How Come a Man Can Have Casual Sex And Be a “Good Guy” But a Woman Can’t?

Alex over at The Urban Dater wrote an interesting post asserting that free dating sites are mostly for people who want casual sex or a middle finger to tyrannyone night stand.

Even on OkCupid, the standard-bearer of all free online dating sites, women can’t get away from the fact that there are dudes that want one night stands; as evidenced when I peruse the countless profiles with that disclaimer at the end about not wanting one-night nookie. Deal with it. That’s what free online dating means. One night bang sessions.

Now, it’s possible that this article was really just a thinly veiled schill for Match.com. If it’s not, allow me to explain what I think this essay is really all about.

 

Free sites are where people who want one night stands flock to. Craigslist anyone? Shit, that site gave me a good number of disposable poon. Sure, it’s an ugly thought, but, hey, that’s why I was there.

I’ve talked to a number of women who get a ton of messages from guys who are hitting them up saying things like “sweetie,” “baby,” “nice tits” and more… detailed. A couple of my female friends have confided that, to a degree, they love the attention. But they just want a good guy. That’s reasonable. Don’t we all? Well, in my case, I’d like a good girl. Good girls are everywhere to be found, but why the fuck would a woman who wants a “good guy,” who doesn’t want a one night stand, put a profile up on a free online dating site? That’s just insane! Free dating sites stop short of putting the punany on a platter and serve it up to any who are buying… That’s crazy to me.

Am I reading this correctly? Alex can fuck around Craigslist with wild abandon and still be a “good guy.” He can get all kinds of “poon” or “punany” or whatever adorable name for a woman’s vagina that he likes and his virtue is still in tact. But if a woman does the very same thing, apparently she’s not what Alex considers a “good girl.” That would be an example of hypocrisy, folks. And slut shaming. And douchebaggery. If a woman uses a free site like OK Cupid then that must mean she’s exclusively seeking casual sex and therefore is a “bad girl.” Here’s the best part: he knows he’s screwed around Craigslist and still considers himself a good guy. He has no definitive knowledge of what the women are doing, yet feels quite comfortable slapping them with the slut label anyway. Am I reading this correctly? The implications seem pretty clear to me.

I’ve been saying this to women for years. I can’t believe it but I’m going to say the same thing to men. A woman can express interest in a sexual relationship or enjoy sex with various partners and still be relationship material. Because, see, sex is fun. Humans like sex. And most of us are pretty careful and safe and responsible and take the necessary precautions. Sometimes? We don’t. But guess what? We’re STILL relationship material. One can have nothing to do with the other.

As for the whole nonsense about free sites being monopolized by people who just want sex, please. Do you really think that paying $30 a month is going to deter a man or woman solely seeking casual sex? Allow me to answer that for you. No, it doesn’t.  Also, why do people forget that OK Cupid also has a paid membership option and that many people utilize it? I deal with female clients every week who are on Match and talk about the guys they believe are only looking for a quick hook up. The attention/free meal/sex seekers are everywhere. Are there more on free sites? Probably. The majority of them make their intentions known upfront, either by stating in their profile what they seek or not making a smidge of effort to complete their ad. You don’t need a PhD in Psychology or Forensics to spot those guys. So it’s not impossible to avoid them.

There is one type of guy becoming more prevalent on dating sites that are hard to read. They’re the guys who, like their female counterparts, include disclaimers in their profiles about not wanting to meet anyone “just” looking for a casual hook-up. Allow me to deconstruct these morally superior dudes.  Here’s what statements like that as well as quotes like the ones above are really saying, “I’ve boned my way around the internet and now I want a ‘good girl.’ Because guys can screw around all they like. Women who do that are sluts. ” The guys insisting upon wanting a “good girl” are really just projecting on to the women their own self-loathing and insecurity for either giving it up “too soon” or because they fear they’ll never satisfy a sexually experienced woman. They’re inability to reconcile with their own choices are the true threat to their pursuit of finding true love. To put it more succinctly, they got caught up in all the sex that was available to them or feel somehow threatened and now hate themselves for it. But instead of just deciding to stop hooking up, they place the responsibility for their sex spree on the women. The women seduced them, you see.

Women are just as guilty of this. they encounter men who all but tell them they just want to get off, but they meet them out of curiosity or some other lame excuse. They lay out stupid tests, and even when they guy fails all of them,they still have sex with them. Then the guy bails. Then they complain about never meeting any “good guys.”

 Free dating sites are custom-made for people to get their bang on. And, yeah, yeah, maybe you met your long-term boyfriend there, or your husband, wife, fiance, life-mate, whatever; doesn’t change the fact that if one night stand poon was on the table that they’d take it.

For people who get laid fairly easily, every medium is custom made for people “to get their bang on.” The platform is not what gets them laid. Their attractiveness and skill set is what gets them laid. Women want the good guy who also makes them toss aside those arbitrary rules they cling to so they can enjoy a night of face-meltingly good sex. I’ve said it before: the women who complain about nice guys or how they want a good guy just need a reason to believe that they’re different or special and they’re in bed on the first date. The reason why guys who send emails asking for a hook up don’t get laid is because they lack finesse. That’s it. The women who say they “just want a good guy” really mean they want a good guy who also happens to turn them on. A guy who is capable of seducing them on the first date is that guy, and that guy is all over most dating sites, especially ones like OK Cupid. That explains why someone might plead with women to stop using a free dating site. Those sites provide far too much competition for them.

It’s concerning to me how offended some of these guys sound at the prospect of a woman wanting to hook up with men. When did that become such a crime? And what is at the root this apparent skittishness towards sexually assertive women?

 

 

 

 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Share
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

80 Responses to “How Come a Man Can Have Casual Sex And Be a “Good Guy” But a Woman Can’t?”

  1. Greg Figueroa Says:

    Interestingly enough if Alex used Craigslist for easy sex, why didn’t he explicitly say that about OKCupid. I mean I can inferred it from his opinion on OKC. It’s easier to rag on Craigslist, but people still go on dates using it. It has a bad rep, but how accurate is it I wonder?

