The Funny Paradox of Virginity Expectations Between Men and Women

[jesshkah]

I read a myTake today that placed a heavy emphasis on a guy losing his virginity (I'm sure most of you know which one) but I was just suddenly struck with the irony of how different and comically opposing the views are in what's "expected" of men and women (by some) in regards to virginity. This Take is written in regards to heterosexual relationships.

Now, I know that most of us live and abide by a much more progressive view of society, myself included, so this is more a discussion for those who I believe do not. Below are two points, one for men and one for women, that I have seen quite often on this site, usually from the same types of people, that are at contrast enough for me to struggle to see how they exist within the same mind.

THESE ARE NOT MY OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS.

1. Male virgins suck and guys need to have had sex to be cool and seen as masculine and attractive. Society looks down on guys who are virgins and no woman wants to be with one.

2. All females need to be virgins and pure or only have had sex with very few people. Society looks down on women who have had sex with too many men and no guy wants to be with a "sloot" at the end of the day.

Wut.

Can someone explain to me, how a man is supposed to have a high number of sexual partners while women are supposed to NOT? Who.. who?? Who do you expect to be having sex with? Or is it that a certain group of women are supposed to be the ones that every guy fucks so they can get their number up, and the rest of us just stand by until we are selected by a great provider to sow their seed in? I am not following this train of logic.

Why is it that a man without experience has something wrong with them? And a woman with experience has something wrong with them?

Now, in case anyone brings this up, because I would in this discussion, a man who has previously dated or had sex is sometimes seen as more desirable to a female because it basically means that another female has given this guy the stamp of approval and chosen to engage in said activities with said man. WHICH I do not agree with because to write someone off for that is just being close minded. As a guy I don't know why you'd look at another dude who was a virgin and call them lame because that's just shit talking with no basis really. And really I can't find a justifiable reason for men OR women to devalue a sexually active female either. But that's just me.

Honestly, I could not give less of a fuck. (And am of the opinion that no one else should give a fuck about your sexual life, nor should you give a fuck IF they actually do give a fuck)

Guys - You a virgin? Ok cool, might be a learning curve but that means I get to teach you how to please me without any previous habits you might have picked up. And if you have some beginners luck, even better for me. You fucked 50 other girls in the past? You clean? No STDs, diseases, treat me with respect? We good to go. Will I be curious as to why you have 0 or 50? Sure, but that's because I'm a nosy bitch, not because I actually care about the number.

Girls - You a virgin? Not a bitch and not pushing abstinence and repentance on me? Of course we can be friends! You go home with a different dude every night we go out? Do you know what you're doing? Are you being safe? Do you not cry to me at 3am every night about a different guy not calling you back? I STILL LUH YOU.

Do you booboo. All of you. Or do whoever else your little heart desires, whenever it desires.

[redeyemindtricks]

At the end of the day, this tends to all work out pretty well, actually.

People who've fucked a lot, and who are genuinely capable of casual sex without emotional strings (either the "attachment" type of strings OR the "bitterness" type of strings) -- almost without exception -- end up in long-term relationships with other people who've *also* fucked a lot, and who have a similar attitude toward their sexuality.

People who *haven't* fucked a lot, and who are conservative in their sexuality -- and for whom sex and emotions are inevitably tied together -- also pretty much always tend to end up in long-term rls with others who are like them, too.

This whole notion of a "Chad Thundercawk" fucking his way through hundreds of women **and then wanting to settle with a virgin, or a woman with very FEW sexual partners** just... isn't a thing. That doesn't exist.
That's a trope that only exists on the internet, and/or in the minds of guys who are jealous of those dudes.

In the real world -- the real world, with real people in it -- those kinds of guys end up with women with similarly long and colorful sexual histories.
For guys who've been with lots and lots of women -- if they meet a girl and she's still a virgin, they either just won't care one way or the other, OR they'll actually find that sketchy and off-putting (... and they'll justifiably wonder whether she's *always* gna keep the pussy locked down -- including in a relationship, as a "weapon" if there are ever problems).

The ONLY guys I've ever met who actually *have* that point of view -- like, they want to fuck a lot, but they really DO want a woman with zero sexual partners (or close) -- are from Middle Eastern countries, and they want to fuck a bunch of women from outside their culture but then marry a woman *from* that culture. In all likelihood, they probably still want to fuck around with other women after they're married, too... but that's another discussion for another day.

In the rest of the world, though, you are describing an "issue" that is actually a complete non-issue.

[Chief16]

Well said, milady.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Chief16 Thank you sir!

[bloodmountain1990]

True but then there's some open minded people who don't care. Let's say a guy has some sexual partners while a girl has a lot of partners or vice versa, as long as they get along and are a match, it won't matter. I've never heard a girl say, sorry I only date guys who sleep with 20+, 30+ partners.

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 Yah that's also true (and doesn't contradict anything I said, so, not sure why you started with "but").

[bloodmountain1990]

Just making a point. I was just saying there's also those people in addition to the ones you mentioned. Personally I think someone's sexual past/lack of is nobody's business but their own. Only things I care about is if a person has an STD, a kid, or cheats. I've had a girl volunteer nearly her sexual history to me on a first date, like it was 90% of the convo that night, and I'm thinking why are you telling me this?

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 Oh hahah, I remember that, that was you... lol The risk/danger of STD's is totally overstated, by the way. Most common STD's are easily cured by a short course of antibiotics. The only common STD that *isn't* curable like that is herpes -- which is asymptomatic most (or even all) of the time, and doesn't really have significant consequences for men anyway. (in women, it can be a big problem if there's an outbreak in the birth canal and the baby gets infected at delivery -- could necessitate a C-section delivery) If you're a straight man, then, yr risk of contracting HIV is so negligible that you'd have to be paranoid to worry about that. If you don't have sex with drug users who share needles, the risk that yr partner will have HIV in the first place is something like 1/100,000 -- AND, the transmission rate is so low that, **even if yr girl were HIV positive**, you'd have to have unprotected sex with her almost 1000 times before you'd even have a 50% chance of

[redeyemindtricks]

getting HIV from her. Just saying... people all too often talk about STD's as though they were some great big huge life-changing thing with a significant risk probability... and, really, they aren't. The kids and the cheating, yeah, I could see how those would be big things.

[jesshkah]

Totally see what you're saying, and that makes sense! I wouldn't exactly call it a "non-issue" though because I think that despite the fact that that world view is much less prevalent in real life than online, that doesn't mean the view doesn't exist. For the most part it does work out, but it doesn't always just fall into place that way. Even if someone doesn't have the exactly mentality I mentioned of embodying both thoughts, there's still the general idea that it's OKAY for guys to have whatever number and less desirable for women to have higher ones. Or even vice versa. It's not as black and white as these types of people always end up with this type, and this other type gets with the other. The conflict between the two "types" if they end up in a relationship together is more what this is addressing (on a more exaggerated scale).

[redeyemindtricks]

"there's still the general idea that it's OKAY for guys to have whatever number and less desirable for women to have higher ones" ^^ ... but, no, that's not really a thing, either. For women who "save themselves", and/or who are conservative about their sexuality and wait until pretty far into a close relationship to have sex, it's absolutely NOT "okay for guys to have whatever number". Sexually conservative women will absolutely dump a guy for having been too cavalier with sex... oh yeah they will. Pretty much 99.9 percent of them will, anyway. "Manwhore" and "fuckboy" aren't insults to society at large -- mostly because **other men** don't use them as insults (contrast this with how often other *women* call women "slut" or "whore"!) -- but, if those words come from the mouth of a sexually conservative woman, they may as well be a death sentence. **IF** there's a differential in how society sees these things, that is 100.00000000 percent due to the fact that MEN don't shame other

[redeyemindtricks]

MEN for having a lot of partners, but WOMEN *do* shame other WOMEN for doing so (... or for even having the *appearance* of doing so). BETWEEN the sexes there is no such difference at all. There are pretty much exactly the same number of women who would instantly disqualify a high-count man for any sort of long-term rl, as there are men who would disqualify a woman for the same thing.

[bloodmountain1990]

@redeyemindtricks Yeah for me it's more about a person's attitude than number of partners. Like a person boasting about their sex life comes off as childish. It's like we get it you enjoy sex, so do millions of other people. And then another girl I saw recently wasn't acting like a sex object, only when we hoooked up which was fine, but right before we had sex there was an empty condom wrapper from another guy just laying in the bed. Despite not being exclusive, that was shady and disgusting, especially because she invited me over and asked me to go into her bed and wait. It's like really? You didn't even clean up before you invited me over? Ironically she ended up ditching me despite we had plans. But these go for both genders by the way. This isn't girls can't do this but guys can.

[bloodmountain1990]

And @redeyemindtricks you're right about STDs. I mean yeah they are a concern but way overblown. I've known people with STDs that have gotten treated pretty quickly.

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 ahha smh @ the condom wrapper... lol.

