What's An Acceptable Number Of Sexual Parters For A 21-Year Old Girl To Have?
- Thread starter bogey_j
- Start date
Ronnie Lott
#49erGang
The Jewnited States
Superstar
truly baffles my mind with the difference from where i grew up and where most of you grew up.
hawaii is mostly asian culture and i can only think of maybe 2 girls that fukked before 9th grade. i knew a LOT of virgins as seniors and even freshman in college.
seems to be a cultural thing to me
personally i feel that at 21 they should be under 5 if they are a respectable girl. only hos are out there fukking everything in site.
hawaii is mostly asian culture and i can only think of maybe 2 girls that fukked before 9th grade. i knew a LOT of virgins as seniors and even freshman in college.
seems to be a cultural thing to me
personally i feel that at 21 they should be under 5 if they are a respectable girl. only hos are out there fukking everything in site.
Man I don't ask this question.... in my mind as long as she hasn't been ran through (e.g. train) or something it's okay..... but if she tells you and it's double digits 
I'm close to 30 and I'm not even in double digits yet 
I'm close to 30 and I'm not even in double digits yet FukkaPaidEmail
Retired Hoodrat whisperer
Man,even 10 is pushing it....
My neck and my back
All Star
all women done fukked 100 nikkas until proven otherwise and that's including moms 
Zapp Brannigan
Captain of the Nimbus
I always figured girls as a labor union. They work together to artificially lower the supply of their goods and services on the market in order to negotiate for better benefits, job security and what not.
Girls that break union ranks are like scab workers and have to be socially sanctioned, earning names like "slut."
This is also why I don't see the point in marrying. I don't want kids, and getting laid is so not difficult.
Girls that break union ranks are like scab workers and have to be socially sanctioned, earning names like "slut."
This is also why I don't see the point in marrying. I don't want kids, and getting laid is so not difficult.
jking23258
Pro
As Long as you strap up and don't get her pregnant it shouldn't matter in my opinion but if she got a STD thats a no no
Mountain
All Star
Its easy for an average women to sleep with a bunch of average nikkas, in fact, it wouldn't take any skill or cunning at all, all they'd have to do is say yes and spread they sht, hence why across most traditions, nations, cultures, e.t.c. promiscuous women fail to garner any respect and are labeled low value/easy.
On the other hand, for an average man to sleep around with a bunch of average chicks it takes a good amount of social skills and cunning (despite what the resident coli/duckburg playas say) because most women (even the ugly ones) are naturally very selective when choosing dudes to fck with, hence why in most traditions, nations, cultures e.t.c. promiscuous men are labeled as "ladies men" "players" and are typically respected.
So to answer your question (although it wasn't for me); no i wouldn't hold my self to the same promiscuity standard as a female, because the standard used for them isnt meant for me.
What's the story behind that chick? Or was it just some demented art/photo with a deep meaning behind it.
Or just a sexual play on Dexter?
that. she has more pics too.
Hacksaw Jim Thuggin
Superstar
this thread again?
Zapp Brannigan
Captain of the Nimbus
Reasons girls get called sluts:
No, this isn't any stupid joke about master keys and shytty locks. This is the real deal, prompted by this recent phenom of girls who are shocked (shocked!) by guys who judge girls over this alleged double-standard.
Anyways, a lot of the whining is to the effect of "why is there a double standard zomg" and other fairly standard timeless questions. As someone who pretty much is an expert only in relationships and sexual subjects, allow me to explain:
Men are easy. Men are always easy. It is not hard for a woman to have sex with 50 men in the span of 3 months. Hell, an average-looking woman could probably knock off three or four guys in a single night if she put her mind to it. All she'd have to do is find a bar full of desperate, drunk military guys.
By contrast, it's hard for men to have sex. Men would love to have sex with three women in one night, but it's hard to do. That's where the term "easy" comes from - a woman is "easy" when having sex with her is (relatively) not a difficult proposition. So, a guy who lays 50 women in 3 months is a "pimp", because he is doing something challenging. A woman who has sex with 50 men in 3 months isn't necessarily more sexually appealing, just more willing to have sex.
Now, the complaint that stems from this is a favorite of women today: that somehow 'society' has invented this system to keep women down, to oppress women, etc.
This is bullshyt. Some evolutionary psychology is helpful here: men want to impregnate as many women as possible. This mentality is evolutionarily desirable and thus has been selected for over millions of years, in the males of many many species. By contrast, human women can only be impregnated by one man at a time (and there are similar limits in other species). Therefore, she must be picky. After all, if she mates with just any old man, her offspring will be less likely to survive, and her genes will be less likely to be passed on. Thus, she picks the most fit male to mate with.
