~ archived since 2018 ~

The problem with probing the past [Video]

Cardiscappa · 2017-10-26T17:54:19+00:00

The problem with probing the past I've been following Independent Man for a while and always like his videos. I was introduced to Bettina from her video...

Cardiscappa

October 26, 2017

0 upvotes

/r/RedPillWomen

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	The problem with probing the past [Video]
Author	Cardiscappa
Upvotes	0
Comments	31
Date	October 26, 2017 5:54 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RedPillWomen
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/78xax9/the_problem_with_probing_the_past_video/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/the-problem-with-probing-the-past-video.73657 https://theredarchive.com/post/73657

Comments

[–]Cardiscappa[S] 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]justtenofusinhere1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

It will help tremendously to stop trying to view men's perspective in the terms of only feelings. It is NOT an ego thing as women would understand that. For most men it is an emotional reaction to an analysis of facts.

Most men who have issues with N counts (and most men do have issues) are of two groups: 1) Those who have used countless women and 2) those for whom obtaining women have been a terrible struggle.

1) Players. Many of these men really do begin to see women as subhuman because those women can't think like men. If they could think like men, they'd understand what was happening an nope out immediately. But they don't take off, so that means they are either stupid or willing to accept being treated that way as it's appropriate. Therefore, all women who do or have done that are stupid/and or admittedly low value.

2) Men who have to work for women. This is the majority of men. Let's first establish something. For men, sex is not a want. Sex is not a need. It is THE NEED!. And they can't get it. At all except with great effort. The closest parallel for women that I can conceive is relationships/intimacy.

Image if throughout your day everyone who you personally interacted with was wholly flat-line/robotic. Absolutely no emotional interaction or words or gestures--at all--ever. No one smiles when they look at you, no one even acts like they care you are there anymore than you care when look at a trash can. And it's been that way for years--except that those same people will immediately treat everyone else with great affection and emotion. That's how men are when they can't have sex. They can't have it but they are surrounded by all these people who can and are having it with each other but pointedly not with them.

So, these men, work and work and work to get to the point where some woman, or hopefully even women, will begin to show a sexual interest. Almost always, by the time this happens those women are looking to settle down. That means yes, she will have sex with him, but if, and only if, he commits to her in a monogamous relationship.

Let's go to the parallel. So, the women, who no one care enough about to show the slightest emotion or concern to, has finally worked herself to the point that others are now starting to react to her. Except, these people want to be the sole exclusive people with whom she can show and receive emotions. How would you feel if you had to cut this deal: you can have this one person with whom you can show and receive emotional intimacy, but in exchange, you must be forever denied any sort of emotional interaction with all other people. Now add to that, your partner has had free exchange with countless people for years in all sorts of circumstances. Now add to it that your partner only paired with you because he/she is done having all these wild and adventurous emotionally charged experiences (and let's be clear he/she had extremely emotional experiences with A LOT of people) and really wants nothing more than to settle down and live a boring life. And, they really are done with emotions, except duty emotions to throw you a bone occasionally and only after you've earned it anew each time. I cannot image many women could manage this without incurring real psychological stress. (This also helps explains many cultures in the world that greatly limit female interactions with non-relatives). If your understandably bad reaction to this deal was met with retorts of, "Don't be so insecure" or "Woman up" or "your fragile ego" "Or, are you on your period?" I think things would likely turn violent in a lot of instances (beta rage anyone?).

So, no, it isn't ego. It isn't weak men. It's the human nature to revolt against what it perceives as a real injustice of humanity.

Most discussions about how high N count women are or are not good prospects for commitment really is just an after the fact rationalization trying to cover up the above. Men have hamsters. They run fast. And they detest impotent rage.

For men who are lucky enough to build the value and then avoid the commitment trap while maintaining their value, they usually get over the N count prejudices as their own partner count grows.

[–]Cardiscappa[S] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

For most men it is an emotional reaction to an analysis of facts.

How is this different from ego?

1) Players. Therefore, all women who do or have done that are stupid/and or admittedly low value.

Is it possible that these Players keep going to the same low value watering hole? I was reading a PUA's essay on the degradation of American women and he used a Nevada brothel as an example of low class women. A brothel. It's like going to the swamp at dusk and being surprised there are mosquitoes. When Players are picking up women at grocery stores, yoga meets and Church, then we can discuss the average value of women. When scraping from the bottom of the barrel, you're going to get barnacles.

