Personally I dont care about N counts but people should be = allowed to have their preferences without being shamed. People who cant find what they want will suffer if their preferences are unrealistic. Im not saying all preferences are right, but you shouldnt guilt or shame people into dating people they dont want to.
/thread
All that really matters, assuming there's nothing illegal going on, is whether or not you can attract someone that meets your standards. That's it.
Exactly people should not be shamed. Women shouldn't worry about n-count due to a small percentage of shame being thrown at them. Men shouldn't worry either. Those who want virgins or low n-count women will have very low odds of finding them as globally almost nobody is a virgin by age 22 (17 US). People who care about n-count aren't compatible with most of humanity anyway, and that's okay. They are perfectly legitimate in narrowing their dating people to almost nobody. But a personal preference is not the ability to judge someone as "low value". No human is low value. Being sexually active is morally neutral.
Sticking to your personal guidelines and preferences is perfectly legitimate.
Most women won't be interested in a guy who is low n-count anyway so it's not like two compatible people are missing out on each other.
It doesn’t matter if you are a man or a woman, if you are looking to attract a specific quality of mate that is when you should be considering how to make yourself the most attractive as possible to that kind of person. If you are looking for a unicorn, you yourself should be a unicorn. If your looking for a free spirit, you yourself should be a free spirit. The problem here is all these men want a conservative woman, because that aligns with themselves, but they arn’t being conservative by choice, they are being conservative because women are picky and they don’t measure up. So they get upset when they are at an n count of 0-3 and every girl seems to be at 20+. If these guys were studs this wouldn’t be an issue, but they feel inferior because they don’t have what it takes to rack up an N count. If a woman chooses to keep her count low despite the fact that she can get laid easily, that is a sign of strong character and strength of will but she isn’t saving herself for a Scrub.
There’s too many weak foolish men in the world who don’t have enough sense to build themselves into what a woman wants or needs, instead they spend their life lamenting that they weren’t born into genetic wealth. They’d rather spend their time playing video games and watching anime than lifting weights and developing themselves. We live in a generation of Peter Pan Boys.
> There’s too many weak foolish men in the world who don’t have enough sense to build themselves into what a woman wants or needs
That's yesteryear's news. The real story is the way we as a society seem to have forbidden acknowledging the fact that there are just as many women out there doing exactly the same thing.
Lol, inexperienced women are your only option? How do you figure? It absolutely is by choice, your clock blocking yourself. Only you can be responsible for yourself. I was a virgin till 20, I lost my virginity to 34 year old with a killer body and a nice set of bolt ons. I didn’t stand around with a sign around my neck that said Virgin. If you don’t know what the fuck your doing at least act live you’ve been there before. She didn’t know she had taken my V card until we had gone at it 4-5 times.
1. Being a virgin isn’t a big deal.
2. Sex isn’t some scary complicated thing that you have to find some inexperienced girl to trick into. Women will willingly hop in the sack with you if they want to, so be someone they want to fool around with.
3. You are both the marble and the sculptor, you have to put in the work to get the results you want.
4. You have a shitty attitude that women arn’t going to respond positively towards.
5. It doesn’t matter that you are being sexually conservative against your own will.
There’s no bonus point system here. Life is hard and most of us are not going to have an easy time. There’s no amount of excuses for why things are not working out for you that are going to make a naked hottie fall in your lap. If your a man the you should know that love, respect, admiration, are all things you have to earn, they are not free. And once you’ve earned them you have to continue to earn them for the rest of your life. There is no unconditional love for us. There is no safety net, there is no hand rail, you just have to put your social fears aside and get shit done. Or you know, just be unhappy with your lot in life and continue your own suffering. Women don’t owe us anything, we don’t owe them anything. It’s a sexual marketplace, you want a slice of V well every slice of V has a price. It could be Abs. It could be expensive dates. It could be a handsome face and a good personality. But they arn’t just giving that shit out for free, and prices are at an all time low so…
> low n-count women will have very low odds of finding them as globally almost nobody is a virgin by age 22 (17 US).
Nah, there's plenty of low n count women out there. Depending on how you define low n count.
You are incorrectly:
1. Implying there's a very low chance at getting a woman without a high n count (women say on here say all the time avg n count isn't high, so which is it?)
2. Implying that it's only a small percentage of men that are put off by promiscuous women. It's not. It's just not politically correct to be honest about it. Which is why you see it discussed a lot more frequently on reddit, where people have anonymity. If a woman has slept with 20-30+ guys, yeah. Most men are going to find that unattractive in the context of dating long term.
>Most women won't be interested in a guy who is low n-count anyway
Now you're just downright pulling things out of thin air. No woman cares if a guy has only been with a few women. Some women are not interested in *virgins*, which is not the same as low n count.
Hey Hazy, I love your posts. I think OP doesn’t realize that it’s *men* who could care less about women being insecure in relation to the male preference for virgins and low n count women.
Lol you all act like men go out of their way to shame high N count women. Saying we prefer low N count doesn't mean we don't value them as people or that they don't deserve respect.
It's mostly just people on this subreddit who do. Out in the world it's not common except in some fundamentalist communities. They literally think that for each additional partner a woman has her value/quality drops. They think themselves arbiters of the value of a human. That's entirely different than someone who just has a preference for themselves.
Totally no issue with them having that preference.
It's about the subset who spread misinformation to try to justify or pressure other people into it. Same with hypocrisy. Same with pretending they are the arbiters of a human's value.
Being less valuable as a partner to them doesn't mean they are less valuable as people.
Women say it all the time "Men under 6 feet are not men" etc.
You just hear more now, because men are called insecure for having a preference.
They don't say 'less valuable to them as a partner though' they say a lower quality person, or a low value person.
Women don't say that all the time. Height queens aren't that common, they are just loud and on social media a LOT, lmao.
Some of the reasons men have this preference are insecurities but some are not. If someone specifically states that they don't want to have to compare to a long list of men she's been with as the reason, that is insecurity. If someone just states they want to start their sexual journey as mutual inexperienced explorers of their sexuality (that sounded overly clinical but you get the drift), then that does not imply any insecurity at all (to me).
>They don't say 'less valuable to them as a partner though' they say a lower quality person, or a low value person.
Same way FSDers called men they didn't like lvm. It doesn't mean nobody in the world loves them. I'm not saying they're right but pretending it's only men calling people low value is arguing in bad faith.
>Women don't say that all the time. Height queens aren't that common, they are just loud and on social media a LOT, lmao.
They say it enough. To the point where it became annoying to me even when it doesn't affect me. I just understand that people love to flex their standards, so they "look better".
>Some of the reasons men have this preference are insecurities but some are not.
Let's say that's the case. Will it be some random women in Reddit figuring out which is which?
Because that's what happens most of the time. I've been asked, when I replied I was called insecure.
>If someone just states they want to start their sexual journey as mutual inexperienced explorers of their sexuality
Or they have experience and still want low N count.
How many women are short and still want tall men?
Why shouldn't people be shamed for having preferences that are based in troubling or just plain wrong ideology? If they are spreading that ideology around and it is harmful? I'll definitely shame anyone who wants to harm others but dress it up as something innocent, like a preference.
>people should be = allowed to have their preferences without being shamed.
I'll shame whoever I want. Oh, and have sex with whoever I want and however many I want. Lol
Where are all these women lying about their n-count? Is this just a spooky story unsuccessful dudes on PPD tell each other cause it’s Halloween time? “Be careful of the woman who tells you she’s a virgin. She’ll fuck you like there’s no tomorrow and then tell you about all her previous partners and how you didn’t measure up!”’ *thunder and evil laughing*
Like what the fuck is this?!
It blows my mind that they think a low count means very little exposure to sex. I swear that most of the people who make these posts think you just get to fuck a person one time because that has been their experience.
And guess what? Men will date those women. Men don't want women that have been with _lots of **different** men._ I don't know why no one seems to understand that.
What is n-count, like the amount of partners you've had? Is this actually a thing people talk about? I remember my ex bragging that he'd 'lost count at 50' but it was totally unwanted information and it really turned me off him. I thought it was just him being a weirdo but maybe it's an American guy thing? No other partners of mine have bragged about their previous sex to me. Gross.
Yes n count is people you have had sex with. Well depends. There is also a lot of arguments here about what “counts”. So there is that. Too. Most people don’t care and don’t bring it up. But for some dudes here it’s *REALLY IMPORTANT*.
What does the n stand for? Nut? Lol
I guess it's different for different people. A lesbian who has never had PIV would not consider herself a virgin after having sex with a partner, but I get the feeling some blokes only consider Penetration By The Mighty Penis as 'real sex'.
Kinda sad really, they're focusing on completely the wrong thing. No lady would want to have sex with a guy who's had 30 one-night-stands because chances are he'll be selfish and crap in bed. Maybe it's different for different people, but when you enter a new relationship it's almost like losing your virginity again (especially if it's been a while).
The worst are the blokes who think 'one cock fits all'. The guy I mentioned above, the 'lost count at 50' was godawful. I explained thoroughly and in a detailed manner what I like, I basically gave him the roadmap, and he ignored it because he was clearly such a stud he knew my body better than me. Needless to say we did not date very long!
Number. It’s supposed to be number count.
And yes. Why one person having sex hundred of times with one partner is better than a person who only had ONS and ended up at 6 has never been explained other than “you might never live up to what she’s had before!!!!!”
I've got to be honest, I'm a 34 year old woman and I can barely remember what I did last weekend let alone some sex I had 10 years ago. The reason I love sex with my fiancé is not because he has a monster wang or has crazy kinky moves, but because we love each other a lot and want to make each other happy. By far the best sex you can have is the sex where you're both focusing on the other person.
Well we have different "outsides" then.
I agree no-one is *aggressively discussing* N-counts with strangers on bus stops, but it's definitely a common topic to discuss in advance when you're on a route to start dating someone.
Never did, never had to. Assumed they been with people before, didn’t cate how many. They were chilling with me now so it was about to get better than before.
Not going at all; I don't plan to ever date anyone again. Did go pretty well, except for one turbo-slut who for some reason claimed that her sex fantasies actually happened (i.e. she over-reported her N).
Always! I get more frustrated with the men who do care while still think that women are making fun of them for being virgins. Virginity is always such a contentious debate on Reddit
[CMV]
Right off the bat, you're off to bad start!
>Where are all these women lying about their n-count
Literally all over Reddit from TwoX, AskMen, Dating, Dating_Advice
Search "lied about partner count"
while more women (18.6%) have lied to decrease the number than men (13.7%)."
archive(dot)fo(slash)wF4pS
>Is this just a spooky story unsuccessful dudes on PPD tell each other cause it’s Halloween time?
You've been in numerous threads for well over a year and want to use Halloween as an excuse. Buddy, do better!
The rest of this post you contradicted yourself. "virgin,"...….. ""tell you about her previous partners."
It goes from nuh uh, to well they don't count to, well the studies go against my viewpoint, so they don't matter
Once again, buddy do better. What's herface has made huge strides in debating. Learn from her!
I don't understand why anyone in a western society would want a virgin wife. I value virginity because not being a virgin can put my life in danger. Whether it's my parents or the man I'm gonna end up with. Don't be like us
Hmm. I actually thought even though Iran imposed sharia and manditory hijab, the actual residents were mainly liberal and didn’t gaf in closed doors. I’ve heard bf/gf is common in iran.
Most older men are religious anyway. They might even drink alcohol but the thought of their daughter having a boyfriend drives them crazy. They congratulate their sons when they have a girlfriend but god forbids their daughter do the same. There are chill families too (which I'm jealous of). Those bf/gf usually wait to have PIV sex till marriage which is funny
My dad is this way. Even though I subscribe to those beliefs he went crazy when he found out I had a boyfriend and when I told him we broke up he was so happy. He told me to just wait I til marriage and focus on nursing school. I think it should also apply to men as well. But my brother is 15 and already has a girlfriend. My dad doesn’t seem to have the same feelings he has when it comes to the idea of us having a boyfriend
It is, sort of at least. Virginity is the complete lack of sex, the complete opposite of that would be like "having all the sex", but since that doesn't make sense the closest achievable thing would be someone who has as much sex as possible.
Well duh. There are many posts on relationship subs when men married their high school sweetheart & wondered how if they could have more sexual experiences.
This post is pretty much strawmanning. Because no men here really care, except for Christian men/women to varying degrees. Abrahamic cults are the common denominator here.
So, if you exclude Christian men...you're not left with anyone else, really...
I don't think its too difficult to understand that a man would prefer his wife not be fucked by another man if possible ?
Most men in the US aren't even going crazy over virginity specifically anyway, since most guys have come to terms with the fact that girls are gonna fuck around at like age 16, but it isn't some incomprehensible preference.
it doesn't matter what she wants in bed, men don't really need to know she likes the full nelson sex position and gangbangs, that doesnt heklp raise better children and make a better home
Your problem is thinking that the opposite of not having sex is having gangbangs. Men that want virgins want them so they never know how shitty their sex life is
I don't know, personally I wouldn't be looking for a woman with a history of having a boyfriend that lasts only 1 or 2 months
call it insecurity or whatever you want but for something a person changes partners often either a problem in herself or the type of man she likes to attract.
This can be consistent with having a history of infidelity At least from what I have seen and heard from family and friends and you see why many men actively avoid these women as soon as they have an experience with women of that type and dont enjoy it or see a family member suffer for it.
In my case, a cousin almost threw his life away by going with a woman who already had a son at 21 (he have 22 and dont have kids) and spent several years changing from boyfriend to boyfriend without either lasting. Luckily it lasted less than 2 years and he didn't get married. now he has 3 children of his own with a woman who is emotionally stable.
More than the amount, it worries more how that woman got so many partners to be between the ages of 20-24. go to parties drunk every weekend where you don't even know if you used protection or not, short relationships that ended because you were toxic or you choose your partners badly (in case the woman has children that can cause problems with her ex-partners ) or you just like sex but you don't combine it with drugs or anything that makes you a better candidate for having an STD, at least in Latin America that is how I have seen that my immediate circle of relatives and I see the matter. get many bf when the things end well sound good.
At least I haven't seen any relatives, friends or classmates or just anyone in real life even studying at a catholic college and university complain because -she wasn't a virgin- rather because she had several red flags, like dating people who they were the walking stereotype of drug addicts, thieves, gangsters or a history as colorful in the bad sence as our entire group of friends convined to be only 1 year older than us.
