4chan archive /adv/ (index)
similar threads
2020-03-04 10:27 21962962 Anonymous I've avoided girls that have had >0 sexual partners (img00015481495645952.png 480x459 263kB)
Kept trying to find me a cute virgin girl, I find either unattractive virgins or used up hotties, and now I'm 26. I'm financially set and have been going to the gym for 2 years, so it's easy for me to get with girls, but as soon as I find out they have fucked or have kids, i break things off. Is this behavior going to leave me single and lonely? Should I just conform and accept someone else's left overs or damaged good? What's your advice?

1 min later 21962970 Anonymous
>>21962962 You should have found your qt virgin girl when you were 16.

3 min later 21962973 Anonymous
>>21962962 I've been trying to do the same. What age are the girls you're dating?

3 min later 21962974 Anonymous
>>21962970 100% agree, but that is obviously not an option. Even 18 year old would be no good. Don't think they are mature enough to form a serious relationship.

3 min later 21962977 Anonymous
She’s going to be harder to find than rubies in a mountain. Don’t worry. Ask God for help and see where that leads you. He did in fact invent marriage.

4 min later 21962984 Anonymous
>>21962973 20 - 25 I find 20 is the minimum for something serious, and I feel like that's pushing it a little, (in regards to maturity). I want someone that doesn't make drinking and going out a priority

8 min later 21962994 Anonymous
>>21962984 As much as I'd like to meet a virgin near my age of 24 I think 18-22 is a more realistic range for finding an attractive virgin. Statistically about 1 in 9 at that age are virgin from 20-24 so it's not impossible but at 18 it's probably closer to 1 in 3. Where are you meeting these girls because that can make a difference?

13 min later 21963009 Anonymous
>>21962994 Do you only care that they're attractive and virgin? That's kind of sad.

15 min later 21963012 Anonymous
>>21963009 No, but OP is complaining that he only meets unattractive virgins so I'm trying to address the issue. Personally I'm happy with a girl around my level or a bit below in looks.

17 min later 21963020 Anonymous
>>21962994 Mostly the gym, or friends of friends, or cold approaches when I go out

18 min later 21963022 Anonymous
>>21963012 You're missing the point. Is it just looks and virginity?

20 min later 21963024 Anonymous
>>21963022 I have absolutely no interes in dating a girl that had sex with someone else that was not me. So yes, virginity is something important for me

21 min later 21963026 Anonymous
Nice Madonna Whore complex Any attractive girl you find that's a virgin past 20 is going to have a bunch of intimacy issues that will ruin your relationship.

22 min later 21963027 Anonymous
>>21963020 From what I hear gym girls are typically kind of slutty except for the new girls who are young. I'm too much of a pussy to cold approach but you could try coffee shops around a campus if you aren't afraid. Joining a group can cost time but could work. >>21963022 Same as OP, I'm a virgin and want another virgin but I definitely care about other things too. Looks just has to pass the minimum. Virginity is just the hardest to meet dealbreaker for me.

24 min later 21963029 Anonymous
>>21963024 You're missing the point again. Do you not care about anything else beyond that? Do you not care about her personality? Her interests? Her ambitions? What kind of life she wants? Her values? Her maturity?

25 min later 21963032 Anonymous
>>21963009 The real sadness comes from people like you lowering their standards and dating. Losing virginities before marriage should not be encouraged or overlooked.

25 min later 21963034 Anonymous
>>21963029 A girl only wanting to date a guy taller than her don't mean height is everything she wants.

26 min later 21963035 Anonymous
I've fucked two virgins and dumped them both because they became insufferable, self-centered cunts. Zoomers are zoomers, doesn't matter whether or not you plucked them before someone else did.

28 min later 21963041 Anonymous
>>21962962 Is it hard to find a virgin girl that's slightly below average that would adore you and love you and think your perfect.

30 min later 21963047 Anonymous
>>21963029 Fair qualities, but if she fucked someone else, she does not have my lifestyle. Simple as that

31 min later 21963052 Anonymous
>>21963034 Still shallow as fuck.

32 min later 21963054 Anonymous
>>21963032 I am not arguing for "lowering your standards", but quite the opposite. >>21963034 That's why I kept asking if he "only cared about it" and it was "just want he wanted", since it was the only thing he was focusing on.

34 min later 21963059 Anonymous
>>21963052 Everyone is shallow in some way, and everyone should persue their ideal match

40 min later 21963077 Anonymous
>>21963059 If that's what you need to think. Myself, I always tought that the fact that people do something doesn't imply at fucking all that doing it is right. It especially doesn't mean that doing something of greater magnitude is right.

51 min later 21963107 Anonymous
>>21963077 Judging others isn't something people just choose to do, it's an integral part of being human that we do subconsciously as well.

1 hours later 21963183 Anonymous
>>21962962 why does it matter if they are virgins or not?

1 hours later 21963189 Anonymous
>>21963183 the dude is clearly a /pol/ak

1 hours later 21963197 Anonymous
>>21963183 >>21963189 Would you rather eat untouched cereal or cereal that had several dicks in it?

1 hours later 21963210 Anonymous
>>21963197 The one with the dicks for sure

1 hours later 21963215 Anonymous
>>21963183 Not OP but I want someone on the same experience level as me. I'm not exactly going to have butterflies in my stomach from kissing thr girl I like knowing she's sucked other guys dicks before. >inb4 don't think about it Can't it just bothers me way too much and yes I've tried therapy. The better question is why people make such a big deal about looking for something in a partner, especially if you have it too.

1 hours later 21963216 Anonymous
>>21963197 Trick question, because cereal is already filled with bugs and rat shit and is gross whether or not dicks have been in it.

1 hours later 21963220 Anonymous
>>21962962 >damaged goods bro the only one who's damaged is you when you have this irrational fear of sex, as well as being a begging chooser. >>21963197 People don't eat cereal with their dicks, if you're gonna go with a food analogy at least be like >oh would you drink from a glass or eat from a bowl that other people have drank and eaten out of? and yes I would, it's called going to a restaurant or a bar, find any glass or fork or whatever and hundreds of mouths have touched it. However they have a thing called dish washers that wash dishes. Likewise, I wouldn't want to kiss a girl while she still had some other guy's cum in her mouth I'd be like "hey can I get you a mentos or something" but girls (generally) brush their teeth and wash their coochies everyday so what's the problem

1 hours later 21963221 Anonymous
>>21962984 >>21962994 OP, finding a virgin aged 18 and above is rare. At most they will be ugly, or around 3/10 in looks. One other possibility is where the girl has had a turnover in her life transforming from ugly girl to an attractive girl. Reason being, majority of girls have sex around the age of 15. They can be very curious and lustful for sexual contact at that age, if you're American you'd not believe this. Good luck OP.

1 hours later 21963222 Anonymous
>>21962962 >Is this behavior going to leave me single and lonely? Yes, but that's entirely up to you. >Should I just conform and accept someone else's left overs or damaged good? The kind of guy who thinks having a sexual encounter, regardless of context, makes you someone's "leftovers" is a pretty big red flag to women above 25. That kind of cold dehumanization smacks of pretty significant emotional immaturity and/or instability. Its not solely the fact that you have unrealistic preferences but that you literally view people who do not match these unrealistic preferences as objects - they are "goods" to you. This mindset is extremely troubling and is probably something that women your age can sniff out. I'm sure there's a lot of other reasons why you have such a difficult time making earnest connections with women.

1 hours later 21963226 Anonymous
>>21963197 Would you rather take medicine that has never been tested or a trusted medicine that has been tested on humans extensively? Anyone can come up with utterly retarded analogies, and none of them apply

1 hours later 21963233 Anonymous
>>21963220 >>21963226 Fuck you. I want a virgin gf and there's nothing wrong with that.

1 hours later 21963234 Anonymous
>>21963220 Going with your analogy, I assume you don't want to make a meal in a restaurant/bar the most important meal of your life

1 hours later 21963236 Anonymous
>>21963221 Girls lose their virginity on average at 17 and many a few years later.

1 hours later 21963238 Anonymous
In all seriousness I can understand the appeal of a virgin but I can’t understand that being your one “make or break” clause. That’s just stupid.

1 hours later 21963244 Anonymous
>>21963215 >I'm not exactly going to have butterflies in my stomach from kissing thr girl I like knowing she's sucked other guys dicks before. why you want a girl that refuses to sick dick altogether or one who's bad at it and is constantly scraping her teeth up on your nob I mean I get the whole "I want a girl who's on my level", but I think it's more of an irrational fear than anything. It's not like a girl who's had more sexual experience is gonna like point at your dick and laugh at it and then take a picture on her phone and upload it to times square. If anything they're the ones that can show you the ropes so to speak and help you get good at sex instead of being with someone with 0 experience and you're like two people trying to build an ikea shelf without any instructions. Ultimately you can want to have a girl who's as big of a virgin as you, if that's what you want then that's what you want and we all want what we want. But you have to accept that you're already rejecting a good percentage of all women everywhere, especially if like OP you do find virgins girls and then you're like "ew you're gross" and whatever. Where it has to be a 10/10 virgin who is into sex paradoxically and is also into whatever politics you believe in and has to be perfect perfect perfect. Perfection doesn't exist.

1 hours later 21963245 Anonymous
>>21963233 >I want a virgin gf and there's nothing wrong with that. Not inherently, no. It really depends on the context and your motivations for doing so. Whether you want to admit it or not a lot of guys use the "virgin gf" trope to mask a lot of insecurity. They want a girl who has never experienced sex or serious relationships because they're afraid of being compared to her other partners and not measuring up. Its a perfectly natural fear you just have to start by being honest with yourself.

1 hours later 21963249 Anonymous
>>21963233 >I want a virgin gf and there's nothing wrong with that. No not really, but it's when you add >and she has to be cute >and she has to be into gaming but not be a "gamer girl", PC only >and she has to be White >and she has to be Based And Red Pilled >and she has to be into anime, but with subs and not dubs >etc. that you limit yourself to an irrational level and how you end up as a 40+ year old virgin.

1 hours later 21963250 Anonymous
>>21963245 Based

1 hours later 21963261 Anonymous
>>21963107 You're right. Of course, one judges even others' judgements. If they can't defend it, it means they appear to be wrong and should really check out their own thinking if they literally can't defend it, simply as that. >>21963215 That's interesting. From what you write, it seems you're thinking about something it never happened to you. If you're going to love someone, you can't be sure before about what you feel.

1 hours later 21963265 Anonymous
>>21963234 >I assume you don't want to make a meal in a restaurant/bar the most important meal of your life I don't know, I'm not even sure what the analogy is supposed to be here. "the most important meal of my life" sounds like death row shit

1 hours later 21963266 Anonymous
>>21963197 >Would you rather eat untouched cereal or cereal that had several dicks in it? Do you plan to keep the cereal around for 40+ years and put your dick in it several times?

1 hours later 21963268 Anonymous
>>21963244 You're really projecting, firstly I'm not insecure at all about my performance. You completely missed the mark. I'm really kind of a girly romantic at heart and want to just enjoy the little things like holding hands, cuddling, kissing long before ever getting sexual. I'm supposed to date her weeks just getting comfortable enough to hold her while knowing she was getting plowed by others. Just imagining it is enough to completely kill any desire to touch her because I can't get that idea out of my head and I don't want to match it either by doing the same thing as those other guys. And idk about OP but I don't expect perfect looks or sex. I'm perfectly happy with a girl with any sex drive so long as she gives me some kind of affection regularly. And obviously we have to get along but I'm not going to be autistic about politics.

1 hours later 21963280 Anonymous
>>21963268 The fact that someone has been in a relationship before you completely killing your ability to become intimate with them is a pretty significant red flag. Nobody is saying you should just get with any girl and dismiss her entire past regardless of context but, seriously? The fact that she has experience in a relationship and has had a romantic/emotional connection with another person is SO revolting to you that you literally could not force yourself to emotionally connect with her regardless of how compatible she is or how much you like her? There's something very dysfunctional about that on a level that far transcends just the mechanics of virginity. It really speaks of some kind of significant inability to develop meaningful, interpersonal connections.

