How do you view women who sleeps around?

[krockerman]

@Leo Gura You have said that no one who sleeps with 100 girls is a wise man. I am curious on how you would evaluate women. is the equivalent of an male stage orange sex addicted PUA the same as an onlyfans girl and/or a girl who sleeps around. 

Before you answer i would assume based on your values that they are similar whatever it is a 100 body count PUA or 100 body count only fans model

I am also curious about peoples opinions regarding this

Edited March 25 by krockerman

[TheGod]

1 hour ago, krockerman said:

@Leo Gura You have said that no one who sleeps with 100 girls is a wise man. I am curious on how you would evaluate women. is the equivalent of an male stage orange sex addicted PUA the same as an onlyfans girl and/or a girl who sleeps around. 

Before you answer i would assume based on your values that they are similar whatever it is a 100 body count PUA or 100 body count only fans model

I am also curious about peoples opinions regarding this

I used to think that people who have had sex with more than 5 people are very immature and can't be trusted in relationships. 

[bebotalk]

Wisdom is relative. Maybe that person thinks a good life has joy. 

A person like that is hedonistic, but i won't say that precludes wisdom. Or maybe they realise they have a vice in being hedonistic and accept it as part of being human. We all have flaws in some capacity. Isn't that being wise? Is that being wiser or more foolish than a person who seldom ever fucks and secretly longs to let themselves go sometimes? The hedonist in this case is at least being more true to themselves and has more self-awareness and knowledge. that's surely being wiser. 

Edited March 25 by bebotalk

[Applegarden8]

I don't know. Same as for a woman who doesn't sleep around. I guess I would like to have more certainty of commitment from the one who doesn't. I think the behavior between both are distinctively different and you would cater to one who you like more. 

[Yimpa]

Quote

How do you view women who sleeps around?

I don’t. 

 

[evgn]

low quality

[Princess Arabia]

On 3/24/2024 at 8:32 PM, krockerman said:

is the equivalent of an male stage orange sex addicted PUA the same as an onlyfans girl and/or a girl who sleeps around.

You're assuming OF girls sleep around. A virgin can do OF. When I was a stripper, and I was for 5yrs, I never slept around, never even slept with a patron. I'm a working girl now and i haven't had straight-up sex in years. Other stuff but not sex. I'm probably the most sexless person on earth. People will judge and talk shit, while they're the ones getting banged up. Don't assume people are sleeping around just because they are on camera. 

[QVx]

Experience lies in both abstaining and participating in sexual encounters.

Be not concerned with the number of another, but with your own experience.

What is the quality of your experience?

I have slept with twenty people ranging from one night stands to a two and a half year relationship. There have been many pros and cons to each of those experiences.

One night stands have been fantastically liberating and also depressingly empty. Equally, the relationships I have been in mirror the same liberation and depression as the one night stands.

Go and experience both, let go of the idea of a number being a measure of one’s being. 

[bebotalk]

the notion that women can't fuck around is literal 19th century thinking. I won't automatically look down on such a person. 

what's wrong with sex positivity? if some "guru" says so, he can go fuck himself.

[Consept]

I think the judgement of women that sleep around comes from the christian, moral idea that we've had through history about protecting a women's 'purity'. Main reason for this is we wanted society to be 'better' and that meant one man for one woman raising kids together. This is an outside way of organising society for the potential collective good. 

However, it can be in direct conflict with our own human nature that might tell us to sleep with more than one person. Even in sexually restrictive societies, people still cheat, have crazy sex etc, they just do it in the shadows. The sexual force is very hard to suppress.

So in modern day, there is more sexual freedom  however the judgement can still remain. But I don't think it makes sense to judge someone for something that is natural to them. Either someone genuinely wants to be sexually free or they have some kind of trauma that's pushing them to do it, either way judgement doesn't make sense. The person either needs help or understanding. 

