A
female
age
36-40,
k_c100
writes:After recently seeing a large number of posts on this site from men asking how to deal with a woman’s sexual past, I wondered why men were so concerned with something that at the end of the day, cannot be changed. So I entered into a conversation with one of the said posters on this site who himself was struggling with his girlfriends past. I found the debate to be quite interesting and thought I would share this with you all, please feel free to comment!Male:You said you want to know why men are so obsess with their gf's past? Well there is quite sound logic to it, and its not just men being stupid...Men, in late teens and early adulthood are pre-programmed to sleep around. We are programmed to fined easy women, inseminate them and leave. The principle being that we are trying to increase the number of our offspring in the world, and hence spread our genes.When we grow up a little we choose a monogamous mate with whom to settle down and have a family. At this point rather than just spreading our sperm and hoping to have offspring, we are investing our time into maximising the potential for children and maximising the potential for their survival by being there to bring them up.For this relationship we choose women to respect, and women who are not promiscuous. By choosing a woman who is selective and careful with her partners, and doesn’t sleep around, we are maximising the chance that the child she bears is our own and not another mans’.We inquire into and are bothered about our woman’s past, because if they behaved in a promiscuous manner there is a possibility she is still like that and we could end up bringing up another mans child. Now...if they have a promiscuous past but regret it ad show they do not agree with the behaviour, its subconsciously reassuring that we have a women who will be exclusive to ourselves. If however she thinks her behaviour was fine, it sows seed of doubt and worry even on a subconscious level.Logically we can tell ourselves many times that she loves us and will never cheat, but subconsciously our brain tells us she is sexually a risk because she thinks its ok to have slept with 50 men.We want an easy woman to be promiscuous with as youngsters, but a solid non-promiscuous woman with whom to invest time and energy bringing up children.The women who is a virgin and isn't a great lover of sex is a much lower risk in terms of being pregnant with someone else’s child, than the women who slept with 50 men and wants sex 10 times a day.It does of course seem rather irrational, and logically we should be secure in knowing that they have chosen us to be their mates for life. But subconsciously we are wrestling with thousands of years of evolution encouraging us to settle with a non-previously promiscuous partner.Female: Its always the past with you men and you seem to have no ability to look to the future! I understand about all the primal instincts about a good mother for your children and not wanting to raise another man's baby - but surely we have evolved past cavemen and cavewomen! Especially with the raising other people's kids - it is pretty obvious when someone is pregnant and you can tell who the father is by the dates, so surely modern man must realise this!And if we are going off our primeval instincts then what about women?! We were supposed to choose a partner based upon strength and ability to provide for us and our children. But I think it is very rare to find a man these days who is both physically and emotionally strong, and someone who wants to provide for a woman - look at today's culture of women working just as much as men and still bringing up the kids. Today men expect women to be independent - if we wanted "providing for" we would be classed as "needy" and no man would go anywhere near us! Or labelled a gold digger!So I think it appears that (based on both of our arguments) that men are still stuck in caveman mode, harbouring primal instincts that are now unnecessary whereas women have evolved to accept men of all types. I actually think it sounds quite true, but also quite sad at the same time! Women have evolved but men are stuck in the dark ages, lucky us!Male:I need to address the principle that you believe men and women should have evolved out of their primeval and illogical (in today’s times) instincts. However, it’s not as simple as that. Firstly, society in terms of current culture has only had these views and understandings of relationships in the last couple of hundred years. This is negligible compared to millions of years of human evolution and behaviour.Men are governed very much by our emotions, but unfortunately we don’t understand them well at all. Interestingly we are built to be less emotionally aware than women, what hunting would have gotten done if we contemplated the emotional ramifications of taking animal life? (Silly example I know).Human behaviour is incredibly complex, but what is becoming more and more clear is that we are far less removed from our primeval ancestors tan we would like to believe. Most women still seek out, weather they realise or not, the physically and emotionally strong male. Just because they can get along OK without him doesn’t mean they don’t want him. Men can get along with a promiscuous wife; it doesn’t mean they don’t want her to be a virgin. See what im getting at?...You said its pretty obvious when she’s carrying someone else’s kid...yes it is, to our conscious intelligent brains. These however are areas that have developed late in the evolution of the human brain, the ancient areas dictating the desire for a virgin etc. cannot understand easily when she is carrying someone else’s child, and the conscious intelligent brain cant actively switch off with logic an instinct that is millions of years old.Women have a real hard time understanding why men get hung up on this stuff, guess what... so do men. But light can be shed on things when we look at them in terms of basic instinct. We are animals after all....Female:I've just read something online which seems to fit with what we have been talking about:"When we're young, our sex drive is strongly influenced by finding the best male mate to reproduce with, which is why biologists believe we're programmed to desire 'high-status' men - that is, men who are physically fit, attractive and good providers.Psychologists agree that our sex drive is linked to reproduction, but believe that it leads us to men with 'good genes' who we sense will make good fathers and remain loyal to us."The article was actually about female sex drives, and what really turns a woman on. So going off their findings (it was based on some research) then younger women are more likely to have a higher sex drive because we as women are more keen to try and find a partner to reproduce with. Therefore this could be applied to your girlfriend - maybe she subconsciously slept with these guys because they fit the ideal "type" of man to reproduce with and her instincts were telling her body to reproduce? And maybe that explains why women go through a promiscuous phase when they are in their late teens/early twenties?It sounds a little silly to me but if we can explain all male behaviour with the theory of evolution and reproduction instincts then surely we can apply the same to women?And going back to the idea that women seek out men that can provide for us etc - this just doesn’t seem true to me anymore. Women are socially not allowed to need men today - we have to have our own careers, own money and our independence in order to be deemed attractive. Look at the rise of footballer's wives and major sports star's wives - these women are technically just following their primal instincts because here are men that are very physically fit and have lots of money - the perfect provider. Yet to be one of these women that actively pursues a man for his money is hugely frowned upon by society and if a man did think a woman was only interested in him for his ability as a provider - he would run a mile!So women have to adhere to the male ideal that we are all virgins (or at least haven’t slept with that many men) because socially that is still acceptable - so men are actively encouraged to continue to use these primal instincts when choosing a partner. Whereas women are actively discouraged to use their primal instincts because we will be branded a "gold digger" or we are unintelligent because we want a man with money because we are not clever enough to make our own.So perhaps men and women will never understand each other on this issue because men have been positively reinforced to use their primal instincts whereas women have been negatively reinforced - therefore we will go around in circles never understanding each other until society one day accepts that a man should provide for a woman? Somehow I think that will never happen, men know now that they can have an easier lifestyle if their partner is working just as much as them and still bringing up the children and maintaining the home. Men will never want to go back to being the sole provider - why would they when their wife can make the same amount of money as them (which means he doesn’t have to pay for her to go clothes shopping - more money for boys toys and the pub!) and she will still carry out the traditional functions of wife and mother too.Perhaps even this promiscuity in women is a rebellion against the life we have been landed with today - why should we behave like the "virgin" ideal that men hold when men are allowed to be the opposite of the "provider" ideal? Perhaps if men started acting like men again and providing for their women then we perhaps might start acting like women should? We have to be masculine in so many ways in modern society - perhaps sleeping around is just another way we have started to act like men!After my last message I am still waiting for a response so I will post any updates!
View related questions:
money, sex drive, sexual past, sperm Reply to this Article
Share |
You can add your comments or thoughts to this article A
male
reader, trell19832002  +, writes (11 July 2010):
men have mopre problems with their partners past because when a woman is having sex she has to summit to it and open up and let the guy take advantage and if u really love your wife u hate to think that somone has tooken advantage of her and if u find out the she has done it more than a few times its kinda hard to cope with .. and wemon dont have that problem because a guy dose not have to summit only take advantage of the girl so a girl cannot b so mad when the guy is being dominat in his past ..
A
male
reader, bharat mehta  +, writes (15 February 2010):
 MALE Vs FEMALE,...Debate about male obsession with a woman's past...Such debate arises on our PERPETUAL VISION...which animal also possess.
