law associates and various climbers didn’t do that here.

    HBS? Not sure who that is. Enlighten the provincial. Also-clarify-he wasn’t playing footsies with Mary? BTW she was not even remotely hot. Oh BTW II get this. She started this “charity” for upper middle-class women who get knocked up. I shit thee not. I forgot what it was called and the details, but it was basically for someone like Mary who found themselves pregs. Again, the media here had a field day although needed to be somewhat cool as the deal was it was supposed to be away to avoid abortion, and you don’t make light of that too much (I guess they were Catholics).

    I remember the Forbes article about them that showed him on his knees looking up to her-they were sick. He didn’t even attend his own mother’s funeral because it conflicted with Mary’s agenda. Flew their kids every week to private school somewhere in California on the company jet. She and an office for her charity downtown, had 100 surveillance cameras installed. Met this lawyer I know, and the next thing you know he’s MK’s spokesman on the company payroll mid-six figures (this is Boise; that’s serious jing). Of course you know his qualifications involved his appendages. I ‘ve forgotten most of it; but not how badly people got hurt. Lawyer I was partnered with at the time father had worked for MK his whole life, every nickel in that stock-all gone.

    Charlotte Simmons-not a success IMO. But some of those themes are ones you’ve got here. Plus Wolfe-you know how to flatter a man (is that flirting?). I hope you meant it sounded like it, not that I copped it. DNR him talking womens studies, but do recall his description of the prof with little man tits-I know one or 2 little arrogant pricks like that, and I wish to God they had the remotest set of balls so they’d do something that’d justify me (ok excessive ref John Travolta “Pulp Fiction”) breaking my arm off in their mouth.Post pubescent women, in fact women at all-Tom can’t write well from that perspective. I read it and little has stayed with me which is unusual for a Tom book for me. What has stayed are how do all the chicks know about brazilians? Do they talk about them?

    Oh, and did Harrison get it right? In the day were you thinking, even a little bit, I’m going to try to take the guy look and incorporate it into this “thing”? At least that’s improved; most women I see know how to look authoritative w/o coming across like what you would expect to get if a man and woman got into that machine that messed up Jeff Goldblum in “The Fly”.

    BTW you subconsciously cribbed a line from “High Frequency” (?) where Cusak says you’ve got to punch your weight (old boxing lore; means stay in your division, work off the weight, don’t move up ‘cuz you’re unlikely to take your punch i e power with you). I don’t mean literally cribbed-score out of your league is your own. But surprise your next group with the boxing analogy-tell them you’ve got the hots for Klinscko!

    Finally, and again your movie refs are “spot on” (I know limeys sound smart, but their attempt at exuberance always sounds limp). The only line from “Bulworth” I remember is that racial one-let’s mix it up. And it’s true-look at Brazil. or Tiger Woods. Once no one knows what the fuck racial identity one has it’ll be over. BTW did you know no less a personage than Adolph Hitler admitted “there’s no such thing as race”? True I’ll look it up if you want me to. Plus there’s a beautiful quote on the soul attributed to him-that one I’ve earmarked because it surprised me so much.

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

      @Munson

      HBS? Not sure who that is. Enlighten the provincial.

      Harvard Business School

      Also-clarify-he wasn’t playing footsies with Mary?

      No, another woman. Hold on, I’ll google her.

      OMG!

      Reader, he married her!

      http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/18/business/privatesector-healing-from-executive-trauma.html?pagewanted=all

      Rick Thoman and Lynn Bendheim. Wow. They married in 1989. I saw them playing footsie while he was married in 1984.

      I part ways with you re Charlotte Simmons. I loved it, and it was a major inspiration for my starting the blog.

      As for Brazilians, I don’t think women necessarily talk about them, but they do get them. In my focus groups, 100% of the women go totally bare. I know one young woman who refuses to trim the bush, and it has been a factor in at least one breakup, and many more “no thank you’s” re Round 2.

      Re dressing like men, no it was not conscious. There was this guy John Molloy who wrote Dress for Success, and we all obeyed. If you recall my sexual harrassment post, you know that a large silk bow under one’s neck was no deterrent to men in the workplace.

      Wow, you freaked me out with the reference to Hitler. Tell me you’re not some kind of neo Nazi. Sorry, but I can’t entertain any notions that Hitler was anything other than the manifestation of pure evil.

  • Jhane Sez

    “I’ll confess something. I fantasize about writing a screenplay, a sort of HUS Big Chill. We all meet up for a weekend, and explore exactly what you describe. I think it would be absolutely fascinating. This group of commenters is amazing – getting all these brilliant people in one place would be a dream for me. I know people are protective of their identities – it could probably never work. But I love the idea.”

    @Susan…

    If I get an invite I am so there… I have an outfit already… it involves a cape, very wide brim hat and Jackie O sunglasses.

    I do have a few small menu request and I have my own guy for lighting…

    but you can discuss that with my agent ~JS

  • Jesus Mahoney

    For what it’s worth, I always assumed you look pretty much like Popeye’s girlfriend.

    Not me. I had an Aunt Olive that used to chase me around the house with a wooden spoon. She never caught me because she used to do everything including cooking in heels. I picture a young Aunt Olive.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I don’t see how oral sex could not count. If a man is concerned about how many dicks have been inside a woman’s coochie, then wouldn’t he also be concerned about how many have been in her mouth?

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

      I don’t see how oral sex could not count. If a man is concerned about how many dicks have been inside a woman’s coochie, then wouldn’t he also be concerned about how many have been in her mouth?

      Personally, I can’t imagine one without the other, but I know that’s not the way youngsters roll. I’ve heard of bar mitzvahs where the boy got blown by two dozen girls as congratulations. (By the way, I’ve always wondered about this – I assume the guy only came, like, with the 24th chick?)

      I do know that women do not count anything but P in V when they report their number. If you want more information than that, you’re going to have to ask for it specifically.

  • Abbot

    “And if you do fancy it, then go for it. Don’t let anybody stop you. Just don’t complain that a lot of men aren’t into marrying that type of woman.”

    But as you can see in this post, the complaints about this universal male truism

    Will. Not. Stop.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jess, like I said before, I really don’t even think 22′s a lot. That’s getting to be fairly common among girls in their 20′s now.

    I agree that it’s common. I just don’t think common necessarily equals attractive, or even acceptable.

  • Emily

    A HUS meetup would be amazing! It’s too bad that most of us are probably too poor to travel anywhere. (…or maybe that’s just me haha.)

  • jess

    right susan and doug and sox,

    Are we pretty much agreeing with the figure of say roughly 1/3 of women having 20 partners at age 25?

    And would we further agree, that for the sake of the following question, that of these 20 guys: 15 were NSA and 5 were LTRs??….

    If so would these women be a fair bet for marriage?

  • jess

    j mahoney,
    would you mind if i asked your new number?
    and are you a safe bet for marriage?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jess,

    I wouldn’t think they’d be a fair bet for marriage. 15 casual partners is a lot. Of course, people can change. But 15 casual partners…. idk, at that point, the odds are that this is a person who enjoys and approves of casual sex. That’s totally cool. I know people like that. I just don’t want to marry them.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    11, and I think I’m a fair bet for marriage. But… I’ve made changes. I stopped having casual sex. I decided it wasn’t for me. I decided that sex should be something that happens between people who care about each other.

    If I met a woman with a similar history, with the same beliefs, then I’d be willing to take the risk.

  • DerHahn

    @Malia and Olive

    Speaking as guy with a fairly long history in the SMP, (and asking the other gentlemen posting to chime in), I’m not so bothered by a woman’s absolute “number” as what it probably represents. Generally speaking, the higher the number the more likely a guy will start to wonder “What sexual shenanigans has she performed for former lovers that she’s now refusing to perform with me?” This is what sours Beta’s on women who have been riding the carousel and decide to exit when the baby alarm goes off.

    My ex-wife and I met when when we were about 25. I was a virgin who had maybe 3 semi-serious gfs. She had been married and had several other relationships. Her experience didn’t really put me off because it became evident pretty quickly in our relationship that she wasn’t holding anything back in the bedroom.

    Current FWB girl is a bit of a different story. We’re both older and both had more partners. She’s let some hints drop and I’ve had to deal with some nagging thoughts about what I might be missing. I’m a big boy and can deal with it but that doesn’t make the thoughts go away.

  • http://flyfreshandyoung.wordpress.com flyfreshandyoung

    Susan,

    IRT college hook ups, I think 80/20 is too extreme of a starting point, and could potentially limit conclusions.

    20/60/20 might be a better starting point, based on my experiences at my school and others in the same state. A conservative state, at that.

    Yes, 20% of both men and women are having sex a lot, but there is that 60% that is also having sex, just not as frequently. (the other 20% plays Halo/CoD/WoW in the dorms on Friday and Saturday nights) The 60% are the average men & women, and they’re having 1-2 different chicks/dudes per semester. Some want bfs/gfs, others don’t want commitment. Either way, there isn’t some overwhelming amount of grinding celebacy going on for a large amount of student populations, just varying degrees of promiscuity.

    Jess is deliberately exaggerating and trying to provoke, but she isn’t that far off the mark. I went to a not too big/not too small school, a place where over my 4 years I got to know a vast amount of people and their stories, and I would peg the average girl as leaving with 6-7 partners for her time there.

  • Sassy6519

    For what it’s worth, I always assumed you look pretty much like Popeye’s girlfriend.

    Heh. For what it’s worth Olive, I imagine you as a shorter and slightly different looking Lisa Loeb.

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    11 partners isn’t a lot at all for a guy. When I first heard from you of your casual sex escapades, I imagined you had 30+ partners. I’m glad to find out that I was wrong about that.

    You are perfectly suitable for marriage. Don’t worry at all about that.

  • jess

    j mahony,
    so you are a safe bet because you have changed?

    but dont most people change?

    i was fundamentally different at 11, 18, 25, 30, 35, 41

    a girl looking to settle at age 27 is NOT the same as when she was 19.

    values and focus are totally different.

    i may have looked as cute as a button when 20 but I was a DICK and had plenty of mouth on me. (over compensating for my shy youth and strict religious schooling) i shudder at both the photos and the memories. my poor parents.

    the girls is in my example haven’t had all that much more sex than you yet you are safe and they aint? gosh you are strict!

  • jess

    fresh and young-
    I really try hard not to exaggerate- in fact the figures Susan is now agreeing on are above my original estimates (that I deliberately made conservative to avoid the charge of exaggeration!)

    i admit my awful ginger joke was provocative…. but alas no takers.

    totally cosign your 20/60/20 claim- i said a near identical thing here about a year ago.

  • OffTheCuff

    He wants to know how many penises she’s had inside her. That’s what “the number” means.

    Um, no: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpQqH4H_SUQ

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Speaking as guy with a fairly long history in the SMP, (and asking the other gentlemen posting to chime in), I’m not so bothered by a woman’s absolute “number” as what it probably represents. Generally speaking, the higher the number the more likely a guy will start to wonder “What sexual shenanigans has she performed for former lovers that she’s now refusing to perform with me?” This is what sours Beta’s on women who have been riding the carousel and decide to exit when the baby alarm goes off.

    That’s not what it’s like for me.

    Have you ever had a best friend, someone you share everything with? When I was 14, my best friend was Eddie. I knew I was his best friend one night when he asked me to hang around after everyone left because he wanted to show me something. We went to his backyard and through the sliding glass door that led into the kitchen, we saw his father, drunk, storming around, banging the table and punching the wall and occasionally taking a shot at his mother while lecturing her about why his life sucked. We sat there for hours, sitting on the grass against the fence of his back yard, smoking cigarettes, watching his dad abuse his mom.

    It was a strange thing to do, but I knew that in his way, he was sharing a part of himself that he couldn’t share with anyone else. He was sharing a deep, very deep secret. And there was a bond between us because of that.

    Now, imagine you had a best friend like that and he shared his deep secret with you. Then, imagine he shared that same deep secret with his Shop teacher, his drug dealer, a guy he met playing basketball, and some dude walking down the street some lonely night. What does that do to the bond you thought you had?

    That’s what it’s like for me, finding out that the woman I’m with has had a lot of casual sex.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jess,

    I just said that I would be willing to take the risk on a woman in the same situation as me. Don’t be obtuse.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’ve heard of bar mitzvahs where the boy got blown by two dozen girls as congratulations.

    I think you’ve mentioned that story before. It turned my stomach both times.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    11 partners isn’t a lot at all for a guy. When I first heard from you of your casual sex escapades, I imagined you had 30+ partners. I’m glad to find out that I was wrong about that.

    Nah. The whole PUA lifestyle lasted from, like, the beginning of July to the end of September, pretty much. It’s not what I want with my life.

  • jess

    ‘obtuse’- how dare you!- i keep a very trim figure

    ‘turning stomachs’- not unless you were one of the ‘congratulators’

    24th girl- Susan, barmitzah aged boys have, how shall we say, remarkable powers of rejuvenation. thing is- dont the Rabbis have anything to say about this? and is there a name for this conduct? “congratulate with ejaculate?” “cumming of age” “white of passage”

    and do they do this right after he’s finished his lines?

  • purplesneakers

    as far as your average attractive American girl is concerned, I’d say 20 by 25-28 would be possible for say, 30-35% (just my opinion).

    I think this sounds about right.

    OMG! Seriously?! Maybe my friends and I are just exceptionally prudish?

    me = virgin, with some hooking up (making out)
    at least 3 other close friends who are virgins
    1 close friend with some hooking up and only 1 LTR with sex
    at least 4 other acquaintances who I think are virgins
    1 acquaintance with partner count of 2, from LTRs

    my sluttiest friends:
    -1 with ‘official’ partner count of I think probably 9 by now, with more BJs given
    -1 with a number of 10+ by senior year of college. suffered from abuse as a child and used promiscuity as a tool to cope, much like Jaclyn Friedmann, but since graduation, has gotten her shit together and is dealing with her demons.
    -1 with a number of at least 4, 2 in LTR’s, 1 in a lame ‘relationship,’ 1 in a rather embarrassing ONS. lots more dancefloor/make-out/more hook-ups and other poor lapses in judgment. This is the one I’m most judgmental of actually. I guess because I’m of Indian descent (which may be why my social circle seems so full of prudes? as WarmWoman mentioned) and she’s the one of these three who is also Indian.

  • http://flyfreshandyoung.wordpress.com flyfreshandyoung

    hooking up=sex

  • Mike C

    Holy shit, the Jess and Tom show has come back to town. And we got Abbott as well. Could get this one to 1000+

    OK, for you newer folks who recently joined HUS the past few months, couple of notations:

    1. Tom isn’t a guy. The smart money still bets that “Tom” is really the significant other of the real Tom who has no idea of her past activity.

    2. Regarding Jess, and make a note of this Olive, debating/discussing with Jess is like wrestling a snake you pull out of the pool of crude oil. So slippery and slimy, you’ll never get a grip on it. All the discussions are in bad faith with no genuine attempt to understand your position, and then deliberate obfuscation of what you said. She is the master of passive-aggressive ad hominem, and her position is ever-shifting from one comment to the next.

  • purplesneakers

    Also forgot to mention – I suppose another part of the reason I’m more judgmental of the third girl mentioned than the other two is that she comes from an intact, well-off, nuclear family. The other two grew up with messed up family situations, so in a sense, I can ‘understand’ their promiscuity more.

  • purplesneakers

    hooking up=sex

    not where I’m from… people like the ambiguity of it, girls because they don’t have to say that they had sex or maybe just gave the guy a BJ (even more demeaning IMO), and guys because they can say a make-out was a ‘hook-up’

  • WarmWoman

    Hi Jesus,

    I didn’t mean that you were insulting Sue. Thanks for responding to my post though. I agree with the rest of all what you said.

    To the rest of the blog regarding Sassy talking about her SMV, I’m going to stand up for her here too. She’s simply being honest about what it’s like for pretty girls. We women get hated on for not being confident, and then we get hated on for being self-assured..sheesh.

  • http://flyfreshandyoung.wordpress.com flyfreshandyoung

    @purp

    Kinda waters it down. I doubt Susan would be concerned if everyone was just making out all the time.

    I’ll take those dudes man cards, btw

  • Mike C

    @Susan,

    I don’t have the time to go back through the comments today referencing the statistics on typical sexual activity and sex partner count, but it seems like this question keeps resurfacing over and over. I thought I caught something in here about 90% under 5 or something like that.

    You had your focus group of I think 20-40 right? Is that even remotely close? Best I can remember, you had a handful that were 20+ and bunch pushing 5-10 but I could be misremembering. I’m just skeptical of some of these surveys because they don’t seem consistent with many people’s on the ground reality.

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

      @Mike C

      I would generalize my focus groups as being in the 10-20 range in terms of sexual partners. There are a couple of dozen women. A few are <5 and a few are >40. The numbers don’t tell the whole story though. For example, one woman took a guy home from a bar, then proceeded to hook up with him, mostly booty calls, for six months. She got chlamydia from him. So she feels good about adding only one to her number, but he’s a disgusting slut. This number thing is complicated – if you’re really interested in someone you need to talk about it. The number alone may not really tell you what you want to know.

  • Mike C

    OTC, hat tip on that one. Does a great job of pretty much nailing every guy’s visceral reaction when he finds something like that out.

  • OffTheCuff

    I bet a case of Sam Adams the bar mitzvah thing is an urban legend.

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

      @OTC

      I bet a case of Sam Adams the bar mitzvah thing is an urban legend.

      Probably. It doesn’t really sound plausible. Each of my kids went to a bunch of them, and I never heard of anything like that.

  • http://flyfreshandyoung.wordpress.com flyfreshandyoung

    @OTC

    It’s not technically true. It was my friend’s bar mitzvah, and I’m not Jewish.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    For what it’s worth, I always assumed you look pretty much like Popeye’s girlfriend.

    Not me. I had an Aunt Olive that used to chase me around the house with a wooden spoon. She never caught me because she used to do everything including cooking in heels. I picture a young Aunt Olive.

    Heh. For what it’s worth Olive, I imagine you as a shorter and slightly different looking Lisa Loeb.

    LOL you guys are hilarious. I dunno which is better, Olive Oil or Aunt Olive running around with a wooden spoon. Hmm. Gonna say Lisa Loeb is the closest, though I don’t look like her either lol. Tempted to do what Dogsquat did and put my pic up for a few hours, then change it before some employer can find me. :-P Will consider it…

  • DC

    When I’m out at a club I always get approached, usually by very goodlooking men who could approach anyone. It’s so terrible to be so goodlooking, I don’t know how I handle it. Really Sassy you must give me some hints. (cue sarcasm) I mean I know I’m in the top 10% but it’s such a burden to be this awesome and goodlooking.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Regarding Jess, and make a note of this Olive, debating/discussing with Jess is like wrestling a snake you pull out of the pool of crude oil. So slippery and slimy, you’ll never get a grip on it. All the discussions are in bad faith with no genuine attempt to understand your position, and then deliberate obfuscation of what you said. She is the master of passive-aggressive ad hominem, and her position is ever-shifting from one comment to the next.

    Eh. I stopped arguing with Jess awhile ago. She didn’t bug me that much.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I don’t like infighting. I feel like I’m telling my kids to knock it off.

    Yeah, sorry Susan. It’s over now.

  • jess

    olive- hey well i guess i must be losing my touch then….

    i didn’t think we did argue did we? i thought we exchanged some views and you thought you might poll some friends on the numbers issue?

  • jess

    susan- you think they would tell you?

    i cannot see myself conveying that kinda info to my mum even now and I’m in my 40′s!

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

      susan- you think they would tell you?

      i cannot see myself conveying that kinda info to my mum even now and I’m in my 40′s!

      haha, they tell me everything. More than I ever wanted to know.

  • Mike C

    I would generalize my focus groups as being in the 10-20 range in terms of sexual partners. There are a couple of dozen women. A few are 40. The numbers don’t tell the whole story though.

    That’s true. A number has to be put in context. That said, my only point is data that seems to suggest some silent majority under 5 is suspect as it isn’t consistent with just about anyone’s reality of a smaller sample size. What you state above indicates under 5 is really a small minority with perhaps the middle of the bell curve being 10-20. Now I don’t know the average age of your group and obviously a 25-year old is going to be at a higher number on average than a 19-20 year old. It just doesn’t pass the smell test to talk of some large percentage under 5 unless you think your focus group is much, much more promiscuous than the larger population.

    For example, one woman took a guy home from a bar, then proceeded to hook up with him, mostly booty calls, for six months. She got chlamydia from him. So she feels good about adding only one to her number, but he’s a disgusting slut.

    FWIW, he might be, but you can’t draw that conclusion from just that. It might take just one time with an infected partner to get that, and guys can be asymptomatic for literally years. Truth be told, if I were single one thing that would scare the beejesus out of me in terms of casual sex, would be the magnitude of STDs floating out there. It is at epidemic levels.

    This number thing is complicated – if you’re really interested in someone you need to talk about it. The number alone may not really tell you what you want to know.

    Absolutely agree, but I’m just uncomfortable with these suspect statistics that seem to resurface every few months.

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

      It just doesn’t pass the smell test to talk of some large percentage under 5 unless you think your focus group is much, much more promiscuous than the larger population.

      First of all, the focus groups represent a pretty wide range of experiences. Some of them are promiscuous and some aren’t – there are a few who have very serious boyfriends, so their numbers are low. A couple of them are virgins. There are a handful in the 30+ range. However, they share certain characteristics that make them more likely to be promiscuous:

      1. They’re good looking, for the most part. They get hit on by cads. More exposure to men of bad character, and more opportunities to make bad decisions.

      2. They’re highly social. Most are in sororities, a few were serious athletes. Most of their socializing involves drinking.

      3. The BU group is made up almost entirely of education majors – they had little interaction with men in class. They were frequently invited, though, to parties at Harvard and other nearby colleges by male groups. What happens in Cambridge…..stays in Cambridge. No accountability or fear re reputation.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    jess,

    You know what’s odd? (I mean one of the many things). You’ve let perfect strangers fuck you, but yet you can’t understand people discussing sex with a parent.

  • SayWhaat

    Wait, purplesneakers and WarmWoman are both Indian??

    I’m losing my monopoly here! :P

  • jess

    j mahoney
    woah- unusually aggressive comment for you!

    i have never let a ‘perfect stranger’ ‘f*ck’ me.

    but even if i had can you not understand why many (sorry make that most) humans dont like to talk about sex with their mother?

    i know brits can be reserved about that stuff but not that much more than other countries.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    You know, I’ve been thinking a lot about Esau’s comment from yesterday and the most interesting thing about feminism and the beta-ization of men isn’t that women wanted to neuter men, but that men so willingly allowed themselves to be neutered.

    So, my theories on this:

    1. Men coming of age in the 60′s were just as unhappy about the rigid gender roles of their parents and women were.
    2. The backlash against the American involvement in Vietnam led a lot of young men who weren’t willing to fight in the war to dissociate themselves from their “masculine” and “aggressive” sides and embrace their beta-tude with open arms.
    3. Processed foods and refined carbs lower testosterone.
    4. The invention of TV makes for a more sedentary lifestyle. This also inhibits testosterone.

    Whatever the reasons, men embraced flower power and feminism at the price of their nuts.

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

      @Jesus

      Your theories about the male experience since the 60s are fascinating, and seem very plausible. I wonder if any of those have been explored by sociologists.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jess,

    I was being blunt, not aggressive. It just seems odd to advocate for casual sex while being too inhibited to discuss sex with your mother.

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

      It just seems odd to advocate for casual sex while being too inhibited to discuss sex with your mother.

      Once, when I was arguing with Jaclyn Friedman, she called me an old scold. I asked her how her mother felt about her choices. She went ballistic. I had clearly struck a nerve – she basically started screaming. Poor Mrs. Friedman.

  • @peace

    I am probably too late again… I think numbers matter because men and women have so little to go on when they are considering one another. It’s an easy question that has a simple answer and yes, it does give *some* indication of a person’s stability, fidelity and fundamental beliefs. Generally speaking, the higher the number the more baggage, scarring and trust issues one must deal with. However, that’s true for both men and women.

    This thread reminds me of a scene from the movie “Clerks” where Dante and his girlfriend Veronica are discussing this very thing. It was quite comical but I’ve always felt it was pretty accurate. In the scene Veronica wants to know how many girls Dante has slept with and Dante unabashedly reveals that he has slept with 12. Veronica is horrified, slaps him and calls him a ‘pig’, later declaring that ‘guys will sleep with anything that says yes’. I think those two were in their early twenties.
    Most of the later part of this thread is discussing how men feel about women with high numbers. What I want to know is how do you ladies feel if you find out the guy you’re dating and/or considering is a high numbers guy? Do you immediately write him off? Do you lose respect for him? Do you feel insecure, unsure, jealous, afraid etc? Do you decide to date/continue to date despite your misgivings? Or perhaps, do you refrain from giving a rat’s ass?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    olive- hey well i guess i must be losing my touch then….

    i didn’t think we did argue did we? i thought we exchanged some views and you thought you might poll some friends on the numbers issue?

    That sounds about right. Will report back if the topic comes up, BTW. Can’t promise anything though, that’s an awkward subject to discuss with my bro’s friends.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    She never caught me because she used to do everything including cooking in heels.

    Dunno how I missed this, I even quoted it! lol. Nah I barely wear heels. I embrace the shortness! :-)

  • jess

    j mahoney

    yeah but you don’t know what my mums like……

  • Babydoll

    Hi Susan! I have been reading your posts for a couple of months now and have really enjoyed the content as well as the lively discussions that tend to follow. I am in my early 30′s and currently single after an LTR which ended earlier this year. I also had a short passionate fling, for lack of a better word and I struggle with using hook-up as it seems so ambiguous, which ended a couple of months ago. The end of that fling led me to your site and it has been an eye-opener.

    I think you are doing a great job. I enjoy the SMP where I live (Australia). It seems pretty straighforward to me and is divided between those in the casual sex market and those in the relationship market. In terms of numbers, mine is 3 – though I do count P in V only. If I included making out, my number would be 4. In general, the men I have been in relationships with or made out with or went on a couple of dates with valued my low number. One ex even said something along the lines of not considering a woman he had picked up in a bar for a relationship because ‘who wants to go where so many have been before’. He had a high number, maybe 30+, when we met and I did point out his double standard. The majority of my female friends have had less than 5 and the few that have had more than 20 have admitted that it takes a lot of drinking as their number was mostly made up of ONS.

    I do come from a conservative background (South East Asian and strict Christian parents) and my preferred number would have been 1. Alas that didn’t work out and I don’t want to get past 5 which isn’t that far away eek! I did struggle initially when I moved to Australia as the men I met seemed to be in such a hurry to get into my pants. I have no criteria in terms of race and have been on dates with men of many races/nationalities but somehow my LTRs and make outs have been with Caucasian men only. What I have learned though is that men will want the fast easy NSA option almost always and they can be flipped into wanting more. I totally support waiting until you know someone before sex, standing up for your beliefs (for me this is sex only in a monogomous relationship) and looking beyond the colour of a person’s skin and eyes. And, it isn’t a nice thing but it’s true, men do divide women into dateable/marryable (sorry i’m sure there is a better term) and fuckable only and this is partly based on a woman’s number so we should stop lying to ourselves that they don’t.

    Thanks Susan for HUS and I look forward to more!

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

      @Babydoll

      Welcome, and thanks so much for introducing yourself! I look forward to hearing more from you in the comment threads :)

  • purplesneakers

    SayWhaat – we could even start an indian virgin club here at HUS!

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JM,

    1. Men coming of age in the 60′s were just as unhappy about the rigid gender roles of their parents and women were.
    2. The backlash against the American involvement in Vietnam led a lot of young men who weren’t willing to fight in the war to dissociate themselves from their “masculine” and “aggressive” sides and embrace their beta-tude with open arms.
    3. Processed foods and refined carbs lower testosterone.
    4. The invention of TV makes for a more sedentary lifestyle. This also inhibits testosterone.

    That’s so funny, Athol Kay just did a post on MMSL about changes in society that led to Marriage 2.0, but these changes would totally fit in with your list of things leading to “betatude.” Did you read the post? He wrote specifically about the changed nature of war, the invention of birth control, and the invention of computers. You hit on number 1, and you hinted at 3 too, when you mentioned the invention of TV (he mentions computers because they changed the nature of traditionally male jobs). It’s a good post, you should check it out.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Cheerful Sadist #391

    Brazilians: In “Simmons”, one of the males talks about how they all have them.

    Hitler: No, I live in Idaho, but I’m no Neo-Nazi. I can’t place my hands on the “race” quote, but that only showed he was a cynic, not a true believer (he shared this quality with Heydrich, probably Himmler and maybe most of them except idiots like Hess). But this is from “Hitler: A Study in Tyranny” by Alan Bulloch, one of the authoritative texts. It is quoting Hitler at a dinner:
    By what would you have me replace the Christians’
    picture of the Beyond? What comes naturally to man-
    kind is the sense of eternity and that sense is at the
    bottom of every man. The soul and mind migrate, just
    as the body returns to nature. Thus life is eternally
    reborn from life. As for the “why” of all that, I feel no
    need to rack my brains on the subject. The soul is
    unplumbable.
    Ibid., p.390 I am not a Nazi, but I was surprised when I read this at the College of Idaho in 1971 and remain so. I find it beautiful, notwithstanding its author. I’m partial to well expressed thoughts. Recoil if you want to Susan, think of him as pure evil. I look at that, frankly, as escapist. He was no manifestation, he was a man, a human being ,and thus incapable of being “purely” anything, good or evil. His humanity, along with that of the literally millions who abetted his crimes, should terrify more than pretending he was some sort of dark ghost let loose upon mankind. The evil he represents still lives in us; like Karposis sarcoma, in the healthy body politic it is suppressed. But should it weaken, like the Weimar Republic, it will issue forth. Denying Hitler’s humanity, or Stalin’s, Mao’s, Pol Pot’s, Kim Il Jung or any of a dozen more I can name exhibits not strength, but weakness.