Also it is their choice, there maybe consequences to the choice, for example of you are used to be sexually promiscuis, it could be hard to all of sudden change to monogamous. I also think a lot of guys judge because they want the girl, they see a girl who sleeps around but they are not able to sleep with them and so they hate them for it. They also hate the fact that they do t have the option to sleep around. 

A man who sleeps around is similar, but probably doesn't receive the same judgement a woman would. 

[Pav]

5 hours ago, Consept said:

I think the judgement of women that sleep around comes from the christian, moral idea that we've had through history about protecting a women's 'purity'. Main reason for this is we wanted society to be 'better' and that meant one man for one woman raising kids together. This is an outside way of organising society for the potential collective good.

It doesn't just come from Christian ideas, there's an abundance of non-christian cultures which shun promiscuity and value purity significantly more than the West.

Monogamy is important for societal stability and is more optimal for the raising of children. The vast majority of people naturally desire monogamous relationships and most people would be happiest in one compared to the alternatives. Thus, it's easy to see why the majority of post-agricultural societies have upheld these values.

5 hours ago, Consept said:

for example of you are used to be sexually promiscuis, it could be hard to all of sudden change to monogamous.

That's a legitimate concern. One of the most reliable predictors of an individual's future behaviour is their past behaviours.

Edited March 27 by Pav

[Consept]

15 minutes ago, Pav said:

It doesn't just come from Christian ideas, there's an abundance of non-christian cultures which shun promiscuity and value purity significantly more than the West.

I was more talking about why its so prominent in the west, but yes other cultures have the same ideas, specifically the muslim world. 

16 minutes ago, Pav said:

Monogamy is important for societal stability and is more optimal for the raising of children. The vast majority of people naturally desire monogamous relationships and most people would be happiest in one compared to the alternatives. Thus, it's easy to see why the majority of post-agricultural societies have upheld these values.

There are many cultures that are not monogamous and have never been but have had to adapt because of religious influence, for example many countries and tribes in Africa werent really monogamous but adapted when they were colonised by the west. You could make the argument that these societies were more successful previous to the colonisation, but obviously there are a lot more factors in play than just monogamy. To argue that monogamy is optimal is hard to say as well, in African tribes they took the view that it takes a village to raise a child which in which case its not that important to have just one stable, monogamous relationship as everyone is involved in child rearing. In our society the child is completely dependent on the strength of the relationship between 2 people, which is actually quite shaky, when you consider that 57% of marriages end in divorce because of infidelity. 

Also the marriages that dont end can sometimes be incredibly toxic environments for children, a lot if not most people i know, didnt have the best situation growing up with 2 parents. This isnt to say that it cant work, but i think the idea of shaming people that dont fall into it, is probably not healthy. This is not a new phenomenon as well, sometimes we like to paint the picture of past generations being idyllic, but prostituion services are not a new thing. 

I dont actually believe more people naturally skew toward monogamous relationships, at the very least it would be hard to ascertain whether thats true because of how much its baked into society. As I said in tribes in Africa today the idea of monogamy barely makes sense 

 

[Princess Arabia]

4 hours ago, Consept said:

A man who sleeps around is similar, but probably doesn't receive the same judgement a woman would. 

Men who sleep around are called players. Women who sleep around are called sluts or whores. Men strive for more pussy and call it being a man, that's what men do, they say. Our testosterone levels are high. Well, who are they trying to sleep with - women. So the man whores need to be grateful for the female whores.

[Leo Gura]

Of course it goes both ways.

But how do you know how much any girl has slept around?

[Pav]

2 hours ago, Consept said:

I was more talking about why its so prominent in the west, but yes other cultures have the same ideas, specifically the muslim world.

Most cultures outside the Muslim world too. How common are large scale societies which practice non-monogamy?

Christianity has played a substantial role in up holding these ideals, but the question is why were these values adopted by Christianity?

