Would you rather screw slvts -- or get into a LTR with a loyal woman you deflowered?

[2Rocky]

I married the virgin I deflowered. Had kids, Had 20 year relationship ...I'd say 10-15 good ones...her notch count (or lack of) at the beginning of our relationship had not a single thing to do with why our relationship unravelled.

When you get into your 40's you are not going to find women who are attractive and socially savvy who have not been in LTR's and had sex partners. In fact I don't feel like I can hold a double standard for my experience and the woman with whom I choose to create an LTR. Personally I want her to realize I am BETTER than all her previous attempts at relationships. I want her to respect my actions. I want MY actions to be respectable, and from my true beliefs and feelings....

I have dogs that OBEY. They may or may not love and respect me but they depend on me...I don't want my partner to need me but to choose me because our paths in life align. I want to be happy for her growth and I want her to be happy for mine.

The woman with Life Experience doesn't have FOMO. She is not going to think that a relationship with you is holding her back. And if you are a truly confident man you are letting her grow where she is planted, she puts down roots and BLOOMS.

 

[MatureDJ]

I just added the 24th vote for the virgin (to 1 for the other). Maybe other folks try to do PUA so that they can essentially bang prostitute-tier chicks for free, but I'm here just to get in the game for one good woman.

 

[Zimbabwe]

I just added the 24th vote for the virgin (to 1 for the other). Maybe other folks try to do PUA so that they can essentially bang prostitute-tier chicks for free, but I'm here just to get in the game for one good woman.

I'm willing to bet it was either @BeExcellent or @catsmeow2 who voted for the other.

What women say and what women respond to are two different things. And even more odd is they're usually oblivious to it.

 

[devilkingx2]

I'd rather bang slvts. Loyal committed women do not exist, and banging lots of women isn't easy as a normal guy.

 

[DoubleBarrel]

I don't think this applies nowadays with so much information at our fingertips...a 3 pump chump might appear to be a Sex Master to some virgin in a remote part of the world, but any girl with access to internet will know he's no good.

I've asked myself the same question and still haven't come up with an answer. Your argument against a virgin is that she hasn't dealt with one or more shi*y guys so she's really grateful once she meets you, the good guy. My argument against this would be...does a smart person really has to burn herself before realizing it's bad to stick fingers in fire? In other words, smart people learn from other's mistakes, life is too short for one to make all the mistakes necessary for learning. My main point against a virgin is that finding a 24-25yrs old virgin who is attractive and clinically sane would be a bit like winning the lottery.

The problem I have with the 1-3 long term boyfriends is that every past boyfriend is a hit on two very important characteristics of a girlfriend: loyalty and rational thinking. I mean, a girl with top loyalty and who properly vets her boyfriend will stay with her first guy for life (I was impressed to find out about Queen Elizabeth who set her eyes on Prince Phillip when she was 13 and he 18). Now, I know life is messy and people are not perfect, but still the question remains...where's the right balance between her learning from experience and loyalty being ireparably damaged ? 1,2,3 past boyfriends?

Learning from observing others will only take a person so far. Real knowledge and wisdom comes from personal experience. A virgin isn't going to learn how to have a healthy relationship by watching others, as the bulk of the important stuff happens behind closed doors, where it can't be observed.

I'd rather bang slvts. Loyal committed women do not exist, and banging lots of women isn't easy as a normal guy.

Loyal, committed women DO exist, and there are a lot of them. But we attract what we are and we repel what we aren't. If you're a player, the loyal women are going to sniff out your agenda from the get-go, and treat you cold. You will just "next" them, thinking their interest is too low; when, in reality, your approach to get sex quick just turned them off. Then you conclude there are none. But this is foolishness.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Impossible to answer because 95% of what's important in an LTR is left out of the question.

 

[BeExcellent]

I'm willing to bet it was either @BeExcellent or @catsmeow2 who voted for the other.

What women say and what women respond to are two different things. And even more odd is they're usually oblivious to it.

Advice from the old lady:

I don’t date women so I didn’t vote, lol.

I know very very well what I respond to. And I screen for it accordingly. And no I’m not oblivious and for many women what you say is true. But those are immature women who are not self aware. You yourself come off as an immature newb to these women. Life is nuanced, not black and white. Your thinking is far too binary and you do not grasp nuance. More sophisticated women sense this. And avoid men like you.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

I don't think this applies nowadays with so much information at our fingertips...a 3 pump chump might appear to be a Sex Master to some virgin in a remote part of the world, but any girl with access to internet will know he's no good.

I've asked myself the same question and still haven't come up with an answer. Your argument against a virgin is that she hasn't dealt with one or more shi*y guys so she's really grateful once she meets you, the good guy. My argument against this would be...does a smart person really has to burn herself before realizing it's bad to stick fingers in fire? In other words, smart people learn from other's mistakes, life is too short for one to make all the mistakes necessary for learning. My main point against a virgin is that finding a 24-25yrs old virgin who is attractive and clinically sane would be a bit like winning the lottery.

The problem I have with the 1-3 long term boyfriends is that every past boyfriend is a hit on two very important characteristics of a girlfriend: loyalty and rational thinking. I mean, a girl with top loyalty and who properly vets her boyfriend will stay with her first guy for life (I was impressed to find out about Queen Elizabeth who set her eyes on Prince Phillip when she was 13 and he 18). Now, I know life is messy and people are not perfect, but still the question remains...where's the right balance between her learning from experience and loyalty being ireparably damaged ? 1,2,3 past boyfriends?

Dude you are either the most naive person on the face of this earth or joking.

If someone vets another person properly they stay with them forever? C'mon man...this doesn't even make any sense.