To consider female's body as procreative mechanism,...and not female's sex organ as counter part of male's sex organ, has only single character, PLEASURING THE MIND...Humanity, as represented by male will choose to live, age old, orthodox life of stone age.
the debate is actually about the meaning of sex organ. and not about female versus male, which is only political issue, derives its contents from MEANING OF SEX ORGAN.
Female Philosopher, Simon D Beauvour has discussed this problem in her book,' THE SECOND SEX' with greater details, covering all aspect; philosophic, scientific...anatomical,neurological,bio-chemical...etc, and I felt shocked, she had exclude Tantric meaning from her discussion...which hold, sex organ [ without making difference between male and female] is really the tool of ENLIGHTENMENT.
To regard sex as dirt is childish and perceptual vision...we can throw away, but to regard sex as impure, means material as such is inherently impure, regardless its proper use, is certainly Religious vision...hold perceptual vision as final. And, hold human intellect, reason, logic and self-evident truth as invalid is proved fatal, first for female and than for male too...but they are unable politically to correct their illusion.
If once, we agreed on meaning, that sex organ is truly enlightening organ....and we can manage our use quite accordingly.... with consistency and honesty, and then no one will take female's past experience with jealousy...which is entirely animalistic feeling.
Under the circumstances, male female relationship will search new and real base...the matching of intellectual wavelength,,,personality matching...and not only physical beauty.
when philosophy discuss about wisdom and or beauty, then it is certainly not beauty of Monalis's body, but
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (13 February 2010): Look, the only thing that matters in a relationship is the third part- the purpose. If you have a purpose in your relationship that both of you believe in, than all this stuff has no meaning.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (7 February 2010):
 "The only thing more confusing than a man feeling entitled to define a woman's sexuality is that women accept it. And that many women are complicit in the double standard."
Amen brother, but your preaching to converted here.. hahaha... for me, my sexual life or your sexual life is your own business. We only got one life to live, enjoy yourself and ignore what people think. Don't understand this hangup with virginity, dosen't make anyone "pure", they aint jesus, they aint saints, they are just people who listen to nonsense or are frightened to get close to people.
PS: I've always thought this way, even when I was a virgin. Virginity is totally overated, it didn't make me pure at all, I was still argumentative and mean.
...............................
A
male
reader, Yos  +, writes (5 February 2010):
 "I have alot of friends who are now married and the men are very much in love and there is no problem with worrying about thier womans past."
Of course. No one is arguing this effects everyone. Only that it's surprisingly common, and given that, not well understood or often discussed. It's hard to find any good information on the subject.
Most 'sensible' guys know that digging into their partners' past is not a good idea. Most will not let themselves dwell on the past, but focus on the present and future. That's good and the right way to avoid this problem in the first place. Likewise, a woman, if she's smart, won't continually discuss her former lovers or sex life. Very few men want to hear that (albeit a few do).
But it does happen. People can develop an unhealthy obsession with their partners previous sex life. Perhaps more frequently than most of us realize. And when it does, it can be very unpleasant indeed.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (5 February 2010):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the question Thanks for adding that in Yos, great answer as always! I was going to try and defend myself after Calico's input but I am in no way as patient as you are and I find arguing against someone who is clearly set on their views with complete disregard for everything else very irritating!
You did a much better job than I would have ever done so thanks again!
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (5 February 2010): There is a big difference between loving someone and liking them a lot and loving to be with them. There is also a big difference between love and infatuation or love and closeness with someone. I liked those 2 women who I wrote about and I liked one a lot. I might have even been able to fall in love with her with enough time. Many people confuse love with liking to be with someone and many people say that they love someone to keep them around. It is also not unusual for someone to try to get back with a person who breaks up with them if they were fun to be with or great in bed. None of those reasons are necessarily love. My wife had 10 partners between her first husband and me. About 5 were relationships. She believes that only one loved her, but he was insecure. He had trouble finding a girlfriend. The rest liked to be with her because she is a very nice person and very sexual. A couple of those other men also wanted to get back with her, but it was obvious to her that they didn't love her. They very much liked to be with her. She was good, both in and out of the bedroom. Even with us, it was probably at least a year before one of us mentioned love to the other. It takes only a short time to fall in like, but much longer to fall in love. It's sometimes very difficult to differentiate the two.
I suspect that a partner's past also bothers more women that we hear about. This is likely because women are taught to accept a man's past and taught that is what men do. They think they are supposed to accept it.
...............................
A
male
reader, Yos +, writes (5 February 2010):
I've been contributing to and reading this site on this specific issue for quite a few years now. I'd agree with k_c100's points.
This tends to bother men more than women, although it can occur to both sexes.
When it does occur, it tends to be different for each sex. I'm generalising, but these tendencies are without question very strong:
Men tend to be more effected by number of partners, and how 'casual' the sex was. They tend to seek reassurance that their partner has been not too sexually available or indiscriminate in who she's had sex with.
Women tend to me more effected by specific previous relationships. They can feel threatened by a very strong / committed previous specific relationship, and tend to focus on a small number of individuals. They seem to seek reassurance that their partner is very committed to them, and are less worried about indiscriminate / casual sex in his past.
And many more men seem to have the problem than women.
I also agree with Troubled on his point about love. This 'condition' really becomes an issue when someone is in love. If a guy is just seeing a girl as someone to have a casual relationship with, rather than a long term or committed one, then this problem doesn't tend to arise. Sorry to say it Calico, but those probably weren't that into you. Not to say they didn't like you and find you attractive and fun, but they likely weren't thinking about planning a long term future with you.
- - -
All this is entirely consistent with evolutionary explanations. In fact, evolution has provided the best reasons yet for why this is the case. I'm fine with someone arguing against the evolutionary explanation based on merit, but then please supply a superior alternative. 'It's just society' is not sufficient. Evolutionary psychology provides some very detailed explanations that are startlingly accurate in their predictions of a lot of sexual behaviour. Which shouldn't be surprising, since the primary purpose of sex is to spread our genes. Sex is the most important part of evolution!
But there's a lot of misunderstanding about evolution, and especially evolutionary psychology. Most of the arguments against it here appear to be based on misunderstanding. Just to be clear:
- Understanding behaviour through the lens of evolution does not lead to a behaviour being labelled as 'good' or 'bad'. Those terms are cultural, what they mean depends very much on which culture you are in. Or put another way: ethics are always partly subjective. Evolution can explain why we do something, but it's up to us as conscious moral beings to decide whether that behaviour is good or bad, and what to do about it. For example: we have the capacity to kill, which is undoubtedly partly genetically-driven, but we label that as wrong, despite the fact it's common in nature. That labelling is cultural only: it wasn't so long ago that a good saturday's entertainment comprised going to watch Christians get eaten by lions at the circus. Take the kids for a fun day out.
- The fact that not everyone experiences something does not mean it's not a genetic trait. For example, Cystic Fibrosis is an inherited trait, but we don't all have it. Seems an obvious point I know, but one that's easily missed. As has been below.
- Genetics doesn't lend itself to simple / binary explanations. We don't have 'one gene for this' and 'one gene for that'. Rather we have huge numbers of them, often with complex interaction and creating competing impulses. As humans we have to make sense of the often contradictory emotions and intuitions our genes give rise to. It's messy, and complicated, and tends to lead to messy and complicated behaviour.
- Nature has a very high failure rate. Unlike eg manufacturing a car, where one in a thousand failures would be seen as too much, nature doesn't mind if lots of us break. It's interested in 'survival of the fittest', in the best of the best. If that means that there's a lot of casualties, so be it. In other words, humans, (and animals and plants) break a lot, and that's to be expected. I think this condition is an example of that: a bit of programming evolved because it helps males safeguard their heredity, but with a tendency to go wrong. Especially in our modern, comparatively promiscuous contraceptive-using contemporary culture.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (5 February 2010):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the questionJust like to reiterate what I said at the top of my original post
"After recently seeing a large number of posts on this site from men asking how to deal with a woman’s sexual past, I wondered why men were so concerned with something that at the end of the day, cannot be changed."