    My point is that Hitler thought of a lot of things. He was evil, no question, argument, or debate. So is Hugo Chavez. But there is a reason that in the depiction of the “yin and the yang” the white contains a black dot, and the black a white; nothing is pure, ours is not an existence like that of the planets and stars, governed simply by the laws of physics. “There are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” Wm. Shakespeare

    Remember “Dress”-I get ya’ on that one.
    Bush-I don’t mind coming through the rye but I’m old fashioned. I haven’t had a bald one (somehow that makes me think of spaghetti-remind me if we meet we are NOT going Italian).
    Footsie man and woman married-love triumphs eternal (once 1st (?) marriage was out of the way-need to read that article; sounds like he fucked something up).

    “Simmons”-Wolfe was probably writing for you in that one. I had been so knocked out by “Man” it isn’t a stretch to say it changed my life, definitely my view of it. I started reading stoicism and found in it the pure grain alcohol of a philosophy I could really understand and relate to, in contrast to the “bourbon” of Christianity, filtered and altered by years in barrels of dreary doctrinaire bullshit and then poured through the charcoal of unadulterated thieving self-interest. I may have been half expecting a similar experience. I do so how it informs the tenor of what goes on here.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    It might take just one time with an infected partner to get that, and guys can be asymptomatic for literally years. Truth be told, if I were single one thing that would scare the beejesus out of me in terms of casual sex, would be the magnitude of STDs floating out there. It is at epidemic levels.

    TOTALLY agree. Chlamydia can be asymptomatic in women too, and it can lead to infertility if it isn’t treated. I read this crazy study about STDs in young people… it found that 67% of people who tested positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea didn’t even think they were at risk. Also almost half the people who tested positive had only had one partner in the last year.

    When I read that shit about casual rawdogging in the ‘sphere, I go into major Public Health Student Mode and get worried about STDs. I know FFY said something about STDs being something “haters” brought up, but no really. It’s a serious concern. I hope he gets checked regularly.

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

      67% of people who tested positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea didn’t even think they were at risk. Also almost half the people who tested positive had only had one partner in the last year.

      There’s the answer to Doug’s question. It also supports the 80/20 theory. A relatively small number of promiscuous men are infecting large numbers of women.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Jesus

    Your theories suck or at least 2 of them do. Were you a young male in the 60s? I was.
    1) Gender roles? Are you nuts? We didn’t give 2 shits. We wanted to get laid. How times have changed.

    2) Do you mean “disassociate”? It helps to spell correctly, even if what you say is still crap. Look, there was a draft, just like in WWII. Most of the guys who fought, bled and died in WWII were draftees, compelled to do what they did. But they had the whole nation behind them, a cause they believed in, and a clear if difficult path to victory (Germany:help the Russians take it over and gang rape all the women; Japan: blow the mother fuckers up).’Nam we had none of those, plus an enemy that starting in ’65 showed itself to be implacable, indefatigable and with a strategy to bleed us dry-which meant our (my) blood. We weren’t any less tough, there was just no clarity and by the late 60s it became obvious we COULD NOT WIN. No one wants to die or get fucked up under those circumstances. We did not disassociate, and had I been drafted I’d a gone and taken my chances. That’s what everyone did ‘cept a few who dodged or got in the Guard etc.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Jesus again

    Even the goddamned draft was unfair. In WWII everybody, and I mean everyfuckingbody, went in. You had to be seriously goofed not to go, and then be prepared to take endlesss shit for not being in. I knew a man who had that experience (his feet were fucked up-you couldn’t tell, so he was took a lot of shit). In ‘Nam, they had such a screwball scheme-finally they had to ditch it and go to a lottery ( I was #64)but by then things were dying down. Plus the chicks WOULD NOT FUCK ANY GUY IN UNIFORM. I used to see it as I was a bartender. Guys would come in with their military cut,but the look was long hair, chicks wouldn’t dance or even talk to them-by 11 I’d have a fight. Guys in uniform got no and I mean no action-and I’m talking Boise Idaho. You take San Fran, Seattle-chicks would probably slit their dicks.

  • purplesneakers

    Susan – how did you find the girls for your focus groups? I wonder if the kind to be eager to join a focus group about the hook-up culture are the ones who have been more involved and burned by it, and therefore there is some kind of selection bias toward the more promiscuous ones?

    Also I’m not really sure what the relevance is of the looks of your former co-worker? Did she do/say anything fermane to the topic of this post that deserves ridicule for her appearance? Which she could easily find if she googled her name?

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

      Susan – how did you find the girls for your focus groups?

      I didn’t recruit them, it happened organically by knowing one young woman well, who then brought her friends along.

      Also I’m not really sure what the relevance is of the looks of your former co-worker?

      Fair point, I’ll kill that comment. Mostly I was disgusted by her behavior. She arrived out of business school, immediately began fucking a senior married executive with two young children, and parlayed that into career success. I was astounded to see that he left his family for her and married her five years in. No respect.

      As for it being OT, sure. Like a good chunk of the comments around here.

  • purplesneakers

    that was supposed to be “germane,” not “fermane”!

  • anonymous

    Susan: “As for Brazilians, I don’t think women necessarily talk about them, but they do get them. In my focus groups, 100% of the women go totally bare. I know one young woman who refuses to trim the bush, and it has been a factor in at least one breakup, and many more “no thank you’s” re Round 2.”

    Aha! There ya go!
    Another weapon for remaining chaste.
    Keep a chia pet! (ch ch ch chia)

    purplesneakers :
    “Susan – how did you find the girls for your focus groups? I wonder if the kind to be eager to join a focus group about the hook-up culture are the ones who have been more involved and burned by it, and therefore there is some kind of selection bias toward the more promiscuous ones?”

    My thoughts exactly!
    Girl who were hookingup dumb who want to be hookingup smart.

  • Clarence

    I got called a “creep” by Amanda Marcotte in that post of Toms over at Good Men Project.
    I’m proud.

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

      @Clarence

      Haha, you should be proud! Good to see you!

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    @peace,

    There are different biological triggers in men & women over partner numbers. With most men, there is a visceral revulsion which is hardwired into us at the thought of the woman we are with being with anyone else EVER (past almost as much as present). Men’s greater sexual jealousy most likely stems from the (now largely unconscious) fear of raising another man’s child, so a lower number (rightly or wrongly) is on an instinctive level taken to be an indication of trustworthy character & so only makes a woman more attractive.

    For most women, on the other hand, at least SOME experience in a man (pre-selection) is an attractive quality – sex is much harder for men to ‘get’ so it confers an increase in status: the man is most likely not a complete loser as other women have vouched for him in the past.

    Female virginity is prized the world over.
    Male virginity is comical & essentially worthless.
    Start your calculations from there.

  • Jhane Sez

    “This thread reminds me of a scene from the movie “Clerks” where Dante and his girlfriend Veronica are discussing this very thing. It was quite comical but I’ve always felt it was pretty accurate. In the scene Veronica wants to know how many girls Dante has slept with and Dante unabashedly reveals that he has slept with 12. Veronica is horrified, slaps him and calls him a ‘pig’, later declaring that ‘guys will sleep with anything that says yes’. I think those two were in their early twenties.”

    You forgot the best part…

    She was giving him grief because she had intercourse with 3 guys (including him I believe) but had performed oral sex on 36. ~JS

  • Jhane Sez

    “discussing this stuff online is that Beauty and the Beast get the same level of attention. What distinguishes people here is the quality of their commentary.

    One of the main reasons I’ve been drawn to online communities, lately and in the past, is that as a short average-looking girl, I don’t hold a lot of sway in social situations. People don’t listen to me when I walk in a room. I’m definitely not an alpha male. ”

    @Olive…

    I hadn’t considered this… ~JS

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Your theories suck or at least 2 of them do.

    I love you, too.

    Were you a young male in the 60s? I was.

    So I struck a nerve. Wasn’t talking about you personally, though interesting that you took it so personally.

    1) Gender roles? Are you nuts? We didn’t give 2 shits. We wanted to get laid. How times have changed.

    All young men want to get laid. That’s true of any generation. My point was that boys were as dissatisfied with the 50′s ideal of Ward and June as girls.

    Do you mean “disassociate”? It helps to spell correctly, even if what you say is still crap.

    lmao. Dissociate is a word, bro. Look it up.

    We did not disassociate, and had I been drafted I’d a gone and taken my chances. That’s what everyone did ‘cept a few who dodged or got in the Guard etc.

    There were more than a few who dodged. And many more who worked their asses off to go to college to avoid the draft. Look, I have more than one family member who fought in Vietnam. I’m not trying to skewer all the men coming of age in the 60′s. Not even the draft dodgers, tbh. I’m just trying to understand the acceptance of feminism. I think chalking it up to guys just wanting to get laid is a bit overly simplistic.

  • Abbot

    “it’s true, men do divide women into dateable/marryable (sorry i’m sure there is a better term) and fuckable only and this is partly based on a woman’s number so we should stop lying to ourselves that they don’t.”

    Why do women lie to themselves about this? Why is it a topic at all? Why is there a “strategy” to denigrate and shame men into getting them to stop this? Why is there a “strategy” to get men to accept fucking-around for women as normal and “positive?” Why dont these fuck-around advocates just politely ask men to change? Why is the approach always so loaded with bitterness, anger and impatience? Men are the target…not people…not society…men!! And NOT a fringe group of throw backs, NO. The target is nearly all men because this manner of thinking is UNIVERSAL among men and these slimy fuck-around advocates know it or they would not be spewing out their campaign at all. Too bad for them. Their efforts are futile. Women who desire to be in the good graces of men must not fuck around and they know it and the inequality of it all is what really really grates on them. Shut up and deal with it.

  • Jhane Sez

    I have asked people to furnish details of people they know who are childless and alone due to their sexual history – virtually none has been forthcoming.

    @Susan…

    There are 3 older (late 50’s early 60’s) women in my extended family who are not just spinsters but still virgins. They were 180 degrees from being sexually liberated, they just never participated in the social scene, nor did they become religious until they were much older… they always have candy corn and peanuts in crystal bowls on their coffee tables.

    There are a couple of crazy aunts on both sides who have been married and divorced a bunch of times with no children who still have gentlemen friends and companions… I guess they were the riders for their generation… they tell great stories about the good times and the fun, but you can’t get them to talk about regrets

    There are several of my contemporaries women in their 30’s and 40’s that were never carousel riders, nor were they really watchers… I don’t recall them doing much socially. These women in high school and college never went on dates hooked up or had boyfriends.

    After they left school they started their careers and have been fairly successful but they still haven’t dated let alone married or had children.

    The one thing this group has in common is they have cultivated a look and a way of being that isn’t a sexual or masculine, but it isn’t appealing or attractive to men… they are invisible to all men.

    Those that I knew in college who rode the hardest are living the ‘fabulous life’… unburdened by any real human connections. Many are still riding dating married or involved men, they mainly share their affections with pets and they travel a lot…. they are still getting pumped and dumped just on their own terms, and claim that they are still considering marriage and children but just not yet.

    I think it would be interesting to do something on this theme in a vignette form ~JS

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Munson,

    that Hitler quote is really quite haunting.

    Yesterday I was reading about a letter Gandhi wrote to Hitler on Christmas Eve, 1940:

    “On this occasion, Gandhi took the trouble of justifying his addressing Hitler as “my friend” and closing his letter with “your sincere friend”, in a brief statement of what exactly he stood for: “That I address you as a friend is no formality. I own no foes. My business in life has been for the past 33 years to enlist the friendship of the whole of humanity by befriending mankind, irrespec­tive of race, colour or creed.” This very un-Hitlerian reason to befriend Hitler, what Gandhi goes on to call the “doctrine of universal friendship”, contrasts with the Hitler-like hatred of one’s enemy which is commonly thought to be the only correct attitude to Hitler.” (my italics).

    http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/fascism/gandhihitler.html

    Thirty years ago, the German psychologist Alice Miller, whose life’s work deals with society’s institutionalized abuse of children, tried to write a book about the childhood of Adolf Hitler, to show how German methods of Victorian-era childrearing explained so much about his future actions. When she returned to Germany to try talk about these ideas, she found no-one would allow it. The only way the people there could deal with the aftermath of the war was to demonize & scapegoat this one man as being pure evil, not human at all.

    But Hitler was human. And, given unlimited power, as he was through a series of thankfully largely unique events, he behaved no differently from how many, many, many ordinary people would behave in the same situation, depending on their personal biases. Recent revelations about current radical feminism bear this out:

    http://triggeralert.blogspot.com/2011/12/term-feminazi-no-longer-seems-like.html

    As mentioned before, the Hitler-like hatred of one’s enemy is – with little thought for the irony – commonly thought to be the only correct response a ‘good’ person should display in regard to Hitler (&, often, the German people at large: c.f. Inglourious Basterds).

    Accepting hateful propaganda & refusing to deal with the human reality is the surest way we know of to make sure it happens all over again. It’s the easiest way to make lots more little Hitlers.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Oh & personally I think Hugo Chavez is cool.

  • Tom

    Abbott,, Universally is a joke.

  • OffTheCuff

    She was giving him grief because she had intercourse with 3 guys (including him I believe) but had performed oral sex on 36.

    Wow, you couldn’t have timed this post it better – that’s the youtube video I posted earlier. “Clerks” should be probably required HUS viewing. Those two scenes, put together, really say it all.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    The ‘is Tom a woman’ debate is old hat to me. What would be much more interesting is: what if Tom & Abbot are the same person? Just one deeply conflicted guy (ok, or girl) sat at home on a computer working out his (or her) issues.

    Wouldn’t that be something? From now on I’m referring to them both as ‘Tomabot’.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Yes, 20% of both men and women are having sex a lot, but there is that 60% that is also having sex, just not as frequently. (the other 20% plays Halo/CoD/WoW in the dorms on Friday and Saturday nights) The 60% are the average men & women, and they’re having 1-2 different chicks/dudes per semester. Some want bfs/gfs, others don’t want commitment. Either way, there isn’t some overwhelming amount of grinding celebacy going on for a large amount of student populations, just varying degrees of promiscuity.”

    This is as close to a believable numbers break down as I have seen anywhere.

    I have been thinking a lot about the current SMP as it relates to hooking up and promiscuity… what I have seen is that what is the bigger stated problem is cheating and infidelity by both boys and girls in LTR.

    For context… 2003 to 2005 I did some tutoring of kids attending the local community college, and I used to do business with some of the smaller local universities so I made a lot of friends with kids in their late teens and early 20’s.

    I noticed that the majority were in relationships of various degrees… the FWB situations that I witnessed were the result of a bridging the gap of a break up so they could still have sex but see other people.

    But what caused most of the drama was cheating.

    In HUS language I guess the alpha man whores and the carousel riders were constantly sleeping with someone in a relationship and there were a lot of retaliation hook ups that followed to attempt to even the score.

    This was 5 to 7 years ago and now I am starting to see them get married… I consider these things a good sign ~JS

  • Jhane Sez

    “I don’t see how oral sex could not count. If a man is concerned about how many dicks have been inside a woman’s coochie, then wouldn’t he also be concerned about how many have been in her mouth?”

    Exactly… as Off the Cuff says ‘Clerks’ should be required viewing for the HUS crowd.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpQqH4H_SUQ

    I think that this puts the number question into perspective ~JS

  • Emily

    >> The one thing this group has in common is they have cultivated a look and a way of being that isn’t a sexual or masculine, but it isn’t appealing or attractive to men… they are invisible to all men.

    Jhane Sez,

    Would you mind elaborating on this?

  • Abbot

    “Universally is a joke”

    Then there would no NO reason for all the slut-defenders, fuck-around advocates, sex-pozzy asshats and every other demented form of “if men do it why cant women” sheeple.

    If the wife pile / slut pile dichotomy was not UNIVERSAL among men then all of the above zombies would merely crawl back to their self-serving agenda-driven mind-control masters from where they were spawned.

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

    Esau..”several generations, now, of men being raised to internalize the idea that we are essentially bad, and so their first task becomes to apologize for their maleness and anything connected with it.”

    Reminds me of something: the writer Doris Lessing, a self-defined feminist, told the following story in 2001:

    “I was in a school, and I saw a… nine or ten years old…. history… and there was this feminist teacher telling these kids that wars throughout history were because men were naturally violent. Now you can imagine the scene – the little girls, so smug and pleased with themselves, and the boys cowering and embarrassed.”

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

      @David Foster

      That’s a great tidbit! I’ve filed that away for future use in a post. Thanks for sharing it.

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

    I meant to include this link:

    http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/stories/s390537.htm

    …for the Doris Lessing quote.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    In addition, here is the quote they are referring to in that interview:

    “I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed… I was in a class of nine and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men. You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives… This kind of thing is happening in schools all over the place and no one says a thing. It has become a kind of religion that you can’t criticise because then you become a traitor to the great cause, which I am not. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests. Men seem to be so cowed that they can’t fight back, and it is time they did.”

    - Doris Lessing

  • Ted D

    “I have asked people to furnish details of people they know who are childless and alone due to their sexual history – virtually none has been forthcoming.:” – JS – I personally don’t know of any formerly promiscuous women that ended up single and without children, but I know of a few that ARE married with kids, and unhappy about it all… Not sure what that proves, but I didn’t want you to think we were ignoring you.

    Jesus – “Now, imagine you had a best friend like that and he shared his deep secret with you. Then, imagine he shared that same deep secret with his Shop teacher, his drug dealer, a guy he met playing basketball, and some dude walking down the street some lonely night. What does that do to the bond you thought you had?”

    OMG THIS! I’ve never been able to put this into words. I’ll add that not only is there a huge disappointment in regards to the “bond” we had, but honestly it makes me wonder if my intuition regarding her qualities in general are all wrong. Was a blinded because on an instinctual level I found her THAT attractive that I missed that she was a bad person? And yes, I am indeed saying that finding out a woman has had a high number of casual sexual partners DOES indeed make me question if she is at the core a good person. Probably along the lines of finding out she used to be a hard core drug user in fact. And, that is another one of the things that would immediately disqualify a woman as a LTR prospect for me. Former heavy drug use/addiction would be a deal killer, even if she has been clean and sober for some time. Too much risk, too likely she did many other bad things during that time.

  • Esau

    JM at 428: “So, my theories on this:

    3. Processed foods and refined carbs lower testosterone.”

    So your thinking is that they sapped and impurified all of our vital bodily fluids? Tell me, Mahoney, when did you first, well, develop this theory?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    The ‘is Tom a woman’ debate is old hat to me. What would be much more interesting is: what if Tom & Abbot are the same person? Just one deeply conflicted guy (ok, or girl) sat at home on a computer working out his (or her) issues.

    Wouldn’t that be something? From now on I’m referring to them both as ‘Tomabot’.

    Throw Jess into the mix and it would be even more interesting. Picture the multiple personalities of Sybil arguing amongst themselves in her head.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    So your thinking is that they sapped and impurified all of our vital bodily fluids? Tell me, Mahoney, when did you first, well, develop this theory?

    Who’s “they”? We know that processed foods, refined carbs, soft drinks, etc… all contribute to lower testosterone levels and in some cases even elevated estrogen levels. That’s science, not theory.

    The theory only involves me connecting eating habits and their inevitable results to the more “beta” behavior of males.

  • Jhane Sez

    “The one thing this group has in common is they have cultivated a look and a way of being that isn’t a sexual or masculine, but it isn’t appealing or attractive to men… they are invisible to all men.
    Jhane Sez,
    Would you mind elaborating on this?”

    @Emily…

    The look is usually old lady or over grown toddler… when we were younger and we would be out socializing other people would think they were either a parent or an aunt… guys their age would call them mam…. they looked like Dana Carvey’s church lady in their 20’s.

    http://www.theimproper.com/18757/justin-bieber-arouses-the-church-lady-on-snl-watch

    Their skirts were too long, not ankle length but mid calf, they wore too many layers blouses and sweaters that didn’t fit properly usually baggy…

    In other words they dressed like the shopped clearance on the home shopping network from 10 years prior and wore shoes the looked like they belonged to a sensible nun.

    Some had facial features that made them look older but for most it was their choice of hair style and lack of make up.

    Or the dressed in a very eccentric juvenile fashion… one of my cousins wore pig tails, overalls and Birkenstocks with socks, and winnie the pooh t shirts all through college, no make up… none of this did anything to flatter her figure or enhance her facial
    features… it made her look like a female baby huey.

    She still has a thing for holiday sweaters… not just Christmas but Easter, Halloween, 4th of July…

    As for their demeanor they are very anti fun… and very vocal and judgmental about it.

    I had a neighbor who lived next door to me in a high rise full of young single people… its new years eve and everyone has their music going preparing for the evenings festivities.

    Starting at about 6:30 pm she started calling security with noise complaints and did not stop complaining until every unit on our floor turned their music down until it was barely audible in their apartment and that included 2 parties.

    She was in her early 20’s and a total buzz kill.
    The other was my friend’s sister. The sisters had gotten a cute apartment in a hot neighborhood and its friday or saturday night and its summer in chicago… we are on the deck and some guys in the next building are playing classic rock and jazz having a couple of beers and we are flirting and they come over and make it a spontaneous barbecue.

    We invited her sister and she declined… after it got dark, around 9:30 she starts going in on her sister for hanging with strange men in the back yard and calling our behavior common and slutty.

    We were drinking beer and talking about comic books and coffee house gossip… a couple of people started dating as a result of our little getting to know the neighbors event one of them was her sister she still refers to the event as that time we were acting like hoes.

    We have tried to do make overs and arrange blind dates but they are hostile toward change, saying that a guy should like them as they are, etc.

    Or their interest aren’t interesting to men… like romance novels, cats, garden gnomes… you get the idea.

    The biggest thing they have in common currently is that they live in what I call a self imposed female only bubble… they have very little chance of meeting men because they never spend anytime around them…

    But they aren’t lesbians.

    I have only heard the term hypothetical heterosexual applied to men… but I think this is the best way to describe or explain their behavior ~JS

  • Jhane Sez

    ““I have asked people to furnish details of people they know who are childless and alone due to their sexual history – virtually none has been forthcoming.:” – JS – I personally don’t know of any formerly promiscuous women that ended up single and without children, but I know of a few that ARE married with kids, and unhappy about it all… Not sure what that proves, but I didn’t want you to think we were ignoring you.”

    @Ted D…

    That is so sweet… your consideration is appreciated, but the quote is Susan, I was responding to her.

    But thank you ~JS

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

      @Jhane Sez

      Actually, that was Jess who asked for those details. She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value.

  • WarmWoman

    @Peace and asking how women would feel with a man with a high number:

    As long as I know he’s loyal and STD-free, I would be willing to forgive someone’s past as long as they have changed their ways. I understand the underlying issues that contribute to promiscuity, so I would be more concerned about whether those issues are fixed.

    Regarding men deciding to commit based on a woman’s number, am I the only woman that’s been lucky to have male partners that didn’t ask? Perhaps these men were judging my demeanor and assumed that my number was low. I believe in waiting a few months to have sex when dating someone seriously, and I’ve been told I come off as a “reserved nice girl.” The fact is I did have a few NSA encounters, but outgrew the idea.

  • jess

    Jhane Sez & Ted,

    thank you for your responses- much appreciated!

    JS- Yes I have for some time thought that very chaste women are in danger of a life of loneliness.

    Its like if they dont get into the ‘habit’ of seducing/keeping a guy before 21 they kinda get into a rut. Its not always linked to attractiveness either.

    Circumstances are everything- i have some relatives who are virgins due to their catholic sphere. Someone dies, eldest looks after the kids, gets passed over for younger sister- that kinda thing.

    At uni it was different- i have one friend who is single but she has pretty severe mental issues. the other people I know of who are still single in their 40s were the chaste or religious ones- and its simply not true to suggest they weren’t attractive.

    There is a new girl in my coffee morning group who is late 30s early 40s. She looks after her sisters kid and brings him to the group. Turns out she is like Susan Boyle in that she has never even been kissed. She’s very pretty- perhaps a tad overweight. She lives her life through her nephew (who’s fast turning into a brat but thats another issue). She says she never really learned how to talk to or attract guys.

    Its a odd thing because more often than not she’s the prettiest girl in the room and she seems so warm and kind- any guy would be lucky to have her.

    Ted- interesting about the very promiscuous women who is now unhappy in her LTR?- is that due to her being bored or just screwed up generally?

    I alway think this observational stuff is just as important as bare numbers. Stats alone miss out critical info and dynamics.

    Anyhow- the feedback was much appreciated- J

  • Jesus Mahoney

    WarmWoman,

    I never asked my ex. I actually haven’t asked my current girlfriend. That doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. That means the men were assuming the best and didn’t want to find out otherwise.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Warm Woman,

    I think most guys would be very put off knowing they waited a few months after finding out you’d had NSA sex in the past.

  • WarmWoman

    Purplesneakers-I didn’t see that you were Indian as well. I didn’t know SayWhaat was Indian too! Cool.

    I agree with your comments about promiscuity being linked to abusive families, especially where incest and sexual abuse occurs. . It seems like the Indians I know gravitate from being very conservative to being overly sexual. There doesn’t seem to be an in-between in my experience.

  • jess

    warmwomen,
    “The fact is I did have a few NSA encounters, but outgrew the idea”

    Quite and I think this is true for both men and women and probably explains why the numbers issue, whilst still pertinent to most, comes some way down the list of important factors when considering someone for an LTR.

    By the way, may I ask how you found your NSA encounters?
    Were they all awful?

  • WarmWoman

    @Jesus-Yes, but I’ve been lucky again where my last boyfriend was understanding. I had disclosed to him my sexual abuse history, and explained that I had regrettably acted out. He simply said “Of course, look at what your parents did to you!”. He didn’t probe further and we left it at that. When two people are in love and crazy about each other, we do tend to overlook flaws that we usually wouldn’t put up with.

  • Emily

    @ Jhane

    Yeah, I have a few girlfriends who match your first description (“church lady”) to a T. IME, this type seems to be especially common in religious circles.

    I really think some people underestimate the effectiveness of clothes/make-up (if it’s done properly). My own natural looks are nothing special (without make-up I maybe have a “6″ face), but over the years I’ve gotten pretty good at “faking it”. So when I’m “dolled up”, I get a decent amount of male attention. I don’t think I’ve EVER been approached when I wasn’t wearing make-up though. (I wear make-up most days, but still.) Wearing skirts and dresses also seems to make a difference.

    These particular friends aren’t bad-looking, but they do tend to style themselves in a way that looks kind of frumpy. My offers to help them “sex up” their appearance (in a classy/feminine way) are generally unsuccessful though. …and then they complain that they can’t get a boyfriend. Urgh.

    They don’t have the kill-joy personality that you describe, but they do tend to be very reluctant/hesitant in co-ed situations. So they’re the ones standing against the wall with their best friend at the party and then on the rare occasions when a guy does approach them, they get too scared to leave the wall or don’t want to leave their best friend or whatever.

    My description probably sounds kind of bitchy, but they’re like a classic example of “what NOT to do” for making yourself approachable.

  • Ted D

    Jess – Well I am friends with one of the husbands and only know the other couple as acquaintances so it would be guessing on my part to say why they are unhappy. In the case of my friend’s relationship I think she is bored and/or just disappointed with her life. They both work and make decent money, but she seems to be having a mid-life crises of a sort. She tells him she is disappointed she didn’t do more with her life, that she wanted to be further along in her career or doing something more important. That the routine of life is making her depressed. *shrug* who knows. She always seemed a bit shallow to me, but to be frank I feel the same way about most people. I just don’t think too many people really “think” about things, they tend to just go along with the flow or attempt to redirect the water in the direction they want without really wondering why.

    It seems to me she is doing the “grass is greener” schtik. Sure being married and raising kids is a huge responsibility, but I personally think there is no greater good than raising children to be quality people, but I guess some people don’t see their children as the legacy they leave behind. I can’t think of anything else more important. What I do at work will be forgotten as soon as someone else does better, or not long after I move on. But my children will represent me LONG after I’m dead, and their children will ensure that my legacy lives on. If that doesn’t scream IMPORTANT, maybe raising children isn’t for you… (not YOU Jess, just YOU in general.)

  • WarmWoman

    Oh, I should revise my last sentence “Waiting a few months when dating seriously” to WAITING PERIOD with anyone.I don’t agree with women that make a potential”Mr.Right” wait and then justify having fun with Mr.Wrong. You either jump on the abstinence boat or you don’t.

    Like you Jesus, I realized NSA sex isn’t what I wanted. I wanted lasting love. I wanted the build-up of emotional/mental intimacy. The only way for me to get that is to save sex for someone that I love. I’m willing to explain that to a future mate, and if he’s put off by it..oh well.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Its like if they dont get into the ‘habit’ of seducing/keeping a guy before 21 they kinda get into a rut. Its not always linked to attractiveness either.”

    That was my point in my response to Emily.

    Its not that the women are unattractive by the sole standards of raw looks it how they present themselves and their demeanor.

    I know women who look like Susan Boyle who are married with kids and have husbands who love them.

    I know women who look like they should be involved in relationships but are invisible to men.

    And just as you mentioned they take care of the sick, the elderly and the children of others frequently sacrificing their own lives.

    I have a niece who will be 21 in a few months, never been kissed, been on a date or had a boyfriend… she took her gay male bestie to prom.

    I notice that all of her friends have boyfriends and are afraid to fix her up because they don’t want to make her feel awkward or embarrassed.

    It is difficult because she is classic invisible to all men girl… even the betas who claim they can’t find a woman.

