Quite possibly my least favorite blue pill belief is the idea that a woman should be judged on her prior sexual experience. It leads men into a false sense of security whenever they believe she’s a “good girl.” Since she’s not a slut, the reasoning goes, she’s proven to be more trustworthy than a slut. I say nay; assume she is a bad woman until proven otherwise. Especially if she calls herself a virgin, assume guilt.
While I agree that “You can’t turn a whore into a housewife,” it is also true that some slutty housewives are not whores. Men should be less concerned with finding a chaste wife than finding a loyal one. Consider the following about virgins: Either she is a virgin because she is young, or she is a old prude who wants to use men with her sexuality. In the former case, she is but a young girl with plenty of time for her to turn into a slut, since all sluts are born virgins, or in the latter case, she is the worst type of relationship material possible as she is unable to open up to a man’s love, only using her sexuality as a means to some end, always placing her interests above any man’s.
For a real world example of an old virgin, see Exhibit A:
Claims to be a virgin… don’t offer to marry her all at once now.
Olympic Athlete Lola Jones, in addition to loving attention, is also an extreme case of the old virgin archetype. She portrays her virginity as valuable, when in fact it represents her inability to bond with a man.
“I’ve been tempted. I’ve had guys tell me, they’re like, ‘Hey you know if you have sex it will help you run faster,’” Jones revealed, before sharing her response. “If you marry me, then yeah.”
She frames the conversation as something she is saving for “her husband,” that is, something she is using as a bartering chip for the best possible deal in the mating game. She makes it sound like no one has been willing to marry her. But given how much of a buyer’s market today’s dating game is, which is more likely to have occurred? Did Lola Jones never find any quality men? Or did Lola Jones never accept any man? It is obvious that her virginity is not an asset, but instead a giant red flag indicating her intimacy issues. She approaches love with a mercenary’s eye, evaluating men based on her personal gain.
I would say any woman who is a virgin after the age of 20 is already a bit crazy, and after 25 she will make the top 10 worst women you’ve ever dated (or at least top 100). But in any case, a woman who saves her virginity past her most sexually desirable years truly isn’t interested in marriage as much as she’s interested in herself. Although she’s never cheated on any man, she has never been loyal to any man either.
Likewise, a young virgin has not proven to be anything more than a pretty face, tits, and ass. Even if you’re the man to claim her cherry, she’s still nothing more than a new girl you’ve started banging. I’ll never forget how one of my close friends took the virginity of a 22 year old girl. He thought he had found “The One.” He could not get enough of the sex, and could not stop raving about her. But when he revealed he had to go get his Masters in another city, it was but only two weeks after he moved before she was sleeping with a different man.
My friend’s girl was not loyal. She valued herself over her man, and that’s why, even though she “gave” her virginity to him, she was nothing but a slut who had saved her virginity. Valuing virginity, which is inherent to a woman’s birth, is just as absurd as valuing a woman for anything else inherent to her birth, such as her eyeballs or hair. Certain crazy religions have worshiped a woman’s virginity as if it revealed an important truth about her character, when, in fact, they have it backwards: A woman of loyal character is more likely to only sleep with one man in her life, but women who’ve only slept with one man may still be a lying, manipulative, nagging, and combative battleaxe. It is necessary for a woman of good character to have slept with few men, but it is not a sufficient.
Blue pill men mistake the effect for the cause, and see sexual experience as an odometer to be measured, when in fact it is nothing more than one card from her hand. You do not have a complete picture and if she’s smart, you never will. So don’t be a dumbass who places value on a woman’s sexual history. Without any sort of context, virginity means nothing. By logical extension, if there’s no reason to value a virgin, then there’s no reason to value any woman who claims to have limited sexual experience.
And continuing further, I would go as far to say that a huge slut may yet still turn out to be better relationship material (never marriage material) than a virgin, since with the slut you know what you are getting while the virgin is someone who may put on false pretenses with her chastity.
Whenever a woman tells you her sexual experience, realize that she is trying to manipulate you by showing you an incomplete picture, shrug your shoulders, and just give her a one word answer of your choice: “Cool.” “Okay.” “Neat.” “Whatever.”
“I’m a virgin.” YOU: *shrugs* “Cool.”
“I’ve only had two boyfriends before you.” YOU: *shrugs* “Okay.”
“I’ve slept with 100 men.” YOU: *shrugs* “Neat.” (Guaranteed you’ll make her feel insecure with this reply.)
“I’m not like other girls. I’m not easy.” YOU: *shrugs* “Whatever.”
Read Next: A Feminist Helps Men With Relationship Game
Thank you, Samseau, for posting this. Our comment thread in “The 10 Slut Commandments” went round and round on this point and you’ve offered a fine rebuttal to those who insist that women are only irredeemable sluts or virgins.
Loyalty and devotion are exceptionally important values in a woman and are almost the antithesis of a slut. Perhaps the best definition of a slut is a woman who puts her sexual pleasure above the relationship she has with her man and lover. Not only do loyal and devoted women make for the glue in her relationship with her man, but they are significant indicators of her motherhood performance.
I don’t understand why discuss something that has been proven anecdotally and scientifically (women with several previous partners ARE NOT long term relationship material, let alone marriage). Lifestyle choices should blind reasoning and common sense.
*Lifestyle choices shouldn´t blind reasoning and common sense.
Let’s be practical. In today’s America, most women are going to have had several sexual partners long before she will even start to think of finding her marriage partner. And, as Sameau noted, finding a woman who is a virgin beyond maybe 25 is definitely a danger sign.
Plus, people, men and women, change as they mature. Should a guy getting caught underage drinking or joy-riding in a “borrowed” car ruin his career prospects for the rest of his life?
To forgive is divine so if you find a woman with good character who behaves well with you, don’t ask too many questions about her prior sexual history (other than STDs.)
The question is…..why bother thinking about marriage or commitment at all when this is the environment?
What you basically suggest is to go ahead and marry a reformed slut because you won’t find anything better to marry.
