"Muh women regret riding the CC" "Muh oxitocyn and pair bonding"

[Enfant terrible]

Every person who believes women will regret being promiscuous in their youth and never be happily married should read this threads.


"I'm posting this question because I'm an older woman (52) who was very promiscuous when I was young (probably upwards of 100 lovers). And I'm here to tell you that the man I married fully accepts and loves me for who I am - and it has never been an issue in our relationship. I wanted to bring this up, because I am dismayed by all the "slut shaming" that is still going on today, especially as my daughters enter their teens. I was hoping that the old double standard would be history by now, but apparently it's not. I am trying to raise my daughters to believe that sexuality is natural and beautiful and fun."

"Absolutely no regrets. I had many partners before I met my husband. My experiences with other men taught me what I liked and what I didn't like both sexually and otherwise. When I met him, I knew what I was looking for and I could see clearly that he met the bill in many different ways. We've been together nearly 30 years now. Our relationship is healthy and strong and I don't think my previous experiences with other men has had any negative impact on it."

"I am very happy that I have had multiple partners. I think it has made my current relationship healthier than it would have otherwise been."


"No regrets at all. My 20s were amazing and wild and free. Now married and have an amazing daughter. Do what you want. Just be safe."

"I sowed plenty of wild oats in my early 20's. I met my husband at 25, married him at 30, turning 34 next month and we have a happy marriage, a wonderful 2 year old and a baby due in 11.5 weeks.
I'm glad I got to have the wild times and now I'm a happy (if more boring) mom.
Do whatever you're comfortable with and practice safe sex. Don't let anyone push you to do anything you don't want to do."

"I don't regret anything. I feel like I got a lot "out of my system" in my late teens and 20's and learned what I like and what I don't. Then I was in a long relationship mid 20s to early 30s and and now I'm single again. I suppose I have the opportunity to act that way again, but I'm all about quality over quantity. So, if I can give any advice, it's that!"

"It didn't really affect me at all. I had lots of sex with lots of people, especially around the age 18-22 range. I'm 40 now and it's not any big deal - other than being surprised that not everyone else was sleeping around as much as I was (I had totally assumed that they were, at the time)."

Is the effect on pair bonding actually scientifically verified ?

 

[AlexAP]

They’ll complain about being lonely and only being used by guys

Cope. What men call "pump and dump" they call "A great night with Chad."

 

[AlexAP]

They really don't though.

They do it to please a man, not because they actually enjoy it, imho. And I say this as a guy with a 100+ lay count

 

[AlexAP]

But women have to deal with childbirth and are basically functionally useless for 9-12 months with each pregnancy. Whereas men can fuck multiple women per day and have no issues. We are literally designed to be more self-sufficient and want to impregnate as many women as possible, hence why promiscuity makes more sense for men than women.

What's against evolution if women fuck 3 guys a day who have good genes? It doesn't really matter who is the father as long as he has good genes, from an evolutionary perspective.

 

[wollet2]

Who tf thought women would regret being whores? That's the best part of their lives. Taking cock into every hole and used like a public toilet, that's living the dream.

 

[FastBananaCEO]

Just slay as much as you can before settling down so you don't worry much that she slayed too.

that's literally what I was thinking

The best way to cope with the fact that your future wife was a whore?

considering the average attractive girl has likely had many partners by the time you get to her, the best way to cope is to just fuck as many women as possible so that you both have a high body count. this way by the time you do settle down with a GL girl you can both just be like “hey, we...

looksmax.org

 

[AlexAP]

Is the effect on pair bonding actually scientifically verified ?

No, it's just assumptions, made mostly by men. There isn't a big difference in the divorce rates among women with lower body counts and the ones with higher body counts.

 

[wollet2]

just become a cuck

 

[wollet2]

They really don't though.

They do it to please a man, not because they actually enjoy it, imho. And I say this as a guy with a 100+ lay count

lmao

 

[Deleted member 9003]

Cope. What men call "pump and dump" they call "A great night with Chad."

A lot of girls regret having sex with medium uglies

 

[AlexAP]

They are, due to the biological cost of pregnancy, from an evolutionary standpoint, a man can impregnate as many females as he wants in a year whereas a women can only have one baby a year

Doesn't matter, as long as the man has good genes the woman doesn't care who is the father. If she sleeps with 10 guys who have good genes, that's a good thing from an evolutionary standpoint, as she's more likely to get pregnant and from a guy with good genes.