2) Men who have to work for women. The closest parallel for women that I can conceive is relationships/intimacy.

You might like this article.

So, no, it isn't ego. It isn't weak men.

You're projecting. When I used the term "ego" it was merely word, a neutral word, to best express my thoughts on the situation. No where did I say or suggest that any of this was a weakness to men. It's just a simple thought experiment and dialogue to the conversation between Independent Man and Bettina Arndt.

[–]justtenofusinhere1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nullberri1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Cardiscappa[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The more people you sleep with the less likely the next one is going to be the best one yet.

Yes, I know the statistic. Correlation does not imply causation. You could say that base jumpers are more likely to do other extreme sports; base jumping doesn't make one likely to do other extreme sports, but rather those who like extreme sports are drawn to base jumping. The same can be said for this stat. The people who are more likely to sleep around are probably not interested in long term or life long relationships. Multiple hook ups may just be a personality trait which would have been curbed back before the sexual revolution with societal pressures to maintain a marriage and no fault divorce only becoming a thing in the late 1960s.

The fewer comparison points you have the easier (theoretically) it should be to like the one you've got.

Bettina points out, and I've thought this as well, a virgin woman who only has one partner may feel that she missed out and be likely to have wandering eyes. To rip off City Slickers, imagine buying cereal for the first time ever and choosing Lucky Charms and then realizing that the only good part are the marshmallows which only constitute 2% of the product. I had a long term relationship very early in my life, and whoo-boy, if I was forced to have sex with him the rest of my life, I would jump off the nearest cliff.

Edit: I'm not really sure if there's an RPW explanation for the issue tho.

I feel that most of the red pill explanations are only anecdotal and don't actually "prove" anything beyond personal observations. I think there's a lot more at play.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

a virgin woman who only has one partner may feel that she missed out and be likely to have wandering eyes.

Yeah exactly lol

I imagine she would only be satisfied if she was either very sheltered, very pious, or raised very religious, to the point where it's so much a part of her life-perception, that wandering would never cross her mind as an option. Or she simply has low self esteem.

The perception of options is key here, I think.

Ignorance can also be bliss, but I imagine it's difficult in this age of mass media/social media for an inexperienced woman to continue convincing herself that her first is the best she could get in life. It's not even just about sex, it's about access to resources and desirable experiences.

When options are/ perceived to be in abundance, appreciation and gratitude only manifests in a person with enough life experience to put everything in proper perspective.

Unless they were born a wise saint, I guess?

[–]Cardiscappa[S] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I think in days past you married young to someone in your immediate area who shared the same culture. Even if it was the worst sex you ever had, you didn't have TV shows, social media and "sex positive" surroundings to compare to and thus be unhappy with your situation; it just was what it was.

Before, the young man who aspired to be a mechanic was a catch because you weren't exposed to ideas of that guy from 50 Shades and the fantasy that you too will have a wealthy attractive man to carry you and your modest looks away to a shining castle. Sure, lots of folk lore and fairy tales said otherwise, but I have a feeling that there was a very healthy dose of reality back then, none of that HAES fat positive you need to love me regardless nonsense.

It reminds me of sales. I learned very quickly to only give clients three choices. Any more choices than that, they become difficult and obnoxious, wanting to know every.single.detail of everything. When given only three options, clients are much happier and the sale progressed efficiently, wasting less time on both ends.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shaela900 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

We're all human and we're all a bit insecure here or there. It's normal to feel a bit of dread at the thought that maybe, just maybe, your partner had better sex elsewhere. No one is spared from this, man or woman.

However, only the lowest of the low hold this feeling(which has nothing to do with the other person and everything to do with themselves) against their chosen partners, as a general rule. These rules and generalizations are usually how scared, insecure, issue-ridden individuals try to protect themselves instead of actually sitting down and figure themselves out. An insecure, bitter man is never a good leader. If he has to set up 'rules' to be able to lead or he needs a woman to submit, he's not Captain material. In the face of a true leader, you simply submit, period. Because you trust and admire him. Not because you have to constantly remind yourself he's a man and should be the leader. Blah.

A high partner count is what I would call a 'pink' flag. It might become a red flag if correlated with other traits, such as being a doormat (and subsequently being easy to be taken advantage of - this goes mostly for women), random, unnecessary lying( meaning maybe this person is just taking advantage of you and would stop at nothing to get what they want - this goes mostly for men), or other tiny little details that add up to paint the picture of the person in front of you.