My rebuttal is, then don’t fvking marry! Seriously, what is the benefit? There is no ROI, only a huge risk.
Cost/benefit analysis would agree with your statement.
Manichean logic my friend! I didn’t say that.. I said you need to look at the woman as an individual who can and will change over the years, maybe within a year.
As to marriage under our domestic relationship laws, you have a point that a man needs to look at marriage as a situation where the external cards are stacked against you.
But I come from a place where having and raising children is a prime responsibility and the principal life reward. And I want my children raised in a safe and secure home that is legal recognized – no bastards for me.
The law won’t give that you – only you and your woman can make that happen. So chose carefully, as we all agree, My point is that hard-and-fast rules aren’t that good predictors of marital success and happiness.
Even your credit report gets slowly updated and past sins vanish. Life is a lot like that.
I agree on not going with hard and fast rules.
I disagree on the past vanishing. It is always there, and there will always be baggage related to past relationships and mistakes.
I come from a place where if you are a white hetero male, the whole system is stacked against you and meanwhile you are paying for everyone else yet still told how you have the world handed to you.
You may believe that having and raising children is the prime reward, but you need to recognize that is your value system, which can differ from everyone else. Yes I would like a good wife and children to go with it, but given the state of women and government today, it is a near impossibility unless you want to imprison yourself with some girl the football team used to hit every Friday night.
My preference is for a woman who did not make such mistakes or have an underlying sense of entitlement to do as she wished today only to have some “Mr Big” pickup the bill later on and ignore what he purchases.
Yea let’s be practical, no rings for sluts.
Compare women and dogs.
If you picked up a dog at the pound and it was loyal, obedient, and affectionate, you wouldn’t worry about whether it had been loyal, obedient, and affectionate to prior owners.
If you brought home a puppy and it chewed the furniture, bite your neighbor, and pissed on the carpet, it wouldn’t matter that it had been in no home but yours and its momma’s..
Good post. Though I’ve never poked a virgin, I have known one or two men who have at some point in their lives.
One of them is a guy in his mid-80s whom I’ve known for over ten years. He poked his first virgin back in Depression-era NYC. His estimation? “Meh.” If nothing else, he added, poking her was a painful experience in and of itself. For him, that is. He said nothing about her.
The sanctity, real or imagined, of virginity is certainly not what it once was. Neither is sexual history, though I still would have misgivings about a woman who had more than five sexual partners before she met me. Maybe that’s just an instinctual reaction.
Sexual history is something personal. That’s it. When a woman is with me, either as a fling or in something more long-term, then she’s with me. The clock starts on the day that she agrees to be with me. Everything before that is immaterial, unless she makes an issue of it or if she carries baggage from those years. If anything, in agreement with what you said, if she’s a virgin after the age of 25, then something is probably seriously wrong with her.
It could also be that everything is right with her but there is something wrong with everyone else including you.
Everyone has their own issues, I guess. I’m no different. 😉
I always thought too many red pill guys bought into this notion as well.
It goes back to the virgin/whore dichotomy: a women can only be one or the other.
Which is just not true. All women are both. Embrace it.
Virgins might turn into whores but whores can’t turn back into virgins
I call BS. You sound like a feminist echo chamber tbh
Virginity is something men value thanks to hardwired imperatives, socialization just reinforces it. And it evolved as such for VERY good reason
It’s no different then being drawn to youth and a firm tight body
How you rationalize that it says nothing about how much she values intimacy and the intimacy implied in sex, short ur single anecdote, is beyond me
You are missing his point. All women are virgins at birth. If they are a virgin at 21 or 22 you have to ask ‘why’? This is not a criticism but an actual questions. Is she doing it as a matter of religion or honour or is it because no man has ever been good enough for her?
It doesn’t take too long to figure that out.
Date 14-year-olds: one less thing to worry about.
Did I stumble upon Jezebel? Stop Slut-Shaming. Don’t judge women on their sexual history.
Of all the girls i’ve banged, the only 2 I ever seriously dated were girls whose virginities I took. That may be partially because I overvalued their virginities, but I think it was mostly because these girls valued me so highly in their eyes.
I’m also fairly narcissistic. I want to be sure this girl shares my view of myself being the best man in the world. I’m free from being compared to exes and its very unlikely a virgin would jump ship for another guy because of how strong the emotional bonding is to the first person you sleep with.
That I think is most guys concern with sluts, that they’re worse at forming emotional bonds with men that they sleep with. A “good girl” will pretty much love any guy she’s currently having sex with. A slut will only love a guy she’s currently having sex with and also demonstrates a suite of alpha traits to keep her from getting bored.
“I’m saving my virginity for my husband.”
No you’re not you, little wench. You’re using it to manipulate every available man who so much as takes an interest in you.
Men want a wife who’s devoted, loving, honest, and (dare I say) chaste. Qualities like that are a lot harder to maintain than one’s virginity. Don’t fall for the girls who use the fact that they’ve managed to keep their legs crossed as an excuse for the fact that they lack anything else that would make them an otherwise good companion.
Good point. 🙂
Number of sexual partners and faithfulness is very heavily correlated.
A girl’s past matters a lot. Always has and always will.
You are writing a feminist perspective while claiming to be red pill. Think about that.
Nowhere did I say a woman’s past does not matter.
“I would go as far to say that a huge slut may yet still turn out to be better relationship material (*never marriage material*) than a virgin, since with the slut you know what you are getting while the virgin is someone who may put on false pretenses with her chastity.”
Try reading the article before you post. And each of the 32 upvoters have just as poor reading comprehension as you do. I put the little stars next to the point of subtle emphasis you missed.
Nowhere did I say a woman’s past does not matter.
“I would go as far to say that a huge slut may yet still turn out to be better relationship material (*never marriage material*) than a virgin, since with the slut you know what you are getting while the virgin is someone who may put on false pretenses with her chastity.”
Try reading the article before you post. And each of the 32 upvoters have just as poor reading comprehension as you do. I put the little stars next to the point of subtle emphasis you missed.