You posted it yourself, men with 2+ partners tended to stay relatively even for marriage whereas the women's trended downwards

They both trended downwards in about the same rate. Men were generally more happier in marriages though, that's the only remarkable difference.

Also we already know that hormones alone have effects alone on male and female behaviour in relationships
For example, those with higher prenatal testosterone/androgens were naturally more inclined towards polygamy, whereas those with higher prenatal estrogen were more inclined towards monogamy, this has already been proven.

Even if that's true, that doesn't prove that women were biologically programmed to be promiscuous.

 

[AlexAP]

at 35 a woman is not going to be able to lock down chad to begin with, but they can at least fuck chad at 18-24 when they are prime. Not being able to get chad in an ltr. They are forced to settle with much less and forced to remember chads cock for the rest of their existence, always remembering what it was like and feeling as if they deserve better.

Well 35 yo women can sometimes still get Chad. But I agree that it's harder. However, most women didn't have only Chads and only ONS after ONS, many had a few LTR and hookups in between (not always with Chads, HTN is enough to slay and sometimes even Normies can luck out). And hookups don't mean much for women, just like for men.
Women don't get emotionally attached to every hookup, they're "just fun", so these encounters don't destroy pair-bonding abilities. If a woman has had 20 hookups and 3 LTR at age 35, she can still fall in love at 35, it would be the 4th serious partner, which isn't that much at that age. Only if she had 10 LTR (1-2 years) or so who were meant to be forever but failed, she would be emotionally damaged.

 

[0Ace0]

Doesn't matter, as long as the man has good genes the woman doesn't care who is the father. If she sleeps with 10 guys who have good genes, that's a good thing from an evolutionary standpoint, as she's more likely to get pregnant and from a guy with good genes.

They both trended downwards in about the same rate. Men were generally more happier in marriages though, that's the only remarkable difference.

Even if that's true, that doesn't prove that women were biologically programmed to be promiscuous.

That doesnt disprove the fact that it largely reduces paternal investment from a evolutionary perspective

The graph clearly shows a disparity in the trends, regardless, women are more relationship oriented in their biology/psychology, so why are the men happier post-promiscuity, hmmm.....

I didnt say women were biologically programmed to be promiscuous, infact I said prenatal estrogen makes you more monogamous which is a clear display of hard biological differences in brain function with regards to relationships/promiscuity

Well 35 yo women can sometimes still get Chad. But I agree that it's harder. However, most women didn't have only Chads and only ONS after ONS, many had a few LTR and hookups in between (not always with Chads, HTN is enough to slay and sometimes even Normies can luck out). And hookups don't mean much for women, just like for men.
Women don't get emotionally attached to every hookup, they're "just fun", so these encounters don't destroy pair-bonding abilities. If a woman has had 20 hookups and 3 LTR at age 35, she can still fall in love at 35, it would be the 4th serious partner, which isn't that much at that age. Only if she had 10 LTR (1-2 years) or so who were meant to be forever but failed, she would be emotionally damaged.

It does affect their pair-bonding ability, do you think its a conscious choice for these bitches "okay this will not register to my oxytocin system"
Women are emotional impulsive creatures, like children, they wouldnt have that level of mental control even if it was a conscious choice

 

[AlexAP]

Even if that's true, that doesn't prove that women were biologically programmed to be promiscuous.

I said it wrong, I meant to say *that doesn't prove that women were biologically programmed to be monogamous.

 

[AlexAP]

That doesnt disprove the fact that it largely reduces paternal investment from a evolutionary perspective

As I said, paternal investment doesn't matter in nature. And even if, there are no DNA tests available for animals.

The graph clearly shows a disparity in the trends, regardless, women are more relationship oriented in their biology/psychology, so why are the men happier post-promiscuity, hmmm.....

There's not a big difference. And men are generally more happy in marriages, women initiate most of the divorces.

I didnt say women were biologically programmed to be promiscuous, infact I said prenatal estrogen makes you more monogamous which is a clear display of hard biological differences in brain function with regards to relationships/promiscuity

I said it wrong, I meant to say your arguments didn't prove that women were biologically programmed to be monogamous.

And yeah, they don't prove it. I don't know which stats you are referring, but the female behavior clearly is influenced a lot by socialization and culture, hormones might be a factor but I don't think it's the most important.

