Number of sexual partners for a woman correlated with percentage in stable marriage and marriage success, for men it was wasn't as evidentView attachment 164273View attachment 164274
Full study please. Also do they also show data for men?
Number of sexual partners for a woman correlated with percentage in stable marriage and marriage success, for men it was wasn't as evidentView attachment 164273View attachment 164274
Yea it showed it doesn't affect men. Are you insecure about your girlfriend?Full study please. Also do they also show data for men?
“yes, but that isnt important”^^Full study please. Also do they also show data for men?
why do you think it is that way? and why do you think it is related? it is a statistic, but does the statistic tell you any reasons? i personally would say first marriages end in divorces because they are first marriages and these days you can marry and divorce as if nothing ever happened, just like starting/ending a realtionship... how many partners someone had doesnt matter, its just because it is easier and marriage doesnt have any real value anymore except some sort of security...Yea it showed it doesn't affect men. Are you insecure about your girlfriend?
I'm genuinely not trolling I mean I would accept a girl with a partner count of 10 max maybe 15.. but over that i don't think i'd hve a seirous relationship with her
but to each of their own. The more a women sleeps around it ruins her ability to pair bond
why do you think it is that way? and why do you think it is related? it is a statistic, but does the statistic tell you any reasons? i personally would say first marriages end in divorces because they are first marriages and these days you can marry and divorce as if nothing ever happened, just like starting/ending a realtionship... how many partners someone had doesnt matter, its just because it is easier and marriage doesnt have any real value anymore except some sort of security...
also does it say something about men being insecure because the wife has more experience than the husband? i wouldnt rule that possibility out, especially when i hear how men want the woman to be (yes, i also dont like women who think the man should be a 7’ abs cash machine with 20incher)...
Thank youAgree, just shows how pathetic modern men have become.
Having standards when it comes to sexual history has nothing to do with insecurity but everything with basic morality. It shows the constraint of a woman and is an important sign for long term relationship potential.
i dont think so, of course noone wants the gf to be sl*t, you are absolutely right with that... i mean that wouldnt last long anyway, if you can count the minutes until she is jumping the dick...Do you think men are "insecure" for not wanting to wife up or girlfriend a sl*t?
man be honest are you a cuckhold?
if you have standards about someone else sexual history, you should live by those standards...Agree, just shows how pathetic modern men have become.
Having standards when it comes to sexual history has nothing to do with insecurity but everything with basic morality. It shows the constraint of a woman and is an important sign for long term relationship potential.
why?if you have standards about someone else sexual history, you should live by those standards...
i've already said this save your breath these dudes are really weird manSure but there is a big difference that needs to be adressed though. Even an ugly woman can get sex extremely easy if she wants, this is absolutely not the case for an average man unless he pays.
The dynamics are completely different between the two genders when it comes to sex and especially its availabilty. It's much more important for a woman to have a chaste history than for the man, although purely out of a moral perspective both need to show constraint imo.
No it’s not. Why would a man be considered a cool guy when sleeping with 50 or 100 women, and a woman a sl*t? Do you think I would be delighted if a guy told me I am number 78?It's much more important for a woman to have a chaste history than for the man, although purely out of a moral perspective both need to show constraint imo.
Double standards implies that the situation is the same for both parties when it's not.No it’s not. Why would a man be considered a cool guy when sleeping with 50 or 100 women, and a woman a sl*t? Do you think I would be delighted if a guy told me I am number 78?
Chaste? We are not in the Victorian era. It’s just double standards.
yeah and noone ever denied that women have it easier...Sure but there is a big difference that needs to be adressed though. Even an ugly woman can get sex extremely easy if she wants, this is absolutely not the case for an average man unless he pays.
The dynamics are completely different between the two genders when it comes to sex and especially its availabilty. It's much more important for a woman to have a chaste history than for the man, although purely out of a moral perspective both need to show constraint imo.
not in this case, in this case it is just about the numbers and nothing else...Double standards implies that the situation is the same for both parties when it's not.
Tell me why it would be OK for you to sleep with tons of women, but not for a woman? It’s exactly the same thing.Double standards implies that the situation is the same for both parties when it's not.
Link to the study, please, and please also post the graphs proving that promiscuous men are thriving in marriage.Number of sexual partners for a woman correlated with percentage in stable marriage and marriage success, for men it was wasn't as evidentView attachment 164273View attachment 164274
Are you retarded?Tell me why it would be OK for you to sleep with tons of women, but not for a woman? It’s exactly the same thing.
The world view here seems to be that a man can be unattractive, slutty, anything he likes, but a woman has to live up to high standards and be hot, kinky and chaste. Haha.
I understand now, it’s a pure matter of envy. Just because you can’t, we shouldn’t eitherAre you retarded?
If every man could sleep around the MAJORITY would. It's in our biologically. But we can't .