Sammy, you sound like one of these little PUA geeks who know nothing about females.
What he doesn’t get is that relationships are still a form of commitment.
You sound like a dude who never passed his 10th grade English class.
You sound like a dude that likes slutty & feminist behavior and wrote this article to justify your crazy. Most of us don’t buy that type of stupidity.
Samseau- “Nowhere did I say a woman’s past does not matter.”
Yet the title of your post is “A Woman’s Sexual Experience Means Nothing”.
Because the past is more inclusive than just her sexual experience. Good thing English is my first language.
And yet, her past sexual experience still matters greatly.
you just revealed yourself in this comment
Hey, hey, chill-out! He may be REALLY red pill, but also he’s a human too! He’s in a committed relationship with someone he met at a whorehouse and he just wants to live with himself. Don’t fault a man for trying to process his inner guilt whilst receiving false respect as a red pill author! GOSH.
I find it refreshing that an author is willing to respond directly to their article. It shows a commitment to what is written. However, using ad hominems as a form of attack is nothing more than a logical fallacy that discredits the author. I’m very interested in your point of view and your rebuttals…but not your ad hominems.
Allow me to illustrate why Samseau’s reasoning is valid here, though I completely understand where you are coming from. Compare two women:
Sarah: She had 3 husbands through out the course of her life. She was faithful to each, for as long as they lived. The first died in war after 3 years of marriage. The second was killed in an accident, after 2 years of marriage, and she currently lives with the third and it has been 10 years. In her society, men are the breadwinners. Widows suffer economically without guardians seeing to their provision.
Jennifer: She’s had sex with 3 men in total, and turned 18 about 7 months ago. The first man was her boyfriend, a college freshmen, who she then cheated on with his room-mate — her 2nd sexual partner. Thereafter, she was dumped by her boyfriend and hit up the clubs after three days of sulking. She hooked up with a stranger, and he ravaged her at his apartment later that night.
Both women have had 3 sexual partners. Who do you think is more loyal? Without context, labels like ‘virginity’ mean nothing.
Miguel
Well, to be fair, life is nothing but a never-ending merry carnival for female virgins, what with the options just lining-up and all these men treating me so well… I deserve a guy acting like a dick to me. Maybe then I’ll learn my lesson to… wait, what did I do?
I think you should judge a girl’s character by your own honest subjective response to her. If you have to intellectualize about her sexual history and how it makes you feel (or if you use somebody else’s blog post to do the same), it probably means you’re fooling yourself and should try to get to the bottom of your real feelings.
An article full of Bull$hit.
If she is a woman who uses her sexuality against you, then you just walk away. It’s that simple.
And yes, All slutty wives are still sluts or wh0res. And statistics show that the more c0ckas, the less loyalty.
And finally, why would any man with options commit to a reformed slut? The point is, none would.
Having said that, I love sluts……they are great for fvking. But anyone who suggests that one should consider reformed sluts for commitment is smoking crack. Keep that feminist bull$hit away.
Well it’s obvious you don’t get a lot of hot ass.
Tell me: Would you rather be in a relationship with a “faithful” 28 year old woman or a 18-year old girl who is still “playing the field?”
I’ll take the slut every time. So please don’t tell me that one should never consider a slut, reformed slut, etc. Who fucking cares, it’s just one of many things you should judge a woman on but without context a woman’s notchcount means nothing.
It’s obvious to me that you are butthurt at your feminist blue-pill perspective.
You should go back and rethink your position based on the fact that a relationship is still a commitment. A reformed slut? That means she is for sex only.
Why? Because she is untrustworthy and she hands out her meat-flaps quite readily.
And your question is meaningless because I would rather fvk both women and not commit to either. Besides which, you never indicated whether the 28 yo was a slut or not.
Look, this is very simple. The only girls worth marrying today are the one’s who at 18 are virgins and not into playing games. Even THEN, I don’t think I would marry her considering the misandric position of the State today.
If you want to commit to or marry everyone’s else leftovers, go right ahead. But don’t get all whiney when other people recognize the insanity of it.
So how come this guy is on RoK? I mean this website isn’t exactly known for being loving of women(especially ones that think for themselves) virgin or not submissive or not traditional or not ect ect. So then why would RoK allow this guy if he sounds like a feminist? Wouldn’t that be counter productive to the Women Aren’t Human message this site tends to convey? Why would a Manosphere website undermine itself?
This MRA/Feminism crap has made everyone paranoid.
I’d take the loyal 18 year old virgin.
Ain’t any such thing, unless she is man ass ugly. Otherwise she is looking to land the stiffest and richest dick she can.
18 is not THAT rare. Some of the absolute hottest women on the planet were still virgins at 18. As are something close to a majority in many churches traditional enough to care, yet sufficiently willing to bend over to bother with laws and custom wrt so called consensual age to marry.
WEAK
God damn, you’re stupid. You didn’t read a word of the article, now did you? Marriage? What are you talking about? Go read the comment to LaidNYC.
“And your question is meaningless because I would rather fvk both women and not commit to either. Besides which, you never indicated whether the 28 yo was a slut or not.”
And here you illustrate why a woman’s slut-hood does not matter.
Now now bluepiller, don’t get all crybaby.
The marriage comment is in comment to your first idiotic response to me about a relationship. Relationship or marriage, they are both commitments.
The sluthood matters for commitment in general. Which includes marriage. Your are the one talking about a relationship with women who ride c0cks for a living. You take the gold on stupid.
You mistitled your essay. It should be: A Woman’s Lack Of Sexual Experience Means Nothing.
If a woman’s sexual experience is, well, lengthy, it sure as Hell does mean something…bad.
Correct…would you have a better shot with a virgin who is an attention whore or a gal with a n of 100 who is an attention whore.
The thing is, the virgin stops being an attention whore once she gets married and receives dat regular attention. Or at least I would… :'(
Loyalty is the number 1 thing men look for in women.
Virginity is a good sign of loyalty. The woman bonds best to the first guy that she has sex with.
