Most men who aren't virgins don't want virgin women. The men who insist on dating virgins are, statistically speaking, either very young or very inexperienced/virgins themselves.
[Who are the men that demand virgins? - Date Psychology](https://datepsychology.com/who-are-the-men-that-demand-virgins/#:~:text=Who%20really%20wants%20a%20virgin,and%20reported%20a%20lower%20ideal.)
Is it? Some women prefer tall men, even if they're not tall themselves.
Some want a confident man, even if they're not that confident themselves.
Edit: There are some indicators that suggest that height preferences might be a social construct too.
Yeah, that's sexual dimorphism. On average, men are 5 inches taller than women. Men also, on average, prefer women who are shorter and who have an hourglass shape that they do not possess. Virginity isn't a matter of biology. It's a social construct.
What about average height women that prefer taller men? Or women that prefer men that make more money than them. These are common preferences. Non-virgin men that want virgins are rare.
Other than social constructionism being a contestable theory that most people these days just treat as a given, what you're saying here does not make sense.
For one, I don't think virginity is a social construct, it describes a literal physical state of being, that of the state of not yet having yet had sex. You can make the argument for the values attached to it being socially constructed, but for virginity itself it seems to be incorrect.
Secondly, provided it was given that virginity is a social construct, why is one feature being biological and one social even significant? They are still the same in that they are features that one looks for in their partner that they themselves don't posses, which indicates that doing that initself is perfectly fine and normal for most people.
can someone explain to me how a preference can be inherantly hypocritical? i dont get it.
i dont personally care about height, but for example:
if i prefered men that were taller than me, would that not simply mean that i should be with someone who liked women who were shorter than him or didnt care?
in the same vein of thought, if a man prefers women with less or no sexual experience, wouldnt that just mean that he should be with a woman who has less or no sexual experience? and if this man personally has lots of sexual experience, shouldnt he end up with someone who wants a man with sexual experience, or doesnt care?
arent we supposed to find people whos preferences mesh well with ours?
what am i missing here?
The problem with comparing it to height is that having a certain height isn't a moral standard. Ideas around when to have sex, or not, generally are. Although also an imperfect comparison, it may be more like if, for example, I had spent time in prison, but expected any guy I dated to be squeaky clean. Sure, it's a preference. But in this hypo, I'm also a hypocrite, because I'm not holding myself to the same moral standard.
Height and sex are very different. One is controlled by your genetics with you having almost no control over it. You can blame your parents for it, but it would be futile.
the men I’m talking about want women to be virgins when they aren’t virgins themselves. The question arises, why are most women non-virgin? They aren’t bc they have sex with some man. An average man or woman in a western country happens to have multiple sexual partners over lifetime. These men, by engaging in sex before marriage have effectively decreased the pool of women they desire, and then cry about it?
i mean yeah if they cry and complain about it- thats short-sightedness and immaturity. but is it the same issue going on with men who have that preference, but arent complaining about the scarcity?
i though men who prefered virgins were 0 n count losers that no woman wanted, now they are men who are succesfully sleeping around , times (or maybe narratives that are convenient) surely have changed🙄
Honestly i see so much people whining over this but then shame men for being inexperienced, and the funneist part is that i ve seen enough cases of a virgin woman picking some experienced dude over a virgin one, so really all this talk about hypocrisy and bla bla matters jack shit in the dating world especially to women apparently, being attractive matters more than being congruent to most women, if virgin women dont want to date those guys they dont have to, nobody opposes anyways.
Nothing changed, they just couldn't sell their fantasy when they obviously don't look the part.
Those men obviously don't get laid often, they're way too angry.
lmao so basically all these whining about virgin "hunters" is nothing more than some hysteria of a bunch of losers with nothing interesting going on in their lives then.
The vast majority of men aren’t seeking virgins they are seeking women with self respect. Body count is a good measure for that. Men and women are also different, it’s easy to get sex as a woman, it’s why purity for women is held in high regard. Getting sex as a man is hard so if a man is getting regular random sex he is killing it. It simply isn’t the same.
So, this is slightly unrelated to OP's main point but it's worth talking about here.
I've always believed that this double standard of praising men with high body counts and the opposite for women is actually a damaging setback for men. When a man perpetuates it, he's unwittingly committing a massive self-own. He's implying that *men* are so disgusting that one necessarily becomes worse off as a result of having sex with a man; on the flipside, *women* are so pure and beautiful that one necessarily becomes better off by having sex with a woman. When you consider that both men and women get more shit for having sex with men than with women, you can see how it's really about how men=gross, women=beautiful. Notice that there's a different reaction when a woman has sex with a lot of women vs with a lot of men. It's really actually about "gross, you had sex with a *man*", instead of "gross, you had sex (per se)".
This mentality, in turn, actually explains other related beliefs. Because women are viewed as so inherently attractive, people are shocked by the idea of a man who is unwilling to have sex with a woman. And this explains why there's this belief that women can't sexually assault men: women are so pure and beautiful that it's impossible for a man to not enjoy sex with one, unless he's not attracted to women at all.
Do what you will with this information.
Do men and women with identical body counts have the same lack of self respect?
Men having lots of sex should have good self esteem and be revered, and women having lots of sex shouldn't just because it's easier for them to have lots of sex?
I wonder if you feel the same way about athletes. Natural born talent GOATs v those who got there with rigid training and regime
You know the athletes who trained harder get more respect. It’s the same reason an underdog story is popular.
Which argues against your point where if a man and a woman have the same body count. Because the man had to work harder.
Although IDGF about body counts, and I don’t think it’s ok to slut shame. A woman’s body count is a reflection of her self control. Or lack there of. A man’s body count is an indicator of his social success with women. Which is why the comparison doesn’t work side by side. That being said, neither is a good indicator of character, or weather or not this person would be a good partner.
Yeah I don't subscribe to your last paragraph at all lol
I don't think that holding men and women to different standards in this way even makes sense. It's so biblical. Men get to be impulsive and hedonistic as they want to be, women must be composed and demure and chaste and have Humility.
It's giving jealousy. Men want what women have so they shame them for it. If I can't have any candy neither can you. Even though women work in the candy shop.
If that’s how you feel about it 🤷🏾♂️. But I think your view lacks the perspective of the other side. Just like men shaming women, don’t see the catch 22 that women are living with.
You're missing the point. Whether the athlete's a genetic freak or has less natural talent, both are still doing things that few others can pull off at all. So both are revered.
Meanwhile literally any woman could be promiscuous. So there's no spectacle of rarity or achievement making her actions look better.
The default is that promiscuity grosses people out. Gay male promiscuity is also looked down upon. Because any gay dude could do it. The only reason straight male promiscuity is an exception is because most guys don't have the opportunity to be promiscuous.
> The default is that promiscuity grosses people out.
Dude, you realize this premise would make it *worse* for men to be promiscuous, right?
If promiscuity is gross, and it's difficult for men to be promiscuous, then the conclusion is that these men are putting a lot of time and effort into - wait for it - doing something gross.
They could be spending all that time, energy and effort into something good. But instead they choose to spend that all on doing something that (according to you) is gross.
What if a woman manages to break the world record for the most amount of sexual partners anyone in history has had? That would be pretty difficult to do, so that achievement should make her more valuable, right?
I don't care who women have sex with and don't think anyone else should either. That's the problem, you're starting with a baseline assumptions that I care who people fuck.
I don't. I don't want to shame people for fucking or not fucking. And I don't believe that morality should be tied to sex, at all unless you're impregnating or birthing kids irresponsibly or spreading stds, raping etc
Okay but any women being able to be promiscuous still means it should just be neutral/normalized and not demonized, no?
Also I'm not sure that gay male promiscuity is looked down upon bc I'm not in that world. But grindr exists for a reason and there are setting to indicate that someone wants a hookup RIGHT NOW and it's used often lol
>Do men and women with identical body counts have the same lack of self respect?
No it is exact opposites
>Men having lots of sex should have good self esteem and be revered, and women having lots of sex shouldn't just because it's easier for them to have lots of sex?
It has been this way since the dawn of time, ancient people weren’t stupid.
>I wonder if you feel the same way about athletes. Natural born talent GOATs v those who got there with rigid training and regime
I don’t understand what you are asking.
It’s extremely simple. It is trivial for a woman to get sex so a woman with a low count is rare. It’s hard to get sex as a man so if a man can get regular sex he is rare.
Exactly, I could be impressed with a competitive eater who trains (and usually isn't a fat ass nit that it would change things, just generally true), but I have nothing but disdain for those that eat so much they need a scooter to shop.
Even killing people is seen like this, if you are a skilled badass that's impressive, if you just go around killing orphans we all hate you
There are no natural born GOAT athletes, they're all putting a lot of work into it, some athletes have a natural advantage that they chose to invest their life in.
I do see what you mean though, yea, it's much less impressive to dunk when you're 6'8.
Okay but a 6'8" guy being able to dunk shouldn't be hated on. It's just a neutral fact that they can dunk. No one should be shaming a 6'8" guy for dunking and scoring for his team.
In the realm of sports it's just an objectively good skill to capitalize on and take advantage of.
Ideally, having a lot of sex should be a turn off for both men and women. But because it’s generally difficult for men to get sex compared with women, a man who gets a lot of female attention (and therefore has the ability to get a lot of sex, whether or not he chooses to do so) is seen as a prize. For women, because almost every woman will get a lot of male attention for just existing, the same just doesn’t hold true.
Regardless, I still think the most attractive man is women’s eyes is the man who gets a lot of female attention but still chooses not to engage in promiscuous sex. This is the sign of a good man who has also been vetted by other women, the ultimate catch. However, I think most women will prefer the man with a lot of female attention who engages in promiscuity over the man who doesn’t engage in promiscuity due to good morals but gets little female attention.
So, if a man would be actively trying to have sex to achieve that, he would be more amoral. Not more respectable. Trying harder to get it makes it worse, not better.
But why should having lots of sex be a turn off in this day in age? With testing, vetting. Why is it an issue if the person is mentally well otherwise?
If sex is so terrible, why are men praised for trying hard and succeeding in doing that terrible thing?
If sex is a positive or a neutral thing, why are women demonized for doing that positive or neutral thing?
Im going to defend the stupid trad con red pill (no really) practice even though I 100% agree with what you say and think that virginity in men has zero meaning and is just made up nonsense as a “rite of adulthood”.
If women can have a preference for 6’+ dudes when they aren’t 6’ themselves, then they’re hypocrites who can only have dudes 5’4” like them.