[bloodmountain1990]

I mean if you leave that there and some other person sees it, how would you expect someone to have no reaction from it?

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 oh yeah, no, I'm with you on that... that's just nasty. (and not the good kind of "nasty", either) I mean, there are always some dudes who would get turned on by that (the weird cuckold-fetish dudes, mostly)... but, those dudes are weird af

[bloodmountain1990]

Weird thing was she ditched me after that and blocked me from social media like I'm the one who screwed up. It's like I don't know if she's embarrassed that I saw it or is mad at me for it, which would be weird. I was just shocked because she's not stupid. She's a grad student in pathology and I've had some very intellectual conversations with her but you think someone like that would be smart enough to at lead then clean up if they were inviting another person they're seeing over. I mean I won't lie, I'm no saint. I've definitely hooked up with a few people in a short amount of time as I wasn't in a relationship but I don't tell others I'm seeing about it or leave evidence behind.

[bloodmountain1990]

Yeah I don't see how anyone would have a cuckold fetish, male or female.

[bloodmountain1990]

At least then clean up*

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 I mean, if it was a one-time fuckup and you weren't committed anyway, I'd think you could let it slide? Unless it just left such an indelible stamp in yr mind that it became one of those "I can't even" things... in which case it'd be a lost cause. All of us have *some* of those points-of-no-return, so, if that's one of yours, then it is what it is. Hey, you think THAT's bad... My little brother (who absolutely over-shares all of these stories... bless his heart) had this one friend with benefits who... uhmm... well, he once found a used condom INSIDE HER. 😂😂😂 You think forgetting a **wrapper** is bad...

[bloodmountain1990]

@redeyemindtricks No, we weren't committed but it was a catch 22 situation because we had a lot in common, made out to some of my favorite bands that I never thought would happen and clicked in so many ways. Then I found she just got out of a 5 year relationship after we had our first date. I was taking it super slow but her behavior was weird. For a few weeks after our first date, she'd text me and hit me up through social media but when I'd ask her out she's like I'm busy, maybe and wouldn't reschedule. I then decided to search for others and then she hits me up to hang out more. Pays for all my drinks and other things. She even brought up how we're very similar. I didn't.

[bloodmountain1990]

I mean not to put her on a pedestal because we had all that stuff in common and she was cute. I mean she still had her flaws and quirks that'd annoy me. It was just refreshing to find someone like that considering most women I've dated I either had nothing in common with or they just wouldn't do much to initiate/further the conversation so I'd get bored, no matter how cute they were.

[bloodmountain1990]

And that's insane about your brother finding the used condom inside her. Don't know how one would forget that. Both scenarios are disgusting though, just one is more than the other lol.

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 "And that's insane about your brother finding the used condom inside her. Don't know how one would forget that"

^^ Knowing my brother, I doubt he even *blinked*. The boy is unflappable -- and this was a totally no-strings "situationship" anyway.

But, really... my brother is VERY non-reactive, and practically impossible to piss off or fluster. That's one of the reasons he's so insanely good with women in the first place, even though he has absolutely zero high social status (he's 40 and just works in my father's mechanic shop, and sometimes takes shifts at a car wash in Fresno when he goes up there to visit his on-again off-again girlfriend... 40 is an age where "drifters" like him shouldn't be getting laid anymore, but, he's *special*).
I wrote about him here:
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q2047748-have-any-guys-on-here-been-able-to-hook-up-with-young-girls-as-they

[bloodmountain1990]

@redeyemindtricks just read that. That's insane and awesome about your brother that he is able to withstand any situation and still keeps his chin up. Not many could do that, not to his extent at least.

[bloodmountain1990]

But anyways I think I misinterpreted your thing. I mean I was definitely disgusted by the condom thing but I kinda let it slide considering we weren't official but how she just ditched me afterwards despite that we had plans was shitty.

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 Fair point.

[bloodmountain1990]

Which one is the fair point?

[redeyemindtricks]

@bloodmountain1990 Yr rationale for being disappointed in the girl (the last thing you wrote)

[bloodmountain1990]

Gotcha, mind if I PM you?

[Scrambledagain]

@redeymindtricks I agree with your sluts end up with sluts and conservatives end up with conservatives thing but: I know some people who are sexually incompatible who end up with each other too. Not a good thing and one of the core reasons of marraige failure. I mean I'm a classic example of a guy who doesn't have a colourful sexual history that looks for women who do have one ( I think this is the main reason why I can't get these women) but anyway, just throwing it out there that you are right and relationships break down because of the imbalance of what you said.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Scrambledagain "I know some people who are sexually incompatible who end up with each other too. Not a good thing and one of the core reasons of marraige failure." ^^ Absolutely. And even if two people *are* compatible, that can sometimes change over the years... especially if they don't put effort into KEEPING stuff hot between them.

[Bluemax]

In Bandit74's response you wrote, "It's the same reason why -- in higher social classes -- guys who are sexually attracted to fat women still don't settle down with fat women." Ah now, this is interesting. I recently visited my friend, we'll call her Michelin Woman (lest anyone think I'm being cruel, that is a name she calls herself). She is, by her own admission, overweight (hence her name). The subject came up about our mutual friend's chronic singleness. We'll call my chronically single other friend Mr. Rogers (a name bestowed by Michelin Woman's daughter, who was very eager to offer her two cents on the subject). To my surprise, I found out Michelin Woman dated Mr. Rogers for about five seconds. I also found out that Mr. Rogers is an avid porn fan, and exhibits all the symptoms (ok, I've put in my dues, can we have sex now?), and that he likes morbidly obese women, which might be why he liked Michelin Woman. But Mr. Rogers told NOBODY he dated Michelin Woman. Ever. Moreover...

[Bluemax]

... many years ago Mr. Rogers made a play for my sister-in-law, quite out in the open, whose build is quite the opposite of Michelin Woman's. He also expressed open interest in my student's mother. Again, Michelin Woman's opposite in terms of build. Like my sister-in-law, this woman was Asian. Anywho, you just got me thinkin'. by the way, by most accounts of my female friends, Mr. Rogers is above average looking. It's just when he starts talking... P. S., it is funny to hear Michelin Woman's daughter discuss Mr. Rogers.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Bluemax "it is funny to hear Michelin Woman's daughter discuss Mr. Rogers" ^^ that's the part about which I would actually want to know more ahah

[kap_nss]

As a man I've seen many guys wanting to sleep around and then marry a virgin. Only that this isn't literally like that. What actually happens to these guys is they TRY to have sex with a lot of women, they partially succeed, but then they WILL TRY to build a relationship with one girl who hasn't that much sexual experience. But, yes, I think that a guy who's slept around has better chances of building a successful relationship with a girl who's slept around too.

[Bluemax]

Well, the gist of Michelin Woman's daughter's opinions are that he is a geek who isn't comfortable in his own skin who seems to perpetually display one emotion. A sort of calm friendliness... not unlike Mr. Rogers. She's also in the camp that he looks kind of cute, but one expression wears thin quickly.

[Amlal]

Sorry but I want to stay pure and want a man who has had lots of hookups

[Scrambledagain]

This is such a long thread that I have to say: if I got a sex worker, it would negate everything everyone has said here. That's the beauty of prostitution💋🤘🏼🤘🏼

[Berethor]

@Amlal and you don't fear that he would use you, just like he used all the other girls?

[redeyemindtricks]

@Amlal You are the worst troll on this whole board. You've made like 10+ accounts and *hundreds* of questions, and that's literally **the only thing you ever write**. Get a new act, please.

[levantine99]

yeah thats a kinda correct point. this notion of complete opposites attracting is more of a stereotype. but its also true. some of the worst men marry some of the best women and vice versa. i see it all the time. the saint/martyr and evil/promiscuous/violent/whatever becoming couples. the cunning ones want to settle with a "victim" that will tolerate their vices and will be trustworthy and a "safe choice". and to do so, they put forth a mask of pretence in the first stages of the relationship... .

[redeyemindtricks]

@levantine99 Ahem... So all the people who've had more lovers are the "worst" and the "evil" people? And they're all "cunning", with "vices" that must be "tolerated"? Fucking EXCUSE me?

[levantine99]

well they aren't saints either. my father was promiscuous and an ahole. my mother a saint and a modest woman. there is some correlation. the point was cunning people, promiscuous or not, try to get the good people. and they usually do.

[Scrambledagain]

@levantine99 I know right! It seems (well for a guy anyway) being an asshole = successful promiscuity. It's like you can't be promiscuous and not an asshole🤔

[redeyemindtricks]

@Scrambledagain My little brother is pretty much the most sexually successful dude I know, and he's not an asshole in the least bit.

I wrote about him here:
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q2047748-have-any-guys-on-here-been-able-to-hook-up-with-young-girls-as-they

[levantine99]

well sounds like a narcissist that uses women. you have positive opinion about him cause he is your brother. i know no true descent person who changes women like shirts... .