    I want to figure out a way to help her ~JS

  • Ted D

    WarmWomen – “When two people are in love and crazy about each other, we do tend to overlook flaws that we usually wouldn’t put up with.”

    I agree 100% with this, but I’d like to counter that it may very well be THIS that causes many divorces. Its easy to overlook things when you are newly in love, but 10 years down the road will it be so easy? (Not asking you personally, just making a point…)

    I’ve never come right out and asked a woman her number. However at some point early on in my relationships I bring the topic up and see how it goes. I’ve only been in four LTRs since I was 16, so I haven’t had this conversation many times. As I’ve said before, it isn’t so much about the exact number as the thoughts and intentions behind it. A few casual encounters won’t put me off, as long as they were old news and she can show me that emotionally she has grown past that state of mind. Lots of past casual sex would be a concern, but again at my age I would seriously consider her current mental state. Any woman that has been involved in casual sex recently is out of the question for me. My current SO has a few casual encounters under her belt, but it was over a decade ago and she stayed married and faithful to a man that can’t say the same for 10 years. I’m pretty sure that shows she is able to commit. (of course I am trusting her to tell me the truth. I can’t do anything about it if she is lying anyway…)

    But, I also feel the need to say that I am NOT looking for a wife and mother of my children, at least not in the traditional sense. I have two kids and don’t intend to have any more. So the risk involved with this relationship is less than if I were just wanting to start a family. I honestly don’t know how I would feel if that were the situation with my current SO. I can clearly see she is a good mother (she has two children as well), but she did also get divorced, so she does indeed fit the mold I’ve been tossing out here about promiscuous women and divorce. Like I said, her husband was a cheater, so I don’t blame her for the divorce. That doesn’t change the facts.

    My ex-wife had far fewer partners however, and yet I am a divorced man. No guaranties I guess, but I still think it is wise to try and stack the deck in your own favor.

  • Ted D

    JS – oops sorry about that. I confused you with Jess. But in my defense, both of your handles start with J! :P

  • dragnet

    @ Susan

    “She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value.”

    This is actually true—to the extent the woman can keep it a secret, which isn’t particularly difficult these days.

  • Ted D

    @ Dragnet – to an extent. However any woman that appears to dodge that conversation would set off all my bells and whistles, and if I didn’t get more info I would be walking in short order. If you did it, own it regardless of how others feel about it. In other words, if she finds it necessary to hide the info, she is embarrassed about it or knows it is a negative thing. Lie of omission is still a lie.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    @Jesus-Yes, but I’ve been lucky again where my last boyfriend was understanding. I had disclosed to him my sexual abuse history, and explained that I had regrettably acted out. He simply said “Of course, look at what your parents did to you!”. He didn’t probe further and we left it at that. When two people are in love and crazy about each other, we do tend to overlook flaws that we usually wouldn’t put up with.

    My bad. Didn’t realize that when you mentioned sexual abuse, you were speaking from personal experience. There’s a difference between, “I did that because I was young and didn’t want something serious at the time and now I do so I’m going to wait,” and, “I did that because I had major issues and then I worked out those issues so now I’m going to wait.”

    I would have a problem waiting for the woman in the first case. Not in the second.

  • jess

    Ted- on children- how wonderfully put- couldn’t agree more

    Emily- i have long found that skirts have a profound effect on guys – or leggings.

    JS- niece- tell her to ‘speed date’ or have a friend set up a blind date- she needs to get some practice- urgently- the more I speak to people about this issue the more I worry about re-inforcing patterns. She needs to kiss a bloke and get ‘used’ to being around someone and being sexual. Of course as you are the uncle I’m not sure how responsive she is gonna be to advice from you- you may need a 3rd party.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Of course as you are the uncle I’m not sure how responsive she is gonna be to advice from you- you may need a 3rd party.

    Jhane is a chick.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Actually, that was Jess who asked for those details. She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value.”

    @Susan…

    Interesting… Escoffer wrote of seeing the SATC NYC girls in their natural habitat… and remarking on their behaviors in another post.

    I think that it is hard to see the long term effects because they work so hard at being fabulous.

    If you know them personally you get a different view. I have friends who are older and haven’t had kids, who have never been interested in playing aunt to my daughter but now that she is a teen and ‘fun’ they want to hang with her go shopping and buy her first drink.

    My concern is that they want to use her to lure men because their own light is dimming… and I don’t think I am wrong.

    I also notice that they invest way too much in animals… one chick I know brought not only a costume for her cat but a carriage so she could take it trick or treating.

    I also don’t think that you see the ill effects because they still, even in their late 40’s think that they still got it and have options.
    Too many of the ones that aren’t married are dating married men, and think the situation ideal.

    Or they get married because they are burned out but hate being married, especially if they have a kid because they really didn’t want one.

    But there are those who stopped riding and REALLY wanted to change and settle down and they are so stepford wife its sickening.

    And then there are those who reinvent… and disavow any and all bad behavior they participated in and put rose colored glasses on their past… by flat out lying.

    Time will tell if they are able to sustain the lie and stay married. ~JS

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

      @Jhane Sez

      If you know them personally you get a different view. I have friends who are older and haven’t had kids, who have never been interested in playing aunt to my daughter but now that she is a teen and ‘fun’ they want to hang with her go shopping and buy her first drink.

      My concern is that they want to use her to lure men because their own light is dimming… and I don’t think I am wrong.

      OMG, that is terrible! It’s good that you’re onto it and don’t allow it. It’s possible it’s entirely subconscious on their part, but wow, what a bait and switch that would be!

      one chick I know brought not only a costume for her cat but a carriage so she could take it trick or treating.

      LOL that really plays into the cat lady meme.

      I do not understand why any woman would sign up to be mistress to a married man. It’s toxic for the emotions, and can’t be any good logistically either – all that sneaking around, time for just a quickie, etc. Not to mention the ethics of such behavior.

  • Escoffier

    I would refine Jesus’ post about the ’60s in the following way.

    I think that men’s first reaction to the SR was “Woo-hoo!” No more double standard! Girls are free to be sluts! I don’t have to commit! They will put out way more and way sooner! This is great!

    They lacked the foresight to see that a very small minority of men would be the sexual “winners” and that most of them would end up net losers. They also either (or both) misunderstood their own desires or counted on being able to satisfy them at some point. By which I mean, they thought more short term–more sexual variety now!–and either ignored the long term–eventually I want a wife–or else just took for granted that once they were ready to get off the carousel themselves there would be potential wives waiting.

    But what the SR did was shrink that pool (for reasons we have discussed here at length) and also make the majority of non-alpha men less attractive to women, who now believed they had better options.

    Another thing is, you can’t really trace the SR in a linear way. I’ve made this point before but it’s interesting to compare Susan’s experience to my own. She came of age as the ’70s were really going crazy. For whatever reason–AIDS, Reagan, Jerry Fallwell, Martha Stewart–morals got more strict in the ’80s. The scene I grew up in was certainly way looser morally than the ’50s and early ’60s but it was nowhere as freewheeling as the ’70s and it was nothing what you all are writing about now.

    I think what we have now is probably the logical and inevitable outcome of the SR but it’s interesting to me that we had that decade or two detour. Really, had everything just followed linearly from the SR, the current scene should have been in place no later than 1990 and it wasn’t.

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

      @Escoffier

      Yes, AIDS was huge. I think that was the single biggest influence. BTW, I just saw that HIV is up sharply among gay college men. When there’s no crisis, we become complacent. Out go the condoms.

  • Sassy6519

    @ DC

    Cool story bro.

    On another note…..

    Once, when I was arguing with Jaclyn Friedman, she called me an old scold. I asked her how her mother felt about her choices. She went ballistic. I had clearly struck a nerve – she basically started screaming. Poor Mrs. Friedman.

    Yeah, I agree. I have a pretty open relationship with my mother and have told her about my dating life. I guess the key to that is to have a dating life that wouldn’t be embarrassing to tell your own mother in the first place. I can only imagine how her mother must feel about her daughter’s dating life.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Actually, that was Jess who asked for those details. She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value”

    Oh… she can if she is attractive enough so he won’t ask the question or care ~JS

  • dragnet

    I agree with the basic premise of this post—that feminist inspired social reforms have been instrumental in creating hook-up culture and that this (among other phenomena) will combine to endanger the long-term reproductive goals of a large swath of the current generation of young women and quite possibly put their risk psychological and physical well-being. The women of previous generations managed to avoid these pitfalls (for the most part) mainly because the guys decided to play by the same rules they always had and/or they didn’t know anything about the true nature of a completely deregulated female sexuality. This is no longer the case. I really believe the next 50 years in the SMP are going to be completely different, and that the young men in the generation right behind me—25 and under—are poised to hit the reset button on gender relations in a way that women are going to find highly surprising and distressing.

    All that said, I don’t think we can underestimate the role that changes in technology and the pill played in this as well. Once women could control their own fertility the ballgame changed. And once we decided to sell out working class men in this country and ship their jobs overseas (to be worked by foreign working class men) and to create an economy based on services, public sector work and paper pushing we effectively created a society where women no longer needed men for anything, really. I can’t blame feminism for everything because the pill, advancing technology, and the information age were going to upend traditional roles and sexual mores even if the poltical feminist movement had never happened.

    In my view, discussion concerning feminism are more impactful when they take on the way that its most strident, misandric and deceitful proponents exercise a near stranglehold on the legal culture of this country—the nature of divorce, family law, sex crimes, the workplace, etc. I tend to be a lot less interested in hook-up culture and feminist influence on the SMP because I believe that individual men have sufficient resources to pushback if they want to: unplugging from their fealty to gynocentric imperatives and learning Game—in that order.

    Blaming feminism for hook-up culture isn’t off-base, but the thesis is also clouded by other factors. Blaming institutional feminist power for a misandric legal culture? Not a slam dunk, but closer still.

  • Ted D

    “For whatever reason–AIDS, Reagan, Jerry Fallwell, Martha Stewart–morals got more strict in the ’80s”

    I believe this had much to do with Reagan being in office. Not saying Reagan actually changed anything, but the fact that he was elected twice indicates that at that time there were plenty of people with a conservative view of life. I think it was the last real push the conservatives made to try and reign in the oncoming tide of the sexual revolution from the 60′s and 70′s. I was born in 1970, and spent most of my formative years in the 80′s and came from a mostly conservative Catholic family, so I guess its no surprise what side of the fence I am on here. I was either going to become very liberal, or very conservative. Its not in my nature to be a rebel, so here I am. :P

  • Escoffier

    On slut tells, well.

    Supposing I were single and “in the market,” I would simply assume that any reasonably attractive female I met in Manhattan within 15 years of may age had a double digit count. If were out for a fling, I wouldn’t care (but I would be quite careful about, um, protection).

    If I were contemplating getting serious, I would look for various tells. But in the end I would just ask. If I got the “you must be insecure to care” response, insta-dump. If she in any way refused to answer or hemmed and hawed, I would take that as slut confirmation and move on. A straight up admission of a high number, sorry but … moving on.

    A lie well … hmmm … would I be able to tell? I dunno. I’d like to think that I could. But of course I’d have no way of really knowing.

    So the only solution is, should I find myself single again, I think I would not contemplate marriage again. At least, that would be my default setting. I’d leave open the possibilty that some magnificent female might get me to reconsider.

  • purplesneakers

    WarmWoman-

    I agree with your comments about promiscuity being linked to abusive families, especially where incest and sexual abuse occurs. . It seems like the Indians I know gravitate from being very conservative to being overly sexual. There doesn’t seem to be an in-between in my experience.

    I know some in-betweeners. The kind who (probably, I’m guessing since they’ve been dating for years) have sex with their boyfriends, but don’t participate in the hook-up culture either. Though I know some who are more promiscuous, and others (like me) who are kind of carousel ‘watchers,’ that is, we go to parties but don’t get drunk and make poor decisions.

    Susan – if the girls were mostly in sororities and most of their socializing involves drinking, then I would say there is definitely a selection bias. Frats and sororities are the most promiscuous segments of most campuses. I think they represent the ’20% of each sex sleeps around’ that you talk about. I guess the rest of the campus is not as interesting because: a) we don’t drink as much, b) we don’t sleep around as much, and c) we’re not as photogenic or dressed to the nines for parties. haha.

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

      @purplesneakers

      Susan – if the girls were mostly in sororities and most of their socializing involves drinking, then I would say there is definitely a selection bias.

      Yes, which is why I never hold them up as a representation of the big picture. What’s useful to me is discussing the hookup scene with women who are in the middle of it. They can and do offer many interesting insights. For example, the ones with lower partner counts have strong opinions about manwhores because they know many. They have lots of experience with cads. IOW, they are on the front lines, and I’ve found their input very helpful. However, for statistics or the wide angle view I rely on a variety of other sources.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    I’m sure that played into it as well, but the fact is that they didn’t just celebrate the sexual revolution, they in many ways supported feminist ideals and the move away from traditional gender roles.

    I refuse to believe that the entire hippie/flower power movement was simply a strategy to get laid. Of course guys as a whole will follow more if easy sex is involved (except for Megaman who claims never to have been interested in any such thing), but I think it’s clear that there were other facts at play. Otherwise, men would’ve embraced the feminist agenda much earlier.

    Anyway, I’m not just saying that “beta” men shot themselves in the foot by indulging in the short term sexual gains (and btw, I don’t believe in the phrase “beta men”), I’m also saying that men as a whole might actually have become more feminine as a result of evironmental factors, such as diet and a more sedentary lifestyle. Whereas during the whole movement this was seen as “radical,” once the movement was over, it just became plain unattractive.

  • Abbot

    “I don’t agree with women that make a potential”Mr.Right” wait and then justify having fun with Mr.Wrong. ”

    Nobody agrees with that exclusively Western society behavior or accepts it and has no reason to accept it. Mr. Wrong notwithstanding. Mr Wrongs rule!! Mr Rights are total losers and suckers who clean up the mess left behind by all those now-snickering Mr Wrongs.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Oh… she can if she is attractive enough so he won’t ask the question or care ~JS

    I think Jess is cohabiting with a sort of weak-willed man. He wanted to marry, but it was against her beliefs at the time, so he apparently agreed to stay in the relationship and have kids without making it official. Any guy who compromises his principals like that is a bit weak.

  • Escoffier

    BTW, I looked into The Second Sex again for the first time in many years. (French edition 1949, English 1953.) It’s amazing how little de Beauvoir cares about careers, etc., and how much she cares about sex. She talks about “independence” and all that but it’s cursory and instrumental. What she really cares about is liberating female sexuality. Since this is the foundational text of all feminism, I take that as a confirmation of the manosphere’s argument that, indeed, the SR was led by women for women, not by men for men. Men went along because it seemed to them (thinking with their little heads) like a great deal for them.

  • Abbot

    “If I got the “you must be insecure to care” response, insta-dump. If she in any way refused to answer or hemmed and hawed, I would take that as slut confirmation and move on.”

    They are sooo easy to weed out. What a joke

    “the only solution is, should I find myself single again, I think I would not contemplate marriage again.”

    One more good reason that the male desire to marry in the West is at an all-time low

  • jess

    “Actually, that was Jess who asked for those details. She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value.”

    Susan you are being so mischievous at the moment!
    You know full well I dont think that!

    To clarify I think in some cases, with some people, certain levels of promiscuity can influence their SMV in a negative or positive way.

    I suspect that a strict ban on NSA sex whilst young may not be healthily for many women’s long term happiness.

    I also suspect that extreme promiscuity can be disastrous for women’s long term happiness.

    I have accepted that SOME men regard any casual sex as a deal breaker and I have explained in detail why I think women need not fret at offending such men.

    I have repeatedly said, today even, that whilst numbers are pertinent (i.e. can effect SMV), for many/most people its not at the top of the list of factors.

    I have based this view upon conversations I have had with both genders, and direct observation of all the relationships in my working life and personal life I have encountered. Thats over 20 years of being a nosy so and so- and in 3 different countries I see the same trends over and over.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    I never asked my ex. I actually haven’t asked my current girlfriend. That doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. That means the men were assuming the best and didn’t want to find out otherwise.

    Same goes here.

  • Ted D

    “the only solution is, should I find myself single again, I think I would not contemplate marriage again.”

    I said this many times right after my divorce. (I also said that I would seriously consider not bothering with a mate and instead would just hire a “professional” once in awhile. Damn my lack of casual sex ability! :P) My current SO has gone a long way towards softening this opinion of mine, but I’m still not rushing to get married or anything. It isn’t so much about the romantic notions of marriage for me now but more about the practical stuff. Health coverage, insurance, power of attorney, etc. We currently live together and are talking about the M word, but it isn’t a priority at the moment.

    I am also a rather traditional guy, so at least a small part of my being is telling me that I should “make this official” at some point. Before we get there, I need to think long and hard about a prenup. I have my own children, and I have to think about what it could mean to them if I were to marry again. the unfortunate thing is they would lose out if another divorce is in my future, as it could result in a huge financial loss for me, and by proxy them.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Ted,

    I have my own children, and I have to think about what it could mean to them if I were to marry again. the unfortunate thing is they would lose out if another divorce is in my future, as it could result in a huge financial loss for me, and by proxy them.

    That’s really interesting, I’ve never heard anyone speak of those concerns going into a second marriage, but they make a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing that.

  • Sox

    @Susan
    “haha, are you pressed for time? I want to tell you something – I LOVE it that you make the time to visit now and then. I know you’re super busy being a navy pilot and all.”

    Thanks. You already know my small-town woes, so I have a little more free time than you’d expect!

  • Sox

    @Jess
    “Are we pretty much agreeing with the figure of say roughly 1/3 of women having 20 partners at age 25?”

    I had said that 30-35% of your average attractive woman might have that many partners. Susan more or less expressed the same when she mentioned the demographics of the girls in her focus group. I’d add that where girls to go college and obviously where they live plays a role in the whole thing too.

    Not saying it’s acceptable or a good thing that the average number’s increasing. It’s just an honest admission that most of the attractive girls I knew had a pretty high partner count by HUS standards. These weren’t girls known for their promiscuity or ones I’d found in a bar either.

    Now the girls in the tiny town I’m in now, that’s a different story. Many of the attractive ones have low partner counts, but they’ve been married since 21 or are pretty religious. The others, well, they’re the ones we see at the Navy haunts every night picking up my buddies.

  • jess

    J mahoney- ‘weak partner’

    there you are again with the personal/aggressive stuff!- this so didnt used to be like you …..

    i dont think there are many that would describe my sarcastic, stubborn partner as weak!

    as it happens neither of us were particularly looking for an LTR when we met-there was a whole bunch of stuff going on in our lives. But we fell hard for each other. He knows Im devoted to him- there was a never a massive row about the marriage issue- quite a lot of london couples dont marry these days.

    the remote control however, now theres an issue that causes friction!! and that guy is one determined git!

  • Abbot

    “I have accepted that SOME men regard any casual sex as a deal breaker”

    And the rest regard any ONS casual sex or while-on-vacation casual sex or Spring Break casual sex or other similar behavioral form as such. ONLY men get to decide what constitutes a deal breaker. ONLY MEN. Good luck

    “I have explained in detail why I think women need not fret at offending such men.”

    That detail really did explain why its perfectly fine to Fuck all the men you want but to see them as people [ie be nice and dont dupe them into thinking you're anything but a lay]. That way, you “need not fret at offending such men.” Its equality – just fuck, dump and repeat.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jess,

    He wanted to get married and you were against it. He stayed with you anyway. He let you set the terms of the relationship. That is weak in my opinion.

    I’m getting personal because you are portraying yourself as the norm and the others as “fringeworthy” and “cringeworthy.” It helps to know where you’re coming from. You’re a 40 something hard-line feminist from the 80′s with a partner count of about 2 dozen (the majority of whom were casual), living with your two daughters in a big city with the man you refused to marry.

  • jess

    Sox,
    indeed- I think your estimations are highly likely to be accurate.

    As for the latter part of your post- do you think the women who now pick your buddies up were too unattractive to land a hubby at 21 or were too promiscuous to land a discerning hubby at 21?

    or maybe a combo?

  • Abbot

    You’re a 40 something hard-line feminist from the 80′s with a partner count of about 2 dozen (the majority of whom were casual), living with your two daughters in a big city with the man you refused to marry….

    ….who is on this website with the stated goal of convincing female lurkers that its perfectly healthy and normal and acceptable to service the patriarchy [aka to fuck men who have no reason to see you as an equal] if it feels right to personally do so.

    Thankfully, those female lurkers did not fall for it. They certainly wont now.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Jesus Mahoney

    Now, imagine you had a best friend like that and he shared his deep secret with you. Then, imagine he shared that same deep secret with his Shop teacher, his drug dealer, a guy he met playing basketball, and some dude walking down the street some lonely night. What does that do to the bond you thought you had?

    That’s what it’s like for me, finding out that the woman I’m with has had a lot of casual sex.

    The first scenario with a friend actually happened to me. There were several of us in the small group, and all of us had left our homes to study in another country, with varying levels of culture shock. During one girl’s first few months, two of her grandparents died within weeks of each other and her mother’s breast cancer came back, but her family couldn’t afford to fly her home for any reason. The whole group was there for her emotionally–and at some cost to ourselves–during the whole time.

    Then a new semester started, our rooms in the dorm were reshuffled, we couldn’t see each other as often as before . . . and just she took up with a new support group. She also had new drama. As another girl who had been close to her a few months before I met her (and who later became my friend) liked to say, “Her mother’s cancer must come back every few months.”

    And there went that “bond we thought we had”–and that bond everyone else thought they had with her.

  • jess

    Jess
    oh i see – the earlier comment i made had rankled and this was a retaliation- i can barely remember it actually but i do recall making a gag along those lines.

    well – your description of my events isn’t really true at all.
    Had he REALLY wanted marriage I would have capitulated.
    I capitulated on the kids issue- i was originally hesitant but he persuaded me, then i wanted 4 but he talked me down to 2. (or something like that)
    And i think he was right both times.

    Portraying myself as the norm?- well several here have said I am. I guess it depends on context. In an indian family I would be outrageous, in NY I would be positively chaste.

    Certainly whilst at uni- I was very chaste- despite having totally rejected my religious upbringing.

    Within my london circle I have very mundane, average sexual history- very ‘vanilla’ in fact.

    As to my politics- yeah i used to hard line- 20 years ago- but i barely qualify as feminist at all these days. I cant see AM & I agreeing on all that much at all.

  • anonymous

    Byron : “For most women, on the other hand, at least SOME experience in a man (pre-selection) is an attractive quality – sex is much harder for men to ‘get’ so it confers an increase in status: the man is most likely not a complete loser as other women have vouched for him in the past.”

    IME, it’s the women with high numbers who prefer men with high numbers so that they won’t hold their sexual past against them.
    People with low numbers are inclined to prefer people whose past is similar to their own.

  • anonymous

    Susan: “Fair point, I’ll kill that comment. Mostly I was disgusted by her behavior. She arrived out of business school, immediately began fucking a senior married executive with two young children, and parlayed that into career success. I was astounded to see that he left his family for her and married her five years in. No respect.”

    You certainly don’t need permission to write about whatever you like, it’s YOUR blog.
    However, I thought the photo was totally relevant because the skanky behavior is always assigned to attractive people and that just doesn’t coincide with my experience IRL.
    I wonder if the man’s wife thought she had absolutely nothing to worry about when her husband was with that homely woman.
    I wish it were as simple as giving people the lookover to determine their character.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Jesus and Cheerful Sadist(you complimented him on his theories)

    Point on word.
    There are 2 ways to write knowledgeably about an era:1) experience it; 2) exhaustively research it (and I mean a 300-500 book bibliography, interviews, archival recovery). You’ve done neither . You did not not “hit a nerve”, nor did I take it personally; I was pointing out that I had been there. I’ll let the readership decide my bona fides as an observer and commentator. The fact that you’re related to some who fought in ‘Nam means exactly nothing; you weren’t writing about them. You did not experience the era, betray no second hand knowledge gained through erudition, and what you say in #2 is an unmitigated crock of shit.

    First of all let’s establsih my orientation in the era. I graduated high school in ’70. That’s late for the ‘Nam era. The guys who actually fought over there, at least as I’ve encountered them, we’re there in roughly ’64-70; note, I’m describing my experience. We can look to stats to establish the actual numbers, but our fighting formations left in ’73, and ‘Nam fell in ’75 (early). If you had family members who fought, I’d guess they were there pre-1970. I could be wrong.

    You’re trying to understand the “acceptance of feminism”; you interpret me as saying men of that era accepted feminism “to get laid”. We can address both those issues with one unassailable truth: in the era we are talking about THERE WAS NO FEMINISM TO ACCEPT. The Viet Nam War ended (for us) with the withdrawal of combat and most support operations in 1973. The flow of few new draftees to Viet Nam began to be seriously curtailed begining with the adoption of the lottery (I was a low number-trust me we followed this shit; oh and why do you think the number got lower? Because Mr. and Mrs. Middle Class’s kid theoretically now stood a MUCH greater chance of getting his white ass (read that again) blown off.)

    Now you’ve said two things: first of all, guys weren’t willing to fight then. Yeah. I’ve explained why. Then you go on to say they left their masculine sides and embraced feminism. There was no feminism. Sure, Gloria Steinhem had “Ms.” magazine, there were a few books around, but fuck birth control was still illegal in some states in the 1963-1973 era. Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973! Women hadn’t been admitted to some colleges until 1969 (Princeton for example-I forget the others), and at many schools (I went to one) girls had curfews (9:00 p m weeknights). Reed v Reed was decided in 1968; it said women could be admistrators OF THEIR OWN HUSBAND’S ESTATES-we had a law here in Idaho that said if she had a male son, he got the job and the property. I could go on,but if you haven’t seen my point, you never will. The feminism you are discussing simply wasn’t around. It began to get some limited traction around the very late 70s (ERA for example) but the women’s studies, college curricula stuff that propelled it to where it is today started in the early 80s. ‘Nam era guys were way down the road by then.

    As for flower power, we embraced that FOR our nuts (and weed and LSD (mostly)). Again, it was a style. Girls liked long hair; duh! look at the Stones, Beatles, Joe Namath. You missed my point on that too. I was saying as yet another reason you didn’t want to get drafted (look, most guys don’t want to be soldiers; how many we got in this volunteer army as compared to the male population? how many are doing it because they don’t want to end up $100,000 in the hole for a shitty undergrad degree? how many would rather end up $100,000 in the hole for a shitty undergrad degree than dead or with 3/4 of their body missing from an IED?) was that for at least 2 years you’d get no pussy, unless you bought it in ‘Nam and you’ better hope she didn’t have a razor handy to cut your fucking throat (or dick) ‘cuz she was actually a VC officer and not some stupid street cunt.

    No, we grew are hair long, wore a peace sign, and went after the hippy chicks. They were young, pretty, and their pussies smelled like flowers. There is no power in a flower and only numbnuts ever believed there was; but if a chick saw you in a shirt with a flower print she might blow you.

    You want to understand the “acceptance” of feminism, I assume by young males in the Viet Nam era and the immediate post era? Short answer-they didn’t. Now, go read about feminsim, get the curricula fron a women’s studies program, learn some law(besides Roe and Reed, study Griswold v Conneticut (wish I knew how to underline), the ERA’s genesis , legislative history, and the various adoption fights in the states, plus a buttload of contraceptive, property law, and assorted cases I last studied 31 years ago and there have been dozens of highly important ones since) , get a sense for the zeitgeist in roughly the following general categories 1980-1985; ’85-92; 92-present by reading magazines like the aforesaid “Ms.’, essays but the noteworthy ones like G. Greer, responses from the right by James Kilpatrick, and note with particular emphasis the subtle encroachment into the consciousness that women and men are not only entitled to equal pay for equal work, equal treatment before the law without any gender bias, that morphing into the unexpressed, amorphous, intangilbe yet real, and I submit, powerful concept that men and women are the same.

    Finally, for a popular cultural extrapolation of the above, and especially as it relates to the present milieu including this very blog, read Tom Wolfe’s insightful “I Am Charlotte Simmons” where Wolfe exapnds on themes he introduced in “Hooking Up”. BTW for a very very good feel for the zeitgeist of the 60s-early 70s, read Wolfe’s “The Pump House Gang”, “Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers” (this reappears in “Bonfire” and “Man in Full”), “The Electric Kool Aid Acid Test”, and “The Kandy-Kolored Tangerine-Flake Streamlined Baby”. I can’t leave without mentioning his elegiac “The Right Stuff”; it is not germane to our discussion, but tt’s beautiful. The movie is ok, but I tear up even thinking about that book. And his “A Man in Full” changed my life.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    anon,

    I’m sure in life most people eventually find their own level, but I was speaking about what men & women generally find attractive.

    It’s extremely rare in romantic fiction (almost exclusively produced & consumed by women) that you get a male love interest who is a virgin, & male virginity being portrayed as an attractive trait.

    On the other hand, you don’t ever get a female equivalent of James Bond – neither women or men would find a woman who travels around the world jumping into bed with a new man every week for the rest of her life something to desire or aspire to.

    The only exception to this rule I can think of would be in maybe a Christian community, where because of religious laws that are strongly disapproving of sex, virginity is expected of both partners at marriage. I imagine in highly unnatural circumstances such as those, other qualities relating to status would be looked on as being attractive in a man instead.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    Viet Nam draft lottery was held summer of 1971. Left that our. The curtailment of fresh draftees to ‘Nam began shortly after that.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    munson,

    I stopped reading after the first paragraph. I couldn’t give less of a shit what some self-important blow hard from Idaho thinks. Have a nice day.

    Tip: as for the flirting with Sue, waaaay too much push, and not nearly enough pull. You’re beginning to act like a kink-obsessed puppy dog.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    Jesus! I’m crushed! Great repartee too.

