Some of my readers/commenters didn’t pay enough attention when reading my latest post, Advice for a Prodigal Daughter, and so commented in ways that exceeded the scope of what I was allowing. I will give them the benefit of this doubt in this matter, and won’t interpret as trolling or anything. Since there is room for critiquing here, I am creating this post to allow those who have problems with my latest post to comment here. This will be free ranging, and nearly unrestricted in what I allow. So if anyone wants to preserve what they said in the previous post, they can re-created their comment(s) here before I delete the unhelpful ones. I will make that final clean-up early tomorrow, just so everyone know how much time they have.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Christian Blogs
Christian Masculinity Blogs
Edifying Reading
Feminine Blogs
Inactive/Archived/Private
Parenting/Families
Red Pill Christian Blogs
Red Pill Women
Secular Red Pill Blogs
Top Posts
Categories
- Alpha
- Alpha Widow
- APE
- Attraction
- Beta
- Blue Pill
- Christianity
- Churchianity
- Civilization
- Courtship
- Desire
- Fatherhood
- Femininity
- Feminism
- Fitness Test
- God
- Hypergamy
- LAMPS
- Marriage
- Marriage Market Place
- Masculinity
- Men
- Moral Agency
- Neo-Reaction
- Pair Bonding
- Parenting
- Polygamy
- Red Pill
- Reference
- Saturday Saints
- Selected Sunday Scriptures
- Serial Monogamy
- Sex
- Sexual Market Place
- Sexual Strategies
- Sin
- State of Nature
- Sunshine Mary
- Temptation
- The Church
- Tradition
- Uncategorized
- Women
Archives
- April 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
Meta
Donal Graeme · Wisdom cries out in the street… who shall listen?
Donal Graeme 
After a quarter century in church, i met more than a few prodigals turned alpha widows. Mostly they became alpha widows, unhappy wives and many moved on to divorce.
Having sinned sexually, were there situatuons hopeless and their futures blighted? Of course not. But there were commonalities.
There rarely if ever seemed any true repentance. The girls all claimed that they were seduced, they were victims and they bore no shame. Out of wedlock pregnancy? Rejoice, sister! Take charge of the ministry to single mommies (I wish i were making this up).
The women were all strong, empowered, independent women. Except sexually where they were helpless to the charms of the hunky surfer/speaker/musician (delete those not applicable). Ordinary guys were invisible, and being one of them, got mightily sick of being used and abused as free labour to repair the church, help single girls move house, etc.
You cannot negotiate attraction, i know. But you can get an accurate read on your personal smv and mmv and act accordingly.
Point is: There’s a script that N>0 women use to put themselves on themselves on the same shelves as virgins. You have to watch it, because they say all the right things, but what does their speech actually accomplish? Especially because she’s prodigal: she was raised hearing that script.
I actually don’t think she dated a beta. I think that whatever went down made her upset to the point of wanting a way out, and therefore, pointing a finger at herself as the solution. She’s attempting to find a church guy, aka an omega, to marry, or fix the problem. She wants nothing more to do with the world. If she was raised Christian and had Kissed Dating Goodbye, she probably pair-bonded with whatever man was alpha enough to do the deed.
Sin is sin. It can be forgiven, but there is also consequences.
Put bluntly, we have a problem when the lock that opens to a thousand keys thinks its still a good lock. ‘But i’m a good girl.’ they insist.
Heard that a lot.
The church gets this consistently wrong. Sin only has consequences for men. So men leave when they recognise the double standard.
After reading an observer’s comments, it dawned on me that there is entirelty too much of this going on. Men are losing confidence because women are undercutting their reputations with bad behavior.
To those who say there are no consequences for their bad behavior, I say that it hasn’t hit the fan yet. Wait a little while.
@ tru
There’s a script that N>0 women use to put themselves on the same shelves as virgins (minus the typo)
That script is to label themselves as “born again virgins”. I didn’t get the impression that this particular Prodigal Daughter is doing that ~ it seems to me like she is truly repentant.
I fully understand your frustration though, because as a virgin myself (actual… not “technical” or “born again”) I feel it to.
There is much here – she isn’t as ‘bad’ as most christian women in this context. Many of them still ride the carousel, then go to church sunday and ask forgiveness as it is ‘expected’…..
anyway – if Prodigal is not familiar with deliverance ministry, I will provide some links. She built soul ties with the person she had sex with, and these MUST be broken and dealt with spiritually.