[levantine99]

@Scrambledagain and when i say my father was an asshole i mean just to my mother and us. towards strangers he was that pleasant, social good guy. as every manipulative psycho does... .

[Scrambledagain]

@levantine99 I reckon you can be a good person and be promiscuous. Sex for recreation shouldn't be a problem, or make you a bad person. It's just that promiscuous women are not attracted to nice guys in general. So promiscuous wannabe nice guys don't get a shot.

[Berethor]

Most promiscuous people are assholes, because they usually had betrayed/leaved many people, and use/break the heart of some/all of them, also promiscuous people tend to use controversial means for getting sex. Promiscuous women are not attracted to nice guys? actually it's the nice guys who usually don't want sluts, and rightfully so, nice guys are more vulnerable for getting used by sluts, because they get attached more, while womanizers are simply fucking and dumping sluts.

[Scrambledagain]

@Berethor No. Nice guys can't get promiscuous women period, which makes your "nice guys get too attached" theory moot. You have to get that girl to experience those feelings. But the asshole part about getting women. I know one can be cool and promiscuous (I'm one of them😇) but I'm not that successful which leads me to believe that the "asshole theory" if getting girls works better.

[bloodmountain1990]

@Scrambledagain I don't think it's all that black and white. Nice guys can get promiscuous women, whether it be for a hookup, fling, or even a relationship. How long it lasts is really the question.

[Scrambledagain]

@bloodmountain1990 I dunno dude, not really my world. I do read about it though. i find older promiscuous women (35 and up) are more receptive to nice guys/average joes. Anything under and you have to be some type "alpha" dude.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Scrambledagain I think you're mis-classifying a lot of sexually successful guys (the ones you're calling "alphas") as "assholes" because you're looking at this from too much of a male perspective. Admittedly, of the boys who get lots of pussy, a large % will probably be "assholes" TO OTHER GUYS, to some extent. Because... from what I've seen, anyway... that sort of thing just isn't very compatible with male bonding and having a big group of "bros". If you're a guy who gets lots of pussy, then, jealousy is going to kick in with other guys, and a lot of "bros" who are *supposedly* yr friends will start cock-blocking you, or trying to one-up you, or whatever. Trust me, I'm... a woman. I see this shit happen all the time. Bunch of guys get together who are supposedly "bros"... and, as soon as I enter the picture wearing any sort of tight dress, OMG THE CATTINESS. They're like fucking 11-year-old girls. Tryna one-up each other and subtly sabotage each other, to try to best "position"

[redeyemindtricks]

themselves. This even happens when I make it abundantly clear that I'm very, very, VERY married, and that there's no chance in hell any of them could compete with the pure awesomeness that is my husband... still doesn't matter. So... guys who get lots of pussy eventually get sick of that sort of dynamic, and drift away from it. That entails "being an asshole" WITH GUYS... and that's probably what you are seeing. For the most part, these same guys are NOT "assholes" with women -- unless they're using money and/or influence as their only attractant, in which case the women honestly don't much care (gold diggers give 0 fucks as long as they can dig their gold). Otherwise, these guys are quite the opposite -- they're charming as all sweet fuck, and they give women a GREAT time. Sometimes they turn out to be liars and players -- and **in retrospect** that produces (totally justified) female anger, whereupon you'll hear the "asshole" complaints. Other times, they're just totally honest

[redeyemindtricks]

from the get go, because they *can* be. But either way they're not actually assholes WITH WOMEN… at least while they’re still entertaining those women, anyway. For the most part. Obviously there will be exceptions to everything. But I think this goes a long way toward explaining what you’re identifying as “assholes getting the girls”.

[Scrambledagain]

@redeyemindtricks Firstly, to get this out the way, I know the whole "guys look like assholes to other guys". I hate that. I cannot stand how, when I am out with my friends, they will do stupid things in front of girls. But its not "asshole" competition usually. The competition is rather between two groups of men. But even then, you can see a narcissistic, bag of hot air from a mile away. Maybe he isn't bad as in "bad" but still. I know one thing. I learnt this at school. When this group of guys beat me up in front of their girlfriends, the girls were not laughing but they never left those guys. I couldn't understand it why these girls would be with these dicks. Then it hit me. It doesn't matter how much of an asshole the guy is. Could be a guy waiting a murder trial (my one chick friend is really dating this guy), but as long as he is good to HER, it doesn't matter, you are right. Second thing:...

[Scrambledagain]

@redeyemindtricks ... I read about your brother. sounds like an awesome dude. But here is the thing again (and again and again)... I can be that social, but I have to give up my talents (music, some work etc) to be that. I have to go out all the time to meet all these women. Your bro sounds like one of my best friends. Most popular guy I know. Constant party. But heaven forbid you leave that dynamic... You see what I am saying? Women don't have this dilemma. They can pursue their talents and STILL get laid more than your average dude. They can sit at home and still get laid from online requests. Men have to be that other dynamic to get that (and closer to your brother the better). I always said guys need to have some outlier thing to get lots of women, and your bro sounds like a social outlier, like my friend.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Scrambledagain Could be, yeah.

[redeyemindtricks]

Although you are just as much of an outlier, too. Most guys are happy with fucking a hot woman in a relationship, esp at yr age and beyond. Mb with the occasional threesome, in the case of guys with a greater taste for variety. If you really have this whole "poly" situation you've talked about, and you're STILL deeply unsatisfied, the vast majority of men AND women would agree that you have some unresolved issues to confront.

[Scrambledagain]

@redeyemindtricks I'm not content with missing out then settling for one... one... repeat... one girl at my age. No man who missed out should be content that they are finally some consolation prize for one girl who had the opportunity to do all things he hasn't. Maybe it's my unrelenting values and drive to experience all that life has to offer. Yes I'm in a poly set up. Yes i practice rope (shibari) and am into bdsm, but that doesn't mean I'm good at it or can claim my sex life back. In fact nothing is worse than knowing you have all these doors open but can't go through them because You are not attractive (outlier my ass lol. Subpar I think 😏) for example I had an opportunity for a 3some but they turned it down. But those two girls went out and brought a guy back. He had a threesome. If that's not friendshipzone level 10, then nothing is. that's my world.

[smartc]

as a middle eastern i agree that middle easterns do that ( but i dont agree with them ) ... the reason of this is that in the middle easterns want women who are won't have sex but with them (for marriage ) but they would fuck girls outsde if they see the opportunity to it cuz why not... so they want to fuck a lot of hot chicks and make a good decent family with super decent girl and hide their sexual history... for me i want a loving caring girlfriend who i will marry and i am not interested in sleeping with others (provided that i live beside her so i can have sex with her whenever i want... we have a quote that says "whenever you found a girl that you really desire while you already have a wife (or in this case girlfriend ) just go and have sex with her to lose the sexual desire so stay faithful to her "

[smartc]

@Chief16 go have sex with your girlfriend i mean :P sorry for bad English

[YankeePoint]

Being an old flower child of the sixties, many of us had casual sex, with no judgement. It was an enjoyable, joyous part of the times. I had a couple virgins in those years, and can't say as I would ever care to have the experience again. An experienced woman is much more enjoyable. I went with a lady for several years when I was in my forties, who was very promiscuous. I approved, as she absolutely loved sex, and even if we would fuck two or three times a day, she was always ready for more. Guys knew that all they had to do was ask, and she most likely would beat them getting her clothes off. Unfortunately, she sold her business and moved away. If I ever get another full time lady friend, I hope she is the same kind of woman. I don't mind that other cocks are in a girlfriend, as long as she is enjoying it. That is the most important thing to me.

[redeyemindtricks]

@YankeePoint Yep -- like I was saying, people really tend to be firmly on one or the other side of that fence. People who are *really* down with casual sex ("high sociosexuality" people) -- a category that includes more women and fewer men than people THINK (because of how the sexes are socialized) -- pretty much never judge negatively when their partners, too, have had a lot of sexual experience. ... Whereas people who fundamentally view sex as inseparable from emotional attachment ("low sociosexuality" people) definitely do judge -- early and often. The good news is... Unless someone is completely in denial about his or her *own* sociosexuality (... which most commonly means a man who actually CAN'T separate sex from emotions, even though society and/or his friends have pressured him into thinking he can or "should")... these groups tend to stay away from each other when coupling off. As they well should.

[JRICHARDS1996]

I'm glad to see I inspired something.

The answer to your question is quite simple: not all men are supposed to reproduce. This is the biological reality. This is the patriarchy - which is actually only benefits the top 10% of men - and this is polygyny. It is about a tiny number of men dominating all of the women. Hence women having a low number. It is all at the expense of average guys like myself. We are expendable.

And this is why it hurts so much.

Originally tradition and monogamy mitigated this pain by ensuring that everyone would be entitled to at least one mate. There was hope for men like me.

But then came feminism.

And ironically, in their attempt to kill the last vestiges of the patriarchy, they actually revived it in full.