  • Ted D

    Totally off topic – is it because of the holiday season that many of us at HUS are getting cranky? I’m guilty of posting some snark in the last few threads, and although I am all about spirited debate, I usually don’t go there. I know I’m stressing as Christmas approaches, and I’m sure that is at least part of my issue.

    Sorry for the divergence Susan. I’m just noticing a few folks that are typically not disgruntled getting in pissing contests, and I’m wondering what changed. On the plus side, Abbot has been back for a few threads and hasn’t started one! I consider him to be the resident HUS sniper. He hides in the shadows and pops off a comment here and there, picking off single posts or posters while the rest keep on charging. I’ve also noticed we seemed to lose DogSquat. Oh well, ’tis the season!

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Munson,

    I’m not as much a fan of your winded repartee as Sue. And why should I bother debating a kink-obsessed puppy dog who quotes Hitler and television shows and blows up in an apoplectic, poorly-articulated rage from reading a mere theory?

  • Doug1

    Byron—

    Men’s greater sexual jealousy most likely stems from the (now largely unconscious) fear of raising another man’s child, so a lower number (rightly or wrongly) is on an instinctive level taken to be an indication of trustworthy character & so only makes a woman more attractive.

    It’s based on two instinctual/subconscious things I think:

    1) As you say, raising another man’s child; and

    2) Having the gut feel that women are monogamous, or serially monogamous, and that after a few years into monogamous union her eyes might start to wander some, and if she gives vent to that, and has great sex with a compatible man she’s likely after awhile to fall in love with him, which, since she’s serially monogamous or monogamous by nature, will cause her to lose sexual attraction for her husband and hence feel her sense of bondedness to him melt away. Some small percentage of girls aren’t exactly like this, mostly because they’re promiscuous sluts, either by nature or because they’ve become that through bedding too many men. But then again they’re not much bonded to their husband in the first place, more a practical decision.

  • driftwood

    I don’t actually think hookup culture was caused by feminists. Feminism provides a partial rationalization for hookup culture with all its talk about empowerment and sexual discovery. However, feminism was really just a cheap rationalization of what people wanted to do. Girls wanted to play the game and guys wanted easy sex. These two facts are no different than how things have ever been. However, what’s changed is that modern society with it’s liberal ideals about freedom (tracing back to the 18th European Enlightenment) suddenly decided that society has no business moderating or setting standards of sexual and interpersonal conduct. After that decision was made by society, it was in truth the raw power of animal desires that ushered in the modern hookup world rather than rational decision making based upon the philosophies espoused by feminists.

    Regarding the two articles by Hugo, I find him to be a supremely delusional man who is wracked by guilt over his prior conduct. His argument is that if he hadn’t made so many mistakes along the way, he never would have been able to evolve to be as good as a person as he is now. I do agree with him that personal failures are critical to personal growth. However, what he fails to seem to understand is that personal failures are unavoidable regardless of what environment you exist in. Even if society had prevented him from making any of the mistakes he made in his sexual life which are possible in the modern hookup society, he would no doubt have made all sorts of other personal mistakes in his life that would have contributed to his personal growth also. It’s not true that the only way people can learn lessons is to start from square one. After all, do children have to commit burglaries before they can learn not to steal? Do they have to play with fire before they learn that fire is dangerous? Any society should endeavor to instruct their citizens on ethics to the greatest extent possible before then leaving them to stand on their own two feet to advance into the world.

    Also, even supposing that Hugo’s personal growth was only possible through the route he chose, who is to say this growth was worth the damage he wrought? He makes the claim up front that hurt leaves no lasting scars without providing any proof other than himself. When I read his writings, I see a man that definitely has scars. All his writings strike me as attempts to rationalize the pain he committed against others in the past (which includes possibly begetting a bastard son among who knows what else). I see all sorts of people walking around with the wounds of their past and the unfortunate truth is most of these people will never resolve their issues before they die. It is ultimately up to the people that Hugo hurt to decide if his personal growth was worth the price paid for it.

    Also, Hugo’s writing contains a lot of what is obviously sucking up to women in an attempt to alleviate his guilt.

    As for Neely, I don’t think it is just women who are uncomfortable with casual sex, I believe that most men are also. And most men are looking for more meaning in their sexual relations with women than just getting off. How do I know this? Because I’ve met many men in my time in the PUA community in real life and even among these guys, who are much more sexually libertine than the average Joe, almost all of them settle into relationships shortly after acquiring a basic level of game. Even those that keep going and bang lots of chicks do so because of personal insecurities and a desire to bolster their self esteem with endless conquests rather than for hedonistic reasons.

    Also, Neely blames the feminist establishment for misleading her. However, do they really deserve all the blame? If Neely were honest with herself, I think she would see that the person who really wanted to chase after all those alphas and uncaring cads was herself. I deal with women like this all the time. They are unable to start a real relationship because they so much prefer the hookup scene where they find what they truly desire: to be freed of the burden of agency by alcohol and to be swept off her feet onto a emotional ride led by a man who considers himself to be above her. She should really blame her own natural instincts and her lack of personal insight. This is just how women are though and men shouldn’t blame them for being this way. It’s just genetic. Eventually she realizes this though when she says that she “turn a critical eye on myself”.

    Let’s not blame feminism too much. Feminism is just a scam and what we’re really dealing with is natural desires.

  • Escoffier

    I’m always like this, holiday or no.

  • anonymous

    Susan: “Actually, that was Jess who asked for those details. She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value.”
    Jhane Sez : “I think that it is hard to see the long term effects because they work so hard at being fabulous.
    If you know them personally you get a different view. ”

    I grew up personally knowing so many promiscuous people of both genders with all of their drama that I could NEVER be persuaded that that lifestyle brought true happiness to anyone, although all of these people are highly social. I saw/see no glamor in it whatsoever, but I’m low on drama.
    And now that those people are in their 60s/70s/80s, I’m more convinced than ever by my observation.
    The only difference is that none of these people remained childless. Come to think of it, I agree with someone (can’t remember who) who mentioned that they don’t know any promiscuous childless people, neither do I. But those people of that generation all wanted children.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’m feeling extra-festive. It’s Christmas and I’m falling in love. What’s not to like?

  • Escoffier

    On male v. female jealousy:

    Well, if we apply the polygamy v. hypergamy paradigm, the following would make sense.

    Women are overall less jealous and more likely to forgive an affair because to the extent that they understand men, they realize that his cheating at root is not about her. He is simply wired to want variety. Variety for its own sake. More partners = better. Hence she is not necessarily comparing herself to the others nor does she necessarily assume that they must have something she doesn’t. (Of course this doesn’t apply if the mistress is hotter or if the husband effuses about his “soul mate” Mark Sanford style).

    Men on the other hand, to the extent that they understand women, know that when she cheats it absolutely DOES say something about him. She’s not satisfied. Most women are happy with one man (at a time) but they want the best man they can get (at a given time). So if she cheats, it means you ain’t gettin’ it done, she has found a better man. Direct blow to your ego.

  • anonymous

    Ted D : “I’ve also noticed we seemed to lose DogSquat.!”

    I was reminded of him when munson and JM were discussing war.

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

      I confess I am feeling a little forlorn without Dogsquat. He never stops by, he never calls. At first I told myself that he was just busy with finals and work. Then I thought that mentioning him in a comment or two would bring him back. He never indicated that he was done with me, I thought everything was fine! But it’s been weeks now and I haven’t heard a word. Should I FIDO or is there still hope? Do you think he cares?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Doc,

    I think what you wrote is asinine and offensive. And yet I forgive it all because I’m a fan of Don Quixote.

  • Escoffier

    Don Quixote proves that a book can be at once too long and very good.

    But as a general rule, books are too long so writers shouldn’t try to emulate.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    But as a general rule, books are too long so writers shouldn’t try to emulate.

    It’s not the size. It’s the motion of the ocean, baby.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Escoffier on hypergamy,

    Yep, agreed.

    Ted,

    it’s just you, dude. (joke :)

    Mahoney,

    munson does occasionally come out with something really interesting, & then it’s almost worth it, but I must confess for the most part I just skip his screeds now. It often feels comparable to having a nice conversation with a bunch of people when a drunk guy wearing a sandwich board walks in & proceeds to declaim through a megaphone for 15 minutes about things you must hear until everyone has left.

    Bah humbug.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Yea, I miss Dogsquat, too.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Byron,

    munson does occasionally come out with something really interesting, & then it’s almost worth it, but I must confess for the most part I just skip his screeds now. It often feels comparable to having a nice conversation with a bunch of people when a drunk guy wearing a sandwich board walks in & proceeds to declaim through a megaphone for 15 minutes about things you must hear until everyone has left.

    lol. I’ve never been accosted by a man with a sandwich board and a megaphone, but that was the perfect analogy.

  • anonymous

    Escoffier: “Hence she is not necessarily comparing herself to the others nor does she necessarily assume that they must have something she doesn’t. (Of course this doesn’t apply if the mistress is hotter or if the husband effuses about his “soul mate” Mark Sanford style).”

    IME, the mistress is often less hot than the wife, and the wife is devastated by that fact to the point that it makes her very very insecure.
    If the mistress is hotter, it angers the wife but she understands better why the husband strayed.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    I’m getting tips on flirting from JESUS! (cue Handel: “Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Halleeeeelluuujah!!!

    For the Lord God Omnipotent Reignith
    Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah”

    JESUS re flirting: You mean it’s not going to work? You mean Susan Walsh is NOT going to fly out to Boise, appear at the door of my office, redolent of that really really expensive & good perfume women from Boston who know what HBS means ( I didn’t; she had to tell me-damn talk about beta!-Oh BTW did she go there?) buy, wearing a raincoat to hide the (again, really really expensive & good) teddy she’s has on underneath, softly closing the door behind her as she eyes me and says “Ok, well… like the say, it’s the miles. not the years, and big boy I’d say there’s more than few I can add to you”, me caught totally unaware, not noticing that in her (dominant) right hand she’s brandishing the very cat’o’nine tails I’d envisioned on so many cold Idaho nights, pecking away at my lonely computer, and as she closes the door behind her there is the briefest pause and then my staff hears, muted but clearly, whack! whack!whack! interposed with soft languorous masculine moaning as night falls in River City.

    You’re saying no good? You, who changed water into wine, walked on water, made the blind see, said all sorts of solid shit that people still quote, stilled the waters, told the Devil to buzz off when he suggested you turn stones into bread and jump off a cliff (not the best sales job, but hey even Satan has an off day), stopped that woman from getting stoned, cured a bunch of lepers, spastics, even a Centurion’s servant who wasn’t even in attendance plus the Romans hated Your Ass but you were down anyway, made a bunch of bread and fish appear at a real big Woodstock style picnic to feed the crowd, threw a bunch of bad-ass devils into a drove of pigs, put a guys ear back on after one of Your crew jumped him, and last but not least rose from the dead thereby earning the title of the THE GREATEST DOWNEST BADDEST MOST-ADMIRED-DON’T’-YOU WANT-TO-BE-HIM-WISH-WE-HAD-MORE-LIKE-HIM JEW OF ALL TIME-you can’t make me and Susan a thing?

    Don’t be expecting any Birthday (I should have said Xmas, but don’t feel like dissin’ You) presents from me on Sunday.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Munson,

    Stopped reading after, “You, who changed water into wine….”

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    as a general rule, books are too long so writers shouldn’t try to emulate.

    I used to be convinced no book needed to be over 150 pages. I was reading a lot of Tove Jansson at the time.

    C.S. Lewis was once asked why a great writer like himself would lower himself to write children books, & he said it was the perfect way to convey anything you wanted to say: if you can write something that a child can understand, then everyone can understand it.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    munson,

    yep, that’s exactly what I meant. Thanks.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Byron @544

    It’s working!

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’m still not convinced that munson isn’t the other troll who showed up the same day as he with another athlete’s name.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    I miss Dogsquat too, hope he’s ok.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    which troll? I’m not good with athelete’s names.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    OMG-I am not universally loved and admired on this blogsite! Oh no! Say it isn’t so-say it!

  • jess

    Ted re Abbott,

    Your post made me giggle..,,

    I tend to think of him as an ACTUAL sniper.

    complete with rifle, telescopic sight, and tin of cheap Wallmart bullets.

    in the true american tradition…..

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    Jesus-I ain’t him. I only say this because I do not knwo who he is, and it would be unfair for me to share your enmity with him. And it is somehting that 32 years after his death so many remember Thurman. R I P

  • Abbot

    “it’s the women with high numbers who prefer men with high numbers ”

    Oh, how quaint. Isn’t that special. Do men with high numbers prefer women with high numbers?

    Well, that pretty much sums it all up.

  • anonymous

    tvmunson: ” OMG-I am not universally loved and admired on this blogsite! Oh no! Say it isn’t so-say it!”

    Haven’t you learned anything from these parts?
    Stay away from supplicating beta behavior, K?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Byron,

    I forget what the name was. But both he and munson showed up within an hour of each other on the same thread. One man, a total caricature of effeminacy, and munson, who was insulting him. My guess is that they were both munson, but the moment the “munson who remained” got some validation from Sue who found him funny, he dropped his alter ego to start flirting like a shameless lecher with her under the one name.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    I do not have an athlete’s name; my name is Tom, and there’s enough info about me here to verify it if you care to.

  • anonymous

    Abbot:
    ““it’s the women with high numbers who prefer men with high numbers ”
    >Oh, how quaint. Isn’t that special. Do men with high numbers prefer women with high numbers?<"

    That's been my observation.
    If a man has high numbers, she feels he's less likely to use her high numbers against her, and……. she's mostly right.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jesus-I ain’t him. I only say this because I do not knwo who he is, and it would be unfair for me to share your enmity with him.

    I know. That’s your story and you’re sticking to it.

    Sure, I’ve heard of Thurman Munson. I don’t recall the other name you used, though. I wouldn’t even have guessed he was an athlete except that you alluded to it. I suspected he was you to begin with, but that was what sealed the deal for me.

  • Abbot

    “If a man has high numbers, she feels he’s less likely to use her high numbers against her, and……. she’s mostly right.”

    Due to her own misguided past behavior, her taint limits herself to actively seek a man with high numbers. Does a man with high numbers actively seek or desire a woman with high numbers?

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Abbot,

    “it’s the women with high numbers who prefer men with high numbers ”

    Oh, how quaint. Isn’t that special. Do men with high numbers prefer women with high numbers?

    Well, that pretty much sums it all up.

    Ha! I hadn’t thought of that but yes, that’s the correct response.

  • Abbot

    “Ha! I hadn’t thought of that but yes, that’s the correct response.”

    and thus the take-a-way for all the female lurkers here. Men think and behave a certain way. It sucks, but thats way it is.

  • Ted D

    Jess – There is nothing wrong with Walmart ammo! :P

    Meh, maybe it is just me. I love the holidays for the time spent with family and friends, but I hate all the chaos and drama they cause as well. As a person that highly values routine, Christmas and New Years always throws my life into a tizzy.

    DogSquat! DogSquat! DogSquat! *looks around* figured I’d try…

  • Pingback: For Shame! « stagedreality

  • anonymous

    Abbot: “Does a man with high numbers actively seek or desire a woman with high numbers?”

    Some of them actually do when all they’re looking for is a good time (fling, STR).
    But, smart truly *good* girls should steer clear away from these men and look for men with lower numbers unless they want a lifetime of heartache.
    Let the promiscuous girls have at ‘em.

    None of that negates my observation- that high numbered women know that they’ll have less judgement from the high numbered men, so I’m missing your point. ??
    Is it that they’re hurting themselves?
    Well, yeah, but if they’re jumping in the sack with some random- they must not be afraid of getting hurt, no?

  • Ted D

    Anon – the point is, even guys with high numbers PREFER women with low partner counts. They may take a woman with a high count, but he would still prefer the count be lower.

    IME I have never met a man that said: “my girlfriend would make the perfect wife if she had just rode a couple dozen more cocks when she was in college.”

  • tom

    “Escoiffer..you are right. Mens jealously is a direct result of mens ego as you say they way they understand women…. most men here do not understand women. They get stuck on stats and research that can be tilted a number of ways depending on ones agenda. Most men here still think it is only men who have a promiscuous nature. Not so. “Research” latelt has suggested that women too are NATURALLY promiscuous but because of the power men have wielded over women for eons, abuse, monitary power, shaming etc. Women have kept it check. It is mens egos and insecurities that give them rise to wanting chaste partners. Insecurity abounds on this site, as does false accusations and immaturity. One thing most of these guys lack is a backbone and life experience. No wonder I stayed away. These guys THINK they speak for most men but they don’t. The entire premise here is to tell women is you fuck around you will have a very difficult time finding a good man. It is absurd. Millions of former slut are married or in stable relationships. If women are tainted from casual sex so are men and fuck you if you think I am tainted from what I did back in college. And fuck you for thinking wonderful women who probably STILL wouldn’t give most the guys here a second look are tainted…..by the way escoffier..I’m not directing this at you…”they know who they are

  • Ted D

    “The entire premise here is to tell women is you fuck around you will have a very difficult time finding a good man. It is absurd. Millions of former slut are married or in stable relationships. If women are tainted from casual sex so are men and fuck you if you think I am tainted from what I did back in college. And fuck you for thinking wonderful women who probably STILL wouldn’t give most the guys here a second look are tainted….”

    You can “fuck you” me all you want, but I do firmly believe that you and anyone that participates in lots of casual sex is indeed tainted. I have NEVER ONCE claimed that ONLY WOMEN are tainted by casual sex. And, if you cared to look, I have ALWAYS espoused that both women and MEN should not participate in casual sex in large amounts. And, it isn’t ONLY that they may have difficulty finding a good man, but statistics show they are WAY more likely to end up divorced. I’m sorry you don’t like stats, but numbers don’t lie.

    And in the interests of full disclosure, I have never said that I am not tainted in some ways, I simply am not tainted by casual sex. No one is perfect, and I am not looking for a perfect woman. I AM looking for a woman that shares my morals and beliefs, and casual sex just isn’t a part of my life. Do I represent most men? Hell no! I know I am not a typical man, and never EVER would aspire to be something so common and lowly. Yes, I do tend to preach from my perch when it comes to sex, but I firmly believe my sexual history permits me to be a bit judgmental. Oh I know, it isn’t PC to judge anyone. Tough shit! I judge everyone based on my own set of criteria, and there isn’t one damn thing you or anyone can do about it.

  • WarmWoman

    @Jesus-I was formerly Lurker1983 in Roosh’s brotherly advice. I did try to explain my story in that thread, got frustrated at some of the comments, and left the blog…then came back under this name. It seems like you get what I’m trying to convey, so I don’t want to rehash things again to random strangers.

  • anonymous

    Ted D: ” Anon – the point is, even guys with high numbers PREFER women with low partner counts.”

    Yes, I know that, I just don’t see what that has to do with the point I made. ??
    Most people on the carousel want to get off eventually and settle with someone. They don’t mind a low-numbered person, as long as they get no judgement or can conceal their past.
    If you’re a low-numbered person, you have to be very astute in making sure you don’t end up with one of them.
    If only they stuck to each other, life would be so much easier.

    It’s like slobs living with a clean person, it’s usually the clean person that’s more bothered by the slob than vice versa.

  • tom

    Escoffier..you are absolutely right. Mens jealously towards women is ego based as to how men understand women. Problem is most men do not understand women. Most men think men get a pass for promiscuity because it is natural. Lastest studies show women are at least as promiscuous as men are but have been shamed and held down financially and legally for eons. Sluts are proof. By the way most guys I’ve known, especially the athletes I’ve associated with only chased women to stroke their own ego. Had nothing to do with spreading their seed. They saw themselves as more of a man with more holes in their belt and more women to brag about. So understanding there is an equal chance for promiscuity. The guys here can kiss my ass. If women are tainted, so are men. I’m not tainted for what I did back in college and neither are the ladies. It is only perception of weak minded insecure little men and a few do gooder women here on this site. Out in real life MILLIONS OF PROMISCUOUS people have found love, marriage, and/or relatioships. This fact can not de denied by the few here on HUS.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Christ O’Gratin #565

    My name is Thomas V. Munson. My Idaho State Bar license is #2748. I do not hide behind nom de plumes; I did use tmunson at OBNUG.com-in fact, if you go to Urban Dictionary and query “munson’d”, along with the “Kingpin” definition you’ll see me, referring to my poor spelling and grammar which is due to my lousy typing and lack of an edit button. When they screw up over there they still say “munson’d”. I do not give a shit who knows who I am or what they think of what I write. I like tmunson, and that’s when the Thurman stuff came up, but I also liked T.V.Munson (my name is a lawsuit).The only names I ever used are these 2; SB Nation has me entered under both. Were I this other blogger I’d say so.

    So stay confirmed in your suspicions. But if this other guy (or gal-you sure were not talking about the limey I was hacking with, only to find out she WAS a chick, which meant everything I’d written was nonsensical (I set that up especially for you); that’s the one I’m thinking of-I said he wrote like a bithc and then someone said Munson dude she IS a chick) DOES show up again, let me know-I don’t want him (or her) taking credit for what I write. Seems like it was a baseball or basketball ref-was it Michael Jordan ref? Did they use #26, and some weird combo on the name?

    Plus Susan think’s I’m a Neo-Nazi. ‘Scuse me while I straighten that out too.

  • Escoffier

    The souls of men and women are both tainted by casual sex but, as a general matter:

    -Women get tainted more
    -It takes fewer partners to taint them
    -Men are more bothered by high count women than women are bothered by high count men
    -Some women are turned on by high count men but close to zero men are turned on by high count women, except for a kinky ONS or short fling
    -For a wife, the vast majority of men are way turned off by high count women

    /bearer of bad news

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful Sadist

    Please don’t call me a neo-Nazi. It’s ugly. How ’bout crypto-Fascist? In fact, I’ll give you a song to remember it:
    (to the tune of “I’ve Been Working on the Railroad”)
    (a-vun-and-a-two-and-a)

    You are just a crypto-facsict
    all the livelong day
    you are just a crypto-fascist
    you couldn’t scare anybody away
    listenin’ to your right-wing bullshit
    all we do is end up gettin’ bored
    take your stupid propaganda
    and go gobble a “pork”-sword!

    Ok it ain’t Wagner but this ain’t the Cistine Chapel and we ain’t writin’ the Dead Sea Scrolls (I know I’m mixing up countries, eras, arts,everything-hey, I went to Boise State, not Harvard, which I’m sure means you picture me typing this whilst I eat a banana with my feet.) (Munson scratches at flea on his forehead, catches same, eats it.)

  • jess

    Ted- ‘the numbers don’t lie’

    not strictly true-
    do you remember that Sesame Street expose on the ‘number 3′.
    Turns out that number is an outright liar and cheat.

    Now the numbers 7 and 8- they are stand up guys….

    and 4 and 9? well they are just squares if you ask me….

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Christ O’Gratin

    You didn’t like my Hitler quote, but Lord Byron found it haunting, and went to cite some interesting interplay between Hitler and Gandhi. Hitler is quoted for a number of reasons; I respectfully submit that discrediting a writer on that basis ALONE is unwarranted (I know you several other basis with respect to ME; ain’t disputin’ it either).

  • jess

    Tom,
    well put- although a tad more forceful than usual perhaps ( is there something in the air?)
    Like the scientific references-gosh that makes some guys so angry when they hear that stuff….
    And do you think some of the posters still don’t get the difference between ‘preference’ & ‘requirement’?

  • Anacaona

    So since I moved to a new house and I don’t have internet for the moment (I’m getting the shakes of lack of PC radiation!) I had lost a lot of comments, including about Doris Lessing arrggh! I’m telling you guys The Golden Notebook is like hook up culture and manosphere from the past, read it, so from the top of my head.
    I miss Dogsquat too but he surely is busy and having fun so we will probably hear from him soon.
    Interracial lovers: seems to be that we traitors to our race want to know more to both improve our relationships and to teach our future interracial kids, so this is collateral benefits for you to rejoice Sue. :)

    Virgin men: I did wanted a virgin man for myself but as I grew older, got distance from the church and started to realize that I might need to outsource I let that one go from the list because according to Hollywood everybody loses it during prom night (I know I was naive but if you ask around the world half the image of America comes from your entertainment for good or bad). I did find nonnegotiable the whole ONS, Casual Sex, FWB… sex with no commitment with other women before me was a deal breaker, so yeah lots of sexual partners was something I wouldn’t tolerate in a man, regardless of how good it looks on paper I’m sure at the first sign of trouble I would attribute it to it and them from there downhill.
    One of the things I do love to bits about Edward Cullen is the fact that he is a virgin and he totally wants to get married like that (yay Team Virginity!) funny enough at least 20% of fanfiction have him as a badboy manwhore who Bella “tame”, like totally OOC and awful so I guess some women do like this stupid unrealistic fantasy, meet future catladies I guess. :\

    Jess: Probably unneeded at this point but for what is worth… Jess and logic are like Jess and her virginity she lost it when she was very young, hated it while it lasted and doesn’t miss it now that is gone and wish women lost their too ASAP and never miss it as well. You had been warned.

  • OffTheCuff

    It’s fun to watch the new folks tangle with Tom. It’s like watching reruns of Charlie Brown trying to kick the football.

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

      It’s fun to watch the new folks tangle with Tom. It’s like watching reruns of Charlie Brown trying to kick the football.

      Haha! Same with Jess. I like to think of myself as Lucy. The Doctor is In. 5 cents.

  • Tom

    First off Ted it wasnt aimed at you….secondly, just how am I tainted. I was married 24 years, I am successful in business, I had a successful daughter who played major college softball and was a 4.0 in high school. Im normally known as a nice guy. I never cheated nor will I cheat with my fiance. Im fun at parties, but Im also pretty humble. I treat my woman like gold, so tell me just HOW am I tainted?

  • jess

    Anacoana,
    Is 18 young to lose your virginity?

    and if you like Edward Cullen I’m afraid you have no basis to your claims of superior logical thought.

  • anonymous

    Tom: “I was married 24 years….. so tell me just HOW am I tainted?”

    What are you defining as “promiscuous?”

    It’s irrelevant to me what your gender is… but seriously “kiss my ass?”

  • Tom

    @ Byron
    do men with high numbers want women with high numbers?

    Well, that pretty much sums it all up.

    Ha! I hadn’t thought of that but yes, that’s the correct response.
    ____________

    Yup hypocrites are born every day.

  • SayWhaat

    “and if you like Edward Cullen I’m afraid you have no basis to your claims of superior logical thought.”

    *z-snap*

    oo uh-uh, no she di’nt!

  • Tom

    anon
    What are you defining as “promiscuous?”

    It’s irrelevant to me what your gender is… but seriously “kiss my ass?”

    For me it was @ 20 or so. My name is Tom what the friggin gender do you think I am… Yeah anyone who thinks all formerly promiscuous people are tainted can kiss my ass. it is only their insecurities talking anyway. Ive explaned a few minutes ago, I have led a very respectful life once I left college. What we did as kids does not necessary determind how we are once we go out into the real world. I could tell someone i have two lovers, there is no way to tell. Being a college athlete with ample women around was a long time ago. I became engaged while the groupies were everywhere. I had options.

  • Tom

    Yeah Jess I know It was a bit over the top, but judgemental fools just get to me after a while. One more thing…. Taint THIS……lol

  • anonymous

    Tom: “For me it was @ 20 or so. … . it is only their insecurities talking anyway. Ive explaned a few minutes ago, I have led a very respectful life once I left college. ”

    Most of the comments on here are about men not wanting to be with promiscuous women, so why exactly would this even bother you as a man?
    So what if it’s “their insecurities talking”, that’s how they feel.
    ——————-
    Tom: “My name is Tom what the friggin gender do you think I am
    Yeah anyone who thinks all formerly promiscuous people are tainted can kiss my ass”

    where I come from a guy doesn’t tell other guys to kiss his ass. I really don’t care what gender you are anyway, it just struck me as odd and uncalled for, though this is not MY blog so I should’ve ignored it.

  • FeralEmployee

    A bit bored, I used a search engine to look up opinions on people and sexual past. Funny enough, I didn’t expect to come across the following article on “Don’t Date Him Girl”:

    http://www.dontdatehimgirl.com/news_view/17/

    The same website that has no problem blacklisting men for cheating and abuse (which I agree with to some extent, though there is always the issue of privacy and the law), is saying that when it comes to women, their sexual past does not matter.

    Now, I have absolutely no problem with women that have… an elaborate sexual past. I will work, talk, interact with them. But I won’t date them, let alone marry. I actually agree with their third suggestion in their article:

    “If he insists, then tell him this: It seems that you are more interested in discussing my past that our future. I’m a grown woman and I have dated a number of people. Some relationships worked out, and others did not. The question that you should really be asking is whether I have any sexual history that you need to know about (current STD’s). The answer to that question is no. Now, if you insist of really talking about this, you go first and lay out every detail of every stripper, one night stand, sorority slut and bar skank you’ve been with. I’ll be happy to go after that.”

    Sure, no problem, I have nothing to hide.

  • jess

    anonymous re ‘its how they feel’

    sorry to but into your conversation with Tom,

    but a big part of this blog is about ethics, choices and consequences.

    the ‘its just how I feel’ isn’t the most resilient response I wouldn’t have thought.

    I mean “i can’t stand black people… its the way I feel so just deal with it” clearly would not be acceptable as a rationale for anything.

    I think Tom is asking ‘hostile’ posters to examine where their hostility stems from and if its justifiable or not. It may be that they are truly unable to change their feelings perhaps but they can certainly refrain from insult or false claim can’t they?

    As to why Tom, I, or anyone else is offended by ‘slut shaming etc’ I would have thought thats obvious. You don’t need to be a particular gender to show empathy for that same gender. Tom and I both have daughters so you can see why we wouldn’t them growing up in a culture of hostility and sexism.