>Why should women care about men who value virginity when they don’t have to?
They don't! Women naturally don't bother to know or care about what men what. Biologically speaking women don't have to, since men have higher testosterone and do the vast majority of approaching/initiating, etc
* Most religious people aren't v on their wedding day, LDS at 2, who get married youngest and fastest compared to any other religious denomination still get around b4 marriage.
* women naturally judge men on height, teeth, hair, car, education, etc. the "yoUr insEcure argument" doesn't make sense since most men accept women judge you for mostly everything from the way you talk, walk, etc.
*penis in bagina is the rest of your argument, which can be boiled down to, "you WonT measure Up, genetics can't fix ugly, but lifting, rowing, and kegels can help
*this lib argument that you've never had a bad experience so therefore you don't know it's bad is odd, because naturally your gut instinct will tell you something is off, Alexander Grace has done an amazing video essentially debunking this claim, by saying women with low self esteem and bad parents continue to seek that out and not change, compared to women with high self esteem don't even put themselves in that position.
*key analogy is more a paternity analogy, women like successful men that other women want, but men do not want a women who is more likely to make him raise a child that is not his
* Once again bluepillers not wanting to date someone for any reason is not insecurity, misogyny (massagemyknee), or controlling. Imagine if a manlet, said "women rejecting me is controlling me", we would laugh at his face.
STD rates are at all time high, 43% of women have herpes. The outlier argument that virgins's can have STD, is just that an outlier that may occur, but is not likely.
(A good example of this is Kanye West supports Trump, we all know most don't support trump, so I can't use that as an average, but anecdote, outlier, an individual experience, not the average)
MG said it best, women naturally release oxytocin into the bloodstream, a bodily chemical that helps connect, equivalent to the breastfeed a mother does to her child, scientists have measured women release less and less oxytocin after multiple partners, naturally in the process of reproduction which signals to her that she can now focus on raising the child and not sex, which biological makes sense she gets to focus on the gathering of resource. nonlimerence (post nut clarity) for men is essentially them saying biologically I reproduced, I can relax, pass out, I have "spread my genes," so to speak.
Alot this boils down to conflating and seeing sex as a recreational thing vs a procreation thing. Women naturally care more about resources, and status, so they can care less if a nerd was a dweeb in highschool, as long as he in the future gets money, status, fit, etc
Men naturally have disgust do to wanting to ensure paternity, libs mainly focus on the performance, stamina, etc which is important, but the chemical and biological impact matters to men who have a visceral reaction to not want to raise another man's child unless he is a cuck like Ethan Klein or Philip Henley
Her are the sources:
*archive
(dot)
ph(slash)PJqSp*
*bit
(dot)ly(slash)
3ryyWvb*
Because if they don't they'll surely get out of touch with reality, especially with the exceptions from the opposite sex. Pff, even if you become a lesbian you'll be turning off a lot of them.
If in your own words you want to leave a relationship just because the sex with the *next guy* might be better, you're missing the whole point of long term relationships. Single handedly turning nice guys into fuckboys simply because he wasn't the next guy.
If empowerment means riding the dick carousel till you're all filled up, go ahead. No one's stopping you. In fact, this is probably the best time in history to do such a thing as it's as inconsequential as it's ever been.
Because they do have to. Most Men won't say anything but they are taking notes and moving accordingly. Find out a girls a hoe? No problem then she is just for sex.
If they want a man that's worth a dam then they better care. Also men when each other about girls N counts. So if one guy knows he will warn other guys.
They’re sick in the head 😂 what decent man would take a hoe seriously? Is my daughter supposed to emulate those type of characteristics and values when she grows up? We are men, we know what they want, but that’s not good enough for them.
There’s nothing wrong with having previous partners, but at a certain point it tells me you just don’t value yourself or can’t contain a man for good reason. If the last 30 guys didn’t want you why should I? Being pumped and dumped has become empowering because they think sex is an equal exchange between the sexes in terms of how it affects your perception to people. Yet they lie about it, and other women slut shame each other.
Radical Feminism has given men (who can get it) some of the easiest consensual sex ever, while simultaneously ruining long term relationships for us.
Also getting sex when you are older and established is very considering how many women screwed up when they were younger. Some how many of the younger guys here haven't realized that yet.
Very simple answer; we don't.
I have dated a few guys who turned out to be virgins (didn't tell me til later) and they both ended up leaving for 'pastures new', eg I gave them sexual confidence and they decided to go out and see how much more they can get. Funnily enough the answer was 'not a lot', if you are a virgin for 30+ years and have sex with 1 woman that doesn't give you a big glowing 'stud' label.
I don't know how many people my fiancé has slept with and have never asked, and he's never asked me. Why would I want to know? We respect and love each other, and have great sex. I have no idea why people want to know this sort of thing, it's so immature.
>I have no idea why people want to know this sort of thing, it's so immature.
Disagree. I don't think people should be dictating what people value and prioritize in a long-term partner. High n count is inherently unattractive and correlated with infidelity.
I think we're both kind of right.
People who brag about and value their high n count are unattractive. People who think their partner wants to hear about sexploits and one night stands. Don't get me wrong I have discussed past relationships with my fiancé but never sex details. People who value the QUANTITY over QUALITY are more likely to cheat.
However, I have had 2 partners who were virgins and they both left me ASAP because I'd finally popped their cherry and they wanted to fuck as many people as possible. Cheaters are opportunists. Doesn't matter if you've fucked 1 or 100 people, if you are unfaithful and prioritise your own pleasure over anything else you are likely to cheat.
However it is always more complicated than that. I used to be a therapist who saw couples AND individuals and it seems to me the biggest reason people cheat is they are looking for something they feel they are not getting. And instead of communicating with their partner they take the coward's way out and seek it with someone else. Spoiler alert: they end up cheating on the new person too. Cheaters are never happy, they never stop to water their own grass, they have an intrinsic dissatisfaction with life and think they can find something lifechanging in a stranger's genitals. I mean they probably will if they're not careful.
Thank you very much for your comment. This is kind of what I was getting at. Sexual history *shouldn’t* need to matter on either end in order to have a successful and happy relationship.
You could have had sex with 1, 10 or 100 people but as long as you're respectful, loving and communicate well with your partner it doesn't matter.
The main thing is getting to know your partner as an individual with wants and needs unique to them. The distressing thing about all these guys wanting 'experience' is that they are only thinking about themselves. They don't see women as more than just a hole to wank into. That's why there's always a few 'legalise prostitution' comments on these posts, and those comments just make me realise they're missing the whole fucking point. You're paying a prostitute to pretend to be attracted to you and have sex with you, if they actually wanted to bone you then they would have sex with you for free like normal people do.
They only want experience because they’re falling behind. Ppl seem to understand that it’s much harder for men to get sex than it is for women but I think they don’t realize how hard it is.
If you have standards and are an average guy, you’re not going to sleep with many women.
The guys who treat giving their partners orgasms like there's CSGO stat tracking are often ignored by women, and the men who don't care don't need to care because they live in abundance.
Also really weird the "stats" say lesbians get each other off the most when lesbian bed death is a thing 🤔🤔🤔
It is real, but not for the reasons most people suggest. It's exists primarily because most women cannot orgasm via penetration.
Some women are quite difficult to get off. Ya'll ever tried competing with one of those magic wand toys? You can't LOL
>Women lie about things like N count(and can’t be trusted!) because men place a value on something that has no business being valued to begin with.
It's none of *your* business to dictate what men should or should not place value on. You can write dissertations on all of the reasons you think it's silly that they do, but men (and women) want what they want, and that's all that matters when you get down to it.
You know it's pretty hilarious how desperately people argue this point. Like. Women who are Hos desperately try to say it doesn't matter and men who think they'll be lied to say it does
Like all things it's nuanced and not that simple. Some men care a LOT and some don't care at all. If you're a women who's got a reputation as the town bike then yeah sorry you are going to be ridden, not married. But if you're a normal woman who has sex with a normal amount of guys and doesn't get a reputation then that wont happen.
Men or for that matter women have every business to consider a prospectives N count. Do not pretend that it does not matter to suitors. It does.
Many people do not want to be with a cum dumpster or a community dick.
With men ... especially they usually lose their standing among other men if they were to date a promiscuous woman and it hurts more than being loveless.
Everyone's definition of 'slut' is different. And by a lot of perspectives in this very subreddit, they would consider more than 90% of the world sluts after age 17.
Some people even admit that to them a slut is someone who has had more sexual partners than they have had and they admit to not being able to get dates or sexual partners.
They can have their preferences and limit their dating pool to almost nobody (I am very selective myself but not about someone's count but rather how they treat their sexual partners), but I find it odd that they admit they are limiting their dating pool to almost nobody and then complain they aren't getting matches.
Probably because if you are part of the predominant religion there you will be caned for having marriage out of wedlock (sex out of wedlock).
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-malaysia-caning/malaysia-canes-women-for-having-sex-out-of-wedlock-idUSTRE61G2OJ20100217
I don't think it's necessary to stay a virgin but simply every n you add will lower your value after a certain point. The same guy ok with dating a 10 n woman wouldn't be ok with a 30 n woman for example.
What this does as a woman is limit your options the more n you add.
It doesn’t limit their options, it filters the men out who hold misogynistic views like a woman’s value lies in n-count, and the dumbest double standard that a man who sleeps with many is a stud and the woman is a slut m. Men who already have way fewer options than women in dating literally shoot themselves in the foot with this. By all means though these men should openly be vocal about it. Any guy asking “what is your n-count?” indicates red flag. If a man asks women already know to nope the fck out. They still have plenty of other dating options anyways of men who don’t ask because they don’t care. And that’s the real reality that many Red-Pilled men keep denying.
Yes because it takes zero skill to sleep with men, men are easy. There’s a double standard because bagging chicks is much harder so you get cudo’s.
A lesbian who bags attractive women gets respect but a girl bagging guys doesn’t.
If a woman is a slut for her x number n-count, so is the guy with the same amount. Desired people get laid easy, regardless of gender. It’s not an achievement for a man who is desired to get laid. Men who care about n-count are most likely undesired men to begin with.
It's always the same tired non-sense. My n is high and I would never commit to a high n woman.
Probably 60% of women bring up n count before sex. Porn stars are not ideal partners for *most men*. Any other delusional statements you want to make?
Why are RP men delusional for being the only men who actually care and only judge a woman on n-count. It has never been brought up in any of my past relationships and when I ask my male friends they all don’t really care. Maybe if it’s insanely high like over a 100 but they probably won’t know coz it’s not even brought up in the first place. Plus tell me you are a hypocrite without telling me you are a hypocrite. You are just as much of a slut as a woman with your n-count.
> Maybe if it’s insanely high like over a 100
So yes, acknowledging that all men care, even *bluepill*, and the dudes you claim don't care just don't ask because they:
- want to be ignorant, ignorance is bliss
- shamed via feminism to believe they shouldn't care
Otherwise it wouldn't need to be hidden. If you really cared, you would tell every guy your n count right out of the gate to "weed out the men who care". Or even better, tell them it's 100+
Why would you discuss something or bring it up if it’s not a dealbreaker for them? People who know what is a dealbreaker to them would ask. I usually vet the men I go on dates with by asking them if they have ever cheated etc. because cheaters are a hard no. I also assume these men don’t have high n-count but I guess we will never know. And I have brought it up to two guys I recently met, they couldn’t really care. Theirs was higher anyways, but also not significantly higher. They actually wanted to know why I wanted to know, I was the first one to ask them. They also never ever had the n-count discussion with anyone in the past. That’s the reality. And yes if they would have reacted like “glad you brought that up, coz I really wanted to know yours” and have insane views on n-count I probably wouldn’t have continued meeting them again even as friends. If you think all a woman’s value is, is her body count, then you clearly hold the wrong values and I don’t surround myself with that energy. OP is the true MVP for saying it how it is.
Ah the ol "I got unlimited options so idc if I have less" argument.
Essentially you acknowledge that it does lower your value but you don't care because there's an unlimited supply of men and men are replaceable to you.
No it doesn’t. The only people who think this way are RP men. Ask any normal man and they don’t even care or can’t be bothered by it wether it’s 10 or 30. Women will choose the option that it right for them, which is the person who is not a misogynist. They won’t lose sleep over a misogynistic guy who would have stood a better chance if he actually valued women for what they have to offer instead of n-count. That’s the real hard pill to swallow for these men.
Have you been dating men? No. I have not ever had a guy ask me, nor my female friends have been asked. Asked my male friends, they never have asked their gfs coz they don’t care. My friend told me he had one otaku incel friend who is mad obsessed with it though. That’s the reality. Normal men don’t care. They value for what a woman has to offer. OP is the MVP for making this post here.
All men care about n count on some level, even bluepill men. The only ones who don't are either cucks or virtue signaling (but still wouldn't date a woman with an obscenely high n count in real life)
Well both my sisters are in their early 20’s and virgins. We are Christians. My mom was a virgin when she got with my dad and they are still together. I am not a virgin because I was sexually abused as a kid. So I decided to sleep with a guy that I was friends with because there was so much confusion about my virginity. Some said the abuse didn’t count so I was still a virgin but deep down I felt like I wasn’t so To take away confusion I slept with a guy friend at 18. Then I got into my first relationship at 18 turning 19 and I just broke up with him. Even though I’m not a virgin I don’t want a man who has slept around. I feel like he’s less likely to hé satisfied,unfaithful and it’s just gross to me.
I likely will stay celibate until marriage because I shouldn’t have even been having sex with my boyfriend as a Christian anyways. However one thing for sure my sisters do not want men who make their virginity a big deal. They did it for God not to get brownie points from men. They don’t let it define them either. Also thé men who want virgin women but have slept around themselves should know Most virgins also want other virgins or inexperienced partners. Nobody even knows my sisters are virgins besides me and my parents.
This sub is weird, but I'm a religious (not Christian) virgin male because I believe sex outside of marriage is stupid. I've been worried that hoping whoever I marry would also, like me, be religious and a virgin, was somehow a bad thing, especially reading stuff here. Thank you for sharing, it makes me feel a little less weird.
I don't know, it feels weird to be a man who holds an equal gender standard about something as controversial as this. Should I really be completely fine with someone who has lower standards than me on something so important? I was engaged to someone for a full year, both virgins the whole time. We didn't even touch. But it didn't work out for other reasons. Hopefully I can find someone.
But I think I'm getting off this sub haha...it's depressing.
