Have you ever been in a relationship? Because, unless it's an absolutely terrible one, the weight of the time and memories shared together makes you have a bit of empathy and concern for their general well-being even after you split.
It is, for me. I enter a relationship if I think it's going to last forever (or, more realistically, a very long time). Therefore whatever happens after we break up is something that doesn't concern me. But it concerns me that she hasn't been promiscuous before, because that says a lot about her character.
You'd simply not care about what happens to someone after a break-up at all? With someone you were otherwise prepared to spend your entire life with - given your anti-"promiscuity" position?
If you were prepared to just drop your ex-girlfriend and move on (and would rather have done so than meet the exact same person a few years and a few partners later) then this suggests not that you're against people having multiple partners ... but that you're against women having multiple sexual partners.
Sorry, I meant I don't care about her number of partners after we break up. Not about her as a person.
I am not against or for people having multiple partners. People can do whatever they want. I only care about the number of partners of women I am interested in.
Let's be honest about double standards here. People are absolutely losing their minds because they feel personally attacked because they are promiscuous.
I'm a woman who married her husband, and was extremely picky about marrying someone who wasn't promiscuous (low number of sexual partners).
I have two sons, and a daughter. As a mother you absolutely see the double standards in a couple ways.
Women on tiktok, instagram, and other social media constantly shame men for being under 6 feet. I'm Korean, and I see Asian men being shamed from being under 5'7 in Asian!
Any male preferences get demonized, while female preferences get revered.
It makes me worried for my kids. I don't want my daughter to grow up without a grasp on reality, and I don't want my sons being doormats.
> Any male preferences get demonized, while female preferences get revered.
Let's preface with the fact that I am a male.
What I have seen is the complete opposite. We males aren't "demonized" for being promiscuous, quite the opposite in fact. Females are outright called "sluts".
What you see on the internet is a drop in the bucket. Social media will default to exaggerated points of view, because they generate engagement. Kids will outgrow these fake trends at some point.
I don't think they were talking about a specific trait here. It's simply that any filters/preference women have at all are seen as giving power to women. If a male even has preference in race/religion it's seen as close minded. Political views are about the only "good filter", but you're just putting a huge target on your back anyway.
I still don’t get how some men are so keen to be perceived as victims here.
For centuries, the vast majority of women didn’t have the luxury of choosing. To this day, most men still discriminate on the basis on religion, race, or politics when looking for partners.
What are these men complaining about?
> Political views are about the only "good filter", but you're just putting a huge target on your back anyway.
Yes, most women wouldn’t fuck conservatives because they despise their ideals. Perhaps the issue here is the lack of self awareness among conservatives, then.
>I still don’t get how some men are so keen to be perceived as victims here.
I see it less about victims and more about empathy. You can understand the historical burden minorities and women have had and also still sympathize with modern dating scene, for men and women alike.
> Nowhere in the article says that women prefer "promiscuous" men, but men regarded as "attractive" by other women.
What do women do with the men they are attracted to, generally speaking? Is there anything women could use as a informal gauge as to how attractive other women find any particular man?
> It also does not justify the fact that women are regarded more negatively when they have had multiple sexual partners, compared to men.
Oh OK, so when 5 foot tall women should stop being creepy and preferring men taller than them right? Their preferences are unbalanced and unjustified correct?
> What do women do with the men they are attracted to, generally speaking? Is there anything women could use as a informal gauge as to how attractive other women find any particular man?
Have you even read the article you yourself posted?
> Oh OK, so when 5 foot tall women should stop being creepy and preferring men taller than them right? Their preferences are unbalanced and unjustified correct?
I honestly cannot believe I would have to explain this to a seemingly functional adult.
We are talking about the imbalance in how sexual activity is regarded depending on gender.
Preferring taller or shorter partners is not "creepy", same as in choosing between blondes or brunettes. No one, outside the constant noise that is social media, is going to chastise you for choosing one or another.
Asking about "body count" before dating someone is creepy, because our society regards this as a private matter. Even worse, as I said, men get a pass on this, and women do not.
It blows my mind that anyone would be trying to compare one to another, and even tried to spin it into "promiscuous men are more preferable among women anyway". What the hell?
If recounting one's sexual experiences to a stranger for the possibility of becoming their partner, is just "feelings land", then rejecting that person for having too many sexual partners is too, and so is to reject the person who asked how many.
I wonder if you yourself have started any date by saying "I have fucked this many people". After all, it seems only natural that you would lead by example. How has that worked for you so far?