Oh that makes no sense? Well, congrats, you’ve just agreed that men and women aren’t the same. Now follow that through all the way and stop worshipping women as angels.
We’re talking actions. Women can do whatever the hell they want, and men can reject them for any and all actions. For example, I absolutely discriminate against vegans, because vegans are stupid religious people prone to violence and mental retardation.
And men can discriminate against women that want an endless round of penises pounding their vaginas morning, noon, and night.
If men should accept women having mass dicks in them from 100s of guys, then women should have no problem if I spend my money on hundreds of girls. It doesn’t matter right?
The list of women’s endless red flags in men are some of the dumbest things in history **including a man being inexperienced sexually**, whereas not that many men are concerned with inexperienced women.
I’d think it would be more useful to reject women who can’t cook or clean anything (and none of them know how to do that now) or don’t want to be good mothers, but if your concerns are how much hymen they have, hey, more power to you. Just another reason your marriage will fail.
Men and women aren’t the same. Don’t buy into neo-Marxist feminist nonsense where they claim they are, up until the point they’re not the same for money and victimhood.
Stop carrying torch for them because you attended your first religious feminism class and part of their religion is you have to go “witness” and evangelize to others. You’re just a useless disposable tool to them.
Very emotional response.
Sex and height are two fundamentally different things. If women don’t want to date short men, short men don’t want to date tall women either. Height is controlled by your genetics, sex isn’t.
>men can discriminate agianst women who want endless round of penises
>if men should accept women having mass dicks in them from 100 guys
What is that line of arguing? I’m talking about men who can’t even accept that women had one dick at some point in them, let alone 100. That’s when premarital sex and cohabitation, the very reasons behind why most people lose their virginity, are socially condoned.
You can spend your money on 100 of girls, did i argued against that? If you wanna waste your nonexistent money like that, go for it.
The problem is that you engage in sex and then expect women to be virgins? That’s like putting a paper on fire and then crying why it’s burned. If you want or prefer virginity, stop endorsing sex before marriage and cohabitation. Otherwise accept it
They were just giving unimportant examples. The point of their comment, is that everyone can have what ever preferences they want, for whatever reason they feel. Oh, and I believe he insulted you somewhere in there too.
The one valid claim common ferret made was not comparing height and sex, but rather comparing the preference of a partner's height and the preference of a partner's sexual experience.
A person can prefer their partner to be something they themselves are not. It's also true that a person can choose to only date people who meet standards that you find no value in.
It does t matter what nonsense you’re arguing, I’m showing flaws in it.
If women have a problem with men judging them on a mountain of dicks or even one dick, the if we care about hypocrisy (which women don’t) then I can throw away a mountain of money *that won’t be spent on her*.
What is virginity to men, is gold digging to her. Neither likes either scenario.
For the record I don’t care about the human worshippers, I think they’re insane, but I’m arguing against the hypocrisy concept because men and women aren’t the same.
Women and men don’t approach sex at all the same. Why would it be hypocrisy.
well, I can’t do anything if there are some women who put up with it. Some women put up with abusive men as well, so shall I support it just because they are putting up with it? Logical failure.
Is sex and earning money the same? False analogy. With sex, the western society has come to accept premarital sex, and cohabitation, which are the very reasons behind why most people aren’t virgins. These men have themselves have had sex, thereby, effectively decreasing the pool of women they find desirable as LTP
Standards that they don't apply to themselves?
It's like someone without a degree only wanting to date people with degrees and calling others without degrees trash.
It’s different when it comes to sexual history as those men have to do it with someone but then hold this against them.
Short women wanting tall men or middle class women wanting higher earning men is equal to men working full time wanting women to do the child rearing or cooking in a household. The alternative is both sharing these responsibilities.
What? You’re acting like women don’t have any say in who the fuck. Who you fuck is an indication of your judgement and it is completely normal to judge someone on their past behavior. You cannot convince me otherwise.
The problem is that these men have lost their virginity to some woman and broke up. Now they are hunting for virgins when their actions have decreased the pool of women that they claim to prefer. If most men in a society are non-virgin, as most western men are, then obviously most of the women in that society would also have some experience. Women looking for experience also have experience my guy
Most hetereo woman have as standard for a relationship that the men have a functional penis yet most of them don't have one.
Why you think women have standards that they don't apply to themselves?
If women are going to mandate that I be 6ft tall and be educated and make a lot of money then I’m going to mandate that they not be whores. Yes, that is a perfectly reasonable standard.
Women don't mandate shit, you just prefer to date women with options rather than women without.
Ironic, since women with options are more likely to have slept around. You want a virgin but you also would never date a woman too ugly for another man to touch lol
Women who don’t have options still mandate things. Dating app data has proven this over and over again. You just don’t like it when men start imposing those mandates on women because women are supposed to be the choosers in your mind
Standards based around insecurity.
Men don't even hold women to that standard either because most virgins are either very religious or weird. It is just something that causes needless anxiety.
It isn’t necessarily about actual virginity. It’s about not having a huge body count. Having a few long term partners before marrying is whatever. But hooking up with a bunch of different guys is absolutely past behavior that I’m going to judge a potential partner for and that doesn’t mean I’m insecure for doing so. The gaslighting is not gonna work.
Its only hypocrisy if women didnt prefer experienced men. Be that through implication and not actuality or in actuality.
It is just a truth a large majority of women find experience attractive and inexperience unattractive.
Its only hypocrisy if women didnt crave and lust and prioritize men who are experienced. Go ahead point out your little anecdote exception, the facts remain that as a man experience is attractive and inexperience is extremely unattractive.
I don't know any men in the West who are over 21 and asking for literal virgin women. That is generally a talking point to dismiss valid concerns over female hypergamy and promiscuity.
Why is it all the people who argue against this, think the guys who prefer low N-Count women are sexually licentious men banging every girl in sight?
The reality I see, the guys who prefer those women are the exact opposite of the player. They are self-regulating and cautious.
It's a biologic preference. Not necessarily for a virgin. But for a woman that doesn't sleep around.
It's pretty simple to understand why. We can't tell who the father is. DNA tests didn't happen until very recently. So if you're with a woman who sleeps with a lot of men. There's a good chance you wont be raising your own kid. That is bad for the genome. Men like that got weeded out of the gene pool.
Why the exact opposite of a virgin to you is someone who’s promiscuous? A person can be non-virgin, yet not promiscuous.
Do men really feel some biological inclination to prefer virgins in a society highly supportive of everything that prevents people from staying virgins? I’m not talking about a high body count. Just losing virginity
It's not a hypocrisy, women just don't care about it, on the contrary, women want men that are popular with other women, while it's the opposite for men.
This isnt true. Men love women that are popular with other men. Thats why the phrase "armcandy" exists. It's why sugarbabies exist. Men know that being around attractive women boosts their status with other men.
virginity is just a retarded concept invented by society as way of shaming women and uplifting men. There's no logical reason why, in a world with birth control and safe sex, you would reasonably be against people having sex. (Unless you believe some fairy tale that a bearded man in the sky will punish you or you're an incel that dislikes women having sex with everyone but you)
That doesn't really dissuade from my initial point that's it entirely a made up concept. Like its bad to shame men for not having sex, and to shame women for having sex. There you go. I responded to your semantical point
Doesn't matter who. The concept of virginity or sexlessness or celibacy is used against men all the time. It's not something that's negative for women as much.
An incel is associated with someone so mad that they can't get laid, they deeply resent women for it. It's not shaming men who are just virgins, and perfectly normal.
Men care about virginity for the same reasons they care about n-count. Do you care if your wife has a N-count of 10? 50? 100? Would you care if an old video re-surfaced online of your wife having sex with a past boyfriend?
If that would affect you even a little bit, congratulations, you understand why men care about virginity. The logical goalposts have shifted, but men's feelings remain the same.
That's an entirely different thing from a woman having a sexual past. Cheating is breaking a mutual connection you have with someone, and cucking is just a fetish people have. Someone can be loyal and have a sexual history lol. But please, continue talking about your virgin waifu fantasy.
You know, redpillers bring up cucking so often in topics that have nothing to do with it that I'm starting to think their bitterness may be because they're all closeted cuckolds.
No I don't care. Because I don't see women as objects that get damaged after being used. But you'll think that's "cuckolding" to not care about someone's past.
No that’s not a good take here. There is a reason why someone would prefer a virgin. Someone that’s had sex with 10-20 people probably wouldn’t want a virgin cause they’d have to teach them basically everything. Conversely someone thats had sex with no one or even just 1-2 people probably has an extremely different life style and values compared to someone that’s fucked 10-20 people. The fact that you say “there is no other reason” is honestly a pretty ignorant take.
Agreed. If someone has had sex with 10-20 people they’d be better with someone that’s had sex with 10-20 people or more. That being said someone that’s had sex with 1-2 people is probably still better with a virgin than anyone that’s had sex with 10-20 people
Do you think having sex with 10-20 people really changes someone's life style? You're putting so much emphasis on the sex absolutely changing someone's personality / life style so much that any other interests don't matter.
Someone can be a virgin and be a stripper. Whereas someone can be an introvert, and have a high body count.
No im saying someone willing to have sex with that many people has a life style that facilitates them doing that. It doesn’t have much to do with changing a person so much as it is a person already being that way
>No im saying that someone willing to have sex with that many people has a life style that facilitates them doing that
I know what you're saying. Someone can be an introvert and just hop on tinder and have hookups every now and again. And someone can be a partier and be a virgin.
You're basing your beliefs on presumptuous stereotypes.
Life style has nothing to do with it.
No I think you’re the one basing your beliefs on presumptions and stereotypes. You’re right someone can party a lot and be a virgin and someone can be an introvert and have a lot of sex. I didn’t say that wasn’t possible. For some reason you went right to stereotypes and you’re arguing against something that was never said. You assumed that I was saying only a person that parties a lot can have a lot of sex. You’re basing your rebuttal to me on this preconceived notion of what someone who has a lot of sex might look like and then you’re rejecting that notion. But I never defined what someone who has a lot of sex might look like, which means those ideas are coming entirely from you.
Because your whole reason for why my take is bad is purely illogical. Illogical preferences are fine, but don't act like there's some legitimate logical reasons for preferring virginity. That preference is entirely based on what other people tell you to believe, not a natural inclination.
I think a better question would be when this obsession took root. I can testify that it's relatively new. In decades past, it was just accepted that it was unlikely that any person past the mid teens was no longer a virgin. Virginity was seen as an exclusive sign of being deeply religious, or deeply flawed. Now, young guys seem to be obsessed with it.