We are essentially living in a polygynous world now, and average men like me are back at the bottom.

This is because feminists were too stupid to take sexual selection theory into account. They did not predict that by encouraging female promiscuity, women would only choose the top 10% of Chad Thundercocks of the male population.

Hence 10% of men monopolizing 90% of women.

... And this is why men like me are resorting to prostitution or at least considering it.

It is our last hope.

[JRICHARDS1996]

So in short, feminists revived the patriarchy and we are now living in a polygynous world once again.

[jesshkah]

I can't say I agree with you there. If truly only a percentage of men were capable or selected to reproduce, natural selection and evolution would basically render them extinct eventually. Which really doesn't make any sense. A tiny number of men cannot actually dominate all women.. because women are also not fans of sharing.

[redeyemindtricks]

"A tiny number of men cannot actually dominate all women.. because women are also not fans of sharing"

^^ Yeah, but, women having any choice in the matter is strictly part of modernity.

The history of the human race is *mostly* a sordid tale of powerful men monopolizing multiple women by force. It's even written in our genes -- there are plenty of studies to show that we have at least twice as many female ancestors as male ancestors in our modern gene pool, and possibly more.
tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/.../?_r=0

It's like the FLDS compound -- where Warren Jeffs took all the women for himself and kicked out the "lost boys" -- on a slightly lesser scale, for tens or hundreds of thousands of years.

Monogamy was only instituted after civilizations started to fight wars against each other, when emperors and religious leaders were smart enough to realize that an

[redeyemindtricks]

army of married men with wives and kids to fight for, would kick the living shit out of an army of celibate slaves... anytime everytime. I mean... it's cute to think it would MATTER that "women are not fans of sharing", in prehistoric times. But... yeahhhh no. Also, as much as it pisses ME off to admit this, "women are not fans of sharing" just isn't true. The ONLY societies where rich men don't have multiple wives... are the societies where that is strictly prohibited by law. Literally, the only ones. This is definitely a function of... shall we call it "gold-digging", and has little to do with attraction or sex -- but, it's a thing. Monogamy is something that societies have to ENFORCE -- and its primary beneficiaries are MEN who are not in the élite ruling/wealthy classes.

[JRICHARDS1996]

@redeyemindtricks Wow did you just actually agree with me for once?

[redeyemindtricks]

I don't agree with the "supposed to's" and the "should's" -- and, obviously, it's a gross exaggeration to say that we're back in a polygynous world (MOST guys end up in relationships, get laid, and eventually get married). But, I get that you exaggerate to bring more clicks to yr takes... (: so whatevs The historical reality, though, is historical reality. The genetic history of the human species is what it is. It's not something to "agree" or "disagree" with; it's factual. And it's important to understand, too -- because a society could go to shit pretty quickly if monogamy isn't enforced as the norm. Promiscuity doesn't create the problem here, tho. Promiscuous men end up marrying promiscuous women, and the sexually restricted women end up marrying sexually restricted men. If you tried to clamp down too hard on that, there would just be more bad marriages and more cheating, since the right people couldn't match up with each other anymore. I mean... LOL dude. You can't stop people

[redeyemindtricks]

from fucking each other. You know what happens in cultures where adultery is punishable by DEATH, right? ... People still cheat. Yep. People also still have gay sex in countries where that's punishable by death, too. And people still have pre-marital sex in countries where they risk honor killings. In other words, people are literally willing to risk DEATH to fuck the people they want to fuck. It makes no fucking difference *at all* whether promiscuity is "encouraged", because it's gna happen either way. The best solution is to enforce monogamy as the eventual pattern, and otherwise to let the market sort itself out. Like any other market, this one works better the fewer restrictions and compulsions that are placed on it.

[aasasas]

@redeyemindtricks cheaters should be killed

[Jamesol1]

Proof of this is in the tv series love island. The dudes on it are within the top 10% no doubt. They all talked about having sex with 200-500 different women each. These men are in their mid twenties.

[levantine99]

@redeyemindtricks both your and the OP's theories, are sexist, generalising and ridiculous. oh and enough with the pseudo-evolution and pseudo-scientific guesses. we dont know how ancient people lived, nor can we say things like "monogamy is only forced". we know very little things about the human being's past and we can't filter reality through our personal passions (in the case of redyeminds) or fears (in the case of the OP of the comment. dude you kill your own chances with self defeating mindsets like that.)

[redeyemindtricks]

@levantine99 did you read the linked article? There is SCIENTIFIC PROOF that the collective human gene pool descends from relatively fewer men and relatively more women. It's literally written in our DNA.

[Jamesol1]

@redeyemindtricks Hence why there is such thing as the theory of 80% women sleeping with 20% men. It may not be bang on right statistically but I bet its close.

[JRICHARDS1996]

@levantine99 Humans match the biological requirements of a polygynous species such as the fact that we are sexually dymorphic. Redeye's DNA study confirms this. Furthermore virtually every species of primate including our closest relatives are polygynous. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with monogamy - I actually think it is the ideal mating system because it ensures that EVERYONE gets a piece of the pie - but it is certainly not "natural." Rather, it is something we arrive at through religion, social conditioning, and politics. All of which uniquely make us human,

[levantine99]

@redeyemindtricks these are your personal interpretations of the studies findings. men also were always fewer since many died in wars, during hunting, labor etc.. .

[levantine99]

monogamy APPEARS to be a later construct but the bible clearely says it was Adam and Eve at first. humans are naturally originally monogamous. its just that this knowledge was lost in later generations with the passing of time... .

[JRICHARDS1996]

@levantine99 I would say rather that it was lost through the Fall, and that only through Christ does it become possible again. Hence, monogamy rooted more in religion, social conditioning, and morality than "nature" itself, unless you are referring to our new nature in Christ that will be manifest in the resurrection of the dead and life of the world to come.

[levantine99]

very accurate comment although it also manifests here and now. not only then.

[JesseBrooks]

@Jamesol1 Yep. Whats even worse are those "genes" being passed on are 9/10 times looks and bods. The critical genes essential to our entire species are being snuffed out do do human nature, 'I only want physically attractive ken dolls' type shit. Fuckin sad

[Jamesol1]

@JesseBrooks Thing is these women think they look like their selfie taken at a pertiuclar angle/lighting then add lots of face paint (makeup they call it)... and bam from one snap a girl could look 8 or even 9 /10... but in real life... 5/10? 4? I think women have a bigger ego when it comes to their looks... im sure some are 'insecure' but they still go around seeking the best looking men.

[Jamesol1]

@JesseBrooks There is a program called 'love island' here in the UK... bunch of very attractive men and women dating in this resort... all the guy spoke to having sex with 200-500 different women each... one guys says women literally throw themselves naked into his bed... thats all the proof you need for the 80/20 theory.

[JesseBrooks]

@Jamesol1 I hear ya. Physical attraction is HUGE, but when looks overcome all other traits I believe it has become a problem. Whenever a women tells me straight faced,'I really want a nice guy' or 'I want a man that actually loves me' I have to say "Your a fucking liar" it sounds horrible, but then so are there PUA boyfriends they can't get over.

[JesseBrooks]

Add the fact that their PUA boyfriends are usually 8-10s, all they have say is some BS about I'll care for you or some ridiculous cheesey shit, and women go wobbly knee'd. I consider myself a 8.5 in attractiveness standards, but I dont have that cheesy sycophantic, masochistic mindset PUAs do, and I never will.

[Jamesol1]

@JesseBrooks 8.5? Nice man. Do you get quite a lot of looks from women? Do any approach you outside of clubs etc? And yeah I agree ''I want a nice guy (who is also very attractive, humble, likes to pay for dates, caring, loyal...)... that's the truth.

[JesseBrooks]

@Jamesol1 Im still a virgin LOL, yeah I do get a lot of looks, but Im shy, and nerdy. Not sure why I haven't found someone yet. I believe its because Im too shy, high school was hell. Confidence was pretty much shot after that. I wasn't always attractive though, after high school is when I finally "flowered' or whatever. Having been shit on my whole youth is probably stay away from women I guess. Having always been alone, I get to see the whole picture from the outside looking in

[Jamesol1]

@JesseBrooks I've been told im ranging from a 7-7.5... I get looks from women sometimes but when i do i can't keep eye contact or start a convo. High school was hell for me too. Now i have left my anxiety/shyness is going gradually... but i think how you are in your teen years does stick for a while. Women gave me looks when i began six form... I would get occasional things like 'hey spice... or some girl group once said 'he is fit'. You are literally describing my life except I'm ''above average looking''... not 8+ (hot they call it).

[JesseBrooks]

And being a virgin makes me subhuman trash even if I am a good looking guy. The past 7 women who wanted sex turned tail when they found out i was virgin. Yep its great for my lack of confidence. Being raised as a gentleman also severely stunted me. It doesn't seem to be helping in modern society

[JesseBrooks]

@Jamesol1 Im just a teddy bear wallflower lol. Haven't learned otherwise yet, in my experience, girls love the arrogant version of me. Well Im SOL then :(

[Blanquino]

What the fuck man shut the fuck up! If you are single it's bc you are a piece of chauvinist shit, not because of feminism!