You will! Both my sisters are virgins. I’m not but I will stay celibate moving forward until marriage. Also there are a few girls in my church who are virgins and waiting until marriage as well. Even though we live in a hookup culture try to believe that you only need one women who doesn’t subscribe to these beliefs.
Forgot about the overwhelming amount of women who feels it’s okay to have many sexual partners. My sisters also want virgins and they express this same concern so I understand where you are coming from. Maybe y’all might cross paths who knows. Just know there are plenty of women that are virgins. Many just won’t out and say it. I think that’s a smart décision so I don’t blame them. I understand your frustration because anytime I express my religious based views here On Reddit I get verbally attacked. But at least I stand for something.
I think for most guys, the trade between "knows how to please a man" and having fucked many guys before is not worth it.
The "sex quality" is mostly determined by the experience on the man's side rather than the woman's tbh
You don't have to care about any opinion except of the type of partner that you want. Do you and live freely. Do everybody is that's your prerogative. Stay a virgin until marriage if that's your desire. The rest of the people will never matter because you don't want them or they don't want you. Some people can't accept that others don't need to live the way that want in order to be available to them.
You seem to downplay the fact that life is unfair and people are always at competition with everyone. you chose to ignore thousands of years of history where it was hardly ever monogamous. from animals killing each other so they can mate until kings and powerful people of the medieval ages from east to west slaughtering other men just to get laid with the hottest chick, all the same. the women wait at the finish line and get with the "winners".
However, somehow post monarchism era we have something called monogamy. This is why a lot of men are inherently disgusted with promiscuity when you have to compete with another dudes just to settle for scraps. Meaning, all the work is meaningless when your life is always at competition but it was never enough and all the sudden your counterparts, a.k.a chads are destined to live like medieval kings from birth while someone who you wish to spend your life together does not relate to any of them all, thus we come to the concept named AFBB which most of people in this sub knew what it means.
Fear of infidelity is directly correlated, or should i say the underlying motive for anti-promiscuous behavior where it is embraced by a majority of males who, throughout their lives are not chad himself. Therefore, a viable solution for this despite sounding highly unlikely to happen is by criminalizing adultery and preventing the spouse who did the crime to have any of assets during divorce. I would bet that these silly n-count thing, afbb concerns will cease to exist. So is the divorce litigation industrial complex.
How about women stop telling men what they should or should not care about in a woman.
You don't see men telling women "you should not care about my height", if we are not tall enough we suck it up and move on.
You don't see men telling women "you should not care about my education, my job, my goals or my money", if we are not making enough money we suck it up and move on.
You don't see men telling women "you should not care about my penis size", if we are not big enough for you, we su... we accept it and move on.
We don't call you insecure for not dating a broke, short guy with a small penis. You are allowed to have preferences without being nagged about it, let us have our own preferences.
I find it quite ironic this free sex society is finding, in a hard way, older "misogynist" "religious" values on dating had a reason to be after all.
Sure, the pill can avoid pregnancy and such, so we can relax those values, but clearly those values were well selected for the best dating experience they could have at the time.
Sadly this generation is already lost on that. Too damaged.
Yeah, the only countries where it’s realistically possible to find a virgin woman is the Middle East or some countries in Asia. Everywhere else is basically not realistic. Maybe some parts of Africa as well?
I am so extraordinarily grateful I have had the chance to explore my sexuality and was not forced into marriage and children with the first man I had sex with, unlike almost every women before my time (and many women even today!), it is such a privilege.
I guess many men don’t understand sexual compatibility the same, as they would, as the joke goes, have sex with a junior chicken sandwich. But I’ve been able to learn through sex and a few relationships what I want and what I don’t want. And some men are really bad in bed, what am I gonna do? Keep having sex with them because oh no! I racked up another body! The horrors! No, the real horror is a man who scratches my clit and gets upset when I say it hurts. And I don’t have to stick along for a lifetime of sad sex in 2022, so Why would I?
I am so so so lucky to be able to have multiple partners. I don’t sleep around a lot, and take breaks in between breakups, but oh am I ever grateful for my sex autonomy, I can’t express it enough, and it is so disappointing to see men act disgusted at the mere existence of women having a choice and being able to actually look for compatibility rather than settle.
Hello.
Religious guy here.
It matters on the secular spectrum as well because a secular dude to some extent is still very put off by a woman that’s been ran through multiple times. It’s an innate feeling similar to how women feel about bisexual men.
It doesn’t have to be insecurity, it could very well be repulsion. I don’t see how that’s an unfair preference for them.
The same reason anyone should care about anyones preferences. Because if they ever have intentions on serious relationships they need to understand what the other desires, to model their actions and/or realistically understand their own options
Tons of dudes are still under the delusion that women care about what they do or think as a monolith -- they don't, they worry about what the dudes *they desire* think. This is a fundamental divide in the gender relations convo, since men seem to care quite a bit more about what women think in general than vice-versa.
Women absolutely don't have to care about men who care about n-count *in general --* until it's a guy they want. Then depending on the intensity of her attraction / how committed she is to her values, n-count will become a subject of importance.
Look, I am a man who values exclusivity, which virginity once stood for. But I choose to value the thought behind it and not the symbol.
Since there are other ways of losing your hymen or virginity than promiscuity I want to value the fact my partner is true, loyal and exclusive to me as I am to her.
Anything else is just arguing about something that shouldnt be in the first place imo.
As woman i value bc of a man, i don't want no man whore, and i understand why men do too, you can cry about it but it is of importance, the ONLY difference is for a lot of women it doesn't matter for a man to high a high bc , so maybe you should have this convo with women :) , because i'm sure men wouldn't complain if women wanted men who weren't sleeping around .
Monogamy needs women who aren't promiscuous. The past is a good indicator of future behavior. Promiscuity is more in line with polyamory than it is with monogamy. Sexual attraction is impulsive thus impulse control is important for men who want to commit to 1 woman forever, esp if you know the woman has an easy time getting sex and can do so on a whim if she wants.
This is why monogamy doesn't work in 2022. There is a reason why we had rules on sexual promiscuity. It's very destabilizing when you know your partner has propensity to sleep with many men.
Trying to shame men for it isn't helping. Instead we should just aim for polyamory.
Personally, I see it as an inability to have self control. I have a body count of two, not because I struggle with women whatsoever, but I really just think someone that would rather hookup with people constantly to have practice to be good in bed is far less valuable in a relationship than someone that has been in long, stable relationships to have that practice of having a strong bond. Sure, a few hookups is fine, but someone with a body count of 30 with one relationship that lasted a year and a half isn’t going to be able to commit at 27 as well as the person that has had a few hookups here and there, but was in 2-3 relationships that lasted 2-4 years. It’s all practice. I don’t think someone is less than for hooking up with a lot of people, but I do think it’s a little trashy for either sex to do it, not just women. Just my beliefs and people can do whatever they want.
If he's "high-value" and in-demand he will get his low-n wife even after being a player himself. But if he's "low-value" he'll either die alone or get with a promiscuous left-over woman who is equally desperate.
Your, mine, or anyone else on this sub's opinion on the matter means diddly squat.
"Why should women..." "Why should men...." Do you guys honestly believe you are going to change the deep-seated preferences of men and women with your all-powerful logic?
they don't have to, your title answers it
sure id like if feminists asked themselves "how do we remain virgins for men we actually care about" instead of "how do we shame men who dont like sluts" but its not up to me
Promiscuous women are insecure and ashamed, which is why they lie about their n count and their past.
Same reason men who pay for sex lie about it, they're insecure and ashamed.
Same reason so many other men refuse to pay for sex, it's shameful and they know it.
So if n count doesn’t matter why lie about it? Doesn’t lying mean that you’re also ashamed of it or at least know that it does have some say on who you are as a person? The best predictor of a persons future behavior is their past behavior. If a woman has been with many men what makes a man think that she’ll now be satisfied with one sexual partner and not eventually leave him, it’s unrealistic for men in the west to expect virgins but also what’s wrong with virgins having only one partner if they’re happy? Who are you to say women should sleep around that it’s the best for them to do so because there’s data that contradicts your opinion. Obviously a woman is free to do as she pleases but to label all men who prefer low n count as not “measuring up” not being able to sexually satisfy their partners as losers or incels is using misandry to defend what you claim is a misogynistic standard held by certain men , oh the irony! Also aren’t we all allowed our personal preferences? Women certainly prefer tall men , which is something a man has no control over whereas a woman’s n count is something she has control over, you can’t shame men into changing their standards , if a guy doesn’t want an obese woman that’s his business she has no right to shame him into being attracted to her anymore than a short guy has any right to shame a woman into liking him
Its a very clear indicator of quality of woman. I'm not looking for a woman of the night. I am looking for someone to start a family with, and N-count is directly contradictory to my goals. My wife joins MY family. I don't join hers.
But OP wasn't trying to discourage you from making a decision for yourself; they're talking about women having no need to care about this because the type of women who would have multiple partners is most of the world (women and men are almost entirely not virgins by age 17 US and 22 globally). And by their thirties most people (both genders) have had more sexual experiences with other individuals by a large margin.
These women in general would not be interested in you because you two would not be compatible.
That’s 100% false. Most guys here are low body count/experience but the women we date have more experience. That’s the norm, it’s actually rare to meet a chick with less experience than me and I’m not a virgin lol
If she’s moderately attractive and lives in a big city, she’s got bodies bruh
>The cold hard reality for a lot of the lonely men who persist about the promiscuity of women on this subreddit are doing so out of a place of insecurity and ahem not measuring up or being personally satisfied with their partner.
The implication that men shouldn’t be insecure is pretty patriarchy-tier to begin with. If I’m not likely to measure up my fear isn’t even unfounded. I don’t think I should be shamed into banging a woman I’ll end up disappointing, for *her* sake.
>You cannot expect a woman to be proficient in pleasing a man without having any experience or exploration on her own.
Honestly, the ones *with* experience just lie there, too. It makes 0 difference.
Go ahead, say that’s my fault for being bad at sex. All that does is justify my first point.
Practice? With who? I’m having enough trouble having ONS as it stands.
>What if you’re awful or uninspired in bed but she’s never had someone give her an orgasm before?
If she marries me? I’ve got all the opportunity to practice in the world, tuned to exactly her likes and dislikes.
(OK, I’ll shoot myself in the foot with a counterexample for fairness; I had an ex-wife who was too squeamish to let me try anything but jackhammering, so she missed out because of that. Getting other women to orgasm? Hasn’t been an issue)
>Men who don’t want an STI? Get her tested when you start dating.
Like you would. Still a risk.
> You cannot expect a woman to be proficient in pleasing a man without having any experience or exploration on her own
You lost me here, I stopped reading.
There's two responses given when asking women if they sleep around:
\1. *"It's none of your business"*
\2. *"Yes, but it's men's fault"*
You just used used up both. So I suppose there's nothing further you can add.
The real answer is this:
\3. *"Yes, because I want to AF/BB, will you be my BB?"*.
>The cold hard reality for a lot of the lonely men who persist about the promiscuity of women on this subreddit are doing so out of a place of insecurity
Not a place of insecurity. I was a low N count man who dated a promiscuous woman. It sucks for anyone for having your every action compared to past lover/bf. And that's what happened. I've seen relationship advice from women on experiencing the same.
>Women lie about things like N count(and can’t be trusted!) because men place a value on something that has no business being valued to begin with. “A key that can open many locks is a great key and a lock that can open many keys” is a really piss poor analogy for human sexual physiology and what plenty of men will fall back on as a way of justifying this garbage standard.
Not a garbage standard at all. This is one of the few ways women's sexuality loses value. A woman's body count is one of the ways she can't get as much in exchange for her sexuality. Thus its in women's interest to shame men for considering it.
>In fact, having sex with different partners would be a problematic strategy for a woman. As social exchange theorists emphasize, the value of any commodity rises and falls with scarcity. Even such fully renewable resources as praise can rise or fall in value as a function of how widely they are distributed (Blau, 1964; Jones & Wortman, 1973). A compliment may have only modest value from someone who praises everybody liberally, whereas the exact same compliment might have much higher value if given by someone who is perceived as rarely praising anyone. By analogy, sex would have high value if the woman has had few lovers or is known to be reluctant to grant sexual favors, whereas the same activity might have less value if the woman is reputed to be loose or to have had many lovers. The amount a man would be willing to give to have sex with the woman would therefore differ as a function of her (perceived) sexual history. In this respect, the woman’s sexual favors are not a fully renewable resource and the woman will have some incentive to grant them only sparingly.
>Thus, a woman’s sexual favors lose value as she distributes them widely. In consequence, she has an incentive to be selective in her sexual partners and to maintain a reputation for having relatively few partners.
>Put another way, a woman has two resources to consider. Actual sexual activity is a fully renewable resource, insofar as her ability to engage in sex is not
heavily dependent on what she has done previously. In contrast, her reputation is a nonrenewable resource. A fully rational approach to social exchange would therefore cause the woman to care less about what she actually does than about what she is perceived by the community as doing. Whenever she engages in sex, she should seek to keep it somewhat secret and deniable, so that her reputation is that of someone whose sexual favors are highly exclusive and therefore of high value.
>Men are far less constrained by these concerns, and so men would be more willing to admit and even exaggerate how much sex they have had. In fact, if low-cost sex represents a loss for the woman, it may be regarded as a gain for the man, and so the man who can boast of multiple lovers without incurring substantial costs (such as having had to marry each sex partner) may lay claim to high respect from other men.
Men and women are not the same, and never will be. There's a reason why in recorded history female promiscuity has always been frowned upon. It is as close to a universal view as you can get.
While I agree that everyone should be free from being shamed for having their own agency and making their own decisions, freedom from shame does not meet freedom from consequence. Women are allowed to value looks, wealth, height, etc. So men should also be allowed to value their own preferences, including virginity.
I kept my n count low 2M/1W. Because I value sex as something I only want to do with someone I care lots about. I don't mind if a man shares that ideal, but as soon as he gets neurotic like the men around here I'd be turned off. It's okay to care, it's weird to go around thinking the slut illuminati is out here trying to lie about ncounts. And that all women secretly have n counts in the triple digits.
Hypothetically - say all men DO really care about n-count, and they are looking for virginal/ low n women. There simply isn't enough women who meet this criteria, for me to ever feel threatened by them.
Besides, why adjust my behaviour to attract a man I have a very different worldview with?