1 hours later 21963282 Anonymous
>>21963261 Love is irrelevant because it's something you cultivate over a long time anyway so it's far more practical to just focus on the things you're looking to avoid in the early stages. Short term love is just called infatuation.

1 hours later 21963300 Anonymous
>>21963280 I have really close friends I've had for a long time so I think I can form interpersonal connections. I have some strong hangups with sex. The best way I can sum it up is try to imagine the girl you love being fucked by another guy through a glass panel while you've never even gotten intimate with her. If that doesn't evoke some kind of gut wrenching disgust then I don't know how to explain. But I am absolutely confident I can form strong relationships I just have some hangups.

1 hours later 21963304 Anonymous
>>21963268 >And idk about OP but I don't expect perfect looks or sex. I'm perfectly happy with a girl with any sex drive so long as she gives me some kind of affection regularly. And obviously we have to get along but I'm not going to be autistic about politics. Wait a sec, so why the hell do you even care about her having had sex or not then? If you're down for her being asexual with you, what is the fucking problem? >>21963282 Well, anon, let me be blunt. No. Especially not falling into it.

1 hours later 21963311 Anonymous
>>21963304 Can you not grasp how it would feel to not do the most intimate physical activity with the girl you love when other men have???

1 hours later 21963315 Anonymous
>>21963300 >I have really close friends I've had for a long time so I think I can form interpersonal connections. That's good, however it isn't really comparable to the type of intimacy and vulnerability required in a romantic relationship. I didn't mean to imply that you're incapable of making any kind of bond with another human. >I have some strong hangups with sex. Yes. You clearly do. > The best way I can sum it up is try to imagine the girl you love being fucked by another guy through a glass panel while you've never even gotten intimate with her. If that doesn't evoke some kind of gut wrenching disgust then I don't know how to explain. Yeah I don't understand what gut wrenching feeling you're talking about. If I'm interacting with a woman that enjoys my presence and I enjoy her presence and we're both making the conscious choice to bond and initiate intimacy with each other I don't understand why imagining someone else is necessary or relevant. She's made the choice to be with me. The fact that she has at some point felt connected to someone else doesn't threaten me, personally. I'm not saying you should be exactly like me but the fact that a girl has been in another relationship makes you physically ill to think about is a massive, massive hangup. >But I am absolutely confident I can form strong relationships I just have some hangups. I'd recommend working through them a bit. You obviously have some pretty significant issues surrounding it.

2 hours later 21963322 Anonymous
>>21963311 I've been in a relationship before. I was 16 and thought I was in love. Obviously I wasn't but during the course of our relationship we had sex. Does that mean that I'm unworthy of ever having another girlfriend? Am I "damaged goods"?

2 hours later 21963326 Anonymous
>>21963268 >I'm really kind of a girly romantic at heart and want to just enjoy the little things like holding hands, cuddling, kissing long before ever getting sexual. Nothing wrong with that. The thing is that you can, and almost always do, do that with any girl out there who has had sex before. Very few of them will bang you on the first date or whatever especially when you're not actively trying to smash on the first date. >I'm supposed to date her weeks just getting comfortable enough to hold her That's a very long time. Weeks? For hugging and non-sexual cuddling? Again, if that's what you want then go for it but that's a long ass schedule in my opinion. and yeah I get what you're saying about how it's not even a performance thing of thinking how you hold up to sexual performance and penis size compared to her ex it's the fact that she was at one point handling another dude's junk and that imagery/notion is disturbing to you. I get that. If I sat around and thought about it long and hard I would get upset by it as well, but I don't know what to tell you. In all my times with girls whenever we talked about ex's or I thought about them I always thought like "hey sucks to be you buddy you fucked up big time". Ex's are like ghosts, they don't exist or matter anymore. This sounds more like an OCD intrusive thought pattern and being obsessed with the past than it does sound like sexual issue almost. But like I said if 1 previous partner is just as bad as 10 or 100 previous partners then I don't

2 hours later 21963327 Anonymous
>>21963315 Look you don't get my and obviously never will. I've spent almost 2 years with 2 different psychiatrists and they basically just told me the easiest thing is to find a virgin and told me I have OCD but that it's going to be far more unlikely I change how I feel than meet the right girl. Unless you feel more qualified, understand me any better (which you don't at all), or have some actual tangible solution I think it's better that you just respect that other don't share your emotions.

2 hours later 21963339 Anonymous
>>21963326 I have OCD, but at least you vaguely get the idea. Let's just say I have a very high confidence I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I tried to power through it. >>21963322 I'm not everyone, most people dont care and that's fine by me. But to me it's a problem sorry.

2 hours later 21963350 Anonymous
>>21963327 >I've spent almost 2 years with 2 different psychiatrists and they basically just told me the easiest thing is to find a virgin and told me I have OCD but that it's going to be far more unlikely I change how I feel than meet the right girl I get you. I'm not exactly trying to get you to change your mind. It seems as though you understand on some level you've gone to incredible lengths to moralize and justify your dysfunction. >I think it's better that you just respect that other don't share your emotions. Everyone is broken in their own way, anon. I'm not trying to shame you for that. It is just unfortunate that this obsession of yours completely rules your relationships, and, will most likely undermind any attempt at having a real relationship. I'm sure you know that even finding a virgin won't solve your deeply seated anxieties and emotional dysfunction. I struggle with some anxiety myself so I understand its a lot more complicated than simply deciding not to acknowledge it anymore. Good luck, for whatever its worth.

2 hours later 21963352 Anonymous
I don't get it. You're a virgin looking for a virgin or you're not a virgin exclusively looking for virgins? If it's the latter you can fuck off. If it's the former, what do if she has sucked dick or given handjobs before but the hymen is still intact?

2 hours later 21963363 Anonymous
>>21963236 Sure, I believe you.

2 hours later 21963367 Anonymous
>>21963245 >>21963220 >>21963222 Good content, a lot of people here are masking insecurity as a sexual preference. I have zero doubts their relationships are having trouble because prospective partners sense the bad vibes and fear radiating from them.

2 hours later 21963368 Anonymous
>damaged good Nigga that's what pussy is literally made for. Your ass is made for shitting and it's in no worse condition now than the day you started using it just because you've been using it to shit your sex life away for the past 26 years. Also, pretty much every woman has had sexual experiences in your age range, live with it or become a priest.

2 hours later 21963369 Anonymous
>>21963350 It wont solve my OCD but at least it wont triggers it either. Same way avoiding bees doesn't cure you're allergies but it sure as hell improves your quality of life. Thanks I'll probably need the luck.

2 hours later 21963380 Anonymous
>>21963311 Anon, you've never been in love, why are you thinking you can grasp it? Anyway FWIW a) regarding generally women, I don't give a flying fuck. Actually, it's probably a plus. Ok, maybe I wouldn't like her having more partners than the sand grains in a beach, but still. b) regarding the girl I would love: I was in love exactly with one girl in HS. I was an idiot and she had relationships after the initial crush. Most probably sex, but not exactly the day after it all started, to give a context. No, this didn't change my feelings, if anything I was more and more desperate. Surely sadder, but disgusted? For her being happy or trying to be? The tought never crossed my mind and I would've been enraged if someone even told me something like that. What kinda psycho would've I been for "liking" her like an object? I wasn't angry when I saw her kissing with her bf - I was angry when she kinda let him take her to things she didn't like. No, not the sexual kind. >hell, if anything I'm not even sure if I'd had preferred if she was a virgin if we ended up together. If my absolutely small time with other girls told me something, is that I regretted that I was with other girls - I would've preferred to stay "pure" for her, but no, it wasn't the other way around. If I was about that, I'd have stayed with my gf. Happy now?

2 hours later 21963385 Anonymous
Is there a way to trigger a hymen regrowth? Some sort of drug you stuff up there?

2 hours later 21963395 Anonymous
>>21963380 If it doesn't bother you that another man is fucking the girl you like you might as well be in an open relationship.

2 hours later 21963399 Anonymous
>>21963327 >told me I have OCD I'm nowhere near a doctor I'm a jazz pianist and that's what I guessed in my other post. I'm not officially diagnosed myself but I have all the symptoms, and others in my family were diagnosed and I know of other people as well. A common thread is a fear/dislike of germs, and that often translates into physical intimacy as well including sexuality. What helped my OCD was exposure therapy, my main thing was the dirt on surfaces like doorknobs and counter tops and whatever else. it was so bad that I couldn't use my own washroom without handling everything with a lysol wipe and washing my hands for hours. I started touching things that at least seemed clean and I wouldn't immediately go out to wash my hands I would just sit there and accept the reality that disease wasn't spreading all over my hands like wildfire. I moved onto more relatively dirty things and don't get me wrong I'm still an extremely clean person but I'm also not losing sleep over it anymore. How does that translate into your issue? Try meeting a girl and taking physical intimacy at your own pace and whatever you're comfortable with and just don't ask about her past relationships or whatever. Go with how you feel about yourself and how you feel about her. Don't start to think about how you feel about a guy that may not even exist. You're just holding hands or whatever so you're not gonna get AIDS on your dick if that's a worry

2 hours later 21963402 Anonymous
>>21962962 Dating virgins is just dumb. This isn’t the dark ages we have birth control. Stop being such an immature moron

2 hours later 21963410 Anonymous
>>21963385 No, hymen reconstruction is a simple surgery procedure.

2 hours later 21963413 Anonymous
Here is what you should do to work through your hang ups : Get somebody to arrange three or four girls that you will begin dating and getting to know over the course of several weeks. There will be one virgin among them, the rest, simple whores. Here is the twist: they all will claim to be a virgin. At the end of several weeks you will choose one to marry and after you consummate said marriage she will tell you if she is the true virgin or not. If you pick the whore, you’d of learned to fall in love despite your sexual conditions.

2 hours later 21963441 Anonymous
>>21963399 I appreciate the concern but I don't want to do this and it definitely isn't fair to any girl I date. I've sort of tried it before and ended up just wasting my time and her time because I didn't want to do anything physical with her. No amount of trying not to think about it will solve it. I've also tried going out with a girl who was a virgin, zero anxiety whatever after that. Ended up not turning into anything for multiple reasons. Like my psychiatrist said it's possible to work through but she actually told me it's not worth the effort until it becomes too difficult to find a virgin because many people fail to even fix simple anxieties with lots of effort. Even through consistent exposure it's very very unlikely it would turn out okay, at best it would bother me less but it would probably ruin the relationship. And again it's fucked up to use a girl as my tool to get over an anxiety regardless of the outcome. I dont see why you want to make things any harder than they have to be.

2 hours later 21963458 Anonymous
>>21963395 Nice goalpost moving. You asked me if it bothered me if a girl was a non-virgin. I answered that. The answer: no, especially if I loved her. That doesn't mean I'd be down for an open relationship. I am not now and probably in general. Could happen, I guess. [spoiler]FWIW with her I'd have accepted that. I was in love more than enough. Or like to think so. Definitely not what I would've preferred obviously, as I said I regretted even trying to be with other girls after she got with her bf, felt guilty as hell. But as I loved her, I would've thought the gates of paradise would've been opened just talking to her. Oh god, how I wanted to just hear her voice and see her face. Who the fuck cared about sex as if that was the most important thing.[/spoiler]

2 hours later 21963486 Anonymous
>>21963458 Whatever, I don't relate to your feelings. For me when I knew the girl I had a crush on when I was s kid went with another guy i lost all interest, and I had a crush for 4 years. Kind of a good thing now actually, I was a huge waste of time.

2 hours later 21963524 Anonymous
>>21962962 Not even blaming you. It's just sadly shallow. At I least I did love someone, I guess.

3 hours later 21963544 Anonymous
>>21963441 >isn't fair to any girl I date. >use a girl as my tool It's not unfair. It's not just a tool to help with your issues either it's what a relationship is. You get something out of it and so does she, some people care more about sex some care more about romance and cuddling some care more about money and status others care more about physical appearance. If you want to holdout for a virgin that's your choice but that's also a whole other bag of cats. It comes with a stigma, there's fewer choices especially as you get older, etc. What I don't fully get is how you know if a girl is a virgin or not before you even go on a date? Are you in a religious community?