A personal example, there were a couple of years in my early to mid twenties when I was working very hard to establish myself in a big, expensive city as an IT professional and get rid of the poor provincial stigma with 0 help from my parents or anyone else. I was living in a dumpster, working 7 days out of 7 for 3-4 weeks at a time, then would take a day off then back to the same schedule. During that period, I had no energy, time or anything else to give in/for an actual relationship. I like sex and got a healthy sex drive. So I had fwbs. Could those notches be avoided? Sure. Do they make me, or countless other people like me in various circumstances broken or un-dateable? Well, no. And I'd laugh in the face of any 'RP' man who would try to convince me otherwise.

What I'm trying to say is that all of these rules are usually contextual. Life is not black and white. There are many shades of right and wrong. Usually it falls to what each individual can cope with. Some people can cope with infidelity, some can't. Some people can accept high n-counts, others can't. But to say another human being is tarnished and blame them because YOU can't cope with their n-count is just.... below sea-level low and pitiful.

Also, the study that's being thrown around all over the RP subs about the correlation between a high partner count and the probability of divorce is, in my opinion, a bit manipulated to fit the doctrine. As you've mentioned, these people might very well not be interested in anything long term. I know plenty of people like these. Successful, with good lives and prospects, who just don't want children or a traditional family life. And in the absence of 'greater' goals, like family & children, relationships usually succumb.

Also, maybe, just maybe, there are people who don't need to depend on a partner for anything else than a good time, maybe sharing hobbies and interests. These relationships also tend to get old really fast. I find that 'ties' such as children or costs of living(mortgages etc) make people much more willing to stick together. It doesn't have to be a living hell, I'm sure most of these people who are 'stuck' with each other and actually work on their relationships lead pretty happy, fulfilling lives. Again, life is not a 'one size fits all' affair.

[–]Cardiscappa[S] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

We're all human and we're all a bit insecure here or there.

I really want to explore how a man's ego deal with female partner count and if it's because of what I've already stated. I'm not insecure about my partner count and I feel that most men's count is much higher than mine, and maybe it's because I'm female, but I like that the man may have a higher count. It makes him more experience and knowledgeable and experience and knowledge in a good man puts me at ease. I don't know if it's because it's a default female notion or just my own individuality. If it's default female, then I'd like to wager that a high partner count woman and a low partner count man, the man's default notion of being the leader and in charge, the one who knows, is put in jeopardy.

A high partner count is what I would call a 'pink' flag.

Orange? ;)

What I'm trying to say is that all of these rules are usually contextual.

Yup. I read and liked your posts over in the Disclose high number? thread.

Life is not black and white. There are many shades of right and wrong. Usually it falls to what each individual can cope with.

Yup. Again. I find that RP is quite black and white and I found the video was very grey.

Thank you very much for your thoughtful and thorough reply. :)

[–]BewareTheOldMan3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

The overwhelming majority of men over at Red Pill (Men), MGTOW, AskTRP, the Relationship SubReddit, and male-focused areas of YouTube and social media ALL say the same thing and discuss the subject of sexual partner count on a fairly regular basis.

These men and many others like them seem to think it's a big deal and summarily believe the research that says highly promiscuous women don't do well in LTRs or marriage.

I couldn't care less what any man or woman does with their body and their sexuality. It seems, however, there are women who openly ignore the fact that men have the final decision on whether they prefer promiscuous or virtuous women. Women are subject to men’s preferences, just as men are subject to women’s preferences.

Incidentally, it seems that men have no issue with promiscuous women. Their main issue is that women who were formerly and sexually available for other men transition in to a phase whereby they assume an entirely different and wholesome persona when ready to marry.

I've posted in RPW some advice in this area multiple times in what I thought was a productive and helpful way without trying to be insulting or rude.

Full disclosure – I was rude once, but was summarily corrected and adjusted my comment.

Red Pill Women and other RPW commenters also state the overarching purpose of Red Pill Women is focus on being exceptional girlfriends, wives, and mothers. I am curious how being highly promiscuous is favorable to that end since the vast majority of men will reject high N-Count women.

This man's comment is directly from the Comment Section related to the video:

I don't want to be guy number 87. Guy number 5 or 6 is fine. They can still find something special about you. But women who are in the dozens of partners have this kind of malaise about them; an almost bored and tired look of, meh, you're okay I s'pose, you'll do for now. I want someone who's thrilled to have me in their life, not some cynical and jaded old broad who see men as a kind of utility to be tolerated. Promiscuous women seem to lose the ability to really pair bond. That's why men don't want to partner with sluts and whores. Such women are good for a lay and not much more. Sorry, but there it is.

