Women's Sexual Past

[MysteryWoman]

Originally posted by smooth_as_silk
Yeah stop battling and wasting your energy over this cause.
In the end, men will end up recovering their initial place in society and *****es with no morals will lose the oportunity they are nowadays given to end up with a nice chump....
A ***** shall never be able to live a decent woman's life, she doesn't deserve a husband, children (in a nutshell a family)

Do you have a girlfriend?

 

[Trapspringer]

Originally posted by MysteryWoman
Do you have a girlfriend?

Mystery, deep down, don't you already know the answer?

 

[dietzcoi]

Sorry, DJ Sask... no offense intended, but you gave the classic AFC answer.

This is your approach:

1. Doesn't matter how many men she had, as long as she loves me...
2. Doesn't matter how deep in debt she is, as long as she stops spending when she is with me.
3. Doesn't matter if she has been in prison, as long as she is on parole now
4. Doesn't matter how many STDs she has has as long as she is clean now
5. Doesn't matter if she was a prostitute as long as she has stopped and is only with me...

This is reality:

None of the real dangerous sex gods she lusted after and slept with wanted her, so now it is time to settle for Mr. Chump, the great provider.

Your words: "Her past is what made her the person she is today"
Might be closer to home......maybe not in YOUR case of course

Dietzcoi

 

[baracus]

If the number of partners that your girlfriend has is getting to you, then no matter how hard you try to ignore it, it will eventually eat you alive. Maybe its insecurity; or maybe its a feeling in your gut that one day you'll be walking in the mall with your girlfriend, and you'll run into two guys laughing and pointing at you two because they tag-teamed her a while back; or maybe you are scared of a disease, or feel you can't trust her because of it. There is nothing anyone can say to you to make you change your mind. If it is something that you can truly ignore, it wouldn't be getting to you so badly. Some people genuinely don't care how many partners their girl has been with, and some, like me, do.

This was quite a while back, but I was totally in love with this one ex-gf. I thought I was going to marry her. But the day I found out about her past, is the day everything changed. It wasn't about love anymore at that point, it was about competition. "You did 'this and that' with who?! Well, let's do 'this and that'." And if she refused, I always thought in the back of my mind "you f***ing slut, you would do 'this and that' with some a**hole that you barely knew, but not with me, the person you're supposedly in love with!" I began to hold contempt for her, and sometimes it showed in my attitude.

I could go on, but I'll stop right there. I guess it was a mix of insecurity, and the fear of embarrassment, i.e., the shame of my treasure being some other man's (men's!) garbage.

Since that day, I refuse to get involved with someone with a questionable past. Maybe I'm losing out on some really good girls (I doubt it), but I know it doesn't matter because the relationship will eventually fail since I know it will get to me.

So my suggestion: if it gets to you badly, I mean down in your heart and in your gut, then make a clean break; because trust me, that sh*t will eventually doom the relationship anyway.

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

Originally posted by KCGuy
...that she would have allowed herself to be so weak willed as to give up her 'submissiveness' to someone who was not truly deserveing

This is chump thinking! Too many guys think they are someone 'special' and that it's ok to have sex with me but how or why would you want this other guy. Hors don't care about you...it is about their self-fulfillment and you are nothing but a temporary tool who is the next in their line.

So is it ok for a woman to only give herself sexually to only 'truly' deserving guys, as you state. So if she has 17 'truly' deserving guys then it's ok, but a woman who has 6 non-deserving guys then it is not ok. Your reasoning is flawed.

And who are you to tell a woman what guys are 'truly' deserving -is it to be based on your standards and not hers? The hor mindset, once in place, has no moral standard - if he is what she desires then this is a legitimate enough reason to open her legs. Pure and simple, it is based on her fleshly desire and not on many other factors It is straightforward as that!!

 

[DJSask]

Originally posted by dietzcoi
Sorry, DJ Sask... no offense intended, but you gave the classic AFC answer.

This is your approach:

1. Doesn't matter how many men she had, as long as she loves me...
2. Doesn't matter how deep in debt she is, as long as she stops spending when she is with me.
3. Doesn't matter if she has been in prison, as long as she is on parole now
4. Doesn't matter how many STDs she has has as long as she is clean now
5. Doesn't matter if she was a prostitute as long as she has stopped and is only with me...