However should that guy leave or she leaves…she has an easier path and knowledge of how to get sex from guys.
“Virginity is a good sign of loyalty. The woman bonds best to the first guy that she has sex with.”
Not quite. In my experience, a woman bonds best with the first guy who makes her come.
Not really. Super-slut Madonna’s “Like A Virgin” compares orgasmic sex to a man who can make her feel like a virgin. So if sluts will bond with you if you make her feel like a virgin, why not just fuck a virgin?
Don’t have to. I’ve already watched Reservoir Dogs.
Same here.
ok well if women bond more with their first, then how come most women arent virgins or with their first? simple mathematics.
a woman bonds best with a man that is in control of his own life and this is best demonstrated when they are drawn into his life directly. period.
i dont like the slut vs virgin duality. i prefer single digit vs double digit notch count per age. this tells you how serious a woman takes the men she fucks with. like job history. then as always what am i looking for.
“ok well if women bond more with their first, then how come most women arent virgins or with their first? simple mathematics.”
What a fucking idiot. Go sit in the corner and think about what you’ve just said.
Rather than over or under 10, I think a better metric is to look for the kind of prior relationships she has been through.
In Dystopia, it is very rare to find virgins that feel they are old enough to marry outside of fringe communities. But I have noticed there is a big difference between a non virgin who’s previous encounters have only been of the “got awkwardly laid in high school because everyone said it was awesome and all the cool girls did it”, and those who have either been in a relationship that she tried to make work and still got dumped; and even more so, those that have been told flaunting/exploring her sexuality is some sort of panacea for “modern” women.
Many girls do not seem to be bonded that tightly with some schlub that took her virginity in high school, but will pretty much never get over her first “serious” man. Hence, unless you have good certainty you are her first serious man, she’s for pumping and dumping only, as she’s ruined forever for anything more serious.
I like the way you’ve put the matter. One point mentioned in this article is key, and that is that the value of virginity is linked to context. If the context to which a woman’s virginity is linked, also indicates elements like loyalty, honesty, submissiveness to authority, etc. then she is a good woman for sure. However, this is not always clear, and other factors may govern her being a virgin, that do not ensure loyalty, honesty, and submissiveness to authority.
Other angles should also be examined to acquire a complete picture such as the nature of any previous relationships, traits she possesses (ex. measures of her selfishness and vanity; a virgin with such characteristics is going to be less loyal than a virgin without such characteristics). Basically, one needs a cumulative case.
“Rather than over or under 10, I think a better metric is to look for the kind of prior relationships she has been through.”
That’s always hard to discern if you don’t have any inside sources at the time she had those relationships. If you ask her what kind of relationships they were, she’ll just say they were all committed relationships and the guy ended up being a jerk and dumping her. I guarantee it
absolutely.
I don’t think I’m crazy. Odd, or emotionally immature for my age, perhaps. But not crazy.
Pics or it didn’t happen.
That’s an unclear statement. (?)
Sending pictures to strangers on the internet is a sign of actual craziness.
Also, I’m not a virgin anymore (very happily), but by your evaluation, I’m probably a head case. I rather disagree, is all.
Didn’t Lolo end up turning dyke?
Anytime a girl tells me something similar to “I’m not easy” I always respond that I am not either. I get asked how many girls I’ve had sex with surprising frequently as well. I’ve never had a girl volunteer the number of their sex partners unless the number is very low.
Funny, I recently witnessed something that proves everything Samseau writes about here.
Several months ago, I made friends with this woman who was living the ideal manosphere script (and in fact had been inspired by Roissy, myself and the manosphere in general): married young (while she was still in college), had only slept with one guy prior to getting married, had kids, kept herself thin and hot even after two pregnancies, and just generally tried to be a dutiful housewife. She contacts me on Skype circa March to inform me that she’s divorcing her husband and has shacked up with a mutual friend of ours in Canada.
Realistically, her husband was a useless narcissist (had no job, lived off of his trust fund, kept changing college majors and moving from city to city each month because he couldn’t figure out what he wanted to do with his life, made her do heavy lifting when she was pregnant etc.), so I supported her through the ordeal. She and my friend were making big plans about building a new life together overseas, and I was happy for them.
Fast forward to two months later, after the divorce was finalized (she gave her husband full custody). My friend contacts me to tell me that she took off on him a couple weeks before to hang out with her survivalist buddies in Wyoming. She wouldn’t answer his calls or texts, but finally revealed a couple weeks later that she was moving back to that area to be “closer to the kids” (nevermind that by this point her ex-husband had taken the kids and moved several states away). She had also been badmouthing my friend and I behind our backs. Read between the lines.
If you can’t trust a near-virginal housewife to not divorce her husband and get gang-banged by a bunch of survivalists out in the middle of nowhere, who can you trust?
(had no job, lived off of his trust fund, kept changing college majors
and moving from city to city each month because he couldn’t figure out
what he wanted to do with his life, made her do heavy lifting when she
was pregnant etc.)
So in other words he had no direction in life, let her make the decisions, and had no sense of accomplishment?
A woman can only go so long without dick.
No, he made all the decisions. The problem was that he was playing at being a mighty patriarch when he spent most of his time playing video games and trolling people on Facebook while she waited on him hand and foot.
So, he was a worthless piece of shit and she figured him out? Hardly her fault how it turned out. But…
How did she agree to abandon her children? WTF? How is she so amazing a woman if she couldn’t even keep custody? All she had to do was be female. Failing that, make false allegations of abuse. It works every time.
She chose to give up custody because both she and her husband believe in automatic father custody (the traditionalist way), because she wanted to start anew, and because she was afraid of her husband having a narcissistic meltdown if she took them away.
I should also mention that she married him after all of three days of dating. She has spectacularly poor judgment.
Yes, a number is not the whole picture however it is a good indication of what you’re getting involved with. I’d wager there are far more attention whores who are sluts than are virgins. And it also depends on what your plans for said woman. If you’re looking for the mother to your children N becomes much more important. A low N is a strong indicator of impulse control, determination and perseverance; good traits if you’re looking for a loyal wife.
http://socialpathology.blogspot.ca/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
In the context of this website, you’re probably looking to add her to your harem or entertain her for a night, so you’re correct in that case N is largely irrelevant.