It is likely this man does not peruse TRP, but shares their sentiment. Notably, there are many men on the same video thread who support his comment. It seems his cutoff is five to six sexual partners, but for some men that may be two to three TOO MANY.

In the modern era, it’s unrealistic for men to expect most women to come to them without sexual experience, but for a 21-23 year old woman to have over 45-65 sexual partners seems SPECTACULARLY excessive. That’s the reality for many young men looking for a serious girlfriend, wife, and eventual mother (of his future children).

I once read on another SubReddit where an 18 year old woman was openly bragging about having reached 100 sexual partners. How is she supposed to be a serious candidate for anything other than a hookup and sex ONLY? More importantly, how do her parents feel? Were they even aware of their young daughter’s sexual activity and exposure to possible assault, sexual diseases, or pregnancy? That behavior seems very reckless and irresponsible.

Moreover, there is research conducted by multiple accredited universities and research organizations, and a 20 year Center for Disease Control (CDC) Study that supports their conversation and beliefs. I’ve conducted personal research and recommend others do the same to confirm or refute information presented on internet forums/discussion threads.

Men and women instinctively know this is a problem, yet women seem focused toward shaming men into accepting their promiscuity.

These men are hardcore in their beliefs. Name-calling and shaming will not dissuade their perspective.

Story Time – I once dated a woman who essentially had me in the Beta Male/Nice Guy Category while simultaneously engaging sexual relations with a Bad Boy who treated her badly…or so she told me as such. I found out by pure coincidence we were both having sex with the same woman. The only positive was that both he and I were having great and amazing sex with the same woman. The big negative for me was that I expected to be the ONLY man receiving great sex, love, dedication, effort, loyalty, and attention.

I wasn’t upset she was having sex with multiple men. The issue was the sexual duplicity and deception. I ended my association with her as a candidate for LTR/eventual marriage. We were both mid-30’s and previously married so virginity was off the table, but the expectation of character, integrity, and exclusivity were terms and conditions for the relationship.

Comment from this Discussion Thread: …he balks out of sheer insecurity and absolutely no other reasons, certainly no legitimate reasons…

If women are not ashamed of their past, then what is the reason for deception and rationalization?

u/Shaela90 has a great relationship with her SO. I commend and respect the effort, but the fact is that’s not how it plays out for most men at ground level/in real-time.

Again – asking an honest and legitimate question…

[–]Shaela901 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I am not necessarily responding to your post, u/BewareOldMan but these are just some opinions I'd like to share and maybe discuss here.

The comments you posted are all pretty telling, it's just that I think it's wrong to draw conclusions from extreme examples, the TRP way. I find it hard to believe the vast majority of college girls tend to rack up such n-counts while the vast majority of the guys around them are sad and sexless. I'd say that maybe it's common on a couple 'priviledged' circles. But judging a normal woman you meet post-college by some extreme examples of what some girls you saw on the internet do during college is just ...a bit off. It's the year 2017's internet, the age of tabloids and online fame. Do you expect to see users post videos of college aged women going to Sunday mass?

Also, TRP men encourage approaching both online( on dating sites) and offline, mostly in the club. Again, what kind of women do they expect to find? Again, I'm not sure these examples would be telling for the majority of women.

Aso, TRP men are usually bitter and angry. Most of them aren't really attractive. Most of them have trouble communicating with women on top of that. What kind of women would put up with all that? Yup, just women who have serious issues.

I'm not trying to excuse high n-count or make it so that women are innocent little angels after having sex with 100 men in just a matter of a couple years. The vast majority of people exhibiting that level of recklessness are very far away from the notion of a 'normal' existence.

But the thing is I haven't really seen around me women that could handle such a life style. All I saw were normal college students, trying to have fun while stuck with a load of school work and even jobs, I saw young adults trying to find their path in life, getting jobs, some worrying about having to buy a place to live, some getting married, then trying to get promotions etc. These are the majority of us. We don't really have time to rack up that many sexual partners. Not everyone is thinking of sex every second, lol.

Then there's the issue of preferences. Both sexes have their own individual preferences regarding the opposite sex. But for 90% of the population, those preferences are usually tamed by their possibilities. So you're a 5 looking for a 9? You have to be ready to put up with A LOT. For some people it's worth it. For others, it's not.