Before moving on, God himself thinks that giving ‘it’ away freely is *EVEN WORSE* than being a prostitute, and a prostitute is a very bad actor in scriptures (verse 34):
Ezekiel 16: 32 A wife who commits adultery! who takes strangers instead of her husband!
Ezek. 16:33 They give gifts to all prostitutes; but you give your gifts to all your lovers, and bribe them, that they may come to you on every side for your prostitution.
Ezek. 16:34 You are different from other women in your prostitution, in that none follows you to play the prostitute; and whereas you give hire, and no hire is given to you, therefore you are different.
=========
I agree with Feminine but not Feminist above that the Proverbs 31 woman does her husband good and not harm *ALL* the days of her life, even before she met him – so Donal – I disagree that she didn’t sin against her future husband, she did.
Proverbs 31:
Prov. 31:10 ¶ Who can find a worthy woman?
For her price is far above rubies.
Prov. 31:11 The heart of her husband trusts in her.
He shall have no lack of gain.
Prov. 31:12 She does him good, and not harm,
All the days of her life.
================
Helpful links (If linking other sites is not allowed, please forgive my ignorance of that rule – these are truly to help Prodigal out)
Peaceful wife’s blog – a christian woman married many years, but has transformed herself into a biblical wife – great reading and her ‘tone’ is simply peaceful: http://peacefulwife.com
======
For deliverance – for those whom are not familiar – check out the links on ‘deliverance 101’ and such, yet here is the specific one on sex outside of marriage:
http://www.greatbiblestudy.com/sex_outside_marriage.php
A very specific prayer for dealing with sex outside of marriage and soul ties:
Click to access sexual_healing.pdf
================
The other thing is an act of submission to the Lord, and symbolic of cleansing herself. While saying the prayer above, or after, take anointing oil and anoint or ‘cleanse’ herself by anointing her body where she was touched by the previous partner – thus spiritually purifying her physical person for her future husband. Then ensuring she *STAYS PURE* for her husband on her wedding night.
hope some of this helps
Take charge of the ministry to single mommies (I wish i were making this up).
I know you’re not making it up. Two churchian franchises in my area proudly ADVERTISE their “ministry to mommysluts” (my paraphrasing here). I’m betting that these “ministries” are headed by women – very possibly “reformed” mommysluts.
Put bluntly, we have a problem when the lock that opens to a thousand keys thinks its still a good lock.
Pure gold. I’m stealing that unless you can prove it’s copyrighted.
“The church gets this consistently wrong. Sin only has consequences for men. So men leave when they recognise the unbiblical double standard.”
Fixed.
This is a repeat of something that Trugingstar said in the other thread. I’m moving it over here instead.
——————–
I have to say that she sounds like she’s doing well, but I don’t know why people go into ministry directly after their sin days. I’m just saying in general. I don’t usually run into pastors/ church leadership/ teachers who don’t have some kind, “Before I was saved, I was doing drugs and having sex,” story. I’m not saying that this is something they can’t do, but why does *every* person who’s in a ministry have a backstory? We all do, to an extent, but what I mean is, if you were raised in a Godly home and you never strayed, there’s really no one you can learn under. That means the foundation is really weak. I have a little brother who’s really disciplined about reading the Bible and so on. There’s no one to mentor him to the capacity that he can be mentored. There’s no leader who has a clean past who can go, “this is how I faced this problem.” Instead, there are people with strongholds going, “I used to struggle with this: don’t be bad like I was!” But he’s never been bad, and he probably never will be. Generally, I think there should be more of a trend of someone with no past mentoring someone with a past, not the other way around. I’ve never sinned to that degree, and I still have strongholds. I wouldn’t consider myself a good candidate for leading other women, at least at this point. I have certain spiritual gifts to practice, but that’s not the same thing. It’s probably better to rest in God’s Word instead of pressuring oneself to be a teacher right off the bat. Paul refers to teaching as one of the greater gifts, and it’s hard-won. To give a picture, it comes directly after prophecy, in terms of importance.
I know that Paul said recent converts aren’t allowed to be pastors. So, if someone is called to lead a church, they have to wait a while to “clear.” I think it would be enriching if people with generations of Christian lineage started leading congregations more often. That’s something you hardly ever see; there’s a real nutrient deficiency of time-tested faith. I’d like to have a pastor on whose authority I can lean on and respect, not a pastor who’s so busy trying to fight his own nature that I get alienated.