3 hours later 21963562 Anonymous
>>21963029 People like what they like. I like tall girls. I've known plenty of short girls with the personality of Mother Theresa and a hard body, but they were short.

3 hours later 21963564 Anonymous
>>21963544 I either ask before or during the date. A decent amount of girls are pretty open about it. I'm mainly just afraid of aging. I just turned 24 so I'm doing absolutely everything I can to maintain my youth and get more muscle mass.

4 hours later 21963818 Anonymous
Having such a bad case of virginity fetish is only going to keep you from ever getting a relationship. Try to get rid of it.

4 hours later 21963828 Anonymous
>>21963562 >People like what they like What a spectacularly vague way to not answer the question.

4 hours later 21963833 Anonymous
>>21963818 And what am I supposed to do when I get into a relationship with someone who's not a virgin and I am still going through the whimsical, magical, "I can't believe this is actually happening everything is wonderful" phase of my first relationship and they're just having a fucking tuesday and want me to shut the fuck up and stop hugging them I don't want someone who has 'been there and done that' I need someone who can share my experiences right there next to me without having been through it so many times that it's borderline boring. Have you never had to teach someone something that you've done a million times? Do you not know what that's like?

5 hours later 21963843 Anonymous
>>21963833 Why are you so obsessed with virginity? It's not like you could even tell if a girl is a virgin or not. A girl could lie about it, just to soothe your insecurities.

5 hours later 21963846 Anonymous
>>21963833 >they're just having a fucking tuesday and want me to shut the fuck up and stop hugging them All of this you just said is a projection. You have falsely convinced yourself that because someone has been in a relationship before that they can't be equally excited to be with you. These are your own personal fears that you've projected onto a person. They're based on nothing but your inner insecurity and fear of being more attached to someone than they are to you. There is a massive, massive difference between someone who has been in a relationship or two before and a serial monogamist who compulsively gets into relationships to exercise personal trauma. You need to get this ridiculous idea out of your head that a non-virgin can't truly, honestly fall in love with you. That makes no sense. Its silly.

5 hours later 21963847 Anonymous
>>21963828 >Do you not care about her personality? Her interests? Her ambitions? What kind of life she wants? Her values? Her maturity? Not if she's fat, no. Not if she's short, no. Not if she's ugly, no. Retard. People like what they like.

5 hours later 21963852 Anonymous
>>21963818 Why can everyone else persue what they want but virginity is off the table?

5 hours later 21963855 Anonymous
>>21963833 Every relationship is different m'dude. You invent yourselves together, the person will bring different things out of you, and you'll be different inside. It's like any relationship in your life. Do you make a new friend and go "I feel nothing for you because I've had friends before?"

5 hours later 21963857 Anonymous
>>21963852 You can pursue it if you want, everyone is just telling you you're a retard. Because there is literally zero upside to being in a relationship with a virgin. You are being completely illogical.

5 hours later 21963875 Anonymous
>>21963857 I gave my my reasoning earlier in the thread and surely he has his. Nobody wants something for purely arbitrary reasons. What if it just makes him feel better, is that not reason enough, does every preference or desire have to be justified? Normal people choose others based off of vague feelings all the time and nobody really goes out of their way to criticize it so harshly.

5 hours later 21963886 Anonymous
>>21963875 >Nobody wants something for purely arbitrary reasons. Virgin fetishists do.

5 hours later 21963923 Anonymous
>>21963886 Hard to take a criticism seriously when you resort to name calling. Seems to me like you have some agenda. I seriously don't understand why you're so bothered by it unless you're some insecure girl. Even then if girls say they don't like that I am a virgin idgaf because it's not my problem. And even then women discriminate against virgins and nobody really minds

5 hours later 21963948 Anonymous
>>21963923 >women discriminate against virgins Where did you get this idea from?

5 hours later 21963952 Anonymous
>>21963923 My way of looking at it is if really, really bothers you. and I mean really bothers you after a while you will eventually alter your prefrences. Now dont go all autisitc on me for a sec becuase humans are fluid enitites. we change our minds about things all the time. Just a thought anon, maybe you might make a really nice connection with a girl that maybe has had sex before, its a waste of an oppurtunity. My best advice is for you to stay the fuck off the godforsaken website and take an active role in your community. That way your bound to meet someone eventually.

5 hours later 21963953 Anonymous
>>21963948 There are tons of women who make fun of male virgins and dont want to date them. Seen it both in person and online. I don't know what kind of politically correct fantasy world you live in.

5 hours later 21963956 Anonymous
>>21962962 The only surefire way of getting a virgin is converting to Islam and buying one yourself. All youll find in the west is liars and whores

5 hours later 21963970 Anonymous
>>21963953 Ah I see, you're 16. That's a high school thing. Doesn't really happen in the adult world.

5 hours later 21963978 Anonymous
>>21963952 Not OP but I've felt this way since I realized girls weren't all virgins so maybe 17. I'm 24 now and I haven't changed my mind even a little bit after going out with about a dozen girls and 2 yrs of therapy. Idk about OP but there is practically no way I'm going to change my mind. I'll either get the girl or die alone, preferably the first. I do agree, this site is cancer but I've been on chans for a while, bad habit. I'm looking into volunteer work regardless since I'm pretty bored. >>21963970 Nope people my age do this, last girl irl was about 22 and made fun of virgins until I said I was one.

5 hours later 21963981 Anonymous
>>21962962 This entire thread is a shining example of why teenagers with no life experience shouldn't be giving advice.

5 hours later 21963987 Anonymous
>>21962962 Go to Japan to find a wife

5 hours later 21963996 Anonymous
>>21962962 I can see why it would matter to you if someone is used to sleeping around. Depending on how often this was done maintaining committment can be a problem. These people are used to dealing with detachment and it could be easier the more times they did this. I would be willing to overlook 1-2 partners but anything beyond 5 is a red flag for me.

5 hours later 21964001 Anonymous
>>21963020 Stop bothering girls at the gym. It’s creepy. They are there to work on their health, not be bothered by desperate muscle heads.

5 hours later 21964004 Anonymous
>>21964001 /fit/'s problems summed up in one post

5 hours later 21964005 Anonymous
>>21963978 You chose to be a virgin, don't fret if people make fun of you for it.

6 hours later 21964015 Anonymous
>>21964001 >don't hit on girls in class, they're there to study >don't hit on girls at the mall they're there to shop >dont hit on girls at while they're existing, they're busy Nobody would ever date if you had to follow these stupid rules

6 hours later 21964020 Anonymous
>>21964005 I don't, you also choose not to be a virgin so don't get upset when someone doesn't like it. It's the same logic reversed so why can I not get away with it?

6 hours later 21964025 Anonymous
>>21962962 Women are bigger whores than men. Good luck. But you're more likely to get struck by lightning than find a virgin.

6 hours later 21964027 Anonymous
>>21964020 You can, people dont care if you're a virgin. People only usually care when you're an outcast.

6 hours later 21964030 Anonymous
>>21964020 It's not healthy to have a virgin fetishism. If you are dating a girl then it's normal and healthy to have sex in the relationship. Maybe she has had relationships before, why is this such a big concern for you?

6 hours later 21964041 Anonymous
>>21964020 Trust me, your average woman is not upset about a bunch of incels and sperglords disliking their choice not to be a virgin. The world at large isn't exactly hung up on the approval of a gaggle of emotionally stunted autists.

6 hours later 21964059 Anonymous
>>21964027 Idc either way >>21963399 >>21964030 This >>21964041 I know, even the girls I've gone on dates with never made a big deal out of it, only some tinder girls I messaged. What's I'm wondering is why you people care.

6 hours later 21964061 Anonymous
>>21964041 Whoa big insults and nothing to back it up.

6 hours later 21964078 Anonymous
>>21964030 It is not normal if you have values. I hate how nowadays, casual sex is socially acceptable. Whatever happened to no sex until marriage? Of only sleeping with one person. We have been programmed by external factors and as a result we now believe such behavior is ok when it really isn't.

6 hours later 21964102 Anonymous
>>21964078 >nowadays Nowadays people are having less sex than before. The average number of sexual partners is down from previous generations, and people lose their virginities later.

6 hours later 21964105 Anonymous
>>21964078 Why is it not okay? Why do you think you are some kind of authority who gets to dictate values on everyone else? You sound like a really evil person honestly. People have always had premarital sex, this has not changed.

6 hours later 21964109 Anonymous
>>21964102 People are definitely having more partners than in the middle ages

6 hours later 21964118 Anonymous
>>21964109 Do you have a source for this other than your ass?

6 hours later 21964126 Anonymous
>>21964118 If he gives you a list from a ten second glance at google, you’re going to scream fake news.

6 hours later 21964128 Anonymous
>>21964102 Mind backing it up please? Back in the days, there was less degeneracy. People were less socially conditioned to casual sex due to the lack of the internet primarily. Things such as marriage, virginity, and family relations meant a lot. Now people engage in all kinds of degenerate behavior such as casual sex, same sex marriage, incest, open relationships, etc and the general consensus seems to be that "As long as they are not hurting anyone, I don't care what they do and I don't judge" which I find to be bullshit. People nowadays are also scared to speak their minds just to avoid being ostracized, so they would much rather go with the flow which is such a shame. Going back to the topic of a virgin girl, like others have mentioned, girls tend to lose their virginity rather young nowadays. Therefore, if a girl willingly manages to stay virgin until marriage, despite having the opportunity to lose it earlier, means she is scrupulous and demure, worthy of being a wife. It means she is demure and has the ability to resist temptation.

6 hours later 21964133 Anonymous
>>21964105 I think everyone has a right to choose, it seems being a virgin nowadays holds a stigma like there's something wrong with someone for choosing not to do the deed. I know, I've experienced this firsthand from younger generations.

6 hours later 21964135 Anonymous
>>21964109 The wealthy kept gaggles of whores, consorts, etc. it was the right of the land owner to break in virgins. Half of Ireland were the wealthiest’s bastard children.

6 hours later 21964137 Anonymous
>>21964118 Sure I'll just pull up the CDC stats for 1524-1532 baka Christionanity was a huge part of midieval life, giving how basically all music, art, and culture revolved around it and fornication was looked down upon and women in particular were expected to be virgins culturally. Add on the lack of birth control, later puberty and the limited availability of partners and you get much less promiscuity. Of course there will be stories of people who did have lots of sex but they were definitely the exception and most who did were forced to marry.

6 hours later 21964140 Anonymous
>>21964128 When was “back in the days” to you? Back in the day, women frequently spent the summer with their aunts ( disappeared to have a baby or abortion). Sex has always been there, they just didn’t have the internet to spread it around.

6 hours later 21964145 Anonymous
>>21964140 Back in the days of Harun Al Rashid

6 hours later 21964149 Anonymous
>>21964102 When will this meme die? People are having *slightly* less sex on average than boomers or gen X did. That's it. To pretend that recorded history began with the boomers and the sexual """revolution""" is either woefully ignorant or a malicious lie. Also, while there is a slight drop in overall partner count, the nature of sexual behavior is only getting worse--on top of greater social acceptance of casual sex/less condemnation of fornication, the relative divorce rate is still astronomical. The absolute divorce rates are going down for the simple fact that absolute marriage rates are also going down. >>21964105 >Why do you think you are some kind of authority who gets to dictate values on everyone else? Blow it out your ass, hedonist. You almost certainly support the boot of the state whenever it's being rammed up someone else's backside, as long as you agree with it. What matters is the purpose of a standard. The fact is that waiting until marriage is demonstrably beneficial to relationships, and if this is "evil" to you, it says a lot more about your mindset than OP's. In any case, the entire point of a societal standard like sexual restraint is so it *isn't* up to the individual. Telling everyone all of their beliefs are equally valid is the same thing as saying they're all meaningless, because none of them will have any practical way of being enforced. That is, they will always fail to guide personal behavior. >People have always had premarital sex Not an argument. You're describing what IS, not what should be. Also, both the rates of sexual immorality and the public's acceptance thereof have been far from constant over history.