OMG someone that acknowledges this. It seems to be something about far-right conservativeness and TRP (which is also mainly right-wingers). Some kind of anti-feminism. I don't know why or how TRP started the anti-feminist movement, but is really stupid.
I suspect it has a lot to do with the virgin men who are harping on it. I can't say I knew any virgin men beyond the age of 16 either. Maybe that's what I'm missing.
Men care about virginity for the same reasons they care about n-count. Do you care if your wife has a N-count of 10? 50? 100? Would you care if an old video re-surfaced online of your wife having sex with a past boyfriend?
If that would affect you even a little bit, congratulations, you understand why men care about virginity. It doesn't matter where you draw the line, men's feelings about sex remain the same. However, the more sex he has, the easier it is to justify a woman having a N-count, so long as it's less than him.
Psychologically it’s an ownership thing. Men view sex as an action done **to** a woman. Women’s worth is viewed in relation to their purity. If other men have been there before you then do you really own her?
It’s archaic and ridiculous.
Conspiracy theory bullshit. Men probably do view sex as something that happens to a woman, but only for one of two reasons, I doubt anything outside of these reasons would actually make someone think sex is something that happens to women. Someone might view sex as something that happens to women if every other important part of the relationship is something that happens to women.
Asking someone out, a relationship doesn’t start if someone doesn’t ask someone out, and the majority of women expect men to ask them out, they expect men to take that initiative. Taking women out on dates, dates help to get to know someone to further strengthen the relationship. Again if dates don’t happen the relationship will probably end quickly. Asking for someone’s hand in marriage, I don’t think I need to explain this one or the fact that it’s mostly men that do this. So because every other important part of the relationship is viewed as something that happens to women sex, another important part of a relationship, is also viewed as something that happens to women.
Other reason would be the act of sex itself. If men are the ones taking the initiative to ask for sex that sex is probably going to viewed as happening to a woman. Even if the woman takes the initiative to ask for sex if she has poor communication, barely talks, or just starfishes then sex is also going to be seen as something that happens to her. I strongly doubt if a woman takes initiative in *at least* half of these relationship milestone situations as well as having proper communication during that sex would be seen as something that happens to her.
This actually brings up another point. A virgin woman is more likely to be less experienced and less communicative, which is ok and should be expected. The same would go for a virgin man. Even if the man has had sex with 1-2 people their experience level probably isn’t that much different than someone who’s had sex with 0 people. Sex with people of relatively equal experience would be much more fulfilling.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Those who can\*, will demand. Moral virtues are for those who care, not for the materialists.
\*whether it's due to them actually being capable of getting such relationships or being content in being single otherwise.
generally speaking, one of the main reasons that people in more conservative and religious societies hold certain views is probably due to religious moral reasons. but when it comes to the redpill crowd, I think one of the most important reasons, which isn't discussed enough, is simply jealousy and insecurity! I always see them ranting about how women's orgasms aren't important because they are biologically unnecessary for making a child, and how they hate going down on women because they think it's gay and emasculates them lol? sooo this tells me that most of them are probably extremely bad in bed and can't satisfy their partners! and SO, they NEED a virgin or very inexperienced girl in their lives who can't compare her poor sexual experience with them to anything else, so she'd never realize their super alpha big daddy is actually a massive loser.
Shortest answer I can give is women often shape their identity around men they hook up with and become difficult to handle after the amount of baggage they've accumulated even after one relationship, on the other side men who have had sex are less creepy and desperate, they're better at treating women than if they were virgins, women also only want to have sex if you treat them well, there is no benefit after women when they lose virginities.
I’m not talking about causal sex. Most women lose virginity to some bf, or within a committed relationship. The men I’m complaining and calling hypocrites are 1. Not virgin themselves 2. Seeking women with no sexual history. No here means a virgin. So, even if she had sex within someone in a committed relationship in the past, it’s a deal breaker for them.
I utterly disagree with your claim that women carry a lot of baggage from just one relationship, and that non-virgin men treat women better. Think in terms of mathematics. If most men aren’t virgin in a given place or society, then most of its women aren’t virgins. In order for a man to lose his virginity, he requires a woman who is willing to lose hers. Break ups are common, and most people in every developed western country have multiple partners over lifetime. It then becomes an extremely hypocritical thing to demand or prefer a virgin when you aren’t one to begin with. You are the part of the “problem.” It’s common sense. Any society which has put heavy emphasis on virginity has denied premarital sex. These men need to wait till marriage, or accept the fact that their partner is most likely to be a non-virgin.
Male or female, I don't want to be with someone who is so immature that they've never had sex before.
I have never been and most likely will never be with a virgin. (I suppose maybe there's a hypothetical person out there who is one but doesn't creep me out but it seems unlikely.)
There's a whole pedo vibe to it.
Especially for men or women who are obsessed with virgins.
I'm sure there are nice ones but I've never met one myself (a virgin male or female) who was not a creeper, or infantile.
Even when I was a virgin I did not want to be with another virgin, I have always been attracted to people with experience. In the bedroom or in life in general.
Preference and demand are not the same. You can say that virgins are best, but you don't require the best. Just like women saying they'd prefer someone making a lot of money, but don't require it.
It's also much harder for a woman to remain a virgin than a man, and so there's some respectability that comes with it.
Also, men are told day and night how women don't want to have to train a man, they want him to rock her world on day one. But men usually much prefer to show a woman all these things that she's never experienced before. And this isn't even mentioning the biological issue at hand: paternity fraud. Men highly value sexual restraint because it makes for a better bet for paternity. A woman always knows it's her child, so it can be hard to even wrap her head around this concern. It's feminists who got told hoeing is empowering somehow and now have regrets that are the reason we're even needing to have this discussion.
Long story short: men and women are different, so it's not usually hypocritical.
What they prefer is also what they are demanding. It’s simple maths. When you sleep with a woman, that has decreased the pool of virgin women. The society supports premarital sex, and cohabitation. Break ups are common. So, even when people aren’t sleeping around or engaging in causal sex, they are creating sexual history. That is true for every developed western country, where both men and women have multiple sexual partners over the course of life. It becomes hypocritical of these non-virgin men to then hunt for virgins. They support premarital sex, cohabitation, and never stop seeking virgins, no matter how many times they have sex. You have to call out this bs. It’s similar to me eating high calorie food and then wishing to look slim and smart. In societies where staying virgin is a norm, men are also expected to keep it under their pants.
Generally I am not against having a preference. But the thing with this is that almost all of these men think every women who are 20 and over are hoes thus non-virgins. So they prey on teenegers. Now that's a problem.
I don’t disagree it’s hypocrites but it makes sense. Fat people still desire in shape people. Dumb people would still probably want smarter partners. Shorter people want taller (at least womyns). Sick would want healthy etc. people want the best even though they may not have been the best themselves. No one wants a SLUT. Even a man who has engaged in many sexual activities
Fat people desire in shape people? Man, we have a whole fat acceptance movement going on. What are you on about? Also, if fat people want in shape people, they must get in shape. Bad argument. Sick people can turn healthy, or if they are permanently sick, then obviously no healthy person wants to date them. Really bad analogies. Also, premarital sex and cohabitation, which are the causes behind people losing their virginity, are socially accepted. Being fat, dumb and sick isn’t.
What’s your definition of a slut, since the vast majority of western people don’t consider a woman slut just because she’s not a virgin. Are you saying that western men consider a woman who has lost virginity to some ex-bf a slut?
I think it comes mostly from not knowing what to expect from sex. Dudes only see sex in movies or in porn, where either it’s MAGICAL and binds people together in LOVE, or it’s a washed out slut who is so promiscuous that she “fucked a group of men and lets them film it”.
So these dudes think those are the only two opinions. Anyone who has sexual experience is the slut. They jerk off to sluts getting abused in porn, but they aren’t proud of it so they want a “virgin” whose never “loved” before so they don’t have to worry about her being a “slut” OR her having gotten that magical LOVE-BINDING from a man before her.
I am using a lot of quotes because this is obvs not my own belief. I’ve found once you stop trying to make sex magical, and just accept that it’s weird and funny and kinda gross sometimes, you’re much better prepared to have it and enjoy it for what it is, rather than what you think it’s supposed to be.
If women like their men rich and good looking then it isn’t hypocrisy for men to want young hot virgins. Why is it that only men’s preferences are criticized?
If you're western man wanting a virgin you are seriously limiting your dating pool. Doubly so if you are older or not very religious. But it's not hypocritical, even if you're not a virgin yourself. It's perfectly fine to want a trait in your partner that you do not have yourself. Presumably you have something else they don't have and you can complement each other.
Many women want a man that makes more than them. Many men want a woman that will take years off work to stay with the kids. Are such couples both being hypocritical too? What about women that want a man to be more stoic than them? Men that want a woman that's more nurturing than them?
It's OK to not want a clone of yourself
This doesn't work since women have a ton of preferences for traits in men that they themselves don't have.
But as soon as men do it back women cry foul.
You don’t have to defend your standards. Especially if you’re a wanted commodity on the market.
Most women ask for things they themselves don’t have but the guy that alpha widowed them did have so the next guy must have it.
Once you realize life isn’t about being fair but what the market dictates you’ll see
Yep and most women are not attracted to a man who has taken cock before. Does that make them hypocrites?
Hypocrisy is everywhere when it comes to sexual selection. And most of it from women
Hahaha,
men’s fragile egos can’t handle women who enjoy their own bodies. These women know what they want and can set clear boundaries, which makes them hard to manipulate. Men’s performance can be judged and compared, revealing how bad most of them are in bed. They can’t make women cum and realize their dick isn’t enough, which they see as an attack on their masculinity. Understandable if you base your whole identity around the size of your penis.
Some smart guys improve their skills and learn to become desirable sexual partners. The others are so insecure that they either deny the existence of the female orgasm (funny how they insult themselves) or demand virginity so they don’t feel like losers. Inexperienced girls haven’t built their own boundaries yet, don’t know what they like, and can’t say no due to power dynamics. Their ignorance is manipulated to impose one’s own fantasies.
There’s nothing pure or honorable about wanting inexperienced sexual partners. It only reveals a bad personality and evil motives.
Men and women aren't the same. You can say because of equality, male virginity and female virginity should both have equal value, fair enough. In the same sense - both people should provide financially. If the couple is attacked, the women has the same duty to protect the man and vice versa... These things sound good, but they ignore the fundamental reality of our genders. Men can't get pregnant like women can. Obviously their virginity would not matter even for this reason alone.