I am a moderator on this site and have been for a long time - therefore I closely monitor questions on this site daily. I was never trying to imply that all men have a problem with a woman's past, and that all women dont care about their man's past either. What I was trying to say is that I have noticed a major trend on this site - most questions about promiscuity in the past and how to deal with it come from men. It is very rare (on this site at least) to come across a question from a woman who is having trouble dealing with their partners past, whereas it is very common to come across a man having issues with his partner's past.
In no way am I trying to generalise to the whole population, and I dont think in my original post I ever try and generalise, I am purely using my experience as a moderator on this site in raising this debate.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (5 February 2010): "i feel the need to point out that not all men have this problem with accepting a womans past , i have had a great many relationships and only a small minority in fact of about 18 relationships that ive had only 1 of them have had a problem with it at all! in fact from talking to my female friends it seems that i know more females that are bothered by mens promicuos past."
I agree that not all men will be bothered by a woman's past. It is also not any surprise to me that 17 of your relationships were not bothered at all. First of all, what were the first few going to be bothered by? They were your first few. The other reason is that not all of those men were in love with you. Most likely very few were in love with you. It bothers men when they begin to fall in love with a woman. If he is not in love with her then more experience and better in bed is an advantage to him. He gets better sex and couldn't care less.
I dated a woman when I was dating my wife early in our relationship. She likely had more experience than my wife did before me. She told me about things that she had done and the stories were interesting to hear. I couldn't have cared less. She was great in bed and I was not falling in love with her. I didn't expect to ever get to the point where I would want to marry her. If I had, I would guess that it would have then bothered me. She was also dating someone else when she was dating me and I also didn't care at all about that. Another woman who I dated once went home with someone else when we were at a picnic. I hadn't gone with her, so it didn't matter to me what she did. She apologized the next day and I told her it was fine as she didn't go with me. I didn't care.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (3 February 2010):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the questionAccountable - I couldnt agree with you more.
As for evolutionary psychology - I think as with most psychological theories there are elements of it that work, and other elements that do not. I think it explains quite a lot and is relevant when looking at the past - however it does not take into account any form of conscious choice and that is where it fails. After studying psychology for some time I like to think that nearly all theories presented in psychology have some useful aspects, and tend to work best when elements and ideas are combined. Like cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) - one of the best forms of therapy out there today. Yet some freudian principles still have their place, just as evolutionary does and all of the other theories that have been put out there.
I think we all agreed on this debate that double standards are wrong - so if a promiscuous man has a problem with a woman's sexual past then that is just hypocrisy at its worst.
I think nature and nurture clash in this debate - while the conscious, socially aware, mature mind knows that if you love and care about someone then their past should not matter because it is in the past and the future is the most important thing. Men are able to think this way, its just no matter how often they tell themselves it should not matter somehow it always creeps back into their mind and causes problems for them. I think this re-occurrence, a very much unwanted occurrence, comes back to instincts deep within the subconscious that no matter how hard the man tries, cannot be removed. This is where evolutionary theory fits into the argument - to answer why men cannot forget about something so irrelevant as a woman's past when they are socialised, rational and logical creatures.
I think women have a better ability to acknowledge their instincts and put things to one side if deemed unimportant or talk about them if necessary, whereas men (especially men in relationships) tend to be more affected by something like the past and then allow it to fester in their heads without talking about it.
Thanks for your input, its always good to hear other opinions on the debate!
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 February 2010): "As far as I'm concerned any man who claims its ok for him to sleep around because of his genes is just abusing the evolutionary theory to his advantage, to justify his behaviour. As such, in my opinion, any man who is promiscuous has no right to judge a woman with a promiscuous past."
Absolutely true. To do so is just hypocritical.
"I wouldnt want to be with a man who had slept with lots of women and still felt it was acceptable - am I being sexist and unfairly judgemental?"
Not at all, as long as you have not acted in that way. Just like a man who has the same opinion about a woman isn't being sexist and unfairly judgmental, as long as he hasn't done the same thing.
I believe that the main reason that men are uncomfortable with a woman's past is upbringing. Some men, like me, were brought up to think that men and women who sleep around are "tramps". Some men are brought up to think that of women only. The same type of things are taught to young women. The longer that parents reinforce these teachings, the more they are ingrained in the subconscious and more difficult to overcome with rational thinking.
...............................
A
female
reader, Accountable +, writes (3 February 2010):
 I just spent about half an hour working my way through this thread - its very interesting, nice debate to pick! I personally can completely understand why some men have difficulties accepting a promiscuous woman's past - providing they themselves have a 'clean' past. Then its just a case of a difference in values, which can presumeably be resolved if the womans values have now changed, or the man is tolerant, etc. What I dont bite is this evolutionary psychology - theoretically I think its very interesting, but in practice I'm not sure it applies anymore. The impression I'm getting is that men are genetically pre-disposed to sleep around to carry on their DNA, and will only look for worthy women when older, therefore promiscuity is acceptable behaviour whereas a woman doing the same is some kind of genetic deviant? Personally I'm unconvinced, on the basis that people clearly arent biological machines; men are fully capable of understanding the changes in society which has made sexual freedom for women acceptable. We might be somewhat driven towards certain behaviours by our genes, but we have the mental capacity to recognise they are not deterministic (yay for cognition). As far as I'm concerned any man who claims its ok for him to sleep around because of his genes is just abusing the evolutionary theory to his advantage, to justify his behaviour. As such, in my opinion, any man who is promiscuous has no right to judge a woman with a promiscuous past.Code Warrior's rather more emotional response, I felt, was a more convincing answer to the debate, and has the advantage of working both ways - any woman with these values would probably feel the same way about a male partner who had a hazy sexual past. I personally feel both men and woman can do what they like sexually, but I would be lying if I said I wouldnt consider somebodys choices and opinions concerning sex when starting a relationship with them - doesnt it just come down to whether your values are in conflict? I wouldnt want to be with a man who had slept with lots of women and still felt it was acceptable - am I being sexist and unfairly judgemental?Well those are just my thoughts, they're not as well constructed as some of the others posted here but hopefully offer you another perspective to chew over. :)
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 February 2010): "if it weren't for women you woulnd't be here."
If it weren't for men, YOU wouldn't be here. I assume you've figured sex out by now.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (3 February 2010):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the questionWell Calico58 - It seems that you have not done much reading on evolution or just simply choose to ignore the scientific evidence that has mounted over the last couple of hundred years proving evolution happened! Here are a few links that if you have a bit of time, you might want to read so you can see that everything you claim is wrong and has no evidence, actually has a lot of evidence to back it up (especially lots of Fossils!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil (these are your "missing link" fossils
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_horse (great example of how one animal has evolved over the years)
http://www.trueorigin.org/sex01.asp
http://www.epjournal.net/ (there is a whole area of psychology dedicated to evolutionary psychology - why would scientists and academics develop this whole area of study if there was no evidence?!)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/genetics/article6987092.ece
This is just a tiny selection of articles and theories on evolution. Of course we cannot say that we are 100% certain that evolution happened, but the stacks of evidence point in that direction. There have been no other theories presented which have the same quantities of evidence as the evolutionary theory so for now I think it is fairly safe to accept that evolution happened, and our pre-historic animal like activity has lead to a lot of the mannerisms and behaviours of males and females today.
As for your "fish cant just grow feet" argument - of course they cant, that would be very scary if they did! But the whole point of evolution is that it takes millions of years for even the smallest of changes to happen within a species. And it happens through mutations. Mutations happen in every species very frequently - however it takes millions of years for a beneficial mutation to occur and then spread throughout that species. For example, human mutations occur all the time. Like children born with too many limbs (I recall a TV programme where a baby girl was born with 8 limbs), or people born with webbed toes/hands. These are genetic mutations - google it if you dont believe me but this does happen. This is part of evolution working today - not many mutations are useful but every now and then one person mutates in a beneficial way, then they breed and pass it on to their children and so on. Just as over time our Coccyx has gone from being a tail to a nearly redundant bone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coccyx
I feel these discussions are taking away from the original discussion about the male issues with a womans past. However evolution is a major part of the argument - instincts that have come with us from caveman and cavewoman times and I think the general consensus from the number of people that replied to this debate (and contributed to the original debate in the first place) is that instincts have a huge part to play in this.
