A great thread. 3 quotes, I think, sum the debate up nicely.
Originally posted by PuertoRican_Lover
A woman’s mental and emotional nature, as a female, is fundamentally and spiritually different than a man’s nature. But women, as of late, have mimicked men in satisfying their physical appetites, and sexual gratification and pursuits; however, they have done this without the emotional and mental armor that is embedded within a man’s nature.
The most lucid, reasoned thing you've ever said, PRL.
Although I am by no means saying it is an impossibility, I have personally not known, or for that matter heard of, a woman that is capable of having sex without forming, or at least trying to form (either at the time or after) SOME level of emotional connection or attachment with their partner. It is my belief that so many women (again, not all women) feel subsequently violated, used and even claim they have in some way been coerced into sex (Ill avoid the term "rape") as a direct result of this emotional disparity. Often, a women will "have sex WITH" a guy who is just merely "****ing" HER.
Originally posted by Alonso
... if your potential honey has been acting on her (on average, weaker-than-your) biological drives more often than you have been acting on your (on average, stronger) desires, she is a mathematical anomaly in this respect. You may then reasonably ask yourself, in what other emotional/willpower/character respects is she an anomaly? Anomalies often become problems.
While human beings are not reducible to mathematical functions, the idea that sexual promiscuity - statistically higher than average sexual behaviour - is highly correlated with emotional instability, insecurity and, in particular, neurotic personality traits is well established within psychology. Despite all modern sexual accoutrements, sex does, of course, pose a greater risk to the health and wellbeing of a woman than it does a man. It is the woman who, following sex (without a condom) is left with another human being's bodily fluids inside her, and not the other way round. It is the woman who, following unprotected sex, must conduct a pregnancy test, and contemplate the ramifications. And it is the woman, following the new of an accidental pregancy, who must contemplate a tortuous moral and emotional dilemma, a dilemma to which either resolution has far reaching, potentially catastophic implications. A woman who does not honor or respect the seriousness of this responsbility is a biological liability: biology teaches us that it is the female who is the guardian of genetic quality, while men are the guardian of genetic quantity; it is biologically necessary for a women to be selective.
In this way, the symbolisation of sex as a transgression of a woman's being...
Originally posted by bp1974
Any person, man or woman, who regularly submits, either willingly or through coercion, to being f*cked by people without any true intimacy, automatically loses the respect of the people who are f*cking them and the people who know about it. They are physically and sexually subordinate, and in the case of an 'easy' woman or man, they've willingly put themselves in that position time and again. How debasing!
.. is in some way due to, and representative of, the biological and evolutionary implications of, and the social significance attached to, the act.
Again, while the human behaviour is not understood simply in terms of sociological symbolism, from a psychological perspective a women who persistently seeks to put herself in the position of ultimate vulnerability - and with strangers - is highly likely be over-compensating for a lack of, or an inconsistency of, physical affection in childhood (an "anxious/ambivalent attachment pattern".)
And so personally I find the crux of this argument to lie in the level and especially, the nature, of the women's past sexual behaviour. If she has simply had a large number of sexual experiences - but they were nonetheless within the context of a a formal or exclusive relationship - this is not in my view a point of special concern.
However, if the woman has a history of persistent "sleeping" around, one night stands, or particularly unusual or bizarre sexual habits, only a fool would not consider these when evaluating the wisdom of a lasting emotional commitment to this woman.