This is reality:

None of the real dangerous sex gods she lusted after and slept with wanted her, so now it is time to settle for Mr. Chump, the great provider.

Your words: "Her past is what made her the person she is today"
Might be closer to home......maybe not in YOUR case of course

Dietzcoi

What you've never done anything you wish you could change??

I mean ya if a week before I started dating a girl she was involved in a gang band with the hell's angels .... then ya I might be a little leary...

But people change and the things they did in their mid teen's to try and fit in and find acceptance because of whatever issues they had shouldn't be held against them 5 years later.

I've done **** i'm not proud of and i'd hate it to be held against me now.

AFC answer... whatever. I'm not average, i'm certainly not frustrated... and i ain't no chump.

I just think people change... and its their behavior now thats important.

WOmen are sexual creatures just like men, and are allowed to have a past too. If you can't get over it, then that's your own insecurity.

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

The past is 99.99999999999999999% of your time on this earth, the present is too minute to calculate, and the future never happened...now why in the hell would I disregard a woman's past actions to determine our current and future situation?

The past is the only thing that matters...your past actions brought you where you are at today, and the past is the only indicator of what you will do in the future.

Just to say, "I've changed" means nothing!!! You are a fool to believe so. Quit using the word, 'insecure' - women get insecure not men!!

 

[dietzcoi]

DJ Sask, what you write seems to make some sense, if we were nont emotional beings, but we are.

PRL is dead on, the past makes us what we are. Why do you think so many criminals go right back to it when they get released from prison?

DJ Sask: Are you going to marry a "reformed" prostitute? I think not... well, why not? Are you going to marry a woman with 3 kids and open your wallet to raise another man's kids? I wouldn't... the past does matter!!

Baracus: Well said... you are right on. Walking down the street having men laugh at the chump (you)... bad business indeed.

Well to each his own, but I have decided not to be that chump in the future.

Dietzcoi

 

[MysteryWoman]

The thing is that so many of you guys will probably end up with a woman with a history and will never know about, and have probably dated promisicuous women in the past. It is only honest girls, who are stupid. We all know how men will catergorise in to one or two categories.

The trouble with you guys is that everything is black and white. Whilst with women it more of a grey area. Women are experts at deception and getting their cake and eatting it (when it comes to being good girl/wh@re), always have been always will be.

 

[DJSask]

I'm not saying that the past doesn't matter at all.

Obviously if a woman has three kids, thats not the past, that is the present.

And if a woman used to be a *****, chances are she's got more baggage than a boeing 747, and would be incapable of being a decent partner now.

What i'm saying is just because a woman may have slept with 15 guys, or had a threesome, or whatever doesn't mean you should dump her if you have an awesome relationship and connection.

My motto, don't ask. You know what if you don't ask then you don't need to worry about it. it doesn't change the relationship you have now, in the present. The present is reality.

I know my girlfriend has had more partners than me, and I know she had a threesome once, and I know she's bi-sexual.

I didn't ask, she told me because she wanted me to know who she is and accept where's been, and but also who she is now.
and its the person she is now that i'm in love with, not the messed up teenager she was 5-7 years ago.... if i judged her on the past i'd be missing out on the great relationship i have now.

Its not like i've never had a one night fling, or slept with people I didn't care about... and i'd be mighty ****ing hurt if someone who tells me they care about me left me for a mistake i made 3 years ago.

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

DJ sask - you are a tolerable man...to the extreme, in my opinion.
But if that is what you want in life then that is your decision and no one elses. I however, will always start with the ideal and allow for some exceptions from there...the differences among men lie in what allowances they will make to attain the ideal relationship. But lets not take away the ideal...and let us not make it seem unworthy or dishonorable to ask for such.

 

[MVPlaya]

Forget about their sexual past and get started on their sexual future...

 

[MysteryWoman]

Originally posted by fuzzx
Hmmm its funny that we only get the woman DJ's replying to our messages... and I guess if your a woman DJ then you are also a hor, so of course you are only going to get the natural hor reaction to PRL's posts. I wouldn't bother trying to talk to girls who call themselves DJ's, infact I think its kind of dumb that there are women who are trying to use men's pickup techniques to meet men?!

Gonna get BLAMed by the women and their army of AFC's for this post...

BTW I am a virgin till marriage in case you've forgotten my prior posting and I figure If I have the will to wait for her then she better have the same to wait for me... NO HORS NEED APPLY

But at least you don't practice double standards

 

[AMF]

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.

