Why do we have to come up with excuses for not liking women with a high body count?

[MatureDJ]

If there´s money involved, I think its probable most of those girls are lying.

I wonder if a customer gets to return the merchandise if he determines that she is not virginal. Henry VIII did it with Wife #4.

Anne of Cleves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The couple's first night as husband and wife was not a successful one. Henry confided to Cromwell that he had not consummated the marriage, saying, "I liked her before not well, but now I like her much worse".

The marriage was annulled on 12 July 1540, on the grounds of non-consummation and her pre-contract to Francis of Lorraine. Henry VIII's physician stated that after the wedding night, Henry said he was not impotent because he experienced "duas pollutiones nocturnas in somno" (two nocturnal pollutions while in sleep).[31][32]

 

[Hamurabimbi]

I seem to attract aggressive, high-notch girls. So I’ve had my far share. What I’ve noticed about them is:
1) They are Very horny
2) They are obsessed with sex.
3) Size queens.
4) confident & boastful of their sexual prowess.

Now most women exhibit these traits to some degree. But high-mileage girls seem to carry them to the extreme.

For example. One girl wanted me to
fvck her in ever room in my house. (I have a decent sized house). On the stairs. Bent over tables. In the shower. In the bath…

 

[Divorced w 3]

A slvt can reform herself overnight into the saintliest good girl if she sets her mind on snagging the right guy; maybe you and then go back to being an intrepid and shameless whxre when her pvssy tells her it's time to meet the wrong kind of guy again. This can all happen before you bat an eye and you would be none the wiser.

They "reform" when they get old and dry with children normally after their 3rd decade and they become inveterate churchgoers, suddenly real close to her parents and community organizers. Women have the genius for life, they roll with the punches and they take what is on offer. For this, they have my not-so-grudging admiration. That, and the exquisite and unspeakable uses of their splendid curves and alternately wet and dry holes.

High body count is the most insidious and disgusting of LTR-girlfriend-worthy violations. It is really unfortunate because basically every chick out there outside of Saudi Arabia has been chain smoking pole since their late teens. So what's a guy to do..

You can either rationalize by burning that into your frontal cortex and potentially LTR/wife up a used cvm dumpster female who will lie to you about her sexcapades

or

dive into the deep end of the Mack daddy player lifestyle by icing the heart and offering no commitment whatsoever when going thru the ringer with women.

If you are banging a chick for long enough regardless of her past you will develop some kind of pair bond, and eventually that will lead to emotional investment, and it's concomitant pain, one way or the other.

My father once told me “Your gut is God and Nature whispering in your ear” and I been running with that ever since.

I wonder if this logic creates a stronger case for LTR the right single mom

 

[jhonny9546]

That happens to women, but what about men?
Did you feel that after a certain number of partners, it became difficult to bond with someone? If yes, what was that number for you?

 

[Dr.Suave]

I saw the correlations with body count and behaviors/attitude. My 1st relationship had 30, my 2nd had 10+, my 3rd had 3, and my current one had 0. I refused to settle although every single one loved me. I cut it off with all of them. Each one was progressively less crazy and where the first had a mental illness + so many other issues and the second had major daddy issues and narcissistic qualities. The one I'm with now is so appreciative of everything, isn't possessive, doesn't try to control me or change my stubbornness, and there's just a different level of comfort. I would've been happy with just a lower body count but I'm glad that I didn't settle and I encourage all men to not settle as well.

Are you still together?

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

Did you feel that after a certain number of partners, it became difficult to bond with someone? If yes, what was that number for you?

What is your issue with this bonding? What is bonding to you?

 

[jhonny9546]

What is bonding to you?

You feel a more intimate connection with someone, rather than a connection, you can have with anyone

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

You feel a more intimate connection with someone, rather than a connection, you can have with anyone

I have an intimate connection with all the women I'm intimate with.
Bonding goes beyond that. Bonding is a type of commitment.
It's like the difference between a promise and an oath and a vow.

