Genuine Classy Lady or a Retired Jump Off?

[carhill]

OP, this 'retired' part is where I think things go sideways. People live and grow and change. Sure, if promiscuity is still part of her mindset and manifests itself in behavior/signals, then she's not 'retired' and, in your case, incompatible. However, if she lived that life, had those experiences, learned from them, and now treats you the way she does and behaves how she does, in positive ways which indicate monogamy, IMO you should accept her retirement as self-evident *unless* future events indicate otherwise. Trust and accept her how she is and for who she is *today*.

 

Ask the women how they accept, trust and love a man who's 'sown his wild oats' (meaning he was a slut). Listen. Learn. Grow. Good luck

[mr.dream merchant]

OP, this 'retired' part is where I think things go sideways. People live and grow and change. Sure, if promiscuity is still part of her mindset and manifests itself in behavior/signals, then she's not 'retired' and, in your case, incompatible. However, if she lived that life, had those experiences, learned from them, and now treats you the way she does and behaves how she does, in positive ways which indicate monogamy, IMO you should accept her retirement as self-evident *unless* future events indicate otherwise. Trust and accept her how she is and for who she is *today*.

 

Ask the women how they accept, trust and love a man who's 'sown his wild oats' (meaning he was a slut). Listen. Learn. Grow. Good luck

 

It's hard Carhill. Promiscuity to me means the bigger the chance of them hurting you. It's a chance I will not take. Also, why settle for the used and busted goods when I can get something less used and busted? Do I want the 96 Altima or the 2010 Altima? I prefer better quality, and I just can't sit down and act as if a once promiscuous woman is the kind of quality and class I want. But I do want to work on that, but the first step is giving the ladies a chance lol..but when it comes to my emotions I'm very protective.

[K'aycie]

Solid feedback. Insecure upon finding out she's really a trashy girl? Hell yes. Trashy girls are NOT good investments. They're too much of a liability. As for the other girl, I've actually made peace with her and we plan on kicking it once she gets back in town. Thankful she actually gave me a second chance. :S Now that the residual feelings for the ex are gone, maybe that friendship will blossom into something nice, but I'm not bankin on it..just going with the flow.

 

No. Insecure because she may have been with other men before you...?

 

Girl with the non promiscuious past, you rejected as a relationship prospect, because she was "boring", but she helped you get over your ex, and now you like her again.

 

Hmmm. Good stuff.

[mr.dream merchant]

No. Insecure because she may have been with other men before you...?

 

Girl with the non promiscuious past, you rejected as a relationship prospect, because she was "boring", but she helped you get over your ex, and now you like her again.

 

Hmmm. Good stuff.

 

When it comes to other men, I'm not insecure. I'm actually pretty confident in that area. What I'm not confident in is a promiscuous woman's ability to stay faithful. Because...she is promiscuous. It's not in her nature. To invest time, love, and money into a promiscuous woman isn't playing the cards you were dealt to the best of your ability.

 

As for the classy girl, no she wasn't boring. We actually pushed for a relationship and once things got heavy I realized I wasn't ready, and let her down the honest way. She was upset, but now we're cool! Not like I had sex with her and left, I actually put my foot down before any heavy physical actions were made.

[carhill]

It's hard Carhill. Promiscuity to me means the bigger the chance of them hurting you

 

Perhaps it does, and that's equal-opportunity. What this parameter, if enforced, does, is limit the size and scope of your dating pool. This may or may not be an issue. However, before pursuing a compatible woman, I would suggest centering yourself and neutralizing the baggage from the ex.

 

FWIW, I'm a low-numbers non-promiscuous guy and I still hurt stbx plenty with my EA. There are *no* guarantees in life. It's completely up to you how you want to handle that uncertainty.

[K'aycie]

What I'm not confident in is a promiscuous woman's ability to stay faithful.

 

There's the nuts and bolts of it. Solid concern and understandable.

[sally4sara]

What I'm not confident in is a promiscuous woman's ability to stay faithful. Because...she is promiscuous. It's not in her nature.