6 hours later 21964151 Anonymous
>>21964135 Depends heavily on the exact time period and location. But in general wealthy men did frequently have sex with whores. But most people were peasants and under the scrutiny of the church We talk about "now" as a span of maybe 40 years in the west. Just the middle ages alone spans separate cultures and like a thousand years. There's no consistent answer but many people were chaste.

6 hours later 21964159 Anonymous
>>21962962 Goodluck. You're gonna need it.

6 hours later 21964172 Anonymous
>>21964137 While Christian ideals indeed influenced medieval attitudes to sex, they were rather more complex than contemporary prejudices suggest. Christian beliefs interacted with medieval medical theories to help shape some surprising and sophisticated ideas about sex, and a wide variety of different sexual practices, long before the sexual revolution.

6 hours later 21964174 Anonymous
>>21964135 >it was the right of the land owner to break in virgins. This is a poetic invention that's complete nonsense, and you should feel bad for believing it. The only references to this at all were of late medieval or renaissance writers talking about it being abolished by the end of the last millennium (i.e. the era of European Christianization) as barbarism. >The wealthy kept gaggles of whores, consorts That people with power in places with weak laws and institutions are able to get away with degeneracy is unsurprising and also unrelated to general social standards. On that note, even though plenty of degenerate popes fathered children themselves, Church teaching (which you wouldn't publicly break with unless you wanted to be broken on the wheel) was and is unambiguous on the question of what constitutes sexual immorality. Whereas in the past, people who actually practiced what they preached were lauded as inspirations, today they are callled "coping incels" or "effeminate manchildren" for not behaving like profligate garbage. This is not to mention the current trend among fedoras where they reflexively associate morality with religion, unwittingly proving fundamentalists right by taking the same position--that one must be religious to be moral.

6 hours later 21964178 Anonymous
>>21964151 The were chaste and under the influence of a corrupt church.

6 hours later 21964186 Anonymous
>>21962962 >Is this behavior going to leave me single and lonely? Yes.

6 hours later 21964187 Anonymous
>>21964172 nice to see some who is imformed about history in here

6 hours later 21964194 Anonymous
>>21962962 Wait until marriage and expect the same of any potential partner. Once you find someone with the same standards, you'll both be glad to have found each other, and if you do get married, you'll be relieved you had the conviction to stick to your beliefs. Also, while some level of attraction (or at least not being repulsed) is important initially, do remember that everyone gets ugly with old age anyway. If you can find a kind, loyal, and moral 4 or 5/10 with a matching personality, that's a lot better than most can ever hope for. Sure, it's lucky to find a really attractive woman who still meets your standards, but in the long term, beauty depreciates far more than character. Those who 'settle' for a superficial 9 that's also a whore will end up with an old bag (assuming the relationship even lasts that long), minus the personality that really carries a lifelong partnership like marriage. >Is this behavior going to leave me single I don't know about you, but I'm waiting until marriage and I'm not religious. If anyone is going to end up alone, it would be me, but I would rather die alone than compromise on morality. Take from that what you will. >Should I just conform No. What is wrong is wrong, no matter how many are doing it.

6 hours later 21964195 Anonymous
>>21964172 Sure, but having a lot of family from small catholic villages in Europe it's pretty obvious that most people were not having many partners, many lost their virginity and were just expected to marry them and surprisingly enough the marriages actually worked out quite well most of the time. One big difference is that a lot more men used whores than today, which I don't think is a good thing at all but it seems to have been common. Largely speaking people were told to be chaste by the church and that's as far back as my great grandparents who only had toilets in their 60s. The fact of the matter is that it heavily depends on a lot of factors. But more often than not if you were a farmer in a small village you'd likely only ever sleep with the person you marry with some exceptions.

6 hours later 21964198 Anonymous
>>21964178 Better a corrupt church than no church. People need guidance and a strict moral code, there simply isn't a better alternative.

7 hours later 21964209 Anonymous
>>21964174 It’s debatable regarding it being utter nonsense. While not officially on the books as a given right, women- especially impoverished, divorced, or widowed- had few rights regarding the misogynistic behavior men in power held over them, of which rape was not discounted.

7 hours later 21964210 Anonymous
>>21964126 Let him. Unlike you incels, I'm not going to scream fake news just because some facts appear that go against your belief system. So, where is the source? Links? Your 10 seconds in google confirming your incel beliefs?

7 hours later 21964212 Anonymous
>>21964137 >Source: my ass So you can't give a source for your fantasies?

7 hours later 21964215 Anonymous
>>21964149 Hitler had premarital sex you fucking autistic Elliot wannabe.

7 hours later 21964219 Anonymous
>>21964212 Sure man, idc enough to debate this. There are way too few sources that far back and they usually come from the most populated, wealthy, and decadent areas because few had to means to actually record things in writing and most sure as hell weren't going to bother writing about the boring lives of peasants. My knowledge mostly comes from seeing and speaking with people who lived simple lives in small villages, a lifestyle not too far from what would have been further back.

7 hours later 21964233 Anonymous
>>21964209 >impoverished Granted. I'm not debating that people have the capacity to be depraved in spite of law and custom--I'm debating what the social view of 'depraved' was, and whether or not this is something which can be partially controlled through law and social standards. >Divorced In medieval Europe? It's highly unlikely they could get an annulment to begin with unless they were nobility playing dynastic games. >Widowed They tended to have greater rights and social status than single women. >>21964215 Memes aside, yes, the Nazis were quite degenerate in the sexual sense--at least the party ideologues as opposed to much of the population. >Elliot wannabe Can't you come up with a more creative baseless accusation? At least use a variety of them instead of the same tired line that you've thrown out for over a year.

7 hours later 21964235 Anonymous
>>21964215 Hitler did a lot of things a degenerate would do. Why is he even brought up?

7 hours later 21964237 Anonymous
>>21964174 The church could also offer indulgencies as a means of tithed forgiveness in regards to the wealthy and their sexual relationships with prostitutes. I don’t believe people were any more chaste back then than now. We, in fact , have more limitations placed upon our sexuality then in any other time in history. We have legal protections covering age limitations, forced or unwanted sexual attention, the threat of fine, jail time, media attention, repercussions from friends, employment, legal recourse. Then of course sexual education (including the legal aspects and financial obligations of siring a child out of wedlock), health repercussions ranging from a variety of std’s- many which are life long or or reduced mortality. We still have the church, but now we the “@metoo” crew, economic and career related, etc. Back in the day it was sores, blasphemy, or a husband returning home early from the fields that made you think twice about having the sex.

7 hours later 21964245 Anonymous
>>21964237 As long as reliable statistics have been collected, the trend has been that each generation is less degenerate than the last. Now of course we can never know accurately how things were 100 or 200 or 500 years ago, but there's no reason to not believe it was way more degenerate then than today. Alcoholism was rampant and prostitutes and brothels were everywhere. Bastard children everywhere.

7 hours later 21964247 Anonymous
honey you are the damaged goods

7 hours later 21964248 Anonymous
>>21964210 Like deja vu. I was referring to another thread that was nearly identical to this situation.

7 hours later 21964249 Anonymous
>>21963059 Overusing "shoulds" is a predictor of depression. I'd rather eat scabs than date someone who does this too. A man who acts like some nagging mother. Oof and yikes, not for me.

7 hours later 21964258 Anonymous
>>21964210 I think the ten secs were someone proving facts were not pulled from their ass regarding the fact that people are actually having less sex than prior generations citing a source like the Guardian to which an incel screamed, “ fake news”. Leading of course, to this exact post to which I’m now replying.

7 hours later 21964262 Anonymous
>>21964247 Oops I deflowered this one and we didn't work out. Oops I deflowered this one too and it also didn't work out. And on and on. And just what is the recourse for these jilted virgins? Oh yeah probably a convent or something, who honestly gives a shit about the women lol

7 hours later 21964263 Anonymous
>>21964249 Do whatever you want, I'm just saying that it's reasonable for people to look for certain things in a partner. Where'd you come up with the rest?

7 hours later 21964268 Anonymous
>>21964237 > I don’t believe people were any more chaste back then than now. Inherently? No. But practically? In a society which condemns promiscuity, there's much less incentive to engage in it than one were sex is an omnipresent commodity. As for sexual regulations, part of this is just the increasing capacity of governments to intervene in society, but I'll grant you we have some improvements--age of consent/marriage being among them (though it should be noted that the average age of marriage in Western Europe almost never went below 20, and child marriages were pretty much exclusively arranged by the nobility). These are also of a very different nature in many cases--the concern with 'safe sex' is only an issue because of the tacit acceptance of promiscuity, since STD's are pretty much irrelevant to those who only have one lifetime partner. >>21964245 >As long as reliable statistics have been collected, the trend has been that each generation is less degenerate than the last. Categorically false. The NSFG records a decrease in women who wait until marriage from almost 1 in 4 in the 70s (AFTER the sexual """revolution""") to barely 1 in 20 in 2011. The decrease in average number of sexual partners since the 80s peak is tiny (iirc, it went from about 9 to 8 in the US--not exactly an explosion of chaste sentiment) and comparatively meaningless, since it mainly reflects circumstance (rise of the internet, with porn and greater social isolation) rather than character. This obviously doesn't mean that society is in apocalyptic death throes. But to say that things are getting better across the board isn't accurate, either.

7 hours later 21964270 Anonymous
>>21964268 Why is having sex bad? Current generations already have less casual sex than before. But obviously people still have sex.

7 hours later 21964274 Anonymous
>>21964245 You’re preaching to the wrong person, brother. I’m not dismissing this fact. Main factors have nothing to do with sex as being degenerate behavior though. More like, focused on career goals, marrying later, too much debt causing them to put off marriage and child bearing, more people living at home later in life, changes in attitudes related to the actual importance of sex and social status.

7 hours later 21964275 Anonymous
>>21964268 >The NSFG records a decrease in women who wait until marriage from almost 1 in 4 in the 70s Curious about this number, got a link to where NSFG states this?

7 hours later 21964278 Anonymous
>>21964262 Who are you talking to? You wait until marriage so that you're as sure as possible things WILL work out with the person you commit to spend the rest of your life with. >Who honestly gives a shit about the women If I take your non sequitur to refer to men fucking and leaving women, that's the standard course of action for modern manwhores: demand sex first, and hope for the best. If a woman doesn't let a man use her body when she's waiting until marriage, by the way, the sad reality is that most men will instantly leave her. How's that for objectification? Contrast that with the expectation of waiting: commit first, and only then give yourself to your partner.

7 hours later 21964282 Anonymous
>>21964278 What qualifies as commitment? 3 dates? A month of dating? Living together? Marriage? Waiting for marriage until having sex is something pretty much nobody does because it simply doesn't make sense.

7 hours later 21964290 Anonymous
>>21964263 It's just beyond unattractive to listen to someone who's on a soap box every day rattling off about how reality and all things within don't meet their expectations. I just wouldn't want to be around it that's all. I don't think you would be too and it's very easy to imagine a high maintenance wife doing just this based on stereotypes so I don't see how you struggle with adopting this perspective.

7 hours later 21964293 Anonymous
>>21963047 >>21962962 >it's easy for me to get with girls Are you a virgin?

7 hours later 21964306 Anonymous
>>21964282 You'll get your slowly fattening wife with vaginismus and you'll enjoy her for the rest of your fucking life goddammit

7 hours later 21964308 Anonymous
>>21964290 There's not that much to say. I want a virgin girl, I don't think it's any less reasonable than wanting any other trait in a partner. People disagree so I respond. If you know better what would you have me do? I suppose I could just ignore it but then what's the point of anyone commenting?

7 hours later 21964320 Anonymous
>>21964308 You don't care in the slightest about who a girl is. You only care that she is a virgin. That is disgusting. It shows that you only see girls as possessions with no value.

