I keep seeing topics here casually linking high n-counts with poor impulse control. This is, at best reductive and, at worst, sour grapes (aka, jealous moralizing).

The primary reason a woman or man has a high n-count is because they want one. They desire variety and have a relatively high risk-tolerance to accommodate it. There may be many, complex psychological factors feeding into that desire. But putting the focus on “impulse control” suggests they are trying to resist and failing—by extension, that they will also fail to resist other temptations, like cheating, in a more serious relationship.
In truth, “control” often plays no role at all, because the high n-count individual may have no reason to not want what they want.

Even less accurate is the correlative take, that low n-count individuals (especially women) have outstanding impulse control. In many cases, these people simply have few viable options. I know, I know—common wisdom is that an average woman can basically lay down on main street with her legs open and find a dozen willing men a day. But they don’t WANT those men or desire that kind of sex. There is no impulse control because there is no impulse. Often the men they actually desire are out of their league, in a relationship, sources of social anxiety for them, or otherwise unavailable. Plenty of options, technically, but few which actually require impulse control.

As far as I can see, this “impulse control” theory is just a way to rationalize slut-shaming, as if math can prove that people who don’t get laid are more virtuous—that ancient, superstitious notion.