While I respect your opinion, I feel happy with the conclusion we have all come to on this debate before you added your comments, and until you provide some evidence to prove otherwise, I think we have come to a well educated and well-informed conclusion taking into account opinions, genetics, evolutionary theory and scientific evidence.
Thanks to everyone for taking the time to add to this debate!
...............................
A
male
reader, Yos +, writes (3 February 2010):
"the evidence against evolution is that there is no evidence for it."
Arguing for or against evolution is not the subject of this article. So I won't do it. Other than to say there is more evidence for evolution than any other theory ever discovered by humanity, second only to quantum mechanics.
"the fact that our dna is similar to apes again does not proove that we were once apes, it simply says we are a similar creature from the same planet."
It shows we share a common ancestor. In fact we share a common ancestor with tomato plants too, you just have to go back a lot further in time to find it.
Anyway, as long as you're aware that 99% of current scientific consensus disagrees with your points, it's all good. And yes, everyone may well be proved wrong some day. But claiming that's possible is very different from actually doing it, and as yet there isn't a single experiment that demonstrates evolution to be false. You'd make yourself very famous if you could come up with one!
...............................
A
female
reader, Mystery Girl +, writes (2 February 2010):
-------------I'm a helpless romantic. I wish chivalry existed. I don't let guys get to me. I like being who i am no matter what anyone says, thinks, or does. I'm a woman but i'm different. I'm not like most... yes alot of people say that but truely i am. i'm only 18 yet people say i'm the most mature 18 year old they've met. I'm both tom boy and girly girl, i have a perverted mind and i love it (it makes life interesting;that doesn't mean that you act on what you say), i'm down to earth, i like being different(i wear things i like but hope they don't become popular), and much more that i don't share because i never get the chance to. I'm judged before even getting to know me.
To be honest... I can't stand how sexist men are. I used to never be sexist till i found out what men actaully think of women. if it weren't for women you woulnd't be here. i'm athiest so i don't believe in the whole crap where man was created first. i believe in what i see not what one tells me.
see this is how i see it... religion reminds me of highschool gossip.. it starts out one thing and it becomes something different (sometimes still containing some true facts). That's why i think most religions are so similar. I honestly think that people believe in religion because they are afraid of the unknown and by having an 'answer' it makes them feel secure.
It sorta ties in how men are with women. They think they have women so figured out when there are girls that you may have never met that you thought didn't exist but you won't give her a chance. That's what i've done with guys since i was little. I used to be more open. I didn't worry about if my best guy friend hated me because of what someone told him.
btw if you think you figured out women ur very wrong because everyone is there own puzzle. the puzzles can not be conjoined but can have similarities.
...............................
A
male
reader, Yos +, writes (2 February 2010):
Evolution is one of the two best supported scientific theories (in terms of volume of evidence) that humanity has ever discovered. The other is quantum mechanics. There is no 'extreme evidence' against it, just some highly flawed 'intelligent design' arguments derived from creationist dogma. Well, according to 99% of the scientific community at least.
However it's important to understand that our DNA makes no claims about right or wrong, or good or bad. The fact that we have certain emotional responses hard-coded into us has no direct moral consequence.
Society (nurture) is where we make judgements about right and wrong, and good and bad. And society is ours to mould as we wish.
Don't make the mistake of conflating the two.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 February 2010): kc100, I can't believe how much I agree with you on this subject, not to think that there is a reason that I shouldn't.
As I have said before, any man or woman has the right to sleep with as many partners as they wish, but any future partner has an equal right to not approve of that behavior. Of course, if the future partner has done the same, then it is hypocritical to think that. For instance, most of the questions on DC where a man (mostly) or a woman is bothered by their partner's sexual past involve the other person having had many more sexual partners. But I do remember at least one case where a guy had more experience than his partner and it still bothered him and he didn't approve of what she had done. Now that is just hypocrisy and not fair at all. That is a true double standard. However, I don't believe that it is a double standard for a guy (or woman) to not approve of the behavior of a partner who has slept around and had one night stands when they have been conservative and had very few partners and no sleeping around.
"It seems we only have the choice of a) feminist bitch who sleeps around or b) "frigid" as they call it."
I think there is a 3rd choice. There is the woman who has had several partners and is sexual and likes sex and is good at it, but all the partners were relationships. No 1 night stands, no sleeping with a guy who she just met at a bar that night, no 3somes or whatever. I think that most guys can accept that in a woman, especially if she is in her late 20s or older. It is the "cheap and easy" behavior that bothers most men who have problems with their partners. I don't approve of either male of female sluts and I don't think I would approve of a man who slept around and took advantage of woman for sex if I were a woman and were dating him. I don't approve of that as a man.
"but we dont punish ourselves either if we make a mistake or have a moment of bad judgment."
Yes, to a point. I can understand a woman or man picking someone up at a bar when they have had too much to drink or are lonely and have ended a relationship. But why do they do it time after time, especially whey they feel bad about what they did 2 days later? OK, I'll give them the 2nd time, but why the 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc? Yes, I've had these discussions and understand to some extent, but it still baffles me. This person is not really a slut. They are not proud of what they are doing and might actually disapprove of it while they are doing it. So why do they continue?
I would also like to see what evidence there is of the non-evolution theory. With the amount of DNA we share with some of the apes (mainly chimps I think), it is hard to believe that we are not from the same tree.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (2 February 2010):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the questionCalico58 - I would be fascinated to hear this evidence against the evolutionary theory and that we did not evolve from animals, in all my reading I dont think I have come across any other theories that argue against evolution, with the exception of religion of course.
I think we all agree that women enjoy sex just as much as men, and in some cases more. I think we also all agree that there should not be double standards for men and women - a man sleeping around is just as bad as a woman sleeping around.
However I think that saying women are now sexually liberated hence we can do what we want is very wrong - feminism has only caused more problems than it has done good. While equality is obviously important, we have now (as women) created an impossible situation for men. They are fighting their natural instincts to want to protect and provide for a woman because society now dictates that is wrong and a woman should look after herself. To add to all this men still have an "ideal" of a woman where she does not have too much of a sexual history.
However because men have no idea how to treat a woman anymore due to the huge changes to the female role in society, yet women still deep down want men to remain in a more traditional role, we have a huge conflict and women do not get treated well.
I think young women have this idea that it is fine to have sex with whoever you want, whenever you want because women have just as much right to as men. We are competing against men in everything we do, and this now includes sex. When we actually dont realise the damage it is doing. Sex is always going to be more enjoyable with someone you love - and you are never going to feel proud if you have racked up a huge number of sexual partners.
It is time for us to let go of feminism because it doesnt work, and it is time to stop trying to compete with men for everything. We need to put our health first (after all, high numbers of sexual partners only puts your health at risk and if women carry on the way we are going, cervical cancer will be at an all time high in a number of years). We need to follow what we believe in, make our own rules instead of conforming to one stereotype or another. It seems we only have the choice of a) feminist bitch who sleeps around or b) "frigid" as they call it. We need to start carving out a middle ground, where sex is special with someone we love, but we dont punish ourselves either if we make a mistake or have a moment of bad judgment. We need to carry on fighting for equality but also allow traditional roles to have a place in society, and stop trying to be everything to everyone. We are not wonderwoman - we cant do it all.
I think both nature and nurture have a huge part to play in this debate, but neither is more important than the other.
Thanks for your input - and I look forward to hearing these other theories on evolution (or against evolution!).
...............................
A
male
reader, RosesAreRed86 +, writes (2 November 2009):
Yos, TroubledTooMuch and Code Warrior made brilliant observations, and there is validity to everything they said.
I think, however, why promiscuous women (even though who believe they are just "looking for love") are a turn off to men can be summed up by what the original poster k_c100 said:
"Perhaps most women with high numbers of sexual partners are just all really bad judges of character and fall for the wrong men?"