8 hours later 21964323 Anonymous
>>21964275 My internet is shit and the pdf in the link won't load, but have at it: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/nsfg_ cycle1.htm You can also see key statistics in other cycles for comparison. Somewhat surprisingly, men have become slightly more likely (~2%) to wait in the past 20 years, while women have become less likely to do so (although they are still slightly more conservative than men in this regard). >>21964282 >what qualifies as commitment An enforceable, binding agreement. So marriage. >Waiting for marriage until having sex is something pretty much nobody does because it simply doesn't make sense. Absolutely false, from multiple standpoints. "Sexual compatibility" as it's thrown out by hedonists trying to rationalize their behavior is pretty much never helped by fornication. There are two main cases where a relationship could fall apart from incompatibility: either a drastic difference in sex drives, or a disgusting fetish that is not shared. In the first case, someone with an incredibly high libido would be neither willing nor able to wait until marriage, so it isn't an issue. In the second, you don't have to eat shit or pretend to be a toddler in bondage to decide you think it's repulsive. Any other issues here can be solved by solid, genuine communication of expectations both before and during a marriage--and communication IS vital to a successful marriage. It's also a fact that sexual restraint--up to and including marital exclusivity--is beneficial to the quality of a relationship.

8 hours later 21964330 Anonymous
>>21964320 No, ffs I decided to not keep going with a girl who was both attractive and a virgin because I didn't like her as a person. Why are you unable to comprehend that wanting a virgin and want something who's personality, ethics, interests, sociability, etc match are not mutually exclusive. That's why I said a girl who refuses to date shorter men doesn't mean she only sees men as a yardstick God how can you possibly be this dense?

8 hours later 21964333 Anonymous
>>21964320 That's not what he said, are you illiterate? There is a difference between wanting a girl BECAUSE she is a virgin or only considering a girl if she is one (and furthermore, is willing to wait). In the former case, I think we can all agree the guy is a creep. The latter is a statement of values which serves as a qualification, not a point of interest. This is like a woman who expects a guy to be able to support himself and a family: if she wants a man BECAUSE of his money, she's a gold-digger, but she's hardly being either materialistic or irrational if she only considers men who meet a basic expectation. I wouldn't marry a virgin if I didn't love who she was enough to spend the rest of my life with her. I suspect OP wouldn't, either. That said, because of my values, I only want to give myself to my life partner, and if a woman couldn't say the same, then I wouldn't be interested. The value of marital exclusivity in no way contradicts the importance of affection and personal compatibility. >you must see girls as possessions Fuck off. I guarantee your typical fuckboy has a far more objectifying mindset, what with his thrill of "conquest" and refusal to stay with a girl if he can't use her body.

8 hours later 21964336 Anonymous
>>21964330 Wanting a girl who is inexperienced with penises shows inexperience and immaturity on your part, it’s disgusting because you’re a pathetic slob of a human who’s main concern when finding a mate is their lack of ability to compare you to other penises or enjoy sex of their own volition/know what they like. If you somehow manage to snag a virgin like the pedophile you are her sexual desires most certainly wont be you.

8 hours later 21964346 Anonymous
>>21964323 >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/nsfg _cycle1.htm That is a whole load of data, can you point to where the 1 in 4 numbers you quoted is? Which pdf, which page? Also for some reason the "Currently married Females 15-44" link is broken.

8 hours later 21964356 Anonymous
>>21964336 Forgetting any other insults? You make it pretty obvious you're just mad because you don't want to be judged for your past. Like the other anon said it's actually fuckboys who are the most objectifying and completely unapologetic. If anything holding a girl to a standard shows you respect her. If I truly didn't care I'd do what other guys do, fuck them and ghost them. It's honest to God amazing how women can get more upset over being judged than literally used as a hole and thrown away.

8 hours later 21964360 Anonymous
>>21964356 It's you virgin fetishists who are the most objectifying and completely unapologetic.

8 hours later 21964361 Anonymous
>>21964336 >If you somehow manage to snag a virgin like the pedophile you are >when you make an absolutely abhorrent post.jpg So now people with standards are not only incel manchildren, but pedophiles. Into the trash it goes. >>21964346 As I said, the pdf wasn't loading for me. It's getting late for me, but you can look around by searching for some keywords like "premarital sex", "marriage", and/or "sexual partners". Also keep in mind that these are aggregate results, since US privacy law forbids releasing microdata to the general public.

8 hours later 21964365 Anonymous
>>21964356 I’m a married woman, pedo. >holding a girl to a standard The only person you should be holding a standard for is the only person on this planet you can control, yourself. If a guy cares about a girl he’ll fuck her no matter what her past. But go on, keep trying to justify yourself to a bunch of anonymous people about your pedophile desires.

8 hours later 21964368 Anonymous
>>21964361 Okay, so you just pulled that 1 out of 4 number out of your ass.

8 hours later 21964371 Anonymous
>>21964360 So if I only date attractive girls I guess that's objectifying and unapologetic as well? Oh wait I got it... we accept everyone and anything indiscriminately... ya that really sounds like treating someone as an individual. I seriously think I'm going to have an aneurism from the stupidity.

8 hours later 21964378 Anonymous
>>21964365 0% chance you'd be with him if he were 5ft tall, or ugly, or worked a mcjob. You think you get to decide what's an acceptable dealbreaker for everyone?

8 hours later 21964404 Anonymous
>>21964360 Virgin fetishists (of whom there are comparatively few, and none in this thread) are not at all the same thing as those who have a standard of waiting until marriage. The former want a girl because she's a virgin. The latter expect a girl to be a virgin as part of their values, but would still only marry if they wanted to commit their life to her. Also, think: if a couple is together for an ideal of two or even three years before marriage without sex to keep them together, wouldn't it follow that they must genuinely enjoy each other for who they are, rather than as masturbatory aids? Seriously, the number one thing actual incels will say is a benefit of a gf is sex (and incels often say women are ONLY good for sex, which I categorically reject as the degeneracy it is). This is something they share with manwhores, not those who want to save themselves for marriage. >>21964365 >If a guy cares about a girl he’ll fuck her no matter what her past. >lmao the past doesn't matter you pedo What utter fucking nonsense--people are the sum of their actions, as those reveal who they truly are. It's madness NOT to consider someone's past. Don't believe me? Alright, say it turns out that your husband was a regular at Epstein's sex parties and loved raping kids. Are you honestly telling me that you wouldn't hold it against him, and that you still would have married him having known that? >>21964368 >if you don't spoonfeed me every source on demand and show me exactly where to look in that source, then you must be lying I even gave you the source myself--why would I do that if I were trying to lie to you? How about you look at the damn thing instead of finding ways to ignore it? You can look at the more recent data (in the "key statistics" tab under "premarital sex") in the meantime, as it's much easier to spot. It shows overall waiting remaining roughly constant (women being slightly less likely, men slightly more likely to wait) since the 2002 cycle.

8 hours later 21964411 Anonymous
>>21963222 this right here boyo

8 hours later 21964415 Anonymous
>>21964404 You have so obviously never been in a relationship, a sexless relationship is miserable and will only make people unhappy. You seem to have an intense hatred of sex for some reason. Happy couples, married or not, have it. It is an important part of a relationship.

8 hours later 21964417 Anonymous
>>21964404 >hurr here is a number from NSFG >durr no I won't give a link where NSFG said it >reee I'm not going to spoonfeed you that number Source: trust me bro

8 hours later 21964425 Anonymous (images.jpeg-4.jpg 259x194 6kB)
>>21962962 >Is this behavior going to leave me single and lonely? Without a doubt. >Should I just conform and accept someone else's left overs or damaged good? Everyone is damaged goods, including yourself. In fact, I would say that if you post on 4chan this is almost guaranteed. Get over yourself. Lots of people go to the gym and have jobs.

8 hours later 21964428 Anonymous
>>21964415 > a sexless relationship is miserable and will only make people unhappy. I'm advocating for sexual restraint, not unconditional chastity. And on that note, it is statistically better, both for relationship happiness and stability, to wait until marriage. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00996.x/ab stract >Bivariate results suggested that delaying sexual involvement was associated with higher relationship quality across several dimensions. The multivariate results indicated that the speed of entry into sexual relationships was negatively associated with marital quality, but only among women." http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x/ab stract >"I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution." http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010- 25811-011 >"Both structural equation and group comparison analyses demonstrated that sexual restraint was associated with better relationship outcomes, even when controlling for education, the number of sexual partners, religiosity, and relationship length." >You seem to have an intense hatred of sex I have a hatred for promiscuity, not sex. It's perfectly fine within marriage. Your problem, and the problem with society as a whole, is the decoupling of sex from commitment. >>21964417 I literally did give you the link. If you can't even meet me a quarter of the way by assuming dishonesty (not even giving me the benefit of the doubt on that) and looking where I said it would be, the problem is on you for coming into this with a ridiculous level of bad faith.

8 hours later 21964439 Anonymous
>>21964428 You did not give a link to the "1 in 4" number. You said it came from NSFG. Either say where in which pdf on which page that figure is located, or admit you lied.

9 hours later 21964454 Anonymous
>>21964439 >you didn't spoonfeed me exactly what I wanted without any effort on my part, so you must be a liar Jesus Christ, you insufferable shit. Here's one: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad 107acc.pdf >The proportion of women who delayed sexual intercourse until marriage declined from 48 percent among women marrying during the period 1960-64, to 21 percent among women marrying in the years 1975–79. The largest decline appears to have occurred between 1965-69, when 42 percent of women marrying for the first time had not previously had intercourse, and 1970-74, when only 28 percent had delayed intercourse. Wow, 21 to 28 percent in the 70s. Exactly what I fucking said. Go fellate a shotgun, you pseudointellectual waste of space. Words cannot describe how repugnant creatures like you are, constantly pretending their bad-faith questions are a sign of reason or intelligence rather than unmitigated conceit and unmitigated gall. Next time, you might want to stop exploring your own colon before you accuse others of pulling things out of their ass.

9 hours later 21964483 Anonymous
>>21964454 That's an interesting paper since it shows that divorce rates were also way higher when more people waited for marriage until sex.

9 hours later 21964493 Anonymous
>>21962962 I'm a virgin, people compliment my looks. I'm looking for a serious relationship, if you want to we can try dating?

11 hours later 21964642 Anonymous
Guess I'm gonna start dating high school girls.

11 hours later 21964653 Anonymous
>>21964454 >>21964428 Nice info anon, as soon as someone says the words of sexual restraint on this bluepilled reddit board everyone looses their minds , kek.

16 hours later 21965030 Anonymous
A lot of people are also forgetting than men ARE ALLOWED to have sex with as many girls as they want simply because it's their innate right. That's just part of being a man. Girls on the other hand need to have restraint and commit only to a single guy. Unless you are a loose girl that gets fucked and shared around by men. But these nobody wants to marry.

16 hours later 21965038 Anonymous (A4E00466-D482-455E-8F7D-9693D16627A2.jpg 250x170 6kB)
>>21962962 Sorry buddy but women are whores whos deserve to be put on short leash with nothing but half a pack of dunkaroos a day

16 hours later 21965040 Anonymous
>>21965030 Youre forgetting that women lie buddy. They fuck around then look for a clown who believes her sob story

16 hours later 21965067 Anonymous
>>21963197 If you give it a good clean with soap and water and test it for STDs sure I would.

16 hours later 21965072 Anonymous
>>21965040 That's why you don't settle for anything less than a virgin. Once it's lost, there is no way to determine if she has had 1 dick or 1k

16 hours later 21965074 Anonymous
Here is a hot take, it is a very good thing people are generally getting married less and not having kids why? Because they genuinely don't want kids and when your parents don't want you it will absolutely fuck up your life they will abuse and neglect you and be awful parents. Let the people who truly want to be parents and will do a damn good job of it be parents. I didn't feel like replying to an anon on this it is just a response to the "traditionalist" bullshit mindset.

16 hours later 21965076 Anonymous
>>21965030 Nah, women fuck around more by definition. Men have to struggle to get laid even once. That said humanity could really benefit from introducing the natural order. Older guys keeping the youngsters in line by beating them to the brink of death anytime they even look in the direction of a girl.

16 hours later 21965080 Anonymous
>>21965074 But neglected kids are required to satisfy the pedophile priests. It's literally the backbone of the church, who in turn reinforce traditionalists to keep serving them more unwanted kids. It's a perfect cycle.

18 hours later 21965233 Anonymous
>>21965080 This is the most retarded thing ever

19 hours later 21965401 Anonymous
nobody wants sloppy secons OP. Those who overlook a girls past are beta cucks. Hang in there!