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

Originally posted by AMF
The most lucid, reasoned thing you've ever said, PRL.

Of all the intelligible things I state, that is quite a compliment coming from you - I must slowly be gaining your favor. (don't take the statement in a gay way)

Judging from the textbook summarization of your latest post, You must be a student of psychology. Thank you for providing us with your pyscho-analysis of this situation, now can you please psycho analyze Mystery Woman for us!

 

[CharmaLeo]

bp1974 my hats off to you on an excellent post. This post unfortunatelly touches a deep sore that I couldn't figure out why it hurt.
I was married to a girl that I loved for a long time but unfortunatelly she had a past. Like a good partner I stepped down a lot of times and even appologized for crap I wasn't responsible for while being married. In time I couldn't anymore.

The thought that she was being a b1tch with me. Me, the one that loved her and provided for...while she never did anything of such against the guys that raped her (2 in fact and at different times). Yeah I thought I was her savior and that she would love me forever and unconditionally. Pardon me a gotta vomit.........

Well on top of that she had had multiple partners before me. She was a little naive and would tell me what she did and in what positions. Being the chump that I was I thought that now I was the special one, and she would only do that with me.

The fact is that we are men and we are wired the way we are. I don't give a rat's a55 what a woman will tell me differently. She was submissive with a lot lof other men and even with me the majority of the times.

If she hadn't had so many c0cks inside her before, it would have been different. I would have been more patient and would have treasured her, once the love and the lust had subsided.

Did I mentioned that I got her pregnant and now I will pay child support for years and years...Ok I'll go and slit my wrists now.

Before I go I have to ask the women. Why will a woman not allow a man to have more than one woman at the same time openly? Secretly the majority will allow it. Whereas the majority of men will dump her a55 in a second, secretly or not.

 

[MysteryWoman]

The majority of women will not allow a man to have more than one woman if she loves him. If she does it is often it is because she doesn't have the freedom to, were women are forced in to polygamous marriages. But only rich men have this privillege, poorer guys miss out, and the wives in polygamous marriages often hate each other. So basically polygamous men only care about their sexual gratification and spreading their genes on to the next generation, they don't take into account their wives feelings.

Another reason why a woman turns a blind eye to cheating, is because she does not enjoy sex and is glad to see the back of her husband. She stays in the marriage for materialistic reasons.

Others turn a blind eye, so that they can secretly conduct extra maritial affairs behind their husbands back, whilst he is distracted with another woman/women, he is less likely to notice her infidelities.

But despite what most guys say, I think the majority of women play fairer. If a woman is unfaithful, she is more likely to accept it if her man is unfaithful to her (not all women, just generalising most). Whereas most men (but some of course get turned on by the idea of the wives sleeping with other guys) who cheat will go mad if they find out if their wives are cheating. I think this goes back to Evolution theory where a lot of men want to have as many women as possible, yet has an unconscious desire to kill another man who cuckolds one of his women. They were competing with other men to produce as many offspring as possible, the only problem with the 21 century is nowadays he can't excuse it. The last thing society wants is as many b@stards as possible, and I'm sure nowadays men do not want be paying maintainance for many different children.

 

[MysteryWoman]

Originally posted by bp1974
If you look at the definition of 'rape' commonly used by the gender feminists in campus surveys in the mid-nineties you will find that it is so broad as to cover 90% of all sexual encounters.

When later investigated, using the same definition of 'rape' it was found that 60% of male college students had also been 'raped' (by women they'd willingly slept with).

It was also found that, of the campus women interviewed, 70% of those who had been ticked as having been 'raped', did not themselves believe that they had been raped, and had not been asked the question directly during the survey. It was the surveyors who told them they'd been raped, and included them in the statistics for their own agenda-pushing ends. And a large number of the women who had been ticked as 'raped', had since had consensual sex with the same men who supposedly 'raped' them.

Source: "Who stole Feminism?" - Christine Hoff-Sommers, 1995. I highly recommend it. The statistics I quote are as I remember them, and may not be exact.

This does not mean I'm defending true rape in any way, I just don't like to see false statistics being used to bash any gender over the head.

As for the topic at hand, a lot of women seem to have a naive and idealised view of how they are seen by the men they have casual encounters with. For some reason, it never occurs to them that men might disrespect them while in the process of f*cking them for being so easy, and that that is part of the turn on for a guy.

