That's because 90% of guys are AFCs (and that's a conservative estimate). Actually he's feeling that way because he's an AFC. This guy is a chump, for exactly the same reason anyone else here is thinking that women ought to have some mythical, virginic code to live up to in order to make her guy feel special. Guys, women ƒuck other guys than you, get over it. It's not a "mistake" she made in some fit of youthful indescretion, she met a guy who got her blood flowing and they ƒucked because she WANTED to. That doesn't make her a slut or a tramp, it just means she was hot for another guy she happened to meet before you entered the picture. Just like you (should've) banged plenty of women before her.
Now if she's constently harping on how great her previous lover's were, or even if she brings it up in casual conversation then you need to see this for what it is - a sh!t test. The well conditioned AFC will have the reaction most of this thread has already exhibited; nervous discontent that's eliciting an emotional response. Of course you don't want to hear about how the guy before you had a 10" c0ck. You don't think she knows this? This is a sh!t test meant to gauge your reaction and/or a covert message of her dissatisfaction with you. The issue isn't whether or not she's had previous lovers, it's her communicating the details to you - THAT is the message. The best (and really the most rational) reaction is simply to not allow it to phase you. Easier said than done you'll say, but not if you're spinning plates as you should.
As ruthless as you think she's being with you by brining up past sexual experiences, understand that what she's looking for is a sense of your self-confidence. If you turn it into a pissing contest, you failed the test - "I had a 3-way with my last BF", "Oh yeah? I had a 4-way with my last GF." Oneupmanship will only make you look as if you're qualifying yourself to her, she sees you as lacking confidence (or worse still, making it all up) and she controls the frame.
If you allow her sexual past to "get to you" and you become possessive, or you turn into a mewling emotional symp about it, you fail as well. Why? Because you confirm for her that you are, and most likely have been, optionless with other women. If you're going to cry about her ƒucking her last few BFs, how insecure are you really? What does that say about your attitude and confidence in yourself about how many women have wanted you as a sexual partner in your own past? A woman wants to know, and be kept in the anxiety that, she's with a guy that could be with other women if he chose to be so. This is the essence of Plate Theory - the feminine competitive dynamic. Pook said it best, women would rather share a successful Man than be saddled to a faithful loser. When you kvetch on and on about your GFs sexual exploits (whether she offered them up or not) you OVERTLY tell here I am a faithful loser.
The way to pass the test is of course by displaying confidence in what would rattle most AFCs, but doing so COVERTLY. The miniute you acknowledge it's a sh!t test, the minute you acknowledge that it bothers you, your communicating in the OVERT, and not only do you fail the test, but you lose the frame. The best way to react to this test is to be more mature about it than she is. Keep her guessing by being ambiguous and nebulous about your own sexual past. As I've always advised in every other situation, the most powerful tool a DJ has is to let a woman's imagination work for you. Far too many chumps think that an issue will be resolved with complete and full disclosure; nothing could be worse. If you adopt the attitude that you're unphased by her confessions it plants that seed of doubt that she really looking for, in that you may or may not take what she's saying at face value. Regardless, always do so with a been-there done-that attitude. Nothing shakes a woman's sh!t test and turns it around on them better than an attitude that says "I'm older and more mature than you" and conveys it to them in a covert manner. Sort of a "why are you telling me this?" presence.
). 