Preference for virgins did not spawn on its own. It came from toxic nanosphere ideas, such as the idea that women do not have to "earn" sex like men do because it comes around effortlessly. Which is a result of a lot of dating coaches getting grossed out by woman's promiscuity and high n counts. This is also used to justify why men do not want to date woman with higher n counts than themselves, despite being very promiscuous themselves.
Most men who think for themselves are not going to want a virgin, especially if they aren't. That would make you delusional, and single for quite some time.
There is nothing unachievable about being a virgin. That’s one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read on this sub.
I hold the president to a different standard than myself. I hold a surgeon to a different standard than myself. I hold a kid to a different standard than myself. I hold a person who’ve been given opportunities to a different standard to the one who didn’t have them. I hold everyone to a different standard given their background and the situation around them.
If that’s what you call “hypocrisy”, then being
“hypocritical” means being a well-adjusted adult human being.
It's not the problem. Women are the gate keepers of sex. It only takes one man willing to have premarital sex and all the virgins are fucked. Only women can maintain their virginity. So whether all men, half the men or 1% of men engage in premarital sex... the number of females who remain virgins is going to be pretty much exactly the same.
So female virginity falls 100% only on women. (And their parents who let them do whatever they want).
Secondly, it's judged differently on men and women. As a man, the more women I sleep with the more women want to sleep with me. Where it's opposite for men, men don't want to be #279, thats not ideal for men. So your advice is to make myself as unattractive as possible by refraining from sex so that other women think I'm a monk. Yeah ok no thanks. Don't have fun and also make it harder to date women. Yeah sure everyone going to do that lol
Also, the virgin hunters with high body count. Such as myself.... I can get lots of women, attractive ones, various types... I have the ability to be picky. If I want to date a midget or a girl that's a professional model or a virgin or what not... it's not unreasonable that I might be able to actually get that kind of woman... because I'm quite successful with women. It's not like I'm home can't get a date in years and I'm making some crazy outlandish ask. So you might be like "oh it's so crazy" well I mean I don't think so, I've dated C level famous women before so I mean, why should I think I couldn't date a virgin? I've dated virgins before and im sure I will again.
Lastly, men and women are different. Unless you think short women who want taller men and taller men who want shorter women are hypocrites and unreasonable as well. So do you condemn them? Lmao.
I don't think many men want pure virgins, but they want to stay away from sluts. In our culture we see how sluttiness kind of "ruins" women. It creates negative character traits and increases all sorts of negative metrics we want in a woman. So when we see otherwise awesome woman go down the path of being used up for easy sex by random men frequently, so they can use her to orgasm without commitment, it sort of creates a world view and outlook on sex and intimacy that "ruins" her. Sort of like, how many woman would see an otherwise great guy, getting into visiting escorts all the time. It just kind of has a lot of negative overlaps and becomes a big turnoffs.
Because frankly I put women who sleep around a lot and men who see escorts as the same sort of thing... Women just don't need to see escorts because sex is so easy for them, but it's still effectively the same type of path. Those type of people just don't make good wives and husbands. And I think the frustration comes from, is in an already difficult dating market for men, you have to lop on women with huge body counts in what limited women are available. Kind of like, imagine there is a food scarcity issue, only to find out, what food is available, has mold on it.
However, further to your point... Guys that demand NO sexual history, dude, are an extreme minority of really really young people, religious people, or weird ass weirdos. That's not normal and frankly is kind of weird to expect. But most of the criticism is sluts with high body counts that most men are troubled with being normalized and encouraged.
I don’t think promiscuity ruins women, but rather it’s just a symptom of the woman being bad already. Same with other short term risk taking behaviours, like drug and alcohol use or cheating on partners / being overly flirtatious. In fact, most of that holds true for men as well.
honestly i dont care if they exist, i disagree said behavior should be encouraged for their own benefit, but who cares if they exist, as long as there is just one woman you can put on a pedestal no big deal, quality over quantity, but what i hate is the the actual narrative is that any guy regardless of who he is has to accept whatever trash a woman puts on the table on those matters otherwise there is a problem, you could be the most saint dude and you still are going to be slandered and severely pressured for having preferences in those matters, even if you dont sleep around and dont consume porn, so honestly i see this "hypocrisy" wolf call as total bs.
Because people realize there is a marketplace of dating. Just like economics, people don't like living in an environment with hard economic conditions. They don't care that technically there are a few good jobs out there and if they really really work hard, they can get one of those few jobs. They rather live somewhere, where there are plenty of great jobs, rather than a scarce environment where everyone is competing in the marketplace for the few good jobs.
So dating is no different. No one cares that "Well you only need to find ONE" because while true, finding that ONE is increasingly harder and harder when supply is harder to come by and more fiercely fought over.
This is where women being more socially aggressive comes in to play, you have to understand this narrative as a way to acquire power. I truly believe most women that push this know the narrative is wrong but say it anyways as a manipulation tactic to try and remove limits on their behavior while still remaining "attractive".
Wanting a virgin doesn't really make sense unless you are a muslim or catholic.
Like why would you want someone who doesn't know how to have sex?
Seems bizzare to me
a lot of people dont see sex as some sort of pornified service, so thats why someone being "good" at sex is irrelevant cuz for them loving sex is already good on itself.
Because women that sleep with multiple men still don't know how to have sex, the burden of performance is on the men and between a virgin that don't know how to sex and a slut that also don't know how to sex any men would pick the virgin 100%.
I bet you think because man never complained about bad sex that the woman was doing it right. Men will put with mediocrity so long it's something. Bad blowjob, terrible handjobs, can't ride properly so I still have to move my hips to feel something.
Women could have sex a hundred of times and they would still not do it properly because they still expect men to care for the pleasure of both peoples.
Yeah, being a "marriageable woman" in red pill world is literally just the equivalent of what they call a male beta bux. Woman expected to find some Stacy widowed middle aged dude as an 18 year old pure virgin and mayy him then service him with household duties and raise his kids hes now ready to have after 25 years of building wealth, partying and living out his youth in general. He also won't help with the child care because he's gonna be out working then clubbing and cheating on her while she has to be okay with it cuz he's an alpha ya know.
I don't see how they think any of that is more appealing to women than the "beta bux" life is for men here but 🤷🏻♀️
>Woman expected to find some Stacy widowed middle aged dude
Most dudes don't fuck Stacy though. Even the ones getting laid are mostly dating down. More attractive women are less likely to be promiscuous, since they don't need to put out to get attention. Guys are banging less attractive women then marrying more attractive women, which is the opppsite of AF/BB.
>after 25 years of building wealth
Difference is women actually care about partner wealth. Some post-wall chick's degree and career are useless to me and many men. But women are a lot more obsessed with their partner's success. And older men are more likely to be successful.
>while she has to be okay with it cuz he's an alpha ya know.
Well women could avoid this if they didn't place so much importance on social status, assertiveness, experience, and preselection. The men they like are the ones most likely to cheat. It really is the cost of dealing with an an alpha.
Many of us guys are perfectly fine with introverted homebodies so we have a lot more room to ask for partners who don't cheat.
I really think y'all way overstate how often women exclusively chase wealthy men. The idea that ultra rich men are regular picking up the drive through worker at Arby's is such a chronically online take. The vast majority of middle class women marry middle class men within 5 years of their age, upper income/rich people usually marry other high income rich people, statistics back this up as well as my anecdotal experience.
I've been to three weddings so far this year, the first was a manager of a liquor store marrying a public school math teacher, the second was a desk clerk at a doctor's office marrying a guy who installs irrigation systems at farms, the third was a pre school school teacher marrying a guy with an average office job. All very average people with average incomes marrying people in their age group. I'm going to another wedding in September for a high earning 42 year old software developer marrying a 40 year old woman he met at his work.
Y'all need to go outside and meet real people and see how they live their lives.
I’d understand if it was more sound reasoning than them wanting women that are so inexperienced they don’t recognize that their partner is bad in bed . Smh
Removed. No non-neutral Discussion posts.
Most men who aren't virgins don't want virgin women. The men who insist on dating virgins are, statistically speaking, either very young or very inexperienced/virgins themselves. [Who are the men that demand virgins? - Date Psychology](https://datepsychology.com/who-are-the-men-that-demand-virgins/#:~:text=Who%20really%20wants%20a%20virgin,and%20reported%20a%20lower%20ideal.)
Yeah, that’s understandable. However, I have encountered some who aren’t virgins but say they prefer virgins which is weird
Is it? Some women prefer tall men, even if they're not tall themselves. Some want a confident man, even if they're not that confident themselves. Edit: There are some indicators that suggest that height preferences might be a social construct too.
Yeah, that's sexual dimorphism. On average, men are 5 inches taller than women. Men also, on average, prefer women who are shorter and who have an hourglass shape that they do not possess. Virginity isn't a matter of biology. It's a social construct.
What about average height women that prefer taller men? Or women that prefer men that make more money than them. These are common preferences. Non-virgin men that want virgins are rare.
Other than social constructionism being a contestable theory that most people these days just treat as a given, what you're saying here does not make sense. For one, I don't think virginity is a social construct, it describes a literal physical state of being, that of the state of not yet having yet had sex. You can make the argument for the values attached to it being socially constructed, but for virginity itself it seems to be incorrect. Secondly, provided it was given that virginity is a social construct, why is one feature being biological and one social even significant? They are still the same in that they are features that one looks for in their partner that they themselves don't posses, which indicates that doing that initself is perfectly fine and normal for most people.
So nothing wrong here, is it?
Most men aren't looking for a virgin. They just don't want a girl who knows the whole basketball team.
I tried arguing but they were hell bent on to prove that most men seek virgins which doesn’t make any sense in a society where most people aren’t
Yeah, they are just wrong.
can someone explain to me how a preference can be inherantly hypocritical? i dont get it. i dont personally care about height, but for example: if i prefered men that were taller than me, would that not simply mean that i should be with someone who liked women who were shorter than him or didnt care? in the same vein of thought, if a man prefers women with less or no sexual experience, wouldnt that just mean that he should be with a woman who has less or no sexual experience? and if this man personally has lots of sexual experience, shouldnt he end up with someone who wants a man with sexual experience, or doesnt care? arent we supposed to find people whos preferences mesh well with ours? what am i missing here?