A friend of mine said she enjoyed the fantasy of being f*cked by two guys, because she liked the idea of being the centre of their attention, being adored and pampered. When I told her that the reality was that two guys could only ever do that to a girl they had no attachment to or respect for, because no man wants to see a woman he cares about being degraded like that with a c*ck in her at both ends, she was truly surprised. She'd never thought of it like that.

There's a difference between penetrating lots of people, and allowing lots of people to penetrate you, and at the end of the day that's the male/female, top/bottom, butch/fem, dom/sub, powerful/powerless difference.

So, when a woman lets lots of guys inside her, she is willingly going into the submissive, female position. Forget women fooling themselves that it's a place of power - it isn't. Not unless they're in an equal, caring, intimate relationship with someone who respects them.

When it's casual or very short term, they are letting themselves get f*cked, plain and simple. And that's the difference between men who sleep around and do the f*cking, and women who sleep around and let themselves get f*cked.

A lot of guys will deny that this is how they see it, but more often than not, this is how they see it. What guy in his right mind would admit that when' he's f*cking his ONS from behind, he's thinking "Take it you stupid f*cking sl*t." But, for a lot of men who sleep around, that's exactly what they're thinking. We guys know this, which is why we hold the women who gladly and naively end up underneath them in such contempt.

Well its good Psychology to understand why men have contempt for women who sleep around, but does it make it right?

The sickening thing is that most men want to penetrate as many women as possible who they are attracted to, yet the more they get to fcuk the greater their hatred goes towards women grows. It always the woman's fault for faling to resist them, but they never take the responsibility to try and control their own urges.

I have nothing against a man having emotionally detached sex with a woman and not wanting to see her again, I do have a problem when he has contempt and hatred towards her for letting her sleep with him. So a woman is promisicuous (it is not against the law), the way some of you guys talk of her she may as well be a murderer.

 

[dietzcoi]

CharmaLeo

Welcome to the world of the recovering AFCs

I feel you pain, believe me. But life goes on

A perfect lesson for all you guys who think it is fine to marry a woman with a seriously d1cked up past (literally)

At least you figured out what was what. It took me to age 38 to even begin to wake up. 38 years in the AFC matrix!!!

Life will get better. Keep reading this site. You will never make that mistake again!

Dietzcoi

 

[bp1974]

Originally posted by MW
Well its good Psychology to understand why men have contempt for women who sleep around, but does it make it right?

The sickening thing is that most men want to penetrate as many women as possible who they are attracted to, yet the more they get to fcuk the greater their hatred goes towards women grows. It always the woman's fault for faling to resist them, but they never take the responsibility to try and control their own urges.

I have nothing against a man having emotionally detached sex with a woman and not wanting to see her again, I do have a problem when he has contempt and hatred towards her for letting her sleep with him. So a woman is promisicuous (it is not against the law), the way some of you guys talk of her she may as well be a murderer.

This isn't a man/women thing or even a sex thing. It's a power thing - MALE/FEMALE, as I talked about earlier.

Let's look at it the other way around. How does a woman 'f*ck' a guy? By ruining him. Financially or emotionally, or destroying his reputation, etc. If a woman wants to give a man a good f*cking, those are some of the tools at her disposal.

Take the spoilt, beautiful princess, model, actress or whatever. She has guys falling over themselves to give her presents, to give her the best they can afford, if only she'll be theirs. How do we view these poor deluded chumps who are gladly debasing themselves for her? With contempt and, if we're feeling charitable, pity. How does a woman like that view these men? With utter contempt and zero respect. How else could she view them? Because they are gladly giving her what she would have to work hard to take from any self-respecting man. In her eyes, the men she comes across are easily manipulated, easily charmed and willingly part with whatever she asks of them. What's to respect?

This is the dynamic at work between a man who sleeps around and the women he sleeps with. Again, the MALE and the FEMALE, regardless of what genders are involved. He is being willingly given the very thing he knows he should have to earn through building trust, intimacy and mutual respect. They are letting him give them a f*cking. Of course the male's contempt is going to grow for these unsuspecting females. His attitudes about women are reinforced by the women he comes in contact with. Just as the princesses's are by the men she encounters.

Not to mention that the male who sleeps around like this is, like the princess, emotionally immature himself, and so revels in the adolescent illusion of power.