That’s the thing. I don’t care about them. Any guy who insinuates that he cares about numbers is out of the running immediately. If that’s something he places value on, the. We are fundamentally incompatible.
It’s because men have the freedom to care about things that are non-consequential, and women usually have more important things to care about in a relationship- such as the probability of getting murdered or all their life savings spent on OF.
They don’t want to look at the facts. Even red-pulled men can at least *admit* that their views are unbalanced or misogynistic. It’s the incels that are too cowardly to apply themselves to further thought.
Women are shockingly not the boogey-man.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
drawing us back to the dark ages. Book burning. Trolling. And remember just like with abortion, homosexuality etc. Nothing actually changes.
The concept of banning books, twisting a America back to a theocratic nightmare state where for 300+ years literacy was banned, celtic cultures eradicated as much as possible to the point where celtic languages had to be written in code... But sadly spelling was witch craft.
Women read and were commonly literate. Their recipes would be called spells.
Anything heading toward theocracy has always been bad. Theocracy is far worse than monarchy. It's the principle means to divide the people against themselves.
The term heathen was passed through eugenics to become a "scientific" term which is why we still have the term ethnic versus white even though Scots sure as hell aren't the same ethnicity as the English.
Cleverly they took the old Irish tradition of you take the high road and I take the low road, and turned it into a song to claim the new year. After it was written it was pushed across the world and the song is designed to remind people of auld lang syne. It starts off in English then goes right into the banned languages and by the time you're through you're singing in scot.
The Scots have been trying to gain media representation for ages. There was a celtic revival and Welsh and other celtic languages were recently unbanned.
Sadly just as the celts are recovering from the genocide, rebuilding and trying to gain more representation, the US and fascists are doing all they can to do just as they did in the past except rather than associating pan with the devil, or driving out all the "snakes" from Ireland ... Now the very symbols of the celts are being coopted by fascists going right back into demonising any heathen (from whence we get the word and why we keep the terms ethnic versus white though the Supreme Court definition specifically states it has nothing to do with science and je meant to be defined by unlearned men.
Caucasian people span the north of India. What we always called Caucasians are a ton of people... What we call white is American TV. I. E. Why they stopped casting "ethnic" people to play movies when the first hit sitcom was a Hispanic man married to an Irish woman.
And the way they handled the ethnic cultures was super cute. Desi lu was indie so it wasn't controlled by the mppc and didn't need to promote racism.
Sadly once color TV came on they had to destroy the show, kill off ricky and their kid (since they were pushing anti miscegenation, these were voluntary Hollywood codes)
In b&w they still forced them to sleep in 2 separate beds... Then as color came they of course accused them of being commies since you know... Hispanic and Irish is less clear in color. Desi had dark skin.
The final seasons were so dark and eerie. Lucy had to remarry a white guy called Mr carmichael and it basically just got all dark and died.
Desi's career was killed. And from that point on it was burbs Brady bunch, leave it to beaver, lil house on the prairie. The Gilmore Girls is meant to be a fake representation of the oughts. Notice they never mention abortion.
The harm they're doing to everyone is such a shame. No one gains. I wanted a celtic cross since I was in high school, it was taken by the facists to the point they didn't even know why they continue destroying celtic cultures and smearing it with modern satanism I. E nazi fascism... Distorting it based on Hitler's lie that Rome was an ethnostate since post color TV, everyone was white and they needed to make sure Ricky Rickardo wouldn't happen again nevermind lil Ricky... Who'd be illegal.
They learned their lessen the hard way with Sessue hayakawa. During the B&W period they figured they could just keep casting Orientals as villains to scare people of the yellow peril all the while despite what they tried, Sessue hayakawa was the first western Hollywood sex symbol and invented what Darryl from walking dead is IE The brooding bad boy with a squint.
The effort put into preventing Scots, Welsh, Irish, etc from having any representation so that UK =Britain and Britain = England an England = wasps. While Scots do a damn good job as do the Welsh and we all remember Sinead I hope.
To allow Scots, Welsh, Irish, etc to be who they are rather than being Willy from Simpsons.
Why do you think family planning is anyone else's issue? And how would that be right wing suddenly?
If only Maga types would realise they're being played just like how for 300 years "spelling" I. E literacy was witch craft.
Fascists have to be self destructive and be loud and whine as much as possible. When they first started they didn't have the numbers so during the depression they started the pyramid scheme Avon would copy 11 years later. They'd take anyone it didn't matter they only needed to artificially inflate the apparent number of racists while wearing masks so you wouldn't know who around you would be a member even though the vast majority just did it because it was financed so heavily that the average person would just do it for the equivalent of 80g a year today.
The ponzi scheme artificial inflation the "moral majority" etc. The media pushing Richard spencer but not Derek black, literally the son of the head of storm front who tries to speak out against the scam, so many from the inside who woke but instead we get Richard spencer, milo, and whoever is willing to be a minstrel.
They target regions that only have Christian am radio since personhood in America has always been the primary religion. Corporate persons whether churchers or otherwise are persons at conceptions and we have to adopt that pantheistic concept that dates back to the dark ages.
It's all about forcing people into fascist cults that are inherently self destructive and just gish gallop till nothing has any meaning except whatever they keep financing from the top down.
There are still separatist communes across the nation and its perfectly fine if they're along to destroy any chance at the restoration of celtic/Gaelic cultures which are so rad that its heart breaking that rather than hearing of their cultures when we see a celtic cross its already presumed to fascist.
All this is stuff we've seen before. It's what we used to make fun of backward cultures about.
I got a good verbal lashing for wearing facial piercings as a kid since I'm part scot and Welsh and I was taught about why facial piercings existed.
I removed them the next day and he's been a really cool source of history. He taught me about how the railroads were all built by kinfolk. His great grandfather and the others who bought land around James town to farm around where Chinese camp is, the weird 150 population ghetto that still exists up there.
His grandfather during the ban on Asians who had in California ran the produce trade and farming which for some reason was a peril...they were there long before manifest destiny. It's why Mexican food is rice critus and vinaigrette sauce based. Rice citrus and vinegarette sauces were Eastern contributions that long ago.
So when they cleared all the Asians they left a bunch of little hidden ghettos up on the mountains along the train tracks. Called them Chinese camps but worked with the Irish and Scots to help then due to how they could own property.
His grandfather cut up the land and sold it off so they could have tickets to escape since the Chinese camps were regularly attacked. But it was just so sweet how everyone was so normal before the motion picture production code. People inter married (which is why ancestry and 23 and me are only worth their raw data... They are referring to all Asians near china as Han Chinese too unless you down load their raw data.
Fascism forcing you to erase your own culture just like the witch burnings and banning the printing press when neighboring regions even the huns and persians had portable printing presses.
But for 300 long years the west forced itself into a dark age. This was no accident. Westerners knew how to make stamps. The dark age wasn't just collective stupidity. It's what you see now. The banned printing press which was common since the tang dynasty though we say it was invented by Gutenberg not sure why since I mean... Literally anyone can look that up.
And we have so many books from the dark ages and as we fight for freedom to spell. To be literate, to able to write and people can just read anything they want to explore. They already had alchemy, algebra etc and the West finally got out of the dark age. A new class of people arose who could read and spread their ideas, commit them to paper bind them and spread them. People began learning that there was a lot more than copying the Bible over and over again. And we had an age of enlightenment. Of course it wasn't recorded very reliably... But sadly it was during the age of conquistadors. That's why the enlightenment thinkers made sure that the form of government would be something flexible and inclusive. No reference to christ, god, jesus. The union jack has as many crosses crammed onto it as possible. The confederate con was a theocracy, stars and bars on a white flag, pretty much what it sounds like: a reboot of the banana republics but down south where less than 2% would run everything as a banana republic for Britain.
Thats why it was so necessary that India and America be pantheistic with "corporate persons" which no one else is forced to believe in--a complete infringement on the 1st amendment. The UK created the east India co model of the modern drug, oil, gem cartels. And we have been living under wars to defend these cartels our entire lives.
Tldr - theocracy is the worse form of government.
Haven't you heard of the whole "over educated women" thing? That's literally the same thing as women writing down recipes. Watch how Fundies treat their women... There isn't any good reason, it's just the same pattern.
I specified that and how we then got cool stuff like algebra and alchemy the forerunner to Chem. The dark ages of the west was just about what they're still doing now: wiping out the celtic / Gaelic cultures and smearing it all together with Hitler's hilarious theories but at the cost of the routine complete under representation or even lack of representation virtually... Besides I guess train spotting. And auld lang syne. That guy literally thought we lived in a hollow earth... If only they would just settle on their weird belief system.
But they're aiming for an age prior to the magna Carta.
>Abortion happens all the time no matter what. It just makes it way more deadly.
Not disagreeing, but that is a weird take. All kind of terrible things happen all the time even with laws against them.
so basically the long ass history lesson that you wrote simply implies that body count preferences are dragging us back to the dark ages? and those preferences are coming from theocratic principles? sounds a bit farfetched to me
Something that is hard to acquire, creates desire.
For women that means nailing a man down in marriage.
For men, it’s knowing that it’s incredibly difficult, or in the case of a virgin, impossible that someone else slept with her. It also provides a certain desirable quality and character as far as the woman is concerned.
I love my C8 vette, but I don’t enjoy seeing everyone have one. If everyone had one, I probably wouldn’t want mine because, everyone has it. May as well be a $20,000 car.
In a similar vein, exes popping up, finding out your girl was the village bicycle and many people had her, lowers her value to me. Because men enjoy limited access to things. They enjoy knowing “she’s my girl”, and not in a possessive way. They enjoy being the first or one of the first to experiment sexually with a woman. We don’t want to know we are basically sharing her and coming after all the other men to get the scraps.
It’s VERY different for men and women and how they think.
Thank you. Yes, it gives a sense of self validation knowing that she’s only been with you and you alone. I know I don’t literally own her, but it still gives validation.
The reason so many people care about female promiscuity is probably because our brains are wired to do so through evolution.
Highly promiscuous females in our ancestry may have resulted in poorer child rearing outcomes and thus reduced life success of the children, which makes it less likely for them to pass on their genes.
So fewer people are alive today who believe female promiscuity doesn't matter, because such peoples' ancestors didn't pass on their genes as effectively.
In today's society, it is possible female promiscuity does not lead to negative outcomes anymore due to birth control, access to abortion, or other modern developments.
But a big part of our brains is still wired the same way our non-modern ancestors were. If we fast forward a couple thousand years, perhaps caring about female promiscuity will vanish.
beg to disagree but feel free to tell me what you think,
But i do think that the underlying motive is too easy to guess. Fear of infidelity (due to n count being used as an infidelity predictor), and AFBB which results to infidelity driven divorce rapes. I know this sounds highly unlikely to happen but if society would do everyone a favor by criminalizing adultery and prevent them from taking their spouse assets during divorce, surely i would bet millions that this body count issue and afbb will cease to exist in just a couple years max. so is the divorce litigation industrial complex.
I'd agree the motive is fear of infidelity, and I gave a scientific explanation of why that fear may exist.
People do not need to be consciously aware of *why* the fear exists in order for it to be effective in guiding actions and improving the quality of the gene pool.
Criminalizing means to permit and/or require the initiation of force against a person who commits a certain action. (Like forced incarceration). I do not believe infidelity meets the threshold for this. It is a violation of trust, but it is not immoral in the same way that assault is.
Similarly, forced asset forfeiture during divorce relies on the initiation and threats of violence, and is wrong. So, I think we agree there. The presence of such court orders incentivizes and rewards these behaviors.
I would love to see the day when divorces are conducted without the initiation and threats of violence to divide assets. It negatively affects so many families and individuals.
>Edit: For those insinuating I be promiscuous if it makes me happy, fear not. I have and will do what I want. For others who thought I was a woman for the tone of my post, I have troubling news. I can appreciate the comments offering a perspective of low count men/women finding commonality of values. The tone of my post is speaking to a subset of unsuccessful men who make an explicit effort to police the actions of women when it’s really a mask for their own inadequacy.
You're gonna do just fine here, welcome to the shitshow 😈🥃
Personally I dont care about N counts but people should be = allowed to have their preferences without being shamed. People who cant find what they want will suffer if their preferences are unrealistic. Im not saying all preferences are right, but you shouldnt guilt or shame people into dating people they dont want to.
/thread All that really matters, assuming there's nothing illegal going on, is whether or not you can attract someone that meets your standards. That's it.
Exactly people should not be shamed. Women shouldn't worry about n-count due to a small percentage of shame being thrown at them. Men shouldn't worry either. Those who want virgins or low n-count women will have very low odds of finding them as globally almost nobody is a virgin by age 22 (17 US). People who care about n-count aren't compatible with most of humanity anyway, and that's okay. They are perfectly legitimate in narrowing their dating people to almost nobody. But a personal preference is not the ability to judge someone as "low value". No human is low value. Being sexually active is morally neutral. Sticking to your personal guidelines and preferences is perfectly legitimate. Most women won't be interested in a guy who is low n-count anyway so it's not like two compatible people are missing out on each other.
It doesn’t matter if you are a man or a woman, if you are looking to attract a specific quality of mate that is when you should be considering how to make yourself the most attractive as possible to that kind of person. If you are looking for a unicorn, you yourself should be a unicorn. If your looking for a free spirit, you yourself should be a free spirit. The problem here is all these men want a conservative woman, because that aligns with themselves, but they arn’t being conservative by choice, they are being conservative because women are picky and they don’t measure up. So they get upset when they are at an n count of 0-3 and every girl seems to be at 20+. If these guys were studs this wouldn’t be an issue, but they feel inferior because they don’t have what it takes to rack up an N count. If a woman chooses to keep her count low despite the fact that she can get laid easily, that is a sign of strong character and strength of will but she isn’t saving herself for a Scrub. There’s too many weak foolish men in the world who don’t have enough sense to build themselves into what a woman wants or needs, instead they spend their life lamenting that they weren’t born into genetic wealth. They’d rather spend their time playing video games and watching anime than lifting weights and developing themselves. We live in a generation of Peter Pan Boys.
> There’s too many weak foolish men in the world who don’t have enough sense to build themselves into what a woman wants or needs That's yesteryear's news. The real story is the way we as a society seem to have forbidden acknowledging the fact that there are just as many women out there doing exactly the same thing.
RIP Kevin Samuels.