    Thats not to say I myself support anti male sentiment at all- to me thats every bit as unjust as anti female sexism. For example I think the USA & UK legal systems needs a serious overhaul in favour of the male.

  • http://hookingupsmart.com GudEnuf
  • @peace

    @Byron

    “For most women, on the other hand, at least SOME experience in a man (pre-selection) is an attractive quality – sex is much harder for men to ‘get’ so it confers an increase in status: the man is most likely not a complete loser as other women have vouched for him in the past.

    Female virginity is prized the world over.
    Male virginity is comical & essentially worthless.
    Start your calculations from there.”

    I agree that men are hardwired to want any prospective mate to be a virgin (ideally) but I do not agree that women are different in that respect. Rather, I feel that societal conditioning in the form of the powerless roles forced upon women throughout the ages have shut the mouth of complaint and/or objection in women. Let’s face it – in a historically male dominated world – women absolutely *needed* men to survive while the opposite has never been true. In almost any society the earth has ever seen, men ruled and women were treated as little better than slaves – often replaced as soon as they wore out their usefulness/attractiveness. And when replaced, what man would take a “used woman”? She was worthless in the eyes of other men and there was nothing she could do about it for she usually had no legal recourse. All she could do was struggle to survive as best she could, or not and die.

    What I find sickening now is the gross injustice and hypocrisy on the lips of so many men as they try to live the way men have always lived in a society that actually affords women real power and real rights. We complain that women can sleep with any man they want but us “poor men” can only sleep with those women that let us. Then we complain that more and more women are losing their virginity before we can get to them, it’s really difficult to find “fresh meat” these days. Then we complain that women actually have *standards* that they impose upon *us* – the nerve! – and if we don’t meet them, *they* walk away from *us*! Who ever heard of such a thing! Finally we complain that there’s not much we can do about it beside complain because women now have just about as many rights as we do. Women don’t *need* us to survive anymore. Yes, the playing field has been evened out and many of us don’t like it at all. We’d love to go back to the time when we could do whatever the hell we wanted with any woman we chose and she would smile at all the right moments, bow her head, grit her teeth and hold on to us for dear life because we really were *all* she had.

  • jess

    Feral Employee (ace nickname btw)-
    Thanks for the link- the article was written by a guy and I rather like it.
    I hope you don’t mind but i have pasted it below:

    He wanted to know the number of men she had slept with. She’s not a child and has clearly seen a bed or two. She’s not an easy woman, but if she liked a guy, she slept with him. Well, if you do that over 20 years, you can start to imagine the numbers. I happen to think she’s typical and well within the norm. Let’s say that from the ages of 20 to 40, she slept with an average of 3 men per year. I don’t think this is a high number. However, when you multiply 20 years times 3 men, you get 60 men! That number seems a little more staggering.

    This is the typical guy’s thinking.

    Yet, I can assure you that we don’t want a virgin either. Does this leave you terribly confused? Yeah, me too and I’m a guy! We want experience, but just enough experience�not too much�not too little. It sounds like something out of a fairy tale.

    Men get these hopes and expectations from our parents. Boys are told to get “good girls,” whatever that is. Clearly, it’s not a girl that has slept around. I can remember in high school that if a girl was given the dreaded “slut” label, she would fight like hell to get rid of it. She would track down every person who ever uttered the word. When I heard these rumors, I always asked “What makes her a slut?” The usual answer to that question was that the girl slept with a guy.

    Men, on the other hand, are told to go out and be “studs”. We are trained to bed as many women as we can and to tell lies to get them into bed. Fathers would brag about how many girls their sons had “bagged”. One of the known benefits of being a good athlete was that you would get the girl. This is not fair; it’s not right. But, it is a situation that we must accept and work to change.

    The joke is that both sexes expect the other to lie about the number of people they have been with. The joke goes, “If a guy gives you a number, cut it in half�if a woman gives you a number, then multiply it by 2.”

    So what do you do about this dreaded topic?

    1. Don’t bring it up! It’s a strange topic anyway and most guys will not ask you directly. We may wonder, but we don’t really want to know.

    2. If, he brings it up, then ask him to disclose first. That will put him on his heels and it should make him question the importance of the inquiry.

    3. If he insists, then tell him this: It seems that you are more interested in discussing my past that our future. I’m a grown woman and I have dated a number of people. Some relationships worked out, and others did not. The question that you should really be asking is whether I have any sexual history that you need to know about (current STD’s). The answer to that question is no. Now, if you insist of really talking about this, you go first and lay out every detail of every stripper, one night stand, sorority slut and bar skank you’ve been with. I’ll be happy to go after that.

  • Anacaona

    @SayWhaat
    Pfft hardly I had been a fan since 2009, had seen worse, better, funnier versions of “Twilight is an IQ test for women” needs more cowbell at the very least :p

  • DC

    Imagine a world where all men could get all the sex they want. Would 5,000 or 10,000 lifetime partners be happening? If I had taken all the sexual opportunities I’ve had I know I could be at 1,000 or more. So if I’ve only had 10 or 20 or even 30 wouldn’t that saw a remarkable self-restraint? Not advocating thousands of partners, just saying it would have been possible, and wondering if the men who complain about ‘high count women’ at 10 or whatever, are not just bitter and resentful. If you’re not interested, that’s your perrogative, and much luck to you. My number is 12 (and yes that includes all) — I have never cheated, have been in long-term relationship 10 years and with a 8.

  • anonymous

    jess: “I mean “i can’t stand black people… its the way I feel so just deal with it””

    When someone doesn’t want to date black people I don’t see black people, all in their face, insisting that they date them.
    Instead they act like “fine, your loss!” (as they should.)
    So, that’s a bad example you’re giving.

    People have the right to their preferences in choosing their partners with whatever criteria they wish and there’s nothing anyone can/should do/say to change that.
    Or do you want people to dictate the kind of person that you should date?

  • @peace

    “As long as I know he’s loyal and STD-free, I would be willing to forgive someone’s past as long as they have changed their ways. I understand the underlying issues that contribute to promiscuity, so I would be more concerned about whether those issues are fixed.”

    Thank you for your answer! I think this kind of honest feedback can help a lot of men to realize that men and women have very similar concerns when it comes to numbers. Stable women (the majority) recognize promiscuity as a negative – not attractive, not desired – in a man because it is a clear indicator of deep rooted problems that will likely cause problems for a LTR. Notice, she used the words “forgive”, “changed” and “fixed”, all indicative of problem resolution and *not* acceptance/indifference and certainly not admiration.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Men get these hopes and expectations from our parents. Boys are told to get “good girls,” …Men, on the other hand, are told to go out and be “studs”. We are trained to bed as many women as we can and to tell lies to get them into bed.

    *sigh*

    Oh the pussy-whipped manginas of christmas past.

  • jess

    anonymous:

    well actually the ‘fine, its your loss’ line is great advice and I would heartily agree with you there.

    but there is, on this blog and still in some pockets of society an active attempt at some pretty unpleasant ‘slut shaming’ hence the indignation of myself and others.

    So you are are right black people don’t go around insisting anyone date them.

    But how do you think they would react (and indeed any other non racist person) if you suddenly made loud proclamations that you nor anyone else should date black people?

    Can you see that its a rather neat comparison which illustrates the points very well….

    and no, i would never ever seek a situation where people should not be able to exercise choice regarding sexual partners- that still goes on in some countries and is quite repellent to me.

  • Lokland

    @ HUS

    Just throwing my two cents in for the slut debate.
    Casual sex is bad. For both men and women. Worse for women. Facts of life.

    When I went wife hunting heres how I broke it down,
    slut tell of any kind. Rejection.
    Over 7, rejection.
    5-7, very good explanation required.
    under 5, details please. More than 3 casual, rejection.
    Under 3, no questions asked.
    0 Will you marry me? (Actually happened though there was a bit of a delay.)

    LTRs, I didn’t care. I only wanted to know casual.
    I dated a girl with a +10 partner count but only one was casual. Didn’t offend me slightly.
    Slut isn’t bad because of the sex itself but the lack of loyalty. Percieved or real.

  • @peace

    @Jhane Sez

    “You forgot the best part…

    She was giving him grief because she had intercourse with 3 guys (including him I believe) but had performed oral sex on 36. ~JS”

    Actually, her fellatio-stained past came out a little while after he revealed his, so her reaction was genuine. And I only mentioned her reaction to his past because my question was about how women feel when they find out a guy has high numbers.

  • anonymous

    jess: “But how do you think they would react (and indeed any other non racist person) if you suddenly made loud proclamations that you nor anyone else should date black people?”

    The vast majority of relationships aren’t interracial regardless of whether people voice this as their preference or not. Generally, people don’t voice it but black people are well aware of it and they still act like “fine, your loss.”
    You’re also assuming a bit too much…… as if all black people wanted to date outside of their race.
    Where are all of the black folks shrieking about this?

  • FeralEmployee

    @jess

    Sure, I don’t mind. I just don’t agree with the article myself, here’s my take on it:

    The article makes a point about accumulation of sexual partners (STR or LTR) throughout life. But it basically works against women (and men, for that matter). I say this because:

    1. [Lokland, 601] Casual partners will matter at younger ages, no change there.

    2. At older age, the rate of accumulation will matter an awful lot (for me, at least). A women that has pressed the number will be slightly more successful, though higher numbers will be tolerated. But the higher it goes, the more a new thought pattern will emerge in someone’s perception of said person. Not only will casual sex partners have an effect, but women/men will also get the idea, that said person might have many issues, and possibly incapable of lasting in a LTR.

    It’s as if, we tolerate a logarithmic evolution of sexual partners. At young starting age, a bunch of (moderately) quickly successive relationships, where casual sex plays a role. And as age progresses, women/men are thought to participate into longer lasting relationships. If it remains linear, there is a problem.

  • anonymous

    Correction at #603
    “You’re also *assuming* a bit too much…”
    *presuming*

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    @peace,

    I think perhaps the most interesting part of that tale is how many women can feel differently about sexual activity which doesn’t include the risk of pregnancy. It seems from the accounts that have been listed before here that many women don’t see oral/anal as being ‘sex’ at all & so have much less concern about them. This is very strange to boys, of course, but it’s really fascinating thinking whether that is actually something innate & hardwired, a loophole in the general female resistance to sex without long term commitment perhaps.

  • jess

    Feral,
    Good point, well made and I confess I find 60 ‘up there’ myself.

    I would still contend there are greys on the issue and each person should be judged on their own merits though.

    and i did like the phrasing used in the essay.

  • purplesneakers

    Just throwing my two cents in for the slut debate.
    Casual sex is bad. For both men and women. Worse for women. Facts of life.

    When I went wife hunting heres how I broke it down,
    slut tell of any kind. Rejection.
    Over 7, rejection.
    5-7, very good explanation required.
    under 5, details please. More than 3 casual, rejection.
    Under 3, no questions asked.
    0 Will you marry me? (Actually happened though there was a bit of a delay.)

    LTRs, I didn’t care. I only wanted to know casual.
    I dated a girl with a +10 partner count but only one was casual. Didn’t offend me slightly.
    Slut isn’t bad because of the sex itself but the lack of loyalty. Percieved or real.

    I agree that promiscuity is a red flag.. but in either gender, for marriage. Including ones in which the husband sleeps around with the wife’s permission.

  • jess

    anonymous- “black people shrieking about this’

    thats my point- its not socially acceptable to suggest its wrong to date black people. (well apart from some red neck states and my grandmothers pantry)

    thus people dont do it so no ‘shrieking’ required. But if they did they would (I hope) face fierce opposition from black people and everyone else.

    One can talk about risk rates and personal preferences and thats fine- but extreme slut shaming is something I think is unacceptable.

    there are members of my family who when i was a child described a woman in our street as a ‘filthy whore’ because she had a child out of wedlock. I have 100s of examples like this- its an attitude which i think is unethical and unpleasant.

  • jess

    byron,
    interesting point about women elevating P&V due to possible pregnancy.
    could well be true.

    it still astounds me on a personal level though.
    in the 80s oral sex was seen as MORE intimate than P&V.

    this is logical because oral means you are literally ‘face to genital’- your nether regions are about to be inspected, tasted even!

    (on a tangent- some family members who have several kids have told me about having never seen their husband or wife naked!)

    the idea now that oral doesnt even count now is just crazy to me.

    as for anal- as a catholic girl you will appreciate that is not on the menu- simply inconceivable. (no pun intended)

  • anonymous

    jess: “But if they did they would (I hope) face fierce opposition from black people and everyone else.”

    I really doubt that most black people would shriek about this ’cause they don’t already. I think they might actually prefer the honest truth than all of the bs that a lot of people throw around pretending that they would date black people.
    Like I said, most black people aren’t shedding a single tear- knowing that a lot of folks wouldn’t date them, the feeling is mutual. So, it was really a bad example. Black people don’t want to force anyone to date them, that’s the truth.

  • jess

    lokland,
    by stark contrast if i met a guy who had 9 failed LTRs I would be thinking something may be seriously wrong.

    a normal person would have to be very unlucky indeed to have 9 serious, official relationships go wrong on them.

    I would be thinking that he can’t get on with others, or had anger issues or that there were sexual issues.

    I mean 9 divorces? I don’t wanna an LTR with a male Liz Taylor!

    But if a guy had 3 LTRs and 6 NSA’s- that would not raise any particular red flag. Sometimes people grow apart. sometimes people have a fling because they find sexual activity enjoyable and rewarding.

    and why would a ONS, whilst single, be an act of disloyalty?

  • Abbot

    “These guys THINK they speak for most men but they don’t.”

    Then they DON’T negatively impact women who want to fuck with abandon and have future husbands who would embrace their pasts. Right!?
    .
    .

    “Problem is most men do not understand women.”

    Then they DO negatively impact women who want to fuck with abandon and have future husbands who would embrace their pasts. Right!?
    .
    .

    “Tom and I both have daughters so you can see why we wouldn’t them growing up in a culture of hostility and sexism.”

    Because if a man does not want to marry one of them or any woman due to discomfort with her past then he is hostile and sexist. Thought that was where all this was going.

  • jess

    anonymous,
    thats not what I’m getting at- I’m saying they would be offended (quite rightly) if people suddenly started saying it was wrong to date black people.

    ps in london interracial couples are really, really common- I thought that was true in the USA? at least in some parts?

  • Abbot

    If a man states he does not want to commit to a promiscuous woman then he is not offending anyone. Or is he?

  • anonymous

    jess: “ps in london interracial couples are really, really common- I thought that was true in the USA? at least in some parts?”

    Well, of course there are places where you’ll see interracial couples, but they’re NOT the *majority* of relationships.
    What I’m saying is that black people aren’t protesting if people don’t want to date them. Why would they care?
    If you want to date them- fine, but if you don’t, they’re fine with that too.
    Honestly, I’ve never heard black people protesting about this.
    So, that’s why this is a bad example.

    If there are men who will date a promiscuous woman, then why does she care that some men won’t?
    Date the men who will
    /story.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    The problem with your analogy is that it compares very different concepts. Comparing black people to promiscuous people in defense of your argument isn’t rational. One group is based on race and the other group is based on their actions.

    Not wanting to marry promiscuous people would be the same as not wanting to marry a drug user or compulsive shopper. Both of those groups are comprised of people who are defined by their actions.

    Drug users- engage in drug use
    Compulsive shoppers- engage in compulsive shopping
    Promiscuous people-engage in casual sex

    Your comparison of those groups to black people isn’t logical. I don’t see anyone clamoring to marry a drug user, just as most men aren’t clamoring to marry a promiscuous woman. That’s just how it is. If you engage in an action, people will judge you for it, either positively or negatively. If I volunteer regularly for a homeless shelter, most people would view that action positively. If I go out and spread my legs for every Tom, Dick, and Harry, most people will judge that action negatively. It’s just the way it is.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    What the hell with all the racial arguments?

    “I’m saying they would be offended (quite rightly) if people suddenly started saying it was wrong to date black people.”

    No-one at HUS – not even Abbot at his most rabid, so far as I have noticed – has said it is wrong to date women with promiscuous pasts.

    They have simply noted that many men will not, given the choice, choose to commit to a LTR with a woman with a highly promiscuous past.

    If you insist on keeping with the rather strained racial analogy, it is the equivalent of saying some black people will not want to marry white people. Both these statements are facts.

    Logic, meet Jess.

  • Abbot

    If there are men who will date a promiscuous woman, then why does she care that some men won’t?

    You will not get an answer. Only more rants, whines, bellyaches, denigration, shaming and words slung such as sheeple, insecure, hypocritical, offensive and any other meant to illicit provocation. The goal is to get sexual past buried into irrelevancy because some women are having a blast repeatedly getting easy sex from always-willing out-of-their-league desirable men with zero effort and seemingly without consequences. HUS is a party pooper that absolutely does speak for most men.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    I am wondering if all these italics are because I left a html tag open..

  • Abbot

    “If you engage in an action, people will judge you for it, either positively or negatively”

    Well, that is understood and universally accepted. Yet, for the first time in human history, there have emerged some very odd folks who are in a tirade to remove female sexual activity from the realm of *action* in order to render it off limits to judgement if that judgement is negative.

  • FeralEmployee

    Source page says yes to your question Byron.

  • jess

    sassy/byron/anonymous,
    no thats not quite right.
    anonymous said no discussions are to be had because “people feel what they feel”

    i said thats not on because, for example, what if someone said “they dont like black people because thats the way they feel” .

    By the way i didnt mean that just in relation to relationships I meant it in the simple racist dislike of another race- but it still applies in the way the conversation panned out.

    the example works because if people have animosity towards a group of people then they should be able to articulate why using ethical rationale.

    I can justify why I do not approve of drug use (though i would never resort to insults)
    I can justify why I approve of occasional casual sex
    I can justify why I don’t approve of excessive casual sex
    I cannot justify a dislike for any particular racial group

  • Abbot

    If a man happily dates many women who are promiscuous and discreetly decides not to marry any of them because he feels more personally comfortable with another type of woman, does he “have animosity towards a group of people?” And if the answer is yes, is that group negatively affected by his personal preferences?

  • jess

    Byron- i could trawl through this blog to find examples where people have vehemently suggested one should not date women with experience and furthermore that they are bad people.

    Susan’s been called a cock carousel rider I think in the not too distant past.
    I recall phrases like ‘cum dumpster’, ‘disgusting animal’, ‘tainted’, ‘fellatio stained’ used to describe women with differing levels of promiscuity.

    As I say I have no problem with people offering reasonable, evidence based advice couched in respectful terms- even its not something I personally subscribe to. But thats not what has gone on here.

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

      Susan’s been called a cock carousel rider I think in the not too distant past.

      Oh that’s happening in the manosphere right this minute!

      Jess, you are arguing something that isn’t debatable. We are not discussing whether men should wife up promiscuous women. We don’t get to decide that. You don’t get to wipe men’s brains clean of the dreaded sexual double standard. Every man will make his choice. You cannot control it.

      No man is repulsed by a woman of low sexual partner count, other than for a ONS.

      Many men, as evidenced here, are repulsed by a woman of high partner count, unless it’s for a ONS.

      This is a fact.

      You’re trying to make the sun come up in the west here. Just give it a rest.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jess

    You are missing the point. Actions (let me repeat that for you), ACTIONS have always been judged. It doesn’t matter what it is. People instinctively feel positively or negatively about all actions. Trying to throw black people into this does not work. Race is not an action. I’ll repeat that for you once again. Race is not an action.

    Promiscuous people are like drug users or compulsive shoppers. Those groups are based on their actions. Since these groups are based on their actions, they are judged. Most men simply don’t want to marry women who have participated in promiscuous actions.

  • Lokland

    @ jess

    “by stark contrast if i met a guy who had 9 failed LTRs I would be thinking something may be seriously wrong.
    a normal person would have to be very unlucky indeed to have 9 serious, official relationships go wrong on them.
    I would be thinking that he can’t get on with others, or had anger issues or that there were sexual issues.
    I mean 9 divorces? I don’t wanna an LTR with a male Liz Taylor!”

    You must be old. I’m in the pre-marrying age group. I know four couples who are married.
    As for LTR, anything with exclusive commitement over 6 months and not just sex qualifies as an LTR for me. Others would call that dating around.

    “But if a guy had 3 LTRs and 6 NSA’s- that would not raise any particular red flag. Sometimes people grow apart. sometimes people have a fling because they find sexual activity enjoyable and rewarding.”

    Okay sex can be rewarding and enjoyable. You can have it in a relationship or out of one. If someone prefers (by majority) having sex out of relationships it means that the sex in a relationship is less fulfilling.
    When something is less fulfilling people tend to trade up.
    (So you note, I’m an non-theist, liberal don’t try and pan me off as some kind of crazy religous person who believes sex should only occur in marriage.)

    You could argue that sex is easier to get out of a relationship for women than men. I flat out don’t care if you can string along 17 guys with a fishing wire strung around the tip of their dick.
    A) I prefer to be around people with similar abilities to myself. I don’t play basketball with Kobe I do it with my buds who suck at it just as much as I do. I prefer to date women who haven’t slept around much because frankly I haven’t slept around much.
    (For every women who just seethed at me there if you want the number ask.)

    “and why would a ONS, whilst single, be an act of disloyalty?”

    See above point. Now extrapolate to eventual results.
    Not worried about what a woman does beforehand its what her past behaviour indicates she will do in the future.
    People don’t change they just get better at lying about it.

    If there was someway it could be guaranteed that a woman would not cuckold her husband then this would be a non-issue. (A biological sense not in a judicial way.)
    But thats not the case when I become exlusive I invest HUGE risk with no guaranteed payback. (Women invest huge as well but they get atleast some guaranteed payback in the form of children that are def’s theirs.) I want to take the most well educated, risk free option possible.

    So lets look at it.

    Slut or virgin. Both could be equally loyal or equally unloyal. But if I had to play pin the divorce papers on the cheater it would be the hoe. The other options possible but it actually appears like a comical choice to me.
    (Legitimately chuckle every time I look at it.)

    My instincts tell me hoes are bad. They also tell me when to eat, poop, breath, drink, sleep etc. They keep me alive. I think I’ll go with them over the words of any individual who thinks their special and come with magical butterflies and unicorns.

    So no, nothing disloyal about a ONS. It does indicate an increased chance of future disloyalty. Whether or not this is true is irrelevant. My instincts trump every hoe, fortune teller, political figure, fairy god mother, Amanda Marcotte (ugly, bleh), cosmo magazine and other peice of idiotic crap written by the states. If you think my instincts are wrong you must obviously be correct. (Its okay I’m just telling her that guys, calm down I really believe you.)

    Last, you hold the US up as some kind of pillar of humanity. Please stop.
    Your economiy is stagnant, fat chicks, your money is cheaper than buying firewood, fat chicks, you have CEOs saying “paper or plastic”, school shootings, an incurable obesity epidemic, did I mention fat chicks?
    Wars, rampant poverty, a second-rate education system (not so bad on the liberl arts though :P) with very few institutions catering to the majority, ohh and sky high tution rates sure help. Then theres the whole education bubble thing, bursting as we speak. Ohh ya and the crowning achievments, no public healthcare (the only developed country without one) and the lowest lifespan in the devloped world.
    Seriously just being Canadian I’m gonna live 10 years longer than you. I can pick up a stone and breaj your window probably.
    Not saying we’re much better up here but stop holding up North American culture as some kind of ideal. Our golden time is ending but atleast we can fuck like rabbits.

  • Doug1

    Tom—

    Lastest studies show women are at least as promiscuous as men are but have been shamed and held down financially and legally for eons. Sluts are proof.

    I know of no such studies. Link them.

    If they do exist I’d bet the reason why is that most beta’s can’t be promiscuous with girls the find attractive enough to want to be with, in this SMP. Alphas can and generally do but there’s a lot more betas and omegas than alpha, yet most of same sex ranked girls 6’s and 7’s CAN have promiscuous sex easy peasy with guys 2 or even 3 SMV’s above them.

  • jess

    DC & Peace- great posts by the way- just noticed them on the previous page.

  • Abbot

    “You don’t get to wipe men’s brains clean of the dreaded sexual double standard. Every man will make his choice. You cannot control it.”

    That would be like trying to control how men vote. Men are voting and women with low partner counts are the clear winners.

  • Doug1

    dragnet–

    “She doesn’t believe that promiscuity has a negative effect on a woman’s sexual market value.”

    This is actually true—to the extent the woman can keep it a secret, which isn’t particularly difficult these days.

    I think I can almost always tell. Plus I get them to tell me by telling them at early stages that I like sexually adventurous girls.

  • jess

    Susan- “give it a rest”

    I would have thought you liked the traffic- isn’t that why you create provocative threads from time to time?

    and i will ‘give it rest’ when the ‘absurd comments’ come to a rest.

    tis a fair deal methinks

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

      @Jess

      Susan- “give it a rest”

      I would have thought you liked the traffic- isn’t that why you create provocative threads from time to time?

      Do you really believe your harping on this point is driving traffic to the blog?

      I can honestly say I have never written a single post (out of 550) with the intent of driving traffic. Because the advertising pays very little, there isn’t much financial incentive. Don’t get me wrong – it pays for the hosting of the blog, it’s nice to offset some expenses. But it’s not enough to get me thinking about click-throughs or anything.

      The traffic at HUS has risen slowly but steadily for three years. It’s not been a pattern of spikes based on individual posts.

  • jess

    doug1 & Tom
    its took me a few seconds to find this but there loads out there.
    helen fisher has down some work in this area.
    i have posted loads of similar links in previous threads on the natural female promiscuity issue
    (and some great quotes from Aldonza- what ever happened to her!)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/sep/03/anthonybrowne.theobserver

  • Doug1

    Tom—

    Millions of former slut are married or in stable relationships.

    And then a lot of them get divorced after awhile, exacting divorce theft, and stealing his kids away from their husbands – a lot more than non sluts do.

    You’re mainly talk your position, what with you being engaged to a promiscuous woman. High risk. Well maybe if you don’t mind getting cheated on …

  • Ted D

    tom – you didn’t name me directly, but some of your comments certainly struck me as hostile to men that feel as I do. And for the record I am no hypocrite. My total sexual partner count is 5 and only 4 if we count only P in V. Again, I feel perfectly justified looking for and expecting a low partner count. It has little to do with ego and much to do with morals and ethics. As far as your personal life goes, I am happy things turned out so well for you. It proves nothing on the whole though. And the taint? You will carry the mark of your behavior with you all of your life. It may never affect you outwardly, but it is there all the same. If I was a religious person I would say it is a scar on your soul, but I see it more as a spiritual or karmic pock mark.

    jess – I don’t treat anyone differently because they were or are promiscuous
    I don’t walk around asking every woman I see how many guys they slept with. i am friends with people that have had very wild pasts. This ONLY comes up when I am in a relationship, or here. That being the case, I don’t understand why my views create such a hostile response. Being a former Catholic I know there are plenty of people in my family that believe I’m going to hell for many reasons. It doesn’t bother me in the least since as far as I can tell they don’t treat me differently. They are entitled to thier opinion, and as long as it doesn’t change my life in the least.

  • Doug1

    Tom—

    If women are tainted from casual sex so are men and fuck you if you think I am tainted from what I did back in college. And fuck you for thinking wonderful women who probably STILL wouldn’t give most the guys here a second look are tainted…..by the way escoffier..I’m not directing this at you…”they know who they are

    Nope, the sexes are wired differently on that. Most cute and hot women are attracted to men who demo a lot of pre-selection by having seduced a bunch of cute and hot girls. Most men including lesser and full on alphas are squicked by sluts for purposes of falling in love with them and certainly marriage.

    Sure ideally women want alphas or lesser alphas with small be very hot numbers, they do exist, but not in large percentages in this slutty SMP. They’re not emotionally squiked by male numbers though. Outside of this blog and to some extent the Roissysphere they don’t think much in terms of alphaish men being more likely to cheat.

  • jess

    Sassy- then it seems you missed the point I was making.
    Whether or not its actions or physical/cultural characteristics is neither here nor there.
    I was saying that any animosity towards any group should/could be up for discussion/justification.
    I didn’t have to choose racism- I could easily have picked the elderly/disabled/women/lesbians as a group that has faced hostility.

    “why do you dislike elderly people- dunno- just do”
    “why would you discount a virgin for a husband?- dunno- just do”
    not much of a debate is it?

    This is hardly a big deal. This blog wouldn’t exist if we were simply gonna say “we all feel what we feel- so please log out!”

    anonymous asked why Tom was asking guys to examine their (sometimes) hostile attitudes- I was explaining the fairly obvious.

  • Doug1

    DC–

    Imagine a world where all men could get all the sex they want. Would 5,000 or 10,000 lifetime partners be happening?

    Look to the gay community for an indicator on that. 300 lifetime partners wasn’t uncommon before AIDs. Alphas and super alphas tend to have high partner counts. Most who aren’t self conceived PUA’s however aren’t manic about it.

  • Abbot

    “will ‘give it rest’ when the ‘absurd comments’ come to a rest”

    A lie. There only be a “rest” when every man worth marrying embraces or at the very least does not consider a woman’s sexual past as part of their selection criteria. Thats going to add up to a lifelong supply of insomnia…

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    ‘what if someone said “they don’t like black people because that’s the way they feel” ‘

    I would rather they didn’t feel that way, but if they did, I’d be glad they were at least honest about how they felt. Maybe they could explain to me why they felt that way. It’s only feelings, after all.

    On the other hand, if they were to say “I don’t like black people so I’m going to work towards a final solution which will eradicate the black race from the face of the earth forever” (the way a lot of radical feminists talk about men, say) then I would do what I could to stop them because their actions borne out of hatred would only cause suffering.

