It is not the sexual liberation that lead to increased divorce rates, it's women being able to have legitimate careers and providing for themselves.

Listen, if you don't like it, then don't marry one. But it's not a societal problem you portray it as

I'm only interested in virgins. If that means I will die alone, so be it. Better to die alone than get some fukkboi's sloppy seconds. I will die with dignity and honor. I don't need sloots.

you will die a virgin and alone but not with dignity nor honor - and it has nothing to do with anyone else in your life

Its still ok today, nobody going to kill you or put you in jail for being with a slut. Its your choice, if thats all you can get, so be it.


Im amazed at your disingenuity, you are never changing your mind no matter what you read. Science, philosophy, morality, common sense, all these support our arguments, sluts have less value than non-sluts in the eyes of men seeking a relationship. This is a fact, and deep inside you know this too. You simply dont want to get it for whatever reason.

I used to - then I started to see the flaws in the arguments. It's pointless. Listen if you like a woman for who she is today - the things she did in the past all lead her to being who she is today that you like.

You're the one that said earlier that you wouldn't want to be in a room with a bunch of your woman's exes and how each of them lowered her value. Well, if her value is so low and that bothers you, why are you with her to begin with?

Thats the point, i wouldnt be with her. No man likes to introduce a woman to their friends only to then find out she's been creampied and had her ass licked by 2 of them. Its not insecurity, men like delicacy, feminity, submission, innocence in a woman, because we see women as someone to protect and care for and they look up to us as someone strong and capable of taking care of them.

There's nothing innocent about a girl swallowing dozens of guy's jizz for the hell of her pleasure.


I completely reject the idea that promiscuity is okay in women, i 100% support sloot shaming and i encourage men to completely ignore emotionally any woman that has giving her most intimate self to multiple random guys. That woman is damaged, cheap, easy to get, dumb, and has no self awareness, just as a guy that is willing to marry or GF her several times creampied ass by multiple men.


A sloot is dangeours, wiser men than you and i have been ruined by sluts, and wiser men than us have preached for milleniums about avoiding these type of women. Im not going to suddenly drop any common sense just to listen and accept a completely degenerate modern idea that for whatever reason women fuking a bunch of people is liberation and progress.



Now i understand why in todays world, men would be more willing to look past a woman's past. Sex drive in men is a powerfull thing, and 80% of men are basically ignored nowadays, so when they finally find someone to have sex often that they are attracted to, they will look past several red flags just to stay with her. I understand that too and for them, i simply say good luck.

After all, most men nowadays are ok with the idea of taking pictures of their woman's semi naked bodies for them to post on their social media and have thousands of men see that pic and DM her, fap to her, etc.

If most men are desperate enough to take their girls picture like that, then i have little to no hope about men calling women out about being sluts.

This thread is proof that you guys have watered down Cope to the point where it's lost its initial meaning.

Solid deconstruction, OP.

Repped.

Unless you marry a girlfriend from middle school your chance of getting a virgin is slim.

women refuse to think of their promiscuity as a negative trait. Because so many women are like this, men are stuck with a pool of sloots. This does require some level of cope by us men, however reality does not mean men are happy or ok with it.

Nope, verified. Cross referenced what she said by asking about different events in her life to see if she slipped up. Seen her social media history (have access to all her emails and socials and phone etc). Corroborated it with her friends etc.

It’s very easy to catch a girl in a lie specially when you been with her for a number of years. One drink one day 4 years later and you’re talking about past dates and she mentions a name not accounted for in that 5 for example. Of her friends slips up a guy or an event that she didn’t mention. Or a DM from a guy she didn’t account for 7 years ago etc.

But most men are too dumb to really figure their women out. They take guesses or walk in blindly and are surprised when she’s nothing like she portrayed herself as.

Well the stats directly refute your claim that promiscuity has nothing to do with it because her chances of being in a happy marriage after 10 years is directly correlated with how many previous partners she had prior to marriage.

You’re guessing and making stuff up to cope harder. I’m presenting facts.

And tbh this is common sense chit.

When Plain Jane gets ran through by Chad, Chang and Tyrone, then settles at 30, so you think she’s gonna have the same contentment with that man after having all those memories as a virgin who believes she married the love of her life first time around?

they are correlated but that doesn't prove causation. It may impact rates but the overall increase in divorce rate is most caused by the woman having options now compared to generations in the past.

Oh wow, use exceptions to justify the majority.

Next you’re going to tell me that women worked as much back in 1800 as today cos some women actually did work.

Do you even understand how stats and generalisations work?

I just quoted a stat to you. 43% of women in 1970s has only ever had 1 partner before getting married.

I went to uni and the average girl had over 10 bodycount, and that’s if they weren’t lying!

Sure options is one thing.

But the study shows that more partners = less likely to be happy.

This means that the study would show that women with only 1 partner could also have jobs and options YET their chances of a happy marriage after 10 years is 80%.

Meanwhile, women with over 5 partners, also have jobs, same options etc, it goes down to 20%.

The variable is isolated down to number of partners within a similar demographic.

So you can stop making assumptions to justify your cope. Data is in and it confirms what ancient wisdom already knew. 304s for the streets.

because they weren't lying in the 70s? The 70s!!!! The beginning still had free love hippies and then got taken over by disco, porn chic, and swinging and you believe women averaged 1 partner.


Thinking clearly is not your strong suit.

If my wife ever told me she had been playing chess with another dude(s) I'm just gonna assume it's equally as over

Oh great. So when data is presented they’re lying.

Ok, so any social scientist will tell you that dating apps, social media, sexualisation via media, more openly acceptable and liberal sexual values, women at Uni, women in the workplace, clubbing, marrying later - ALL these things facilitate and encourage more sex for women.

You mean to tell me that absent of all of the above - women not going to party with boys at Uni, can’t cheat at work with workmate but stuck at home as housewife, no easy quick discrete lays via tinder or ass photos on Instagram, have to sex in secret as will be shunned by society, women getting married and having kids much earlier, on average 10 years younger, society less safe so women can’t just go home to random guys, birth control less effective, std more rampant.

In all the logic you can muster, you don’t think that would result in less partners as the data indicates. You actually think that instead, the data is just composed of all lying women? Lmfao.

And you say thinking isn’t my strong suit.

I’m open to debates but you are either a woman devoid of logic, a troll, a man with t-levels equivalent to that of a tranny or someone who’s woman has been ran through so much you’re coping so fkin hard right now.

And data is inhttps://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexu...ital-happiness

Which confirms everything we said is true, and you’re just plain wrong. Number of virgins/1 pre-marital sex have been on a steady decline since 1920s. Unless you think there were just more liars as your progress further back in history, conveniently an upward trend of liars.

okay so given the fact that the huge majority of women get a fukking hell of a lot less action than y'all are pretending, I realize that these threads are actually just the way y'all idiots masturbate. There are churches jam packed with women who have had 1 partner and that's it for life. The majority of women, easy. But y'all are fixated on the megasloots and y'all can't stop clutching the pearls.

Here's your menu of options:
refocus on bible thumpers
admit you like megasloots.

The average woman in 2018 had 19 partners. 19.

By contrast

“The median American woman born in the 1980s has had three sex partners in her lifetime. The median man has had six partners, but only four if he’s a four-year college graduate.”