[Sammirae]

Well someone with more experience should, theoretically, be better at pleasing their partner-woe is the virgin who's partner lacked even a Google's search of an idea what to do to them-or it could make them that many more times likely to give them a special kind of itch. Whichever way you want to look at it. You could also say that a "key" that unlocks many locks is a useful key, but a "lock" that opens for any key is a bit less so.
At the same time, who really gives a fuck. As a 19 yo virgin who has seen most of their friends and family members get hitched and/or have kids, had a younger sister try to give them the sex talk, I can honestly say that it doesn't really matter. If he/she really cares about whether you're a virgin or not, it means they have priorities and you're not at the top of them if they're letting something stupid like that determine their relationship with you.
I don't agree with someone who says that after a certain age if someone is still a virgin then it means their too "sexually inhibited" to enjoy sex. My virginity is not because I'm sexually inhibited - sex occupies my mind as much as it would any other 19yo as well as questions about my own lacking sexual experience and any insecurities that give me - or because I've never dated anyone. It's because I feel old fashioned and decided not to have sex. It's not even about my religion or keeping it until marriage - people just assumed that and I never told them they were wrong, because who knows what I'll do? I simply never was in a relationship with someone I so seriously liked and thought "I wouldn't mind letting him take me to the hotel on the way back from the movies". I've dated people who just wanted sex and when it became clear after 2 weeks that I didn't feel the same, I didn't exist to them, and that was okay since if they were willing to drop me just because I didn't want sex (this goes for ANYONE boy or girl) they weren't worth existing in my little world of self-respect and semi-celibasy.
Your V-card status doesn't matter. If you're a lock that's known for being easy to pick, then people will talk and that's fine if you don't care. They may as well talk if you're a stubborn, prude of a lock waiting for the right key. The same goes for any master keys being called "players" or celibate little monks holding out for a special kind of lock. You only ask how many people your partner slept with is if you want to start a fight. You know when it matters? When You make it matter.

[jesshkah]

100% agree with your last statement there

[pnl86]

Well,

Male population: Man A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I & J. (Count: 10).

Female population: Female 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10. (Count: 10).

Man (A) has had sex with females 7-10 (Count: 4).

Man (B) has had sex with females 4-6 (Count: 3).

Man (C) has had sex with female 3-4 (Count: 2).

Man (D) has had sex with female 2 (Count: 1).

Notice, of the entire population, "Men" have had sex a total of 10 times, even though only (4) men have had sex. "Women" have had sex a total of 10 times, even though (9) women have had sex.

Notice female #4, she has had sex with both Male (B) & (C). Yet, notice Male (A), he has had sex with females 7-10.

Notice further the kinds of pressures these types of beliefs create on the different kinds of sexes. In an effort to have sex with "as few partners as possible," females essentially restrict themselves to having just 25% of Male (A)'s attention, whereas they may have had 50% of Male (D)'s attention, or 100% of Male (E)'s attention. Women are literally creating competition among themselves in a quest to maintain as "low" of a "number" as possible.

In an effort to have many sexual partners as possible, men are creating what economists call "negative externalities," loading them up on the women they discard, and letting "other men" deal with those externalities. Unfortunately, there's nothing you can really do to socially regulate this, because it's not in a man's interest to curb this behavior (compare to women, where they can actually benefit by less competition).

We've all experienced this, although have cared too little to really care about it at all. I've broken up with one of my first "girlfriends" just because she didn't feel the need to dress in a sexual way - made me feel sexually dead. I don't know what issues that caused her, nor did I care, but now some other guy has to live with how she coped with my statements. More importantly, SHE has to live with her RELATIONSHIP with this other guy, as he's left being punished for something I did 10+ years ago.

From a purely math/economics POV, the "solution" to this "problem," is for women to collude and have sex with men, thereby destroying any "reward" value "having sex with multiple women" has for men, thereby causing men to see dating differently.. no longer focus on getting "women," but instead, on finding "a woman" (singular).

[pnl86]

Rather than outright say that it's basically collusion to try and destroy the incentive/reward or novelty value of men having sex with a high number of partners.. this notion and idea is framed and spun as being "modern," or "liberalized," etc.

[Bandit74]

So you think womens tendency to hookup with only the most attractive men is primarily due to a desire to maintain a low number and that if slut shaming didn't exist they would be a lot more willing to have casual no strings attached sex with more average Joes?

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 well, to answer the second part of your question (which will then answer the remainder of the question) .. "Would women be interested in having sex with men OTHER THAN.. THE ONE?" Now, I'm sure there are some guys who believe the answer is, "No, women don't like sex to begin with, they only have sex in order to get into and maintain a relationship." In my opinion, I don't think that's true. I think if you free women from the anxiety of social judgment and perceived or apprehended (non-STD non-pregnancy) consequences of having sex.. they would absolutely love to go around and sample a little bit of Jeff, Tom, Brad, Aaron, Bruce, and Jamal (just for the novelty/experience of it, and simply because they're cute, or because they felt connected in the moment). And, if that's the case, the tendency to actively be on a mission to NOT HAVE SEX, or to have sex with ONLY the clearly physically attractive guys would start to be eroded.

[Bandit74]

Do you think people will change their perception of promiscuous women any time soon? Even with slut shaming tajen out of the picture, do you not see any validity in the evolutionary phycology theory that women are instinctively driven to prioritize strong genes for short-term, non-committed mating?

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 here's the problem with all these evolutionary psychology studies.. it's the same exact problem in the current family law following case law that was based on the circumstances of the 1500s. 1. Women can and do work, and can and do make the same (or more) than men. 2. Women are no longer dependent on men. In fact, the Affordable Care Act actually forces men to shoulder the burdens of having to pay for maternity care, recreational uses of birth control, and other costs that would normally be born exclusively be females. So, women don't even need a man to shoulder the burden of certain risks and costs anymore. 3. Birth control, condoms, plan B and abortion are effective, safe, and more socially accepted. Sex =/= pregnancy. So, when sex =/= pregnancy, you cannot arrive at conclusions based on the assumption that sex = pregnancy = childbirth = motherhood.

[pnl86]

So, the same way there are plenty of guys who LOVE boobs.. there are still plenty of women whose brains haven't adapted to 2016. Yet, there are also men who understand that the child (should there be one) will no starve and have plenty of nutrients available, notwithstanding the size of the mother's boobs (or her body weight). They have a house to keep the mother warm, so she will not die. They have a Costco around the corner and advanced systems of food distribution to survive any kind of weather. Large breasts are no longer a proxy for likelihood of the child surviving extreme conditions. Or rather, more accurately, there are no longer "extreme conditions" that fathers need to worry about their child surviving.

[pnl86]

So, you get a lot of guys who are "butt" guys. Why? Because the butt and legs are a proxy of women being physically fit, dieting and exercising, having good cardiovascular health, which will increase circulation to her genitals, and make for a woman that has a higher sex drive and has more stamina in the bedroom. People have evolved and transitioned from "survival" to "luxury." Women are no longer vessels of genetic "survival." For as long as they're fertile enough to have 1-2 kids, that box is checked off. A man doesn't need to populate a village to ensure that maybe 1% of his children will survive when he's gone. Gone are those days. Today, his "sex life" and the day-to-day interaction and relationship with his partner are more important. So, you can see evolutionary psychology failing to properly reflect the sexual preferences of men now days.

[pnl86]

It's no different for women. Again, are there some women whose head is back in 3,586 B. C? Sure. For the most part, however, women have adapted better and faster than men. So, "degrees" and "number of zeros behind the dollar sign" are the new "height" and "muscle." There's a song in my culture where the guy is telling guys, "Dudes, there's a crisis, contrary to nature. Why are you busting your ass at the gym trying to get a six pack? She's not interested in that. She's interested in how fat your piggy bank is and what car you're driving." If you want to truly talk about evolutionary psychology, then a physically dominant man could simply take whatever "property" the other man possessed. So, "physical dominance" should supersede and be controlling in sexual selection. We know this to not be the case. As uncomfortable or "touchy" of a subject as this is for girls, because they feel guys are calling them shallow or gold-diggers, we've seen enough of life to know what's up.

[Bandit74]

Birth control and women not being dependent on men are relatively recent changes when considering the entirety of human evolution. Currently Sex =/= pregnancy, but for the majority of the time that humans have existed it did. Just because we understand that we can now have sex without having a baby does not necessarily mean that the instincts from the times where that wasn't the case aren't still here on some level. And haven't butts always been a sexual focal point? I don't think men liking female butts is something that just suddenly came up in modern times.