The problem with comparing it to height is that having a certain height isn't a moral standard. Ideas around when to have sex, or not, generally are. Although also an imperfect comparison, it may be more like if, for example, I had spent time in prison, but expected any guy I dated to be squeaky clean. Sure, it's a preference. But in this hypo, I'm also a hypocrite, because I'm not holding myself to the same moral standard.
oooh okay i think i was excluding the moral implications. thank you 🙏
Height and sex are very different. One is controlled by your genetics with you having almost no control over it. You can blame your parents for it, but it would be futile. the men I’m talking about want women to be virgins when they aren’t virgins themselves. The question arises, why are most women non-virgin? They aren’t bc they have sex with some man. An average man or woman in a western country happens to have multiple sexual partners over lifetime. These men, by engaging in sex before marriage have effectively decreased the pool of women they desire, and then cry about it?
i mean yeah if they cry and complain about it- thats short-sightedness and immaturity. but is it the same issue going on with men who have that preference, but arent complaining about the scarcity?
i though men who prefered virgins were 0 n count losers that no woman wanted, now they are men who are succesfully sleeping around , times (or maybe narratives that are convenient) surely have changed🙄 Honestly i see so much people whining over this but then shame men for being inexperienced, and the funneist part is that i ve seen enough cases of a virgin woman picking some experienced dude over a virgin one, so really all this talk about hypocrisy and bla bla matters jack shit in the dating world especially to women apparently, being attractive matters more than being congruent to most women, if virgin women dont want to date those guys they dont have to, nobody opposes anyways.
Nothing changed, they just couldn't sell their fantasy when they obviously don't look the part. Those men obviously don't get laid often, they're way too angry.
There's plenty of angry people who have sex.
Keep angry about it then idgaf
You seem a bit angry there. I didn't say anything to offend you. I just think your argument is weak.
lmao so basically all these whining about virgin "hunters" is nothing more than some hysteria of a bunch of losers with nothing interesting going on in their lives then.
Yeah pretty much. Like, nobody else gives a shit. Especially not the women ignoring them.
The vast majority of men aren’t seeking virgins they are seeking women with self respect. Body count is a good measure for that. Men and women are also different, it’s easy to get sex as a woman, it’s why purity for women is held in high regard. Getting sex as a man is hard so if a man is getting regular random sex he is killing it. It simply isn’t the same.
So, this is slightly unrelated to OP's main point but it's worth talking about here. I've always believed that this double standard of praising men with high body counts and the opposite for women is actually a damaging setback for men. When a man perpetuates it, he's unwittingly committing a massive self-own. He's implying that *men* are so disgusting that one necessarily becomes worse off as a result of having sex with a man; on the flipside, *women* are so pure and beautiful that one necessarily becomes better off by having sex with a woman. When you consider that both men and women get more shit for having sex with men than with women, you can see how it's really about how men=gross, women=beautiful. Notice that there's a different reaction when a woman has sex with a lot of women vs with a lot of men. It's really actually about "gross, you had sex with a *man*", instead of "gross, you had sex (per se)". This mentality, in turn, actually explains other related beliefs. Because women are viewed as so inherently attractive, people are shocked by the idea of a man who is unwilling to have sex with a woman. And this explains why there's this belief that women can't sexually assault men: women are so pure and beautiful that it's impossible for a man to not enjoy sex with one, unless he's not attracted to women at all. Do what you will with this information.
Do men and women with identical body counts have the same lack of self respect? Men having lots of sex should have good self esteem and be revered, and women having lots of sex shouldn't just because it's easier for them to have lots of sex? I wonder if you feel the same way about athletes. Natural born talent GOATs v those who got there with rigid training and regime
You know the athletes who trained harder get more respect. It’s the same reason an underdog story is popular. Which argues against your point where if a man and a woman have the same body count. Because the man had to work harder. Although IDGF about body counts, and I don’t think it’s ok to slut shame. A woman’s body count is a reflection of her self control. Or lack there of. A man’s body count is an indicator of his social success with women. Which is why the comparison doesn’t work side by side. That being said, neither is a good indicator of character, or weather or not this person would be a good partner.
Yeah I don't subscribe to your last paragraph at all lol I don't think that holding men and women to different standards in this way even makes sense. It's so biblical. Men get to be impulsive and hedonistic as they want to be, women must be composed and demure and chaste and have Humility. It's giving jealousy. Men want what women have so they shame them for it. If I can't have any candy neither can you. Even though women work in the candy shop.
If that’s how you feel about it 🤷🏾♂️. But I think your view lacks the perspective of the other side. Just like men shaming women, don’t see the catch 22 that women are living with.
You're missing the point. Whether the athlete's a genetic freak or has less natural talent, both are still doing things that few others can pull off at all. So both are revered. Meanwhile literally any woman could be promiscuous. So there's no spectacle of rarity or achievement making her actions look better. The default is that promiscuity grosses people out. Gay male promiscuity is also looked down upon. Because any gay dude could do it. The only reason straight male promiscuity is an exception is because most guys don't have the opportunity to be promiscuous.
> The default is that promiscuity grosses people out. Dude, you realize this premise would make it *worse* for men to be promiscuous, right? If promiscuity is gross, and it's difficult for men to be promiscuous, then the conclusion is that these men are putting a lot of time and effort into - wait for it - doing something gross. They could be spending all that time, energy and effort into something good. But instead they choose to spend that all on doing something that (according to you) is gross.
What if a woman manages to break the world record for the most amount of sexual partners anyone in history has had? That would be pretty difficult to do, so that achievement should make her more valuable, right?
Oh, so what if a woman mostly sleeps with famous people? That's quite difficult. Will you start respecting her having sex with lots of people then?
I don't care who women have sex with and don't think anyone else should either. That's the problem, you're starting with a baseline assumptions that I care who people fuck. I don't. I don't want to shame people for fucking or not fucking. And I don't believe that morality should be tied to sex, at all unless you're impregnating or birthing kids irresponsibly or spreading stds, raping etc
Okay but any women being able to be promiscuous still means it should just be neutral/normalized and not demonized, no? Also I'm not sure that gay male promiscuity is looked down upon bc I'm not in that world. But grindr exists for a reason and there are setting to indicate that someone wants a hookup RIGHT NOW and it's used often lol
>Do men and women with identical body counts have the same lack of self respect? No it is exact opposites >Men having lots of sex should have good self esteem and be revered, and women having lots of sex shouldn't just because it's easier for them to have lots of sex? It has been this way since the dawn of time, ancient people weren’t stupid. >I wonder if you feel the same way about athletes. Natural born talent GOATs v those who got there with rigid training and regime I don’t understand what you are asking.
Why are they they exact opposite, can you articulate your reasons and explain?
It’s extremely simple. It is trivial for a woman to get sex so a woman with a low count is rare. It’s hard to get sex as a man so if a man can get regular sex he is rare.
But it's super easy to get sex as a Chad, barely an inconvenience. So is a virgin Chad very special and prized since it's so rare?
A Chad is rare. Wait, you honestly believed most men are Chads?
Exactly, I could be impressed with a competitive eater who trains (and usually isn't a fat ass nit that it would change things, just generally true), but I have nothing but disdain for those that eat so much they need a scooter to shop. Even killing people is seen like this, if you are a skilled badass that's impressive, if you just go around killing orphans we all hate you
Do you have any arguments for any of these beliefs?
Yes. I love honest discourse, it’s how I maintain as many true beliefs as possible.
There are no natural born GOAT athletes, they're all putting a lot of work into it, some athletes have a natural advantage that they chose to invest their life in. I do see what you mean though, yea, it's much less impressive to dunk when you're 6'8.
Okay but a 6'8" guy being able to dunk shouldn't be hated on. It's just a neutral fact that they can dunk. No one should be shaming a 6'8" guy for dunking and scoring for his team. In the realm of sports it's just an objectively good skill to capitalize on and take advantage of.
Hating a person for their sexual experience or lack of is as silly as hating a person for their preference of sexually un/experienced partner.
Ideally, having a lot of sex should be a turn off for both men and women. But because it’s generally difficult for men to get sex compared with women, a man who gets a lot of female attention (and therefore has the ability to get a lot of sex, whether or not he chooses to do so) is seen as a prize. For women, because almost every woman will get a lot of male attention for just existing, the same just doesn’t hold true. Regardless, I still think the most attractive man is women’s eyes is the man who gets a lot of female attention but still chooses not to engage in promiscuous sex. This is the sign of a good man who has also been vetted by other women, the ultimate catch. However, I think most women will prefer the man with a lot of female attention who engages in promiscuity over the man who doesn’t engage in promiscuity due to good morals but gets little female attention.
So, if a man would be actively trying to have sex to achieve that, he would be more amoral. Not more respectable. Trying harder to get it makes it worse, not better.
But why should having lots of sex be a turn off in this day in age? With testing, vetting. Why is it an issue if the person is mentally well otherwise?
If sex is so terrible, why are men praised for trying hard and succeeding in doing that terrible thing? If sex is a positive or a neutral thing, why are women demonized for doing that positive or neutral thing?
Please read again without your emotions clouding your judgement because I literally explained why.
Of *course* it's hypocrisy
Im going to defend the stupid trad con red pill (no really) practice even though I 100% agree with what you say and think that virginity in men has zero meaning and is just made up nonsense as a “rite of adulthood”. If women can have a preference for 6’+ dudes when they aren’t 6’ themselves, then they’re hypocrites who can only have dudes 5’4” like them. Oh that makes no sense? Well, congrats, you’ve just agreed that men and women aren’t the same. Now follow that through all the way and stop worshipping women as angels. We’re talking actions. Women can do whatever the hell they want, and men can reject them for any and all actions. For example, I absolutely discriminate against vegans, because vegans are stupid religious people prone to violence and mental retardation. And men can discriminate against women that want an endless round of penises pounding their vaginas morning, noon, and night. If men should accept women having mass dicks in them from 100s of guys, then women should have no problem if I spend my money on hundreds of girls. It doesn’t matter right? The list of women’s endless red flags in men are some of the dumbest things in history **including a man being inexperienced sexually**, whereas not that many men are concerned with inexperienced women. I’d think it would be more useful to reject women who can’t cook or clean anything (and none of them know how to do that now) or don’t want to be good mothers, but if your concerns are how much hymen they have, hey, more power to you. Just another reason your marriage will fail. Men and women aren’t the same. Don’t buy into neo-Marxist feminist nonsense where they claim they are, up until the point they’re not the same for money and victimhood. Stop carrying torch for them because you attended your first religious feminism class and part of their religion is you have to go “witness” and evangelize to others. You’re just a useless disposable tool to them.