 

So then YOU are not capable of being faithful. It is not in YOUR nature.

 

If you think you are capable of being faithful, then it stands to reason so too can a promiscuous woman. And probably a woman would be more capable of it than you for the lower sex drive.

 

By your standard and assumption - you are not a good choice for anyone either. Go buy a really long ladder so you can come down off that horse.

[mr.dream merchant]

It all boils down to that, who's more likely to cause me pain? Point them out to me, and you'll have front row seats to my back - cause I'm walking the other way.

[zengirl]

I'm not even sure what promiscuous means here.

 

I've known women who sleep around in various ways---some that will have ONS, some that will do FWB---at which point does it become promiscuous? How much is discretion involved? Are you talking about the illustrious "number"?

 

I don't think someone sleeping with many available men when they were available makes them any more likely to cheat than a man doing the same thing with many available women. They weren't cheaters.

 

I find this nature of delving into a woman's past so strange. I've never eliminated a fellow because he slept with too many girls (Honestly, I never even ask this question, because this conversation is never a good one, we all want to pretend that the sex with our new love is so mind-blowing it has thus erased everything that came before, but it always comes up). I wouldn't date a guy who still thought sleeping with lots of women sounded like a cool idea because. . . well, that's self-evident, no?

 

This notion of sex as some sort of badge is weird to me. I don't sleep around, but it's not because I find it to be "giving something away for free." It's because I don't find it fun, interesting, or a good healthy choice for me mentally and emotionally. But I've never been single for a significant amount of time (longest time was 7 months, and that was only once), since I've been sexually active. I imagine my number would be higher if I had been. I look for a healthy attitude towards sex in the present in a mate. It's funny how hung up on this guys get.

[meerkat stew]

I can guarantee any reasonably attractive guy was a fairly big slut at some point or another yet I seldom if ever hear women asking these questions.

 

Have been through this before, will do so again. There is very little comparison between how the average man seeks and obtains sex and how the average woman does so. Women have almost complete control over when and with whom they have sex. Men have very little control over which of their advances result in sex and which will be rejected.

 

How a man seeks and obtains sex is like a legally blind man walking into the woods hunting with a shotgun, shooting at noises. He better keep shooting in hopes of hitting -something-. Sometimes he gets lucky and hits lots of critters in a row, sometimes he doesn't hit anything for days. If he stops shooting though, he will definitely starve.

 

How a woman seeks and obtains sex is like someone in a restaurant who is given a choice of a whole table of dishes set before them. They don't know whether the next dish will be unappealing to them, or whether it will be the best dish ever, before they taste the dish. There will always be something to eat though, it just may or may not be a favorite. If this person eats literally every dish set before them, they are a glutton, and gluttony translates into lots of other areas of life.

 

Men who take advantage of eating everything they manage to shoot blind are keeping fed because they never know for certain where their next meal is coming from. Women who eat every dish they can are gluttons because despite knowing they will always have plenty to eat, they eat everything that is set before them anyway. That's the difference, and it's an elementary and very distinct one.

 

There is no comparison between how average women and men seek and obtain sex, so arguments that go down the "well he did it too" path are without any rational foundation.

[mr.dream merchant]

I'm not even sure what promiscuous means here.

 

I've known women who sleep around in various ways---some that will have ONS, some that will do FWB---at which point does it become promiscuous? How much is discretion involved? Are you talking about the illustrious "number"?

 

I don't think someone sleeping with many available men when they were available makes them any more likely to cheat than a man doing the same thing with many available women. They weren't cheaters.

 

I find this nature of delving into a woman's past so strange. I've never eliminated a fellow because he slept with too many girls (Honestly, I never even ask this question, because this conversation is never a good one, we all want to pretend that the sex with our new love is so mind-blowing it has thus erased everything that came before, but it always comes up). I wouldn't date a guy who still thought sleeping with lots of women sounded like a cool idea because. . . well, that's self-evident, no?