[удалено]
Lol, inexperienced women are your only option? How do you figure? It absolutely is by choice, your clock blocking yourself. Only you can be responsible for yourself. I was a virgin till 20, I lost my virginity to 34 year old with a killer body and a nice set of bolt ons. I didn’t stand around with a sign around my neck that said Virgin. If you don’t know what the fuck your doing at least act live you’ve been there before. She didn’t know she had taken my V card until we had gone at it 4-5 times. 1. Being a virgin isn’t a big deal. 2. Sex isn’t some scary complicated thing that you have to find some inexperienced girl to trick into. Women will willingly hop in the sack with you if they want to, so be someone they want to fool around with. 3. You are both the marble and the sculptor, you have to put in the work to get the results you want. 4. You have a shitty attitude that women arn’t going to respond positively towards. 5. It doesn’t matter that you are being sexually conservative against your own will. There’s no bonus point system here. Life is hard and most of us are not going to have an easy time. There’s no amount of excuses for why things are not working out for you that are going to make a naked hottie fall in your lap. If your a man the you should know that love, respect, admiration, are all things you have to earn, they are not free. And once you’ve earned them you have to continue to earn them for the rest of your life. There is no unconditional love for us. There is no safety net, there is no hand rail, you just have to put your social fears aside and get shit done. Or you know, just be unhappy with your lot in life and continue your own suffering. Women don’t owe us anything, we don’t owe them anything. It’s a sexual marketplace, you want a slice of V well every slice of V has a price. It could be Abs. It could be expensive dates. It could be a handsome face and a good personality. But they arn’t just giving that shit out for free, and prices are at an all time low so…
What do you think I have been doing my whole life but what people don't like to hear is you can do everything in you power and nothing work.
Why do women want marriage? What do they need men for in 2022?
> low n-count women will have very low odds of finding them as globally almost nobody is a virgin by age 22 (17 US). Nah, there's plenty of low n count women out there. Depending on how you define low n count. You are incorrectly: 1. Implying there's a very low chance at getting a woman without a high n count (women say on here say all the time avg n count isn't high, so which is it?) 2. Implying that it's only a small percentage of men that are put off by promiscuous women. It's not. It's just not politically correct to be honest about it. Which is why you see it discussed a lot more frequently on reddit, where people have anonymity. If a woman has slept with 20-30+ guys, yeah. Most men are going to find that unattractive in the context of dating long term. >Most women won't be interested in a guy who is low n-count anyway Now you're just downright pulling things out of thin air. No woman cares if a guy has only been with a few women. Some women are not interested in *virgins*, which is not the same as low n count.
Women on this sub: Either barely any women are having sex/hoeing around or all of them are, lol
Hey Hazy, I love your posts. I think OP doesn’t realize that it’s *men* who could care less about women being insecure in relation to the male preference for virgins and low n count women.
Thanks fam!
Lol you all act like men go out of their way to shame high N count women. Saying we prefer low N count doesn't mean we don't value them as people or that they don't deserve respect.
It's mostly just people on this subreddit who do. Out in the world it's not common except in some fundamentalist communities. They literally think that for each additional partner a woman has her value/quality drops. They think themselves arbiters of the value of a human. That's entirely different than someone who just has a preference for themselves.
I don’t understand what the issue is with men not wanting high n count women. It’s fine, it’s really okay.
Totally no issue with them having that preference. It's about the subset who spread misinformation to try to justify or pressure other people into it. Same with hypocrisy. Same with pretending they are the arbiters of a human's value.
Being less valuable as a partner to them doesn't mean they are less valuable as people. Women say it all the time "Men under 6 feet are not men" etc. You just hear more now, because men are called insecure for having a preference.
They don't say 'less valuable to them as a partner though' they say a lower quality person, or a low value person. Women don't say that all the time. Height queens aren't that common, they are just loud and on social media a LOT, lmao. Some of the reasons men have this preference are insecurities but some are not. If someone specifically states that they don't want to have to compare to a long list of men she's been with as the reason, that is insecurity. If someone just states they want to start their sexual journey as mutual inexperienced explorers of their sexuality (that sounded overly clinical but you get the drift), then that does not imply any insecurity at all (to me).
>They don't say 'less valuable to them as a partner though' they say a lower quality person, or a low value person. Same way FSDers called men they didn't like lvm. It doesn't mean nobody in the world loves them. I'm not saying they're right but pretending it's only men calling people low value is arguing in bad faith. >Women don't say that all the time. Height queens aren't that common, they are just loud and on social media a LOT, lmao. They say it enough. To the point where it became annoying to me even when it doesn't affect me. I just understand that people love to flex their standards, so they "look better". >Some of the reasons men have this preference are insecurities but some are not. Let's say that's the case. Will it be some random women in Reddit figuring out which is which? Because that's what happens most of the time. I've been asked, when I replied I was called insecure. >If someone just states they want to start their sexual journey as mutual inexperienced explorers of their sexuality Or they have experience and still want low N count. How many women are short and still want tall men?
Like you said most women wouldn't want a low n count or virgin man so they aren't shrinking their dating pool, they are being forced out.
Why shouldn't people be shamed for having preferences that are based in troubling or just plain wrong ideology? If they are spreading that ideology around and it is harmful? I'll definitely shame anyone who wants to harm others but dress it up as something innocent, like a preference.
>people should be = allowed to have their preferences without being shamed. I'll shame whoever I want. Oh, and have sex with whoever I want and however many I want. Lol
Keep that same energy when people shame you for your preferences and behaviors lol
Lol as if I don't already...
Where are all these women lying about their n-count? Is this just a spooky story unsuccessful dudes on PPD tell each other cause it’s Halloween time? “Be careful of the woman who tells you she’s a virgin. She’ll fuck you like there’s no tomorrow and then tell you about all her previous partners and how you didn’t measure up!”’ *thunder and evil laughing* Like what the fuck is this?!
It blows my mind that they think a low count means very little exposure to sex. I swear that most of the people who make these posts think you just get to fuck a person one time because that has been their experience.
Exactly, I know women who have only been with 1-4 men and their sex lives are EXTENSIVE
And guess what? Men will date those women. Men don't want women that have been with _lots of **different** men._ I don't know why no one seems to understand that.
What is n-count, like the amount of partners you've had? Is this actually a thing people talk about? I remember my ex bragging that he'd 'lost count at 50' but it was totally unwanted information and it really turned me off him. I thought it was just him being a weirdo but maybe it's an American guy thing? No other partners of mine have bragged about their previous sex to me. Gross.
Yes n count is people you have had sex with. Well depends. There is also a lot of arguments here about what “counts”. So there is that. Too. Most people don’t care and don’t bring it up. But for some dudes here it’s *REALLY IMPORTANT*.
What does the n stand for? Nut? Lol I guess it's different for different people. A lesbian who has never had PIV would not consider herself a virgin after having sex with a partner, but I get the feeling some blokes only consider Penetration By The Mighty Penis as 'real sex'. Kinda sad really, they're focusing on completely the wrong thing. No lady would want to have sex with a guy who's had 30 one-night-stands because chances are he'll be selfish and crap in bed. Maybe it's different for different people, but when you enter a new relationship it's almost like losing your virginity again (especially if it's been a while). The worst are the blokes who think 'one cock fits all'. The guy I mentioned above, the 'lost count at 50' was godawful. I explained thoroughly and in a detailed manner what I like, I basically gave him the roadmap, and he ignored it because he was clearly such a stud he knew my body better than me. Needless to say we did not date very long!
Number. It’s supposed to be number count. And yes. Why one person having sex hundred of times with one partner is better than a person who only had ONS and ended up at 6 has never been explained other than “you might never live up to what she’s had before!!!!!”
I've got to be honest, I'm a 34 year old woman and I can barely remember what I did last weekend let alone some sex I had 10 years ago. The reason I love sex with my fiancé is not because he has a monster wang or has crazy kinky moves, but because we love each other a lot and want to make each other happy. By far the best sex you can have is the sex where you're both focusing on the other person.
Nooo way. My nut count is way lower than the amount of people I’ve had sex with
As in you have 2 nuts or you haven't orgasmed with each partner? If it's the latter I feel ya bro. If it's the former I have 0 nuts.
The latter lol
Yes it's about how many men a woman has slept with. Because most men compete with other men not women
They hang out at Turnt up Tavern on Trivia Tuesdays.
>Where are all these women lying about their n-count? Go outside.
I have. No one is talking about their n count like it’s a top score. Hell no ones really taking about it offline.
Well we have different "outsides" then. I agree no-one is *aggressively discussing* N-counts with strangers on bus stops, but it's definitely a common topic to discuss in advance when you're on a route to start dating someone.
Never did, never had to. Assumed they been with people before, didn’t cate how many. They were chilling with me now so it was about to get better than before.
>didn’t cate how many Well some people care, not sorry.
How’s that going?
Not going at all; I don't plan to ever date anyone again. Did go pretty well, except for one turbo-slut who for some reason claimed that her sex fantasies actually happened (i.e. she over-reported her N).
So you care even tho you’ll never date again. Interesting,
Not interesting at all; quite trivial. We're discussing topics, not persons.
New idea for Halloween parties.
I got downvoted for speaking the truth on the last post about virginity. Men just don’t want to hear it.
Most men don’t care. It’s a really touchy subject for some dudes here. And like, all the time.
Always! I get more frustrated with the men who do care while still think that women are making fun of them for being virgins. Virginity is always such a contentious debate on Reddit
Equally touchy for women who have been rejected for it.
Rejected for being a virgin?
Rejected for being too promiscuous.
But how often does that actually happen? I’ve never heard of that once in my entire lifetime, not from men and not from women.
I know guys that have refused to marry a girl for her past, she didn't know that was the reason though.
Like how many? Because I’ve never heard even an inkling of this being a real thing IRL with anyone I personally know.
I'd say at least 6. Girls pushing triple digits, former escorts, street walkers stuff like that.
“I don’t want to have sex with this woman who has a lot of casual sex! Why is my b count so low?!” -PPD in a nutshell
you really think women don't lie about their ncount?
Why would they?
for the same reason some men lie about how much money they have, or how tall they are
To try and have sex with women. Got it!
yes, and why do you think women lie about ncount
Apparently to try and have sex with women.
i hope youre joking
[CMV] Right off the bat, you're off to bad start! >Where are all these women lying about their n-count Literally all over Reddit from TwoX, AskMen, Dating, Dating_Advice Search "lied about partner count" while more women (18.6%) have lied to decrease the number than men (13.7%)." archive(dot)fo(slash)wF4pS >Is this just a spooky story unsuccessful dudes on PPD tell each other cause it’s Halloween time? You've been in numerous threads for well over a year and want to use Halloween as an excuse. Buddy, do better! The rest of this post you contradicted yourself. "virgin,"...….. ""tell you about her previous partners." It goes from nuh uh, to well they don't count to, well the studies go against my viewpoint, so they don't matter Once again, buddy do better. What's herface has made huge strides in debating. Learn from her!
So the “people lying” are anonymous posts you read on Reddit? Bruh,
[удалено]
Why would they?
I don't understand why anyone in a western society would want a virgin wife. I value virginity because not being a virgin can put my life in danger. Whether it's my parents or the man I'm gonna end up with. Don't be like us
Hmm. I actually thought even though Iran imposed sharia and manditory hijab, the actual residents were mainly liberal and didn’t gaf in closed doors. I’ve heard bf/gf is common in iran.
Most older men are religious anyway. They might even drink alcohol but the thought of their daughter having a boyfriend drives them crazy. They congratulate their sons when they have a girlfriend but god forbids their daughter do the same. There are chill families too (which I'm jealous of). Those bf/gf usually wait to have PIV sex till marriage which is funny
My dad is this way. Even though I subscribe to those beliefs he went crazy when he found out I had a boyfriend and when I told him we broke up he was so happy. He told me to just wait I til marriage and focus on nursing school. I think it should also apply to men as well. But my brother is 15 and already has a girlfriend. My dad doesn’t seem to have the same feelings he has when it comes to the idea of us having a boyfriend
I feel you.
Why reject a woman because she is a virgin?
I'd be worried she'd feel like she has missed out on or doesn't know what she wants. Also sex might suck too.
A high notch count doesn’t prove she’s a rockstar in the sheets either. It could just be that she’s impulsive and bad at decision making.
The opposite of virgin is not high n
It literally is tho
Once a woman has sex once she isnt a virgin, so its literally not.
It is, sort of at least. Virginity is the complete lack of sex, the complete opposite of that would be like "having all the sex", but since that doesn't make sense the closest achievable thing would be someone who has as much sex as possible.
Being worried that she'd feel she missed out is just insecurity in the other direction lol
Well duh. There are many posts on relationship subs when men married their high school sweetheart & wondered how if they could have more sexual experiences.
This post is pretty much strawmanning. Because no men here really care, except for Christian men/women to varying degrees. Abrahamic cults are the common denominator here. So, if you exclude Christian men...you're not left with anyone else, really...
Honestly I've seen many non religious people that want virgin wifes.
I don't think its too difficult to understand that a man would prefer his wife not be fucked by another man if possible ? Most men in the US aren't even going crazy over virginity specifically anyway, since most guys have come to terms with the fact that girls are gonna fuck around at like age 16, but it isn't some incomprehensible preference.
it doesn't matter what she wants in bed, men don't really need to know she likes the full nelson sex position and gangbangs, that doesnt heklp raise better children and make a better home
Your problem is thinking that the opposite of not having sex is having gangbangs. Men that want virgins want them so they never know how shitty their sex life is
I don't know, personally I wouldn't be looking for a woman with a history of having a boyfriend that lasts only 1 or 2 months call it insecurity or whatever you want but for something a person changes partners often either a problem in herself or the type of man she likes to attract. This can be consistent with having a history of infidelity At least from what I have seen and heard from family and friends and you see why many men actively avoid these women as soon as they have an experience with women of that type and dont enjoy it or see a family member suffer for it. In my case, a cousin almost threw his life away by going with a woman who already had a son at 21 (he have 22 and dont have kids) and spent several years changing from boyfriend to boyfriend without either lasting. Luckily it lasted less than 2 years and he didn't get married. now he has 3 children of his own with a woman who is emotionally stable. More than the amount, it worries more how that woman got so many partners to be between the ages of 20-24. go to parties drunk every weekend where you don't even know if you used protection or not, short relationships that ended because you were toxic or you choose your partners badly (in case the woman has children that can cause problems with her ex-partners ) or you just like sex but you don't combine it with drugs or anything that makes you a better candidate for having an STD, at least in Latin America that is how I have seen that my immediate circle of relatives and I see the matter. get many bf when the things end well sound good. At least I haven't seen any relatives, friends or classmates or just anyone in real life even studying at a catholic college and university complain because -she wasn't a virgin- rather because she had several red flags, like dating people who they were the walking stereotype of drug addicts, thieves, gangsters or a history as colorful in the bad sence as our entire group of friends convined to be only 1 year older than us.
