Quote:
I would argue that slut shaming displays insecurity.
It can. It can also be an indicator of higher worth.
Prepare for a nerd rant or zone out:
The human mind was shaped by natural selection in the context of the early human's social and physical environment. We evolved in relatively small tribes in the African savannah. However, sexual behavior in many mammals, especially ones which display evidence of monogamous relationships show that the dynamics are very similar. Males have minimal investment in the act of sex with a female. Sperm production is cheap and renewable. A male can mate with a number of females at very low biological risk or cost to himself, and it is in his interest to spread his genes as widely as possible. This creates an incentive for the male to impregnate as many as females as possible. Studies have been done and actually show that more promiscuous mammals such as chimps produce more, and more viscous sperm because it is LITERALLY a race to the egg. The higher quality females mate with the best males in a rapid succession, and the males with the most/most viscous sperm have an advantage over the others and a higher chance of impregnation. Human semen has been found to be closer to that of the more promiscuous primates, such as chimps.
The case for a female is the opposite. Mating with a male is a huge biological investment. The opportunity, health, and time cost of a pregnancy is huge, and the risks are large. A female wants to be impregnated by the most genetically fit male, so that her offspring is of the highest quality possible, and that her genes will be the most successful. However, the most genetically fit males, tend to be shitty partners (this has actually been demonstrated in controlled studies), and flake on parental duties, because they know that by playing the field they will be more genetically prolific (nature made this easy enough to understand "I'm horny and look at all these babes that want it"). Therefore the female needs to find a "nice guy"/reliable mate that will protect her and look after her while she's pregnant and help raise the child. Generally the guys that are willing to sacrifice so much energy and effort tend to be ones who are not the "fittest" and have limited options ("she's the best i can do, i better not do anything to lose her"). This gives an incentive for the female to stray from her chump mate and mate with the highest quality male she can find, without being caught. This has been demonstrated time and time again in controlled animal studies, and in controlled human preference studies. Women prefer the "alpha" guys for mating, but later on, the "beta" guys to be providers.
The absolutely worst thing that can happen to you in biology, is being fooled in to raising someone else's offspring thinking its yours. It renders you a total and utter Darwininan failure, and it cuts you out of the gene pool with a vengeance. Not only did you not reproduce, but you actually helped someone who is of no kin to you pass on their genes, creating more competition for your kin.
For this reason, there is nothing "weird" about men wanting women who have not slept with 9001 men. They want mates that they do not have to worry about cheating, and then having to raise another man's child. In fact, for a man, it is far far worse to be cheated on and not know, than to be left for someone else. Being dumped means you can find new females and procreate. Until paternal testing (all of evolution), being cheated on and not finding out meant you're FUCKED.
On the flipside, a woman's chances of surviving/reproducing, while harmed by the danger of her man leaving if he was to impregnate another female, are not as affected. Women evolved to be in a bigger fear of being abandoned, and left to their own devices, which in the evolutionary context, put them in a bigger twist than a loner man would be in. That's why, in many cultures, a women tolerate cheating men as long as they stay with her (I don't think this is right, nor do I advocate for this, but I'm explaining why it happens and why it works).
Now, before the Feminazi Waffen SS breaks down my door and carries me off for a mandatory castration, I want to qualify this explanation with the following:
All human behavior evolved within the context I described. While reality now is completely different, and women don't *need* men to survive, can raise children on their own, and there is now birth control, and paternity testing, STD SPAM, etc etc etc, NONE of this was a factor in the context of the evolution of the human mind. Our minds are still fresh out of Africa, and have not changed in the last 10,000 years. We have the same genes that helped us hunt gazelle and survive in the tribe. There is no Iphone gene, or Birth Control gene. Those natural forces shaped the human thinking to be the way it is now. We do not have to think about any of this. These thought processes were shaped genetically and through natural selection. Those who thought differently did not reproduce successfully.
This is why, a man with a high value, doesn't need to, nor should he have to settle for a female that is quick to sex with strangers. It's because he can find someone who's attractive, but at the same time dedicated to him, and won't put him in as much jeopardy of ultimate biological failure.
Quote:
It is also detrimental to honest communication and to a guy's long-term interactions with women. We are here to better our interactions with women. Therefore, slut-shaming should be discouraged on these forums.
With all due respect, you made some sweeping statements here, with nothing to back them up with.
Quote:
Are you familiar with the Madonna-Whore Complex as it relates to pick-up? It basically states that guys want a girl who's great in bed, is hot and who enjoys sex, but we also want a girl who's innocent and "pure". Guys want the Madonna and the Whore. It's a paradox. You can't have both.
I am familiar with it. Are you familiar with the Goldilocks phenomenon? There is a balance in everything.
Quote:
Sexual variety is GREAT for a long-term relationship. As guys, it's basically our job to provide that variety. Therefore, the more sexually open you are, the better equipped you are to sustain a healthy long-term relationship. If you have hang-ups about sex and sexual activity, then that's one less weapon in your arsenal you can use to maintain a good LTR.
No. The more partners I have, the more difficult it is for me to care about my relationships, and the less committed I become. This applies to every "player" type I know. Some are too far gone to ever be brought back. They're going to try to settle down and end up with 8 divorces by age 45.
CHAT