I think fucking a virgin is a mad over-rated experience. They’re uptight, take way too much unneccesary work to get in the sack, and they’re akward as shit in bed. In my book, if any chick hasn’t fucked by 25, then something is wrong with that chick upstairs. Case in point, Lola Jones likes to hide behind religion being the reason she isn’t fucking anybody. Lola Jones has extreme “daddy issues.”
Last year HBO Real Sports with Bryant Gumble did a segment on her. The segment talked about how Lola grew up real poor and her mother raised her and her siblings by herself. Lola’s father was a theif, physically abusive towards the family, a drug addict, and is currently serving time in an Iowa state prison.
Lola Jones is not a virgin for religious resons likes she says; she just can’t trust men because of her dad.
The other reason being that she is horridly unattractive. She looks like a rawboned Davy Crockett minus the coonskin cap but add saggy tits.
Not every virgin story is the same either. Religion brain washes its
adherents to remain virgins, sex is bad, etc…. I would blame religion
over her being crazy. If she is farking crazy chic, she will be crazy if
she has slept with 100 versus none. Crazy is crazy, and how many sexual
partners isn’t always an indicator of crazy.
However many sexual partners almost always means unreliable and most likely crazy.
I don’t know what virgins you have fucked, but mine have been very experimental to the point of wild, plus within a few weeks they are experienced and not at all awkward.
Some very good observations here. “Although she has never cheated on a man, she has never been loyal to any man, either”. I like that point.
Bit of a hyperbolic title for this article don’t ya think? You are really saying that a slut is as valuable as a traditional/chaste girl?
Nope.
I have honestly never thought about it like this. When I think wife, I think mother of my children, that number cannot be high. Single digits unless under extreme circumstance which I could not contemplate currently. Now if I do not plan to look at you as a marriage prospect, numbers are irrelevant because I do not do girlfriends I am just fucking you regardless of where you think the relationship is going. I know very quickly if a prospect is future mother of my child, and it is a brutal culling process with no mercy for total disregard for excuses for past behavior.
This article made me think about some things I had read once. Consider:
Chastity is a comparatively late development in human history. In primitive societies, it was not valued very much. What the primitive woman dreaded was not the loss of virginity, but a reputation for sterility. The anthropologists say that in very ancient times premarital pregnancy may have actually been an aid rather than a handicap in finding a husband, for it proved she was not sterile.
Before the institution of property was established and the patriarchy was firmly entrenched, virginity seems to have been held in contempt as indicating unpopularity.
And in some societies, virginity would also have been a barrier to marriage because it made a man violate taboos about the shedding of blood (i.e., breaking the hymen and shedding blood) of a member of the tribe. In some cases, girls would offer themselves to strangers or outsiders in order to break this “blood taboo” against their marriage. In ancient Tibet mothers sought men who would deflower their daughters; in Malabar the same service would be requested of travelers, since virgins would be unable to find husbands. In some tribes the bride was obliged to give herself to the wedding guests before going to her husband; and among some Philippine tribes, a special official was appointed at a high salary to perform this job. Incredible, but true.
So what was it that changed virginity from a fault to a “virtue”, and made it part of the idealized moral code of all higher civilizations? Apparently it was the institution of property. The valuation of virginity rose when the virgin bride could bring a higher price than a non-virgin. For then the man could be assured of passing his property (cattle, land, etc) on to children that were his and not someone else’s. The desire to leave property to one’s own children helped to develop the cult of virginity.
On the other hand, virginity in a man has never been valued by any society in history. Apparently there is no language in the world that has a special word for a male virgin.
Morals change slowly over time, and adapt to the conditions of society and technology.
Has any of these marginal cultures you mention survived for long and produced anything of value?
There have been declines in cultures in past too and in different scales.
Nothing changes the fact that female chastity before marriage is required to build a stable and prospering culture.
I’m not sure what you mean by “survived for long”. Tibet still exists, the Philippines still exist, and so does Malabar. I’m trying to make a point and am using anthropology to illustrate. As for “producing anything of value”, I assume you are stating that these primitive cultures are inferior. That is in the eye of the beholder, but I can tell you that so-called primitive cultures are much more complex than is generally appreciated. Technological progress is not everything, you know.
I am trying to argue in favor of Samseau’s thesis in his article. I think it is being unfairly attacked.
All he is trying to say is: (1) a girl’s over-focus on her virginity is actually an expression of narcissism. It is not a positive, but an indicator of repressed hostility or some other personality defect. Either that, or she is an asexual creature and destined for spinsterhood. That’s fine, but what irritates the author is the false elevation of chastity into a virtue by someone who does not deserve it. He is also saying that (2) don’t be too quick to judge a girl by her sexual history alone. There are many other factors that come into play.
His points are completely reasonable, and they match my own experience.
In my earlier anthropology comment above, I was also trying to make the point that virginity is overrated. And by using anthropology, the point is made. For all the hype surrounding virginity, it was at one time actually a handicap. So, the science supports Samseau.
And neither is a particularly attractive place to live or a world power.
Just as the strongest animal has first right to eat his kill, this is ownership, property is just the extent to which you have power over things and people, and although I agree that we having long-term property of ‘things’ now on a scale that our minds are not really ready for, since most things perished quickly and could not be stored in bank accounts, but having power over people is something slightly different and something that is more in touch with human nature since it is an advantage to be able to do long-term.
You’ve seen braveheart where the English try to ‘prima-nocte’ the brides to ‘breed them out’, it caused enough anger in the Scottish to rouse them to kill the entire army there, which felt like just retribution watching it. Thinking about another man’s penis in your woman is a very real danger. Although I take your point that with contraception and DNA testing now, you can be certain that you sired the offspring, I think it will be a long time before our brains change to reflect that change in reality, they may not even.