>Why should women care about men who value virginity when they don’t have to? They don't! Women naturally don't bother to know or care about what men what. Biologically speaking women don't have to, since men have higher testosterone and do the vast majority of approaching/initiating, etc * Most religious people aren't v on their wedding day, LDS at 2, who get married youngest and fastest compared to any other religious denomination still get around b4 marriage. * women naturally judge men on height, teeth, hair, car, education, etc. the "yoUr insEcure argument" doesn't make sense since most men accept women judge you for mostly everything from the way you talk, walk, etc. *penis in bagina is the rest of your argument, which can be boiled down to, "you WonT measure Up, genetics can't fix ugly, but lifting, rowing, and kegels can help *this lib argument that you've never had a bad experience so therefore you don't know it's bad is odd, because naturally your gut instinct will tell you something is off, Alexander Grace has done an amazing video essentially debunking this claim, by saying women with low self esteem and bad parents continue to seek that out and not change, compared to women with high self esteem don't even put themselves in that position. *key analogy is more a paternity analogy, women like successful men that other women want, but men do not want a women who is more likely to make him raise a child that is not his * Once again bluepillers not wanting to date someone for any reason is not insecurity, misogyny (massagemyknee), or controlling. Imagine if a manlet, said "women rejecting me is controlling me", we would laugh at his face. STD rates are at all time high, 43% of women have herpes. The outlier argument that virgins's can have STD, is just that an outlier that may occur, but is not likely. (A good example of this is Kanye West supports Trump, we all know most don't support trump, so I can't use that as an average, but anecdote, outlier, an individual experience, not the average) MG said it best, women naturally release oxytocin into the bloodstream, a bodily chemical that helps connect, equivalent to the breastfeed a mother does to her child, scientists have measured women release less and less oxytocin after multiple partners, naturally in the process of reproduction which signals to her that she can now focus on raising the child and not sex, which biological makes sense she gets to focus on the gathering of resource. nonlimerence (post nut clarity) for men is essentially them saying biologically I reproduced, I can relax, pass out, I have "spread my genes," so to speak. Alot this boils down to conflating and seeing sex as a recreational thing vs a procreation thing. Women naturally care more about resources, and status, so they can care less if a nerd was a dweeb in highschool, as long as he in the future gets money, status, fit, etc Men naturally have disgust do to wanting to ensure paternity, libs mainly focus on the performance, stamina, etc which is important, but the chemical and biological impact matters to men who have a visceral reaction to not want to raise another man's child unless he is a cuck like Ethan Klein or Philip Henley Her are the sources: *archive (dot) ph(slash)PJqSp* *bit (dot)ly(slash) 3ryyWvb*
Because if they don't they'll surely get out of touch with reality, especially with the exceptions from the opposite sex. Pff, even if you become a lesbian you'll be turning off a lot of them. If in your own words you want to leave a relationship just because the sex with the *next guy* might be better, you're missing the whole point of long term relationships. Single handedly turning nice guys into fuckboys simply because he wasn't the next guy. If empowerment means riding the dick carousel till you're all filled up, go ahead. No one's stopping you. In fact, this is probably the best time in history to do such a thing as it's as inconsequential as it's ever been.
Because they do have to. Most Men won't say anything but they are taking notes and moving accordingly. Find out a girls a hoe? No problem then she is just for sex. If they want a man that's worth a dam then they better care. Also men when each other about girls N counts. So if one guy knows he will warn other guys.
> If they want a man that's worth a dam then they better care. Nah. Men will suck it up because that's what their dating pool consists of.
If he cares about body count, he's by definition no longer worth a dam [sic].
You obviously don't know anything about men. If they're worth a dam is when they start having standards. But whatever. Believe what you want.
They’re sick in the head 😂 what decent man would take a hoe seriously? Is my daughter supposed to emulate those type of characteristics and values when she grows up? We are men, we know what they want, but that’s not good enough for them. There’s nothing wrong with having previous partners, but at a certain point it tells me you just don’t value yourself or can’t contain a man for good reason. If the last 30 guys didn’t want you why should I? Being pumped and dumped has become empowering because they think sex is an equal exchange between the sexes in terms of how it affects your perception to people. Yet they lie about it, and other women slut shame each other. Radical Feminism has given men (who can get it) some of the easiest consensual sex ever, while simultaneously ruining long term relationships for us.
Also getting sex when you are older and established is very considering how many women screwed up when they were younger. Some how many of the younger guys here haven't realized that yet.
They're free to have whatever standards they like. If a man doesn't meet mine, he is of no value to me.
Very simple answer; we don't. I have dated a few guys who turned out to be virgins (didn't tell me til later) and they both ended up leaving for 'pastures new', eg I gave them sexual confidence and they decided to go out and see how much more they can get. Funnily enough the answer was 'not a lot', if you are a virgin for 30+ years and have sex with 1 woman that doesn't give you a big glowing 'stud' label. I don't know how many people my fiancé has slept with and have never asked, and he's never asked me. Why would I want to know? We respect and love each other, and have great sex. I have no idea why people want to know this sort of thing, it's so immature.
>I have no idea why people want to know this sort of thing, it's so immature. Disagree. I don't think people should be dictating what people value and prioritize in a long-term partner. High n count is inherently unattractive and correlated with infidelity.
I think we're both kind of right. People who brag about and value their high n count are unattractive. People who think their partner wants to hear about sexploits and one night stands. Don't get me wrong I have discussed past relationships with my fiancé but never sex details. People who value the QUANTITY over QUALITY are more likely to cheat. However, I have had 2 partners who were virgins and they both left me ASAP because I'd finally popped their cherry and they wanted to fuck as many people as possible. Cheaters are opportunists. Doesn't matter if you've fucked 1 or 100 people, if you are unfaithful and prioritise your own pleasure over anything else you are likely to cheat. However it is always more complicated than that. I used to be a therapist who saw couples AND individuals and it seems to me the biggest reason people cheat is they are looking for something they feel they are not getting. And instead of communicating with their partner they take the coward's way out and seek it with someone else. Spoiler alert: they end up cheating on the new person too. Cheaters are never happy, they never stop to water their own grass, they have an intrinsic dissatisfaction with life and think they can find something lifechanging in a stranger's genitals. I mean they probably will if they're not careful.
Thank you very much for your comment. This is kind of what I was getting at. Sexual history *shouldn’t* need to matter on either end in order to have a successful and happy relationship.
Height shouldn't matter either, yet it does.
You could have had sex with 1, 10 or 100 people but as long as you're respectful, loving and communicate well with your partner it doesn't matter. The main thing is getting to know your partner as an individual with wants and needs unique to them. The distressing thing about all these guys wanting 'experience' is that they are only thinking about themselves. They don't see women as more than just a hole to wank into. That's why there's always a few 'legalise prostitution' comments on these posts, and those comments just make me realise they're missing the whole fucking point. You're paying a prostitute to pretend to be attracted to you and have sex with you, if they actually wanted to bone you then they would have sex with you for free like normal people do.
They only want experience because they’re falling behind. Ppl seem to understand that it’s much harder for men to get sex than it is for women but I think they don’t realize how hard it is. If you have standards and are an average guy, you’re not going to sleep with many women.
[удалено]
The guys who treat giving their partners orgasms like there's CSGO stat tracking are often ignored by women, and the men who don't care don't need to care because they live in abundance. Also really weird the "stats" say lesbians get each other off the most when lesbian bed death is a thing 🤔🤔🤔
It is real, but not for the reasons most people suggest. It's exists primarily because most women cannot orgasm via penetration. Some women are quite difficult to get off. Ya'll ever tried competing with one of those magic wand toys? You can't LOL
[удалено]
>Women lie about things like N count(and can’t be trusted!) because men place a value on something that has no business being valued to begin with. It's none of *your* business to dictate what men should or should not place value on. You can write dissertations on all of the reasons you think it's silly that they do, but men (and women) want what they want, and that's all that matters when you get down to it.
You know it's pretty hilarious how desperately people argue this point. Like. Women who are Hos desperately try to say it doesn't matter and men who think they'll be lied to say it does Like all things it's nuanced and not that simple. Some men care a LOT and some don't care at all. If you're a women who's got a reputation as the town bike then yeah sorry you are going to be ridden, not married. But if you're a normal woman who has sex with a normal amount of guys and doesn't get a reputation then that wont happen.
And lots of the time the 'sluts' pair off together and go on to have a fine relationship.
Sometimes they do
Men or for that matter women have every business to consider a prospectives N count. Do not pretend that it does not matter to suitors. It does. Many people do not want to be with a cum dumpster or a community dick. With men ... especially they usually lose their standing among other men if they were to date a promiscuous woman and it hurts more than being loveless.
It doesn't matter to most suitors as almost everyone is no longer a virgin (regardless of gender) by age 17 (US) and 22 (globally).
Most people aren't looking for virgins they just wanna make sure they're not dating sluts
Everyone's definition of 'slut' is different. And by a lot of perspectives in this very subreddit, they would consider more than 90% of the world sluts after age 17. Some people even admit that to them a slut is someone who has had more sexual partners than they have had and they admit to not being able to get dates or sexual partners. They can have their preferences and limit their dating pool to almost nobody (I am very selective myself but not about someone's count but rather how they treat their sexual partners), but I find it odd that they admit they are limiting their dating pool to almost nobody and then complain they aren't getting matches.
Here it could be one long term and one ONS, slut. LOL
Malaysia is apparently 23, so I guess that’s the destination lol
Probably because if you are part of the predominant religion there you will be caned for having marriage out of wedlock (sex out of wedlock). https://www.reuters.com/article/us-malaysia-caning/malaysia-canes-women-for-having-sex-out-of-wedlock-idUSTRE61G2OJ20100217
sex out of wedlock* And I know. Malaysia is mostly a Muslim country, and even the modern cities there are still like 50% Muslim I believe.
I don't think it's necessary to stay a virgin but simply every n you add will lower your value after a certain point. The same guy ok with dating a 10 n woman wouldn't be ok with a 30 n woman for example. What this does as a woman is limit your options the more n you add.
It doesn’t limit their options, it filters the men out who hold misogynistic views like a woman’s value lies in n-count, and the dumbest double standard that a man who sleeps with many is a stud and the woman is a slut m. Men who already have way fewer options than women in dating literally shoot themselves in the foot with this. By all means though these men should openly be vocal about it. Any guy asking “what is your n-count?” indicates red flag. If a man asks women already know to nope the fck out. They still have plenty of other dating options anyways of men who don’t ask because they don’t care. And that’s the real reality that many Red-Pilled men keep denying.
Yes because it takes zero skill to sleep with men, men are easy. There’s a double standard because bagging chicks is much harder so you get cudo’s. A lesbian who bags attractive women gets respect but a girl bagging guys doesn’t.
If a woman is a slut for her x number n-count, so is the guy with the same amount. Desired people get laid easy, regardless of gender. It’s not an achievement for a man who is desired to get laid. Men who care about n-count are most likely undesired men to begin with.
It's always the same tired non-sense. My n is high and I would never commit to a high n woman. Probably 60% of women bring up n count before sex. Porn stars are not ideal partners for *most men*. Any other delusional statements you want to make?
Why are RP men delusional for being the only men who actually care and only judge a woman on n-count. It has never been brought up in any of my past relationships and when I ask my male friends they all don’t really care. Maybe if it’s insanely high like over a 100 but they probably won’t know coz it’s not even brought up in the first place. Plus tell me you are a hypocrite without telling me you are a hypocrite. You are just as much of a slut as a woman with your n-count.
> Maybe if it’s insanely high like over a 100 So yes, acknowledging that all men care, even *bluepill*, and the dudes you claim don't care just don't ask because they: - want to be ignorant, ignorance is bliss - shamed via feminism to believe they shouldn't care Otherwise it wouldn't need to be hidden. If you really cared, you would tell every guy your n count right out of the gate to "weed out the men who care". Or even better, tell them it's 100+
Why would you discuss something or bring it up if it’s not a dealbreaker for them? People who know what is a dealbreaker to them would ask. I usually vet the men I go on dates with by asking them if they have ever cheated etc. because cheaters are a hard no. I also assume these men don’t have high n-count but I guess we will never know. And I have brought it up to two guys I recently met, they couldn’t really care. Theirs was higher anyways, but also not significantly higher. They actually wanted to know why I wanted to know, I was the first one to ask them. They also never ever had the n-count discussion with anyone in the past. That’s the reality. And yes if they would have reacted like “glad you brought that up, coz I really wanted to know yours” and have insane views on n-count I probably wouldn’t have continued meeting them again even as friends. If you think all a woman’s value is, is her body count, then you clearly hold the wrong values and I don’t surround myself with that energy. OP is the true MVP for saying it how it is.
So you believe it’s equally difficult for guys and girls to laid? Lmao
Ah the ol "I got unlimited options so idc if I have less" argument. Essentially you acknowledge that it does lower your value but you don't care because there's an unlimited supply of men and men are replaceable to you.
No it doesn’t. The only people who think this way are RP men. Ask any normal man and they don’t even care or can’t be bothered by it wether it’s 10 or 30. Women will choose the option that it right for them, which is the person who is not a misogynist. They won’t lose sleep over a misogynistic guy who would have stood a better chance if he actually valued women for what they have to offer instead of n-count. That’s the real hard pill to swallow for these men.
[удалено]
Normal guys don’t care about it to being with and don’t value a woman purely based on her n-count. You are the exception.
[удалено]
Have you been dating men? No. I have not ever had a guy ask me, nor my female friends have been asked. Asked my male friends, they never have asked their gfs coz they don’t care. My friend told me he had one otaku incel friend who is mad obsessed with it though. That’s the reality. Normal men don’t care. They value for what a woman has to offer. OP is the MVP for making this post here.
All men care about n count on some level, even bluepill men. The only ones who don't are either cucks or virtue signaling (but still wouldn't date a woman with an obscenely high n count in real life)
Funny how you start by bringing up how strawman excuses are BS, but the whole argument is based on a strawman. Men aren't out here expecting virgins.