19 hours later 21965416 Anonymous
>>21965233 rot in hell, heathen

21 hours later 21965652 Anonymous
>>21963322 bro are you trying to fuck OP? it's just his preference but you guys are shitting up the thread about it

21 hours later 21965672 Anonymous
>>21965076 >Nah, women fuck around more by definition. What definition? >Men have to struggle to get laid even once. No we don't. Stop lying.

21 hours later 21965769 Anonymous
>>21963978 Do you want to date?

21 hours later 21965785 Anonymous
>>21964483 Not going to apologize for accusing me of lying? That's fine. How about you back up your own assertion (again)--because nowhere are divorce rates 'far higher' in the time period referenced, and you should also note that the report, given in 1982, will not capture the total divorce rate just a few years after the latest cohort--making the overall divorce rate look higher than it actually is. That's literally in the chart, saying that numbers in italics reflect an incomplete experience. For someone who blusters on about others being full of shit, you're remarkably full of it yourself. Just for the purposes of illustration to the rest of the thread, let's take your bullshit claim and put it next to a direct quote from the text. Your baseless claim: >"it shows that divorce rates were also way higher when more people waited for marriage until sex." The text: >the more recent marriage cohorts experienced a higher rate of marital dissolution than the earlier ones" The amount of sheer delusion in continuing to put out retarded statements on your end is, frankly, impressive. >>21965030 > men ARE ALLOWED to have sex with as many girls as they want Firstly, it's almost entirely a meme that this is the case--those who value restraint are highly unlikely to support the double standard. Secondly, nobody in this thread has argued for male promiscuity, because of the obvious result that it creates more degenerates.

21 hours later 21965792 Anonymous
>>21965785 Someone sure sounds salty that others are having sex but not him.

21 hours later 21965797 Anonymous
>>21963322 >I was 16 and thought I was in love. Obviously I wasn't but during the course of our relationship we had sex. That's exactly why you should have waited. So that you are sure to the highest possible degree that you DON'T fuck up like that. You're certainly unworthy of a partner who held themselves to a higher standard. >>21965792 >gets completely btfo, again >lol you're just mad you're not getting any Whatever helps you cope, mental midget.

21 hours later 21965822 Anonymous
>>21965797 >That's exactly why you should have waited. So that you are sure to the highest possible degree that you DON'T fuck up like that. You're certainly unworthy of a partner who held themselves to a higher standard. I couldn't agree more. They fucked up but still want to be accepted lol. Sure they may have been 16, but it was still their choice

21 hours later 21965840 Anonymous
>>21965797 >having sex is bad mmkay ok incel

22 hours later 21965857 Anonymous
>>21965840 Having premarital sex, i.e. sex outside of commitment, is bad. How is advocating for voluntary restraint a sign of involuntary celibacy, you smoothbrain?

22 hours later 21965877 Anonymous
>>21965857 why's it bad?

22 hours later 21965895 Anonymous
>>21965877 scroll up

23 hours later 21966146 Anonymous
ITT: Beta men accepting used up bitches

23 hours later 21966161 Anonymous
>>21964493 Do you live in the US?

24 hours later 21966197 Anonymous
>>21965769 In general yes, you specifically idk you or where you're from, I'm open to talking but sorry if I'm a bit confused why you'd be interested without really knowing anything about me aside from my hangups/anxiety? I'm you to pm I can give you a contact?

24 hours later 21966244 Anonymous
>>21966197 Yeah give it to me im 24 m, never fucked

24 hours later 21966266 Anonymous
>>21966244 I dunno why I'd expect anything else from here.

26 hours later 21966505 Anonymous
Absolute cave people in this thread I bet you dont carry your own spoon/plate/glass when going out to eat and use the same plate other people eated from like the filthy animals you are. Dont listen to this guys OP my friend was not a virgin yet he found a chick around 21 years old that was a virgin and they are going to marry next year. Anecdotal evidence I know more couples that are virgins, they are happily married with kids than reverese. Disgusted by people that take someones else junk/scraps might as well eat from a dumpster.

26 hours later 21966516 Anonymous
>>21966505 The issue is actually finding another virgin, they aren't too common and it's frowned upon socially to say it's something you're looking for. Also with the age issue. If you're out of college like I am it's hard meeting girls at the age where they haven't lost it. I'm a virgin but the female equivalent is rare

26 hours later 21966530 Anonymous
>>21966516 >it's frowned upon socially to say it's something you're looking for. Its not frowned upon is just doesn't make any sense and typically smacks of emotional dysfunction. Having relationships when you are young is a developmental milestone. People who don't hit those developmental milestones miss them for a reason. Its one thing to prefer to date someone relative to your level of experience or someone who practices a sensible amount of chastity with who they are sexually intimate with but to consider virginity a 100% make-or-break standard that you're completely unwilling to budge on is dysfunctional and weird, absolutely.

26 hours later 21966547 Anonymous
>>21966530 How does this information help me get a virgin girl I love to marry?

26 hours later 21966560 Anonymous
>>21963222 this honestly

29 hours later 21967021 Anonymous
>>21966516 My dude, you need to emphasize the standard rather than a characteristic of following it--for example, saying you expect someone to take care of themselves sounds much better than saying you want someone with no blemishes and good skin. You shouldn't go around autistically asking "aRe YoU a VIrGiN?". Just say you're waiting until marriage (which,I presume, you are) if the topic comes up, and you'll quickly filter out those who can't say the same. And remember, let these things come naturally--I can't give specific tips on how to tell a girl you're waiting, but one thing you shouldn't do is sit down on a first date and instantly start talking about the philosophical implications of sex. That will tend to creep people out.

30 hours later 21967044 Anonymous
>>21964270 >Why is having sex bad? The more people she fucks, the less she is able to form a lasting connection with her next partner. You want to have the best odds at a marriage lasting until you die: marry a woman that has had the least amount of sexual partners possible.

30 hours later 21967057 Anonymous
>>21966547 If you're willing to let the fact that a girl is not a virgin completely override every other trait about her then you're nowhere near emotionally competent enough to be getting married.

30 hours later 21967063 Anonymous
>>21967044 >The more people she fucks, the less she is able to form a lasting connection with her next partner. This "pair-bonding" bullshit is my favorite incel meme.

30 hours later 21967070 Anonymous
>>21967057 You probably have hundreds of latent dealbreakers, you pretentious shit.

30 hours later 21967082 Anonymous
>>21967063 >It's bullshit because I don't like it! okay roastie.

30 hours later 21967104 Anonymous
>>21967021 Just because she's willing to wait for marriage at my request doesn't mean she's a virgin, so I'd end up asking anyway. >>21967057 Not sure if you've ever met people but they generally all have dealbreakers. Like would you date a crack addict if you otherwise liked him? It all comes down to my dealbreaker offending you because it excludes you. Ever consider I might not agree with one of your dealbreakers, but of course it doesn't matter because you only care about how you feel.

30 hours later 21967121 Anonymous
>>21967104 >Just because she's willing to wait for marriage at my request doesn't mean she's a virgin Yes, I know. But if you are waiting until marriage, you should also wait 2-3 years before deciding on said marriage, and in that time, you will have plenty of opportunity to find out about your partner organically. If she turns out to not meet your standards, you can and should break up. A major benefit of waiting until marriage is that you have a large amount of time to evaluate a partner before seriously giving yourself to them. Asking like an autist whether someone is a virgin or not is much faster, but it will also reduce your chances--and remember, it still won't save you if she decides to lie out of guilt/fear, or if she did something that she thinks "didn't count". The only thing that can be relied on is time and the trust that you build, neither of which are served by instantly asking for a "virginity check" on impulse.

30 hours later 21967143 Anonymous
>>21964133 Not really. I'm 22 and still a virgin and nothing is wrong with that. Me and my boyfriend are taking things slow and no one honestly seems to give a shit outside of the internet. Maybe opinions like this are amplified online but irl, no one gives a shit.

31 hours later 21967281 Anonymous
>>21966197 >>21966244 >>21966266 That was a different anon, I'm a female, I just feel like our worldview is quite close. If you don't mind, yes, I would like to chat with you.

31 hours later 21967290 Anonymous
>>21967281 Let's see if Charlie Brown goes in for another kick, lads

31 hours later 21967298 Anonymous
>>21962962 are you a virgin as well?

31 hours later 21967302 Anonymous
>>21967290 I'm not a bait, stop bulling him

31 hours later 21967310 Anonymous
>>21967281 I'm going to sleep but I made a kik: guttten

31 hours later 21967320 Anonymous
>>21967310 gluttten Sry

31 hours later 21967321 Anonymous
>>21967310 >but I made a kik You are on kik for 2958 days. I don't think you are the anon above

31 hours later 21967338 Anonymous
>>21967321 Ya typo, it's gluttten with an l

32 hours later 21967343 Anonymous
OP your desires are perfectly normal, natural, and healthy. Men have an instinctual desire to avoid anything other men's sexuality has come in contact with, when viewed on an MRI it triggers a response in the brain comparable to viewing maggots. Step 1 is unapologetically knowing what you want and not being afraid to go out and let it be known how you feel. You seem to be close based on how you dealt with the roastie in this thread who kept getting mad your 1 standard disqualified her because of a choice she voluntarily made. Step 2 is not wasting any time. If you have your life together, good income, own house, etc. and looking for something long-term it should be a lot easier to be taken seriously and not mistaken for a fetishist creep. You'll want to find a way to meet a decent community of people quickly, make strong good impressions, and let it be known that you are looking for a serious relationship and one of this network can help you guys meet in the first place. You want to do this before the age gap gets too big because more and more people will assume you're a creep and it gets harder to do the networking, as well as overcoming any conditioning the girl has from society about an age gap being wrong. Overall you have a huge uphill battle ahead of you so you are going to have to try some drastic tactic changes. You don't need to overcome some self-pathology with a psychologist, you are a normal healthy male (although I do recommend trying a male psychologist, women have a remarkable inability to understand male problems)

32 hours later 21967350 Anonymous
The way I see it you shouldn't take it against women if they fell in love once and gave up their virginity with the intention of staying with their current partner. Maybe things didn't work out and they broke up. There's a difference between women that lose their virginity but willing to commit compared to women that treat sex like it's a part of partying and doing the deed over and over again for self gratification in these circumstances.

32 hours later 21967362 Anonymous
>>21966516 >I'm a virgin but the female equivalent is rare Given the fact that both men and women lose their virginities at around the same age, you are wrong.

32 hours later 21967373 Anonymous
>>21967082 Go ahead and post evidence for your pair-bonding meme. And while you're at it post evidence for your 80/20 meme. The tenets of your beliefs. Surely you wouldn't let an incel wiki as your sole source dictate your beliefs right?

32 hours later 21967378 Anonymous
>>21967343 >Men have an instinctual desire to avoid anything other men's sexuality has come in contact with, when viewed on an MRI it triggers a response in the brain comparable to viewing maggots. [citation needed]

32 hours later 21967381 Anonymous
>>21967350 > you shouldn't take it against women if they fell in love once and gave up their virginity with the intention of staying with their current partner Of course you should, because that's impulsive behavior based on a delusion. Nobody gets into a relationship with the expectation that it will fail, but at the same time, unless you already have a good idea it HAS succeeded (i.e. marriage), you shouldn't jump the gun and behave like you'll be 'together forever'. The extreme harmfulness of the delusion that sex is okay as long as you THINK you'll stay together is exactly why it's wrong NOT to hold it against people. The behavior will only continue to propagate as long as people continue to see it as justified--or worse, desirable. >There's a difference between women that lose their virginity but willing to commit compared to women that treat sex like it's a part of partying and doing the deed over and over again for self gratification Sure, but neither of them is worth consideration. Having sex without commitment (regardless of a "willingness" to commit later on) is putting the cart before the horse by gambling on the future, and as such it should never be encouraged as a behavior.

32 hours later 21967383 Anonymous
>>21967063 No, anon has a point. It's not about pair bonding so much as you get used to feeling everything that goes from sex to breakup to sex again that it eventually becomes habitual. You won't care as much the more you do it with different people.