It does affect their pair-bonding ability, do you think its a conscious choice for these bitches "okay this will not register to my oxytocin system"
Women are emotional impulsive creatures, like children, they wouldnt have that level of mental control even if it was a conscious choice

Women do not emotionally bond with every sexual partner. They can have sex with the landlord to pay the rent, with a sugar daddy to finance college, they can work as an escort, or just sleep with a man who is a "good catch" to get commitment from him. It's a bluepilled cope to think that women always catch feelings for a sexual partner.

 

[0Ace0]

As I said, paternal investment doesn't matter in nature. And even if, there are no DNA tests for animals.

There's not a big difference. And men are generally more happy in marriages, women initiate most of the divorces.

I said it wrong, I meant to say your arguments didn't prove that women were biologically programmed to be monogamous.

And yeah, they don't prove it. I don't know which stats you are referring, but the female behavior clearly is influenced a lot by socialization and culture, hormones might be a factor but I don't think it's the most important.

Women do not emotionally bond with every sexual partner. They can have sex with the landlord to pay the rent, with a sugar daddy to finance college, they work as an escort, or just sleep with a man who is a "good catch" to get commitment from him. It's a bluepilled cope to think that women always catch feelings for a sexual partner.

Paternal investment does matter genius, a man is much less likely to invest in offspring and aid in their survival if he knows if they arent his, or if he doesnt know at all

There is a big difference, regardless, as Ive alluded to earlier, the scale of the difference doesnt even matter once you see that there is one, as it its existence alone is enough to prove a disparity and inequality among men and women

Hormonal environment is a major factor, it can literally affect the shape and function of your brain, socialization is also a factor of course, but only to a certain extent, its likely more of a spectrum, more hormonally masculinized women are more likely to be pro-feminist whores etc, Infact I'm pretty sure there were studies done on this particular area

Women will bond with a partner where there is interest, and interests are mediated by hormones/neurotransmitters in the brain, examples like favours for landlords or sugar daddies are more towards the extreme and chances are the women actively willing to get involved in these areas are already damaged to begin with
Its a bluepilled cope to think everything comes down to socialization and personal choice

 

[Deleted member 16944]

View attachment 1498554

He's got a point.

Look, I have met girls (including my ex) in that 103 or so who enjoyed it, but it was not the majority.
Many of them do it just to help build a deeper connection. I don't think they get off on the animalistic raw side of it like we do.

 

[stamaster21]

Yes it will. They love being ran through by whole football teams.

this notion that women want to be in mostly relationships, is somewhat false. They want to be in relationship with men 1-3 points higher then themselves, only problem those men cum and go no pun intended. Women rather share a winner then have avg or loser man to herself. So they go with a cycle in their teens and 20s of revolving door of short flings, or casual sex with a small pool of higher value men.

 

[stamaster21]

He's got a point.

Look, I have met girls (including my ex) in that 103 or so who enjoyed it, but it was not the majority.
Many of them do it just to help build a deeper connection. I don't think they get off on the animalistic raw side of it like we do.

sorry but i gota say cope, if these women wanted a deeper connection they would go fuck ugly/fat men who would cater to their every need. Sex for the most part comes down to physical attraction. To think women don't love sex or the animalistic side is blue-pilled cope.

 

[stamaster21]

You must understand that not all of those 20% of menfuck the most fuck equal amounts of pussy. Gigachads fuck thousands of women, chads too.
So yes, average modern woman has laycount of 100.

View attachment 1498291

good post he thinks the top 20 percent of men fuck women at similar rates, which is a lie, a 10/10 guy who has money status and fame, will fuck hundreds of women if not thousands. They will literally fuck 100-120 women a year, im talking about guys in the top 1-2 percent of that 20 percent. To most guys they think this is lies and some fantasy, they can't even imagine this , because its so far from their own daily lives.

 

[Deleted member 16970]

so this hipster slut is comparing the sexual revolution to modern times. her husband probably has no idea how big of a whore she was because the culture was WAY different , no internet, no evidence, nothing.

ideal for lying manipulative pussy.

 

[Deleted member 3573]

Women don't get emotionally attached to every hookup, they're "just fun", so these encounters don't destroy pair-bonding abilities. If a woman has had 20 hookups and 3 LTR at age 35, she can still fall in love at 35, it would be the 4th serious partner, which isn't that much at that age. Only if she had 10 LTR (1-2 years) or so who were meant to be forever but failed, she would be emotionally damaged.