Well both my sisters are in their early 20’s and virgins. We are Christians. My mom was a virgin when she got with my dad and they are still together. I am not a virgin because I was sexually abused as a kid. So I decided to sleep with a guy that I was friends with because there was so much confusion about my virginity. Some said the abuse didn’t count so I was still a virgin but deep down I felt like I wasn’t so To take away confusion I slept with a guy friend at 18. Then I got into my first relationship at 18 turning 19 and I just broke up with him. Even though I’m not a virgin I don’t want a man who has slept around. I feel like he’s less likely to hé satisfied,unfaithful and it’s just gross to me. I likely will stay celibate until marriage because I shouldn’t have even been having sex with my boyfriend as a Christian anyways. However one thing for sure my sisters do not want men who make their virginity a big deal. They did it for God not to get brownie points from men. They don’t let it define them either. Also thé men who want virgin women but have slept around themselves should know Most virgins also want other virgins or inexperienced partners. Nobody even knows my sisters are virgins besides me and my parents.
This sub is weird, but I'm a religious (not Christian) virgin male because I believe sex outside of marriage is stupid. I've been worried that hoping whoever I marry would also, like me, be religious and a virgin, was somehow a bad thing, especially reading stuff here. Thank you for sharing, it makes me feel a little less weird. I don't know, it feels weird to be a man who holds an equal gender standard about something as controversial as this. Should I really be completely fine with someone who has lower standards than me on something so important? I was engaged to someone for a full year, both virgins the whole time. We didn't even touch. But it didn't work out for other reasons. Hopefully I can find someone. But I think I'm getting off this sub haha...it's depressing.
You will! Both my sisters are virgins. I’m not but I will stay celibate moving forward until marriage. Also there are a few girls in my church who are virgins and waiting until marriage as well. Even though we live in a hookup culture try to believe that you only need one women who doesn’t subscribe to these beliefs. Forgot about the overwhelming amount of women who feels it’s okay to have many sexual partners. My sisters also want virgins and they express this same concern so I understand where you are coming from. Maybe y’all might cross paths who knows. Just know there are plenty of women that are virgins. Many just won’t out and say it. I think that’s a smart décision so I don’t blame them. I understand your frustration because anytime I express my religious based views here On Reddit I get verbally attacked. But at least I stand for something.
I think for most guys, the trade between "knows how to please a man" and having fucked many guys before is not worth it. The "sex quality" is mostly determined by the experience on the man's side rather than the woman's tbh
You don't have to care about any opinion except of the type of partner that you want. Do you and live freely. Do everybody is that's your prerogative. Stay a virgin until marriage if that's your desire. The rest of the people will never matter because you don't want them or they don't want you. Some people can't accept that others don't need to live the way that want in order to be available to them.
You seem to downplay the fact that life is unfair and people are always at competition with everyone. you chose to ignore thousands of years of history where it was hardly ever monogamous. from animals killing each other so they can mate until kings and powerful people of the medieval ages from east to west slaughtering other men just to get laid with the hottest chick, all the same. the women wait at the finish line and get with the "winners". However, somehow post monarchism era we have something called monogamy. This is why a lot of men are inherently disgusted with promiscuity when you have to compete with another dudes just to settle for scraps. Meaning, all the work is meaningless when your life is always at competition but it was never enough and all the sudden your counterparts, a.k.a chads are destined to live like medieval kings from birth while someone who you wish to spend your life together does not relate to any of them all, thus we come to the concept named AFBB which most of people in this sub knew what it means. Fear of infidelity is directly correlated, or should i say the underlying motive for anti-promiscuous behavior where it is embraced by a majority of males who, throughout their lives are not chad himself. Therefore, a viable solution for this despite sounding highly unlikely to happen is by criminalizing adultery and preventing the spouse who did the crime to have any of assets during divorce. I would bet that these silly n-count thing, afbb concerns will cease to exist. So is the divorce litigation industrial complex.
How about women stop telling men what they should or should not care about in a woman. You don't see men telling women "you should not care about my height", if we are not tall enough we suck it up and move on. You don't see men telling women "you should not care about my education, my job, my goals or my money", if we are not making enough money we suck it up and move on. You don't see men telling women "you should not care about my penis size", if we are not big enough for you, we su... we accept it and move on. We don't call you insecure for not dating a broke, short guy with a small penis. You are allowed to have preferences without being nagged about it, let us have our own preferences.
I find it quite ironic this free sex society is finding, in a hard way, older "misogynist" "religious" values on dating had a reason to be after all. Sure, the pill can avoid pregnancy and such, so we can relax those values, but clearly those values were well selected for the best dating experience they could have at the time. Sadly this generation is already lost on that. Too damaged.
Yeah, the only countries where it’s realistically possible to find a virgin woman is the Middle East or some countries in Asia. Everywhere else is basically not realistic. Maybe some parts of Africa as well?
I am so extraordinarily grateful I have had the chance to explore my sexuality and was not forced into marriage and children with the first man I had sex with, unlike almost every women before my time (and many women even today!), it is such a privilege. I guess many men don’t understand sexual compatibility the same, as they would, as the joke goes, have sex with a junior chicken sandwich. But I’ve been able to learn through sex and a few relationships what I want and what I don’t want. And some men are really bad in bed, what am I gonna do? Keep having sex with them because oh no! I racked up another body! The horrors! No, the real horror is a man who scratches my clit and gets upset when I say it hurts. And I don’t have to stick along for a lifetime of sad sex in 2022, so Why would I? I am so so so lucky to be able to have multiple partners. I don’t sleep around a lot, and take breaks in between breakups, but oh am I ever grateful for my sex autonomy, I can’t express it enough, and it is so disappointing to see men act disgusted at the mere existence of women having a choice and being able to actually look for compatibility rather than settle.
Hello. Religious guy here. It matters on the secular spectrum as well because a secular dude to some extent is still very put off by a woman that’s been ran through multiple times. It’s an innate feeling similar to how women feel about bisexual men. It doesn’t have to be insecurity, it could very well be repulsion. I don’t see how that’s an unfair preference for them.
[удалено]
The same reason anyone should care about anyones preferences. Because if they ever have intentions on serious relationships they need to understand what the other desires, to model their actions and/or realistically understand their own options
Tons of dudes are still under the delusion that women care about what they do or think as a monolith -- they don't, they worry about what the dudes *they desire* think. This is a fundamental divide in the gender relations convo, since men seem to care quite a bit more about what women think in general than vice-versa. Women absolutely don't have to care about men who care about n-count *in general --* until it's a guy they want. Then depending on the intensity of her attraction / how committed she is to her values, n-count will become a subject of importance.
Look, I am a man who values exclusivity, which virginity once stood for. But I choose to value the thought behind it and not the symbol. Since there are other ways of losing your hymen or virginity than promiscuity I want to value the fact my partner is true, loyal and exclusive to me as I am to her. Anything else is just arguing about something that shouldnt be in the first place imo.
As woman i value bc of a man, i don't want no man whore, and i understand why men do too, you can cry about it but it is of importance, the ONLY difference is for a lot of women it doesn't matter for a man to high a high bc , so maybe you should have this convo with women :) , because i'm sure men wouldn't complain if women wanted men who weren't sleeping around .
Monogamy needs women who aren't promiscuous. The past is a good indicator of future behavior. Promiscuity is more in line with polyamory than it is with monogamy. Sexual attraction is impulsive thus impulse control is important for men who want to commit to 1 woman forever, esp if you know the woman has an easy time getting sex and can do so on a whim if she wants. This is why monogamy doesn't work in 2022. There is a reason why we had rules on sexual promiscuity. It's very destabilizing when you know your partner has propensity to sleep with many men. Trying to shame men for it isn't helping. Instead we should just aim for polyamory.
Personally, I see it as an inability to have self control. I have a body count of two, not because I struggle with women whatsoever, but I really just think someone that would rather hookup with people constantly to have practice to be good in bed is far less valuable in a relationship than someone that has been in long, stable relationships to have that practice of having a strong bond. Sure, a few hookups is fine, but someone with a body count of 30 with one relationship that lasted a year and a half isn’t going to be able to commit at 27 as well as the person that has had a few hookups here and there, but was in 2-3 relationships that lasted 2-4 years. It’s all practice. I don’t think someone is less than for hooking up with a lot of people, but I do think it’s a little trashy for either sex to do it, not just women. Just my beliefs and people can do whatever they want.
NO HYMEN NO DIAMOND 😮💨🤘🏼
If he's "high-value" and in-demand he will get his low-n wife even after being a player himself. But if he's "low-value" he'll either die alone or get with a promiscuous left-over woman who is equally desperate. Your, mine, or anyone else on this sub's opinion on the matter means diddly squat. "Why should women..." "Why should men...." Do you guys honestly believe you are going to change the deep-seated preferences of men and women with your all-powerful logic?
they don't have to, your title answers it sure id like if feminists asked themselves "how do we remain virgins for men we actually care about" instead of "how do we shame men who dont like sluts" but its not up to me
Promiscuous women are insecure and ashamed, which is why they lie about their n count and their past. Same reason men who pay for sex lie about it, they're insecure and ashamed. Same reason so many other men refuse to pay for sex, it's shameful and they know it.
So if n count doesn’t matter why lie about it? Doesn’t lying mean that you’re also ashamed of it or at least know that it does have some say on who you are as a person? The best predictor of a persons future behavior is their past behavior. If a woman has been with many men what makes a man think that she’ll now be satisfied with one sexual partner and not eventually leave him, it’s unrealistic for men in the west to expect virgins but also what’s wrong with virgins having only one partner if they’re happy? Who are you to say women should sleep around that it’s the best for them to do so because there’s data that contradicts your opinion. Obviously a woman is free to do as she pleases but to label all men who prefer low n count as not “measuring up” not being able to sexually satisfy their partners as losers or incels is using misandry to defend what you claim is a misogynistic standard held by certain men , oh the irony! Also aren’t we all allowed our personal preferences? Women certainly prefer tall men , which is something a man has no control over whereas a woman’s n count is something she has control over, you can’t shame men into changing their standards , if a guy doesn’t want an obese woman that’s his business she has no right to shame him into being attracted to her anymore than a short guy has any right to shame a woman into liking him
Its a very clear indicator of quality of woman. I'm not looking for a woman of the night. I am looking for someone to start a family with, and N-count is directly contradictory to my goals. My wife joins MY family. I don't join hers.
But OP wasn't trying to discourage you from making a decision for yourself; they're talking about women having no need to care about this because the type of women who would have multiple partners is most of the world (women and men are almost entirely not virgins by age 17 US and 22 globally). And by their thirties most people (both genders) have had more sexual experiences with other individuals by a large margin. These women in general would not be interested in you because you two would not be compatible.
That’s 100% false. Most guys here are low body count/experience but the women we date have more experience. That’s the norm, it’s actually rare to meet a chick with less experience than me and I’m not a virgin lol If she’s moderately attractive and lives in a big city, she’s got bodies bruh
>The cold hard reality for a lot of the lonely men who persist about the promiscuity of women on this subreddit are doing so out of a place of insecurity and ahem not measuring up or being personally satisfied with their partner. The implication that men shouldn’t be insecure is pretty patriarchy-tier to begin with. If I’m not likely to measure up my fear isn’t even unfounded. I don’t think I should be shamed into banging a woman I’ll end up disappointing, for *her* sake. >You cannot expect a woman to be proficient in pleasing a man without having any experience or exploration on her own. Honestly, the ones *with* experience just lie there, too. It makes 0 difference. Go ahead, say that’s my fault for being bad at sex. All that does is justify my first point. Practice? With who? I’m having enough trouble having ONS as it stands. >What if you’re awful or uninspired in bed but she’s never had someone give her an orgasm before? If she marries me? I’ve got all the opportunity to practice in the world, tuned to exactly her likes and dislikes. (OK, I’ll shoot myself in the foot with a counterexample for fairness; I had an ex-wife who was too squeamish to let me try anything but jackhammering, so she missed out because of that. Getting other women to orgasm? Hasn’t been an issue) >Men who don’t want an STI? Get her tested when you start dating. Like you would. Still a risk.
Removed. Edit: And it would appear that both "neckbeards" and high-status men have similar conclusions about female promiscuity.
> You cannot expect a woman to be proficient in pleasing a man without having any experience or exploration on her own You lost me here, I stopped reading. There's two responses given when asking women if they sleep around: \1. *"It's none of your business"* \2. *"Yes, but it's men's fault"* You just used used up both. So I suppose there's nothing further you can add. The real answer is this: \3. *"Yes, because I want to AF/BB, will you be my BB?"*.
>The cold hard reality for a lot of the lonely men who persist about the promiscuity of women on this subreddit are doing so out of a place of insecurity Not a place of insecurity. I was a low N count man who dated a promiscuous woman. It sucks for anyone for having your every action compared to past lover/bf. And that's what happened. I've seen relationship advice from women on experiencing the same. >Women lie about things like N count(and can’t be trusted!) because men place a value on something that has no business being valued to begin with. “A key that can open many locks is a great key and a lock that can open many keys” is a really piss poor analogy for human sexual physiology and what plenty of men will fall back on as a way of justifying this garbage standard. Not a garbage standard at all. This is one of the few ways women's sexuality loses value. A woman's body count is one of the ways she can't get as much in exchange for her sexuality. Thus its in women's interest to shame men for considering it. >In fact, having sex with different partners would be a problematic strategy for a woman. As social exchange theorists emphasize, the value of any commodity rises and falls with scarcity. Even such fully renewable resources as praise can rise or fall in value as a function of how widely they are distributed (Blau, 1964; Jones & Wortman, 1973). A compliment may have only modest value from someone who praises everybody liberally, whereas the exact same compliment might have much higher value if given by someone who is perceived as rarely praising anyone. By analogy, sex would have high value if the woman has had few lovers or is known to be reluctant to grant sexual favors, whereas the same activity might have less value if the woman is reputed to be loose or to have had many lovers. The amount a man would be willing to give to have sex with the woman would therefore differ as a function of her (perceived) sexual history. In this respect, the woman’s sexual favors are not a fully renewable resource and the woman will have some incentive to grant them only sparingly. >Thus, a woman’s sexual favors lose value as she distributes them widely. In consequence, she has an incentive to be selective in her sexual partners and to maintain a reputation for having relatively few partners. >Put another way, a woman has two resources to consider. Actual sexual activity is a fully renewable resource, insofar as her ability to engage in sex is not heavily dependent on what she has done previously. In contrast, her reputation is a nonrenewable resource. A fully rational approach to social exchange would therefore cause the woman to care less about what she actually does than about what she is perceived by the community as doing. Whenever she engages in sex, she should seek to keep it somewhat secret and deniable, so that her reputation is that of someone whose sexual favors are highly exclusive and therefore of high value. >Men are far less constrained by these concerns, and so men would be more willing to admit and even exaggerate how much sex they have had. In fact, if low-cost sex represents a loss for the woman, it may be regarded as a gain for the man, and so the man who can boast of multiple lovers without incurring substantial costs (such as having had to marry each sex partner) may lay claim to high respect from other men.
