[Samseau]

(12-07-2013 04:55 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(12-07-2013 04:14 PM)master_thespian Wrote:  

I stopped asking the girls I date a lot time ago about their sexual history. First off, they will likely just lie, so I don't really see the point?

This. Most girls will lie about their sexual history.

You can tell if a girl is a slut by how she acts, and like the poster above said, the terminology she uses when describing her sexual past.

All of my LTRs have been sluts. Even my first LTR, who was a virgin. She went on to become a huge slut. If you catch them when they're virgins, they're sluts-in-the-making. To me it makes no difference whether they've already banged 20+ dudes or if they do it in the future. I don't get hung up on how many dicks have been in the girl's vagina. I'm not that concerned with anatomical functions.

I am more concerned with the mental, emotional, and spiritual repercussions to having that many sexual partners. No-one wants a bitter, jaded, shit-testing, shell for a partner.

Being a slut is a symptom to a deeper problem we have with women in America. The society here has placed a woman's happiness as the primary virtue, while simultaneously making it impossible for her to be happy.

Exactly. This is the most enlightened view of the subject, imo. I've written about this before but most guys cannot accept the truth.

http://www.returnofkings.com/12791/a-wom...ns-nothing

Quote:

Likewise, a young virgin has not proven to be anything more than a pretty face, tits, and ass. Even if you’re the man to claim her cherry, she’s still nothing more than a new girl you’ve started banging. I’ll never forget how one of my close friends took the virginity of a 22 year old girl. He thought he had found “The One.” He could not get enough of the sex, and could not stop raving about her. But when he revealed he had to go get his Masters in another city, it was but only two weeks after he moved before she was sleeping with a different man.

My friend’s girl was not loyal. She valued herself over her man, and that’s why, even though she “gave” her virginity to him, she was nothing but a slut who had saved her virginity. Valuing virginity, which is inherent to a woman’s birth, is just as absurd as valuing a woman for anything else inherent to her birth, such as her eyeballs or hair. Certain crazy religions have worshiped a woman’s virginity as if it revealed an important truth about her character, when, in fact, they have it backwards: A woman of loyal character is more likely to only sleep with one man in her life, but women who’ve only slept with one man may still be a lying, manipulative, nagging, and combative battleaxe. It is necessary for a woman of good character to have slept with few men, but it is not a sufficient.

Blue pill men mistake the effect for the cause, and see sexual experience as an odometer to be measured, when in fact it is nothing more than one card from her hand. You do not have a complete picture and if she’s smart, you never will. So don’t be a dumbass who places value on a woman’s sexual history. Without any sort of context, virginity means nothing. By logical extension, if there’s no reason to value a virgin, then there’s no reason to value any woman who claims to have limited sexual experience.

And continuing further, I would go as far to say that a huge slut may yet still turn out to be better relationship material (never marriage material) than a virgin, since with the slut you know what you are getting while the virgin is someone who may put on false pretenses with her chastity.