Um, if you aren’t invested in the megachurch thing, you can easily find such churches led by generational Christians. Not really sure how it works with priests for the Catholics and Orthodox, but they have married clergy as well, so it’s certainly possible.
“The other thing is an act of submission to the Lord, and symbolic of cleansing herself. While saying the prayer above, or after, take anointing oil and anoint or ‘cleanse’ herself by anointing her body where she was touched by the previous partner – thus spiritually purifying her physical person for her future husband. Then ensuring she *STAYS PURE* for her husband on her wedding night. ”
For those of us who are Catholic, this submission to the Lord, is done in the confessional. We speak the words of our sins out loud to the priest who sits “in persona Christi” (in the person of Christ). In other words, the priest as another Christian isn’t the one who absolves sin. He is the channel that Christs uses to give grace. He hears the confession. He gives spiritual advice. He gives a penance that we do for restitution for our sins. He hears the person who has confessed pray the Act of Contrition which includes a promise to do penance and amend their life. He raises his hand in blessing over the penitent and says the prayer of absolution.
“God the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of your Son, you have reconciled the world to yourself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins. Through the ministry of the church, may God grant you pardon and peace. And I absolve you of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen”
The penitent leaves the confessional, completes the penance that was given to them to make restitution for their sins, and rejoices in God’s tender mercy and forgiveness.
There is great healing in hearing the prayer of absolution said over you. I believe God gave us the sacraments, which are experienced through our senses of sight, hearing, speaking, and sometimes taste, touch and smell of incense or anointed oils, not because He needs these things to give us grace but because we need them. We need to experience these outward signs of inward grace we’ve received because it’s healing for us. We have the memory of the experience to help us recall and live the grace we’ve received.
I can vouch, through personal experience today, of the power of confession. It really is good for the soul.
Said by an Observer:
Mentoring can be useful but culture resists it. Under a patriarchy not bound by notions of love, mentoring helped recalibrate her attraction filter to consider men she would normally filter out. Provided she could respect him, the marriage could work. But we live in an era where we believe we must love our spouses and be madly attracted to them. This is an exception to the norm.
Another outcome is that mentoring helps overcome temperament differences that may hinder the development of trust. Fbnf alluded to this. Specific personality types dont work together, but often those that might never get to develop because the lack of attraction fostered by hypergamy negates it. Skilled matchmakers can overcome this by identifying those with characteristics that could work. Its a largely lost role in the broader culture, and we are the poorer the the passing of these skills.
“Based on descriptions, I don’t see how her situation is different from my situation… ?_?
“Men don’t care about virginity, do they?”
Generally: men care more about virginity than women do when it comes to commitment. Women care less about virginity for sex and commitment. Women find virgin men, chaste men, unattractive, as a general rule.
Generally, secular men don’t care about a woman’s virginity. Christian men care very much about a woman’s virginity if her marital suitability is being considered.
Men looking for sex don’t care about whether a woman is a virgin. In fact, they’d prefer a woman NOT be a virgin, because they don’t want the responsibility of easing a virgin into a sexual relationship they have no intention of making permanent. Men looking for a commitment care very, very much about a woman’s virginity or lack thereof. This is because a man is investing his life into this woman – he wants to know he’s making a good investment in a woman who wants HIM, not just a pack mule, a drafthorse, or walking wallet.
Well, then, here’s an interesting question: how do women get their virginity taken away? Is it at church, or is it outside of church? Most men prefer experience outside of church, right?
“So what you’re saying is there’s little incentive for women to remain virgins?
It depends on what a woman wants incentivized, and, really, what she wants from life.
If she wants to have fun and meet lots of very attractive men, then yes, there’s little incentive to remain a virgin.
If she wants, as a young woman, to find a husband who loves her and will stay with her, and she wants to become a mother of more than one kid, then there is a lot of incentive to remain a virgin.
If she wants to avoid becoming an alpha widow, then there is a lot of incentive to remain a virgin.
IF she wants to reduce the odds of unwanted pregnancy, there’s not a lot of incentive to remain a virgin, because she can reduce the odds of unwanted pregnancy to near zero with HBC.
If she wants to reduce the odds of contracting an STD, then there’s some incentive, but not much, to remain a virgin, because she can avoid most STDs with condom usage.
If she is a typical woman in today’s SMP/MMP, then no, there’s not lots of incentive to remain a virgin. Her virginity and average typical premarital sex partner count of 4 (which is VERY conservative but based on CDC numbers) really means next to nothing in terms of her marriageability. Her nonvirgin status doesn’t affect her health, her weight, her sexual response, or much else, really.