I think this is absolutely true. Every single promiscuous women in the world is either one of two things: 1) a shameless slut who doesn't see anything wrong with sleeping with a lot of men, regardless of whether they care about her or not or, 2) a girl who may actually care about whether the guys respect her or not, but is an extremely bad judge of character.
Either way, slutty behavior is indicative of weakness in a women, either in her morals, or her judgement.
...............................
A
male
reader, metalsman +, writes (7 September 2009):
 Correction..I meant i'm one of the 90% shy/caring/non-experienced guys who fell for one of the 90% women.
...............................
A
male
reader, metalsman +, writes (7 September 2009):
I'd like to thank ALL the contributors to this discussion, i read with great interest what i think is a well balanced, constructively argued, and supportive article.I'm one of those 10% guys who unfortunatley have been trying to contend with the issues raised by this disscussion for some time now..and after 25yrs of marriage i'm only just seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.That is not to say that 25yrs have been sheer unadulterated hell..far from it, but the ground swell feelings have always been there and within the last 18months raised themselves to new thresholds..all because of lack of understanding on my part and deliberate witholding of communication of the facts by my better half.Much of the phsycology of what's been written here i can agree with (both female and male orientated) and i found to be enlightening and helpful, thanks again folks..
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (5 September 2009): Sorry for being offensive. I was just trying to understand how some other person thinks about posting personal stories on this board. I normally review any of my answers that have personal information with my wife to get her opinion on whether she is bothered by the information given. I have read an occasional question where the person asking is worried that their partner might read it and it makes me wonder why people don't talk their problems over with their partners first. Many, perhaps most, times my advice is to better communication between partners.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (4 September 2009): I'm a little curious Code Warrior. Why is it that you are concerned about your wife reading what you say? My wife reads a lot of what I say on this board and other boards. We discuss things that we don't agree on. She knows exactly how I feel about her past behavior, my past behavior and both of our present behaviors. We are not happy with some of what the other has done in the past, both before and after we started dating, and we are not happy with some of what we have done in the past ourselves. I am not afraid of her reading what I have to say about both her and me as I try to answer questions and discuss subjects like this. My first question on this board was about my renewed trouble accepting my wife's past behavior. I wrote it and asked her to read it and tell me if she agreed with my assessment or if she thought I misunderstood something. I think that is the way that our relationship should be. That might not be best for many people though, as everyone is different.
I'm not accusing you or your wife of anything at all or insinuating that either of you are doing anything wrong in your relationship. I am just curious as to why you seem to be concerned about her reading your post on this discussion.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (4 September 2009): I guess our definitions of regret are different. Your wishing that you had fewer sexual partners is regret to me. Maybe I'm using the word improperly. I'll have to look up the dictionary definition. My wife does not wish that she had not had any sexual partners during those 3 years and neither do I. She just wishes that she had not slept with 4 or 5 of those 10 or so guys. The rest taught her something about herself and they were nice guys. Even the last one who obviously just wanted a FWB was good for her. She wanted a relationship, but she stayed with him because she needed somebody and didn't want to increase her number until she found somebody who she thought would be a possibility.I don't know why women have to tell a guy about their pasts. Well, actually, I think I do. The reason that my wife had to tell me was because she was not proud of what she had done and wanted to tell me. She never got a reputation among the people who we both knew, but perhaps she was worried that I would find out too. I never asked any woman about her past, but 3 of my 4 serious partners just had to tell me or at least start telling me. Perhaps I would have eventually asked, but I never had the chance to find out. Actually, I even knew about the 4th, as she got pregnant at the age of 16 and got married and was with her husband until just before we started dating. I might have been her 2nd lifetime partner, but I don't know.I think you are right in your approach about telling. Don't volunteer the information, but don't lie either. Either tell the guy that you don't want to talk about it or tell the truth if he asks. If he wants to discuss it to understand why you did some things then tell him you will discuss it if he promises not to make you feel cheap and keeps that promise. Saying that you boinked 20 guys and then refusing to say anything else will probably make him think the worst. Of course, you might luck out and he will think that 20 is a small number and be happy. I really don't know how guys think these days, as it was 30 years ago that my wife and I started dating. From the questions on DC, it appears to not have changed much. That is too bad. I'm not happy with myself for having such a difficult time accepting my wife's past behavior. Perhaps it would have been easier if she had been willing to talk about it when she told me instead of when all the bad feeling came back 2 years ago. I guess I just hid them well for all those years. She said that I didn't show that it still bothered me and it really didn't for many years.Anyway, good discussion. My wife read all of this except your last post and can relate. She wasn't finding anyone either after she got over the promiscuous phase and wanted a real relationship. But as she said, you are young and have a lot of time to find the right guy. She was 34 when she and I started dating and was feeling old. That sounds funny now that we are in our 60s. Good luck.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (4 September 2009):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the questionI totally agree, acting proud of your sexual exploitations in the past is a recipe for disaster, it just shouts "I slept around and loved it!". I think my approach for the future will be to not bring the subject up (I never like to talk about my past or his either, I think it is silly to look backwards when you are just starting a new relationship) but if he does ask then I will be honest and just give the real number.
As for you thinking that I will oneday admit to myself that I regret my past behaviour - I think that is unlikely. I just think it was part of me growing up and it was a learning experience really, I wouldnt be who I am today if I hadnt done all that in the past. Yes maybe I would like to have a smaller number of sexual partners and wished that I realised sooner that sleeping around wasnt the way to go but I wont ever regret what I did - there is no point in living life with regrets.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (4 September 2009): I can understand where you are coming from. You have to sleep with the guy within a few weeks or else he will move on to someone else. I understand that. But what about the women who made a habit of sleeping with a guy who she just met at a bar 2 hours earlier? What about the women who slept with everyone on the first date? For instance, I was the first guy who my wife didn't sleep with on the first date or the night she met him after she left her first husband. We were both divorced and in our mid 30s at the time. Why didn't she? Because I didn't make the slightest attempt at trying. On the second date I took it very slow and gave her every chance to tell me to stop. She didn't. This is how I acted with every woman who I dated, except the one night stand that I am not happy about. The total was 5, including her. I didn't believe it right to expect sex. I also never tried to get sex for the first time when a woman was drunk. I wanted her to sleep with me because she wanted to. The interesting is that every woman who I dated back then wanted to sleep with me on the first date.Why do women sleep with guys they just met? There are many reasons that I can see from discussions with my wife and reading many questions and answers here. They have gone through a bad relationship or marriage where they were cheated on or put down. They are angry and demoralized. They feel unattractive or old or something like that. They want to get even with the ex or are seeking confirmation that they are attractive or are just lonely and seeking affection and/or love. They need something.Then there are those that have just gotten their freedom from their parents. Perhaps they have just separated from a husband of years and he was their only sexual partner until the separation. They now want to experience what they have heard that other women are doing. They jump into bed with many guys, perhaps guys who they just met or guys who are friends.The women who I dated were women who I met at work. I knew them before we dated. I never tried to pick up a woman at a bar. There were 2 reasons for that. I didn't think I was very good at that and they were not the type of women who I wanted to be with. Women tried to pick me up at a bar on 2 occasions and I just got away from them. Nicely, of course. I think that women who have sex with guys who they meet at bars or clubs are asking for failure. Guys think of these women as easy lays, but not as relationship partners. Not all of course. The first guy who my wife met after leaving her ex was after a relationship, but could not attract any women who he knew. As my wife found out after a few months, there was a reason. He had some phobias that were deal breakers. Still, he really wanted her and was very nice to her and they dated for over a year. She also slept with 4 or 5 other guys in that time period. She finally broke up with him The rest of the guys who she slept with were just after the sex and disappeared after they were through with her, except the one who she was dating when she met me. He wanted to continue dating her, along with other women, but he made it clear that he didn't want a relationship. She dated him for 6 or 8 months and broke up with him the night after our first date. Actually, she didn't want a serious relationship for that first year after she left her ex.Yes, women do have it tough. They either have