    Thankfully, in the examples given, this is not the case, it’s simply peoples personal choices about their own lives & their own inner feelings. The personal isn’t ALWAYS political, y’know. In this case the personal really IS personal.

  • jess

    Ted,
    It seems there is a spiritual dimension to your views regarding the effect of sex on people and I respect that. If you openly treat everyone with respect then thats of course totally cool.

    If you look back at the threads in this blog you will see some pretty strong remarks about promiscuous women and in real life both men and women can be highly insulting and derogatory to women above a specific number (dependant upon the insulting party)

    That hostility is not necessary so hopefully the debates on the issue can inform lurkers and posters that there is another way to think about things.

    Of course there is always the advice angle. I think Tom has advised that guys may be missing out if they automatically discount girls they think are too experienced.
    I have advised that there are many, many guys who have an alternative life view about the whole numbers issue anyway.
    I also have consistently advised overindulgence in alcohol/drug/sex- I daresay there is much we would agree on even though our rationales may come from slightly different places.

  • Doug1

    Jess—

    there are members of my family who when i was a child described a woman in our street as a ‘filthy whore’ because she had a child out of wedlock. I have 100s of examples like this- its an attitude which i think is unethical and unpleasant.

    It’s an attitude I largely agree with. I wouldn’t use the language “filthy whore” exactly, but I think we should bring back shaming of out of wedlock births esp. when the man isn’t cohabiting with his baby moma, big time.

    I don’t think bastards should have any inheritance rights if there’s legitimate issues or other legitimate relatives, unless the bio dad decides to bequeath in a will.

  • anonymous

    jess: ” anonymous said no discussions are to be had because “people feel what they feel”

    Then I guess you don’t mind my discussing why I think you should stop being promiscuous and join the church of MY choice.
    ————————
    “By the way i didnt mean that just in relation to relationships I meant it in the simple racist dislike of another race- but it still applies in the way the conversation panned out.”

    Now you’re really going waaaaayyy out on a limb.
    We’re not discussing housing, jobs, education, healthcare….. we’re discussing who someone wants to date/marry.
    You want the freedom to chose for yourself but want to deny it to others unless you approve?
    ————-
    “the example works because if people have animosity towards a group of people then they should be able to articulate why using ethical rationale.”

    The courts have some basic criteria in order to obtain a marriage certificate, any additional criteria is up to the individual couple.
    No ethical rationale required by the courts for “I liked her rack” or “she had low numbers.”
    Who is anyone to demand an explanation of why people marry each other?
    —————————–
    jess: “i will ‘give it rest’ when the ‘absurd comments’ come to a rest.”

    So, have you decided when you’re going to stop making absurd comments? :-) hahaha (j/k)

  • jess

    Byron,
    “Maybe they could explain to me why they felt that way.”

    Well yes- my point entirely.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Doug,

    it’s actually even higher than that: Gaëtan Dugas – the “patient zero” who was one of the first known carriers of HIV back in the early 80′s – seemed to have documentation (a little black book) of 250+ sexual encounters A YEAR.

    But as you say, most men would probably make do with less.

  • jess

    doug- b*stards- i do hope you didn’t really mean that.

    not everyone subscribes to the status of marriage for political/ethical reasons. and its hardly the fault of a newly born infant whatever the circumstances.

    plenty of very ethical and principled people choose not to marry.
    and plenty of people have pre marital sex these days anyway.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Since when did the HUS font become italicized? So confused. ::crouches back into shadows::

  • Doug1

    Jess—

    No citation or link to a study much less studies.

    The main thing though is this:

    scientists – male ones anyway – are convinced they have proved it. Women – far from being naturally monogamous – are, like men, naturally promiscuous. Biologists believe that women are genetically programmed to have sex with several different men in order to increase the chances of healthy children with the greatest likelihood of survival.

    The theory helps to explain the high incidence of mistaken paternity. Evidence suggests that one in seven people is not the biological child of the man he or she believes is the father.

    “Several men” is a far cry from human females having a promiscuous instinct. They’re leading with promiscuous to be sensational and also sex positive feminist. Evo psych people have long postulated from the evidence a female tendency, or that within many women anyway, towards serial monogamy, rather than necessarily lifetime what’s begun monogamy, if the costs of doing so for her are not too great. (And it’s super favorable for women now in our feminism created marriage and divorce 2.0 legal and cultural climate. No shame for her serial monogamy game, just say there was abuse. Good to go.)

    As for talking about other animals even mammals, that’s bogus on this. Too different. Chimps are maybe a tad suggestive but that’s about it.

  • Abbot

    “Tom has advised that guys may be missing out if they automatically discount girls they think are too experienced.”

    There would not be all these heated attacks against men and the existence of the “sex positive” fad if promiscuous women represented the majority of women and it was the guys who were missing out. That is a fact.

  • jess

    anonymous,
    1. my current partner is likely to be my last but an attempt on church membership is unlikely for me, the most lapsed catholic since a certain King Of England. I have real issues with the catholic church- see previous threads.

    2. no- i just said a discussion was in order!

    3. i dont think anyone has demanded that- they are just debating- its a blog after all.

    4.absurd comments- “I prostrate myself in front of the worlds greatest living comedian”- “Black Adder II 1987″ :)

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Doug,
    Thanks for the explanation.

    In other news, I have no time for this thread, but the JM-munson back-and-forth on page 4 was hilarious.

  • jess

    Ted,
    ahem I meant that I advise AGAINST overindulgence in sex/drugs/alcohol!

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Olive #655

    Mwaa! (kiss)

  • jess

    sassy and byron- i haven’t ignored you- my replies are in moderation- no idea why.

  • Doug1

    Jess–

    doug- b*stards- i do hope you didn’t really mean that.

    Yep did mean it.

    I wouldn’t go heavy on shaming the bastard itself, but rather on the unwed mother for having one out of wedlock. And I did mean no intestate inheritance unless he or she is the only living relative. He can will him or her some inheritance of course. I don’t think most Anglosphere jurisdictions do give bastards intestate inheritance, but there’s been some tendency for some more liberal American states to do that.

    In most cases men who don’t leave wills don’t want their illegitimate child to share in the inheritance of their legitimate ones. I am quite sure that most white at least out of wedlock births are “ooops” pregnancies, consciously or subconsciously wanted, in hopes of snaring her lover into marriage, or failing that to receive a child support=also stealth alimony substantial income stream, or just to get a baby somehow, with the possibility of going for child support=also stealth alimony if times get rough and/or he gets affluent.

    College girls esp. in elite colleges rarely have babies. Cause they don’t subconsciously want them until married. Girls tend to be very good at not getting preggers when it’s really costly to them to become so.

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

      College girls esp. in elite colleges rarely have babies. Cause they don’t subconsciously want them until married. Girls tend to be very good at not getting preggers when it’s really costly to them to become so.

      They do get pregnant, but they abort.

  • Doug1

    Jess–

    The moderation around here seems to be light but semi random.

    Susan’s not around just now.

    That’s why.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Warm Woman,

    Okay, I like this new name better. And yea, I get what you’re saying.

  • jess

    lokland
    ‘that the sex in a relationship is less fulfilling.’
    -no- its just that the NSA sex was appropriate/available at that time. most women prefer LTR sex but that does stop them from enjoying NSA sex in some circumstances. e.g. an 18yo ‘couple’ about to go to college in different countries but had a 2 week affair prior to leaving.

    “I prefer to be around people with similar abilities to myself”-
    ok, i can see the logic there.

    “I prefer to date women who haven’t slept around much because frankly I haven’t slept around much.”- thats ok too- is it because you worry about std’s or comparing sexual performance? or simply an instinctual thing?

    “and why would a ONS, whilst single, be an act of disloyalty?”
    “See above point. Now extrapolate to eventual results.”- lost me a bit now?

    “past behaviour indicates she will do in the future.” –
    thats a phrase often used around here but actually the data on divorce risk vs number count actually showed a pretty marginal risk increase. And in the uk there is research suggesting earlier and/or virginal marriages are more at risk of divorce.

    “People don’t change they just get better at lying about it.”
    Well no- i used to poop my pants- but i have been potty trained since 2- see people do change! My experienced peers (as far as I know) have monogamous happy LTRs. People change big time!

    “If there was someway it could be guaranteed that a woman would not cuckold her husband”- there are no guarantees and the extra ‘risk ratio’ is marginal. You are better off marrying someone you like and love rather than accepting their hypothetical risk coefficient. I assume you already know about paternity tests.

  • purplesneakers

    There would not be all these heated attacks against men and the existence of the “sex positive” fad if promiscuous women represented the majority of women and it was the guys who were missing out. That is a fact.

    I confess that I don’t entirely understand what you were saying here, but FWIW I don’t think promiscuous women (15+ partner count by mid-20′s) represent the majority of American women. I do think they speak louder than other women though, in part because they are probably overrepresented in cities like NY, Boston, and D.C.

    Other women are reluctant to speak (much less write) about their sex lives because a) they’re not having as much sex, either in quantity or variety of ‘sexual exploration’ (threesomes, filming encounters, whatever), and b) they’re not comfortable being as open about it. But it’s also because virginity and being chaste and modest are looked down upon these days – a sign that you’re ‘repressed’ and ‘judgmental’ (I’ve been called the latter, for remarking to someone that pornstar Jenna Jameson must be a little messed up in the head. some girls got really offended and called me judgmental since ‘you don’t know her’ [um, wtf? seriously are we at the point where we have to be all accepting and completely non-judgmental of people who have sex on camera for a living?!]). It’s basically become really uncool to judge other people for any decisions they may make, in addition to not participating in those activities yourself.

    I do think there is also an element of wanting other women to validate your own promiscuity and that there’s nothing wrong with it. So for a girl who hasn’t had lots of casual sex to suggest that her relative chasteness is indicative of some kind of virtue–or worse, that she’s proud of herself for it!–is, by default, offensive to them.

  • Anacaona

    “I don’t think of Dominicans as being blacks really, anyway unless maybe if they’re really dark. They don’t seem to identify much or live much within black American culture. I’ve also heard it said by Spanish people that Dominicans think they’re Spanish pretty much. But I don’t know a ton about it. Curious about what you can tell me.”

    Well this is a hot button because of Zoe Saldana being the “hot black chick of the moment” thus our usual “whatever attitude about race has not being very welcome in the black community. I will say that Dominicans don’t worry about identifying since we all poor really white looking relatives and poor really black looking relatives, and the other way around is hard to be any kind of loyal when you have wiped the ass of people of every race and they had done the same to you. However there are focus (less than 3%) that had tried the whole “pride” thing both black looking and white looking, is like feminism theoretically they exist but we pay little to no attention to them. We are pretty laid back. Also we had issues with Haitians but is not about race is about the fact that they invaded us for 22 years and we still have stories of the atrocities they did when they were in power, they got unlucky and now need our help and we are slowly working out better relationships but the old generation still has a grudge against them, it will take some time.
    If I had to describe myself I would say Filippino looking. Strange weird mixed funny is depending who I’m talking they assume I’m one of them with my long new extensions Mexicans think I’m Mexican and with curly hair I look black and black people think the same I can’t pass for white though, but some of them do ask me if I’m mixed so…I look like everyone and no one at the same time? Is an odd feeling since I look obviously Dominican from my POV. But is interesting.

    @Olive
    Forgot to tell you that I imagine you looking like Kristen Chenoweth from her character in Pushing Daisies Olive Snook, short, busty and with a nice voice :P

  • Jesus Mahoney

    munson,

    @Christ O’Gratin

    You didn’t like my Hitler quote, but Lord Byron found it haunting, and went to cite some interesting interplay between Hitler and Gandhi. Hitler is quoted for a number of reasons; I respectfully submit that discrediting a writer on that basis ALONE is unwarranted (I know you several other basis with respect to ME; ain’t disputin’ it either).

    That’s cool, bro. So talk to Byron. I don’t like you.

  • purplesneakers

    That said, I do think there is a lot of misogyny in the Roissysphere (does that surprise anyone? I think the sickest place is probably the Roosh forum), and that the way those commenters talk about promiscuous women (‘cum dumpster’ etc.) is disgusting, off-putting, and even considering ‘men’s biological imperative,’ hypocritical. I think it is understandable for your average man to want a relationship with a woman who hasn’t slept around–but for a man who has made it his life’s mission to fuck as many women as possible to want to marry a 20-year-old virgin? That is absolutely ridiculous. FWIW I’m a virgin and while I would prefer to be with someone with more experience (and older) than me, I don’t want to be with someone who has slept around a lot and has absolutely no respect for women either.

    I think women who have had casual sex should be forced to read some of these blogs and see what these men really think of them–it would hopefully put them off casual sex. (Unfortunately, I kind of think that they will probably just get defensive, accuse them of being sexist pigs, and not realize that next weekend’s ONS is basically a repeat of last weekend’s ONS).

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    Oh that hurts. :(

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    Must’ve taken the Lord’s Name in vain too often.

  • Aobh

    I am so delighted to see this discussion taking place. It confirms my belief that men and women are ready to get real together.
    At one time in my life I described myself as a feminist. Today I am a confirmed humanist. We are living in obsolete stories in the USA circa 2011

    In my view woman as inherently morally superior beings is a really stupid story.

    Flip that coin—if woman is inherently morally superior—and we all accept that at face value, then of course if a man makes a choice that is unconscionable—OH WELL!—it’s the woman’s job to set the standard anyhow. Clever hat trick.

    Face it: Men have a perfectly awful role to play in our social order, always the be the first, the fastest, the best, know the most, compete, vie for the alpha dog status. Be willing to protect and defend laying one’s life on the line should the situation call for such an act.
    Go to war. Go to war every day of their lives in America. Compete, beat, win, score, achieve, succeed at all costs. Be the breadwinner. Be the person responsible to go down into the sewer when there is something that needs fixed. Be the bottom line.
    Oh! And while you are at all the above display a sex drive that is indistinguishable from an every-ready battery. Maintain the manly man’s erection, and face rejection of your sex drive gracefully, with the woman having the last word in this world. Now fit this into the framework that you are supposed to dominate, as you were coached to do all your life to “prove” your manhood, the magnitude of this wack-a-doodle role becomes evident. In their heart of hearts any man worth talking to really wants to know he is loved and respected, and deeply invested in pleasing the woman in his life, who rarely speaks directly about what she really wants…BECAUSE she has been in the “not-out-loud-cloud all her life.

    Women have an equally shitty role, now liberated to be another family breadwinner WHILE; competing to be the fairest of them all, at all times competing with the airbrushed images and professionally trained video hardbodies that are all over the media. Attractive but not TOO sexy in the workaday world.
    (Because as we all know a woman who has authentic sexual desire is a loose cannon. 
One never knows where she will drop that estrogen bomb next).

    Bottom line: subjecting ourselves to these old stories is just nuts!

    We are in the Twenty-first Century outside the man/woman story. We can communicate with people all over the planet at the speed of light. Why then do we choose to communicate within our primary connections from the point of view of a stone-age story?

    My (working) top nine list of obsolete ideas about the sexes;

    The Animal Story; When it comes to dating, mating and relating we are just like those other primates.
    OK then it would stand to reason that monkeys should be able to type, paint the Sistine Chapel, and build a spaceship that would take us to the moon. We are not animals, we are divine animals. We do not transcend the flesh we infuse it with the divine.

    Sex is about procreation; A women’s hip to waist ratio is the key determinant for mate selection; Would be significant, if the world’s population were not seven billion. Repopulating the planet is not at issue. Give it up! It’s an obsolete story. You can’t text your response and tell me you are incapable of making change. Open your mind and the rest will follow.
    Women are inherently morally superior: Women are fifty percent of the world’s population and therefore 50% responsible for every condition on the planet. Any of my sisters who are hiding behind their Goddess skirts using their inside voices in a woman’s circle; it’s time to woman up. Lean to speak up in mixed company. Keep speaking up until you are heard. You will be called “aggressive”. Don’t take it personally. That language is designed to keep you from speaking up again. Ignore it.

    Men should form men’s support groups and talk about this with one another and Women should support women’s support groups and talk about this with one another.
    You are either in gender bias or your are in gender balance. Pretending we are unable to have an open discussion between the sexes holds us in our current limbo. In our separate gender circles we can only reinforce our dysfunctional patterns. We have to break out of our own molds.

    Men/Women have to do the changing. All men are dwags, irresponsible, grown up boys, all women are bitches, nags, hormonally crazed, gold diggers…etc. We all have to behave better.

    Men are from one planet Women are from another and can’t ever understand the other. Major cop-out! How does this rhetoric build a bridge? People who choose to make a conscious effort will not fail to understand one another. This is a very damaging story as it leaves everyone at an impasse always.

    I’m the only one who always does the everything—because I’m the only one who always does the everything just right! If you do it it’s your job. Either don’t do it or don’t play martyr if you choose to do it. Own your choices.

    The Sexual Revolution moved us forward. The sexual revolution is over. Everybody lost. (Well not EVERYBODY, Americans now spend $41 billion a year on their pets). The couple dynamic is the foundation of society. Ours is ruptured. Doesn’t matter much to me who is in that couple dynamic as long as both parties are treating one another with love and respect.

    Men want sex more than women. Consider that men spent 10 billion on viagra last decade, Women spend 30 billion ANNUALLY to be attractive. Which begs the question whom are they trying to attract for what? Women want sex just as much if not MORE than men they just don’t want Titanic Sex* (Starts as an adventure and ends as monumental disaster disproportionally leaving men dead in the water— no oxytocin is produced in Titanic Sex

  • @peace

    @Byron,

    “I think perhaps the most interesting part of that tale is how many women can feel differently about sexual activity which doesn’t include the risk of pregnancy. It seems from the accounts that have been listed before here that many women don’t see oral/anal as being ‘sex’ at all & so have much less concern about them. This is very strange to boys, of course, but it’s really fascinating thinking whether that is actually something innate & hardwired, a loophole in the general female resistance to sex without long term commitment perhaps.”

    Taking a look at history and personal experience, I don’t believe that particular standard (for some girls) has anything to do with hard wiring. I believe women are very cognizant, even sensitive to any sexual act and it’s ramifications. That scene in “Clerks” (although certainly not any kind of official study) certainly supports the idea that women do think of any sexual act as having real consequence. Veronica was not at all proud or unabashed when she revealed the number of guys she had blown. She was sheepish and shamed and clearly afraid to tell Dante. In fact, Dante had to all but drag it out of her.

    We live in a confused and confusing world that is dealing with the very real consequences of ‘the sins of our fathers’ so-to-speak. For centuries women were forced to compromise everything they were and everything they had in exchange for simple survival. That kind of conditioning doesn’t just slough off because women ‘got the vote’. They’re still compromising. The so-called “sexual freedom” that both men and women now think they have just means there is no clear guidance, no simple way to figure out how each sexual decision is going to affect them and the future. Instead of sexual enlightenment, it’s more confusing than ever for girls. Sex and sex acts have been considered rights of passage in middle/high school for decades now and there is a ton of pressure on young girls to experience sex. If you’re a graduating virgin, you’re likely considered a self-righteous prude by your peer group. I think, with all that pressure, some girls decide to make a compromise with themselves and their future mates. They’ll do *certain* things that don’t involve penetration with guys they don’t really care that much about and thereby still maintain the approval of their peers (guys and girls both). However they will save actual intercourse for a guy they really like/love. However, their own feelings often betray the self-deception and those feeling are often confirmed if the subject is broached with a guy they are really into. So no, I don’t think girls are hardwired to believe sex acts aside from so-called p&v are without consequence. I think many women and girls are just trying to find a way to please everyone and make it all work with just the right compromise in a confusing and sex crazed world.

  • @peace

    @Jess

    “DC & Peace- great posts by the way- just noticed them on the previous page.”

    Thanks.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Christ O’Gratin #655

    Would it change matters if I DID get you a birthday present Sunday? Lit a votive candle? Said a “Hail Mary”?

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Christ O’Gratin

    Tell you what. I’ll just keep posting things here to You, and occasionally commenting when You say something ridiculous, or anything that catches my attention, and meanwhile You just ignore them or, if You feel like You’ve still got a miracle or 2 in You after 2,000 plus years, why just miracle them the fuck on outta’ here. Deal?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    purplesneakers,

    It doesn’t seem like Veronica is afraid of Dante’s reaction:

    VERONICA
    Bye
    (to DANTE)
    That was Snowball.

    DANTE
    Why do you call him that?

    VERONICA
    Sylvan made it up. It’s a blow job
    thing.

    DANTE
    What do you mean?

    VERONICA
    After he gets a blow job, he likes
    to have the cum spit back into his
    mouth while kissing. It’s called
    snowballing.

    DANTE
    He requested this?

    VERONICA
    He gets off on it.

    24.

    DANTE
    Sylvan can be talked into anything.

    VERONICA
    Why do you say that?

    DANTE
    Like you said-she snowballed him.

    VERONICA
    Sylvan? No; I snowballed him.

    DANTE
    Yeah, right.

    VERONICA
    I’m serious…

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Anacaona

    If I had to describe myself I would say Filippino looking. Strange weird mixed funny is depending who I’m talking they assume I’m one of them with my long new extensions Mexicans think I’m Mexican and with curly hair I look black and black people think the same I can’t pass for white though, but some of them do ask me if I’m mixed so…I look like everyone and no one at the same time? Is an odd feeling since I look obviously Dominican from my POV. But is interesting.

    I’m Filipina and an American friend who knows what I look like says that in certain parts of the US, people would assume I was Mexican, too. I don’t know if that means actual Mexicans as well.

  • @peace

    @Jesus Mahoney

    I know your comment wasn’t directed at me but you can’t get Veronica’s feelings from the transcript, you have to actually watch the whole scene. Her discomfort really started when he started pressing for numbers. She had none of Dante’s nonchalant way about herself when revealing the number of guys she had gone down on. She was clearly uncomfortable.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Bellita,

    I saw your post before and then I got distracted. But yea, that’s how I felt when I found out about my ex-fiancee’s past. It was like, wait, this thing… I waited months for, that I thought was special and meaningful and intimate and all that…. you’ve done it with guys you barely knew or cared about?

    And the bond just disappeared. It was like, oh, she does this with everyone. You feel taken, like you did with the friend who claimed her mom had cancer.

  • purplesneakers

    Jesus Mahoney – I’ve never seen the movie in question (Reality Bytes, right?). I’m not sure which of my comments that was in response to? but if it’s about *not* sexually experimenting being uncool only recently, well, I guess it’s been building for a while, right? I also think Hollywood kind of pushes promiscuity in a way that a lot of people actually aren’t comfortable with.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    peace,

    Yea, I saw it. She was uncomfortable when she realized it was a big deal to Dante. But she had no problem telling him she snowballed some guy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sorry purple, the comment was meant for peace. But yea, Hollywood pushes promiscuity big-time.

  • purplesneakers

    Also I think the pressure to ‘be cool by sleeping around/sexually experimenting’ happens more in group environments, because no one wants to be the repressed bitch or sexist douchebag who actually voices publicly that it’s disgusting. Just look at how Tom Matlack got torn a new one. I bet, though, that in smaller groups of girls or in groups of guys, a lot of shit gets thrown around about promiscuous women. Bear in mind that it’s convenient for guys to egg on slutty behavior, too, because it increases their own chances of getting laid.

  • purplesneakers

    though I haven’t seen the movie I can kind of understand Veronica’s semi-bragging about snowballing some guy. It signals that you’re sexually adventurous, and girls do want to be seen as sexy. Of course we don’t necessarily go about it the right way, but it can’t be denied that girls who present themselves most sexually get the most attention from men.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Forgot to tell you that I imagine you looking like Kristen Chenoweth from her character in Pushing Daisies Olive Snook, short, busty and with a nice voice

    LOL Sassy is still the closest. I’m not blonde. Also definitely not busty…

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sexually adventurous girls get attention from guys who want to P & D them.

  • purplesneakers

    Sexually adventurous girls get attention from guys who want to P & D them.

    Yeah but the beta guys are on the sidelines and lust after those girls, too. They just never get the chance to P&D them.

    But it actually doesn’t take much to signal that you are ‘sexually adventurous,’ at least in a college environment:

    1. dress in a skimpy little dress
    2. get drunk

    What I found weird is that girls would not wear jewelry or even any make-up. The dress wasn’t about signaling femininity, it was about signaling sexual availability.

  • @peace

    @Jesus Mahoney

    “Yea, I saw it. She was uncomfortable when she realized it was a big deal to Dante. But she had no problem telling him she snowballed some guy.”

    As I stated in my post, “Clerks” is no authoritative source but I can see that very scenario playing out any day of week. Why would she be terribly worried about telling the ‘pig’ who slept with 12 girls she had gone down on some guy? However, when asked about numbers she had a totally different reaction than Dante had when she asked him for the same info. When he answered her, it was like he had no concept that she might find it offensive and was quite surprised when she did. She, on the other hand, was very keyed in to how he felt when he asked her for numbers. I also think it is worth noting that Dante obviously felt that fellatio was particularly degrading/disgusting because he later asked her, “Why didn’t you just sleep with them like any decent person?”

  • Lokland

    @ Lokland
    “-no- its just that the NSA sex was appropriate/available at that time. most women prefer LTR sex but that does stop them from enjoying NSA sex in some circumstances. e.g. an 18yo ‘couple’ about to go to college in different countries but had a 2 week affair prior to leaving.”

    Two things to be taken from this. One, the girl is in a situation that leads to casual over relationship sex more often. I don’t like that.
    Two, I could indulge in chocolate brownies until the cows come home but I don’t due to their ill effects. Moderation is key. (You disagree with those ill effects but men not you are the judge and jury on this. AKA our decision your opnion is pointless.)
    Also, I don’t see anything wrong with your hypothetical couple. Its just sex. I do see a problem when girl goes and gets smashed and has sex every weekend. Its called poor character and bad judgement. The two things I do not want in a wife or the mother of my children.

    “I prefer to date women who haven’t slept around much because frankly I haven’t slept around much.”- thats ok too- is it because you worry about std’s or comparing sexual performance? or simply an instinctual thing?”

    Umm no. If I played basketball with Kobe I’d get my ass kicked and it would be no fun. At the same time I could go play with a pygmy tribe and be a god but it still wouldn’t be fun. Challenge is good but only when its winnable. Comparing sexual performace? Is that a chick thing?
    Ya, its instinctual.

    “and why would a ONS, whilst single, be an act of disloyalty?”
    “See above point. Now extrapolate to eventual results.”- lost me a bit now?

    Assuming the girl either enjoys casual sex or finds herself in situations in which they are more likely to occur she is less likely to find relationship sex enjoyable and/or less likely to enjoy the change in venue. Therefore she will eventually get bored and leave. Its an inevtiable problem when dealing with party girls.

    “past behaviour indicates she will do in the future.” –
    thats a phrase often used around here but actually the data on divorce risk vs number count actually showed a pretty marginal risk increase. And in the uk there is research suggesting earlier and/or virginal marriages are more at risk of divorce.

    I’ve read quite the opposite multiple times. Marriage after a partner count of 5 for the lady drops to 30% after X(can’t remember) years. Someone else should be able to provide the citing.

    “People don’t change they just get better at lying about it.”
    Well no- i used to poop my pants- but i have been potty trained since 2- see people do change! My experienced peers (as far as I know) have monogamous happy LTRs. People change big time!

    I don’t care if your experienced peers are happy. Are their SOs also vastly experienced? Again, the people I know who are still married and holding hands when they’re white haired q-tips tend to be very proud of the fact they were virgins at marriage. (Theres this one couple that came into one of my parents restaurants as a kid they were the most adorable people on the planet.) My parents are also the same and proud.
    The last point is, I would not be happy if my wife was vastly experienced. It would be impossible for me to believe her. End of story, she could not change my mind.

    “If there was someway it could be guaranteed that a woman would not cuckold her husband”- there are no guarantees and the extra ‘risk ratio’ is marginal. You are better off marrying someone you like and love rather than accepting their hypothetical risk coefficient. I assume you already know about paternity tests.

    Love is important. But not that important. Common sentiment here is that a guy gets way more out of being respected than love. I’ll be quite honest I’d be upset if my fiance didn’t love me but if she didn’t respect me it would be the end of the relationship. Key part of respect = exclusive acess to her vagina. Increased risk of non-exclusvity of vagina = increased loss of respect = ohh hell no. Yes the actual risk increase is disrespectful in and of itself.

    So again love is easy for guys. Really not that big a deal to me, I’ve had women fall in love with me over a few months of dating many times. Little wine, clever witticisms, random strumming. Honestly not that hard.
    Therefore if respect is linked to fidelity and fidelity is linked to low partner count (real or instintual) I need to consider that risk factor to my respect as vastly more important. Afterall love is easy.

    As for paternity tests, I’m intimately aware with them. I’m a geneticist my fiance has already agreed to testing all children. Her condition is that I do it discreetly. Seems fair, she is embarrassed but she feels I deserve the certainty. (She offered I didn’t ask.)

    So now all thats left is to determine how much loss of respect is tolerable.
    Don’t think of it as a linear scale, its and exponential decrease in respect for every partner due to increased risk.

    The more partners you have the more likely you are to cheat. Maybe not by much but thats irrelavant because every .1% you are more likely to cheat can correspond to 10% on the loss of respect scale.

  • @peace

    @purplesneakers

    “though I haven’t seen the movie I can kind of understand Veronica’s semi-bragging about snowballing some guy.”

    Watch the scene and you probably won’t feel she was semi bragging at all.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    peace,

    She was keyed in, but it wasn’t too difficult. Dante was going into full panic mode.