When the men at the top of the hierarchy horde the majority of the women this leads to those at the bottom becoming disgruntled and disillusioned with society and often turning to violent revolts. It is also less fulfilling for the women too since most desire monogamous committed relationships rather than being part of a harem.

2 hours ago, Consept said:

 many countries and tribes in Africa werent really monogamous but adapted when they were colonised by the west

Non-monogamous systems can be found in tribes of a few hundred people, however I was talking about role monogamy plays in larger, post-agricultural societies. What works in small tribes will often not scale well on to larger states of 100s of thousands of people or more. Having said that, monogamy is also quite common place among tribes too.

2 hours ago, Consept said:

To argue that monogamy is optimal is hard to say as well, in African tribes they took the view that it takes a village to raise a child which in which case its not that important to have just one stable, monogamous relationship as everyone is involved in child rearing.

It is better for extended family get involved in child rearing too. How does that mean the stability of the child's parent's relationship is not of vital importance? They are still the most influential factor in the child's development.

Large-scale societies function very differently to close-knit tribal societies, how would this system of getting the whole tribe involved in the raising of a child work in a city state of ten thousand people, most of whom are unrelated?

2 hours ago, Consept said:

In our society the child is completely dependent on the strength of the relationship between 2 people, which is actually quite shaky

There's issues with culturally monogamous systems, I don't think anyone would argue that there isn't. But it is one of the few systems which has worked in preventing societal instability. When a system is seen quite universally across cultures and has been implemented for hundreds or thousands of years, there's certainly a very good reason for it.

It is easy to overlook the benefits which we receive from stage blue structures since we have never had to suffer from the consequences which it prevents.

Edited March 27 by Pav

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Princess Arabia said:

Men who sleep around are called players. Women who sleep around are called sluts or whores. Men strive for more pussy and call it being a man, that's what men do, they say. Our testosterone levels are high. Well, who are they trying to sleep with - women. So the man whores need to be grateful for the female whores.

I'd argue its not necessarily as cool as it was for a guy just to randomly sleep with a lot of women. In reality a successful man hasn't really got time to be doing cold approach and trying to get as many women as possible, it's more of a young boys mindset, as in a 16 year old will probably be seen as cool amongst his friends if he sleeps around, but that's probably just cos he can and his friends find it hard. Also recently there has been more negative connotations put on men for doing it by women, calling them fuck boys etc.

I don't think guys for the most part see someone who's fucking constantly as more of a man, maybe before though. Also in reality it's only 5% of men and women who really promiscuous, most aren't either by choice or because they can't. 

I do agree with you, I never understood why guys in school labelled girls as sluts and whores, I always thought 'if you call them that, no ones gonna have a chance' lol 

[StarStruck]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Of course it goes both ways.

But how do you know how much any girl has slept around?

You can smell it. 

[Princess Arabia]

33 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

You can smell it. 

Just like how dogs smell cats and other dogs. Sniff, sniff. Come here let me smell if you smell like me. I know what that smells like.

[bebotalk]

7 hours ago, Pav said:

It doesn't just come from Christian ideas, there's an abundance of non-christian cultures which shun promiscuity and value purity significantly more than the West.

Monogamy is important for societal stability and is more optimal for the raising of children. The vast majority of people naturally desire monogamous relationships and most people would be happiest in one compared to the alternatives. Thus, it's easy to see why the majority of post-agricultural societies have upheld these values.

That's a legitimate concern. One of the most reliable predictors of an individual's future behaviour is their past behaviours.

Correlation isn't causation. If people naturally desire monogamy, then it's possibly socially constructed.

 

 

[Twentyfirst]

11 hours ago, bebotalk said:

the notion that women can't fuck around is literal 19th century thinking. I won't automatically look down on such a person. 

what's wrong with sex positivity? if some "guru" says so, he can go fuck himself.

Theres two problems. 19th century thinking is actually what lead us here so maybe it was good. Sex positivity is a made up word