    Also, he’s talking from a certain experience point of a guy who gets laid. Other guys would disagree with him because they don’t get laid at all or as much. Personally, I know sex comes from anywhere if you have some social awareness. Ultimately, I agree with Moxie about any medium is custom made to get us laid.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3

  2. jack Says:

    Except you don’t get to decide who is “relationship material”. Men do.

    You simply asserting that women who sleep around are still relationship material doesn’t make it so. Your metrics for what makes a girl good relationship material don’t mean anything. Only men’s metrics matter and on this issue they have voiced loud and clear that they don’t want to have committed relationships with girls who sleep around. Sorry.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 37

    • Trix Says:

      I’ll tell my long term BF that. He’ll be surprised to hear it.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 13

      • jack Says:

        No he won’t. If men didn’t care about a woman’s sexual past, then articles like this one wouldn’t exist.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 16

        • Trix Says:

          You speak for all men? No gender is a monolith.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 8

          • jack Says:

            all men who are speaking honestly would rather date a girl who has had less previous sexual partners. Just because your boyfriend is dating you means nothing.. he could have no better options. That doesn’t mean he prefers you with the mileage you have.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 40 Thumb down 41

            • Trix Says:

              If you say so!

              I think I live in a different world than most of these mouth-breathers who cannot fathom:
              -the idea that women can and do enjoy sex for its own merits
              -the idea that there are men who appreciate those kind of women
              -the idea that not everyone is as insecure as them, and needs a partner who remains sexually inexperienced so that partner won’t recognize their lack of prowess.

              You look for those chaste women! We’ll see how well it works out for you.

              Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 18

            • James Says:

              So a man who does not agree with you must be dishonest. Very clever. Clap, clap.

              You are infallible in terms of logic, because you do not follow logic.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 21

            • Clover Says:

              Jack? I think you’re over-egging it. You can’t say what ‘all men’ honestly think. What about guys who marry prostitutes? Clearly they can afford to skip out on commitment and just hire a new pretty lady whenever they want sex….but they decide they want a relationship because actually men consider more than just how well-used a woman’s cagina is before deciding to spend a lifetime with her.
              You would be right if you said most men don’t like a woman to have had a ‘lot’ of sexual partners, but it depends on cicumstance – his norms, her previous relationships, and what else they like about one another. Men who don’t care about a girl’s history may be in the minority, but it’s a big enough minority that a woman with other attractive features than her vagina won’t have a problem finding a partner.

              Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 7

    • Raving Lunatic Says:

      “You simply asserting that women who sleep around are still relationship material doesn’t make it so. ”

      By the same token, you asserting that they aren’t doesn’t make it so, either. As Trix said, no gender is a monolith, so speak for yourself as you will. But don’t deign to speak for me, please. Your metrics for what makes good material is only valid for one person – You.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 12

  3. Keanu Says:

    As much as I’d like this to be true, I’ve found it is not. If I find out a woman whom I am with has had a large amount of sexual partners, I automatically put her in the ‘not going to date seriously’ category. I’ve tried to date girls who are sexually liberated…but I always feel like I’m nothing special to them. I feel like I’m putting in all of this work and time and effort and she finally sleeps with me after a few months of dating…and then I found out how she slept with several guys on one night stands. I don’t feel special in that situation. I feel like that super-attracted and sexual connection isn’t real, like it’s an act she is putting on for me whereas with these other guys she just couldn’t control herself.

    So there’s that.

    The bottom line is this (and girls do not like to hear it, but it’s true): There will always be a stigma for girls who sleep with lots of men, because it is EASY to do. If you are a moderately attractive girl and you go to a bar with the intent of having sex, it’ll happen if you bat your eyelashes with a low cut shirt and let guys talk to you and buy you drinks. Not very difficult to do. Just say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to a guy’s questions. However, if you are a guy and you go to the bar and are socially inept, even if you are one of the ‘good guys’ you speak of in this article, you will not be able to sleep with women. You will go home alone. Even if you have some social skills you will still have a hard time finding a girl who just wants to hook up with you. Men hear a girl say ‘well you know, I’m not really looking for anything serious right now” and their ears perk up. Thus the stigma.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 19

    • AnnieNonymous Says:

      You state that attractive women can easily get laid but unattractive or socially awkward men can’t. That’s true. But why judge all women for the pursuits of the attractive ones? What about the attractive men and the unattractive women? I’d say the score is pretty even. You can’t always control which category you fall into, but comparing pretty women and ugly men, as if those are the only two categories of human beings, doesn’t fly.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 14

      • Brigadon Says:

        Actually even ORDINARY or somewhat unattractive girls can get laid easily, as long as they are reasonably young (under 50?) and are not cheeseburger-inflated hogs. It doesn’t matter if they are socially awkward, totally stupid, or even handicapped.

        The thing is, even ATTRACTIVE guys, who are not ‘on their game’ will not be guaranteed to go home with a girl tonight. average guys? just laugh. Socially awkward or stupid guys? Not a chance in hell.

        THAT is the comparison. of course all the ‘pretty people’ go home together, but the ugly chicks who are not complete monsters or incredible fatasses have to put forth absolutely zero effort to get a piece.

        Men who have had lots of partners are lauded (although they are kept away from serious friendship) because they have triumphed in the face of stiff competition many times. Women who have had lots of partners spread their legs at the drop of a hat. See the difference? Women are not in competition for ‘getting laid’, their competition is only for the ‘best guy’.

        That, by the way, was ‘mansplaining’. informing someone of something that is clearly obvious to anyone that can be bothered to actually THINK before putting up an irrelevant and ill-informed attempt at a rebuttal.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 21

        • AnnieNonymous Says:

          1) You sure seem to be in the socially inept category to me, though I think you see yourself as a “nice guy.”

          2) Women can’t have multiple partners unless men are willing to sleep with them. Just as many men as women are to blame for your perceived injustice. Maybe call out your fellow men for going home with these women. They’re just as responsible as the women are.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 24

          • pistudent Says:

            You don’t seem to understand the difference between men and women, men are always willing to sleep with girls two point below them in a 1-10 grade (8 with a 6, 5 with a 3) if they throw themselves at them (it’s an easy lay that you might as well enjoy), on the other hand, a girl will never consider sleeping with a guy below her, and sometimes even guys at her own level will have to have near perfect game to land her. Thus, the level of effort and skill required for a guy to get laid is much higher than for a woman, and that is why one is a sign of ability and the other a sign of sluttiness. Just as being in shape is far more appreciated than being a fat slob, it requires effort and discipline.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 17

            • AnnieNonymous Says:

              Actually, there have been quite a few scientific studies stating that in most relationships, the male is the less attractive one.

              The “rules” of sex and relationships seem to depend on the gender of the person who’s the one presenting these supposed truths and whether he or she is successful at dating. Other posts here are full of men commenting about having too many options.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 17

              • mindstar Says:

                The following will a little crass is also a good summation of the attitude of many men and women toward each other’s sexual experience levels:

                “A key which will open many locks is called a master key. While a lock which will open for many keys is just a lousy lock.”

                Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 18

                • Trix Says:

                  Can you please stop comparing vaginas to inanimate objects that do not, in any way, shape, or form, resemble vaginas?

                  Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 23 Thumb down 23

                • AnnieNonymous Says:

                  Anyone can come up with an analogy to support whatever viewpoint they have. My vagina isn’t a lock. Dicks aren’t keys.

                  Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 16

                  • Clover Says:

                    Exactly what is ‘opening’ in this metaphor? It looks like you picked that analogy just because of shape similarilites. What about this – a brush that has scrubbed many jars is worn out and used, but a jar that has been scrubbed often is clean and shiny! See, pick different objectsand the message is turned around.
                    The thing is, a lock is only ever there to guard against unwanted access…but if a girl wants to sleep around that access isn’t unwanted! Likewise, a key that you stick into an unlocked door isn’t doing anything special, just pretending to have acheived something. Sleeping with unattractive girls is no achievement at all, but an unattractive girl getting laid? That might take skill and charm on her part. It’s not a black and white subject.

                    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 12

              • LostSailor Says:

                Actually, there have been quite a few scientific studies stating that in most relationships, the male is the less attractive one.

                Really? Proof please…

                Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3

              • Fenrir Says:

                Rule 1 for credibility… when quoting scientific studies, please provide references. That being said, I would partially disagree with the gentleman using the X-2 theory. Mainly because I don’t know a single man who rates himself on a 1-10 scale, or has a realistic concept of what he looks like to women, regardless whether in the positive or negative. Furthermore, I know few men who know what women truly do find attractive. That being said, aforementioned dude is right in the sense that guys will settle for less attractive women, if that means they get laid. His further analysis is spot on.
                Since the vast majority of the time the woman plays the (relatively) passive role in any kind of initial meeting and even past that, if it ever comes to that, we can conclude that the man has to do the heavy lifting in terms of being attractive to the female. Attractive meaning charming, masculine, well-groomed, assertive, confident and socially capable (all these attributes can be interpreted and adapted to different cultures and sub-cultures – go ahead, try it). While there are a few men who just seem to possess these attributes, for most men it is just as much work as it is for women to pick out their outfit for a night out (granted, there are exceptions). To get even more specific, in order for any man to go into a bar, pick up a woman and take her home the first night, a lot of skill and effort is required. In short, it’s hard.
                LIke stated above, it’s rather obvious that it is in fact much easier for an averagely attractive girl to go out and get laid, than it is for a very attractive guy. There’s no need for scientific studies for this claim btw… social awareness and a couple of nights out should suffice to come to this conclusion.
                The only way a man can get laid more or less instantly is money and fame. Oh, and in the States, college athletes… but they do kind of fall in the latter category.

                That being said, the guy who wrote the initial article (Alex) seems to be a fool. However, the above article displays, much like the one it intends to rebut, a lack of social understanding and awareness and a very black and white kind of view

                To summarize this whole discussion (without the use of an analogy, since I aim to please) I’d say it’s fair to say that society doesn’t reward what comes easy. What society does reward, is hard work and effort. There are exceptions to this rule, however, so I’m asking you to think of such an exception that personally affects you and note how you feel about it. Then apply this feeling to this discussion. Be honest.

                And as a last Schmankerl, the difference between men and women in this whole context is that the challenge for men is to be able to pursue the woman they want to marry, while the challenge for women is to fend off all the men who are not worth marrying. Success equals respect. Double standard? I would venture to say no. Gender equality doesn’t mean males and females are the same creatures. It means they have the same rights.

                Best regards and happy rebutting

                Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

    • VJ Says:

      And it’s not like this affect is unknown to women judging other women harshly too. And why yes, they’ve got studies for that too: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130603142237.htm

      It may not be ‘fair’, it may indeed be a ‘double standard’, and against ‘everything you believe’. But it’s nevertheless REAL. And denying reality does not advance anyone very far or fast for long. Cheers, ‘VJ’

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0

      • mindstar Says:

        Fascinating article VJ. Especially the confirmation that men only disapprove of a promiscuous man in so far as he poses a threat of mate stealing whereas women disapprove of a promiscuous women on almost all levels even when they themselves are similarly promiscuous.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

  4. Amusingly Naive Says:

    Women that strap mattresses on their backs are useful for a hit and run and that is all. Women want to believe that their ‘leftovers’ are equally as good and ought to be valued as much as a ‘steak’ dinner.Well, it just isn’t so. This is completely fair because the opposite sex sets the value. Men value chaste women. Women either don’t care, or are indifferent concerning men. Now that more men are indifferent towards women, can’t blame us really you don’t offer much anymore, women probably have no other alternative but to accept whatever man can be tricked into a ltr with them. Which is getting harder for women to do, you can’t withhold sex, because too many of your ‘sisters’ eagerly give it away. Basically, women have given men complete power and control of the relationship, ( yay feminism, I knew it would be good for something eventually).

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 30 Thumb down 28

  5. D. Says:

    Jesus, what a ridiculous article THAT was (the one by Alex, that is). First, it’s premised entirely on bullshit and the whole “You get what you pay for” argument. I and other people I know used Match.com for years and had plenty of casual sex result from using it. While I expect that free sites will have plenty of people who will make less effort to obtain casual sex (e.g. the guys who send out the online equivalent of cat-calls such as “hey sweetie” or “nice tits”), that doesn’t automatically mean that people on Match.com or other pay sites AREN’T going to try for casual sex. They just may be willing to put in a little more effort to get it.

    Eharmony probably has a lower percentage of “just sex” seekers, but I tend to think that this is due to their branding as a site that pairs up life-long couples, rather than a place to find a date. That said, I’m sure plenty of casual sex or casual dating results from matchups on eharmony.

    On the subject of hypocrisy and who’s deemed good vs. bad…yeah, Alex is hypocritical and deserves to be called out on it. That said, his attitude (certainly as evidenced by some of the comments above) does encapsulate the mindset of many men. Which also deserves to be called out, and which also doesn’t represent the attitudes of ALL men. The attitude isn’t “fair,” even if it’s truthfully what many (not all) men believe.

    Personally, I don’t really care if a woman has slept with a lot of men in her past. Wait. Scratch that. I do care. I care quite a bit, actually. I’d prefer that she has some experience, both with sex and dating, rather than being a neophyte. I’d rather she know about herself by virtue of experience. It’ll make sleeping with her, dating her, and being in a relationship with her much easier. And anyway, the numbers and her history are irrelevant except insofar as they brought the two of you together right now. I might be interested in hearing how that all happened, but as long as she’s there with me and says and acts like she wants to be, why would the past matter?

    As for the guys who view this as some sort of power-reversal, allowing them to exact some measure of revenge now that “the tables have turned” or whatever….dude…let go of your bitterness. Life’s too short to hang on to that crap.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 6

  6. DrivingMeNutes Says:

    Not the defend the article, which is pointless blog filler, but I think you’re misreading his point.

    He’s questioning (I think) what a woman who claims she wants a “relationship guy” is doing on a dating site that, he says, is filled with one-night-stand-seeeking-scoundrels, like him. I actually think that’s a good question, not limited to OK Cupid, of course. But, more generally: Why do women CLAIM they want x but then behave in a way that appears that they don’t want x. (The answer, I think, is that they don’t actually want x, but that’s another argument for another day.)

    I don’t think he’s saying “good girls” aren’t on ok cupid. He’s saying that girls who want “good guys” shouldn’t be using free sites.

    And, the answer to the underlying premise is that all dating sites have casual-sex-seeking-men – ok cupid is just cheaper (and/or free) so those free sites draw the broke and less “invested.” In some ways, the paid sites are worse because the guys there are more invested in their craft, as someone suggested above.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0

    • Andthatswhyyouresingle Says:

      The majority of my male and female profile review clients use OK Cupid. The main reason why is because of all of the questionable business practices of Match.com. At least with OKC you’re not emailing people who don’t have the ability to reply because they aren’t paid members. A user knows that whomever they contact *can* reply. If they don’t, so be it. But at least the users aren’t paying money to a website under false pretenses. That’s why I use it. I won’t give Match.com a dime, though when clients ask which paid site they should use, I do suggest Match because it’s the lesser of two evils.

      He’s questioning (I think) what a woman who claims she wants a “relationship guy” is doing on a dating site that, he says, is filled with one-night-stand-seeeking-scoundrels,

      The answer is that it’s not filled with one night stand seeking scoundrels. He just likes to think it is because it puts all the blame on the women for why he can’t find a “good girl.” He – like many of the whiny red pill dudes above – are frustrated because the women they want are going for the OKC guys and not them.

      If I find out a woman whom I am with has had a large amount of sexual partners, I automatically put her in the ‘not going to date seriously’ category.

      And how would you know this other than if she tells you? You wouldn’t have a clue. No amount of snooping would reveal that, either. So stop with these stupid excuses to justify why you lack confidence and social skills. Yes, the reason you’re alone is because you’re surrounded by sluts. How convenient for you.

      This logic is so faulty and flawed that it’s ridiculous. It sounds plausible, but if you really think about it you realize that it’s just an excuse that guys use to explain why they can’t get a date.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 6

      • DrivingMeNutes Says:

        “The answer is that it’s not filled with one night stand seeking scoundrels. He just likes to think it is because it puts all the blame on the women for why he can’t find a “good girl.””

        Oh, please. He’s looking to hook up. He’s just doing his best pandering Evan Marc Katz impression for his blog.

        Whatever his motivations, I think it’s safe to say that most people populating the Internet cannot be taken seriously. He’s right that OK Cupid is no different than craigslist, in that respect. All guys want free sex. The more exclusive the site (i.e. the higher the cost), the more invested the members, and the more serious they can be taken. Or, they are willing to “do more” to get sex.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

        • mindstar Says:

          And he’s looking to hook up without making the same amount of effort as the more sucessful men who he complains about. Rather than whine about the shortage of “good girls” the OP should work on improving his social skills and his appearance which are two areas where improvement will bring him increased sucess with women. I personally think that if the men who claimed they were looking for “good girls” were honest they’d spend more time in church/temple/mosque or in humanitarian activities than in bars and trolling Craigslist.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3

        • CoolDude Says:

          This whole thing reminds me of a Chris Rock sketch. Essentially, us men, are pretty much ALWAYS looking for sex (pretty much true). Some of us go to great lengths (i.e. paid dating sites) and some of us the more standard channels (meeting up with people naturally, free dating sites). Whatever the method, it’s really only about us and our plethora or lack of charm to connect with women in order to get them in bed. Sometimes we fall for these women and want to date them, sometimes we don’t. Either way, some guy trying to put himself on a high horse because he doesn’t use a free dating site sounds like he has some internal bitterness and or insecurities.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1

      • Jack Says:

        This logic is so faulty and flawed that it’s ridiculous.

        To turn a Manosphere phrase, that’s their rationalization hamster at work. That’s what is so entertaining about those blogs. The men who read them are as over-programmed and deluded as the women they’re dissecting.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

      • PhillyGal Says:

        First of all, Moxie brings up an excellent point here: “And how would you know this other than if she tells you? You wouldn’t have a clue. No amount of snooping would reveal that, either.”

        I spent a lot of years “saving myself” and only having sex in relationships because I thought that is what a “good girl” does. But all that made me was frustrated and horny. A couple of years ago, I dated a man who was appalled by how many men I’d KISSED. That’s when I had a true paradigm shift on this topic.

        It doesn’t matter what I do/don’t do if I’m dating an insecure man, so I may as well A: do whatever the hell feels right and B: date a man with some damned confidence in himself. I’d say I’ve still got a relatively low “number’ compared to most women my age who live in a big city. But I’m now doing what I feel, even if that does mean having sex on the first or second date. And P.S. I’m still a moral person and a fantastic catch for the right guy.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 5

        • CoolDude Says:

          “I spent a lot of years “saving myself” and only having sex in relationships because I thought that is what a “good girl” does. But all that made me was frustrated and horny.”

          That’s a really good level of self-awareness and I’d be curious as to how many women have finally figured that out. My question to you, and I guess women in general, is that if they have sex with a man on the 1st/3rd date and the relationship doesn’t work out or fizzles quickly, why is it that women (not all, but some) feel like the man got the best of them? I suppose the flipside is the guy who takes a woman out, pays and has it go nowhere. He feels pissy like he was entitled to something. Keep in mind, this isn’t directed at you personally, just something I wonder about from time to time. On a lighter note, kudos to having a good attitude which is rare for the comment section on this site.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1

          • L Says:

            ” My question to you, and I guess women in general, is that if they have sex with a man on the 1st/3rd date and the relationship doesn’t work out or fizzles quickly, why is it that women (not all, but some) feel like the man got the best of them?”

            The only times I have felt like that was when the guy came on like he was REALLY interested in me as a person then disappeared or dropped the romantic interest and tried to turn me into a FWB once we had sex. Some men still seem to believe that they need to romance a woman into bed and will lie shamelessly to do so. Funny, because I can think of more than one man who would have made excellent FWBs had they been up-front about what they wanted. If it’s just a case of us sleeping together but there not being enough there to go beyond a date or 3, then no big deal.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0

            • Trix Says:

              Yeah, when it feels sort of coercive, like they weren’t just willing to be straightforward. That’s when it stings.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

            • PhillyGal Says:

              Yes, its being disingenuous. Sometimes I want a booty call. So don’t pods on my leg and tell me it’s raining. If that’s all it is, fine. I’m a big girl, just be honest with me.

              And self awareness is incredibly useful in life, but especially in dating. I have to know who I am, what I want and what I have to offer before I can even think about dating someone else. At least, that’s what I think is the backbone of healthy relationships.

              Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0

      • D. Says:

        Do people actually even ask the “number” question past a certain age? I mean, once you’re over, oh, 26 or so, who’s asking the other person’s “number”? I don’t even see how this comes up unless someone’s reputation somehow precedes them or they feel compelled to say “By the way, here’s how many people I’ve had sex with.”

        So, if there’s no real way to know about someone’s number — outside of asking them directly (smoooooooth) or them blurting it out….who exactly are these guys talking about? Are they going out on dates with women who tell them about their “number” unsolicited? Or who are telling them stories about the crazy sex parties they’ve had or whatever?

        How does this ever even actually occur to the point where said men are given the opportunity to pass judgment on said “slutty” women? I mean, ok, a guy has a theory that he wants to be with a woman who’s not “too” experienced (whatever that means). But when exactly is this ACTUALLY happening that a guy is saying “Well, I DID think of you as potential relationship material, but now you just seem like a dirty whore, so….” The whole thing’s absurd once you take it out of the realm of the purely theoretical.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3

        • CoolDude Says:

          I’ve argued the same thing for years. After college, is there really a point to asking someone’s #? I mean, if you’re single in your 30’s and dating a woman in her 30’s, chances are you both have had a fair amount of experience. If you’re both clean of STD’s, I shouldn’t see how it would matter. Sure, it might be hard to stomach for some guy if he knew the girl he’s currently in love with had been gang-banged at one time but….maybe it’s best not to ask about that. On the flipside, if you’re a woman, maybe you’d prefer not to know the number of girls your current man has propositioned and (successfully or not) gotten into bed.

          “Well, I DID think of you as potential relationship material, but now you just seem like a dirty whore, so….”

          This is said by insecure men and nothing but.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 6

        • fuzzilla Says:

          >But when exactly is this ACTUALLY happening that a guy is saying “Well, I DID think of you as potential relationship material, but now you just seem like a dirty whore, so….”<

          Exactly. It probably is not happening, it's just sour grapes from some bitter dudes who never had a shot in the first place.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7

          • Maria Says:

            Haha, well I doubt that’s ever actually been said. But I can say I’ve definitely seen men pull the ever lovely fade out once they’ve found out their current lady slept with 1 or more of their friends/acquaintances.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

            • fuzzilla Says:

              Yeah, I guess small town/incestuous social circles is the one way you’d know if someone’s “been around,” outside of asking nosy questions or someone oversharing their information. I can see how that might get awkward, but I still think the issue really stems from insecurity.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

            • fuzzilla Says:

              I see what you’re saying, but in that case, is it really the *number* of partners the guys take issue with, or is it more the access to dirty laundry about said choice of partners (“ugh, really, she dated *that* guy?” “Dude, did you hear about their breakup? Drama city” etc.)?

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

              • Maria Says:

                Well, I’ve lived in Manhattan and LA since I started having sex, so I don’t think it’s just a small town thing. It could be an age/activity thing. We’re still pretty young, going out to bars all the time – meeting people there. Online dating is so much on my radar (tried it for about 2 months and it was awful – so, so creepy). Most people I’ve dated, and even the one I settled down with, I met through friends of friends while out. In those situations, people definitely end up hearing about your dirty laundry.

                Now, on the other hand, not all guys are so hypotrical. I mean, I’m certainly no angel but it wasn’t a dealbreaker. Unfortunately, though, I’ve definitely seen it a lot where guys do judge based on dirty laundry.

                Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

                • fuzzilla Says:

                  I think the past shouldn’t matter as long as a person is happy in the present, disease free, relatively baggage free, etc. Still, I can kind of understand judging someone or being hesitant to date them if you know they were shitty to past partners, for instance – especially if the past partners are also your friends. Judging someone based solely on an arbitrary number, though, seems pretty immature/insecure.

                  I work long hours and most people my age are married/seriously partnered, so online dating feels like a necessary evil.

                  Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4

        • Greg Figueroa Says:

          After a one night stand or a second and she gives up sex too fast to her date, then she’s a slut that must be shamed. Other then that there is no other way of knowing because not many people reveal their number of sex partners.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 21

          • D. Says:

            “After a one night stand or a second and she gives up sex too fast to her date, then she’s a slut that must be shamed.”

            I really hope this is a case where an attempt at verbal irony just isn’t translating well in a written medium…

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1

          • Kurt Says:

            Roissy/Heartiste has a good post about tell-tale signs of a slutty woman. Emotionally flighty and self-absorbed attitudes tends to be a hallmark of a promiscuous woman.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10

            • Andthatswhyyouresingle Says:

              I asked for tangible, hard evidence. That is not evidence. I know plenty of self-absorbed people who border on asexual. Try again.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3

              • mindstar Says:

                Well some generally agreed upon “signs” are engaging in sexually explicit conversations on a first date; open display of sex toys in her bedroom; expressing a willingness to engage in bondage, pose for photos or videos, participate in role play etc very early in the dating process. Now my personal reaction to that behavior is to send a prayer of thanks and gratitude to the gods but I can’t speak for all men. I happen to like “slutty” women as many men do. I even think Moixe had a post on that very topic a while back.

                Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3

  7. John Says:

    “They’re the guys who, like their female counterparts, include disclaimers in their profiles about not wanting to meet anyone “just” looking for a casual hook-up. Allow me to deconstruct these morally superior dudes. Here’s what statements like that as well as quotes like the ones above are really saying, “I’ve boned my way around the internet and now I want a ‘good girl”

    I think your take on this is wrong. They aren’t acting all morally superior. This phrase is probably a direct response to women’s profiles who state ‘they don’t want players or just hookups”. So many women’s profiles state that. But if a girl really believes that by putting in that disclaimer, it will only attract relationship guys, then a savvy guy will play right into that with his similar phrase. And she will believe him which makes his job easier to get laid if that’s all he wants.

    I think this is a case of a guy telling a woman via his profile what she wants to hear. Moxie can see right this.. But many women cant. Or at least the ones that are so paranoid about getting played cant. That phrase he uses is just greasing the wheel since it is exactly what she wants to hear. It isn’t him being morally superior. It is moving his pieces into place for the attack. It is him acting like a con man by telling her what she wants to hear so she can let her guard down that he “isn’t one of those guys”.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0

    • Eliza Says:

      That’s why (John)–I don’t bother with online crap — ANYONE can market themselves to be in the best possible light…say this or that – and claim to be a non-player, or “nice guy”…well for me, what I see is not always what I have gotten….so I put more value in people’s action, than what they write on profiles. Best to just meet – in person. By the way, with some people juggling tons of other financial obligations, perhaps they are on OKC or a similar free site – merely because they don’t want to pay to be on ANOTHER dating website. They are pretty much all the same. Actually, same faces on Match.com and OKC alike. So it’s a ridiculous and presumptuous statement to make. That a nice girl, or someone seeking a nice guy should overlook OKC. There are players and drama queens or goldiggers everywhere. online and offline.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1

  8. Belle Vierge Says:

    So… according the first half of these comments (the pretty horrible, sexist, slut-shaming ones), I should have just auctioned off my virginity to the highest bidder? I thought my inherent value as a girlfriend came from my personality/kindness/intelligence/etc. Apparently not.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 5

  9. LostSailor Says:

    Having now read some of Alex’s posts, my response to his article is simply: douchey guy is gonna douche.
    Of course he’s an idiot for trying to claim that free dating sites are the equivalent of trolling craigslist for booty calls, and that women who post profiles on such sites are in effect chumming the waters for NSA sexual encouters. I definitely take it as a shill for paid dating sites because that’s just demonstrable BS. But he does make one semi-valid point: “but there just has to be some sort of good guy on OkCupid that doesn’t just want me for sex. Right” Sure, of course there is, but you don’t give two shits about that guy. Of course the then ruins the semi-valid point by saying that “those guys” are basically ugly social losers and that all the “good” guys are just out to get laid and that’s all.

    But I have to disagree that Alex’s over-all point, or even the subtext of the piece, is that men can screw around and be considered still “good” but women can’t. And I particularly don’t agree with the idea that

    “I’ve boned my way around the internet and now I want a ‘good girl.’ Because guys can screw around all they like. Women who do that are sluts. ” The guys insisting upon wanting a “good girl” are really just projecting on to the women their own self-loathing and insecurity for either giving it up “too soon” or because they fear they’ll never satisfy a sexually experienced woman. They’re inability to reconcile with their own choices are the true threat to their pursuit of finding true love. To put it more succinctly, they got caught up in all the sex that was available to them or feel somehow threatened and now hate themselves for it.

    Uh, no. Any guy that has “boned his way around the internet” are not going to fear they can’t satisfy an experienced woman. Mainly because they’ve apparently been doing it for a while. Projecting their own “self-loathing and insecurity” for having sex? I can’t think of a single, frequently sexually active man I know who is going to feel that way.

    Now, there may be a point to be made regarding men that aren’t that sexually experienced wanting a “good girl” because of insecurity (though probably not the self-loathing part) over sex, but you can’t have it both ways. Men who “got caught up in all the sex” simply are not going to suddenly hate themselves or feel threatened by sexually experienced women. Who do you think they’ve been having all this sex with?

    And finally It’s concerning to me how offended some of these guys sound at the prospect of a woman wanting to hook up with men. When did that become such a crime? And what is at the root this apparent skittishness towards sexually assertive women?

    I really don’t think men are “offended” by women who want sex (because you’re right, it’s not a crime) or are skittish towards sexually assertive women. In that respect Alex is correct: most men will take the sex if it’s on offer and feel quite fine about those women. What they probably won’t do is want to form a long-term relationship with them, which is really the crux of the matter.

    Many comments here, particularly the responses to @jack’s comment above (Trix and Raving Lunatic) miss the point: women with a high number of sexual partners are a much higher risk for future infidelity or divorce. This is not a matter of mere opinion: there have been a number of studies done on both infidelity and divorce. And while this is true for both men and women, the effect on women starts at a much lower number of sexual partners than it does for men.

    And it isn’t as if this double standard hasn’t been around for ages. It’s just that it’s shifted to focus on longer-term relationships. I don’t think men are getting their boxers in a twist because a woman might have had multiple previous sexual partners, they’re just happy there are now many more women out there who are willing to knock boots…

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8

    • LostSailor Says:

      Ack! Sorry. Neglected to close the tag on the last link. Mondays….

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

    • Raving Lunatic Says:

      No, LS, that point is not lost on me. High risk is a consideration, but it is not an invalidation.

      My beef with jack was the repeated assertion that ALL men see everything his way, and the sneering arrogance with which it was delivered was too much. As I said, speak for himself as he will, do not speak for me.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6

      • LostSailor Says:

        It was probably Jack’s tone that brought the ire. But your “beef” and focusing a NAMALT argument is a bit of a red herring and deflection. Taken as a generalization, Jack’s statement that “men decide who is relationship material” is true. (So do women.) Someone upthread mentioned men marrying prostitutes as a supposed counter-example. Well, I’m sure it has happened, but it’s an outlier and a rare one at that.

        There is good reason for men to prefer women with a low partner count for long-term relationships or marriage. That’s not to say a woman with a long sexual history won’t have other qualities that might overcome that, but for many if not most men, high risk of future infidelity or divorce is invalidation.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6

    • meh Says:

      “What they probably won’t do is want to form a long-term relationship with them, which is really the crux of the matter.

      Many comments here, particularly the responses to @jack’s comment above (Trix and Raving Lunatic) miss the point: women with a high number of sexual partners are a much higher risk for future infidelity or divorce. This is not a matter of mere opinion: there have been a number of studies done on both infidelity and divorce. And while this is true for both men and women, the effect on women starts at a much lower number of sexual partners than it does for men.

      And it isn’t as if this double standard hasn’t been around for ages. It’s just that it’s shifted to focus on longer-term relationships. I don’t think men are getting their boxers in a twist because a woman might have had multiple previous sexual partners, they’re just happy there are now many more women out there who are willing to knock boots…

      exactly. women need to stop whining about this.

      this double standard is never going to go away. sure there may be some guys with no other options than to settle for one of these easy women but most men who are pursuing a LTR are not going to settle, because they don’t have to. they know it will probably not last long with one of these women so we just categorize them as STR & not get emotionally involved.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7

  10. Maria Says:

    Well, I suspect online dating is different, because as multiple people have pointed out, there is no way somebody would come across your sexual past unless you offer it up freely. The comments on men prefering chaste women are somewhat irrevelent there.

    But, a lot of people don’t meet online. Most people I know in relationships met through friends/aquaintances. People will probably know at least a bit about your past based on mutual friends. Even if you don’t talk about your sexing, if you are out with a group of friends, they will likely notice when you leave with a guy. Friends tell each other stories, it’s not unheard of. Especially if you’re in your 20s.

    While it might be hypocritical, comments here would imply a lot of men don’t want to date a woman who has been around. It might not be fair, but it’s pretty ridiculous to pretend that mentality isn’t out there.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1

    • Trix Says:

      I don’t think that most of the commenters here, myself included, are disbelieving about there being men (and women!) who subscribe to this mentality. The comments above, though, act as though their experiences, thoughts, and desires are inarguably universal, which *is* unbelievable.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5

      • Andthatswhyyouresingle Says:

        Right, but keep in mind that these men and women who ascribe to these opinions typically insulate and surround themselves with people who believe what they believe. It’s all they know and it’s all they hear. These are not people who have been exposed to any other way of thinking. It’s also crucial to them that they repeat these messages over and over in order to convince people that there opinions are the norm or majority.

        Women slut shame because they feel threatened. Men slut shame for the same reason.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 7

      • Maria Says:

        Trix, I completely agree with you – and that’s a good point. It’s certainly true that not all men think that way (thank goodness). It’s kind of a shame that a lot of men do, but I stopped fighting that fight because they aren’t gonna change anyways.

        And Moxie, I don’t think that’s true. I mean, are women attracted to tall men because we haven’t been exposed to short ones? Silly. One thing, women who are sexually agressive also tend to be more assertive in personality. Some people would prefer to date someone more subdued. I’m not saying that eveyone who is more assertive sexually isn’t calm, but, in general, it’s a fair parallel. I just think people have preferences. You can fight it all you want and get up in arms, but it isn’t gonna change.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

      • fuzzilla Says:

        Yeah. Also, how exactly is “oh well, that’s just how men are” any better an argument than “don’t want to pay for every date? Oh well, that’s just how women are – deal with it”? Why are women supposed to examine their beliefs and change and men aren’t?

        Anyway, Maria has it right – that’s how *some* men are; just avoid them.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

  11. monica Says:

    Yes, it is hypocritical, but we all know that the traits that make a guy a “good guy” are not necessarily the same traits that make a woman a “good woman”. Unless you are a super hot model/actress type (a potential trophy wife) or an exotic foreigner with loads of confidence who is into older more established/successful men, then the average guys that the average women meet want a woman who at least appears to be modest. You know the line that Robert DeNiro’s character says when Billy Crystal’s character asks why he has a wife and a mistress and why can’t he do the things he does with his mistress with his wife in the movie “Analyze This 2″… “Hey, that’s the mouth that kisses my kids goodnight.”

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7

  12. Kurt Says:

    I disagree. A woman who sleeps around is definitely not “relationship material,” unless the relationship is short-term. Most men I know don’t want to get into a serious relationship with promiscuous women.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 12

    • Andthatswhyyouresingle Says:

      And how, pray tell, would you know that she was promiscuous?

      I want tangible evidence. I don’t want answers like you can tell by the way she dresses or how she carries herself. I want facts. I want something definitive that you can point to that determines, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that she’s had a lot of partners.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8

      • meh Says:

        no one can give you a satisfactory answer based on your parameters.

        it’s like asking how you would know that a man is marriage material or a loser. women know based on how he carries himself, how he dresses, etc.

        i used to be a nice guy so after i’ve been banging a girl for about a month those natural tendencies of mine come out. i buy her something randomly, or i take her to do something she mentioned weeks ago. then she realizes i’m one of the good guys because even though i try to hide it, the truth about who we are comes out.

        how can we tell a woman is a slut? in the way a woman talks about sex, how comfortable she is with certain sex acts, her attitude about relationships, how jaded she is, how she talks about men, etc. because being with a lot of partners takes a toll on both men & women. (there are even some women who have read too many feminist blogs that actually think it’s ok to brag about their past sex life.)

        so no, there is no “tangible evidence” or “facts” that are “beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

        all that matters is that an observant man is watching you & judging you, and eventually, as hard as you try to hide your past, it will reveal itself & that man will silently decide that you are not LTR material & downgrade you to short term relationship material.

        so women can whine about being judged a slut & slut-shaming it doesn’t change anything.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 18

        • D. Says:

          “i used to be a nice guy so after i’ve been banging a girl for about a month those natural tendencies of mine come out. i buy her something randomly, or i take her to do something she mentioned weeks ago. then she realizes i’m one of the good guys because even though i try to hide it, the truth about who we are comes out.”

          You keep saying “nice guy.” I do not think that word means what you think it means.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4

          • meh Says:

            “used to be” as in: “not anymore.” you even quoted it.
            instead of reciting lines from the princess bride, maybe you should pick up a dictionary.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4

            • D. Says:

              Two things:

              1. My point still stands. You claim that after basically treating a woman as a sperm receptacle for a few months, you buy her a trinket of some kind or indicate that, in fact, you’ve been paying attention to some of the stuff she said by taking her somewhere she mentioned, and this is all because you just can’t hide what a good guy you are. You’re not a good guy.

              2. Therapy. Look into it.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3

        • Trix Says:

          Ah, yes. One of those dudes who thinks that women don’t like him because he’s “such a nice guy”, rather than realizing that it’s all of his other unpleasant qualities that drive them away.

          These are the same kind of men who think “nice” is a major selling point. I expect men I get involved with to be nice the same way I expect the new car I buy to come with fucking tires. The selling points are above and beyond the bare necessities.

          You’re a Nice Guy™, not a nice guy. There’s a difference.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7

          • meh Says:

            i’m not a nice guy. i’m a bitter angry old man.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

            • mindstar Says:

              Meh let go of the anger and bitterness (justified as it may be). Holding on to anger is like drinking poison and expecting the people who angered you to die.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

      • Kurt Says:

        Obviously there is no 100% foolproof way to know whether a woman is a slut. Even if she mentioned how many men she had slept with, she may have lied. So we have to judge her based on her attitudes and behavior. In my own personal experience, if a woman is emotional/disagreeable and kind of a bitch, yet pushes for sex right away, she is almost certainly a slut.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15

        • fuzzilla Says:

          A woman can be emotional/disagreeable/kind of a bitch and not have had many sex partners. A woman can have banged 200 guys and be a total sweetheart.

          Why not just let emotional/disagreeable/bitch be the deal breaker and leave the “number” out of it? If there’s overlap between the two, then so be it, but behavior is a reasonable explanation for rejecting someone and an arbitrary number is not.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 6

          • Kurt Says:

            I seriously doubt that a woman who has been with 200 men is a “total sweetheart.” Instead, she is likely mentally unstable/crazy and a broken woman.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 17

            • D. Says:

              This is rigoddamndiculous.

              You have ZERO way of knowing how many men — or women — a woman has slept with. Even if she flat-out tells you, you’re assuming she’s told you the truth. Maybe she’s just testing you to see if you’re one of those slut-shaming types. Maybe she’s just trynig to shock you. Maybe when she tells you she’s fucked 200 guys, the ACTUAL number is closer to 500. You have NO idea one way or the other.

              So, you say, let’s resort to analyzing behavior. Does she flirt about sex? Does she talk openly about it? Ah ha! An obvious SLUT then! Ditch her at the earliest opportunity. Or maybe after you fuck her. Whatever.

              The behavior you’re reacting to is not about the number of people she’s slept with. Nor is it even about her attitudes towards sex. It’s about the fact that she’s unbalanced, yes. I’ll grant you that. But the reaction would be identical, I’d bet, if she offered up on a first date how great her latest lithium prescription is and how it’s totally stopped all the voices. Or how her uncontrollable flatulence is really doing better since she started taking Beano regularly. Or how, oh my god, two weeks ago she and her girlfriends went out and got TOTALLY trashed and she woke up in the bathroom stall of a bar she didn’t even remember going to!

              The problematic behavior is someone’s lack of boundaries and good common sense, not how much sex they’ve had. If woman was a divorcee who’d been with ONE guy in her entire life and still couldn’t stop talking about how he gave her the best anal she’d ever had, the reaction would be the same, but you’d sound like a jackass for calling her a slut. Because you ARE a jackass for calling her a slut.

              And who the hell are these women banging 200 guys that you’re meeting in your daily life, anyway? These women are imaginary outside of the realms of professional sex trades. By the way, would you consider a sex therapist a slut? Just wondering. But I digress. For as cautious as you are about avoiding sluts, you might as well spend your time worrying about whether she’s a fucking mermaid and trying to determine ways to spot it based on behavior. “Well, it’s rude to just splash water on her, but watch how she eats shellfish…that’s always a dead giveaway.”

              Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 8

        • John Says:

          There was an episode in Jersey Shore where Mike the Situation was dating a really hot chick. They were laying on the couch together with the other housemates hanging out also. The topic came to sex. All of a sudden, that girl was throwing around terms like “The Superman” and ‘The Shocker”.

          It was funny but even a guy who has no morals at all, Mike the Situation, was completely turned off by her behavior as were the other male housemates. The reason is because if she starts talking about sex like a guy, especially using wild and crazy terms, then its a turnoff. If she knew what those terms meant then was it because she did those things? Maybe yes, maybe no. But the perception was that she was a skank and he dumped her.

          The moral of the story is that you don’t need to be an actual slut in order for a guy to deem you as one. Just the mere perception that you are is enough to make you not LTR material. The girl could be a virgin for all anyone cares.

          So I agree with Kurt that that it is based on her attitude and behavior that will make a guy judge her. Since there is no way of actually knowing her true number, all you can do is take an educated guess by her attitude and behavior. Just like you know have no idea if someone will be a good worker or not at an interview. All you can do is make an educated guess by the way they present themselves.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8

  13. VeryTrue Says:

    well if there weren’t so many very mean and nasty women that wouldn’t curse at us men for trying to start a conversation with the one that attracts us, then we might just be able to meet a good woman to share a life with.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7

© 2013-2017 And That's Why You're Single All Rights Reserved