~ archived since 2018 ~

What demographic would a woman with little no pre marital partners exist in the most?

February 1, 2022
5 upvotes

I heard it was mid to high income bracket with SAHM mom and family devoted father? What would be the best predictors for a pure woman and potential wife?

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/askRPC.

/r/askRPC archive

Download the post

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

Post Information
Title What demographic would a woman with little no pre marital partners exist in the most?
Author KnownLedgesIsPowder
Upvotes 5
Comments 17
Date February 1, 2022 12:50 AM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit /r/askRPC
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/askRPC/what-demographic-would-a-woman-with-little-no-pre.1098594
https://theredarchive.com/post/1098594
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/askRPC/comments/shhg4a/what_demographic_would_a_woman_with_little_no_pre/
Comments

[–]Deep_Strength 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What demographic would a woman with little no pre marital partners exist in the most?

I heard it was mid to high income bracket with SAHM mom and family devoted father? What would be the best predictors for a pure woman and potential wife?

Already covered this:

https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2020/12/10/doom-and-gloom-and-the-amount-of-attractive-christian-virgins-part-4/

At least in the Baptist Church study, about 40% of all women marrying in the 21-24 age range were virgins. Regular attendance and growing up in the Church also had some moderate correlations obviously.

Several dozens of other factors are included here:

https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2018/01/07/review-of-vetting-virgins-and-new-info-on-virginity-pledges/

Most important ones usually are:

  • No drugs
  • No alcohol
  • Grew up in a stable father and mother home
  • Father & mother had no children out of wedlock
  • Does not find cohabitation acceptable
  • Employed
  • No mental illness

[–]WhereProgressIsMade 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Find the most traditional college ministry groups and look for the female freshmen.

[–]OsmiumZulu 4 points5 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

18 years old homeschooled gal with a fundamentalist family background in a rural town somewhere far away from the coastal cities. Even then, no guarantees.

Also, this isn't as important as people make it out to be.

[–]Sad_Decision_3628 1 point2 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

God demanded non virgin Jewish girls be killed in the Old Testament.

If we can just go fornicate why bother with marriage.

[–]OsmiumZulu -1 points0 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Oh he did? Where?

[–]Sad_Decision_3628 2 points3 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Deut 22:13-21 "If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 “And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, “I did not find your daughter a virgin.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city. 18 “So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. 20 “But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21 then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel, by playing the harlot in her father’s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you,”

Pay attention to the last verse.

[–]Willow-girl 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Read this verse carefully and consider the social implications. If a man tired of his wife and disposed of her, what was likely to happen to her? Either she would go back to her parents' home and they would provide for her, or she would become a burden on the community.

Now, would any parent allow a son-in-law to unjustly make allegations against their daughter? Of course not; any parents worth their salt would gin up "proof" of their daughter's virginity to get her off the hook. And those same parents would likely take in a daughter who had been cast off by her husband.

Who would not have anyone to vouch for her virginity? A girl whose parents were no longer alive, or were estranged from her for some reason, and thus would be unable or unwilling to take her in, either.

So ... what this law does is provide society with a convenient way of disposing of abandoned women ... by killing them.

A bit chilling, isn't it?

[–]Sad_Decision_3628 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I'd assume that if the girl is an orphan then her adoptive parents would take over. Or perhaps an uncle or a brother.

I have no idea what you mean with your 2nd last sentence. This law is clearly about crushing female promiscuity.

[–]Willow-girl 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I have no idea what you mean with your 2nd last sentence.

It means exactly what it says. If a man tired of his wife, he could accuse her of not being a virgin when he married her, and if she had no family willing or able to come to her defense, he could kill her. That way, he would be rid of her, but she wouldn't become a burden on the rest of the community.

Life in ancient times was tough and single women evidently were considered a liability. Perhaps societies that coddled their widows, orphans and single mothers were generally overtaken by ones that didn't? (Quite possibly this is still the case; China, which makes unwed motherhood illegal, appears to be eating our lunch!) For centuries, widows in India were expected to immolate themselves on their husbands' funeral pyres in a practice known as the suttee or sati. Another convenient way of disposing of women who no longer had a husband able or willing to take care of them ...

[–]Sad_Decision_3628 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

This is something which would be done at the wedding. At the wedding, the bridegroom would sleep with the bride, and the parents would collect the bloodstained sheets to prove she was a virgin. This isn't a law which you could use to get rid of your wife years down the line.

I really, really don't think people would take you seriously if you claimed years after the wedding your wife wasn't a virgin. If she wasn't a virgin, you would raise it on the very first day of the marriage.