to put out or get dumped. However, they can weed out the worst of the guys by waiting 3 or 4 dates before they sleep with him. The worst will leave before that. But then I guess you have discovered that waiting a few dates doesn't work that well either. Besides, sex is fun for both the men and the women. I have no answers how to make it better though.The men have it tough too. There are the feelings that I have discussed. Then there is the fact that it is normally left up to us to make the approach and make the first moves. We get rejected a lot and it is demoralizing, especially to us shy guys or those who lacked confidence in themselves as lovers. There seem to be a lot of guys who are very confident in themselves in most every way except relationships. Men and women both have it tough, but in different ways.From your story, it sounds to me like you acted more promiscuous when you first went off to uni and then you started to seek a real relationship. You were the slut who turned into a desirable partner. I'm not being nasty here. Just like my wife and many other women do for many reasons. There is the young and free group and then the ones who have been hurt badly in a relationship. They are promiscuous for a certain reason and then settle down. That does not make them bad, but it does make it difficult for most or at least many guys to be comfortable with their past behavior. I couldn't ask for much more that I have with my formerly promiscuous wife. It took me a long time to understand what she was going through when she acted like that. She just had to "confess" to me early in our relationship and then refuse to talk about it. I never asked any women about her past, but 3 of the 4 who I actually dated had to tell me for some reason. You say that you are not particularly proud of parts of your past, but are not ashamed. My wife said the same. However, I doubt the truth in that. If women are not ashamed then why do they just have to tell a guy who they are starting to really like all about it. I think there is some shame there, but they cannot even admit it to themselves. I can understand that. I am also ashamed of how I treated my first wife, but it took a long time to admit it to myself. I am ashamed of how I didn't show her much love or didn't make an effort to make sure that she enjoyed our sex. I'm ashamed of the mean things that I sometimes said to her that hurt. I'm ashamed of how I would reject her when she tried to show love at times. After she left, I worked very hard to correct all of these problems and my wife says that I did, as I was different when we started to date about 6 months later. However, it took years before I really could admit the way I acted and really felt bad about it. My wife can now admit that it was the same for her with her previously promiscuous behavior. We both feel bad about the things that we did. You can decide who did the worse things, but in my opinion I did.Men and women both have feelings that bother them. How would you feel if you found out that the guy who you have dated for 6 or 8 months had cheated on his last partner and she left him? How wound you feel if he had a 3some with 2 women? OK, this is not a normal behavior for either sex, but you do see questions here about it. It is the same way a guy thinks about his new love's past promiscuity. We all make mistakes and we all can change for the better. Some people do change and others don't. How can we know if our new love has changed or never will? How can us guys know if past promiscuity will show up after marriage? How can you women know if he will cheat or if he will treat you badly? It is a chance that we all take when in a new relationship. It can always be a concern.I saw 2 of my wife's former boyfriends and her ex hubby. I never talked to either of them, as it was basically just in passing and she told me who they were. They were both good looking guys. One was the first partner who really liked her. It was about 3 years after she broke up with him and I mentioned to her that he looked at her like he still loved her and she agreed. There was no nasty look at me or any look of confrontation. He just looked at her with some sadness. The second guy was her last boyfriend. He was at a restaurant when we were there and he came up to her when I went to the restroom and left before I got back to the table. She said that he just wished her luck. He tried to contact her a couple of times after she broke up with him to get back with her, but she ignored him.I have no answer to all of this, but do have one suggestion for those women who want to tell their new partner about their past. There have been a few questions here in the past 2 years that I have been on DC where a women will ask how to tell her new boyfriend. Many women say not to tell him anything, some say to lie and some say to sound proud of your past when you tell him. They say to sound like you are proud of how you acted. Well, in my opinion, that is a recipe for a major problem. There is little else that will make the guy feel worse than giving him the thought that you are proud of past promiscuity. It is like saying to him, "I'm a slut and I'm proud of it." Just my little suggestion. I have other ways of not doing it, but I have no real suggestion of a way to tell him that will make him feel great about it.
...............................
A
female
reader, k_c100 +, writes (4 September 2009):
k_c100 is verified as being by the original poster of the questionWell thanks for the replies everyone! It is great to hear all of your opinions on the matter!
Now more specifically to Code Warrior, I would like to respond to your post. You make some very valid points and it is good to see the more "emotional" side to a male reasoning about this issue.
However I would like to give myself as an example and see what you have to think. I am 22 and have slept with 20 men. I am not particularly proud of that but then again I am not ashamed either, I dont have any regrets so I dont believe I should feel that I have done something wrong by sleeping with this number of men. So I am sure by all of your standards I would be classed as "promiscous" or at worst a "slag/slut".
But is it really fair to stereotype all women that have slept with what, more than 5-10 men as sluts/promiscous? Is it fair to say that none of us care about "making love" and we dont form deep emotional connections? I think it is wrong to taint all women with high numbers of sexual partners in this was, while I am sure you are right about some women, others (like myself) do not act in this way!
I admit when I was 18 and first went to uni there was a phase when I slept around, I guess it was because I had my freedom from living away from home and perhaps that went to my head, and I felt sexually free as well.
But I quickly grew out of this and started to look for real relationships based on much more than just sex. When I went away to uni I had slept with 5 men - 3 being serious relationships where I was very much in love. Throughout my 3 years at uni I slept with a total of 12 men - 2 of which were serious relationships and the rest were people I was casually "seeing". But still, within the last year since graduating I have slept with a further 4 men - this is where my problem lies.
I have realised that I dont want to carry on as I did at uni, I want to find something real and meaningful. However my number is still increasing, so I ask myself why? I dont just jump into bed with these men, I wait a month/2 months to sleep with them, I make sure they like me and I feel the same about them...but then nothing seems to work out! Men seem to be getting incredibly good at blatantly lying, acting like cowards and not communicating. If men were more honest and straightforwards with their thoughts/feelings then women would not always get into these situation!
Like the last guy I dated for example. We had been seeing each other regularly for around a month, I really liked him and was genuinely excited about the relationship and where it could be going. He came over one night, we went to the cinema and he stayed at my house. That was the first time we had sex - I wanted to make sure I liked him and he liked me before I slept with him and felt at this point that we were definitely moving towards something special. But surprise surprise within a week or 2 of sleeping with him (we continued to meet up regularly after that one night and go on dates etc) he just vanished, off the face of the earth it seems! With no explanation, just wont return my texts! What annoys me the most is that he didnt have the decency to let me know it wasnt working or whatever, after he had been saying things like "I've waited so long to meet someone like you", "I really like you" - all the usual stuff you say when you first start seeing someone.
So what are women supposed to do? Not have sex with every guy they date (and then consequently lose him because there is only so long a man will wait!) just in case things dont work out? Is it so wrong that I believe in love, and finding someone special so I go out on dates and enter into relationships with these people? Because at the end of the day I am very happy alone, and enjoy my own company but it would make my life that little bit better if I had a great man in my life. So when I do start to develop feelings for someone and want the relationship to progress, is it so wrong for me to sleep with them? After all, it makes you feel closer as a couple, it is something special that you share so why not have sex?
In reality I think I have just had a bit of a bad time with men recently (a couple of them have been exactly the same as this guy I was talking about above!). So I have the choice - I could stereotype all men as being jerks (like said guy above) just in the same way that you stereotype all women with a high number of sexual partners as promiscous and devoid of emotions. But I wont do that in the vain hope that one day I will meet a man that isnt a complete idiot!
Maybe I am just a bad judge of character, but how can men say these things to a woman (to her face) and not mean them? Or how do they change in such a short space of time? Men appear to be very fickle and can blow hot and cold too easy! Perhaps most women with high numbers of sexual partners are just all really bad judges of character and fall for the wrong men? So does that make us all that bad? Does that mean that we should be branded as sluts and doomed to bad relationships in the future where our men will hang on to the issue that we have slept with too many men?
Surely it would be better to judge a woman on her individual case and her personality? Yes some women may have sex purely for the sexual gratification and dont see any reason to associate sex with emotions, so perhaps you can judge them however you see fit. But as for the rest of us, who maybe have just made bad choices when it comes to men, or perhaps we have just not found the right man yet, surely you cannot judge us quite in the same way?