  • @peace

    @purplesneakers

    “Also I think the pressure to ‘be cool by sleeping around/sexually experimenting’ happens more in group environments, because no one wants to be the repressed bitch or sexist douchebag who actually voices publicly that it’s disgusting. Just look at how Tom Matlack got torn a new one. I bet, though, that in smaller groups of girls or in groups of guys, a lot of shit gets thrown around about promiscuous women. Bear in mind that it’s convenient for guys to egg on slutty behavior, too, because it increases their own chances of getting laid.”

    I completely agree which is why I think many girls “compromise”. They often do not really want to participate but feel pressured to do so by their peers and by whatever stigma they think will attach itself to them if they don’t go along with the crowd. It’s a fact that people want other people to like them and approve of their actions. If the people around you are telling you that they won’t like you or approve of your actions unless you do X, then you are probably going to do X unless you have a very compelling reason not to, such as clear and predetermined moral standards based on a working knowledge and understanding of the consequences of the action in question.

  • @peace

    Mahoney,

    “She was keyed in, but it wasn’t too difficult. Dante was going into full panic mode.”

    Which was a really funny scene now that I think back on it… Anyway, all I will say at this point is, it shouldn’t have been difficult for Dante either. The lack of understanding between the sexes on the most basic topics is another testimony to the lameness of this dying world.

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

    @Wayfinder

    Thanks for the tip. All fixed now. And good to see you!

  • purplesneakers

    I think your opinion is wrong, and I’m anything but a simplistic thinker.

    LOL.

  • Jhane Sez

    You are just a crypto-facsict
    all the livelong day
    you are just a crypto-fascist
    you couldn’t scare anybody away
    listenin’ to your right-wing bullshit
    all we do is end up gettin’ bored
    take your stupid propaganda
    and go gobble a “pork”-sword!

    Ok it ain’t Wagner but this ain’t the Cistine Chapel and we ain’t writin’ the Dead Sea Scrolls (I know I’m mixing up countries, eras, arts,everything-hey, I went to Boise State, not Harvard, which I’m sure means you picture me typing this whilst I eat a banana with my feet.) (Munson scratches at flea on his forehead, catches same, eats it.)

    Funnier than American Horror Story tonight and brought to mind The Producers

    I really try to stay out of what goes on between you and SW… but this one killed me ~JS

  • Babydoll

    I can vouch for peer pressure and I’m a long time out of high school. I have a couple of friends whose number is over 20 and I really enjoy spending time with them. They both sorely tested our friendship a few months ago when they started to pressure me to join them in their weekly Saturday night ONS hunt. One is in her mid-30′s and the other is in her mid-40′s. Both have been single for over a year. They said it would make me feel better, that I was too nice and nice girls finish last. I kept saying no, politely but firmly, and explained that I had only ever had 3 partners and that sex with anyone new is a BIG DEAL and it takes me ages to recover from a failed relationship so I don’t think I would survive a pump and dump. They stopped asking after that and now ask me to go out for the fun of it instead. If I had been a weaker person in my most vulnerable time in the few months after the end of my last LTR, I probably would have jumped on their train. But I saw that it had made them hard and they were still lonely despite all the men they’d had.

    The lesson I learned from this is: choose the company you keep. The herd mentality is strong in women and sometimes it’s easier to go with the tide and not stand up for yourself for fear of being ridiculed. I’m glad I didn’t cave in but it’s sad that my friends felt the need to convert me – I think it would have validated what they were doing if Miss Conservative became a weekly feature at the local pub. I told them I don’t care what they do, they are still my friends and I respect their decisions, just back off and respect mine in return.

  • Abbot

    “jumped on their train. But I saw that it had made them hard and they were still lonely despite all the men they’d had.”

    But dontchyaknow, men universally are lining up for the chance to rescue these pinnacles of worthiness who “explored their sexuality” on the train. The slut apologizers say so. It must be true.

  • Abbot

    “I’m glad I didn’t cave in but it’s sad that my friends felt the need to convert me”

    Well, it seems that they have slimed their way onto HUS racked with guilt for current and past indiscretions. But don’t worry. Other female lurkers will also not cave.

  • Ted D

    “I’m glad I didn’t cave in but it’s sad that my friends felt the need to convert me”

    Well in all fairness, on some level we are ALL here to “convert” people. Or at least influence them in a direction we feel is appropriate. The difference between us and your friends is: we don’t have a captive audience. If the young woman lurking here don’t like our advice, they can simply stop reading. When a friend tries to pressure you into something, they are really taking advantage of the bond they share with you.

    Jess – sex is absolutely a spiritual experience. You will NEVER be closer to another human being than during sex, other than your birth. And this is a huge part of my core belief that casual sex is damaging. I’m not talking about “sex only in marriage” or some other strict religious dogma. I’m talking about the essence that makes you, well YOU. Every interaction you have with another human changes you, forever. Something as simple as a smile in passing can change a person’s day, or maybe their life. One mean spirited word can push someone over the edge and cause them to do something tragic. Can you honestly say to me that having casual sex can’t possible have any detrimental affects on you? Literally sharing your body with another human being? Allowing them to be INSIDE you, physically and spiritually is an enormous risk. Anyone that would take such a thing so lightly is not the kind of person I am willing to share myself with.

    So, a few early casual encounters will not “break” anyone. For those that cannot understand the connection sex creates, it may take a few attempts for them to realize what is missing. For those that continue on the carousel, I must conclude that they either can’t figure it out, or simply don’t care. In either case my assumption is that their sexual energy is tainted. I could be wrong, but I am unwilling to risk sharing myself with such a person.

    And again to be clear, I’m not attempt to shame or blame anyone. I am not perfect, and never will be. I don’t go around telling young women they are sullied, and I don’t treat anyone badly because they are promiscuous. I simply take note, and move on. And by take note, I do mean pass judgement. I judge people every single day on thousands of different variables, and as long as I don’t allow it to change my behavior, I truly find no issue with it. And, I have no issue with being judged. After all, I am an INTJ – guess what the “J” stands for. ;)

    tom – so let me ask you: As a man with a low partner count, do you feel it is inappropriate of me to judge woman on their count? I can understand your point about being hypocritical, but I’m not asking for or expecting anything from women that I have not already accomplished.

  • Abbot

    “their sexual energy is tainted. I could be wrong, but I am unwilling to risk sharing myself with such a person”

    Shame on you. You hypocritical judgemental spineless misygonistic insecure sheeple who lacks all understanding of modern Western women

    “As a man with a low partner count, do you feel it is inappropriate of me to judge woman on their count?”

    Yes it inappropriate ONLY becuase there are only so many men to go around and most Western women will, on average, have higher counts due to the sole fact that they can rack em up faster.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Yeah but the beta guys are on the sidelines and lust after those girls, too. They just never get the chance to P&D them.

    Some, not all. I admit to being easily aroused, but the women I’m most interested in, and have always been most interested in, are the ones that display their femininity through their actions: a woman who is shy and demure, a woman who is playing with children, a woman who expresses or acts upon compassion and empathy, a woman who gives of herself to help others, a woman who displays her selectivity and values by not falling prey to the cads, and a woman who can just radiate joy while doing the simplest, most mundane things.

    Women are hypergamous, but men, believe it or not, can be aroused and attracted to many different flavors of femininity.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    purple sneakers,

    So, like, I’ve read hundreds or thousands of novels, and I can tell you that of every female character I’ve read, the one I’ve loved most, without doubt, is Rose of Sharon from Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath. In the final scene of the novel, breastfeeds a starving man in order to save his life. Probably, in all of literature, this is the most beautiful and poignant expression of femininity that’s ever been captured in words.

    Sure, you’ll see beta guys staring at half naked girls at parties, just like you’ll find drivers slowing down to a crawl to gawk at the car accident that occured on the opposite side of the highway. But just because they stare, it doesn’t mean they wish they were involved.

  • Ted D

    I was very beta, but I never sat on the sidelines “lusting” after promiscuous women. Instead, I formed and kept several LTRs throughout my life starting at 15 years old. I participated in the manner I perceived to be correct, which is to say I dated, progressed to an “official” LTR, and then moved forward to physical intimacy and sex. My longest dry spell (meaning time without sex, NOT time without getting a casual fuck) was around 10 months(ish). So it isn’t like I went for years without. In fact, I know that in high school I did MUCH better than the “alpha cads” in terms of the amount of sex I got, simply because I stayed with the same girl for four years, while they had to go out and look for someone to band every few weeks or so.

    I’m not here saying no one should have sex outside of marriage. I agree with many that “marriage” in our current society is really just a legal contract which has little to no bearing on the spiritual, so using it as the guideline seems pointless to me. (not so when marriage WAS a spiritual/religious experience. For those folks, waiting until marriage may very well be worth it). But I AM saying that men and woman should try to form meaningful relationships FIRST, and if that works out then move to the physical. Sure, that would take a lot more work, risk, and time. But most things in life worth a damn aren’t easy or fast, IMO. And in the end, we all would have a much lower partner count, and a much better foundation to form and maintain a long lasting relationship, since we all have experienced it while maturing. What does casual sex give you for later in life? OH! It will teach you have to snowball someone. THAT should really make your future husband/wife proud. *rolls eyes*

    NOTE: I should add that I did go for several years with very little to no sex late in my marriage. I didn’t count that here because it wasn’t a result of my abilities in the SMP, it was because I was married to a woman that no longer found me attractive, and my morals didn’t allow me to cheat.

  • BSD

    Ted, unlike the alpha cads, and this is ironic, I guess, because it applies to slutty women, you had a certain amount of foresight and understood what worked for you.

    Anyway I agree with everything you said.

    I also don’t understand why someone would want to throw snowballs at their partner during sex. I also don’t understand how that would work unless you were outside…in winter…hmm…

  • BSD

    And when I say it applies to slutty women, I mean like…that slutty women don’t have foresight usually. Concept of delayed gratification.

  • Ted D

    “Ted, unlike the alpha cads, and this is ironic, I guess, because it applies to slutty women, you had a certain amount of foresight and understood what worked for you.”

    This is the point I’m really trying to get out there. That both young women AND men seem to not be thinking about the future. As a teen, I was young and stupid, but at no time did I EVER forget that tomorrow would come, and what I did today would directly affect how tomorrow would look.

    I think we spend far too much time in the now, and not nearly enough thinking about then. I’m not saying you should spend your entire life worrying about tomorrow, but I think it is a great strategy to keep it in mind as you go about your daily life. How often do we hear “Live for today!”, and “if it feels good do it”, without any indication of the consequences of those actions. No one wants to take responsibility or blame for what they did wrong, and because they “do no wrong” they never learn from their mistakes.

    In terms of sexuality, this means that although it “feels good” to have random casual sex, that doesn’t mean it won’t change your future. If you understand that and are still willing to take the risk, so be it. Be aware that people like me will judge you and although we may be your friend, we will never be your lover/mate. If you try and and find that it isn’t for you, then great! the experience served its purpose, you learned and grew. But for the remainder, the people that never examine the action and never consider the future implications of those actions, they need to be told. That is what I believe Susan and most of the regulars her at HUS are trying to do: Let young women know exactly what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what could come from those actions. If they want to continues behaving as before, so be it. But they can’t every claim ignorance again, and when the time comes that their pasts arise to haunt them, they must claim full responsibility for those actions and the results they created.

    Of everything here, THAT is what I want the most. I want young men and women to know that they ARE INDEED responsible for everything they chose to do in their lives, and if it leads them to a place they don’t want to be, they only have themselves to blame.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I think your opinion is wrong, and I’m anything but a simplistic thinker.

    Love purplesneakers’ response to this. Unless you care to discuss, I’m gonna go with my own impression of the situation.

  • tom

    Kokland..you just think your dislike of a woman with experience is instictual it more than likely is not. People who can not swim have an insticual fear of water. Once they can swim that fear is gone. It was not insticual if it was easily overcome. Your judgement is based on either moral or insecurity or both. Peace on post 546 I think said it all it was on the page before this one.
    Btw you must be young. Life is a great teacher.as one grows older they begin to control thought process and emotions and add experience to form judgements. People like what they like and perfer what they perfer without really knowing why, especially when they are in their 20′s. We men are GREAT at going alone as sheeple especially when it is apparently to our advantage.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Tom,

    Clearly this is your axe to grind. We haven’t heard from you in months and the moment promiscuous women became a topic, you showed. Clearly you have an agenda.

    Personally, I think Lokland is a bit hypocritcal, since he’s engaged and banging chicks on the side, but I’m a bit tired of the whole “insecurity” bit you roll out whenever this topic arises.

    The fact is that actions bespeak values and beliefs. For some people, sex is a meaningful, intimate experience, and those people want a woman who feels the same way. If a woman is hooking up, having ONSs, playing groupie to jocks or musicians, etc… then those actions indicate that the woman doesn’t value sex in the same way as the man does.

    That’s not to say that the woman is a terrible person, just that there isn’t a value match. Why marry a girl who’s slept around if you think sex should be something special?

  • Ted D

    “People like what they like and perfer what they perfer without really knowing why, especially when they are in their 20′s. ”

    And although this may be a true statement, I also believe it is a piss poor one. There is NO reason why someone should feel/think/or like something without knowing why. its called introspection, and I firmly believe that there isn’t enough of it going on.

  • Ted D

    “Why marry a girl who’s slept around if you think sex should be something special?”

    And further, IF a man were to marry a promiscuous woman with the ideal that sex is special, they will most likely never be fully satisfied with that woman. They may always wonder if SHE feels it is as special as he does, and if not, what it means. He may always believe that there is an imbalance in the relationship because he gave her a valuable gift that she could not reciprocate.

  • Abbot

    “People who can not swim have an insticual fear of water. Once they can swim that fear is gone.”

    IOW, once you a try a slut you will be swept off your feet.

    “as one grows older they begin to control thought process and emotions”

    …if they don’t have a choice.

    “Why marry a girl who’s slept around if you think sex should be something special?”

    Because how men feel about sex is irrelevant and that bears repeating. Apparently.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Jhane #700

    It’s catchy huh? In truth, Susan didn’t call me a neo-Nazi but questioned whether I was because of an allusion I made to a Hitler quote. Doesn’t help I’m from Idaho.Several commenters have (disparagingly) noted my alleged dallaince with Ms. Walsh, what you alluded to as “what goes on between you and SW”. Right now-nothing. She hasn’t responded to any of my cat-o’-nine-tails ref, nor to my ditty.

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

      Several commenters have (disparagingly) noted my alleged dallaince with Ms. Walsh, what you alluded to as “what goes on between you and SW”. Right now-nothing. She hasn’t responded to any of my cat-o’-nine-tails ref, nor to my ditty.

      Good grief. I’m kicking you to the curb, Munson.

  • Anacaona

    On Haiti
    Haiti was the first country of liberate the slaves and their first leader Louverture was an inspired educated man who became wealthy of his own efforts and work, he was in the same level of the independence fathers in USA. They had a bright start but then the problem was that once freed, the slave owners feared for their lives and flee in mass from the country, they took most of the money and most the educated class with them. Thus there was a lot of ignorant people with a lot of freedom and no reason to repress themselves, much like SMP right now, thus things started to get downhill. There is something poorly documented about newly liberated people and how much they hate work because they associate it to ‘slavery” some sectors in my country is still suffer from that but is a hard to break culture (for the ones that know Spanish google a song called El Negrito del Batey, one of my most hated songs that sums up this culture) and then the very few that stayed managed to control the population in a way that Haiti is closer to feudalism with a top 1% very interested in keeping people down, and 99% poor and poorly educated. Thus corruption is even worse than in my country were we have a growing working class, we had access to cheap European education, and you can have a home business with little or non paperwork, while Haitians with a bit of vision keep fleeing to my country to educated themselves but then they marry, leave for franc and so on so they don’t return to help their own nation, specially because the few ones that do are whether corrupted or killed of course some of them try to destroy the system from the inside playing a bit of corruption but then trying to built schools and try to help a tiny bit. So would all the help make the nation to become strong again and get over centuries of this tendency? Hard to tell.
    But please for anyone reading would you stop the “instant IQ” readings? A person can have a high IQ and still make poor choices of he is not educated or the culture is one that doesn’t provide them for any tools. The whole “Your IQ is X if you do or don’t do Y” is the most ignorant pretentious first world habit I ever read, so stop it.

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

      @Ana

      I’m sorry those offensive remarks were left standing for a while. I’m racing around this week and I confess I don’t read all of Doug’s comments. Too upsetting. :( I think I’ve deleted them all, but please call any remaining ones to my attention.

      I have said repeatedly, and will say it again now:

      We do not discuss IQ by race here. The next person who introduces an assessment of who has higher or lower IQs based on race will be banned from the blog.

      P.S. I hope you had a lovely anniversary!

  • Ted D

    “But please for anyone reading would you stop the “instant IQ” readings? A person can have a high IQ and still make poor choices of he is not educated or the culture is one that doesn’t provide them for any tools. The whole “Your IQ is X if you do or don’t do Y” is the most ignorant pretentious first world habit I ever read, so stop it.”

    My grandfather had a name for highly educated people that made bad choices regularly: educated idiots!

    A high IQ only shows your potential for learning. All the knowledge in the world won’t amount to much if you can’t use that knowledge in practical applications. Intelligence AND street smarts is the best combination, but if I had to choose one over the other, I’d take street smarts any day.

  • Anacaona

    @Susan
    No offense taken as mentioned we Dominicans are pretty much “whatever” about race but given our audience and since I lived next to Haiti for over 30 years I wanted to expose a bit of history also a cautionary tale, too much freedom can also be a bad thing.
    PS
    Can you ban people that discuss IQ per Twilight as well? :p *batseyelashes*

    Thanks! It was fun, charming, hot and steamy….just like our wedding! :D

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    A high IQ only shows your potential for learning. All the knowledge in the world won’t amount to much if you can’t use that knowledge in practical applications. Intelligence AND street smarts is the best combination, but if I had to choose one over the other, I’d take street smarts any day.

    It’s so true. I took issue with Doug’s assertion that they should base college acceptances primarily on SAT scores, as they are not good indicators of an individual’s success in college. I used my roomie and I as perfect examples, and I’ll do it again: my roomie and I had approximately the same SAT scores. Actually I think she might’ve done slightly better on some sections. We were both above average, but neither of our scores were that impressive. Anyway, I graduated with honors, Phi Beta Kappa, got in to grad school with a partial scholarship. She graduated with no honors and is now working at Kohls. So. IQ has nothing to do with it.

    Also Doug: I think it’s a little silly to compare the San Francisco fire to the Haiti earthquake. SF is a city, Haiti is a friggin’ country. Context is important here. Haiti’s government was corrupt and the people were poor BEFORE the earthquake. The infrastructure just wasn’t there in the first place, so how can they “rebuild” what wasn’t there? Have you ever been to a developing country and lived with no electricity and met the people? If not, I don’t see how you’re in a position to judge the “patheticness” of Haitian people.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Can you ban people that discuss IQ per Twilight as well? :p *batseyelashes*

    LOL! And this is why I love Anacaona.

  • Doug1

    Anacaona—

    Agree about Louverture, from what I’ve read. He does seem to have been a great man.

    Dessalines however, a general under him who succeeded him after the French captured and imprisoned him back in France using deceit, was another matter.

    They had a bright start but then the problem was that once freed, the slave owners feared for their lives and flee in mass from the country, they took most of the money and most the educated class with them. Thus there was a lot of ignorant people with a lot of freedom and no reason to repress themselves, much like SMP right now, thus things started to get downhill.

    Whites whether plantation owners or merchants feared for their lives for very good reason. One whole hell of a lot of them, plus educated mulatto blacks who were often the allies of whites, were massacred, men, women and children in a large racial genocide. As that was going on, year the remaining whites and most mulattoes fled, mostly to New Orleans.

    I agree with you that having no substantial educated class, in Haiti’s case that being all whites and mulattoes at the time of the revolution, greatly impeded Haitian commercial and other progress, which has been pretty abysmal since their revolution. One of the best periods for Haiti, even though leftists and Haitian elites hate this, was actually during US army occupation to try to turn the place around in the 20s and 30s.

  • Doug1

    Olive–

    Also Doug: I think it’s a little silly to compare the San Francisco fire to the Haiti earthquake. SF is a city, Haiti is a friggin’ country.

    They’re very comparable.

    Most of Haiti wasn’t hit by that earthquake to any significant degree. Mostly Port au Prince was, and much smaller cities and towns nearby to the west and south of that southern Haitian capital.

    San Francisco was the financial and sea trade effective capital of the American west at that time. It was hit by a comparably intense earthquake, and the fire was a result of it, iirc from gas mains going ablaze. The rebuilding in San Francisco was rapid, with no international help and only some federal help, mainly the army building temporary shacks for about 20k displaced people. Within a year most of those (very cheaply rented at $2 a month) shacks had been left by their residents. The bank of Italy, headquartered then in San Francisco, became a really big deal in the rebuilding, and changed its name to the Bank of America. You may have head of it. All self help, or nearly so.

  • tom

    Jesus….wrong again. I had not even opened this blog until the other day. It was soley chance the topic was here.
    Look I understand values. Some people want a mate that has matching values..I get that..but leave it at, that stop the shaming. If having sex with an “experienced” isn’t for someone that’s cool with me. But to claim the reason why is because the experiences damaged them is not cool. It MAY have or they may have already been damaged in the first place. Also you don’t think the sex between my women and me isn’t special.. I beg to differ. What we both have been thru hasn’t be a hinderance but an eye opener. We really appreciate what we now have. The past is where it belongs, in the past.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Doug,
    Alright, that’s a fair assessment. The context thing though. Do you agree that Haiti’s government is operating in a different context, with a different history, than the U.S. government at the time of the SF fire? I still think it’s kind of like comparing apples to oranges.

  • Abbot

    “to claim the reason why is because the experiences damaged them is not cool.”

    The claim of “damage” has not been made. Like all experiences/actions it does however have an effect on the person who had the experience and the person who learns about it. Its never neutral. Wise women who want to present themselves as outstanding understand that and act accordingly.

  • tom

    Part of theproblem susan and others here have with women like Jess and men like me is we go against everything this blog is trying to agenatize (is that even a word..lol) we both were promiscuous while a lot younger but yet we came out unscathed and wound up in great loving relationships. While some people here have played by the rules and have been burned. Not to worry I will eventually have had enough aaagain and disappear.

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

      @Tom

      we both were promiscuous while a lot younger but yet we came out unscathed and wound up in great loving relationships. While some people here have played by the rules and have been burned.

      Of course! There are no absolutes, it’s all about following a strategy that gives you the best odds. I’ve never claimed that women with a high number of partners won’t marry, just that the pool of interested men will shrink. And no one has ever discussed your sexual past here, that I can recall. You’re always going to bat for your fiancee, who’s probably similar to Jess.

      You’re in a great loving relationship, that’s great. No one is saying there’s something wrong with your choice – for you. You want them to say they’d make the same choice, and that’s not going to happen. I don’t know why you find that surprising. Honestly, I can’t help but feel that if you were at peace with your choice, you wouldn’t feel such a strong need to defend it.

  • @peace

    I am going to do my usual ‘swim against the current’ thing and actually comment on the original blog post. Why we are talking about race now, I am not even going to bother finding out.

    I’ve seen several comments from Warmwoman, purplesneakers and Babydoll that really support what Neely was getting at. Feminism, although it had noble intentions, got lost along the way because it lacked real guidance. Instead of helping to free women from desperation and social/legal slavery, it tried to make women just like the Man of historical precedent. Let me tell you – as a guy – I don’t even want to be the Man of historical precedent. He’s an A-1 asshole. However, I cannot blame some women for wanting to ‘live like the other side does’ after watching their husbands, fathers, brothers etc get to go and do things no woman could for so long. Men appeared to hold all the cards so when women got a few, many wanted to play them for all they were worth. And that is what they did. Women got a real taste of what it was like to live like the Man of historical precedent. What they found though was that it wasn’t all it had appeared to be, in fact it was a pretty miserable existence. Neely makes that pretty clear here:

    “It was our right (rite?) as women, our responsibility as sexual creatures, to show the world we can fuck like men do, have instantaneous orgasms, and feel faaaabulous while doing it in our 4-inch Manolo Blahniks. Countless women bought into this lie, only to realize years later that it doesn’t, in fact, feel so great most of the time, and that actually, there’s nothing all that empowering and liberating about spreading your legs with wild abandon.”

    When it comes down to it, no one wants to feel disgusting and no one wants to be an asshole, yet that is the price of promiscuity. There is no freedom in being sexually free, it’s just a different kind of slavery. There is also no lasting satisfaction or meaning in it. It is empty. And I am speaking, not just about women but men as well. We may have slightly fewer social consequences but it still comes at the cost of a great deal of pain caused, a good reputation and a lot of emotional scarring – whether we care to admit it or not.

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

      @Peace

      When it comes down to it, no one wants to feel disgusting and no one wants to be an asshole, yet that is the price of promiscuity. There is no freedom in being sexually free, it’s just a different kind of slavery. There is also no lasting satisfaction or meaning in it. It is empty. And I am speaking, not just about women but men as well. We may have slightly fewer social consequences but it still comes at the cost of a great deal of pain caused, a good reputation and a lot of emotional scarring – whether we care to admit it or not.

      It’s very good to hear a man say this. I think you’re right – casual sex turns all of us into assholes.

  • LeapofaBeta

    @Peace
    Just to jump off your analogy of a card game, feminism had a great hand when it got some accomplishments like women’s voting, right to work, ect. Then it really decided it wanted to own the game, traded in all the cards that had been working for women so far, mixed them with cards the men had, and got a bogus hand that doesn’t work for anyone anymore.

    I think there’s a lot of great rediscovery of what it means to be a woman or be a man these days. The last two months since I took my red pill I’ve seen it all over blogs, the internet, and some media as well. It’s exciting and I think extremely healthy.

    Lets just hope the current Feminists and MRA’s don’t screw it up. I won’t hold my breath.

  • @peace

    @Tom

    “we both were promiscuous while a lot younger but yet we came out unscathed and wound up in great loving relationships. While some people here have played by the rules and have been burned.”

    You played by “the rules” too, the rules of this world which dictate a man’s freedom to do whatever he wants sexually with relative social impunity. Women like Jess were following “the rules” as well, the rules of the sexual liberation of women, championed by Feminism. However,
    if you think living by those rules makes the world a better place and could be recommended as a wise course to those looking for advice on how to ‘wind up in a great, loving relationship’, you need to brush up on your statistics. Maybe you are an exception in *some* respects but that probably has more to do with a self-centered perspective than anything else. I doubt you left a string of happiness behind you.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Cherful Sadist #715 ref “kicking to the curb”

    In stilletto FMPs (my wife had to tell me what those were-I thought they were Full Metal i e reinforced with rebar(if anyone would do it it’d be the Italians they haven’t built anything worth a shit in centuries), with harness?

  • http://www.occupytitanicsex.com Aobh

    Get freaking REAL. MTV and mass media promote the hookup culture.
    Every man woman and child in the USA is sexually harassed at the grocery store checkout with hyper sexualized imagery blaring out from the cover of the Cosmo etc every day of the week.
    In the forties the phrase for a “hook-up” in pop music was a “trip to the moon on gossamer wings” and today we get
    Don’t they know my nigga Gutter f/***in’ kidnap kids?
    Fuck ‘em in the a**, throw ‘em over the bridge.
    A lot more violence in that phrase and hundreds more like it.

  • Malia

    yet we came out unscathed and wound up in great loving relationships.

    And that’s the deal. You came out UNSCATHED. Otherwise the end result would be expected. The problem is not that you were able to succeed despite your choices, it’s that you want to make it seem like you succeeded BECAUSE OF your choices.

    You can find a decent number of successful people who have done drugs, yet we don’t advocate a drug positive culture because we know it has ill effects for most. A sex-poz culture is not about what makes sense for MOST people, it is about a FEW people trying to force PREFERENCE for their choices.

    (and this includes ppl like Doug)

  • tom

    @susan
    I am at peace with my selection. Maybe the way YOU crudsade for chasity means you are not comfortable with who you settled for?..turnabout fair play?
    I have never said my way was the right way, only that is is another way that is, Dare I say, more acceptable than in the past? When the bikinni came out guess who was the most outraged? MEN. They certainly didn’t want their property, I mean woman, to show that much skin….my how times have changed. I certainly do not think sleeping around is right for everyone. Many people can not handle it emotionally, while many people can. It seems the people who can’t handle it or disagree with it feel the need to shame. And that only pisses people like me off. Btw I too am turned off by the classic indiscriminate slut. That is not the level of promiscuity I personaly accept. The point is if doug or jesus or abbott do not want a women who has entertained casual sex that is certainly their right. But if they shame them expect to get it back in the form of rational reasoning for their opinion

  • LeapofaBeta

    “A sex-poz culture is not about what makes sense for MOST people, it is about a FEW people trying to force PREFERENCE for their choices.”

    I’ve been thinking the last couple days about how people handle people that push their life choices on others; life choices that generally hurt the other person when you look at statistical results. Some people think shame, some rational arguments, and some ignoring the person.

    Through life I’ve always seen very little reaction to the person themselves.

    So how do we best keep people from the negative results of listening to people with a harmful agenda? I specifically always think of things like slutty behavior pushed on others (both sexes included), divorce porn type behavior, ect. Any thoughts?

  • LeapofaBeta

    And for the record, I fully support people that sleep around, divorce for non-frivolous reasons, and basically live their life in the way they choose. I have many friends I respect and interact with that have done those things.

    Its when an individual starts preaching EVERYONE should live this way when there’s statistical proof that its harmful that gets me frustrated and angry at the harm they’re causing. Or that people should ignore their actions and not hold them responsible.