[–]Willow-girl -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I really, really don't think people would take you seriously if you claimed years after the wedding your wife wasn't a virgin.

Exactly. Clearly this has nothing to do with the bride's virginity or lack thereof ... it's just a loophole that allows a man to neatly dispose of a woman he doesn't want around anymore. He doesn't have to keep providing for her and neither do the other men of the community ... they can just kill her off.

[–]Sad_Decision_3628 -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Now I see why the 1st woman fell for that lie about that tree.

[–]OsmiumZulu 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

This section of the OT law is often cited uncritically.

The issue at hand in this section is a woman and / or her father lying about her being a virgin, perhaps so she would fetch a higher bride price. In other words, this is a punishment for fraud, not non-virginity per se.

Notice how none of this applies to a non-virgin woman who gets married and doesn't misrepresent her status.

Consider King Solomon's great act of wisdom when he is approached by two prostitutes for judgement regarding who's child a baby was. Why would two self-evident non-virgins approach the throne of the king for judgment if non-virginity was a capital crime? They wouldn't.

So no, the Bible doesn't command non virgins be put to death as is so often claimed by people who don't bother to actually examine the text critically.

Tag: u/willow-girl so you can ammend your piss poor understanding of this text

[–]Willow-girl 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Examining the text critically, as you say, I find that it doesn't say, "If any man takes a wife and goes into to her and finds she is not a virgin ..."

What it says instead is that if a man takes a wife, and at some later point "turns against her," he can make a public accusation of her impurity, and he can then have her stoned if her parents aren't around to (or willing to) defend her reputation.

A careful reading suggests that this is a huge loophole for men to escape from a marriage to a wife they have "turned against." Not only can they do away with her, but they can do it in such a way (stoning to death) that she doesn't become a public burden on the rest of the community.

Life in Biblical times was harsh! Remember that the OT also calls for women to be married to their rapists, as this was presumably better than having them become a burden on the community (as no one would want to marry them).

[–]OsmiumZulu 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

You're proving the case for why we banned women from participating in the main sub. I've never understood why you even bother to hang around here and post these fedora-enthusiast tier takes.

How can a man turn on his wife and accuse her of impurity if it was already known that she wasn't a virgin before the marriage and payment of bride price?

Let's think this through... a bad mean nasty man decides he doesn't like his wife anymore and decides to her have killed using this "legal loophole". He goes and publically accuses her of not being a virgin at their wedding day. The city elders, the family, and everyone else in the tribe goes, "...uh yeah. We know. You didn't pay the bride price for a virgin because she wasn't one... nobody claimed she was" and then nothing happens to her and the guy is outted as a fool. On the otherhand, if she and her father claimed she was a virgin and demanded a bride price according to the lie, a major fraud was committed that could absolutely destroy a lineage and proper inheritance and was thus discouraged by treating it as a high crime.

I know your worldview requires these sorts of texts to be as mean and nasty to wammanz as possible to justify this chip on your shoulder, but it is tiresome and unhelp to have to constantly clean up the trash tier takes you litter all over this place.

Keep it up and get banned.

[–]Willow-girl 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Let's think this through... a bad mean nasty man decides he doesn't like his wife anymore and decides to her have killed using this "legal loophole".

Exactly! You get it. Look, those were different and much harsher times; survival was much more difficult than it is today. For instance, consider punishments like "an eye for an eye," which might sound brutal and barbaric to our modern minds -- putting someone's eye out? YIKES -- but the reality of the situation was that society at the time couldn't afford to imprison very many people the way it can today. It couldn't afford to have people locked up, idle, not productive, consuming scarce resources -- it was necessary to punish them and move on. By the same token, you couldn't have abandoned women dragging society down -- if they blew it with their husband and didn't have family willing to step up and provide for them, it made more sense to just do away with them.

The Hebrews weren't unusual in this regard or even unusually harsh; for instance, in India it was common to incinerate widows on their husband's funeral pyre in a custom known as "suttee." Various societies also did things like "expose" unwanted infants or practice senilicide, the abandonment or killing of the elderly. Ancient societies that didn't eliminate the unproductive were probably at a competitive disadvantage compared to ones that did.

Now, your feminists will pick out stuff like this, or the verse about women being forced to marry their rapists, and use it as an excuse to hate on Christianity, but IMO, you can't judge people and societies back then by modern standards. It's like hating on America's founders because some were slaveowners. Different times, different standards, and you have to look at issues in the context of their times and not through a modern lens in order to get a clear picture, IMO.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter