There are two kinds of women

There are two kinds of women, as far as men are concerned: the sex-positive slut-bunnies who indulge themselves with casual sex, and women worth marrying. These two categories only overlap for men who are desperate enough to settle despite their misgivings. So, yes, if you’re a young, horny female, you can have as much sex as you want – but here’s the rub: you’re not going to be able to later marry as valuable a man as you want without lying to him about your sex life. Because sex kittens aren’t the kind of woman most men want to make their wives, and the kind of man who’s banging the sex kittens isn’t the man they’re trying to marry. Even in places like Tunisia.

Note that one of the women in question who blames the “hypocrisy of men” for “forcing” her to consent to have hymen-replacement surgery so she could lie about her sexual past and fake being a virgin recounts what happened: she was dating a man, and hadn’t had sex with him yet, when she confessed to having had casual sex with other men. “But as soon as he knew, he refused to marry and did everything he could to get me into his bed.” Just a thought: maybe if you’d slept with him before admitting that you’d banged other guys, he might have been more accepting. Or, you know, you could have just kept your legs closed to everyone, since you knew from the beginning that the men of your culture will bang sluts but not marry them. Cry me a river. Hypocrisy? Double standards? Only if you’d slept with him first, honey! You can’t complain that some OTHER man-whores banged you, and thus your current not-sexed-up boyfriend must therefore overlook your sexual history because Double Standards. He’s not one of the men who pump-and-dumped you while you were horny and putting out for casual sex. It’s only barely “double standards” if you bedded a guy with the same number and type of past sexual relationships, and then he suddenly refused to marry you on account of your not being a virgin when he’d never mentioned virginity as a wife-requirement before. I say “barely” because let’s be honest: men and women value different things when it comes to sexual partners. It’s not a double standard. It’s a different standard. Women don’t want to marry penniless basement dwellers, but ugly rich dudes get a lot of attention; men don’t ask a hot woman what her income is before deciding they’re interested. But somehow nobody mentions little facts like that when it comes to “double standards”!

Now, generally the sex-positive feminists (as opposed to the man-hating lesbian feminists) get really upset by the fact that the hot stud who’s bedded 32 women can marry a young, hot girl who never slept with anyone but him when he’s 45. But remember that feminists don’t care about actual equality, they just want all women to be equal to the elite men: women are very good at ignoring the left 3/4ths of the masculine bell curve. Therefore the slut who’s had fifty drunken hookups and twenty one-night-stands in her late teens and 20s has every right (in a feminist’s eyes) to cry “double standards” when the men she dates in her early 30s break up with her once they find out her sexual history. It doesn’t actually matter to the feminists that those men are unlikely to be the apex alphas with equal sexual history – in their 20s, women absolutely dominate the sexual marketplace and can have sex as often as they wish. Not so for men. So if a man who’s had maybe five girlfriends, only three of whom ever put out, over the course of 15 years decides that he doesn’t want to marry a girl whose “count” is at least TEN TIMES his over the same past 15 years? Yeah. Good decision, buddy. Especially if she tells you about all the other men she’s slept with before she’s put out for you – barring genuine religious conversion, that just means she’s dating you for your resources, and not because she thinks you’re hot stuff, and if you do marry her, she’s likely gonna bang the attractive pool-boy while you’re not looking.

In my theoretical prescription for how to fix the secular marriage laws, lying about your sexual history before your marriage would count as a valid reason for divorce, specifically a divorce-for-cause that would obligate the liar to pay a hefty fee for damages, considering that the injured party would be legally barred from ever gaining the benefits of civil marriage again. Kind of rough, considering it wouldn’t necessarily be the guy’s fault he got defrauded, but even without that kind of penalty, these days it seems like it would be prudent for people to get full background checks and STD tests before getting married, unless they’re part of an intact social group where everyone is within two degrees of knowing each other for decades.

TL;DR – If a majority of men in a society desire to marry virgins, and a minority of men in that society are having casual sex with lots of unmarried women (which is generally what actually happens), that doesn’t make the “virgin wife requirement” a double standard for all the guys who haven’t gotten laid. Which is the set of men that the women are trying to trick into marrying them – you know, the good providers that worked hard and saved their income rather than spending it on booze and partying every weekend. The real hypocrites here are the women who’ve been handing out free sex – and then denying sex to the men they’ve decided they want to marry!


About pancakeloach :)
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s