 

This notion of sex as some sort of badge is weird to me. I don't sleep around, but it's not because I find it to be "giving something away for free." It's because I don't find it fun, interesting, or a good healthy choice for me mentally and emotionally. But I've never been single for a significant amount of time (longest time was 7 months, and that was only once), since I've been sexually active. I imagine my number would be higher if I had been. I look for a healthy attitude towards sex in the present in a mate. It's funny how hung up on this guys get.

 

That's just how I, and alot of other guys I know treat dating. Most hot women we would have sex with, but that doesn't necessarily mean we want to date them.

 

A promiscuous girl for me is one that gives up the goods easily. If you're down to screw me and we just met in the club - that's promiscuous. If you're screwing multiple guys - that's promiscuous etc. Yeah she may be single, but honestly any woman with that loose of a view on sexual acts and self preservation is not one I'd want to date. If she's hot, sure, I'll have a good time banging her. But that's all it'll be. Promiscuous all depends upon the person. For me, if you're too loose with your sexuality, I wouldn't bother. Even if you were the most faithful GF in the world, I wouldn't bother. Because considering all the men she's slept with, it's gross. Sleeping with multiple partners when you're single doesn't make you more likely to cheat, it just means you're more likely to give into lust. Which may lead to cheating, STD's, etc..its just a road better NOT taken. Just bang her, use protection, and that's that.

 

And yes, I am 100% aware of the present double standard, but men and women are not one in the same. And the sex game for the both of them isn't. Meerkat provided an excellent analogy.

[brainygirl]

Have been through this before, will do so again. There is very little comparison between how the average man seeks and obtains sex and how the average woman does so. Women have almost complete control over when and with whom they have sex. Men have very little control over which of their advances result in sex and which will be rejected.

 

How a man seeks and obtains sex is like a legally blind man walking into the woods hunting with a shotgun, shooting at noises. He better keep shooting in hopes of hitting -something-. Sometimes he gets lucky and hits lots of critters in a row, sometimes he doesn't hit anything for days. If he stops shooting though, he will definitely starve.

 

How a woman seeks and obtains sex is like someone in a restaurant who is given a choice of a whole table of dishes set before them. They don't know whether the next dish will be unappealing to them, or whether it will be the best dish ever, before they taste the dish. There will always be something to eat though, it just may or may not be a favorite. If this person eats literally every dish set before them, they are a glutton, and gluttony translates into lots of other areas of life.

 

Men who take advantage of eating everything they manage to shoot blind are keeping fed because they never know for certain where their next meal is coming from. Women who eat every dish they can are gluttons because despite knowing they will always have plenty to eat, they eat everything that is set before them anyway. That's the difference, and it's an elementary and very distinct one.

 

There is no comparison between how average women and men seek and obtain sex, so arguments that go down the "well he did it too" path are without any rational foundation.

 

Bull and ****.

 

Could I, attractive, articulate woman that I am, get laid if I walked into a bar or club with that in mind? Yes, by anyone I wanted? No.

 

Could a guy get laid if that was his only aim? Yes, with the girl he wants? No.

 

It isn't that easy.

[K'aycie]

Originally Posted by mr.dream merchantWhat I'm not confident in is a promiscuous woman's ability to stay faithful.

 

Promiscuous all depends upon the person. For me, if you're too loose with your sexuality, I wouldn't bother. Even if you were the most faithful GF in the world, I wouldn't bother.

 

I think you need to figure out what it is exactly, that you are looking for, because it doesn't appear that you really know.

[mr.dream merchant]

I think you need to figure out what it is exactly' date=' that you are looking for, because it doesn't appear that you really know.[/quote']

 

That's basically it. Promiscuous women aren't a risk worth taking.

[zengirl]

That's just how I, and alot of other guys I know treat dating. Most hot women we would have sex with, but that doesn't necessarily mean we want to date them.