[pnl86]

Additionally, women do want to see proxies for how a man "relates" to other people, and more specifically, how he will "relate" to her. When I say, "relate," I mean the psychology term. What guys call "shit tests," and are preoccupied with trying to seem "alpha," ... what's really going on is that women just want to see if this is a guy who is going to kill her, physically beat her, emotionally abuse and oppress her (negative) .. or she can emotionally or psychologically manipulate and overpower (negative) .. or whether he can be assertive in a very calm and relaxed way.. and can continue to "relate" to people in a sustainable way. That's why men can usually tell most of what they want to know about a woman just by looking at her, whereas women need to "interact" with a man for a bit before they start to have their boxes checked off.

[pnl86]

I think we're already getting there. The fact that we're not stoning or burning women alive for losing their "virtue" or "betraying" their "family" or "honor," etc., in just the past 200 years.. is a pretty remarkably fast leap forward. If this trend continues, you're going to see the "individual" (not "heard") interpersonal (not "group") dynamics between men and women resemble that of lions and lionesses, or scorpions or the praying mantis. Women will be the aggressor 99% of the way through, and the male will simply fulfill the remaining 1% gap on the back end. Men are going to look back at all the complaining and whining they made towards women not initiating, and then beg or fantasize about a time or world where women would not dictate the direction of sex, and where men are the directors rather than simply the actors.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 what you just said highlights the irony of evolutionary psychology. Imagine a man and a woman about to engage in unprotected sex. Who between them should be more afraid in 3,500 BC vs. 2017? In 3,500 BC, the woman should be terrified. She most likely will get pregnant. He could leave her. Then what? For at least 8 months (and a month after) she'll be vulnerable to predators and danger. In 1500 AD, if they're not married, he can leave her, and she can't even kill or abandon the baby! She is literally forced to be a mother, undesirable and unwanted, and unable to support herself (and her baby) without the financial help of a man. In 2017, the man should be shitting in his pants! If she gets pregnant, he is fucked! Her, on the other hand, has plan B, can abort the pregnancy, or can carry the pregnancy to term (if she is against abortion) and simply leave the child at a safe haven (even if he wants to be a dad), without his knowledge or consent being required.

[pnl86]

That's the funny thing about emotions and emotional reasoning. People may "think" certain thoughts, feed themselves certain scripts, but not truly understand the core of what's really going on inside of them, and motivating those feelings and thoughts. This is especially true of men, who aren't renowned for understanding and expressing their feelings that well. What may "feel" like anxiety or depression or anger towards women.. for having to initiate sex or intimate contact.. might actually be the awareness of the consequences TO THE MAN if the woman in this picture gets pregnant. This also helps account for the reduction in fear and anxiety women experience from initiating or reciprocating sexual contract.. because they are more in control of their reproductive lives and ability to determine their status and financial obligations as a parent.

[Bandit74]

Men are going to look back at all the complaining and whining they made towards women not initiating, and then beg or fantasize about a time or world where women would not dictate the direction of sex, and where men are the directors rather than simply the actors" Lol, that would be interesting to see 🙈 I agree that men face more repercussions from sex today compared to women. Women have many options to avoid being responsible for a child while a mans only option is to go along with whatever the woman decides. Despite this, men are still seeminly more willing to have casual sex and are open to it with a wider range of people compared to women who are mostly only interested in it with the most desirable guys. So it doesn't seem like our actions have changed all that much in respect to the new dynamics.

[jesshkah]

This is great. Sorry, not that I don't have anything to say in response, I'm just very much enjoying this discussions and I see your points.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "Despite this, men are still seeminly more willing to have casual sex and are open to it with a wider range of people compared to women who are mostly only interested in it with the most desirable guys. So it doesn't seem like our actions have changed all that much in respect to the new dynamics." That depends on "which" men and "when" (in their lifecycle) you're looking at those men. When you have "nothing to lose," then you don't really have any financial risk/consequences. So, you see "younger" and "broke" guys with "little to no future earning capacity potential" behaving and thinking the way you described. Unfortunately, that's a large percentage of the overall sexually active male population. Yet, that's definitely not all men. If you actually have a future or are printing good paper, you have plenty "at risk," and the risk often outweighs even the idealized/romanticized idea of some godly "miracle" perfect-10 pussy.

[USMC-Crossroads]

Pay attention... I'm going to tell you the truth. That every guy knows, but women never believe; The truth is, no one gives a shit. Teen Comedies, and stupid, repetitious SitComs all push the narrative that guys are all competitive and shit... but in all actuality... we don't really care. News Flash, girls, guys don't 'Bet' or 'Dare' each other into bedding as many girls as possible... we really don't care what other guys accomplish. When we are talking together after work, over a couple beers, we talk about just wanting to find a normal girl, and we don't care if she is 'hot' or not. We tell each other what the girl said on the last date, and ask each other a million times what she might have meant, and if they think she REALLY likes us. And I mean the VAST majority of guys. Me and my friends, for example, are not shy or lacking confidence in any way (I'm a Marine, after all), and still, we analyze our relationships to death over and over again. not once does virginity come up with any significant pressure thrust upon it. Stop getting your opinions of men from 'Jersey Shore' or what ever the latest bullshit depiction the mass media is shoving down your throats these days - it's called The Normalcy Bias. So, to be sure, the only pressure real men feel regarding their virginity, is having to pretend we give a shit; Because when we try to get it across to girls that we actually don't care about it they way television tells you we do, you never believe us. And since people today believe WhatEverTheHell the media tells them to believe... we just don't bother setting the record straight. I'll prove it - Even after reading this, there will be a Metric Ton of girls saying that they 'know a guy who blah blah blah' and that I'm either lying, in denial, or stupid and out of touch. Maybe that latter part is true, because, after all, i am NOT a typical asshole guy these days - as I said earlier - I'm a former United State Marine, and this current culture of forcing men to be as effeminate as possible, along with shaming real men into being embarrassed by, and hiding their masculinity, is making it VERY difficult for women to get a true bearing on what it means to be a man. And I'll throw one other thing in (as unsolicited as it may be), if you're a women (girl) who is proud of the masculinization of women today, along with the Pussification of men, then, my Dear, you don't want a man... you want another woman. No shame in that, just don't tell me you understand men.

[jesshkah]

Thanks for the comment. I'll be completely honest though, as a former marine I'm of the opinion that your world view is much different than the average person's (have been dating an 8 year marine vet for 2.5+ years). Although these things seem trivial to YOU, I have both seen and heard not exceptions of the behaviors I've described in both men and women.

[FashionQueen86]

I was never one to shame male virgins. In fact, they are high on my list as my first pick.

[jesshkah]

Interesting! Haha I'm sure a lot of guys on here need to hear someone say that..

[Errhh]

It's because men don't like to admit it, but they are far more insecure than women are... that's the reason most men prefer a girl who has had zero or very few sexual partners.. they are afraid to be compared to other men.

I on the contrary, the reason I lose interest in someone whose been with many sexual partners is because I find it disgusting to kiss someone whose mouth has been in soooo many different people's private parts... ewwwk!! It's just gross.. for me I rather have a totally inexperienced person! They can become experts with me!! No need to impress with what you learned elsewhere lol cause yewk! 😁👽😯!!!

[Berethor]

Men are insecure? or women tend to be suckers much more then men, that's why an man is much less willing to compromise on someone who had been with others. You are not really on a contrary, being disgust by used goods is an common reason to prefer an virgin, and it's can come with other reasons as well.

[Errhh]

@Berethor men are far from being disgusted about a girl being used by five decks or a million... they simply care about the fact they may be compared to the guy with he bigger thicker dick... that's all... whereas I, in particular..., am truly disgusted to kiss anybody's lips who has been licking other private bodily parts,... and it doesn't mean I only want virgins.. but that is a main reason why I'd prefer an inexperienced guy over any guy who says who knows exactly what girls like based in the many he's had in his bed. That's just gross. And yes, for the fact stated above, men are insecure more so than girls are in that aspect.

[Errhh]

Decks=dicks auto correct.

[Berethor]

@Errhh if men are not disgust by sluts, then why did they call them dirty sluts? being disgust by sluts is one of the main reasons for not wanting an slut, as well as the fact that it's very hard to trust an slut. Women tend to be much more forgiving for promiscuous partners, you are an exception, but it's okey.

tvtropes.org/.../MyGirlIsNotASlut

[jesshkah]

Haha that's fair. I mean, people wash their mouths hahaha but I get it! As for your debate below.. I wouldn't say you're an exception, I think that mentality happens in guys AND girls. What you guys are saying aren't really at odds with each other, ultimately you've still agreed that men do prefer lesser partners in a woman.

[Djaaaaay]

Opinion owner. You sound very immature and extremely insecure you're self. You only talk about your insecurities and how you're pushing them on to guys... really?

[Errhh]

@Djaaaaay hahah I'm pretty much full of myself and I don't deny it , but you're welcome to assume all the bs you wish to 😜!