Let me repeat: For men, being promiscuous has been selected for evolutionarily. For women, being selective has been evolutionarily selected for.
But to top it off, men have evolved to prefer selective women. First, if a woman is having sex with many men, her pregnancy might not be his offspring. When he invests resources into feeding the child, he'd better be sure it's his. Second, if a woman is having sex indiscriminately, her female children will also be more likely to have sex indiscriminately, which will ultimately negatively affect his own genes' survival.
It gets even worse though! If one woman is having sex with all the men, she's monopolizing the gene pool -- she's decreasing the chance of other women having sex with fit men. And these other women want a shot too. So women themselves have evolved to dislike other women having sex with lots of men.
TL;DR: Men have evolved to be promiscuous. Women have evolved to be selective. Men have evolved to prefer women who are selective. Women have evolved to dislike women who are promiscuous.
Note - I am attaching no moral judgment to any of this. I have no problem with men who are chaste or women who are promiscuous. These are just the very deep-seated reasons why our biology compels us to think of men as pimps and women as sluts.
PS: This is based entirely on science and I'm not making some moralizing grand stand for the most part, but considering the above, imagine what you do to a guy if you run the risk of him finding out that this woman he's committed to has been so easily accomplished by so many in the past. If you're to be his "one" and his life partner, it's going to be extremely difficult to get over the biological impulse of jealousy and just outright hurt.
No, this isn't any stupid joke about master keys and shytty locks. This is the real deal, prompted by this recent phenom of girls who are shocked (shocked!) by guys who judge girls over this alleged double-standard.
Anyways, a lot of the whining is to the effect of "why is there a double standard zomg" and other fairly standard timeless questions. As someone who pretty much is an expert only in relationships and sexual subjects, allow me to explain:
Men are easy. Men are always easy. It is not hard for a woman to have sex with 50 men in the span of 3 months. Hell, an average-looking woman could probably knock off three or four guys in a single night if she put her mind to it. All she'd have to do is find a bar full of desperate, drunk military guys.
By contrast, it's hard for men to have sex. Men would love to have sex with three women in one night, but it's hard to do. That's where the term "easy" comes from - a woman is "easy" when having sex with her is (relatively) not a difficult proposition. So, a guy who lays 50 women in 3 months is a "pimp", because he is doing something challenging. A woman who has sex with 50 men in 3 months isn't necessarily more sexually appealing, just more willing to have sex.
Now, the complaint that stems from this is a favorite of women today: that somehow 'society' has invented this system to keep women down, to oppress women, etc.
This is bullshyt. Some evolutionary psychology is helpful here: men want to impregnate as many women as possible. This mentality is evolutionarily desirable and thus has been selected for over millions of years, in the males of many many species. By contrast, human women can only be impregnated by one man at a time (and there are similar limits in other species). Therefore, she must be picky. After all, if she mates with just any old man, her offspring will be less likely to survive, and her genes will be less likely to be passed on. Thus, she picks the most fit male to mate with.
Let me repeat: For men, being promiscuous has been selected for evolutionarily. For women, being selective has been evolutionarily selected for.
But to top it off, men have evolved to prefer selective women. First, if a woman is having sex with many men, her pregnancy might not be his offspring. When he invests resources into feeding the child, he'd better be sure it's his. Second, if a woman is having sex indiscriminately, her female children will also be more likely to have sex indiscriminately, which will ultimately negatively affect his own genes' survival.
It gets even worse though! If one woman is having sex with all the men, she's monopolizing the gene pool -- she's decreasing the chance of other women having sex with fit men. And these other women want a shot too. So women themselves have evolved to dislike other women having sex with lots of men.
TL;DR: Men have evolved to be promiscuous. Women have evolved to be selective. Men have evolved to prefer women who are selective. Women have evolved to dislike women who are promiscuous.
Note - I am attaching no moral judgment to any of this. I have no problem with men who are chaste or women who are promiscuous. These are just the very deep-seated reasons why our biology compels us to think of men as pimps and women as sluts.
PS: This is based entirely on science and I'm not making some moralizing grand stand for the most part, but considering the above, imagine what you do to a guy if you run the risk of him finding out that this woman he's committed to has been so easily accomplished by so many in the past. If you're to be his "one" and his life partner, it's going to be extremely difficult to get over the biological impulse of jealousy and just outright hurt.
Personally I do hold myself to a high standard so I expect my wife to also.
But the only flaw in that theory is that we as men do not define that standard, it is women who define that standard. Men with alot of partners aren't generally given the same stigma as females with alot of partners. They're actually seen as more "manly and experienced". So until they're given the same stigma as female hoes then things will remain as it is.
This. That's like 2-3 a year
not too shabby