 

A promiscuous girl for me is one that gives up the goods easily. If you're down to screw me and we just met in the club - that's promiscuous. If you're screwing multiple guys - that's promiscuous etc. Yeah she may be single, but honestly any woman with that loose of a view on sexual acts and self preservation is not one I'd want to date. If she's hot, sure, I'll have a good time banging her. But that's all it'll be. Promiscuous all depends upon the person. For me, if you're too loose with your sexuality, I wouldn't bother. Even if you were the most faithful GF in the world, I wouldn't bother. Because considering all the men she's slept with, it's gross. Sleeping with multiple partners when you're single doesn't make you more likely to cheat, it just means you're more likely to give into lust. Which may lead to cheating, STD's, etc..its just a road better NOT taken. Just bang her, use protection, and that's that.

 

And yes, I am 100% aware of the present double standard, but men and women are not one in the same. And the sex game for the both of them isn't. Meerkat provided an excellent analogy.

 

At least you admit to being a hypocrite, I guess. I don't sleep around, but I wouldn't date someone with a double standard like this, whether he was promiscuous or not. We all have our deal breakers, I guess. Choose what works best for you.

 

Have been through this before, will do so again. There is very little comparison between how the average man seeks and obtains sex and how the average woman does so. Women have almost complete control over when and with whom they have sex. Men have very little control over which of their advances result in sex and which will be rejected.

 

How a man seeks and obtains sex is like a legally blind man walking into the woods hunting with a shotgun, shooting at noises. He better keep shooting in hopes of hitting -something-. Sometimes he gets lucky and hits lots of critters in a row, sometimes he doesn't hit anything for days. If he stops shooting though, he will definitely starve.

 

How a woman seeks and obtains sex is like someone in a restaurant who is given a choice of a whole table of dishes set before them. They don't know whether the next dish will be unappealing to them, or whether it will be the best dish ever, before they taste the dish. There will always be something to eat though, it just may or may not be a favorite. If this person eats literally every dish set before them, they are a glutton, and gluttony translates into lots of other areas of life.

 

Men who take advantage of eating everything they manage to shoot blind are keeping fed because they never know for certain where their next meal is coming from. Women who eat every dish they can are gluttons because despite knowing they will always have plenty to eat, they eat everything that is set before them anyway. That's the difference, and it's an elementary and very distinct one.

 

There is no comparison between how average women and men seek and obtain sex, so arguments that go down the "well he did it too" path are without any rational foundation.

 

You can justify your hypocrisy any way you like for you, but that's all you're doing. Not all women who've slept with a lot of fellows sleep with everyone who offers---I know attractive women who sleep around some (I'd say "quite a bit" but again, I've no idea what numbers y'all are talking about, and what I consider a lot might not BE a lot), but it doesn't mean they'd sleep with anyone. They don't. Like men, they don't know when the next person they actually want to sleep with, who wants to sleep with them, might come around. Sex is not food, and no one NEEDS to have it. It's about pleasure, not need.

 

That said, I think men and women who pick up strangers in clubs and sleep with them are exposing themselves to undue health risks, and, as such, that's unattractive. Just like smoking is to me. But, if it was in the past, I wouldn't consider it a dealbreaker with a fellow. Assuming there were no after-effects relating to health and such.

Edited August 9, 2010 by zengirl

[a_woman]

I think what it comes down to is many of us would kill for the chance to be with someone amazing who is also incredibly selective and who would choose us over everyone else. We all want to feel special and secure. As carhill said though, you have to learn to deal with uncertainty.

[ascendotum]

"But for the most part, I'm a gentleman with women. Kind, courteous, attentive, etc.."

To me there's your answer as to why the girls want to go steady with you instead of just bang you.

 

"Which is the part that kind of irks me a bit. Because even the most promiscuous girl will be a modern day Jacqueline Kennedy for a guy she really sees fit for a boyfriend."

In most circumstances this is correct, you'll never know unless you have moved in the same social circles beforehand. I know a few skanky/freaky/total ladette women who are now devoted married wives & mothers living in suburbia with a devoted husband, who are most likely oblivious to her past. It helps if they have moved on from the crowd they ran with.