One historical example was Octavius, later known as Augustus Caesar.
For his bride, he insisted on a woman who had already borne a child, to ensure her fertility.
And yet he adopted Tiberius to be his heir.
I absolutely disagree with the idea that a woman is crazy if a virgin at 20 or 25. The author of the article doesn’t see farther then his nose – farther then his sex addicted American culture. Hid definition of crazy probably means – “different form the common flock whom I can bed without stepping out of my comfort zone”
The problem with the authors way of thinking is that a woman just cannot do it right no matter what she does – if she puts out to a player she is a slut. if she doesn’t- she is crazy. Considering that contemporary alfa men of value do not offer marriage any more – the pressure for a woman to give her virginity is huge and unless the woman is ugly only the most determined will endure but they will constantly be under this huge pressure. And it is this pressure that can drive one crazy – even trough the women who try to endure this pressure actually have the sanest of motives and are thinking logically. But those who have given to the pressure appear chill and more in line and thus seem less crazy then they actually are.
In the same way one could say that any man who is not a beta is a crazy after all to be a contemporary alfa one needs to have dark triad traits and to fake a sociopath until he makes a sociopath. So even a man cannot do it right anymore no matter what he does. Either he is a beta sucker, a involuntary celibate loser or a manipulative sociopath. There is just no way to be normal any more.
The author is a PUA, but he is also a feminist. Altrough he despises feminists he also desires for feminism to continue reigning and to exploit this system. he would not even want for a system where women respect socially productive men and be faithful wives. The inner schism and conflict of the author is greater then those of the few relatively sane women he insults here.
Thread winner.
Winner indeed.
Between 0 and 100, there are a lot of different levels and choices.
In all honesty, Samseau, given all things are same, would you wife up the girl who has had four boyfriends and three experiments, or one whose fucked the entire alpha phi gamma fraternity in college, the town’s football team including the spares, a few from the biker club, a number of they don’t counts and a number of I don’t remember them’s..?
How about neither.
No I’m ot going to wife up or get hitched up with sluts any time soon. Gimme a break.
“…if she calls herself a virgin, assume guilt.”
Uh… just stick your dick in, if it bleeds: virgin. Else, not.
P.S. Fucking virgins is overrated. Tight: good. Virgin: crap.
i reckon if you want a keeper, let someone else knock the edges off and test the waters….. better to buy a two year old car with a year of warranty left and 20,000 miles on the clock, than a brand new one that needs a recall and costs you a fortune the minute you drive it off the lot….
for a keeper or a wifey….. you are better off with a 25 year old, that had one solid ‘first’ boyfriend or even got married young…. and after the split had a fling with a married guy who gamed the shit out of
her….. now she’s ready for the so called ‘serious’ relationship….. virgin is meaningless… since once she gets the taste for fucking she may well want to try other flavors…. in fact when times get rough with
no#1 boy…..she will be much more likely to question her loyalty to her one and only……and more likely to shrug off the taboo of trying a
few more, since she’s already lost her virginity….but never gone any further…. (all she needs is one bitchy friend or co-worker in her ear and she’s riding everything that looks her way…)
lol @ that first paragraph. you sound broke as fuck
guys content with used cars = betas content with used pussies
besides, only suckers buy cars nowadays. be smart and lease
Fuck buddy / fling / date for a few months = don’t give a fuck about virginity, actually would prefer it if she was a slut/stripper/porn star
Wife / mother of my children / woman I commit to = no cherry no marry
In the same way that abandoning dating due to the complications that men can face by getting involved in it is not a good option due to the pull of our nature, so is trying to rationalise away the value of a woman’s virginity.
It is valuable because it sparks up something inside of us that says clean, pure, mine, and even with the physical benefits which for the sake of argument we can ignore, virgins flick a switch in a man’s brain in similar way to nice legs or a cute smile.
i agree that OUT OF CONTEXT a girls sexual history means little. but most of us arent using it as the definitive unit of measure. most of us put it into context.
you got 2 girls. both are 25. one has had sex with 40 men. one has had sex with 2. obviously one is more faithful. the other one doesnt see men as anything special that she has to commit her emotions and body to.
then you see their behavior aside their experience. thats when it gets put into context. lets say the one with a 40 count (41 by now hopefully) cooks every day, cleans your shit and blows you every night before bed. the one with 2 wont suck dick, cant cook shit and feels that her chastity ALONE should be enough for you to value her and wont clean your shit. as a younger man, im going to have to go with the 40 count broad because im not trying to settle down, so the notion that 3 months later shes gonna step one rung up the cock ladder doesnt bother me because im probably gonna be moving around myself.
now, if im 38, ready to retire from chasin tail, then i will just use my powers of persuasion to train the 2 notch count girl and prefer her over the other one.
“A Woman’s Sexual Experience Means Nothing”
lol
Lol. Is this now a feminist site?. A women’s sexual past means nothing? Sure it doesn’t if you’re only fucking her, but if you want to make her you wife it means an awful lot!!!
But don’t take my word for it…. This site is becoming a joke with posts like this. Feminist bullshit. Of course a women’s sexual past matters.
Science doesn’t lie:
http://socialpathology.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/why-sluts-make-bad-wives/
Guys don’t be fooled. Don’t fall asleep.
This comment echoes the internal struggle I am having now.
I want to pass on my genes, but I am not confident that I won’t get fucked over and taken for all I got.
I like your stuff Samseau, but I’m disappointed in this article.
I agree that you shouldn’t assign some magical level of quality to a girl simply because of virginity. That is, in effect, just as dumb as pedestalizing her for looks or sexual prowess or “good girl-ness”.
However, the whole premise of this is dumb. Virginity IS an attribute, at least up through a girl’s mid-20’s. Beyond that you are probably dealing with religious fanaticism, mental problems, or maybe morbid obesity.
I just dont buy the reasoning that a girl who has had ZERO dicks inside of her is on an equal playing field with cock-carousel veterans. Basically what you are doing is devaluing a rarity (virgins), thereby indirectly adding value to the commodity (non-virgins), because there is a preponderance of them and that is what the world mainly has to offer. Kinda beta-herbism 101.