This is a big thing that guys consider but I'd rather have a girl that had a few hookups rather than one that had even 1 long-term relationship tbh. The one without a single relationship is probably more excited for her first relationship. The one that had the serious LTR probably liked that guy a fair bit and a new relationship wouldn't even be that exciting to her. Nevermind one that has had 2+ serious LTRs. You just aren't a special bf to her and never will be

 

[Chadeep]

Also jfl if you think girls don’t regret it

Regret Sex = All her Rape Stories.

 

[Chinacurry]

I mean what do you expect them to say? "Yeah I was wrong and the redpill misogynists were right all along" women would rather perish by drawing and quartering than admit that.

Yep good point. I think there are defo women out there who lost out on a future with the love of their life, maybe not sone prince charming shit, but the right guy, cos they just chased the validation and dopamine and shit from hooking up with good looking, ripped guys.

Also, and u may call me a cuck here, but these foids with insane bodycounts, doesn't it make sense after they are done to get with Chad who also has insane bodycount and get married and shit??

 

[metagross]

JFL at this incel larp thread.

Although I do agree with you on "muh pair bond" aspect of the thread.

Whether a woman regrets sleeping around or not its purely mindset. Regardless most women will never get near 100 bodies. If she gets slut shamed for it she will regret sleeping around. If her friends are like "yes queen!!!" when she gets fucked by chad in the gutter she won't. If she whores around then gets married in her late 20's she wont. It's simple. Her ability to "pair bond" will not change. Red pill evo-psycology is the most autistic shit on the planet.

Fucking hell redpillers are retarded . Just another revenge fantasy cope for having no sexual success in your youth. Be based and blackpilled and realise that its because your a subhuman you can't get laid. Works for me bro .
View attachment 1498258

"Muh Pair Bond"
View attachment 1498249
Redpill autists quote this graph alot. Sure it looks bad but when you realise it only goes down from about 65% to 50% for women you realise its hardly matters. It also goes down for men in a simillar fashion. This is another mindset thing (and probably genetic).

Sure if you luck out when your young it will probably work out but after about 3 partners it levels out. 99% of women you smash past 21 years old will have had atleast 3 partners.

The thing is, that you already have a selection bias going on here.
Marital satisfaction can obviously only be measured, if you ARE MARRIED.
Now, how many people get married and not divorced?

Let's take a look

You get from over 90% to 50% the more sexual partners women had.
So that is already taking out 50% of the sexually free women right from the get-go.
And of those 50%, only 50% feel marital satisfaction.

But there's more:

As you can see, self-reported "Marital satisfaction" is just one piece of the puzzle.
- The marriage quality goes down from 54 to 23% at 11+ partners.
- The divorce rate will be significantly higher. From 9% to 56.5%. (You can't self-report your way out of this one!)
- You have significantly higher STD-rates.
- You have less than 20% of promiscuous women over the age of 30 being in an actual stable marriage.
- The depression rate is 2.7x as high

And much more!
As you can see, there are a lot of problems here, especially those that aren't reliant on self-reported data (like divorce rates, actually being in marriages, STDs, Depressions, etc.) are significantly worse for promiscuous women.
The reason that your chart about marital satisfaction doesn't look too bad, is because it relies on:
- the assumption that these women get married in the first place (which is already less likely, as I have shown above)
- self-reported data; meaning women will simply try to convince themselves that they are actually happy

 

[AlexAP]

The thing is, that you already have a selection bias going on here.
Marital satisfaction can obviously only be measured, if you ARE MARRIED.
Now, how many people get married and not divorced?

Let's take a look
View attachment 1502466

You get from over 90% to 50% the more sexual partners women had.
So that is already taking out 50% of the sexually free women right from the get-go.
And of those 50%, only 50% feel marital satisfaction.