 

The issue of a dating a promiscuous girl will be much more of a big deal to a guy if his friends are aware of her past. Still many guys will baulk at girl who was an easy lay for many guys. Unlike the male equivalent it does not make him feel special to have won her over. Does not matter what logic a woman might apply to the defense of promiscuous women for many men you will not change the mind set.

For the women I have been with and this also applies with my mates, the women who admitted to having many sex partners (or was rumored to or was inferred by her comments) tended to have physiological issues, were unstable/ moody and admitted to drug use or getting blotto drunk a lot in their past or admitted to cheating (because they thought their bf was or their bf pissed them off, etc)

 

The thing that I have found also is that for the majority of the ‘player’ guys that I know is that when it comes to settling down they choose younger, sweet natured ‘nice type’ girls with history of a few LTRs, and did not meet them in a club. Somewhat of a double standard.

 

OP – I do think for many guys the more recent her ‘slutty’ days are, the more it would weigh on their mind to the extent that they would not consider her gf material or it would sabotage the relationship. The longer the gap the less it becomes a factor, though it still depends on the guys principles.

[lino]

Would you date a woman who's RECENT past (0-2 years) was that of a "slut"? By definition that'd be a woman who gave up the goods easy to whoever she found attractive, and whomever chose to pursue it? Who's been with an off-putting number of males within a small time frame? What if she was a "slut" but a great girlfriend? Would how she carries herself when she's single tarnish/ruin her image for you as far as taking her serious goes?

 

 

No, I wouldn't go out with a woman who has a past like that.

 

I would've overlooked it when I was younger but not anymore. Personal experience has made me think differently about this sort of thing.

[sally4sara]

Actually I rethought this. Guys like the OP and those that agree with him need to stay this picky if not even more so.

 

For every girl you refuse to date, there will be one more that is spared the time they would spend being the prop for your ego, ridiculous expectations and the eventual cheating you will do on them.

They won't have to be the thing you use to impress your friends.

They won't have to be with someone who has stunted ideas about female sexuality.

They will be spared the long term awful sex women end up having with guys who hold these views.

And they won't catch the STDs guys who pump and dump carry.

 

If you're just having casual sex with people you think have lots of casual sex - you'll probably end up with a casual disease. And then, when you settle down with a chaste girl who never learned to enjoy sex - the rest of us won't have to worry about her creating more STD carriers in her wake because she doesn't like sex. And its not like you're going to change her mind about sex because you don't feel female sexual enjoyment is possible, important or appropriate.

 

Ahhh the bigger picture wins every time.

[lino]

Topics like this are the easiest way to disinguish which female members are either very promiscuous presently or have a very colourful past.

 

Word it and twist it around however much you like girls

[zengirl]

Topics like this are the easiest way to disinguish which female members are either very promiscuous presently or have a very colourful past.

 

Word it and twist it around however much you like girls

 

Oh, dear God, what decade do we live in? I don't have sex outside of relationships because it'd turn me into a crazy person, emotionally, but I certainly reserve my right to sleep with anyone for any reason I want, so long as we're two consenting adults, without considering it "colorful."

 

Hypocrisy is lame, but I know women who won't date promiscuous men/formerly promiscuous men either. . . not that you ever actually know, mind you, or even have much of a clue, unless you go interrogating folks on early dates. (Which nothing is sexier than expressing your sexual insecurities by asking loads of questions about a gal's sexual past. . . Really. ) If a fellow hasn't slept around himself, I find this attitude not terribly offensive, though I still don't get it. People care too much about the past and the future and rarely evaluate a person for who they are in the moment. But that's just my thing. I get the reasoning behind wanting to feel "special" I guess, but it just seems like an ego-feed. Then again, that's what most people use relationships for, whether they realize it or not, I suppose. And why so many fail to last.

 

Though, FWIW, I think this is a bit of a leap, too:

 

And its not like you're going to change her mind about sex because you don't feel female sexual enjoyment is possible, important or appropriate.

It seems like the fellows in this particular instance are concerned with number of partners, not quality of sex or what the gal did with her SOs. I think it's even lamer if this also translates into not liking a gal who knows what she likes in the bedroom, etc, because that has almost nothing to do with promiscuity.