I think if I were in the situation where I had few sexual partners and my boyfriend has many - I would be a little disturbed by it yes but not so much as it would affect the relationship. While he may have enjoyed sex with these other women, it is now me he is enjoying sex with. If I believed he was a genuine, good person who made me happy, then why would a number make a difference? Yes we could run into his ex girlfriends, yes we could worry that they are not making an emotional connection with us. But really I would feel satisfied if I saw an ex of his, knowing that I have him now and she doesnt! As for the emotional connection, even if someone was a virgin you would never know whether they felt emotionally connected to you on a deep level - it is just born out of trust for that person and the vain hope that all humans have that we just want to find love and be loved in return.
So maybe the real issue is that deep down, men do not trust women? Unless she possess a virginal quality then a man will never truly trust the woman's feelings for him, or her potential future behaviour! And that nicely links back to the evolutionary theory, which explains why the man wont trust her (doesnt want to father someone elses kids etc).
I think us girls are getting a hard time here - it has become much harder to find true love or real love. back in the past when everyone had low numbers of sexual partners, it was much easier! There was not many choices for women - you had to basically get married and bring up kids, that was your life. So now where women are expected to work and be self-sufficient, it has changed the roles of each gender dramatically therefore men have changed a lot I feel when it comes to the way they treat women. I think that while a lot of the time women do just have more sexual freedom and take advantage of that, men also have a big part to play. If a man treated us the way men used to treat women in former generations then perhaps we would not have this problem now!
I think this will never really be fully understood by either sex - I can fully appreciate all of your views on this but I still find it a little odd that you would think this way about someone who you had a great relationship with! Surely the value of the relationship is way more than the issue of her sexual past? And I dont think many men would read what I have said in this post and accept it, I dont think it will make any man change his opinion on women that have slept with a high number of people because it is so deep rooted in the male mentality that no matter what, men will always think this way! I think men will continue to treat women worse and worse yet somehow still expect women to not sleep with many men!
Maybe going back to no sex before marriage is the only option! But that would require men to actually want to settle down, but today that is not something many men are willing to do! So we would have to wait until men reach what, 30, when they are mature enough to be ready for marriage? But then that defies all that is natural to a woman who is designed to be at her best childbearing age younger than that!
I think maybe men and women have evolved out of sync and society has only helped to worsen this gap. Men are still stuck in back in the dark ages acting of their primal urges, whereas women have adapted to the modern world. Society has made it ok for men to treat women badly and it has glorified the eternal bachelor, whereas for women its ideals seem to be stuck between modern independent career woman who is also a virgin and a great cook!
So basically us women are screwed!
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (29 August 2009): There is something else that many people believe and that Yos has eluded to in most of his post. That is that 10% of men are having sex with 90% of women. If you don't agree with the percentages then make it 30% of men are having sex with 70% of women. I think there is a lot of truth in this. The 10% of men have had perhaps hundreds of sexual partners, while the other 90% of men have only had 1 or 2 or perhaps 5 or so at most. So these 90% of men are going to meet and fall in love with one of the 90% who have had 10 or 20 or more sexual partners. Those of us in the 90% have to settle for the women who have had many more partners than us.
Perhaps the 90% of guys have not had many partners because they are not attractive enough to attract the women. Perhaps they are shy and don't know how to pick up women at bars or clubs. Perhaps they have been taught as youth that it is wrong to have sex with many partners. Perhaps they see these easily available women as sluts and they are looking for wife material. Whatever the reason, they don't get many women in the sack.
Now the guy with just 2 previous partners finds a woman who he wants to date. He has sort of known her for a couple of years and she seems nice. They date and he likes her. She seems like a relatively conservative woman, but he finds out that she has slept with many guys. It doesn't matter if he asked, she just told him or he found it out from elsewhere. She slept with them on the first date. She slept with guys who she just met at a club. She might have had a 3some, but that is probably rare.
Now he has a dilemma. He is falling for this woman who he thought met his standards, but now he realizes that she is not that women. She has slept with 20 men, most just once or a few times. Why does she now want him? Perhaps he has a good job and financial future. Now he wonders if she is tired of all the excitement and is willing to settle with a boring guy just for the financial future. He wonders if she will miss all the screwing around with all these exciting guys and will cheat on him. Perhaps most of those guys were terrible lovers, but he will think that all of them were great and much better than him. She might mention that she likes some sexual position that he has never used and he will think that he can never be as good as those guys. He has fallen in love with a slut and doesn't know what to do about it. Does he leave her and give up this woman who seems to love him and treats him very well or does he stay with her and risk her cheating because she will be bored of his lack of lovemaking skills. It doesn't matter if he is the most affectionate man she has ever dated and that is what is the most important to her. He is still not up to her standards in his mind.
All of this bothers him. It bothers him because he cares for her and wants her to be the woman who he thought she was. He wants to be the one who she desires to have sex with, not those other 20 guys who he believes were great lovers and gave her dozens of orgasms or whatever. He thinks that she loved being screwed in dozens of positions or wishes she had that guy with the 8 inch dick again. Even if he is bigger than average at 7 inches, he will only think of the one guy who was bigger than him and wonder if she will want to go back to him or find someone else like him. These are the types of things that will bother the guy who has not had many sexual partners because of being shy or his morals or whatever.
People will say that he lacks self esteem because of the way he thinks and that the woman should avoid him. Well, in my opinion, most women who have slept with guys who they just met at a bar and have had many sexual partners have done so because they lacked self esteem. If she should leave him then why should he want to stay with her? Why should anybody want her for anything but sex? This guy wants her because she is not really the woman who she was when she did those things. Perhaps she has solved her self confidence problems or perhaps she has realized what she was doing was not the best behavior. Whatever the reason, she is now someone who is worthy of a guy who cares for her instead of just wanting her for sex. They are good for each other, but he still cannot get over her past, either because he believes it is wrong to act that way or because he is afraid that she will miss it and want that life again or because he is afraid that she will tire of his lack of ability as a sexual partner and seek someone more exciting.
...............................
A
male
reader, Yos +, writes (28 August 2009):
The arguments being given are based on evolutionary psychology. The idea that we can understand much of our behaviour by looking at our evolution, and in particular whether certain behaviour made our offspring survive and multiply more readily than others. Darwin's natural selection applied to our brains, not just our bodies.
As it turns out, some human behaviour is very easy to describe in these terms, and some is not. Sex is particularly well described by evolutionary psychology, mostly because it is so directly related to reproduction and hence how well our DNA does in the long run. Trying to describe art, by comparison, via evolutionary psychology, is a lot harder. Other areas that evolutionary psychology explains well are family behaviour, and social behaviour around status and co-operation.
One thing to bear in mind about evolutionary psychology: many people attack it because they misunderstand it's ethical implications. Saying stuff like "you're saying that infidelity is programmed in our genes, but cheating is wrong, so you can't be right".
The fact that we have genes telling us to behave a certain way does not make that behaviour 'right'. What we have is many different genes telling us to do many different things, with different degrees of persuasion and force, and as conscious creatures we get to decide which we act on and which we don't. Evolutionary psychology does not absolve us from moral responsibility.
The other common mistake is the one the female point of view in the article is making. Here for example:
"but surely we have evolved past cavemen and cavewomen"
The short answer is... no, we haven't. Evolution happens very slowly. We are essentially physically and mentally hardly different from how we were about 200,000 years ago. We are essentially animals built to live in small nomadic tribal groups of about 150 people, placed in the very different environment of the modern world. In fact, many of our modern social problems can be well understood when you realise this displacement has happened. Like putting animals in the zoo: they have different problems than when they live in their natural habitat.
- - -
The 'male' point of view given in this article is fairly close to what the current mainstream opinion is within evolutionary psychology. Although his interpretation in places is different.