“Well, then, here’s an interesting question: how do women get their virginity taken away? ”
Actually that’s rather banal, not interesting. That answer is found in 7th grade health class.
Seriously, a woman’s virginity is not “taken away” from her. She gives it to her first sex partner, freely and of her own volition. No man “takes” a woman’s virginity. [DG: Rape would be the exception to this.]
“Is it at church, or is it outside of church? Most men prefer experience outside of church, right?”
What are you talking about?
So, only if I care about having a man stay with me to generate rear offspring is virginity important. That, and avoiding a broken heart/ good sex.
“So, only if I care about having a man stay with me to generate rear offspring is virginity important. That, and avoiding a broken heart/ good sex.”
Well, and obedience to God. There’s that little thing too.
If a church girl loses her virginity, will it be to a man she goes to church with or a man in the secular world. The amount of work that it takes for a man to get a virgin woman attracted enough to have sex with him, break her in, and dump her, hardly seems worth. But a church guy will say, “Hey! Here’s my opportunity to N>0!” That’s what I’m getting at.
Deti, that’s why I am a virgin, but that’s the only reason why. That’s my point. If God doesn’t matter to other women, they won’t care. You know what’s more fun than even children? Hot sex, money, and a career. Even more fun than children. Even if you loved children that much, what’s a couple of guys? I don’t even think it matters that much to Christian guys. I think, either the guy at church will white-knight the girl with her newly-acquired skills and marry her, or the girl can get the recovering alpha with the old, “We’ve *both* fallen short!” line. That’s what I think probably.
@ trugingstar
There is more to it than that. I’m somewhat busy right now, but will respond further later when I get a chance.
Here is a re-cap of comments made over on the other thread that I will be cleaning up:
Trugingstar-
Myself-
Deti-
Trugingstar-
Ok, now to respond…
Exactly. That is a huge part of the problem. It used to be that women had a number of strong incentives to avoid fornication. At the very least, they wouldn’t until they were engaged to a man (the whole idea of engagement rings developed as a form of collateral for women to compensate for lost virginity in broken engagements). Nowadays those incentives are gone, and women are allowed to pursue their feral desires. Men, meanwhile, have lost many of their incentives to marry, which drives them toward several paths, none of them good for society (MGTOW, PUA, etc.)
Society has suffered as a result of all of this.
Abortion plus contraceptives. The two go hand in hand. Their full legalization in the last few decades (via Supreme Court fiat) served to seriously reduce the penalties of rampant fornication. Which was the purpose all along, of course.
Historically that was considered the case. Women who weren’t virgins were far, far less desirable as wives. Perhaps as mistresses, but not as wives. The only exception were the most beautiful and those whose marriage brought political power. Otherwise the pejorative “ruined” was often used.
PUAs, by the way, back this up. They often talk about how virgin women are “better” than non-virgin women when it comes to personality. In fact, the higher a woman’s N-count, the worse she becomes. Some have advanced the idea that you should “leave her better than you found here”, but they admit (at least the honest ones do) that it is a lie. Women bond during sex, and the more bonds they acquire, well, it just isn’t good for them. Some women can and do overcome this, but it is a trial. And its not guaranteed.
Less evidence here. The rules about female virginity were never commonly applied to men. Personally, I believe this to be the case. But it is also clear that the effect on men is not so bad, with the possible exception of the Madonna/Whore complex.
I will note that studies have shown that those married couples who married as virgins have reported the best sex lives out of all the other couple possibilities.
Bunch of reasons. Depends on the man. Some men want to raise a family. Others want respectability, or to signal stability in their lives. Others want to lock down a woman they are fond of. For others, it is the only moral means of sating one’s sex drive.
For myself, its the outlet for my sex drive, a desire for a helpmeet that can provide me solace when I need it, and a desire to raise a large family. Just to name a few reasons.
Some of us would love to. But we cannot. Why? Because finding a devout virgin who is interested in marriage, whose personality meshes, who meets our attraction floor and who falls in the right age range has proven impossible thus far.
There are some PUA types who like to deflower Virgins. Perhaps some more work is involved, but worth it in their opinions. Especially given the correlation between a woman’s N and her overall personality.
The thing is, most Churches do a good job emasculating the majority of young men in the pews. The Church guy who is eager will be obvious, and that eagerness will be unattractive, and put most women off. As a result relatively few of the Church-going men will be attractive to the women there. So while some women might lose their virginity to the men in Church, I would suspect that it is at best an even split, and probably tilts towards men out of Church.
