There is post on the front page of TBP subreddit where one user rants about how people on the askmen and relationships subreddits who are uncomfortable with women having a higher number of sexual partners are wrong for having such views.

Time and time again, The Red Pill is criticized for a wide variety of things, many of which we don’t even advocate for (e.g. raping women). Some of the things we are criticized for we do advocate, such as not giving sluts the time of day for a relationship. Invariably, SJWs get their jimmies rustled, TBP calls us misogynists, and the general reddit population/rest of the internet think we are the scum of the Earth.

The Red Pill’s view that women with a high number of previous sexual partners is not relationship material is true. I can post a copious number of links to websites that confirm this general hypothesis, but for the TBP, SJWs, reddit, feminists, etc. it’s never enough.

For example, the Book of Charts shows numerous graphs that all support this general idea that women with previous sexual partner counts make for bad relationship material. But TBP writes this off as conservative propaganda, so according to them it’s invalid. I could then point them to the social pathologist, who analyzes this, but again, they say that is a blog post and not valid since it carries no academic merit. To this I would say no matter, because I can produce links to articles saying that Women who don’t sleep around before their wedding have happier marriages, that A study shows WOMEN are the biggest cheats, and finally, that Women who lost virginity early more likely to divorce.

When presented with these, TBP gets infuriated and retorts NONE of those links have any scientific merit, they’re all clickbait! Sure, they aren’t scientifically peer-reviewed and all that jazz I admit, but can multiple articles, multiple sources on the internet all supporting our general thesis be wrong? No matter, I say, because I can point them to A study conducted by Jay Teachman in 2004 that analyzed Premartial sex and premarital cohabitation, which says:

I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution.

I can also point to another study conducted by Monica Gaughan in 2004 analyzing the impact of premarital liaisons on Marital timing, and in this image, included in the article section (not abstract), it shows that never married women have a higher mean number of nonmarital adult relationships, a higher mean number of sexual liaisons, and a significantly higher mean value for cohabitating with a man they did not marry.

Of course, for whatever reason they can come up with, TBP is going to cause an uproar at this and declare that I’m being a misogynist by not only linking to blogposts and articles that confirm my general thesis, but now to scientific studies that back it. They will hamster and say, those onlinelibrary links are not valid. To this, I respond with Allison Claire Rayburn’s graduate thesis that analyzes the relationship between premarital sexual behaviors and the state of the marriage. In section 4.3 it is stated:

The correlations also revealed a cohabitation effect among the participants. Although cohabitation was not prevalent among the participants compared to the general population, the number of partners that the participants cohabitated with was related to lower marital satisfaction, stability, and feelings.

In her conclusion she states:

The results confirmed past research (Kahn & London, 1991; Teachman, 2003) by demonstrating a negative association between premarital sexual experience and the state of the marriage. The present study, however, showed a much stronger correlation than the relationships previously demonstrated in the literature. The results suggest that the more premarital sexual partners with whom women and their husbands experience intercourse, the lower the marital satisfaction, marital stability, and feelings about the marriage and the higher the thoughts of divorce.


Women with premarital sexual partners and those that have cohabited with men before marriage are not relationship material. They are associated with elevated divorce risks and lower marital satisfaction rates. With this established fact, I’d like to address the post on TBP:

I have NEVER ONCE seen a post about a girl saying that she was uncomfortable with her boyfriend's sexual history.

Men and women are different.

Often times these posts give the ages of the girl between 25-30 and they are like OMG 30 PARTNERS THAT'S SOME GOLD STAR SLUTBAG MATERIAL

She is a slut and I have every right to consider her one.

Alright, let's do the math: say they start becoming sexually active at age 17. If they have one new partner every 6 months, for a new relationship or whatever, that is already 16 sexual partners by age 25! And that is ONE sexual partner every six months

Firstly, that in my definition is a textbook definition of a slut—a teenage girl who jumps on the cock carousel from an early age. Secondly, according to the Kinsey institute, females 30-44 report an average of 4 male sexual partners in their lifetime. Therefore, even if we apply the multiply by 3 rule--which brings the number up to 12--the 25 year old woman in the hypothetical scenario presented on TBP is still sluttier than most women. Because she is 5 years younger than the minimum and has 4 more partners than the average.


TBP, SJWs, reddit in general will never like us. They will never admit that what we have as any merit whatsoever. They will continue to vent and rant, much like that post in TBP, about how misogynistic we are for having standards and putting our foot down.

In conclusion, I’d like to remind everyone out there: you have every right to deny a woman a relationship because you are uncomfortable with her previous sexual partner count. Do not let anyone else convince you otherwise.

Finally, I’d like to end by this pithy quote by /u/SmellyJelly22

In almost every traditional society that has not been attacked by Western feminism, a woman was considered "damaged" if she wasn't a virgin on her wedding day. Now, there could be two things going on:

1- Every traditional culture for the entirety of human history was wrong ....

or

2- There was something to it.

Here is why traditional societies sought to control women's sexualiy: women are naturally hypergamous, which means that they seek a man that is "above" them. There is no limit to this hypergamy; if Obama made it clear he would have sex with regular women there would be a line out of the white house door right now full of women know KNEW Obama wouldn't give a fuck about them when he was done. The problem with letting your hypergamy go out of control is that women end up having sex with dominant, "alpha" men who don't care about them at all. This is psychologically damaging for women. It wrecks their self-esteem, and it brings out their worst emotions: jealousy, anger, sadness, confusion, insecurity, etc...

To control women's damaging and insane hypergamy, traditional societies mandated "beta" behavior by guys to make sure women only had sex with guys who cared for them - they "required" the guy to buy her dinner, buy her a ring, marry her, etc... to show he was serious about a real relationship. A woman who fucked a guy who didn't do that stuff was considered a "slut." Now that those requirements are effectively gone, nothing stops women from fucking rappers and athletes, getting their dopamine fix, and then feeling like shit afterwards. Promiscuous women are literally like drug addicts, and their drug is attention and sex from powerful and alpha men. But like any drug, the high is temporary and the low is crushing. And sluts KNOW that they shouldn't be fucking this alpha guys who don't care about them, and that they should stick to a nice guy who actually likes them, but they can't help themselves. The ego high they get is too exciting. Furthermore, pop culture sells this idea of "love" as an overwhelming emotion that makes you know "he is the one." I've talked to strippers who told me that they and the NBA player they fucked were "soulmates."

Having one's heart broken over and over again damages women psychologically. Like I said, it ruins their self-esteem and makes them feel unloved and unwanted. It also teaches them to deaden their emotions towards men so they don't get hurt again. Getting dumped by somebody you love is one of the worst feelings ever, and most women would rather just not fall in love than fall in love and get dumped again. They seek to fill the hole of the love they lost with alcohol, drugs, shopping, etc...

There is a lot of other shit that is going on, but that's the gist.

TL;DR Women with premarital sexual partners and those that have cohabited with men before marriage are not relationship material. If you rely on TL;DRs on TRP, you're in the wrong sub.