In particular the ideas that men are programmed to have a highly promiscuous 'phase' is not supported by most evidence. Likewise women do not have any particular 'phases' either. Rather, both sexes have various types of behaviour that emerge based on specific situations. Meaning, if you're in a certain situation you are more likely to behave in one way, and if you are in another you are more likely to behave differently. Pretty uncontroversial stuff.
The standard view of male and female sexual behaviour in evolutionary psychology is as follows:
Men typically subconsciously label women as either 'worthy of high investment, or not'. 'Girlfriend material' versus 'just sex'. Men are quite happy to have sex with either type... after all, both might result in pregnancy and hence more of our DNA being passed down. But we are choosy about with whom we invest our time and resources. We look for a mate of sufficient quality (basically as good as we think we can get), and a mate that we believe will remain faithful to us. She will get the lions share of our resources and support, and our children with her will get most of our attention.
The reason for this double standard is that, for men, having kids is very low investment. All it takes is 10 minutes... Since we don't have to carry the child, and we don't have the strong maternal bonds that most women do, we can basically sleep with a large number of women and have lots of kids, whilst doing little or nothing to support them.
However, since those kids won't necessarily do so well without their fathers support, a father will typically choose one woman to 'commit' to and focus his resources on that family. 'His family'. So men do generally want to commit, but they're also happy to have some low-commitment sex on the side.
Women on the other hand have no choice but to have a high investment in their child. At a minimum they have to carry the child for 9 months, and usually support it for it's entire childhood. For this reason, who they have sex with is much more important: because they'll potentially be looking after the consequences for the next 15 years.
Overall this is why men are keener on casual sex than women, and why women can 'choose' who they want to have sex with, whilst men have to work to 'prove' themselves. Because women are the ones with much more at stake.
Things get much more complicated of course.
Women actually need two things from a mate: support, and sperm. But they don't have to necessarily get them from the same person. The female infidelity pattern is to find a safe 'provider' type / 'nice guy' who they know will stick around and support them, and then become pregnant from an alpha-male with better DNA (more handsome, bigger, stronger, more charismatic). The woman subconsciously knows that hanging onto the alpha male is going to be difficult, since all those other women will want him and he's probably quite happy to oblige. So settling for a nice-guy is a much safer bet for long-term support. And then augmenting that with alpha-quality DNA if possible is a great extra.
(note: these are not the only patterns, just the main ones)
- - -
Knowing this we can explain why many guys get so hung up on their partners pasts:
The ultimate DNA disaster for a man is to spend 20 years bringing up someone else's kids without knowing. All his resources spent, and no DNA passed down! By contrast, a woman always knows she is the mother... whilst sa man never can be sure. (at least until DNA testing, which is incredibly recent, and so has no effect on our genetic behaviour).
So any sign that a 'girlfriend-material' woman might not be sexually 'reliable' is a huge warning light for a guy. A promiscuous past, whilst not necessarily a sign of a promiscuous future, is certainly more risky than someone who has been chaste.
This is especially a risk for a guy who is not alpha. Basically a 'nice guy'. This combined with a formerly promiscuous partner raises the fear (subconsciously) that he may being used for resources whilst the sperm is coming from a more prized source. The less alpha the guy is, the higher the risk, because the greater the appeal to the woman to get some alpha DNA if the opportunity presents itself.
This is why most men who have a hard time with this condition have limited sexual experience. Because they're not alpha males, they've not had the chance by and large! Usually the lower the number of sexual partners the male has had, the more his partners promiscuous past troubles him. We've seen this over and over on DearCupid. Likewise more alpha-males tend not to care so much, as they're confident about their sexual (DNA) desirability as well as their value as a resource provider.
Bear in mind also that our genetic behaviour evolved prior to the development of contraception and medicine for STDs. This is important because the horror that the male feels towards his partners prior promiscuity is not based on her having safe sex with no risk of getting pregnant. Rather it is based on someone having unsafe sex with a high risk of getting pregnant each time. This is what it was to be promiscuous over the hundreds of thousands of years our sexual behaviour evolved. Each of those past partners represented a potential pregnancy. Again... big alarm bells in terms of making sure the DNA in your children is actually yours.
The common reaction is also explainable: mainly jealousy.
Jealousy encourages the man to be highly possessive. He'll pay much closer attention to his partners actions, who she is with, how attractive she appears, and so on. This, whilst being unpleasant for both of them, does increase the likelyhood that her children will be his... if only because he's not letting her out of his sight! (or in modern times: reading her email and checking her phone).
- - - -
For me what's still open is why the reaction is so extreme. My intuition is that it's because of our modern environment that has distorted our natural behaviour somewhat. ie, the male brain is not working quite as intended..
In particular, the advent of contraception has made it possible for women to have lots of sex with no risk of pregnancy. Plus things like a morning after pill / abortion if things go wrong. Which is great for them in terms of sexual freedom! But unfortunately I don't think male's brains are built to handle this... our genes don't know about contraception. As a result, we are meeting more and more women with sexual pasts and are just not equipped to deal with it well. Especially the less sexually confident non-alpha males. Which make up most of us!
Also, the primary value of a 'nice guy' to a woman is in decline... as a resource provider. Given that women are increasingly financially and socially independent, men are just not needed as much as they used to be. As a result, that increases the insecurity amongst these men. After all, in a world where women only need men for their sperm, a few super-alpha males would get most of the 'work', and the rest of us would get very thin pickings.
- - - -
This has got really long, so I'll stop. But just to say evolutionary psychology has much to say about environmental factors. This especially has a strong effect on the level of promiscuity in a given population, and on young women in particular. It suggests that a woman (and man) will be promiscuous in specific circumstances, and that our modern culture has many factors that unintentionally encourage this.
...............................
A
male
reader, Danielepew  +, writes (28 August 2009):
 I can but remember what Oscar Wilde once said: "I like men with a future and women with a past". Particularly is she's hot.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (27 August 2009): You are assuming that there is a double standard here. You are assuming that all men boink as many women as possible when young and then want a virgin when they are through with that behavior and want to settle down. Perhaps that is true of some men, but if you were to actually read the many questions that men write on this subject here, you would find that most of them have slept with very few women, while their girlfriends or wives have slept with many men. I guess that does make it a double standard then, doesn't it? The women are allowed to screw around all they want and lie about their pasts. I assume that you think it is wrong for men to do the same. I do remember one question where a guy had dozens of partners and his girlfriend had just a few and he was bothered by that. Well, that is hypocrisy and if I remember correctly, I told him that. Men and women should be treated equally. If a guy has had many partners then he should not condemn his partner for doing the same. However, if he has used restraint in his relationships and sexual life then he has every right to expect a future wife to have done the same. The same goes when the sexes are turned around.I personally think that it is wrong for both men and women to be promiscuous. This does not mean having several sexual partners in several relationships, but in having 1 night stands and dozens of partners. I was brought up to think that it was wrong for both men and women to be promiscuous. Men who slept around were talked about as badly as women who did that. I believe that what I was taught was a bit too puritan, but the basic morals were correct.Have I ever had a 1 night stand. Yes, once. I didn't like it. There were no feelings there. The sex was bad. I felt bad about doing it after the night was over and I never wanted to do that again and never did. I felt badly for having used someone for sex. That was my mistake and I learned from it. From a lot of the answers on DC, it appears that many people don't have the capacity to admit to mistakes and learn from them. Doing what they want at the time and then lying about it is their solution. My wife and I have both made mistakes. We have admitted them and discussed them. Neither of us are completely happy with things that the other has done. Actually, we aren't happy with what we have sometimes done either.I believe that past behaviors, by both men and women, have their consequences. If a person has the courage or lack of control or whatever to behave in some manner, then own up to it, tell the truth and suffer the consequences if that be the case. If an individual believes it is fine to be promiscuous and then lie about it to a future partner, then they are likely to believe that it is fine to cheat and lie about it in the future. Relationships are not built on lies. They are built on truth, working out the problems through conversation and understanding. That is the hard way to run a relationship, but the only way in the long run. Cheating and divorces are built on lies, not loving relationships. Tell the truth and work on the problem. It will take a lot more effort than lying, but it is the right way.
...............................
|