You don't have to ask, I've never asked, behavior is a pretty good indicator and if you are in college or a smaller community word gets around.
Hey man, men rejecting women like that just leaves more for you right? Nobody is stopping you from having a former sex worker as a wife, it's just I and many people like me don't feel lifelong commitment with such a person is worthwhile or desirable.
This is a big thing in the islamic world, where men want their wives to be virgins. I think this is (perhaps subconsciously) caused by insecurity; "what if the previous guy had a bigger dick than me?".
Obviously when we talk about the number of sexual partners we mean in regards to the woman's age. It's not the same having had 10 partners at age 40 than at age 20.
I talk about women because I'm a man! Women also select men in other ways. Nothing wrong about it. Men and women are different and we have different things that makes us tick.
That's not true at all, I had multitude of friends that had 5-10+ sexual partners at age of 20, I also had friends with 3 sexual partners at age ~25-28. Number of sexual partners correlate with attractiveness and promiscuousness more than age.
How is that creepy? Or maybe in which part of the world is it creepy? in your cultural circle? Because in EU where I live nothing about it is creepy.
How is creepy to have own preference? I can't have it? It's not like I'm judging someone by their race that they can't change, I'm judging them by their own actions. They choose to behave in certain way, and it's ok, it's their choice to do what they want, but don't tell me I'm creepy because I have my own preferences, I can choose freely too.
why is it "weird, creepy shit"? I think it's gross when people sleep around a lot and it's a major turn off. I don't see it as being any worse than finding someone attractive or not based on any other characteristics. At least people can control how much they sleep around; how tall you are is largely out of your hands.
Why does her behavior before your relationship speak of her character, but her behavior during and after not speak of her character?
I presume the reason you want to date someone with fewer partners is because you are trying to weed out partners who are unlikely to stick around. So if she doesn't stick around anyway because she wants to play the field, that means your judgement was wrong.
If you don't actually care about breakups (which is the impression your comments are giving me), I'm not sure why any of it matters. Why avoid dating someone with a long history of break-ups if you don't actually care when or why your relationships end?
For what it's worth, when I was looking for a partner, I discounted men who had more than a couple short-term relationships like that. Even if they were completely serious about all of those relationships and it was their partners who left them for a more promiscuous lifestyle, a pattern of such relationships speaks poorly of their ability to identify compatibility in a partner. I was picky about men I would date, and so I was only interested in men who were similarly picky about women they would date.
>Why does her behavior before your relationship speak of her character, but her behavior during and after not speak of her character?
When I enter a relationship, I cannot reliably predict what her behaviour will be during or after the relationship. But I can extrapolate what her current and future behaviour will be from her previous behaviour. Of course, I can guess wrong, but at least I tried.
The number of partners must equal the number of breakups. I don't see the practical difference? I say I want a partner who's had few partners, which means I want a partner who's had few breakups. A woman who's had more partners than breakups has had one or several one-night stands, and those are automatically discarded - I do not even consider them.
Also when I said I want someone with few partners and I am only interested in long relationships I thought it was implied that I was more interested in women whose few relationships had been long.
>a pattern of such relationships speaks poorly of their ability to identify compatibility in a partner
Maybe. But that's not necessarily her fault. My soft skills are very poor so I can't ask for more :) Also she could have had very bad luck. Not a strong reason to discard someone in my book, although it's something to take into account.
Ok, I think I understand your position better now. However, I think maybe you misunderstood mine in my original comment:
>When I enter a relationship, I cannot reliably predict what her behaviour will be during or after the relationship. But I can extrapolate what her current and future behaviour will be from her previous behaviour.
This is the point I was trying to get at. Past behavior is the best predictor we have of future behavior, which is why it is valuable to date people who have a history of behavior for us to examine. It makes it easier to weed out bad matches from good matches. When people have no history of behavior (i.e., they are young and don't have a lot of life/dating experience), there is really no way to know what their future behavior will be.
My main thrust is that early-age marriage is not actually a good thing. It is better for people to marry after they are more experienced, even if that experience reveals that maybe some people shouldn't marry at all (i.e., it is better that they never marry at all than that they get married young and later realize they shouldn't have).
>The number of partners must equal the number of breakups.
Yes, they are the same (I guess outside of ongoing polyamorous relationships). I just used that wording to emphasize the breaking-up aspects of these previous relationships.
Yes? What do I care what happens to her after we break up?