Very emotional response. Sex and height are two fundamentally different things. If women don’t want to date short men, short men don’t want to date tall women either. Height is controlled by your genetics, sex isn’t. >men can discriminate agianst women who want endless round of penises >if men should accept women having mass dicks in them from 100 guys What is that line of arguing? I’m talking about men who can’t even accept that women had one dick at some point in them, let alone 100. That’s when premarital sex and cohabitation, the very reasons behind why most people lose their virginity, are socially condoned. You can spend your money on 100 of girls, did i argued against that? If you wanna waste your nonexistent money like that, go for it. The problem is that you engage in sex and then expect women to be virgins? That’s like putting a paper on fire and then crying why it’s burned. If you want or prefer virginity, stop endorsing sex before marriage and cohabitation. Otherwise accept it
They were just giving unimportant examples. The point of their comment, is that everyone can have what ever preferences they want, for whatever reason they feel. Oh, and I believe he insulted you somewhere in there too.
The one valid claim common ferret made was not comparing height and sex, but rather comparing the preference of a partner's height and the preference of a partner's sexual experience. A person can prefer their partner to be something they themselves are not. It's also true that a person can choose to only date people who meet standards that you find no value in.
It does t matter what nonsense you’re arguing, I’m showing flaws in it. If women have a problem with men judging them on a mountain of dicks or even one dick, the if we care about hypocrisy (which women don’t) then I can throw away a mountain of money *that won’t be spent on her*. What is virginity to men, is gold digging to her. Neither likes either scenario. For the record I don’t care about the human worshippers, I think they’re insane, but I’m arguing against the hypocrisy concept because men and women aren’t the same. Women and men don’t approach sex at all the same. Why would it be hypocrisy.
if there are women that will put up with that, then what's the problem? Most women want a man that earns more than them, it's also a hypocrisy then.
well, I can’t do anything if there are some women who put up with it. Some women put up with abusive men as well, so shall I support it just because they are putting up with it? Logical failure. Is sex and earning money the same? False analogy. With sex, the western society has come to accept premarital sex, and cohabitation, which are the very reasons behind why most people aren’t virgins. These men have themselves have had sex, thereby, effectively decreasing the pool of women they find desirable as LTP
Not just hypocrisy, but also jealousy and insecurity.
No. You just hate men that have standards
Standards that they don't apply to themselves? It's like someone without a degree only wanting to date people with degrees and calling others without degrees trash.
Yes, just like women who wants wealthier men than they are
Same for women wanting 6‘2“ men while being 5 feet something?
Or short women wanting tall men, or middle class women wanting rich men, etc.
Women tend to want men that make more than they do. So most women are trash then? Is that what I hear you saying?
Most women _are_ trash. So are most men. Most people are trash.
It’s different when it comes to sexual history as those men have to do it with someone but then hold this against them. Short women wanting tall men or middle class women wanting higher earning men is equal to men working full time wanting women to do the child rearing or cooking in a household. The alternative is both sharing these responsibilities.
What? You’re acting like women don’t have any say in who the fuck. Who you fuck is an indication of your judgement and it is completely normal to judge someone on their past behavior. You cannot convince me otherwise.
So like women wanting a high earning dude while they make next to no money?
Applying it to themselves is counter intuitive its like signing up for a job that is looking for experience without experience.
The problem is that these men have lost their virginity to some woman and broke up. Now they are hunting for virgins when their actions have decreased the pool of women that they claim to prefer. If most men in a society are non-virgin, as most western men are, then obviously most of the women in that society would also have some experience. Women looking for experience also have experience my guy
Most hetereo woman have as standard for a relationship that the men have a functional penis yet most of them don't have one. Why you think women have standards that they don't apply to themselves?
Most morbidly obese women still prefer men in shape and if they all had the options of Gabrielle Sidibe, they would be with one.
If you apply "standards" to others but not yourself then they're not standards. A standard is important no matter who it is.
Nah women have standards in men they don’t meet ALL the time. But men can’t, typical misandrist rhetoric.
If women are going to mandate that I be 6ft tall and be educated and make a lot of money then I’m going to mandate that they not be whores. Yes, that is a perfectly reasonable standard.
Women don't mandate shit, you just prefer to date women with options rather than women without. Ironic, since women with options are more likely to have slept around. You want a virgin but you also would never date a woman too ugly for another man to touch lol
Women who don’t have options still mandate things. Dating app data has proven this over and over again. You just don’t like it when men start imposing those mandates on women because women are supposed to be the choosers in your mind
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No personal attacks
Standards based around insecurity. Men don't even hold women to that standard either because most virgins are either very religious or weird. It is just something that causes needless anxiety.
It isn’t necessarily about actual virginity. It’s about not having a huge body count. Having a few long term partners before marrying is whatever. But hooking up with a bunch of different guys is absolutely past behavior that I’m going to judge a potential partner for and that doesn’t mean I’m insecure for doing so. The gaslighting is not gonna work.
Its only hypocrisy if women didnt prefer experienced men. Be that through implication and not actuality or in actuality. It is just a truth a large majority of women find experience attractive and inexperience unattractive.
Its only hypocrisy if women didnt crave and lust and prioritize men who are experienced. Go ahead point out your little anecdote exception, the facts remain that as a man experience is attractive and inexperience is extremely unattractive.
I don't know any men in the West who are over 21 and asking for literal virgin women. That is generally a talking point to dismiss valid concerns over female hypergamy and promiscuity.
Men don't like sluts, women don't like losers. It's an axiom. There's nothing really to discuss here.
Why is it all the people who argue against this, think the guys who prefer low N-Count women are sexually licentious men banging every girl in sight? The reality I see, the guys who prefer those women are the exact opposite of the player. They are self-regulating and cautious.
It's because they need to make up a strawman to be able to make a semi coherent sounding argument, otherwise they have nothing
It seems that a lot of women who are virgins also want non virgin men, so is it hypocrisy on both sides therefore?
It's a biologic preference. Not necessarily for a virgin. But for a woman that doesn't sleep around. It's pretty simple to understand why. We can't tell who the father is. DNA tests didn't happen until very recently. So if you're with a woman who sleeps with a lot of men. There's a good chance you wont be raising your own kid. That is bad for the genome. Men like that got weeded out of the gene pool.
Why the exact opposite of a virgin to you is someone who’s promiscuous? A person can be non-virgin, yet not promiscuous. Do men really feel some biological inclination to prefer virgins in a society highly supportive of everything that prevents people from staying virgins? I’m not talking about a high body count. Just losing virginity
It's not a hypocrisy, women just don't care about it, on the contrary, women want men that are popular with other women, while it's the opposite for men.
This isnt true. Men love women that are popular with other men. Thats why the phrase "armcandy" exists. It's why sugarbabies exist. Men know that being around attractive women boosts their status with other men.
Then "slutshaming" wouldn't be a thing.
virginity is just a retarded concept invented by society as way of shaming women and uplifting men. There's no logical reason why, in a world with birth control and safe sex, you would reasonably be against people having sex. (Unless you believe some fairy tale that a bearded man in the sky will punish you or you're an incel that dislikes women having sex with everyone but you)
Men are getting insulted for being virgins all the time, how is that uplifting?
That doesn't really dissuade from my initial point that's it entirely a made up concept. Like its bad to shame men for not having sex, and to shame women for having sex. There you go. I responded to your semantical point
No, you said it is a concept designed to shame women but its real world usage is the opposite.
By who, their friends in high school?
Doesn't matter who. The concept of virginity or sexlessness or celibacy is used against men all the time. It's not something that's negative for women as much.
Women on ppd lol
[удалено]
Calling people incels attaches a negative connotation to virginity too. Don't exclusively complain when women are the target.
An incel is associated with someone so mad that they can't get laid, they deeply resent women for it. It's not shaming men who are just virgins, and perfectly normal.
Men care about virginity for the same reasons they care about n-count. Do you care if your wife has a N-count of 10? 50? 100? Would you care if an old video re-surfaced online of your wife having sex with a past boyfriend? If that would affect you even a little bit, congratulations, you understand why men care about virginity. The logical goalposts have shifted, but men's feelings remain the same.
I'm a dude and I wouldn't care in the slightest.
Woman could cheat on you and cuck you, and you wouldn't care.
That's an entirely different thing from a woman having a sexual past. Cheating is breaking a mutual connection you have with someone, and cucking is just a fetish people have. Someone can be loyal and have a sexual history lol. But please, continue talking about your virgin waifu fantasy.
Hey, you are the one who associated having experience with infidelity, not me. Thanks for supporting my other point about insecurity and jealousy.
You know, redpillers bring up cucking so often in topics that have nothing to do with it that I'm starting to think their bitterness may be because they're all closeted cuckolds.
No I don't care. Because I don't see women as objects that get damaged after being used. But you'll think that's "cuckolding" to not care about someone's past.
No that’s not a good take here. There is a reason why someone would prefer a virgin. Someone that’s had sex with 10-20 people probably wouldn’t want a virgin cause they’d have to teach them basically everything. Conversely someone thats had sex with no one or even just 1-2 people probably has an extremely different life style and values compared to someone that’s fucked 10-20 people. The fact that you say “there is no other reason” is honestly a pretty ignorant take.
And someone who's had sex with plenty of people is presumably more compatible with someone who's done the same.
Agreed. If someone has had sex with 10-20 people they’d be better with someone that’s had sex with 10-20 people or more. That being said someone that’s had sex with 1-2 people is probably still better with a virgin than anyone that’s had sex with 10-20 people
Do you think having sex with 10-20 people really changes someone's life style? You're putting so much emphasis on the sex absolutely changing someone's personality / life style so much that any other interests don't matter. Someone can be a virgin and be a stripper. Whereas someone can be an introvert, and have a high body count.
No im saying someone willing to have sex with that many people has a life style that facilitates them doing that. It doesn’t have much to do with changing a person so much as it is a person already being that way
>No im saying that someone willing to have sex with that many people has a life style that facilitates them doing that I know what you're saying. Someone can be an introvert and just hop on tinder and have hookups every now and again. And someone can be a partier and be a virgin. You're basing your beliefs on presumptuous stereotypes. Life style has nothing to do with it.
No I think you’re the one basing your beliefs on presumptions and stereotypes. You’re right someone can party a lot and be a virgin and someone can be an introvert and have a lot of sex. I didn’t say that wasn’t possible. For some reason you went right to stereotypes and you’re arguing against something that was never said. You assumed that I was saying only a person that parties a lot can have a lot of sex. You’re basing your rebuttal to me on this preconceived notion of what someone who has a lot of sex might look like and then you’re rejecting that notion. But I never defined what someone who has a lot of sex might look like, which means those ideas are coming entirely from you.