As if a person could even know everything there is to know about a person that would allow them to make that decision when they start dating.

Where do people come up with these asinine ideas??

One of the most ridiculous things I have seen on this board in a while.

 

[pipeman84]

@BackInTheGame78 I gave the example of Queen Elizabeth. Also, haven't you heard of people who've been married 40+ years? It's a rare thing, I think it's divinely orchestrated that these people meet so young and manage to grow together for decades or till death does them apart.
The point I was making was about loyalty...the more exes a girl has, the less loyalty and/or rational thinking (mate selection criteria) she has.

 

[devilkingx2]

Loyal, committed women DO exist, and there are a lot of them. But we attract what we are and we repel what we aren't. If you're a player, the loyal women are going to sniff out your agenda from the get-go, and treat you cold. You will just "next" them, thinking their interest is too low; when, in reality, your approach to get sex quick just turned them off. Then you conclude there are none. But this is foolishness.

Yeah it's too much of an exaggeration to say that there are no loyal committed women at all.

And while I do agree that we attract a certain kind of woman, I think it's because an attractive woman with a good personality is the least likely to be single. Whereas a crazy woman or a slvtty one is much more likely to be available (even if she's not single)

As for the quick sex part; in this theoretical scenario where you're guaranteed a loyal committed woman it does make sense to take things slow and have a purple pill approach to not slay the golden goose.

However in real life I'm pretty confident that taking a quick sex approach primarily weeds out low interest girls and boring ones.

 

[devilkingx2]

If someone vets another person properly they stay with them forever? C'mon man...this doesn't even make any sense.

He took it to a wild extreme there but I think there is some merit to that idea.

I had a theory that cheating in a a relationship is caused by selecting a woman who is too easy and ignoring the red flags. (The kind of beta male who will wife up the first woman whose standards are low enough to fvck him easily)

And on the flip side, dead bedrooms are caused by being overly patient (the kind of beta male who isn't following a 2-4 date rule)

I don't think this applies nowadays with so much information at our fingertips...a 3 pump chump might appear to be a Sex Master to some virgin in a remote part of the world, but any girl with access to internet will know he's no good.

A girl who only knows about sex from the internet might end up thinking that guys are supposed to have 10 inches and last for an hour.

 

[member160761]

I agree with you; virginity isn't necessarily a sign of strong character.

I disagree. Haven't met one girl with strong character who was not a virgin. Staying untouched in this day and age if you look above average as a girl can be considered an almost-miracle. Virgin girls, out of choice, well into the their late teens and early 20s radiate a vibrant and magnetic charisma. Every man wanted them but only few were chosen into the pool of getting to know them properly. Also, when you are married you never have to wonder what, how often and with whom she did it. You have a clean conscience on this. As the saying goes: Popped cherry - no marry. No hymen, no diamond.

 

[logicallefty]

When a man can lock a woman down at a young age and keep the right frame so she would never dream of leaving him, that’s the ultimate winner right there. She almost needs to be scared to leave. Not quite scared but almost to that point. Taking her V card is a bonus on top of that. I think a lot of men make the same mistake that I made. Get the girl at the young age. I was 18 she was 16. Popped the cherry. Married her. But I not have a solid enough frame to keep her locked down. So she bailed.

 

[pipeman84]

However in real life I'm pretty confident that taking a quick sex approach primarily weeds out low interest girls and boring ones.

and the high quality, LTR/wife material ones. To weed out the low interest ones is enough to follow Doc Love's 2nd date rule...no kiss by the end of second date or cheek kiss, next. But many people on this forum next if she doesn't have sex by the 2nd date. It comes down to the guy having a clear intention before approaching the girl...is it with the intention of LTR (where you're very selective ie a sniper approach and where quick sex means you've misjudged her potential) or sex (where you approach almost anyone ie machine-gun approach and you're quick to next if she doesn't put out fast)

A girl who only knows about sex from the internet might end up thinking that guys are supposed to have 10 inches and last for an hour.

I don't mean Pornhub, I mean YouTube.

 

[zekko]

I was 18 she was 16. Popped the cherry. Married her. But I not have a solid enough frame to keep her locked down. So she bailed.

A lot of long lasting married couples that I know have been together since high school. But it must be hard to keep her when she goes through those early 20s years when she is at peak attractiveness, and there is the big pull to go party.

 

[AttackFormation]

Neither... these are both mental prisons, madonna-***** complex.

 

[devilkingx2]

and the high quality, LTR/wife material ones.

I don't follow the mainstream school of thought that somehow being more reluctant to have sex or being a less sexual person is a sign of quality or value. I think most people's ideal relationship has lots of wild sex in it.

I can see the logic for a guy who is very high value himself and therefore needs to test his woman to make sure she isn't a slvt for every 6 foot tall millionaire before he takes her out to an exclusive club full of them.

To weed out the low interest ones is enough to follow Doc Love's 2nd date rule...no kiss by the end of second date or cheek kiss, next. But many people on this forum next if she doesn't have sex by the 2nd date

I agree with you here, I think only 2 dates is too short. But I assume the people saying that have so many dates they don't have time for girls that aren't putting out.

That rule is an interesting one, I've never heard that before but it sounds like a good tip.

It comes down to the guy having a clear intention before approaching the girl...is it with the intention of LTR (where you're very selective ie a sniper approach and where quick sex means you've misjudged her potential) or sex (where you approach almost anyone ie machine-gun approach and you're quick to next if she doesn't put out fast)

This is also pretty interesting, I've never seen it broken down like this but I see your logic. I've been doing the latter approach without even realizing this.