Ok Ok I know this is a drawn out debate but I want to settle it onces and for all and this sub has taught be the ultimate sound argument to this age old question and there has never been a rebuttal. The media and western society is trying to force be us and mostly men that “the past doesn’t matter.” I think this is a result of feminism and hedonism where their own past shouldn’t matter. Welp you dont have to be Sherlock Holmes to come to the conclusion that men lower the sexual marketplace value of women for relationships but they do to men also.

Hear me out hear is the thought experiment. Start with the past doesn’t matter as long as your needs are being met. You met a man that’s marriage material and you’re highly attracted to him and he checks all the box. Like he doesn’t bitch and moan when you want a girls night or girl trip. He doesn’t follow 900 Insta models, doesn’t waste his money on OF, your family and friends love him, and he contribute to domestic duties to your liking etc
. Then you find out his past.

Heres the thought exercise , you find out he had a hoe phase where casually hooked up was the norm. This phase was exclusively with other men. Not just “I kissed a guy at a party once” thing but he was getting bent over on the regular. Or you find and see this hidden past which might included getting a “ran through a train” or he could make a BBC disappear at both end, bigger than you’ve ever seen. Or maybe he’s on subs like nattyornot and moreplatemoredates. I just exaggerating more so for comedic effect to get the point across not trying to kink/ slut shame.

I think a lot of hetero women would have an immediate gut reaction like they just had gas station sushi when they find out the man they were seriously dating had a long sexual past with men. She probably wont give some perfect PC response like, “Wow, thank you for sharing, king. The past is the past.” It might affect her attraction, her sense of security, and how she sees long-term compatibility with him. Even if she had experimented with women in her own past she probably wont process his past the same way. She might wonder if he still wants to be filled with something she cannot provide or whether he was fully honest with her. This debate is so dishonest because women don’t want any shame or consequence from their own past until it flipped over men.

We use past behavior as information in almost every other arena of western society. Credit score? DUI? Speeding tickets? Carfax? Resume? Airbnb reviews? Yelp reviews? Nobody buys a used car and says, “I don’t care that it was underwater last year, it still starts now.” Obviously people can change, but if a woman has repeatedly cheated in past relationships it’s reasonable for a future partner to see that as relevant information while it’s still their turn.

There is research around this too, which is funny because people sometimes act like caring about body count was invented by podcasts, red-piller, or tight shirt grifting gurus like Tate. A 2025 paper in Scientific Reports looked across 11 countries and found that people do consider sexual partner history when judging someone as a potential long-term partner. Not just men. Women too. The study found that partner number mattered, but so did timing and pattern (ie hoe phase). Someone whose casual encounters decreased over time was viewed differently from someone whose history suggested the behavior was increasing or still active. In layman’s terms , people care not only about what happened but whether it looks like a past hoe phase, a current pattern, or a future risk.

Again, high body count does not automatically make someone bad, less valuable, or unworthy of love. I am not saying people deserve shame for having a past. I am not saying bisexual, experimental, or sexually adventurous people are incapable of commitment. The argument is that sexual history can affect how someone evaluates long-term compatibility. Men are allowed to ask whether a potential partner’s history lines up with their own views on sex, intimacy, commitment, boundaries, and honesty early in forming a relationship.

The past is not destiny it’s just data to work from. A person with a wild past can mature, settle down, and become a great partner or spouse even if they have had a train or two ran on them in the past. A person with a quiet past can still cheat, lie, manipulate, or get a train ran on them in their later years too. Pretending sexual history tells you nothing is so unrealistic.

Again, high body count does not automatically make someone bad, less valuable, or unworthy of love. A high body count just goes against the intuitive instinct of men who want something long term and we are being force feed to suppress it.

Prove me right and let’s settle it once and for all.
(Typing on phone excuse the typos and run ons)