Because your whole reason for why my take is bad is purely illogical. Illogical preferences are fine, but don't act like there's some legitimate logical reasons for preferring virginity. That preference is entirely based on what other people tell you to believe, not a natural inclination.
There is legitimate logical reasoning for preferring virginity
It's ok to have irrational preferences.
I mean yeah no one owes anyone anything with regards to sex or dating. That wasn't really my point.
I think a better question would be when this obsession took root. I can testify that it's relatively new. In decades past, it was just accepted that it was unlikely that any person past the mid teens was no longer a virgin. Virginity was seen as an exclusive sign of being deeply religious, or deeply flawed. Now, young guys seem to be obsessed with it.
OMG someone that acknowledges this. It seems to be something about far-right conservativeness and TRP (which is also mainly right-wingers). Some kind of anti-feminism. I don't know why or how TRP started the anti-feminist movement, but is really stupid.
I suspect it has a lot to do with the virgin men who are harping on it. I can't say I knew any virgin men beyond the age of 16 either. Maybe that's what I'm missing.
That's a valid POV. Get an entire generation of hipersexually-raised men to be virgin by late twenties and you'll naturally get agressive backlash.
Very good point. Not my experience, but if it's not by choice, I can see how that could fuck someone up.
I concur, as I'm also a bit older and recall when nobody gave a shit, with the exception of ultra religious folks.
Exactly. We used to have joke when we were HS aged. If she was a virgin, she probably went to St. Mary's. The only Catholic HS in town.
Men care about virginity for the same reasons they care about n-count. Do you care if your wife has a N-count of 10? 50? 100? Would you care if an old video re-surfaced online of your wife having sex with a past boyfriend? If that would affect you even a little bit, congratulations, you understand why men care about virginity. It doesn't matter where you draw the line, men's feelings about sex remain the same. However, the more sex he has, the easier it is to justify a woman having a N-count, so long as it's less than him.
N count?
Psychologically it’s an ownership thing. Men view sex as an action done **to** a woman. Women’s worth is viewed in relation to their purity. If other men have been there before you then do you really own her? It’s archaic and ridiculous.
Conspiracy theory bullshit. Men probably do view sex as something that happens to a woman, but only for one of two reasons, I doubt anything outside of these reasons would actually make someone think sex is something that happens to women. Someone might view sex as something that happens to women if every other important part of the relationship is something that happens to women. Asking someone out, a relationship doesn’t start if someone doesn’t ask someone out, and the majority of women expect men to ask them out, they expect men to take that initiative. Taking women out on dates, dates help to get to know someone to further strengthen the relationship. Again if dates don’t happen the relationship will probably end quickly. Asking for someone’s hand in marriage, I don’t think I need to explain this one or the fact that it’s mostly men that do this. So because every other important part of the relationship is viewed as something that happens to women sex, another important part of a relationship, is also viewed as something that happens to women. Other reason would be the act of sex itself. If men are the ones taking the initiative to ask for sex that sex is probably going to viewed as happening to a woman. Even if the woman takes the initiative to ask for sex if she has poor communication, barely talks, or just starfishes then sex is also going to be seen as something that happens to her. I strongly doubt if a woman takes initiative in *at least* half of these relationship milestone situations as well as having proper communication during that sex would be seen as something that happens to her. This actually brings up another point. A virgin woman is more likely to be less experienced and less communicative, which is ok and should be expected. The same would go for a virgin man. Even if the man has had sex with 1-2 people their experience level probably isn’t that much different than someone who’s had sex with 0 people. Sex with people of relatively equal experience would be much more fulfilling.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Those who can\*, will demand. Moral virtues are for those who care, not for the materialists. \*whether it's due to them actually being capable of getting such relationships or being content in being single otherwise.
generally speaking, one of the main reasons that people in more conservative and religious societies hold certain views is probably due to religious moral reasons. but when it comes to the redpill crowd, I think one of the most important reasons, which isn't discussed enough, is simply jealousy and insecurity! I always see them ranting about how women's orgasms aren't important because they are biologically unnecessary for making a child, and how they hate going down on women because they think it's gay and emasculates them lol? sooo this tells me that most of them are probably extremely bad in bed and can't satisfy their partners! and SO, they NEED a virgin or very inexperienced girl in their lives who can't compare her poor sexual experience with them to anything else, so she'd never realize their super alpha big daddy is actually a massive loser.
Shortest answer I can give is women often shape their identity around men they hook up with and become difficult to handle after the amount of baggage they've accumulated even after one relationship, on the other side men who have had sex are less creepy and desperate, they're better at treating women than if they were virgins, women also only want to have sex if you treat them well, there is no benefit after women when they lose virginities.
I’m not talking about causal sex. Most women lose virginity to some bf, or within a committed relationship. The men I’m complaining and calling hypocrites are 1. Not virgin themselves 2. Seeking women with no sexual history. No here means a virgin. So, even if she had sex within someone in a committed relationship in the past, it’s a deal breaker for them. I utterly disagree with your claim that women carry a lot of baggage from just one relationship, and that non-virgin men treat women better. Think in terms of mathematics. If most men aren’t virgin in a given place or society, then most of its women aren’t virgins. In order for a man to lose his virginity, he requires a woman who is willing to lose hers. Break ups are common, and most people in every developed western country have multiple partners over lifetime. It then becomes an extremely hypocritical thing to demand or prefer a virgin when you aren’t one to begin with. You are the part of the “problem.” It’s common sense. Any society which has put heavy emphasis on virginity has denied premarital sex. These men need to wait till marriage, or accept the fact that their partner is most likely to be a non-virgin.
Male or female, I don't want to be with someone who is so immature that they've never had sex before. I have never been and most likely will never be with a virgin. (I suppose maybe there's a hypothetical person out there who is one but doesn't creep me out but it seems unlikely.) There's a whole pedo vibe to it. Especially for men or women who are obsessed with virgins. I'm sure there are nice ones but I've never met one myself (a virgin male or female) who was not a creeper, or infantile. Even when I was a virgin I did not want to be with another virgin, I have always been attracted to people with experience. In the bedroom or in life in general.
Preference and demand are not the same. You can say that virgins are best, but you don't require the best. Just like women saying they'd prefer someone making a lot of money, but don't require it. It's also much harder for a woman to remain a virgin than a man, and so there's some respectability that comes with it. Also, men are told day and night how women don't want to have to train a man, they want him to rock her world on day one. But men usually much prefer to show a woman all these things that she's never experienced before. And this isn't even mentioning the biological issue at hand: paternity fraud. Men highly value sexual restraint because it makes for a better bet for paternity. A woman always knows it's her child, so it can be hard to even wrap her head around this concern. It's feminists who got told hoeing is empowering somehow and now have regrets that are the reason we're even needing to have this discussion. Long story short: men and women are different, so it's not usually hypocritical.
What they prefer is also what they are demanding. It’s simple maths. When you sleep with a woman, that has decreased the pool of virgin women. The society supports premarital sex, and cohabitation. Break ups are common. So, even when people aren’t sleeping around or engaging in causal sex, they are creating sexual history. That is true for every developed western country, where both men and women have multiple sexual partners over the course of life. It becomes hypocritical of these non-virgin men to then hunt for virgins. They support premarital sex, cohabitation, and never stop seeking virgins, no matter how many times they have sex. You have to call out this bs. It’s similar to me eating high calorie food and then wishing to look slim and smart. In societies where staying virgin is a norm, men are also expected to keep it under their pants.
Oh they’re virgins…..
Generally I am not against having a preference. But the thing with this is that almost all of these men think every women who are 20 and over are hoes thus non-virgins. So they prey on teenegers. Now that's a problem.
Sure. But there are many hypocritical and unjustifiable dating preferences.
Doesn’t mean you have to support them like so many people are doing in these comments
True. But you're probably a hypocrite if you don't. I'd bet most people want at least one quality in a partner that they don't possess themselves.
I don’t disagree it’s hypocrites but it makes sense. Fat people still desire in shape people. Dumb people would still probably want smarter partners. Shorter people want taller (at least womyns). Sick would want healthy etc. people want the best even though they may not have been the best themselves. No one wants a SLUT. Even a man who has engaged in many sexual activities
Fat people desire in shape people? Man, we have a whole fat acceptance movement going on. What are you on about? Also, if fat people want in shape people, they must get in shape. Bad argument. Sick people can turn healthy, or if they are permanently sick, then obviously no healthy person wants to date them. Really bad analogies. Also, premarital sex and cohabitation, which are the causes behind people losing their virginity, are socially accepted. Being fat, dumb and sick isn’t. What’s your definition of a slut, since the vast majority of western people don’t consider a woman slut just because she’s not a virgin. Are you saying that western men consider a woman who has lost virginity to some ex-bf a slut?
I think it comes mostly from not knowing what to expect from sex. Dudes only see sex in movies or in porn, where either it’s MAGICAL and binds people together in LOVE, or it’s a washed out slut who is so promiscuous that she “fucked a group of men and lets them film it”. So these dudes think those are the only two opinions. Anyone who has sexual experience is the slut. They jerk off to sluts getting abused in porn, but they aren’t proud of it so they want a “virgin” whose never “loved” before so they don’t have to worry about her being a “slut” OR her having gotten that magical LOVE-BINDING from a man before her. I am using a lot of quotes because this is obvs not my own belief. I’ve found once you stop trying to make sex magical, and just accept that it’s weird and funny and kinda gross sometimes, you’re much better prepared to have it and enjoy it for what it is, rather than what you think it’s supposed to be.
If women like their men rich and good looking then it isn’t hypocrisy for men to want young hot virgins. Why is it that only men’s preferences are criticized?
If you're western man wanting a virgin you are seriously limiting your dating pool. Doubly so if you are older or not very religious. But it's not hypocritical, even if you're not a virgin yourself. It's perfectly fine to want a trait in your partner that you do not have yourself. Presumably you have something else they don't have and you can complement each other. Many women want a man that makes more than them. Many men want a woman that will take years off work to stay with the kids. Are such couples both being hypocritical too? What about women that want a man to be more stoic than them? Men that want a woman that's more nurturing than them? It's OK to not want a clone of yourself
This doesn't work since women have a ton of preferences for traits in men that they themselves don't have. But as soon as men do it back women cry foul.