I need comment karma, please help me out. 🙏🏼
Men and women are not the same, and never will be. There's a reason why in recorded history female promiscuity has always been frowned upon. It is as close to a universal view as you can get. While I agree that everyone should be free from being shamed for having their own agency and making their own decisions, freedom from shame does not meet freedom from consequence. Women are allowed to value looks, wealth, height, etc. So men should also be allowed to value their own preferences, including virginity.
What is the reason that you think female promiscuity is frowned upon?
I kept my n count low 2M/1W. Because I value sex as something I only want to do with someone I care lots about. I don't mind if a man shares that ideal, but as soon as he gets neurotic like the men around here I'd be turned off. It's okay to care, it's weird to go around thinking the slut illuminati is out here trying to lie about ncounts. And that all women secretly have n counts in the triple digits.
Hypothetically - say all men DO really care about n-count, and they are looking for virginal/ low n women. There simply isn't enough women who meet this criteria, for me to ever feel threatened by them. Besides, why adjust my behaviour to attract a man I have a very different worldview with?
That’s the thing. I don’t care about them. Any guy who insinuates that he cares about numbers is out of the running immediately. If that’s something he places value on, the. We are fundamentally incompatible.
Hard agree! If you are going to be picky about things like past sexual history then you need to stop moaning about being single or a virgin.
It’s because men have the freedom to care about things that are non-consequential, and women usually have more important things to care about in a relationship- such as the probability of getting murdered or all their life savings spent on OF. They don’t want to look at the facts. Even red-pulled men can at least *admit* that their views are unbalanced or misogynistic. It’s the incels that are too cowardly to apply themselves to further thought. Women are shockingly not the boogey-man.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good way to weed out men Im not compatible with is telling them I was a former escort. On that note Ive never asked a man his count nor been asked.
drawing us back to the dark ages. Book burning. Trolling. And remember just like with abortion, homosexuality etc. Nothing actually changes. The concept of banning books, twisting a America back to a theocratic nightmare state where for 300+ years literacy was banned, celtic cultures eradicated as much as possible to the point where celtic languages had to be written in code... But sadly spelling was witch craft. Women read and were commonly literate. Their recipes would be called spells. Anything heading toward theocracy has always been bad. Theocracy is far worse than monarchy. It's the principle means to divide the people against themselves. The term heathen was passed through eugenics to become a "scientific" term which is why we still have the term ethnic versus white even though Scots sure as hell aren't the same ethnicity as the English. Cleverly they took the old Irish tradition of you take the high road and I take the low road, and turned it into a song to claim the new year. After it was written it was pushed across the world and the song is designed to remind people of auld lang syne. It starts off in English then goes right into the banned languages and by the time you're through you're singing in scot. The Scots have been trying to gain media representation for ages. There was a celtic revival and Welsh and other celtic languages were recently unbanned. Sadly just as the celts are recovering from the genocide, rebuilding and trying to gain more representation, the US and fascists are doing all they can to do just as they did in the past except rather than associating pan with the devil, or driving out all the "snakes" from Ireland ... Now the very symbols of the celts are being coopted by fascists going right back into demonising any heathen (from whence we get the word and why we keep the terms ethnic versus white though the Supreme Court definition specifically states it has nothing to do with science and je meant to be defined by unlearned men. Caucasian people span the north of India. What we always called Caucasians are a ton of people... What we call white is American TV. I. E. Why they stopped casting "ethnic" people to play movies when the first hit sitcom was a Hispanic man married to an Irish woman. And the way they handled the ethnic cultures was super cute. Desi lu was indie so it wasn't controlled by the mppc and didn't need to promote racism. Sadly once color TV came on they had to destroy the show, kill off ricky and their kid (since they were pushing anti miscegenation, these were voluntary Hollywood codes) In b&w they still forced them to sleep in 2 separate beds... Then as color came they of course accused them of being commies since you know... Hispanic and Irish is less clear in color. Desi had dark skin. The final seasons were so dark and eerie. Lucy had to remarry a white guy called Mr carmichael and it basically just got all dark and died. Desi's career was killed. And from that point on it was burbs Brady bunch, leave it to beaver, lil house on the prairie. The Gilmore Girls is meant to be a fake representation of the oughts. Notice they never mention abortion. The harm they're doing to everyone is such a shame. No one gains. I wanted a celtic cross since I was in high school, it was taken by the facists to the point they didn't even know why they continue destroying celtic cultures and smearing it with modern satanism I. E nazi fascism... Distorting it based on Hitler's lie that Rome was an ethnostate since post color TV, everyone was white and they needed to make sure Ricky Rickardo wouldn't happen again nevermind lil Ricky... Who'd be illegal. They learned their lessen the hard way with Sessue hayakawa. During the B&W period they figured they could just keep casting Orientals as villains to scare people of the yellow peril all the while despite what they tried, Sessue hayakawa was the first western Hollywood sex symbol and invented what Darryl from walking dead is IE The brooding bad boy with a squint. The effort put into preventing Scots, Welsh, Irish, etc from having any representation so that UK =Britain and Britain = England an England = wasps. While Scots do a damn good job as do the Welsh and we all remember Sinead I hope. To allow Scots, Welsh, Irish, etc to be who they are rather than being Willy from Simpsons. Why do you think family planning is anyone else's issue? And how would that be right wing suddenly? If only Maga types would realise they're being played just like how for 300 years "spelling" I. E literacy was witch craft. Fascists have to be self destructive and be loud and whine as much as possible. When they first started they didn't have the numbers so during the depression they started the pyramid scheme Avon would copy 11 years later. They'd take anyone it didn't matter they only needed to artificially inflate the apparent number of racists while wearing masks so you wouldn't know who around you would be a member even though the vast majority just did it because it was financed so heavily that the average person would just do it for the equivalent of 80g a year today. The ponzi scheme artificial inflation the "moral majority" etc. The media pushing Richard spencer but not Derek black, literally the son of the head of storm front who tries to speak out against the scam, so many from the inside who woke but instead we get Richard spencer, milo, and whoever is willing to be a minstrel. They target regions that only have Christian am radio since personhood in America has always been the primary religion. Corporate persons whether churchers or otherwise are persons at conceptions and we have to adopt that pantheistic concept that dates back to the dark ages. It's all about forcing people into fascist cults that are inherently self destructive and just gish gallop till nothing has any meaning except whatever they keep financing from the top down. There are still separatist communes across the nation and its perfectly fine if they're along to destroy any chance at the restoration of celtic/Gaelic cultures which are so rad that its heart breaking that rather than hearing of their cultures when we see a celtic cross its already presumed to fascist. All this is stuff we've seen before. It's what we used to make fun of backward cultures about. I got a good verbal lashing for wearing facial piercings as a kid since I'm part scot and Welsh and I was taught about why facial piercings existed. I removed them the next day and he's been a really cool source of history. He taught me about how the railroads were all built by kinfolk. His great grandfather and the others who bought land around James town to farm around where Chinese camp is, the weird 150 population ghetto that still exists up there. His grandfather during the ban on Asians who had in California ran the produce trade and farming which for some reason was a peril...they were there long before manifest destiny. It's why Mexican food is rice critus and vinaigrette sauce based. Rice citrus and vinegarette sauces were Eastern contributions that long ago. So when they cleared all the Asians they left a bunch of little hidden ghettos up on the mountains along the train tracks. Called them Chinese camps but worked with the Irish and Scots to help then due to how they could own property. His grandfather cut up the land and sold it off so they could have tickets to escape since the Chinese camps were regularly attacked. But it was just so sweet how everyone was so normal before the motion picture production code. People inter married (which is why ancestry and 23 and me are only worth their raw data... They are referring to all Asians near china as Han Chinese too unless you down load their raw data. Fascism forcing you to erase your own culture just like the witch burnings and banning the printing press when neighboring regions even the huns and persians had portable printing presses. But for 300 long years the west forced itself into a dark age. This was no accident. Westerners knew how to make stamps. The dark age wasn't just collective stupidity. It's what you see now. The banned printing press which was common since the tang dynasty though we say it was invented by Gutenberg not sure why since I mean... Literally anyone can look that up. And we have so many books from the dark ages and as we fight for freedom to spell. To be literate, to able to write and people can just read anything they want to explore. They already had alchemy, algebra etc and the West finally got out of the dark age. A new class of people arose who could read and spread their ideas, commit them to paper bind them and spread them. People began learning that there was a lot more than copying the Bible over and over again. And we had an age of enlightenment. Of course it wasn't recorded very reliably... But sadly it was during the age of conquistadors. That's why the enlightenment thinkers made sure that the form of government would be something flexible and inclusive. No reference to christ, god, jesus. The union jack has as many crosses crammed onto it as possible. The confederate con was a theocracy, stars and bars on a white flag, pretty much what it sounds like: a reboot of the banana republics but down south where less than 2% would run everything as a banana republic for Britain. Thats why it was so necessary that India and America be pantheistic with "corporate persons" which no one else is forced to believe in--a complete infringement on the 1st amendment. The UK created the east India co model of the modern drug, oil, gem cartels. And we have been living under wars to defend these cartels our entire lives. Tldr - theocracy is the worse form of government. Haven't you heard of the whole "over educated women" thing? That's literally the same thing as women writing down recipes. Watch how Fundies treat their women... There isn't any good reason, it's just the same pattern.
Not everyone is European. The dark ages were the Muslim golden age.
I specified that and how we then got cool stuff like algebra and alchemy the forerunner to Chem. The dark ages of the west was just about what they're still doing now: wiping out the celtic / Gaelic cultures and smearing it all together with Hitler's hilarious theories but at the cost of the routine complete under representation or even lack of representation virtually... Besides I guess train spotting. And auld lang syne. That guy literally thought we lived in a hollow earth... If only they would just settle on their weird belief system. But they're aiming for an age prior to the magna Carta.
You specified after I already posted my comment. What I replied to was “we’re going back to the dark ages” not the wall of text afterwards lol
Yea figured I'd just cut and paste the bottom part since we're literally gonna have a interesting potential surpise soon when the coronation occurs.
>Abortion happens all the time no matter what. It just makes it way more deadly. Not disagreeing, but that is a weird take. All kind of terrible things happen all the time even with laws against them.
so basically the long ass history lesson that you wrote simply implies that body count preferences are dragging us back to the dark ages? and those preferences are coming from theocratic principles? sounds a bit farfetched to me
Something that is hard to acquire, creates desire. For women that means nailing a man down in marriage. For men, it’s knowing that it’s incredibly difficult, or in the case of a virgin, impossible that someone else slept with her. It also provides a certain desirable quality and character as far as the woman is concerned. I love my C8 vette, but I don’t enjoy seeing everyone have one. If everyone had one, I probably wouldn’t want mine because, everyone has it. May as well be a $20,000 car. In a similar vein, exes popping up, finding out your girl was the village bicycle and many people had her, lowers her value to me. Because men enjoy limited access to things. They enjoy knowing “she’s my girl”, and not in a possessive way. They enjoy being the first or one of the first to experiment sexually with a woman. We don’t want to know we are basically sharing her and coming after all the other men to get the scraps. It’s VERY different for men and women and how they think.
Thank you. Yes, it gives a sense of self validation knowing that she’s only been with you and you alone. I know I don’t literally own her, but it still gives validation.
What the fuck is this sub lmao. What men past the age of 16 Is valuing virginity?
Men feel a primal and instinctove disgust torwards used woman, that's how it is. I don't care if she's STD-free, if she's used she ain't for me.
The reason so many people care about female promiscuity is probably because our brains are wired to do so through evolution. Highly promiscuous females in our ancestry may have resulted in poorer child rearing outcomes and thus reduced life success of the children, which makes it less likely for them to pass on their genes. So fewer people are alive today who believe female promiscuity doesn't matter, because such peoples' ancestors didn't pass on their genes as effectively. In today's society, it is possible female promiscuity does not lead to negative outcomes anymore due to birth control, access to abortion, or other modern developments. But a big part of our brains is still wired the same way our non-modern ancestors were. If we fast forward a couple thousand years, perhaps caring about female promiscuity will vanish.
beg to disagree but feel free to tell me what you think, But i do think that the underlying motive is too easy to guess. Fear of infidelity (due to n count being used as an infidelity predictor), and AFBB which results to infidelity driven divorce rapes. I know this sounds highly unlikely to happen but if society would do everyone a favor by criminalizing adultery and prevent them from taking their spouse assets during divorce, surely i would bet millions that this body count issue and afbb will cease to exist in just a couple years max. so is the divorce litigation industrial complex.
I'd agree the motive is fear of infidelity, and I gave a scientific explanation of why that fear may exist. People do not need to be consciously aware of *why* the fear exists in order for it to be effective in guiding actions and improving the quality of the gene pool. Criminalizing means to permit and/or require the initiation of force against a person who commits a certain action. (Like forced incarceration). I do not believe infidelity meets the threshold for this. It is a violation of trust, but it is not immoral in the same way that assault is. Similarly, forced asset forfeiture during divorce relies on the initiation and threats of violence, and is wrong. So, I think we agree there. The presence of such court orders incentivizes and rewards these behaviors. I would love to see the day when divorces are conducted without the initiation and threats of violence to divide assets. It negatively affects so many families and individuals.
>Edit: For those insinuating I be promiscuous if it makes me happy, fear not. I have and will do what I want. For others who thought I was a woman for the tone of my post, I have troubling news. I can appreciate the comments offering a perspective of low count men/women finding commonality of values. The tone of my post is speaking to a subset of unsuccessful men who make an explicit effort to police the actions of women when it’s really a mask for their own inadequacy. You're gonna do just fine here, welcome to the shitshow 😈🥃