    Again, I’ll go to people that sleep around. I can respect those individuals, but I have a relatively low partner count and look for that in others I’m going to commit my resources and affection to. Others have made their choices, good for them, but don’t preach to me that I should ignore those choices and absolve them of responsibility and thinking of what those choices would mean for a future relationship with that person

  • jess

    “I too am turned off by the classic indiscriminate slut. That is not the level of promiscuity I personaly accept. The point is if doug or jesus or abbott do not want a women who has entertained casual sex that is certainly their right. But if they shame them expect to get it back in the form of rational reasoning for their opinion”

    Tom, perfectly put sir

  • tom

    Malia..please you are comparing having responsible casual sex to a friggin drug addict???..I came out unscathed because I saw nothing wrong with what I did. I never played any of the women and I stopped my JR year in college because I fell in love WHILE I had a lot of women throwing themselves at me. I was never the typical asshole football played who plays women brags of his conquests and does it for ego purposes. I always respected women and quickly tired of NSA sex. I found it fun at first empty at the end. But I would not change a thing and I feel I am no worse off from the experience. We are, after all the sum of all our experiences, are we not? In over 30 years of relationships I have never cheated because I know about the grass on the other side?…sure now the do gooders will say one doesn’t have to sleep around to remain faithful later in life….duh! But there are those who are temped by the grass and just have to find out.

  • Abbot

    “That is not the level of promiscuity I personaly accept”

    All men take into account a woman’s PAST sexual history when its time to select a wife. It is universal. Therefore natural. The degree varies. All men respect other men’s level of emphasis on this point. Or they are not men.

  • Abbot

    “if they shame them expect to get it back in the form of rational reasoning for their opinion”

    Yes, men are now expected to explain why they quietly used past sexual behavior as a criteria for dismissing [aka shaming] women for commitment.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @tom #737

    “Crusade for Chastity”-I like it; it has a nice ring to it. It harkens back to the attempts by the Church to recapture the Holy Lands, plus it evokes an active assertion of what is essentially a passive posture (I mean,if you’re chaste, it means you don’t do anything, right?) This has wheels-damn I wish I were a younger man. I mean Billy Graham II with all due respect he just doesn’t have it; besides, what’s the mantra of the new marketing? FOCUS!
    Graham Crusades where you just go out after “sin” is too genreal, people don’t relate. Here let me try out my openig speech (I’ve got my hair, but it ain’t gleaming grey like the Grahams, just sort of a filthy dingy dishwater brown with swaths of lusterless grey in it, sort of like a used Brillo pad, or Barbara Walter’s pussy unless she’s gone “wax on, wax off” as I’ve heard is the fashion theses days):

    “Brothers and sisters, I stand before you today
    and ask you to join me in announcing New Crusade,
    one that seeks, like those of old, to recapture and
    reclaim lost territory, a territory abandoned to
    wantonless, lust, depravity and despair but yet still
    capable of reclamation if we but only seize this
    moment, declare ourselves the implacable foes of all
    forces, human and incarnate, who would instill in
    our youth carnal stirrings and cravings impure,
    obscene and malevolent, and return them to the
    light, enfold them with the certain knowledge
    that if they but refrain from battin’ the bishop,
    rubbin’ the nubbin, theirs is an eternal glory and
    salvation sublime without measure, joyous beyond
    words, compared to which the tawdry release of
    their precious bodily fluids is but a pale small
    drizzle which barely winks at the grandeur which
    is their birthright. And as the collection plates are
    passed around dig deep brothers and sisters dig
    deep, and those of you writing checks, it is Rev.
    T.V. Munson Esq.

    Not bad for a start. Chastity ought to really bring in the $. I mean, how can you be against it? I agree it is more honored in the breach than the observance (Wm. Shake), but is is paid lip service (ooh-that sounds unchaste-I’m going to need ot work on this).

  • tom

    I am th last person who says everyone should sleep around. But I am the first in line to point the finger at those who look down on those that have had casual sex. That holier than thou attitude is bs.

    @ abbott
    What you do not understand or at least refuse to accept is men have dominated women from a power standpoint, because they can, physically. To say men dispise promiscuity because it is natural to do so is so far from the truth it is ridiculous and totally explains why you had to RESORT to finding a meek brainwashed woman from another country to marry

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Honestly, I can’t help but feel that if you were at peace with your choice, you wouldn’t feel such a strong need to defend it.

    + about a billion

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I am th last person who says everyone should sleep around. But I am the first in line to point the finger at those who look down on those that have had casual sex. That holier than thou attitude is bs.

    It’s not holier than thou. It’s more trustworthy in a committed relationship than thou. That’s all.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them, Tom. Except you. Except you.

    And Hugo Schwyzer.

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

      Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them, Tom. Except you. Except you.

      This line is so well written it gave me goosebumps. Damn Jesus, I want to read your stuff.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    You know what’s odd? I can never understand what Munson really believes. I really think he’s just in it for the performance.

    BTW, Munson, when she kicks your married ass to the curb, that’s your cue to get a life and stop sharing fantasies about her.

    What I don’t get is, if your name is really Thomas Munson and your bar # is what you’ve advertised it to be, then you have to be the dumbest fuck on the planet to come on here and publicly embarrass yourself like this. How did you pass the bar?

  • Abbot

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them

    Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them

    This really does bear repeating. Apparently.

  • tom

    + a billion? Thats coming from a guy who KNEW his woman was a good person and thew it all away when he found out she had had casul sex befor you knew her. Actually she was still the same person she was before but only your perception changed. If she was sooo tainted how could you have fallen for her in the first place? Don’t answer I wouldn’t expect you to know the answer nor give an honset one.

  • Sassy6519

    I am th last person who says everyone should sleep around. But I am the first in line to point the finger at those who look down on those that have had casual sex. That holier than thou attitude is bs.

    How so? I look down on people who are past drug users. I do so because their actions show a lack of self control on their part, not to mention a lack of respect for their bodies. How is looking down on promiscuous people any different?

  • Malia

    Malia..please you are comparing having responsible casual sex to a friggin drug addict???

    Actually, I compared it to a drug USER. You threw in addict. Just as there are people who feel like they slept around and came out fine, there are people who also did drugs in their youth and came out fine. Yet we still do not have a drug positive culture.

  • Abbot

    “Just as there are people who feel like they slept around and came out fine, there are people who also did drugs in their youth and came out fine. Yet we still do not have a drug positive culture.”

    Brilliant. It shows how self serving and validation desperate these sex pozztards really are

  • tom

    Abbott keep telling yourself that…millions of former sluts are married to …drumroll. ….MEN!

    Jesus friggin christ jesus There a lot more trustworthy former sluts jesus than there are not. That study showed only a marinal difference..secret to having a great relationship..find a woman who loves you and treat her like gold.

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

      Jesus friggin christ jesus There a lot more trustworthy former sluts jesus than there are not. That study showed only a marinal difference..

      Are you channeling Mary Magdalene?

  • Mike

    “Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them”

    Actually i do.. but only the promiscuous ones that don’t want to sleep with me. If you’re giving it away for nothing, and you refuse to give it to me unless i jump through hoops, i’m insulted.

    Like the whole pay $5 for a .25 for a newspaper analogy.

    But yes, there is a threshold where they lose they’re marriageability… tho not an issue for me anymore, since i will avoid that like a leaky boat sailing through a hurricane in the bermuda triangle while infested with rats carrying bubonic plague.

  • Abbot

    “there is a threshold where they lose they’re marriageability”

    Promiscuity matters. It varies for each man. Sex pozz asshats want it to not matter at any level for all men. They are caving to the reality that the only way to make it not matter is to scale back on the promiscuity. There is no other way.

  • Abbot

    “millions of former sluts are married”

    Of course. Some men are duped. Some cave.

  • @peace

    @Sassy6519

    “How so? I look down on people who are past drug users. I do so because their actions show a lack of self control on their part, not to mention a lack of respect for their bodies. How is looking down on promiscuous people any different?”

    Anyone and everyone screws up in life. When we fall flat on our face we have a choice to either re-evaluate and make a change or get right back up and keep doing the same thing. If someone screwed up but decided to make a genuine change and leave their former course behind, why should they be judged harshly by anyone? We all fail to one degree or another in life; you could say we all live in ‘glass houses’. Who are we to pass a merciless judgement on another for their failings? I do not believe anyone should be judged for a past course if they have truly corrected it and left it behind.

  • Doug1

    The point is if doug or jesus or abbott do not want a women who has entertained casual sex that is certainly their right. But if they shame them expect to get it back in the form of rational reasoning for their opinion”

    I think promiscuous girls can often be great for flings. I never shame sluts in person, in fact I tell them I like sexually adventurous girls, and that they turn me on. Then I get them to tell me some of their sluttiest adventures after awhile.

  • jess

    and yet despite these claims that guys won’t marry girls with experience, I and others have described how all such women they know are either married or in LTRs. Funny that.

    and even more inconveniently, there appears to be a correlation with extreme chastity and spinsterhood.

    further more there is also a correlation between divorce rates and premature/virginal marriage.

    It would be interesting to get more European and american data on this whole general area.

    I recently posted a link of a survey saying 64% of uk college girls have 5+ partners when graduating. This will have been a mix of NSA and LTR partners. My guess is that most of this 64% will do just fine.

    And thoses that don’t, as Tom has patiently explained, have personality issues that are not necessarily linked to casual sex.

  • jess

    sassy,
    may i ask what qualifies as ‘promiscuous’? for you?
    Thanks

  • Malia

    @Sassy

    The problem with the “holier than thou” attitude is this:

    It’s a constantly moving target. Some people define promiscuity only by the definition which does not include them. First it’s number, then it’s the nature of those experiences, then it’s this then it’s that. You, by common standards are not promiscuous, until the guy who has a lower partner count than you is interested. Then he is giving the side eye because your number is higher than his. Because the porbelm is when that definition does not include you, it’s easy to say things like that about other women. But you’re also young. Another 10 years of single living (which is statistically likely) and that number creeps up a bit, even by chaste standards, unless you plan on very prolonged periods of celibacy.

    The problem is for the most part, promiscuity here is just “people who do more/more casually than I do” and then it’s all let’s look down or judge. NOT ONE person has been able to provide standard that’s pretty close to commonly accepted. NOT ONE.

  • Sassy6519

    @peace

    When we fall flat on our face we have a choice to either re-evaluate and make a change or get right back up and keep doing the same thing. If someone screwed up but decided to make a genuine change and leave their former course behind, why should they be judged harshly by anyone?

    The key thing is that I feel differently about the two groups.

    1. People who make a mistake once or twice, learn from it, and change their ways.
    2. People who make a mistake, don’t learn from it, and continue to do the same destructive action over and over again, yet expecting a different result.

    Most women in the hookup culture tend to lump into the 2nd group. They want a relationship, but they think hooking up will get them one. They sleep with men first and ask questions later. They don’t learn from the first time of being burned or change their ways. They plow through 20+ guys and wonder why they have no relationship to show for it.

    I don’t shame the first group. It’s the idiots in the second group that I have a problem with. If the action isn’t good, stop doing it. If it’s not getting you what you want, change your game plan. The women who rack up high partner counts while complaining about not having a boyfriend get no sympathy from me. If you want men to respect you, you have to respect yourself first. Nothing about spreading your legs often screams self-respect. I think, and have heard from numerous men, that they are incapable of feeling respect for a women who conducts herself that way.

    @ Jess

    I think any woman who has slept with 20+ guys by the time she is 30 is a bit suspicious. I also think any man who has slept with 20+ women by the time he is 30 is a bit suspicious as well.

  • Chris_in_CA

    Dammit, I ran out of popcorn. Maybe if I hurry I won’t miss anything!

  • Sassy6519

    @peace and Jess

    I responded to you both, but the comment is in moderation.

    @Malia

    The problem with defining promiscuity is that the measurement is totally subjective. Two key trends do stand out, however.

    1. Men typically prefer women to have relatively less sexual experience than they do.
    2. Women typically prefer men to have relatively more sexual experience than they do.

    The promiscuity problem at hand is that the SR and hookup culture effectively made it much harder for men (aside from the top 20%) to have the first parameter met. It’s much easier for women to have casual sex than the typical guy in the 80%, so there is a disproportionate amount of highly sexually experienced women to men. These women have weeded themselves out of the relationship/marriage pool of most men without realizing it. That’s why this blog is important. It’s attempting to get the message out there so women know what they are doing to their own chances of future happy relationships.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    You know what’s odd? I can never understand what Munson really believes. I really think he’s just in it for the performance.

    LOL sorry Munson, I usually skip over your stuff too. Having said that, sometimes I come across a tidbit that cracks me up. The problem is you take too long to make your points… the other day you wrote some long-winded essay about how you think we all take our lives to seriously, that we theorize the hell out of every possible SMP situation. But you told us a story about Robert McNamara in order to get there. By the time I got to the end, I had trouble remembering what you were trying to say. So yeah, if your goal is to add comic relief to the threads, you could probably do that more succinctly. :-P

  • LeapofaBeta

    “Who are we to pass a merciless judgement on another for their failings? I do not believe anyone should be judged for a past course if they have truly corrected it and left it behind.”

    A person is responsible for their actions. Some casual sex is acceptable, people do make mistakes, but a lot of it isn’t simply making a mistake, its making a choice. Repeatedly. As much as feminism would like that not to be the case with sexual partners, it is.

    And who are we? We’re the ones that would be letting them into our lives and committing our resources to them. There’s a difference between ‘judging someone’, being rude to them, and refusing to interact with them as opposed to dating, having a relationship, or marrying them. I wouldn’t dismiss someone out of hand, but it would be irresponsible to any future children I had with an individual to not atleast consider their past and if it is an indicator someone would be a poor mother for my children or would squander resources I spent on her and eventually make me miserable even if I didn’t have children.

  • jess

    sassy- “these women have weeded themselves out of the marriage pool”

    well thats very much an issue of contention isn’t it? with direct observation I find precious little evidence of that.

    (well hey- save some of the commentators here that claim to speak for all mankind and maintain all other men who disavow such views are lying)

    and anyway, if there is such a large amount of women with higher numbers than guys, than many guys will either have to marry a higher numbered girl or never marry.

    Now it seems that some guys on here have chosen the latter path and i have heard that ultra alphas dont marry too, but in the uk anyway most blokes do end up in LTRs.

  • Sassy6519

    and anyway, if there is such a large amount of women with higher numbers than guys, than many guys will either have to marry a higher numbered girl or never marry.

    That’s the issue. Guys don’t want to have to marry promiscuous women. They would much rather marry a woman with less sexual experience, but the odds of that are dwindling because of the SR and hookup culture. It’s effectively the same as if men would have no choice but to marry obese women. That reality isn’t to far away either, considering the growing obesity rate in America today.

  • jess

    leapofaBeta,
    Absolutely you owe it to yourself to consider all the thing you mentioned.
    And to do it without any shaming behaviour- absolutely- 100% agree.

    I think people either consciously or subconsciously think ‘number ‘ is pertinent, for health and mental reasons.

    But i think for most men and women that number tends to be quite high before its at ‘deal breaker’ level.

    I know that some guys here think a ‘single’ act of casual sex means a girl is never wife material. And thats fine- if they are sure they have sound internal justifications.

    Of course this does somewhat reduce their pool of prospective partners and finding ‘the one’ can be hard enough.

    It strikes me as a pity that they might just miss out on the love of their life with such a strict ‘admissions criteria’ – but you know- the world will keep turning and I bet even the strictest guys find someone eventually – they may just have to wait a tad longer or compromise on some other traits they wanted in their partner.

  • jess

    “That reality isn’t to far away either, considering the growing obesity rate in America today.”

    not if Frost has his way they won’t!!

    Personally I dont think its any bad thing if guys (and women) stop thinking girls have to be skeletal to be attractive. Obesity should be averted of course for simple health reasons but Im not comfortable with either sex jumping through enormous loops for the sake of the other gender.

    Im happy with people making the best of themselves within reason but boob jobs, tummy tucks and crash diets? no thanks.

    should guys HAVE to go to the gym every day and have hair transplants? for the girls? hell no!

    enjoy your life- have the odd cake, the odd fling whilst you can (only if you really want to but no kids and that pretty face are temporary features- trust me!), maybe have that extra glass of wine and to hell with it – get that expensive cab home just this once.

    Life is there to be lived, not to be existed in a spartan bubble, just in case it alters a particular risk ratio 15 years down the line.

    And before I get the usual snipes- moderation is always my watch word…

  • Malia

    these women have weeded themselves out of the marriage pool

    With CERTAIN types of guys. I think that’s key. The problem is those guys think they speak for all guys, when they speak for all guys LIKE THEM.

    While I entirely understand Susan’s position that these guys represent the better mates, when reading the posts of many of the guys here, I’m not so sure.

    There are some stand outs that are all around decent (from what they write), but a lot of them just seem to be horrendously bitter with an agenda. And it’s just scary.

  • jess

    “Men don’t despise promiscuous women. They just don’t want to marry them, Tom. Except you. Except you.

    This line is so well written it gave me goosebumps. Damn Jesus, I want to read your stuff.”
    —————
    Susan, I am often bewildered in how you choose to dish out praise or rebuke from your keyboard.

    I mean no disrespect to Mr Mahoney- his writing style is absoltuly fine, but in this particular instance, apart for the fact it was an incorrect statement (or at least a huge exageration) it seems to be in plain English.

    In terms of enlightenment, may I ask what subtle cadence of word play here caused follicular erections upon the Walsh dermis?

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

      In terms of enlightenment, may I ask what subtle cadence of word play here caused follicular erections upon the Walsh dermis?

      You just said it. It’s the cadence, the rhythm of the speech. Jesus hit the sweet spot, and that doubling up at the end, after the “,Tom” is just perfect. I can’t explain it better than that.

      Jesus is a very, very good writer.

  • jess

    Malia,

    Your last 2 posts are absolutely on the BUTTON.

    and I confess it slightly annoys me when people write more succinctly and fluidly than me- just like you did there- ah well… i shall blame it on my verbose brit genes.

  • http://www.occupytitanicsex.com Aobh

    IMHO everyone and I do mean everyone should enjoy an experimental phase and live all their consenting adult type fantasies to discover what they want in their life. In my case I decided after my experimental phase was complete, that what I wanted was passion, connection and romance with a body mind and soul mate. The whole using your body like a carnival ride doesn’t get it for me. To some my experimental phase might be considered “promiscuous”. That kind of person wouldn’t be a good LTR partner for me so who cares really?!?!

  • jess

    haha- now i wonder what word in comment 776 caused the filter to activate?

  • Doug1

    Jess—

    and yet despite these claims that guys won’t marry girls with experience, I and others have described how all such women they know are either married or in LTRs. Funny that.

    A promiscuous 8 can get a 7 who she’s compatible with and who’s swallowed feminism to marry her, but can she get a loving strong alpha 9 to, is the point.

  • jess

    Aobh- excellent point-

  • Malia

    but can she get a loving strong alpha 9 to, is the point

    And what has been argued, repeatedly, is that loving strong alphas are not likely to be monogamous.

    Therefore, to that point, she is better off with the 7, or even the 6. Whether she is willing to accept that, and be committed to that man, is an entirely different matter.

  • jess

    Doug1,
    Well i find it difficult to use the SMV value thing anyway.

    I mean when i was 20 if you liked big eyes, skinny figure and grungy clothes i was someones 9. if you liked boobs, make up and curves i would be minus 9!

    one of my boyfriend’s (so called) friends revealed undying love for me, whilst another close male friend told me he found me utterly asexual.

    And i myself HATE alpha 9s they way Susan has described them- I wouldn’t want them as NSA or LTR. (it may be a uk/usa thing- we think jocks are morons)

    But of the ones that I s’pose matched that ‘alpha’ criteria- well they married the more experienced girls (and in at least one case a girl who really couldn’t be described as that ‘hot’ but she was experienced and by all accounts was a ‘rocket’ in the sack)

    I dunno- maybe she snowballed him!

  • Doug1

    Sassy–

    @Malia

    The problem with defining promiscuity is that the measurement is totally subjective. Two key trends do stand out, however.

    1. Men typically prefer women to have relatively less sexual experience than they do.

    2. Women typically prefer men to have relatively more sexual experience than they do.

    The promiscuity problem at hand is that the SR and hookup culture effectively made it much harder for men (aside from the top 20%) to have the first parameter met. It’s much easier for women to have casual sex than the typical guy in the 80%, so there is a disproportionate amount of highly sexually experienced women to men.

    Good comment sassy. You’re right.

    However it’s easier for girls who are 7’s and up to have casual fling or ONS sex with guys one or two SMV points above them than it is for even the top 20% of guys to have fling and casual sex with girls one SMP down. Alpha guys can do it (the top 20% includes a slice at the top of greater betas) fairly easily but not as easily as cute and hot girls can. They pretty much just have to send out vibes of open for business in places where lots of picking up in going on or being attempted by guys, such as singles bars and clubs.

    I would never fall in love with much less marry a woman who had more sexual partners than I had, but then that’s a strong number. My number one criterion for not too much of a slut though is that she can and has fallen adoringly in love with me. Low partner count M passed. I’ve never had a very experienced girl do that. Feel very fond of me and attracted to me, yes. Love sex with me and want to hold onto me, yes. But not way into adoring love. Which lead to my falling in love with her as well.

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

      @Doug1

      But not way into adoring love. Which lead to my falling in love with her as well.

      Can you talk a bit more about this? It suggests that a woman’s love, respect and admiration can trigger those feelings in men. If that’s true, then women need to abandon the Principle of Least Interest entirely and go all in. It’s risky, but the payoff if high.

      Do other men agree with this?

  • LeapofaBeta

    “I know that some guys here think a ‘single’ act of casual sex means a girl is never wife material. And thats fine- if they are sure they have sound internal justifications.”

    I think you’re projecting on your sense of numbers. That very few would rule out someone for one. But that the numbers you imagine most would start ruling people out for are probably lower than you expect.

    I suspect that most would start to question a woman with a count of 5 casual sex encounters. And start ruling them out completely, no questions, over 10.

    But that might also just be me projecting my feelings as well. Though I would also take the individual case into context, such as if they were all at once or spread out or it was more recent in her behavior.

    Also, I believe in blunt honesty. While I can respect a woman with a high count in other areas of life, I’ll be honest with her that I rule her out for any relationship with me and let her know why. I’ll also guide my friends away from her as girlfriend material. I know that counts as ‘shaming’ for some. To me its realistically looking at her actions, holding her responsible for her choices, and making my own choices based upon them.

  • jess

    Sassy,
    “I think any woman who has slept with 20+ guys by the time she is 30 is a bit suspicious. I also think any man who has slept with 20+ women by the time he is 30 is a bit suspicious as well.”

    Fair enough- that is pretty tolerant compared to many here.
    I probably wouldn’t pitch my tolerances all that much higher.

    At 30 I had only 2 guys, one LTR and one NSA.

    I did, ahem, ‘make up for lost time’ in the next 4 years.

    But you know, as I have said many a time, I’m fully expecting to be with my SO till ‘death do us part’ as it were.

  • DC

    I know of two cases of women with extremely high numbers — and I’m talking close to 100 yes 100 not 10. Both married — one with a very dedicated marriage, neither cheated — I mean they had they’re ups and downs but it wasn’t infidelity. And the other woman — she would go to the bar with one guy and leave with a different one — then go back to the first guy later that night. Myself married without very low number — but we still divorced and yes I was the one who filed. I think I am an outlier — being I don’t desire a re-marriage and have never wanted children. Point being — there are a lot of different scenarios — you cannot always tell what someone will do from their past. After the divorce — I took a short spin and had a grand ole time — met great guy and have been totally loyal ever since — I would never cheat — if I didn’t want to be in a relationship — I would end it and I wouldn’t want someone to stay with me and cheat — if someone did that would totally kill my love for them there would be nothing they could do to win me back.

  • Doug1

    Jess–

    I mean when i was 20 if you liked big eyes, skinny figure and grungy clothes i was someones 9. if you liked boobs, make up and curves i would be minus 9!

    You sound like Keira Knightly in Bend it Like Beckham, her first film role I believe and a little charmer of a movie.

    I tend to like the looks and body type of Kim Kardashian, but make her 5’6 at least and give her some brains please. Like me them raven haired beauties. Well that girl who starred in Slumdog Millionaire was also pretty hot, and looks a good lot like my M, though M has a more N. Italian look, sort of twist to it, natch.

  • jess

    Leopofabeta,
    not quite sure i would go along with the ‘shaming thing’ but will agree to differ on that.

    In terms of numbers you can see that Sassy upper limit is 19+

    and a few others have said similar.

    i think someone posted a link last year- i seem to recall a lot of guys got wary at 10+ if i recall so your guess may on target there.

    I think in the uk we might be a bit more tolerant but its so complex, depends on age, mix of LTRs and NSA’s, new attitudes etc

    And as i have said before, I personally would be more worried about say, 7 LTRs than 7 NSA’s. lots of failed LTR’s is a major flag i think – indicative of a major character flaw somewhere perhaps.

  • Doug1

    Jess—

    ultra alphas dont marry too, but in the uk anyway most blokes do end up in LTRs.

    Ole Warren Beatty took a good long while about it, but he did eventually marry. I’d bet with a prenup. I doubt if anyone’s gonna get George Clooney to marry them; he broke up with his much, much younger Italian girlfriend over her efforts to pressure him to do so through the media.

    I think a good lot of alphas and super alphas have understandings with their wives, as I do, of one flavor or another. Another lot have several marriages and prenups if they make big dosh to keep that from being ruinous to them. See Donald Trump. You lot have just this year made prenups enforceable, kinda sorta in court made law. More like they should guide the court your high court said for the first time, rather than simply be followed, regardless of the court’s perception of “fairness”. It’s quite a big murk actually. Only been one prenup case reviewed by your high court under this new interpretation of your common family law.

  • jess

    doug1-
    just googled Kim Kardishan- she does does indeed have great boobs-

    -totally hate her.

  • jess

    “You just said it. It’s the cadence, the rhythm of the speech. Jesus hit the sweet spot, and that doubling up at the end, after the “,Tom” is just perfect. I can’t explain it better than that.
    Jesus is a very, very good writer.”

    Ah I see- and I see what you did there with the “very, very”!

    In that case Im, really, really, really appreciative of the reply :)

  • LeapofaBeta

    @Jess
    “And as i have said before, I personally would be more worried about say, 7 LTRs than 7 NSA’s. lots of failed LTR’s is a major flag i think – indicative of a major character flaw somewhere perhaps.”

    I would worry about a lot of LTRs more as indicative that someone wasn’t able to tell what they were looking for in a relationship or got bored with people after time – so I’d want to know their reasons for ending it or the reasons their partner ended it. To me, the reasons of ending a relationship tell a lot about a person and their priorities – whether they’re willing to sacrifice a relationship for career, falling out of love, finances, ect.

    It also can say a lot of how strong of a bond they were able to develop and whether it was a relationship of convenience/status or one where they actually cared for the other person. But then, NSA’s and ONS’s can do the same thing. Its all looking at how the other person creates personal bonds, the strength of a bond they form, whether they’re able to bring anything to the relationship, and then deciding whether they’re worth allowing into your life and investing time and resources on

  • jess

    leapofabeta- yep – pretty much agree there.

  • Passer_By

    @Susan

    “If that’s true, then women need to abandon the Principle of Least Interest entirely and go all in. It’s risky, but the payoff if high. Do other men agree with this?”

    Yes, I never understood the Principle of Least Interest as a strategy for women. It would just make it a lot easier to dump her after sex.

    “Jesus is a very, very good writer.”

    Eh, he just gets the Apostles to write everything for him and polish up his speeches to make them sound better.

  • Passer_By

    @Tom

    ““I too am turned off by the classic indiscriminate slut. That is not the level of promiscuity I personaly accept. The point is if doug or jesus or abbott do not want a women who has entertained casual sex that is certainly their right. ”

    “Thats coming from a guy who KNEW his woman was a good person and thew it all away when he found out she had had casul sex befor you knew her. Actually she was still the same person she was before but only your perception changed. If she was sooo tainted how could you have fallen for her in the first place? ”

    Make up your mind, man. Is he allowed to be turned off by it, or not?

    It seems to me that you feel people are free to be turned off by it, but only at the level of promiscuity that you personally deem inappropriate (what you have deemed the “classic indiscriminate slut”, whatever that is).

  • purplesneakers

    Some, not all. I admit to being easily aroused, but the women I’m most interested in, and have always been most interested in, are the ones that display their femininity through their actions: a woman who is shy and demure, a woman who is playing with children, a woman who expresses or acts upon compassion and empathy, a woman who gives of herself to help others, a woman who displays her selectivity and values by not falling prey to the cads, and a woman who can just radiate joy while doing the simplest, most mundane things.

    Women are hypergamous, but men, believe it or not, can be aroused and attracted to many different flavors of femininity.

    Point taken!

    Yours too, Ted D.

    I think what I was getting at is some of this bitterness that men seem to have nowadays, and even STEM men refusing to be in relationships, as Jhane Sez reported in a post a while back.

  • @peace

    @Leapofabeta

    “A person is responsible for their actions. Some casual sex is acceptable, people do make mistakes, but a lot of it isn’t simply making a mistake, its making a choice. Repeatedly. As much as feminism would like that not to be the case with sexual partners, it is.

    And who are we? We’re the ones that would be letting them into our lives and committing our resources to them. There’s a difference between ‘judging someone’, being rude to them, and refusing to interact with them as opposed to dating, having a relationship, or marrying them. I wouldn’t dismiss someone out of hand, but it would be irresponsible to any future children I had with an individual to not atleast consider their past and if it is an indicator someone would be a poor mother for my children or would squander resources I spent on her and eventually make me miserable even if I didn’t have children.”

    You’re absolutely right and I never meant to imply that anyone should ignore their better judgement when making a serious relationship decision. My response was directed at SassyR