32 hours later 21967392 Anonymous
>>21967381 You know people divorce right? So even if a couple only had sex until they got married they lost their virginity right? That being the case what happens if they divorce? You're saying neither is worth dating again just because they're not virgins anymore? I'm not condoning promiscuity I'm just saying not being a virgin in itself doesn't mean you're a manwhore/roastie.

32 hours later 21967395 Anonymous
>>21963029 >>21963029 >>21963029 Never listen to guys like this, the woman will be just as interested in his attractiveness and there's no other metric by which to judge people you barely know.

32 hours later 21967399 Anonymous
>>21963220 >bro the only one who's damaged is you when you have this irrational fear of sex, Centuries of thinking a certain away will be handwaved by retards who say bro

32 hours later 21967403 Anonymous
>>21967399 People have thought sex is fun and have had it for centuries.

32 hours later 21967405 Anonymous
>>21967373 Well I dunno about the 80/20 meme thing but I do know people can be VERY selective about people they choose. This isn't something you have to think about very much. You can be the average city person walking around and most of the faces you see you will likely ignore because of social constraints. Until a person is validated through someone else or randomly picked to be around you then you'll probably think about making a move on someone.

32 hours later 21967416 Anonymous
>>21967392 >You know people divorce right? At significantly reduced rates for those who wait until marriage (and who actually follow the spirit of the idea by not getting married after a few weeks for the purpose of sex), yes. >That being the case what happens if they divorce? Then tentatively, it's not the fault of one spouse (the likelihood of both parties being mutually blameless for divorce is extremely low). A woman who divorced after doing everything 'right' leading up to separation, for example, is blameless, and I wouldn't hold it against her character. The same thing would go for widows or rape victims--i.e. those whose virginity or lack thereof has nothing at all to do with their character. At the same time, it's eminently practical not to date divorcees, widows, or rape victims given their increased risk to a relationship. But that wouldn't be a value-based rejection. >I'm just saying not being a virgin in itself doesn't mean you're a manwhore/roastie. We don't disagree. While OP would probably prefer a virgin regardless, and he wouldn't be wrong for doing so in itself, I would hope that he's also capable of making moral distinctions.

32 hours later 21967429 Anonymous
>>21967416 >le virgins divorce less meme

32 hours later 21967434 Anonymous
>>21966161 No, I don't. Is that a problem?

32 hours later 21967436 Anonymous
>>21967429 >facts I don't like are memes http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x/ab stract >"I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution."

32 hours later 21967447 Anonymous
>>21967403 The bastardy rate in victorian days was like 5%

32 hours later 21967453 Anonymous
>>21967436 "These results suggest that neither premarital sex nor premarital cohabitation by itself indicate either preexisting characteristics or subsequent relationship environments that weaken marriages." He specifically says that this does not mean virgins divorce less. Get better at memeing.

32 hours later 21967455 Anonymous
>>21967447 [citation needed]

32 hours later 21967462 Anonymous
>>21967455 https://www.google.com/amp/s/workan dgender.wordpress.com/2017/03/09/cf p-unwed-motherhood-in-18th-and-19th -century-history/amp/ How come redditors use this citation needed meme do you not have google

32 hours later 21967494 Anonymous
>>21967453 Jesus Christ, this board is filled with complete spastics. It means more than one sexual partner is associated with higher rates of divorce. How do you ensure that you only have one sexual partner when you're married rather than gambling that you marry your first sexual partner? By waiting until marriage to go from zero to one. I.e. by being a virgin until marriage.

33 hours later 21967503 Anonymous
>>21967436 >"successful marriage" is 5 years long >1995 data >doesn't take into account virgin marriages that ended in divorce and subsequently had more sexual partners

33 hours later 21967509 Anonymous
>>21967462 That talks about single mothers, not the same thing. There's little ways of knowing actual bastardy rates from that long back, just how many children were actually from another father.

33 hours later 21967516 Anonymous
>>21967509 Do you know what a bastard is?

33 hours later 21967544 Anonymous
>>21967509 https://www.york.ac.uk/media/spsw/d ocuments/research-and-publications/ Kiernan_1971_IllegitimacyPhenomenon OfEnglandAndWales.pdf

33 hours later 21967607 Anonymous
>>21967503 >"successful marriage" is 5 years long That's a benchmark used in the article, which I'll grant is arbitrary (although the NSFG stats track by multiple benchmarks up to 15 years, I believe). >1995 data Yes, and? Do you really need the same thing to be done for each cycle of the NSFG? Sure, more data is always nice, but a 25 year gap isn't exactly going to produce a fundamental shift in human nature. >doesn't take into account virgin marriages that ended in divorce and subsequently had more sexual partners That would be pretty insignificant to the other divorce numbers, given the relatively low proportion of people who wait until marriage to begin with, and then the relatively low proportion of divorcees out of that group. Still, thank you for taking the time to actually look at the source.

33 hours later 21967642 Anonymous
>>21967607 >and then the relatively low proportion of divorcees out of that group That's just an assumption though.

34 hours later 21967734 Anonymous
>tfw dont care about virginity per se but sluttiness kinda disgusts me >see plenty of nice girls everywhere but i talk to almost none and get too hung up on girls that are in relationships already >tfw forever alone Also op give me your secrets on approaching girls at gym.

36 hours later 21967963 Anonymous
>>21964001 It's not creepy. It's normal.

37 hours later 21968063 Anonymous
>>21967963 It is creepy t.femanon

37 hours later 21968074 Anonymous
Are you a virgin OP?

38 hours later 21968266 Anonymous
>>21962970 He still can get a 16 year old depending on his state/country

38 hours later 21968267 Anonymous
>>21963032 >reddit spacing

38 hours later 21968271 Anonymous
>>21963368 Or date younger than your age range? What’s your age range at 26?

39 hours later 21968374 Anonymous
>>21967434 No necessarily, just harder. You didn't find my acc?

39 hours later 21968383 Anonymous
>>21968267 >double tab is now reddit spacing guies

41 hours later 21968515 Anonymous
There's thing more beautiful than finding a girl that was able to stay virgin despite temptations and opportunities to have sex. Thinking a previous BF was the one does not make it ok. You hang in there OP, don't settle for any less

41 hours later 21968520 Anonymous
You sound insecure. It’s not really about women being leftovers, it’s probably about you not feeling man enough for an experienced woman. I’d say that you also need to re evaluate how and why you value a woman. Virginity is not a signal of moral integrity anymore, culture does not sanction sexual freedom anymore, so you are shorting your options thin for a stupid idea that holds no predictive value of how happy a woman can make you.

41 hours later 21968571 Anonymous
>>21968520 DESU, what's unfathomable to me is my girlfriend being in someone else's memory bank doing a lot of nasty shit and what not. I want a woman that has not done anything sexual with anyone but me. I don't want random guys beating their meat to memories of my gf. I also dont want guys bragging to their friends or sharing a lot of private things about my GF. And god forbid, someone having sex videos/pics of my gf. I don't want ANY of this, so it's either 0 partners or deal breaker for me. I too agree with OP

41 hours later 21968582 Anonymous
>>21968074 No but I'm a tranny

41 hours later 21968589 Anonymous
>>21968571 You are reducing women to their sexual past which is stupid imo. You fall in love with a person, not with the sanctimonious quality of their vagina. I would say that since virginity is an “oddity” in the current cultural framework, you probably will only find emotionally damaged or “strange” women to be still virgins. Again, the problem imo is insecurity rather than a misguided sense of purity. But if you are willing to miss out on a possible amazingly enriching relationship because the girl had a penis inside her before then you do you. Just be aware that you are losing more than what you are gaining.

41 hours later 21968601 Anonymous
>>21968520 >her past is not indicative of her future Sorry if I don't buy it, some of us just don't want it. Considering all the animosity in the thread it's hard to believe most of you actually have our wellbeing in mind. Tell you what I'll stop having virginity as a dealbreaker as soon as women stop having face, height, income, strength, etc.. as dealbreakers.

41 hours later 21968604 Anonymous
>>21968589 Thank you very much for your advice anon, I really respect it. I also have accepted what you pointed out. God bless you.

41 hours later 21968611 Anonymous
>>21962977 OP is a degenerate coomer, he doesn't believe in God most likely

41 hours later 21968615 Anonymous (images.jpg 633x360 33kB)
>>21963026 rostie rostie

41 hours later 21968621 Anonymous
>>21963183 God rules always have good reasons behind >>21963197

43 hours later 21968864 Anonymous
what about anal sex? I;ve only been butt fucked OP. Would you still date me? My pussy is intact.

43 hours later 21968871 Anonymous
Virgins are fucking gross.

43 hours later 21968887 Anonymous
>>21968871 Non virgins are gross

44 hours later 21968926 Anonymous
>>21968601 >Tell you what I'll stop having virginity as a dealbreaker as soon as women stop having face, height, income, strength, etc.. as dealbreakers. The virgin chasing incels are retarded and autistic, go fucking figurs.

44 hours later 21968942 Anonymous
>>21968926 Pointing out that everyone has their own dealbreakers and reservations is retarded?

44 hours later 21968957 Anonymous
>>21968942 Dont play that game, thats not what was being pointed out. >as soon as women stop having face, height, income, strength, etc.. as dealbreakers. This shit is retarded. This monolithic shit. Women do not have a standard. You are not trying to fuck/date women. You are trying to fuck/date one person. What standard women have does not matter at all, and basing your behavior on half of the human population is fucking retarded.

44 hours later 21968976 Anonymous
>>21968957 Yes not all women have those standards but they are common ones. If any woman is allowed to have dealbreakers so am I.

44 hours later 21968982 Anonymous
>>21968976 You are a child. >lots of women have shitty standards >so Im can shoot myself in the foot too What a fucking stupid defeatist process. Lots of people are druggies, sluts, or in massive debt. Guess you better start picking up those habits too. No shit you can have dealbreakers, the issue is your dealbreaker just hurts you in the long run. But go ahead, keep modeling your behavior off the majority of shitheads out there, that will do you so much good.

44 hours later 21968987 Anonymous
>>21968982 It wont hurt me any more than being forced to give up on what I want.

44 hours later 21968991 Anonymous
>>21968987 >looking for the wrong things in a partner wont hurt me Sure thing buddy

44 hours later 21968999 Anonymous
>>21968991 I didn't realize some retard on 4chan knew for a fact what's best for someone he knows almost nothing about.

44 hours later 21969012 Anonymous
>>21968999 Haha holy fuck dude, are you like 14? Thats some seriously pathetic cope. Do you think that everyone is a special unicorn that you need to know intimately to suggets whats best for them? News flash asshat, most people have a lot in common. Theres a lot of shit thats universally good/bad for people. Making virginity a dealbreaker is one of them. It is an arbitrary standard thay benefits you very little (if at all) while ruling out a huge majority of your options. That is OBJECTIVELY a bad standard, regardless of what special snowflake "needs" you think you have.

44 hours later 21969020 Anonymous
>>21969012 I'd rather be an idiot who gets what he wants than someone sensible who gives into others. Besides you don't like me so why would I trust what you say anyway?

44 hours later 21969038 Anonymous
Stop objectifying women. Jacking off and thinking of women in lewd ways is just as bad as someone fulfilling that sexual desire with a partner. Giving a shit that a woman has had a normal sexual past is a great way to miss out on great potential partners. If she was a mega whore and fucked like 50 dudes then ye, skip that, but if she has just had boyfriends in her past that she's been sexually active with and otherwise is a great match in terms of financial responsibility, personality, looks, etc, fucking go for it. If you are insecure because you are a virgin and she isnt, dont be. Any decent woman will not give a shit, and you arent expected to be amazing at sex your first time. If you are with someone you love it will be amazing anyways, just like a hug or kiss from someone you love is always amazing. That's why you wait until marriage, when your love has fully matured. Also pray to God for guidance. T. Former incel who missed out on great girls because I fetishized virgins(and ironically now have a virgin gf, just as I learned to stop judging people on their pasts instead of their person).