But there's more:
View attachment 1502477

As you can see, self-reported "Marital satisfaction" is just one piece of the puzzle.
- The marriage quality goes down from 54 to 23% at 11+ partners.
- The divorce rate will be significantly higher. From 9% to 56.5%. (You can't self-report your way out of this one!)
- You have significantly higher STD-rates.
- You have less than 20% of promiscuous women over the age of 30 being in an actual stable marriage.
- The depression rate is 2.7x as high

And much more!
As you can see, there are a lot of problems here, especially those that aren't reliant on self-reported data (like divorce rates, actually being in marriages, STDs, Depressions, etc.) are significantly worse for promiscuous women.
The reason that your chart about marital satisfaction doesn't look too bad, is because it relies on:
- the assumption that these women get married in the first place (which is already less likely, as I have shown above)
- self-reported data; meaning women will simply try to convince themselves that they are actually happy

Women who had only 1 partner in their life are in the majority very religious (Amish, Mormon, evangelicals), they're like 5-10% of all women. Of course they will have low divorce rates. But do you want to marry a very religious woman who wants to wait until wedding day?

And yeah, starting to have sex with 12 or younger is indeed a bad sign, as no one is mature enough at that age. But if you have a normal age for the first time (15-19), promiscuity later on will not have many bad effects.

 

[spark]

Cope, there's no nuclear family in nature, men don't stay around after they fucked a woman (and even if there are no DNA tests in nature jfl). Women are not biologically programmed to be monogamous.

arent humans a tribal animal? We're not solitary

 

[turkproducer]

View attachment 1498314

larp or status pill. KSI looks no more than 4 psl JFL

 

[Deleted member 9568]

They may regret the lack of financial stability in the future, if they have that level of awareness. I've known many older women with promiscuous pasts who end up working dead-end jobs past middle age.

they don't regret financial stability, they regret that they don't have kids/familes...their low tier to mid tier white collar job in the inner cities/areas will be enough to cover for their expensive rent and rest will be foodie calls/drinks till 40's, given that u live in the west. I see ton's of attractive mid 30's to late 40's in inner cities that stay fit/gl/ staring down their phones 24/7. Their brains are fking fried.

 

[Reckless Turtle]

they don't regret financial stability, they regret that they don't have kids/familes...their low tier to mid tier white collar job in the inner cities/areas will be enough to cover for their expensive rent and rest will be foodie calls/drinks till 40's, given that u live in the west. I see ton's of attractive mid 30's to late 40's in inner cities that stay fit/gl/ staring down their phones 24/7. Their brains are fking fried.

Most people (women included) work paycheck to paycheck with very little financial security, even in the West.

 

[Deleted member 9568]

Most people (women included) work paycheck to paycheck with very little financial security, even in the West.

i'm aware but in places like scandinavia/germany/even spain etc it's enough. Don't forget they also have the advantage rental/agreements getting places(more common than you think that foids fuck their landlords in big cities/expensive). Only time can will decide the faith. We can cope with wishing for financial collapse here.

 

[Reckless Turtle]

We can cope with wishing for financial collapse here.

I'm not coping; just being realistic. I've met many older (single) women in the situation I described.

 

[Deleted member 9568]

I'm not coping; just being realistic. I've met many older (single) women in the situation I described.

same

 

[ShowerMaxxing]

View attachment 1498314

From fifa virgin at 19 to slayer. I guess his personality changed Status and money is so underrated

 

[thecel]

The wall is Gigacope too, any woman at any age can get a man for commitment (and for sex, obviously).

but like you said here—

Talking about "the wall" is actually degrading to men

We all know what the wall means: Women can't get Chads for LTR anymore. Among the people who believe in "the wall", this is painted as the most horrible thing women can experience in dating: Losing the ability to date Chads and therefore having to resort to date Normies. Imagine that. The...

looksmax.org

—the wall says they can’t get CHADS but they can always get normies

 

[Deleted member 16944]

From fifa virgin at 19 to slayer. I guess his personality changed Status and money is so underrated

He'd be 100% incel without his status. A rare example of a guy who relies on status for literally all of his lays.

Tbf though, speaking to 14 girls isn't even that many at that level of status, but for a facially ugly black guy that's a lot.

 

[getra]

Huge cope. If you’ve been around a girl with a high body count you’d know they’re annoying.

They even have a look to them
View attachment 1498322

Even innocent looking girls are whores, trust me. Example: my ex

 

[Deleted member 16970]

Its true, women just want to be accepted by the men. Social media will accept any kind of girl so they are happy to please them

 

[ShowerMaxxing]

He'd be 100% incel without his status. A rare example of a guy who relies on status for literally all of his lays.

Tbf though, speaking to 14 girls isn't even that many at that level of status, but for a facially ugly black guy that's a lot.

Yeah also still taking foids on "dates" but Im pre sure that's code for slays. Still mirin success