Danger is also correct in that there is established data supporting the bonding capability and higher degree of loyalty in women with 1 to 0 sexual partners. Biologically it makes sense, emotionally it makes sense, and spiritually (if you are into that) it makes sense. Even pragmatically, think about it—she has no past cocks to compare yours too, no sexual scars, no other men have jizzed in her, and she has never bonded to a man as deeply as she will with you (assuming you take her virginity). Everything you do with her is new. Your dick will automatically be amazing. She will explore all her curiosities with you. She will have zero past sex baggage, and mitigated past relationship baggage.
I will concede that it is possible she may stray once she has had a taste, but it’s also possible you might see a leopard in the wild. Very unlikely. And you can’t create a whole philosophy on some small contingency.
So I don’t think virginity is a complete trump card, but I do think it carries weighted value. Certainly up until a girl’s mid-20’s; beyond that, it is debatable.
Solid. 🙂
What’s wrong with all of you “disappointed” in this article? Quit assuming correctness by anecdotal evidence and really consider what this article is teaching.
That is to say, the basic tenants of “pimp game.”
A woman’s past means jack shit. Evaluate her based on her interactions with you; if it’s a positive contribution by your own standard, then she’s doing well enough to prove her loyalty. If she doesn’t, get rid of her without hesitation, but always encourage and give the chance for a woman to show where she stands or who she is.
Evaluate it objectively, rather than assuming any article defending a person’s history is just more of the same feminist trope.
You are a naive twat. Every individual,at first, is judged by the present. Once you get to know someone and form a relationship with them, their past actions are an indicator of future behaior.
This means: If you find out a girl cheated on every one of her previous boyfriends, you are a fool to stay with her, even if she never cheated on you.
You also forget sex, for a woman, is a valuable commodity, just as emotional transparency and commitment are a man’s highest commodity. The more you give it away, the less it’s valued, and the less it means to the individual who is giving it.
If we take this argument one step further, we can say that these commodities are part of a person’s personality and interwoven into the “soul”, for lack of a better term. By cheapening these commodities, the individual devalues an important part of themselves for low bidders – people who are willing to give nothing or very little in return for these valuable parts of the soul.
So, in layman’s terms: Men, Don’t date a slut. Woman, don’t date beta panzies who emote over chirping birds.
You’re welcome.
Stupid and loudmouthed are a lousy combination. At no where in my reply did I recommend dating anyone. Re-read what I wrote instead of arguing against a strawman brought up by yourself; mental masturbation amounts to little more than patting ones self on the back.
Can you use the past to extrapolate information about a persons charecter? Yes, and no one is debating that. You’d have to be illiterate to come to that conclusion. Do you post on jezebel often?
All the best players interact with a woman based on how those women treat them/respond to them and nothing else. Judging a person on their past highlights your bitter beta. Extrapolating information in favor of odds would be intelligent. Lets see if that was explained simply enough for your simple mind.
Additionally, a man bases his interactions with people on the content of those interactions; if he is not intellectually inferior he will recognize early when a person is toxic and should be removed from the equation. If he is moronic or beta, he will be taken advantage of. Knowing what signs to look for and bailing at the first sight of those signs personifies a rational adult decision- hoping a person changes after their intent is clear would be childlike, effeminant behavior. Additionally, assuming you have correctly identified their intent based on their past without any displayed intent is about as feminist as it gets.
So which is it? Are you an idiot, or a feminist?
Posting as guest from my mobile; make no mistake, I am replying as rewerwhat.
tl;dr
2cool
I agree with this article. Virgin women does-not necessarily guarantee happiness, or even complete faithfulness. It has to be seen in the proper context. I have seen marriages in which the women were most likely virgin before getting married, but end up either cheating, or most likely making the man’s life completely miserable.
This doesnot mean that I am a fan of slutty behavior either. It, as the author says, has to be seen in the proper context. Sometimes virginity can be a huge red flag of extreme prudish behavior. What needs to be established is that the woman has never shown slutty behavior (casual sex, one night stands etc) in her life, and has demonstrated faithfulness to whoever she was with in the past. Also, she views her current partner as considerably alpha. This is the most important criteria. That her current man is alpha.
“I would go as far to say that a huge slut may yet still turn out to be better relationship material (never marriage material) than a virgin, since with the slut you know what you are getting”
Come on. Sluts are the worst girlfriends in the world. They are crazy, hurt, don’t trust easily and will assume you’re fucking them over at the slightest sign of disloyalty. At least virgins are blank pages, and they don’t know how to play games. You can mold them to yourself.
Virgins are highly valuable, mystical even. There’s even some that get officially consecrated by the catholic church for a life of perpetual virginity in the service of God. I think a virgin makes the ideal wife.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consecrated_virgin
http://consecratedvirgins.org/
Sorry, there are double standards..
One small example would be crying… Acceptable for women over many small things, not acceptable for men..I doubt many women would be attracted to guys who cried almost daily over any small thing.
I am pointing out that sex is vastly different for men and women.. That is how we are made.. Even the girl who says she has casual sex without emotions points out the sex she had was with people she was already emotionally connected to, her friends.
I have found that the most insecure women are the most sexual. Making a guy cum seems to be a quick fix for their insecurities. of course aftewards they feel like trash, or are so cold that they lack feelings completely.
I have NEVER met a secure, balanced, confident woman who could just have sex, get up, leave, and feel happy never seeing the person again.
This article is a load of shit. No one wants to be second choice. Good for Lola Jones for saving herself for a decent man.