 

[jhonny9546]

It's like the difference between a promise and an oath and a vow.

Understood.
Could there be bonding but no intimacy?

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

Understood.
Could there be bonding but no intimacy?

No, but there could be bonding without sex.

 

[jhonny9546]

No, but there could be bonding without sex.

Curious! So that explain "platonic" friends? (man / woman)

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

Curious! So that explain "platonic" friends? (man / woman)

The key to bonding is intimacy. Not sex.
When you have sex without intimacy, you're not bonding.
When you have intimacy without sex, you're bonding.

There is bonding with physical intimacy, but without sex. One example would be a person who is physically incapable of having intercourse, often for medical reasons, whether it's simple erectile dysfunction or tetraplegia. You can bond and pair-bond without sex, but not without being intimate with genuine love and affection.

 

[CBear]

Are you still together?

Yes. Not one fight or issue has been had thus far whereas with the other ones, there was unnecessary issues or fights within a couple months. It seems that the ones with bigger baggage are more prone to fight back as well, especially in an immature manner (idk if causation of high body count or correlation or (probably) both) Of course she's very loving but I don't experience the crazy and insecure clingy actions like with the previous ones.

 

[GoodMan32]

The OP's question illustrates a bigger picture:

In general, men are viewed as bad for nexting a woman, no matter how good our reason is (and we get viewed as bad for not being into a woman in the first place).

Yet somehow it's totally socially acceptable for a woman to next us (or not be into us in the first place) for the most trivial reasons.

One of many double standards.

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

The OP's question illustrates a bigger picture:
In general, men are viewed as bad for nexting a woman, no matter how good our reason is (and we get viewed as bad for not being into a woman in the first place).
Yet somehow it's totally socially acceptable for a woman to next us (or not be into us in the first place) for the most trivial reasons.
One of many double standards.

Nonsense, there is no bigger picture here.
Subjective, anecdotal experience isn't evidence for some idiotic theory you're using to justify your weird behaviour around getting rejected and having an autistic hysterical response to having to be in the same space with the woman who 'rejected' you.

Whatever theories you try to espouse, don't think we're all as gullible as you are.

 

[GoodMan32]

Nonsense, there is no bigger picture here.
Subjective, anecdotal experience isn't evidence for some idiotic theory you're using to justify your weird behaviour around getting rejected and having an autistic hysterical response to having to be in the same space with the woman who 'rejected' you.

Whatever theories you try to espouse, don't think we're all as gullible as you are.

Umm, the whole premise of this thread is the idea that it's stupid we're "forced" to explain ourselves if we "next" a woman for having a high body count.

I made a valid point when I pointed out there's a foolish double standard when it comes to a man nexting a woman vs a woman nexting a man.

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

Umm, the whole premise of this thread is the idea that it's stupid we're "forced" to explain ourselves if we "next" a woman for having a high body count.

A wrong premise, because nobody is under any duress of explaining how he acts in relationships. If I 'next' someone, nobody asked me why, but even if they do and you feel like answering, why would you feel the need to explain what bothers you about someone? since when are you accountable for why you don't want to date someone? Who dreams up all these hypothetical scenarios?

This is all imagined accountability: "but what if anybody asks us why we did this or that? How are we going to explain ourselves?", when in reality nobody actually gives an airborne copulation. You only have to explain yourself when you do something wrong. If you don't consider passing over someone to be wrong, no matter what other people 'seem to think', you don't have to account for yourself to them.

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

I made a valid point when I pointed out there's a foolish double standard when it comes to a man nexting a woman vs a woman nexting a man.

No, you made an invalid point, because that double standard only exists in your autistic mind. Nobody gives a crap about why you would 'next' someone. You're not accountable to anyone on refusing to date someone. However, if you autistically start telling people how icky you think women are when they had sex with other men, then people will hold you accountable for that statement and how you came by it. However, if you just shut up and not share every stupid thought that comes into your head with other people, they won't even ask you about your stupid thoughts, much less hold you accountable.