 

I'd still like a number ratio to assess what y'all consider "promiscuous." What does that even mean?

Edited August 9, 2010 by zengirl

[carhill]

I'd still like a number to assess what y'all consider "promiscuous." What does that even mean?

 

Here's a point where it gets interesting, and it didn't occur to me until just now. Stbx, of the 33 years she's been an 'adult', was married for 24 of those years, with three different men. By her admission, my recollection was between 40 and 50 partners in total. So, subtract out three men (she was married to) and that leaves 37-47 partners in nine years of technically not being married and as an adult. It doesn't include the years where she was under 18 and presumably sexually active. I would assume she's added a few to that number since we've been separated. She was not an obviously promiscuous woman, by behavior; IOW, she didn't openly, at least while we were married, solicit the attentions of other men like some of her married female friends did to me.

 

However, a woman does not have to do that. As allina complained in a rant thread, she's tired of always having to fend off the advances of men when she clearly is not seeking any attention. In those instances, all she (or stbx) would have to do is say 'yes', and another number is added to the spreadsheet. It's as simple as that, really. They *choose* to say 'yes' but the offer, in duplicate and triplicate, is right there in front of their face seemingly every day. So, while we were married, did stbx say 'yes'? Unknown. I'm just glad to be out of the total dynamic. It was a good lesson.

[sally4sara]

Though, FWIW, I think this is a bit of a leap, too:

 

I lived in a awful neighborhood during my teen years where this mentality was common. And since I was into things girls were less commonly into - I got an earful. This mentality follows with the things "good girls" won't do in bed, things in bed that indicate the girl isn't a "good girl", the things you need a "side piece" for because you don't marry girls who will do those things. Women were seen as things you DID sex to, not have sex with. "Good girls" were for having babies and being mothers. The others were the ones the guys boasted about lying to to get sex - so it wasn't as thought they thought the promiscuous ones LIKED sex -they were just more easily tricked out of it. Boasting about how quickly they got their "nut" and was out of there. How funny it was that the girl kept calling them. And then they were dumb enough to think I'd enjoy their attention and try to go out with me after I'd over heard so many of their conversations!

 

I'm really glad though, that I met intelligent men who don't think this way. Glad I learned that men who think this way are not as common as they would like to believe. Men who know that it isn't what you do behind close doors that indicates character, but how you treat others and how honest you are in your dealing with people. When I have ran into men who think this way, I noticed other qualities they shared. And none of those qualities were desirable either.

 

Another thing it seemed to indicate is that they couldn't comprehend that perhaps some of the promiscuous women they met - viewed them as trash for use too. As though all woman want a relationship so badly that any guy would do. When in reality, men like this are not relationship material themselves because when women DO want to settle down and have kids, they want to have those kids with a member of their own species. That is impossible to do with a guy who hasn't figured out women are people too. Who wants to have kids with someone who will make their daughter feel bad and push their son into a teen pregnancy situation? The only thing guys like this are good for is exercise and sport. How many of them can you have chasing you like fools while you laugh your butt off with your friends.

 

Oh those ridiculous high school days and the folks that never develop beyond that mentality.

[meerkat stew]

Bull and ****.

 

Could I, attractive, articulate woman that I am, get laid if I walked into a bar or club with that in mind? Yes, by anyone I wanted? No.

 

Could a guy get laid if that was his only aim? Yes, with the girl he wants? No.

 

It isn't that easy.

 

The analogy is completely apt, any thinking person will realize that upon reading it. Call BS all you want, doesn't make it the case, or rather propose a better analogy. I'm all ears.

 

That an average woman can't always obtain sex from the -exact- person she first chooses doesn't change the analogy at all. She can pretty much -always- obtain sex with a partner acceptable to her with paltry effort. It may take five minutes or fifty, but it -will- happen if she chooses. She will get fed.

 

If you think the same is true for average men, you are incredibly naive.