[Djaaaaay]

Opinion owner. What ever... it's your bs

[Errhh]

@Djaaaaay? Bleh

[Djaaaaay]

Opinion owner. Funny how our own tougne gets us in troubled waters.

[TCJ1234567]

This was only an issue before paternity tests. Our brains still think that it is, because we have been conditioned over a million years. In the past you kids were you social security and you didn't want to invest in children that were not yours. This is not the case today. I don't think any of it matters.

[jesshkah]

Huh. That's interesting.. I think it's a bit farther to tie in, but I can see how that might make sense..

[TCJ1234567]

Throughout history, that is why men have prized virgins. There has been a lot of writing through history to back that up. It takes a while for human brains to catch up to changes in the environment. Women still what a protector/provider even though they no long need one to survive. What people have wanted throughout history are the same things they want today.

[sjoes006]

Silliness.

[Tdieseler]

I have quite fixed opinions about virgins in general guy or girl.
1. You are a virgin, thats cool, its natural
2. You are in or past your 20's and dating and still a virgin, you need help
3. You are in or past your 20's and you turn down sex cuz you are waiting for "the right one", you are a moron.
4. You are a virgin and you intend to keep it till marriage, you are the biggest moron of all.
On the flip side, regarding sexual partners, its usually up to the partner. I've seen guys that think a girl that has slept with 3 guys and was in a relationship with all three, is still too much. and i know guys who are with girls who broke 20.
It all depends. there's also the age ratio, you can't be 19 and slept with 18 people, but if a 45 year old person said they have slept with 18 people, its acceptable.
When those dependencies are broken, guy OR girl... they are just icky. but the partner can override if they are fine with it.

[jarofawesome]

Then there are those who are virgins that are over 20 who haven't been dating because they'd rather focus on other goals without the distractions and possibly wasted time that come with dating. And there are those who are virgins who are over 20 who aren't necessarily waiting for 'the right one' but just someone who they feel comfortable around and are sexually attracted to but for some reason, be it bad luck or stupid inhibitions, haven't yet. Then there are some who just don't think or care about sex in general.

[Tdieseler]

@jarofawesome I can agree with the last one... there are those people. but those people don't go around throwing their virginity in people's faces. The second one... those are semi-morons. putting too much emphasis on a natural phenom. I didn't say 18yr olds in my previous comment or mention those below that, but they are just like your second statement. As for your first statement... people go through puberty... the people I've seen that would rather focus on goals are those who have TRIED the dating/sex route and it wasn't their thing (or no one wanted them) so they chose the other way. I don't call them anything. Calling them losers won't suffice, they usually attain their goals... calling them morons doesn't work either... its a replacement choice.

[EyeAmNiceGirl]

OK, here's the scoop on numbers. On AVERAGE, guys and girls have the same number of sex partners in life. It has to be that way, because every time a guy has sex, so dos a girl. Now, virtually no guys are prostitutes, but some women are. A prostitute has lots of sex, easily 300 different guys in a year's time, and possibly even 1000; over 10 years, that number could easily be 5000 penises. Now, average then prostitutes 5000 sex partners with 990 virgins (all age 25), and you get an average of 5 sex partners. Meanwhile, 100 guys each have had sex with ten prostitutes, and their average is also 5. Put another way, any individual guy you randomly select is likely to have a modest number of sex partners in his lifetime (between 5 and 10), any individual girl you talk to is likely to have had sex with less than 5 or more that 10. The girl who are willing, get lots of penis. They girls who aren't willing, don't. Guys are more open to sex at any given time, but often they find themselves dating one of the girls who doesn't give it up. So, over they years, they average out, sometimes getting it, sometimes not. The girls on the other hand either don't do it, or they do it with just about every guy they go out on a third date with, so their numbers are either high or low.

[Meliodas_]

You did a lot of math 😂, I was over here with a calculator, lol but I understand what you saying and I agree

[ThatJarHead]

Ah my favourite saying. "You do you booboo"

[jesshkah]

Lolol for you booboo 😉

[ThatJarHead]

Someone disliked my comment? Wow.

[Tdieseler]

I use it a lot on here...

[ThatJarHead]

@Tdieseler As do I

[aasasas]

booboo sound so corny

[Rahdle]

Do the do boo-ba-do, Booby boo to you to. So Luh the bruh and Luh his duh cuz booby boo will come for you. And gurl so fine, fine as wine, share that Luh, cuz in due time, that bruh of your bruh will shine and shine. and in that moment, that place in time, ya find true Luh, from that bruh of mine. So I say Luh the bruh, and Share that Luh, cuz for you my boo, who's Luh is true, they wait for you, those boobies too

[Embercelica]

I honestly don't care how many people they've slept with it's none of my damn business.

[YourFutureEx]

So, you hate the guys who care about numbers?

[kap_nss]

I like this myTake. I don't agree to everything, but I agree to most of it.

Like it or not I have met many people (in real life) who shares these views. Guys who try to sleep around while they will look for a more sexually conservative girl for marriage. And also I've met girls who prefer not to have sex with a virgin guy. But I've also seen girls sleeping around with "hot guys" and then looking for "economically stable" guys for marriage. If you're a nerdy guy you won't have sex until you are 27 years old. But you will find a lot of women ready to marry you. Because you are more stable and a good prospect for building a family.

So, yes. This is shit. But this happens. This isn't the only reality. But this happens a lot. Way more than we are willing to accept.

[jesshkah]

Thank you, I appreciate the read, and I have also seen what you mentioned in society. It's interesting to me when I come across people who claim that this attitude no longer exists..

[Chiffon]

I read something similar to this and I don't believe for a minute, whomever wrote this particular article about men are not cool, masculine and more socially accepted. To me it's a persona prerogative to choose whatever. The virgin man can very well be outgoing and funny and attractive making him very popular!
Now, scenario 1. He meets this very pretty, intelligent woman and they have like interests and he is really finding himself to try and have a relationship. She brings up sex after a few weeks dating. Does this mean he is going to dump her for not being a virgin? Or does he figure what the heck, I'm going for it and he tells her he's a virgin. It is just as possible she may feel he's a dweeb because he is inexperienced! Or not and enjoys showing him and teaching him what she likes. Scenario 2. The virgin woman happens to meet this really down to earth guy, polite and respectful, doesn't hang with the bad boys etc. Then he tries to make a move. Hmmm Does she let him go? does she explain her situation and he says "Later!" Maybe he can wait and just bop the baloney to ease the pressure. If a guy has to have a virgin, then he must be saving himself too. Many girls lose their virginity in high school the the guy "Books" and she's probably feeling bad but will probably do it again. I may be blowing air but it simply comes down to choice and if the woman says "No Way!!" the that better be heeded. The Paradox is Choice.

[jesshkah]

I get what you're saying, and I agree that it is down to attitude and how you carry yourself, but I'm not talking about the actual situations I'm talking about the paradox in the EXPECTATIONS. Many men here have also argued that virginity for them is not a choice because the woman is ultimately the one who decides whether or not sex happens. (I only slightly agree with that because consent needs to happen on both sides and this is under the assumption already that all men are looking for sex) but I understand what they're saying, sometimes it's not as easy as "just become cool and confident!" And honestly that's likely how those people got with someone anyways. So it doesn't even really apply because if every guy could be cool and confident half of them wouldn't be "struggling" with this.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Being self indulgent and promiscuis is not "progressive" and in fact could very much be argued to be regressive. Their are many reasons that one would shun a sexually promiscuis female, for starters they are far more likely to cheat, divorce, and be generally unhappy in long term relationships. Multiple studies (even studies done by "progressive" people) have shown that it is not good to be promiscuis. Their is 1% chance of divorce with one partner, yet with two it jumps up to 16%. Those who score in the upper half of the sociosexually unrestricted scale (promiscuis/casual view of sex) have a 50% probability of cheating and divorce. Now both of those situations result in a broken home (and of course unhappiness within the relationship also creates discord) all of which negatively impact the offspring of these individuals (children of divorce are, among other things more likely to commit suicide, do drugs, suffer from depression commit crimes and divorce themselves thus ensuring that the cycle continues). It also means that a woman who is promiscuis is also more likely to become a single mother which is damaging to the offspring as well (80% of inmates are from single mother homes) and far more likely to have STD's (hence with the increase of so called "progressive" views on sex the increase in venereal disease and abortions both costing money and health damage to the society (sweden for instance is one of these societies which is why it has such a high rate of STD's (out of all industrialized nations) seconded only by south africa.) It also increases the risk of a man dedicating his time energy resources and life to a woman who is more then likely not faithful while raising a child that is not his which is, from a biological perspective, not in his best interest since it ensures the survival of some one elses genes at the expense of his own. All in all their is ample reason why we as a society have and should continue to shame those who indulge in their sexual impulses as it damages not just them (being more likely to have depression or issues with father figures (at least for women)) but their children and society as well. As for the standard of male virginity, I would agree that this is something that should not be shamed as sex is not a measure of a persons worth, though I think women push this as much (if not more so) then men, hence women immediately attacking a mans virginity when angry with them (as you see on this site for instance).