[–]BewareTheOldMan0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Cardiscappa[S] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

These men and many others like them seem to think it's a big deal and summarily believe the research that says highly promiscuous women don't do well in LTRs or marriage.

Red Pill Women and other RPW commenters also state the overarching purpose of Red Pill Women is focus on being exceptional girlfriends, wives, and mothers. I am curious how being highly promiscuous is favorable to that end since the vast majority of men will reject high N-Count women.

I'm not disagreeing with it, however I am doing a though experiment that perhaps these woman still not do well even if they were virgins when married. I am thinking that perhaps it's an ingrain behaviour that before would have been social suicide. The whole lock and key analogy.

Full disclosure – I was rude once, but was summarily corrected and adjusted my comment.

Full disclosure – if a rhino mated with a turtle, my skin would still be thicker than their offspring.

I once read on another SubReddit where an 18 year old woman was openly bragging about having reached 100 sexual partners.

After realizing Swedish nuns don't fact check everything written on the Internet, I take what I read with a small quarry of salt. If this woman is real and not a bitter neckbeard wanting to get back at the wimminz, then she is definitely an outlier. According to the site Slate:

Why make a sex calculator? We were inspired by a study published this month in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, which found that millennials (or snake people, if you prefer) are on pace to sleep with an average of eight partners during their lifetimes, fewer than Generation X (10 partners) and the baby boomers (11 partners).

[–]BewareTheOldMan1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I get the lock and key analogy and the Slate Calculator is a nice touch (if people are being truthful), but it still begs the question that women are encouraged to lie? If N-Count is truly NOT a big deal, then why all the caterwauling and calling out male insecurities?

My discussions with many millennial-age men indicate otherwise. They are up for sex, but either hesitate or refuse to consider LTR/marriage with many of today’s women. Low marriage numbers, cohabitation versus marriage, overall 40% out of wedlock birth-rate [Source: US Census 2014] and the "Where Are All the Good Men/Nice Guys" articles support these assertions.

Another outlier example for you from another SubReddit:

Man marries local girl who seems to be a decent catch. He knows somewhat that she is not a virgin, but not overly promiscuous. However, she refuses to perform certain sexual acts. He accepts the situation. Man and wife are doing fine. Wife gets pregnant. The new revelation is that the husband anonymously receives an internet video of his wife performing the very sex act she refuses to perform for her husband. Man loses it. Chaos and panic ensues, and the marriage downslide begins…

An outlier, but the wife should have been truthful the start. More importantly, she should have been a sexual dynamo for her husband versus random dudes from her earlier life.

This is the kind of stuff that’s happening out here…

It's best to own the behavior and not allow the issue of N-Count to define the relationship. I note that some women do and seem able to work past "the number."

If women refuse to be honest, there should be less complaining whenever they are ready for marriage if there are men who refuse to engage the institution based on the perceived number of sexual partners. At the root of the issue is disclosure and open honesty.

In short – if sex count is important to men, then it’s also important to women as well…both men and women should behave accordingly.

By the way…rhinos easily crush turtles during mating, hence no offspring.

[–]Shaela901 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I really want to explore how a man's ego deal with female partner count and if it's because of what I've already stated. I'm not insecure about my partner count and I feel that most men's count is much higher than mine, and maybe it's because I'm female, but I like that the man may have a higher count. It makes him more experience and knowledgeable and experience and knowledge in a good man puts me at ease. I don't know if it's because it's a default female notion or just my own individuality. If it's default female, then I'd like to wager

Sure, leading a (much) less experienced woman is much easier for the (experienced) male. But is it easier because he is a better leader or she is willing to submit because she truly likes him? Sometimes. More often than not, what happens is that the woman in this scenario has a scarcity mentality. She's been told to 'find a good man and keep him' and she does. But could you say, for example, a family guy getting fat and unattractive over the years is a bad man? No. He still works hard, provides, takes care of the kids. Yet she'll still experience a loss of attraction towards him, making sex a chore. Then RP comes to tell her that she shouldn't ever withhold sex from her husband, making her go against how she truly feels towards him. Then the covert contracts start pouring in. 'I'm providing sex although he's unattractive to me, so why it is so hard for him to listen to me when he doesn't want to?' Eh...