[zengirl]

Your analogy requires sex be food to men but something unnecessary to women. Oh, men need it, and they don't know where their next "meal" will come from, so they devour and seek anything they can get. Nobody needs sex. The idea that men need sex (which no one does) but women don't (even though sex is just as natural for women as it is for men, or else it'd be downright unhealthy in every relationship and no one would ever have a healthy sex life) and should thus refrain, especially since they can "get" it. I imagine most "promiscuous" women don't sleep with everyone who asks (I'd wager just about NO woman does that), so it's not as though they're eating every "meal" that's put in front of them.

 

It just sounds more like jealousy than anything else. Silly. So, a man is okay (still jealous but can cope) with women having easier access to sex so long as they don't want or exercise it. Why on Earth are men so bitter about this? Jeez. . . Stop sleeping with girls so easily if you're upset and jealous that they can get it whenever they want it!

 

Here's a point where it gets interesting, and it didn't occur to me until just now. Stbx, of the 33 years she's been an 'adult', was married for 24 of those years, with three different men. By her admission, my recollection was between 40 and 50 partners in total. So, subtract out three men (she was married to) and that leaves 37-47 partners in nine years of technically not being married and as an adult. It doesn't include the years where she was under 18 and presumably sexually active. I would assume she's added a few to that number since we've been separated. She was not an obviously promiscuous woman, by behavior; IOW, she didn't openly, at least while we were married, solicit the attentions of other men like some of her married female friends did to me.

 

Okay, well that does sound like a lot of folks to have slept with, and I suppose it'd make me raise an eyebrow if I did that math on a fellow's sexual history. See, things like that. . . they don't make me think, "Men being silly and jealous." That's a sensible thing to worry about. It's a lot of partners for 9 total years, and yes, how likely is it one of them slipped in during the married years? I get you there. I don't have a moral attitude against it, but I can see the point at least.

 

I lived in a awful neighborhood during my teen years where this mentality was common. And since I was into things girls were less commonly into - I got an earful. This mentality follows with the things "good girls" won't do in bed, things in bed that indicate the girl isn't a "good girl", the things you need a "side piece" for because you don't marry girls who will do those things. Women were seen as things you DID sex to, not have sex with. "Good girls" were for having babies and being mothers. The others were the ones the guys boasted about lying to to get sex - so it wasn't as thought they thought the promiscuous ones LIKED sex -they were just more easily tricked out of it. Boasting about how quickly they got their "nut" and was out of there. How funny it was that the girl kept calling them. And then they were dumb enough to think I'd enjoy their attention and try to go out with me after I'd over heard so many of their conversations!

 

I'm really glad though, that I met intelligent men who don't think this way. Glad I learned that men who think this way are not as common as they would like to believe. Men who know that it isn't what you do behind close doors that indicates character, but how you treat others and how honest you are in your dealing with people. When I have ran into men who think this way, I noticed other qualities they shared. And none of those qualities were desirable either.

 

Another thing it seemed to indicate is that they couldn't comprehend that perhaps some of the promiscuous women they met - viewed them as trash for use too. As though all woman want a relationship so badly that any guy would do. When in reality, men like this are not relationship material themselves because when women DO want to settle down and have kids, they want to have those kids with a member of their own species. That is impossible to do with a guy who hasn't figured out women are people too. Who wants to have kids with someone who will make their daughter feel bad and push their son into a teen pregnancy situation? The only thing guys like this are good for is exercise and sport. How many of them can you have chasing you like fools while you laugh your butt off with your friends.

 

Oh those ridiculous high school days and the folks that never develop beyond that mentality.

 

Oh, I understand this exists. And it's crap, I agree. I just think talking about numbers is a different thing, as I tried to explain with the "experience" versus numbers part after. If a fellow is judging a girl by her experience or sexual desire, he's just an idiot. Numbers. . . well, if he isn't promiscuous himself, I find it more limiting than anything, and then of course there's hypocrisy if he is or wants to be promiscuous himself, but it's not quite the same ugliness as all this. This is a particular breed of ugly.