[Berethor]

Yes they are bashing male virgins but they wished that a male virgin would want an slut like them, as it's their only chance of not getting fucked and dumped, as always.

tvtropes.org/.../NatureAdoresAVirgin

[jesshkah]

Ok so it's not just women you're addressing though, correct? It's promiscuity as a whole you are addressing? I have yet to see a study of promiscuity in men and the ties to divorce rate, so I'd like to see that first before claiming that women really are the cause of divorce.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Women initiate over 70% of all divorces so we do know for a fact that it is women. Promiscuity seems to affect women to a far greater degree then men, but the data on cheating seems to hold true for men, those who have a more casual view on sex and are promiscuous are more likely to cheat. So I am against female promiscuity because of all the very hard facts we have and I am against male promiscuity because it does increase the odds of him cheating (though not divorced because their are other social, legal and biological factors at work that repress that outcome) and the fact that it adds to the damage done by women's promiscuous behavior. You don't have to like it, but it is what it is.

[hellionthesagereborn]

@Berethor I do find it very odd that women claim their is nothing wrong with being promiscuous but then get upset when other disagree, its her choice to sleep around just as its his choice to not want to be with a woman who sleeps around. Seems fair enough to me.

[jesshkah]

To your last point I see how that might not make sense. The fine line is that men's refusal to date women without a higher number of partners is has negative judge-y opinions made on those women. Whereas the idea of women having the autonomy to be with multiple partners, is all a decision for themselves.

[Berethor]

@jesshkah it's totally make an sense, but not to radfems, who are always trying to force their beliefs of other people, while claiming to support freedom. Yes many men don't want sluts because they have negative opinion on them, but not every men that dislike sluts on a personal level is trying to stop sluts from doing what they doing, I for one believe that sluts are lost case anyway, and also that it's their right to do that shit, but it's not mean that there is not some consequences for that, being an non-girlfriend material is one of the biggest consequences for being an slut. Maybe their are some desperate guys who are willing to take an slut, but not us, and you can't force us to take an slut, it's totally okey to reject an girl for being a slut.

[hellionthesagereborn]

No, its women get to choose what they want but men can't, men are not allowed to look down on a behavior they are not allowed to make a judgment call if it pertains to women. Thats the problem. We are built to judge, claiming that its wrong is itself a judgment, you cannot escape it except by saying nothing and having no opinion, no feeling on the subject. Thats not what is happening. What is happening is you and many other women are saying she has the right to choose to be promiscuous while also stating he has to accept her choices and not judge her on them. Judging others on their actions is the only thing one can legitamately judge another on. Its a call to monopolize the ability to judge others, thats all that is. Thats the problem. If you are not to judge others then by extention you cannot judge others for judging you, especially when that judgment is based upon your actions. What your doing is rationalizing an unfair situation because it benefits you to do so.(not uncommon)

[OlderAndWiser]

I don't think that a guy who has had 50 sexual partners is a cool guy.

If a girl or guy is a virgin at age 19 or 20, I don't think it is a big deal. If they are still a virgin at age 23-24, I would start wondering if they are so inhibited that they will never be able to enjoy sex. That is a question and not an automatic conclusion. By the time someone gets to be 30 years old, I assume that if they are a virgin, they intend to be a virgin for the remainder of their life.

At my age, I never ask a lady how many sexual partners she has had. Usually, your partner will eventually disclose that information, but if she doesn't, that's okay. For me, whether a girl is a "slut" relates to her state of mind about sex and not her number. If sex is something that she is willing to do with any attractive partner, purely for the physical pleasure, and without any need to have feelings of attachment. . . and if she has done that several times and continues to have the same attitude about sex, she is a slut. If a girl does that a few times and decides that is not how she wants to handle her sexuality, then she is not a slut.

I am talking about girls because I am a guy, but I do think that guys can be sluts just as much as women can be. Sometimes that are called players instead of sluts but, for me, a rose by any other name. . .

[jesshkah]

Agree with everything you've written, thank you for the comment. I try to be open minded as well, but it's natural to question anything that seems out of the norm. "Sluttiness" is also defined by attitude for me.

[aasasas]

a guy who has had 50 sex partners is a cool guy

[OlderAndWiser]

@aasasas Most guys who are young and inexperienced hold that belief. When you have had a few partners and experience with relationships, you may see things differently.

[aasasas]

I still want to lose my virginity to a player

[levantine99]

well no matter how cool and openminded you try to play it, we all know we make our deductions over virgins or sluts and players. which is wrong of course. if he/she is a good human, its none of our business. by the way most of the people that procreate unfortunately never should... .

[HOAAH]

I am a believer that virgins should find virgins and so on... just a preference for me but I know that I have no right to control anyone. You know? I was a virgin before him. And he made fun of me for it, and he continued to rub it in my face how much better he was than me and went on and on about how great his sex life was. Don't be like this guy. Don't do that. Sex doesn't make you any better than anyone else. Period.

[bloodmountain1990]

Agreed. I don't begrudge anyone getting laid, guy or girl, but generally the ones who brag/boast about their sex life are the ones you want to avoid. Usually the guys who do it are douchebags.

[jesshkah]

Yea he was just a shitty person clearly. Virgin shaming, slut shaming, I'm pretty against both of them.

[Berethor]

You do know that most people who are doing slut shaming are not doing virgin shaming? it's actually quite rare for someone to dislike for virgins and sluts, as those groups of people are the opposite, almost like fat and skinny people.

[HorrorFan]

Who is a man supposed to have sex with to build up their numbers?

Well, unfortunately, women get thrown into two categories. 'Sluts' and 'wife material'. Men have sex with the sluts or they do what they can to convince the women that actually want to hold out for an actual relationship into giving it up prematurely.

This is the thing. If a women is at least semi attractive and is willing to have sex, she can have all the sex she wants. There are tons of women like this. Women in their 20s and 30s that have had dozens upon dozens of partners. Some in the triple digits.

These are the women that are mainly breaking guys in. I've heard women literally THANK GOD for sluts because it means that their future husbands will know what they are doing when she eventually finds them and is ready to give it up after marriage. Stupid? Yes. But real.

"a man who has previously dated or had sex is sometimes seen as more desirable to a female"

Always. Or close enough to always outside of teenage years that it's not really hyperbole. Men in their 20s or older that haven't had sex yet are straight up seen as defective.

The World Health Organization is pushing for people that can't find sexual partners to be classified as 'disabled'. This is the world we live in now.

www.express.co.uk/.../Sexual-partner-fertility-disability-World-Health-Organisation-IVF

Don't get me wrong, I agree with your general argument here. It would be awesome if everyone looked past another person's sexual history when judging them, but that will never be reality.

These judgments are ingrained. Society will always function like this. It's too deeply rooted in natural social and biological functions.

[redeyemindtricks]

"I've heard women literally THANK GOD for sluts because it means that their future husbands will know what they are doing when she eventually finds them and is ready to give it up after marriage." ^^ I have a very hard time believing this.

[HorrorFan]

@redeyemindtricks Well, I promise you I'm not making this up. Not really my style. All anecdotal, but between some real life conversations, youtube comments sections (where the example I wrote down came from) and this very site, there have been quite a few similar comments and conversations with this general idea. Another anecdotal example. I had a conversation with two female co workers from a long time ago and the one was telling the two of us that another male coworker was a virgin at age 22 and the look the two girls gave each other... the pure, unfiltered disdain in their faces was enough to make me feel very awkward and walk away. Adult women do not want virgins. I generally feel if it were up to most women, male 'loser virgins' would be fired into the sun. It always feels like when a girl says she doesn't care or how cool it would be to be a sexual teacher, she's just trying to say whatever makes her sound good.

[JRICHARDS1996]

Yet the WHO are the same loonies who think that it is perfectly normal for a grown man to mutilate his penis because he feels like a woman "trapped" in the wrong body. The medical community has lost all semblances of credibility in my eyes after reading that article. And yes, I agree with your last point. Frankly, I think that adult women are so repulsed by male virgins that our very existence disgusts them. It is as if we are subhuman to them, that our presence alone disturbs them. This is a pain most women will never understand. It is beyond just being ignored or shamed. It is an ontological hatred of who you are.

[jesshkah]

I do agree with most of what you said as well, though it's interesting because if we go all the way back to the biological reasons for offspring and relationships etc, I'm not sure if female slut shaming existed back then.

[BrileyCat]

The worst thing about virginity is how much and what is written about it.
Lose it or keep it in your own time and according to your own values and needs.

[noModifierNeeded]

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

[BrileyCat]

@noModifierNeeded "The worst thing about virginity is how much and what is written about it."

[noModifierNeeded]

Agreed. Who did Karl Marx think he was anyway.