In my experience, the only guys that had issues with my n-count were very insecure themselves. Sometimes their insecurities didn't have anything to do with the sexual realm. Or were even faults only in their imagination. At this point, whenever I hear a guy complain about high n-count women in general as being untrustworthy, sluts, etc, I just roll my eyes and start looking closer for their insecurities. I always find things like size/duration issues, insecurities about being too short, about balding, etc. Any normal man will work those out and accept what he can't change, but some just like to cling so hard to their personality faults just because change is hard and find it easy to blame the woman instead. Lol...

My current bf has had less partners than I had, yet he's the most confident man I've been with. He's hard working, ambitious, intelligent, educated, makes me feel wonderful in and out of bed. We generally have an amazing connection BECAUSE he's confident in him and his abilities and doesn't need to keep tabs over past partners or other pointless details like that. Connection happens when you don't judge and actually care to know the other person. We couldn't have had it if he went on judging my past or me judging his. If he were insecure about sex we wouldn't have been able to have such a fulfilling sex life. If I were insecure that he's got a Phd and I only have a HS diploma, we couldn't have had all those amazing conversations. If I were insecure that he’s a scientist doing meaningful work and I’m a disposable corporate slave...If he were insecure that he earns less than I do....if I were insecure that he's got a lot more free time than I do.... I could go on and on about this. The point is it's INSECURITY and JUDGEMENT that kill attraction and connection. I defer to him because I respect his qualities and I trust his judgement. He asks for my advice in the fields I'm more knowledgeable. I couldn't have it any other way.

Male posters can only give advice from their perspective, wanting to fulfill their own biological imperative. Which is why sometimes the advice is downright against women. Not all is bad, we can all use some improvement, but when you tell a woman to STFU and provide sex for a happy relationship, that doesn't really take HER need for a happy relationship into account. Then when she starts complaining BECAUSE she's unhappy and her needs aren't met, she's told she's 'hamstering' and she's better off just swallowing her complains.

[–]ElfFey-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I read in a book that if a man ever asks you how many partners you've had you should just say 3. If you say 0 or 1 (and you're an adult) there's pressure or he thinks you're lying, but if it's more than 3 that's a just don't go there kind of thing. (I don't necessarily think you should lie either way but I get where the author was coming from.) Men do have some biological disgust towards women who've had too many partners.

My number is above 3 but I can only actually remember 3 of them decently well... the others I can only remember snippets and being dissatisfied. I don't know if other women have that experience. I'm very much of the mindset that you should be like a virgin with every new man so that might contribute to me blocking things out.

I think the experience thing is B.S., but with the way our culture is, I've known a few women who ruined their LTRs because they didn't feel they had experience and went looking for it. So because of that, I think if I were a man, I'd actually feel safer with a woman who wasn't a virgin. I wouldn't want us to break up because she had itchy feet. What a stupid reason.

I agree that a lot of people with multiple partners don't want to settle down and that skews the statistics somewhat, like you theorize. Especially with men, a lot of these macho type guys would be dead in most other historical times, you can only go to battle so often before you get killed, so for a really nihilistic guy it just might not be in his makeup to settle down in a monogamous relationship. To be honest, I sometimes suspect I'm not a "relationship" type of person myself, but I've noticed that as a woman that sex makes me feel very attached, so I try to mitigate it. Aand those are my thoughts lol sorry for length

[–]justtenofusinhere2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]smirk_addict3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

I think it’s much easier for a woman to get laid than a man. And in the age of the Internet, social media, and dating apps it’s even easier. Men need charm, charisma, status, humor, and some level of social intelligence. A woman doesn’t need any of those things. Generally speaking, I think for men to have a fair amount of sexual partners he learns what works, how to talk to women, how sometimes women say no but mean yes and how sometimes they say no and mean NO. Even for a woman interested in sex, most prefer the man to still lead the interaction and assume responsibility for her feelings. So I think what bothers men is that women want to celebrate something or want to be appreciated for something that doesn’t really require much effort. Getting commitment requires effort. So if a woman has done this so many times without getting commitment why is she expecting it from me? It means she sees me as lower value because she expecting more if she sleeps with me or she wanted to have fun without being in a committed relationship and now she’s ready to be boring with me. None of that appeals to me. Man often times friend zone themselves or become orbiters. It’s our issue that we give our commitment away for nothing when we really just want sexual partners.