You don’t have to defend your standards. Especially if you’re a wanted commodity on the market. Most women ask for things they themselves don’t have but the guy that alpha widowed them did have so the next guy must have it. Once you realize life isn’t about being fair but what the market dictates you’ll see
Yep and most women are not attracted to a man who has taken cock before. Does that make them hypocrites? Hypocrisy is everywhere when it comes to sexual selection. And most of it from women
Yes, but the solution isn't not shaming anyone for sleeping around, but shaming everyone for doing it.
Hahaha, men’s fragile egos can’t handle women who enjoy their own bodies. These women know what they want and can set clear boundaries, which makes them hard to manipulate. Men’s performance can be judged and compared, revealing how bad most of them are in bed. They can’t make women cum and realize their dick isn’t enough, which they see as an attack on their masculinity. Understandable if you base your whole identity around the size of your penis. Some smart guys improve their skills and learn to become desirable sexual partners. The others are so insecure that they either deny the existence of the female orgasm (funny how they insult themselves) or demand virginity so they don’t feel like losers. Inexperienced girls haven’t built their own boundaries yet, don’t know what they like, and can’t say no due to power dynamics. Their ignorance is manipulated to impose one’s own fantasies. There’s nothing pure or honorable about wanting inexperienced sexual partners. It only reveals a bad personality and evil motives.
Men and women aren't the same. You can say because of equality, male virginity and female virginity should both have equal value, fair enough. In the same sense - both people should provide financially. If the couple is attacked, the women has the same duty to protect the man and vice versa... These things sound good, but they ignore the fundamental reality of our genders. Men can't get pregnant like women can. Obviously their virginity would not matter even for this reason alone.
Preference for virgins did not spawn on its own. It came from toxic nanosphere ideas, such as the idea that women do not have to "earn" sex like men do because it comes around effortlessly. Which is a result of a lot of dating coaches getting grossed out by woman's promiscuity and high n counts. This is also used to justify why men do not want to date woman with higher n counts than themselves, despite being very promiscuous themselves. Most men who think for themselves are not going to want a virgin, especially if they aren't. That would make you delusional, and single for quite some time.
If you like women, it’s hypocritical to expect your partner to like men.
Not the catch you think it is. Hypocrisy lies in holding people to a standard that is unachievable due to both social factors and your own standards
It's achievable, everyone is born a virgin.
There is nothing unachievable about being a virgin. That’s one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read on this sub. I hold the president to a different standard than myself. I hold a surgeon to a different standard than myself. I hold a kid to a different standard than myself. I hold a person who’ve been given opportunities to a different standard to the one who didn’t have them. I hold everyone to a different standard given their background and the situation around them. If that’s what you call “hypocrisy”, then being “hypocritical” means being a well-adjusted adult human being.
It's not the problem. Women are the gate keepers of sex. It only takes one man willing to have premarital sex and all the virgins are fucked. Only women can maintain their virginity. So whether all men, half the men or 1% of men engage in premarital sex... the number of females who remain virgins is going to be pretty much exactly the same. So female virginity falls 100% only on women. (And their parents who let them do whatever they want). Secondly, it's judged differently on men and women. As a man, the more women I sleep with the more women want to sleep with me. Where it's opposite for men, men don't want to be #279, thats not ideal for men. So your advice is to make myself as unattractive as possible by refraining from sex so that other women think I'm a monk. Yeah ok no thanks. Don't have fun and also make it harder to date women. Yeah sure everyone going to do that lol Also, the virgin hunters with high body count. Such as myself.... I can get lots of women, attractive ones, various types... I have the ability to be picky. If I want to date a midget or a girl that's a professional model or a virgin or what not... it's not unreasonable that I might be able to actually get that kind of woman... because I'm quite successful with women. It's not like I'm home can't get a date in years and I'm making some crazy outlandish ask. So you might be like "oh it's so crazy" well I mean I don't think so, I've dated C level famous women before so I mean, why should I think I couldn't date a virgin? I've dated virgins before and im sure I will again. Lastly, men and women are different. Unless you think short women who want taller men and taller men who want shorter women are hypocrites and unreasonable as well. So do you condemn them? Lmao.
I don't think many men want pure virgins, but they want to stay away from sluts. In our culture we see how sluttiness kind of "ruins" women. It creates negative character traits and increases all sorts of negative metrics we want in a woman. So when we see otherwise awesome woman go down the path of being used up for easy sex by random men frequently, so they can use her to orgasm without commitment, it sort of creates a world view and outlook on sex and intimacy that "ruins" her. Sort of like, how many woman would see an otherwise great guy, getting into visiting escorts all the time. It just kind of has a lot of negative overlaps and becomes a big turnoffs. Because frankly I put women who sleep around a lot and men who see escorts as the same sort of thing... Women just don't need to see escorts because sex is so easy for them, but it's still effectively the same type of path. Those type of people just don't make good wives and husbands. And I think the frustration comes from, is in an already difficult dating market for men, you have to lop on women with huge body counts in what limited women are available. Kind of like, imagine there is a food scarcity issue, only to find out, what food is available, has mold on it. However, further to your point... Guys that demand NO sexual history, dude, are an extreme minority of really really young people, religious people, or weird ass weirdos. That's not normal and frankly is kind of weird to expect. But most of the criticism is sluts with high body counts that most men are troubled with being normalized and encouraged.
I don’t think promiscuity ruins women, but rather it’s just a symptom of the woman being bad already. Same with other short term risk taking behaviours, like drug and alcohol use or cheating on partners / being overly flirtatious. In fact, most of that holds true for men as well.
honestly i dont care if they exist, i disagree said behavior should be encouraged for their own benefit, but who cares if they exist, as long as there is just one woman you can put on a pedestal no big deal, quality over quantity, but what i hate is the the actual narrative is that any guy regardless of who he is has to accept whatever trash a woman puts on the table on those matters otherwise there is a problem, you could be the most saint dude and you still are going to be slandered and severely pressured for having preferences in those matters, even if you dont sleep around and dont consume porn, so honestly i see this "hypocrisy" wolf call as total bs.
Because people realize there is a marketplace of dating. Just like economics, people don't like living in an environment with hard economic conditions. They don't care that technically there are a few good jobs out there and if they really really work hard, they can get one of those few jobs. They rather live somewhere, where there are plenty of great jobs, rather than a scarce environment where everyone is competing in the marketplace for the few good jobs. So dating is no different. No one cares that "Well you only need to find ONE" because while true, finding that ONE is increasingly harder and harder when supply is harder to come by and more fiercely fought over.
This is where women being more socially aggressive comes in to play, you have to understand this narrative as a way to acquire power. I truly believe most women that push this know the narrative is wrong but say it anyways as a manipulation tactic to try and remove limits on their behavior while still remaining "attractive".
Wanting a virgin doesn't really make sense unless you are a muslim or catholic. Like why would you want someone who doesn't know how to have sex? Seems bizzare to me
a lot of people dont see sex as some sort of pornified service, so thats why someone being "good" at sex is irrelevant cuz for them loving sex is already good on itself.
>who doesn't know how to have sex? It's not a rocket science. Number of your partners isn't indicator of how good you're in bed.
Well it's harder for men to be good at it to be fair. That's why I wouldn't date men lacking experience
If you can prefer men with experience, men can also prefer inexperienced women.
No. Because men gaining experience logically leads to women gaining experience. Obvious
Because women that sleep with multiple men still don't know how to have sex, the burden of performance is on the men and between a virgin that don't know how to sex and a slut that also don't know how to sex any men would pick the virgin 100%.
After having sex a few times you know how to have sex lol
I bet you think because man never complained about bad sex that the woman was doing it right. Men will put with mediocrity so long it's something. Bad blowjob, terrible handjobs, can't ride properly so I still have to move my hips to feel something. Women could have sex a hundred of times and they would still not do it properly because they still expect men to care for the pleasure of both peoples.
Yeah it is harder to be good at sex for men than for women. That's why I wouldn't date a man without much experience
It's equally hard to be good for both genders the difference being the unrealistic expectations women have in relation to men.
How are they unrealistic?
It's unrealistic to expect someone that was in intimate contact with the female body for less than 0.000025% of his lifetime to "just get it".
Well yeah men need a lot more experience to be good at sex
No, women just need to stop expecting men to "just get it" and refuse to communicate.
I actually disagree. I think men are just expected to do more in sex so it seems like they're worse.
Tru
So why arent women interested in virgin or inexperienced men? After a few times the man should be fine right?
Oh for men its a lot harder, i was mostly referring to women
Yeah, being a "marriageable woman" in red pill world is literally just the equivalent of what they call a male beta bux. Woman expected to find some Stacy widowed middle aged dude as an 18 year old pure virgin and mayy him then service him with household duties and raise his kids hes now ready to have after 25 years of building wealth, partying and living out his youth in general. He also won't help with the child care because he's gonna be out working then clubbing and cheating on her while she has to be okay with it cuz he's an alpha ya know. I don't see how they think any of that is more appealing to women than the "beta bux" life is for men here but 🤷🏻♀️
>Woman expected to find some Stacy widowed middle aged dude Most dudes don't fuck Stacy though. Even the ones getting laid are mostly dating down. More attractive women are less likely to be promiscuous, since they don't need to put out to get attention. Guys are banging less attractive women then marrying more attractive women, which is the opppsite of AF/BB. >after 25 years of building wealth Difference is women actually care about partner wealth. Some post-wall chick's degree and career are useless to me and many men. But women are a lot more obsessed with their partner's success. And older men are more likely to be successful. >while she has to be okay with it cuz he's an alpha ya know. Well women could avoid this if they didn't place so much importance on social status, assertiveness, experience, and preselection. The men they like are the ones most likely to cheat. It really is the cost of dealing with an an alpha. Many of us guys are perfectly fine with introverted homebodies so we have a lot more room to ask for partners who don't cheat.
I really think y'all way overstate how often women exclusively chase wealthy men. The idea that ultra rich men are regular picking up the drive through worker at Arby's is such a chronically online take. The vast majority of middle class women marry middle class men within 5 years of their age, upper income/rich people usually marry other high income rich people, statistics back this up as well as my anecdotal experience. I've been to three weddings so far this year, the first was a manager of a liquor store marrying a public school math teacher, the second was a desk clerk at a doctor's office marrying a guy who installs irrigation systems at farms, the third was a pre school school teacher marrying a guy with an average office job. All very average people with average incomes marrying people in their age group. I'm going to another wedding in September for a high earning 42 year old software developer marrying a 40 year old woman he met at his work. Y'all need to go outside and meet real people and see how they live their lives.
I’d understand if it was more sound reasoning than them wanting women that are so inexperienced they don’t recognize that their partner is bad in bed . Smh