44 hours later 21969046 Anonymous
>>21968957 >women do not have a standard Lmfao

44 hours later 21969049 Anonymous
>>21969038 >tells others not to look for a virgin girl >is dating a virgin girl Ya I think waiting for marriage is good but fuck off with giving up what you want.

45 hours later 21969069 Anonymous
>>21969020 >I'd rather be an idiot who gets what he wants than someone sensible who gives into others. Jfc dude. You wont get what you want. You might get a virgin gf, but youll probably pass many better women before you do, and then the relationship will likely suck. You will have to settle on everything else to get one trait that doesnt mean shit. Also, you think youre not giving in? You already made it clear your basing your dealbreakers off womens standards. Youre still bending to how other people act instead of being independent. Besides, what kind of logic is >hurr durr i refuse to give in to good ideas >holding onto your shit ideas is better than listening to good advice What are you accomplishing? >Besides you don't like me so why would I trust what you say anyway? Wtf is wrong with your worldview? What does it matter if I like you, what matters is if Im giving good advice. Youre so obssessed with ideas like "giving in", "you dont like me", "at least Im independent". How about you try doing whats in your best interest instead of this other meaningless shit? Answer me this, and maybe youll understand the point Im trying to make. If I tell you a woman is not a virgin, what can you infer about her without knowing anything else? How about if she is a virgin?

45 hours later 21969070 Anonymous
>>21969046 Women do not have a collective standard.

45 hours later 21969074 Anonymous
>>21969049 >i want to smoke meth >its more important to stick to this idea than ever consider changing >i refuse to give into doctors and my families concerns This is some legit sub 50iq reasoning.

45 hours later 21969097 Anonymous
>>21969069 I already explained my reasoning, apparently I'm mentally I'll. >>21963268 If she's not a virgin I'm in a constant state of anxiety and don't want her touching me. If she is a virgin I'm fine and can focus on everything else about her.

45 hours later 21969098 Anonymous
>>21969049 I mean the other 3 girls I've gone out with in my short life were all not virgins, the reasons I discerned out of marriage with them had nothing to do with their virginity status. I've even gone out with a girl who had a kid, who was a great woman and worked extremely hard to provide for her child, which I find extremely attractive, we just lived too far away to really develop a relationship. The reasons I'm with my virgin gf rn have nothing to do with her virginity, it has to do with the fact that I really care about her as a person and she cares about me, and there is finally enough peace in my life to have a serious relationship. You know, cause that's how relationships are meant to work.

45 hours later 21969112 Anonymous
>>21969098 That's great of you but I'm not interested. I want someone like me, and I'd 100x rather die alone than date a single mom. Not saying she's always a bad person but I don't want to get involved with that.

45 hours later 21969138 Anonymous
>>21969112 X2 I don;t mind non virgins but single moms are just a no no. Dont mind fucking them though

45 hours later 21969155 Anonymous
>>21964404 >wouldn't it follow they must genuinely enjoy each other for who they are, rather than as masturbatory aids? I first want to object to the form of the question and your restraint argument, because you assumed that how good someone is at sex ISN'T a part of who somebody is. It very much is, in the same way dance skill, a love of hiking, blonde hair, and chiselled abs are part of someone. If that part of a relationship matters to you at all, you're intentionally ignoring what will be a major element of your future relationship together at your own peril. If after 3 years you're unpleasantly surprised, it's 100% your fault, because if you need to break up, it's not just a breakup anymore, now it's a divorce, which is obviously inferior for everyone.

45 hours later 21969165 Anonymous
>>21969155 Completely different poster, but I think how good someone is at sex, and the more insidious meme of 'sexual compatibility' are some of the absolute dumbest concepts that people allow to influence their behaviour. Who cares if a woman is bad at sex? You don't love her because you have sex with her. You have sex with her because you love her. It's a tool for reproduction and for deepening a connection that exists between two people. It is not the basis of that connection. The very idea that someone would divorce a partner on the basis of sexual incompatibility repulses me.

46 hours later 21969187 Anonymous
>>21969165 >t. Never been in a relationship Sex has emtoional impacts, sexual disfatisfaction frequently destroys relationships. Compatibilty matters a lot.

46 hours later 21969201 Anonymous
Muslim bitches my friend thats my advice

46 hours later 21969218 Anonymous
>>21969165 >Who cares if a woman is bad at sex? If you want to date a dancer, if you put up with someone who's literally tone deaf, you're doomed to unhappiness. If you want to have sex worth a shit, finding out what that's like before you're ass-deep in "3 years and half my assets" of sunk costs is a great idea, and acting like it's not is extremely misguided. >You have sex with her because you love her and deepen connection Sure, but there are other great reasons to have sex, including: >Fun >Childbearing >Stress-relief >Mutual emotional bonding >Time-killer >Way to heighten intimacy >Because you both just want some raw lustful fucking And frankly, these reasons are equally valid, and should be treated as such. And if you believe this, it stands to reason that it's a worthy endeavor to see if you are compatible for the above. >The very idea that someone would divorce a partner on the basis of sexual incompatibility repulses me. Given that you're telling people to put themselves in situations in which they've sunk massive costs of time, on the order of years, into a single relationship prior to spending one second finding out if this element of their relationship is compatible, don't you think you, and people in this situation, might be a little bit invested in believing that you've made the correct decision? Hell, If I had done that, I could easily imagine myself feeling repulsed too. The thought that you might not have made the same decision that you did, if you knew everything you did now, years later, or that if your relationship was going to work, you could've easily prevented pregnancy using modern contraception and birth control, while enjoying the deepening of connection the entire time you were together, might be the gnawing at the boards in the attic of one's self-confidence. Far easier to plug your ears and say it's gross, I know you definitely don't have 2-5 years of time invested creating any pressure to feel that way, right?

46 hours later 21969222 Anonymous
>>21969187 I'm a believer that sex ought to grow out of love and not the other way around. And if you truly love someone, you'll do whatever you can to please them. Most instances of 'sexual incompatibility' really stem from selfishness. And that's the result of people prioritizing their own gratification.

46 hours later 21969262 Anonymous
>>21969222 Have you ever been in a relationship? Im not trying to be mean, but you seem genuinely naive. >And if you truly love someone, you'll do whatever you can to please them. This is such an informed idea. For one, its innately contradictive. Consider a two people with dradtically different sex drives. Neither can have what they want and they have too make huge compromises. Ones is left unsatisfied and the other is left feeling like sex is a chore. Its not always as simple as give give give. Sure, there has to be a degree of sacrifice in any relationship, but ideally yous shack up with someone who is already somewhat similar to you. >Most instances of 'sexual incompatibility' really stem from selfishness. And that's the result of people prioritizing their own gratification Its really not that simple. People can be flat out incompatible. Its much better to enthusiastically want what the other wants than simply to do things you dont like for their sake. The difference is tremendous.

46 hours later 21969272 Anonymous
>>21969222 The following are instances of sexual incompatibility that have nothing to do with selfishness: >Unmatcing libido levels >Expectations of sex acts that another partner can't meet >Kink that you're uncomfortable with (eg, they want diaperplay, you to call them daddy, to give anal, bloodplay, or scateating, and you're uncomfortable delivering on for them). >Kink that they're uncomfortable with (whatever normal or sick shit you might be into doesn't get them off) >Physical issues, deformities, or problems that ruin sex for either partner(an incurable bad odor, mangled, deformed, or unpleasant-feeling genitalia) >>21969262 touched on it but the root problem is a lot of sexual needs and desires are mutually exclusive, you can't be having lots of sex and almost no sex at the same time, and you're either indulging your partner or not, there's no beating around the bush and 50% putting on a diaper and having them shit in your mouth. At the end of the day, there are LOTS of forms of >What they want and what I want genuinely don't match Which can't be papered over. My bet is your solution to these kinds of issues are MORE self-denial: they love each other so they should agree on some kind of compromise lowest common denominator sex they both can put up with. Even assuming you should put up with that, shouldn't' you like know WHAT that lowest common denominator IS, before you say >yeah, I'm willing to spend the rest of my life accepting that?

46 hours later 21969281 Anonymous
>>21969272 >there's no beating around the bush and 50% putting on a diaper and having them shit in your mouth >ok babe, the deal is Ill pinch the log off half way Thats a fun mental image.

48 hours later 21969511 Anonymous
>>21969218 I'm not sure you really get my stance. And bear in mind, that was my first post in the thread. Perhaps I explain it better in >>21969222 . I take issue with the very concept of 'sexual compatibility' because it implies that there are certain sexual desires you prioritize over your love for your partner. Where from my perspective, it should be a selfless act of giving, such that the one who loves you most invariably becomes the one you are most compatible with. The act of pleasing that person is innately satisfactory. >>21969262 I haven't been in a relationship because I haven't yet found a woman who I am able to connect with. On the subject of sex drive, I'd personally be willing to accommodate anything practical so long as she was at least interested in trying to have several children. Actually, there was a girl who was quite interested in me, but lost interest when she found out I'm not sexually experienced. Instead, she chose to sleep with my roommate, who had a reputation for having a large penis and being sexually skilled. >>21969272 I'm less a fan of going for the lowest common denominator and more about taking turns. I don't know about you, but I'd be willing to indulge quite a wide array of fetishes for a girl I loved and wouldn't want to impose anything on her unless there were mutual interest. I'd do basically anything up to cuckolding or eating her fecal matter (she can eat mine if she wants). And my opposition to those isn't based in sexual appetite, but personal principle. And respecting someone's principles is something you should establish long before you make it to bed. As an example, I'm terrified of blood to the point where I faint at the mere thought of it, but would still allow my wife to cut me and drink my blood if she wanted. And I think dismissing a partner because of the physical state of their genitalia is horribly shallow.

48 hours later 21969554 Anonymous
>>21968520 >Virginity is not a signal of moral integrity anymore Correct. Virgins by circumstance say almost nothing about character. Waiting until marriage, however, most certainly is, and it's true now more than ever. Given how far into depravity social standards have fallen, it takes a firm, personal commitment to the standard for someone to follow it despite the "normal" option of throwing cautin and restraint to the wind. >>21968589 >>21969155 >you assumed that how good someone is at sex ISN'T a part of who somebody is. Yes, I did, and I stand by it. This isn't an immutable characteristic like one's moral capacity--couples can and should learn together, as committed couples. This is arguing for the permanent sacrifice of moral standards in exchange for expedited learning of skills, which probably don't even matter in the long term. It's madness.

48 hours later 21969576 Anonymous
>>21969554 Waiting until marriage is a sign of mental illness.

48 hours later 21969580 Anonymous
>>21969511 >I'd do basically anything up to cuckolding or eating her fecal matter (she can eat mine if she wants). What the fuck? Kys. This is just bizarre. Sexual incompatibility is a meme because anything that fornication would "solve" (i.e. finding out your partner is a sex maniac or has a vile fetish that you don't want to deal with) would be much better served by open, honest communication rather than "trying out" your partner. >>21969576 >t. degenerate garbage

48 hours later 21969589 Anonymous
>>21969580 >t. mentally ill incel

48 hours later 21969594 Anonymous
>>21969589 >if you're a volcel you're an incel fucking idiot

48 hours later 21969611 Anonymous
>>21969594 Incels despise the thought of having sex so they're volcels.

48 hours later 21969633 Anonymous
>>21969611 They are called incels because they WANT sex but see themselves as unable to get it. Hence, "involuntary". As far as I'm concerned, this is no different from the mindset of manwhores--the only difference being that the latter "succeed". You're just throwing out a buzzword that vaguely connects to a discussion without thinking about what anything actually means. Not only am I not an incel, but the idea that someone waiting until marriage "despises sex" is also dead wrong. Promiscuity is being condemned, not sex as an abstract concept.

49 hours later 21969818 Anonymous
>>21962962 Your older and establish, go for younger and religious girls, there's a higher chance they're virgins

49 hours later 21969822 Anonymous
>>21963009 Most girls are very nice, if they are cute and virgin they probably are good person, the kind of virgin that usually shows a lot of red flags is the fag ass shitty toxic habits one

50 hours later 21969975 Anonymous
>>21969834 It's never weird to ask a girl for her number.

3.866 0.683