Wow, straw man much? So because virginity is not an indicator of loyalty, promiscuity is not an indicator of disloyalty? What a dipshit. The fact is simple: prior conduct is always the best indicator of future conduct. Why? People seldom truly chage. Smart men don’t marry former sluts because they know there’s no such thing. Once a slut, always a slut. Marriage is an investment with great risk for men. Who then in their right mind would make a wager on someone with a known history that highly suggests they will not be faithful in the future? “Reformed” sluts are merely the suckers bet of relationships. Anyone with options and an I.Q. with three digits knows to avoid them like the plague. Smart women understand how the relationship market works, i.e., sluts are meant for fun and non-sluts are meant for marriage. Regardless of what women do, men will continue to be the ones having their cake and eating it to. Unfair double standard? Of course. Contrary to the incesent wail of feminists, women enjoy a great many advantages over men in society. But no matter how much they want to change it, men will always refuse to value women who have been with too many other men. We like shiny new things, not haggered used ones. Sure, we’re not picky in a pinch, but just because I’m willing to use a urinal in a public bar doesn’t mean I want one installed in my house.
Classic Gold. Especially the urinal analogy. 😆
No one really values anyone who’s been with too many people… Also, everyone who has never had sex is a virgin… GUY or GIRL! And some people are still virgins until they’re married.
Regardless of this entire article, which I disagree with in almost every point, but assuming you are right 100% then a virgin is still better than a whore, because if I’m going to go through the hell known as the 99% of women then I would rather do it with a virgin.
In a nutshell, I’m getting from this article (as well as society): Do everything right. Point A to Point B, no exceptions. Within a very specific time frame. or else you are crazy/a prude/a slut/a loser/daddy issues.
Just another reason why I’m depressed and considering becoming a hermit.
What useless verbal diarrhea you
attempt to propagate Samseau! I can’t believe that crap like this still gets
written.
The author is an idiot, one who doesn’t mind letting the world know.
A virgin has never been cheated on a man, but she’s never been loyal to one, either……she’s only been loyal to herself.
I remember when feminism was about doing something that was good for WOMEN. Men didn’t enter the equation. Your very point I mentioned above only goes to show that you are making sex something androcentric. Congratulations.
This sounds very mean and judgemental.
I’m a woman that agrees with a lot of stuff on this site – I do believe modern day “feminism” has ruined much of western culture.
But to say that a woman who has not had sex by the time she is 25 will be one of the worst women you will ever date?
It is EASY to lose your virginity, but very hard to keep it. What is wrong with wanting to share yourself sexually with only one person in your life? Up until this year I had not met a man who I could imaging a future with (long term). The thought of being with a man sexually, when I already knew in my heart I could never eventually marry… just kind of felt wrong.
I’m 28, and I see sex as a sacred and wonderful thing… but for me I’d only feel comfortable sharing that part of myself with the man I knew I was going to marry… and just haven’t found him yet! Guess I’m old fashioned. Not judging anyone else’s choices, just sharing a female perspective.
Anyways y’all shouldn’t hold such impossible standards for us ladies… yikes!!!!!!!
Don’t change the world needs women like you. Bless you.
My post may be late but I find your answer very interesting, I’ve always thought thesame about sex and honestly I haven’t heard or met anyone who shares similar values. The’re indeed good women like yourself out there who to the rest of the world sound or look old school but it is the right way to think. Kudos, wish I knew you in person 🙂
if men where honest everyman wants a virgin and only a virgin. the authour of this article is a liitle bitch
Why is this post illustrated with a photo of Diana Taurasi? (Not Lola Jones?)
I think some of the crap these women come up with is in part a result of how their mom and dad raised them. Were the parents affectionate in front of them, did the parents close the door and knock it out regardless of who was home!! My parents did, they were very affectionate in front of me and my brother, so I grew up thinking it was ok to . I also found my dad’s penthouse and pot stash. I’m sure girls who live in a fatherless home, hear and see their mom on the cock carousel on the weekends which tells the girl, no problem just wear a condom. The word “God” or religion was hardly spoken in my house. Maybe my upbringing was different than some?
Look up the book of charts about females’ prior sexual experience and divorce rates. Simple data to refute your arguments here.
Wives who have only had sex with their husbands divorce and cheat far less often than others with a linear (to a threshold) correlation to their number of previous sex partners.
If you are OK with other men’s leftovers, good for you. I hope you end up with an Alpha widow, so you can compete with her phantom lovers throughout your marital life. Isn’t it empowering to know that when you’re banging your wife, she is fantasizing about one of her numerous former lovers! What a gratifying thought that is!
Total rubbish written by an obvious beta.
1.) It bears repeating women and men approach sex differently because they think about sex differently. Their biological needs and societal roles are completely different. The idea that women enjoy promiscuity like men and enter into it without societal pressure is a Marxist feminist Jew lie spread to cause chaos.
2.) If a woman is slutty, she often is dysfunctional in other ways. No such thing as a nice girl, homemaker, good values who is also slutty. Most likely they drink or do drugs or have some other mental problems if they are a w hore.
3.) Women who remain virgins past twenty are nuts? Really? You sound like Gloria Steinem. I would say a woman who has the good values and strong character to remain a virgin before marriage in the USA should be commended for her strong moral character. I’ve lived in Southeast Asia for the last 15 years and it’s still quite common here to find unmarried women even in their late 20’s who are virgins because they don’t belive in premarital sex. Beautiful women with good values – hard to find in America.
This is true in regards to Asian women but also women of other cultures “it’s still quite common here to find unmarried women even in their late 20’s who are virgins because they don’t believe in premarital sex.”
It’s been fairly well-documented and statistically proven that on average, the more sexual partners a woman has before marriage the higher likelihood of divorce. Also, the more sexual partners a woman has the less overall happiness she will have in her life. These girls are literally fucking their happiness away
Yeah, really “red pill” article. You’re red pill.
One of the worst articles on here. Contradictory to established RP doctrine and contradictory to itself. Red Pill, you ain’t.
Women are complicated. More so then men. More of a case by case basis i reckon
Just a guess that most readers of this site have would have known at least one girl who was a virgin “outside the normal age range” who when she lost her virginity went on to “sleep” with a number of guys in quick succession “to see what its like with other guys”. But having said that past experience has taught me that the MORE men a woman has slept with the more messed up mentally she is.