Think of it this way. Suppose there was a job that required a lot of physical labor, and you yourself aren’t the most physically gifted. Since you don’t have the raw strength you’d have to develop techniques, become proficient in equipment, and have to have a bit patience. You’d probably be really proud of yourself if you learned to do this job well. Now suppose some huge muscular guy shows up and he’s getting the job done in no time and with little effort. What if he saw how people praised you then he became upset and expected to praised and recognized the same way. Even though the job was super easy to him and he didn’t even bother to learn how to use the equipment. Wouldn’t you be just a bit annoyed by that?

[–]Shaela901 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You say sex is easier to get for women than for men and it's perfectly true. But do women WANT most men, according to the TRP? Unfortunately not. That's also true. Most men are exactly like most women. Plain, boring, uninteresting, etc.

Then, the thing is, a woman who's had a handful of partners is able to figure out about how good in bed is a guy just by minor interactions with him. I think that for most girls, after experiencing some partners, the bar just keeps getting higher.

Women who want to be celebrated for their n-counts are deplorable. Men who want to be celebrated for their n-counts are deplorable as well. Not because of said n-count, but because they`re so hungry for validation they have to resort to getting it via sex. Which is one of the primary instincts. If I wanted to be celebrated for my ability to feed myself, you'd say I was weirdly desperate and out of touch with reality. These people are exactly the same. And THAT is a much more serious of a red flag than n-counts. And you should avoid those people and the places they hang out like the plague. If you move to a bad neighborhood then complain that the world is full of thieves, then that's your problem to have made such a place your immediate circle. Society is much bigger than that. For reference, read my response to u/BewareOldMan. Get out of your immediate circle, meet other kinds of people and you'll see that thieves are actually a minority in the world. But if you can't get out of the bad neighborhood, then again, who's to blame? If you can't afford a better neighborhood, find a better job, don't complain, because that won't change your living situation.

[–]smirk_addict1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shaela900 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]smirk_addict1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I appreciate your optimism, but I do live in the real world. I have only met two women from tinder and I do not drink. At all. I also avoid sexual encounters with women that have been drinking. I don't live in a major city or a college town. I'm just trying to make it clear that I don't associate with a lot of vapid party girls. I understand very well that world is much more diverse than that. I also like attractive women. And for most attractive women growing up in this era, It's just too easy for them to indulge themselves because of constant male attention. Men and women alike often make excuses for women poor decisions, and most people these days don't know how socialize without alcohol. Besides, alcohol and recreational drug use make for great plausible deniability. I find that a lot of women don't make an effort to change until they see their options diminishing. I think men change to give themselves options.

So lets see. Generally people like to be social and like attention from their peers. So if I had preference for a woman that didn't need that, she'd be an introvert. Now i'm pretty fit and take that seriously. So i'd have preference for a woman that took her diet and exercise seriously. We all know that no matter how much we try to say differently, drinking alcohol with the opposite sex is playing with fire. But this is something most people do unless it's religious reasons or grew up extremely conservative. This is how most hook ups happen. So i'd prefer a woman who isn't naive or lies to herself about any of this and tries not to put herself in this situation if she was looking for something serious. I'd like a woman that's lived on her on and not been financially dependent on anyone. Not even a roommate. Someone who's come home to absolutely nothing else and have the luxury to just be in their head sometime. Now let me ask you this? If I know meeting someone with these specific preferences has a low probability, but I have no interest in being celibate...with varying degrees do you think an average decent looking is going to be someone I could see as a life partner? I don't really think so. While you say the world is big, I think an ideal partner is quite a small percentage. I think you agree since you did say this earlier:

Most men are exactly like most women. Plain, boring, uninteresting, etc.

[–]Shaela901 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]smirk_addict0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sec-1x1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]smirk_addict1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]sec-1x2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]justtenofusinhere0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Cardiscappa[S] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can women tell when a man is a dedicated orbiter of many women?

Are you referring to a Nice Guy™ ?

If so, how do those men rate as potential mates?

Supplicating Nice Guy™ makes my ovaries shrivel up. I need my friends and most importantly my mate to stand their ground. (Debate and banter is like foreplay to me.) I've had too many Nice Guys™ in my life and I hate it. Again, I don't want someone who will just roll over at the slightest chance of disagreement; I like to push boundaries and unless I get pushback, I learn nothing. Nearly all the Nice Guys™ have also put me on a pedestal which is utterly horrifying. It means they have their own perceived Fantasy Cardiscappa™, a fantasy I will never be able to live up to. I don't want to enter a relationship where I'm battling his subconscious perfect version of me. I will not win.