Yes, most will chose the quick, fun path. Never mind that if often ends quite poorly for them. A lot of Christian guys don’t “care”, true. But for many of them, that is because it has been drilled into their heads that they shouldn’t care. That they should forgive women their “mistakes” (an incorrect term, the proper one is error). They are told it is selfish and sexist to think less of women who have returned to the faith and become “born-again virgins.” And since those Christian men are the good, nice little boys their mothers raised them to be, they adopt that mindset. As for the recovering Alphas, there aren’t really that many of them. Some, yes, but not many. Those who do will probably marry before they return to the fold, usually grabbing a hot former church girl turned secular girl in the process.
Pingback: Selected Sunday Scriptures- #49 | Donal Graeme
Well, that was detailed.
So you have basically have feminism-pua at church forgiving church fornication on both ends. That’s not what I meant. Well, probably that too.
A lot of people suggest that feminism is the main issue. But a virgin woman is not enough of an incentive to keep men at church, let alone get them to marry. Here’s what I think the real issue is. Feminism & chauvanism-pua-mgtow are red herrings. The entire objective is to discourage marriage and encourage singleness. Homosexuality plays into this as well, because homosexual behavior largely revolves around temporary relationships.
I personally see the motive as being rather simple. It’s most accurate to think of a nation as a giant, extended family. If you split-up that family, you get a weak structure and (psychologically) needy individuals. This is where the state moves in loco parentis, and becomes a pseudo-patriarch. The state will feed you, but you have to be obedient. I think this is a very possible explanation for the recent concentrated effort in pushing sexual boundaries.
***
I’ll get to the rest laterz.
@trugingstar: ” If God doesn’t matter to other women, they won’t care.”
Exactly.
Everyday there are women who aren’t virgins or even close, and they get married.
To stay a virgin in hopes of getting married is silly because I don’t think most men care about virginity. I’m watching their actions not their words.
My reasons for being chaste and a virgin before marriage is 1) the idea of sleeping with another man besides my husband repulses me and 2) my love and respect for God (most important).
Some men on the manosphere make it look like if a woman is a virgin she already has a line of suitors, waiting to be her husband.
HA!
Couple of quick thoughts:
Most men, including Christian men, including the most devout of Christian men, are not primarily concerned with virginity when picking a wife. Some of that is because of cultural desensitization, some of it because they themselves have lapses in their pasts, but mostly because they truly believe in redemption and the possibility of moving forward in grace and victory for those who have truly repented.
Now, there is always the question raised around here of, “Well how do you know that she is truly repented?” But that’s a separate issue from whether or not a person can live a full and fruitful life in a walk of true repentance.
“You know what’s more fun than even children? Hot sex, money, and a career.”
Heh. To a 25 year old woman, maybe.
You know what’s the least fun to a 35 year old woman? Hot sex, money, and a career.
“To stay a virgin in hopes of getting married is silly because I don’t think most men care about virginity. I’m watching their actions not their words.”
Most Christian men have had it absolutely POUNDED into their heads that if they DO care about a woman’s virginity, then they are cruel, heartless, mean-spirited, and not true Christians.
“Some men on the manosphere make it look like if a woman is a virgin she already has a line of suitors, waiting to be her husband. “
A virgin woman is as rare as hen’s teeth, and very valuable for marriage. But, some are not physically attractive. Others have issues and problems to work through. Still others are attractive and issue free, but are extremely selective. There are some who are simply waiting for the right man.
That said, it is true that most men will not wait until marriage for sex. A huge part of that is because the risks of marriage are absolutely astronomical. If a man gets the decision wrong, he is in for a lifetime of pain. He absolutely MUST get correct the decision to marry, and whom to marry. There is NO margin for error – NONE. If ANYTHING goes wrong, it will mean disaster for him and any children born to the marriage.
“I personally see the motive as being rather simple. It’s most accurate to think of a nation as a giant, extended family. If you split-up that family, you get a weak structure and (psychologically) needy individuals. This is where the state moves in loco parentis, and becomes a pseudo-patriarch.”
I don’t know that it is that sinister, though I suppose it could be on the part of some of our more godless overlords.
I think what we have here is the culmination of a long historical, political and social drive in Christendom and in Western philosophy toward individual rights and away from collective, community ties. The unintended consequences included the breakdown of collective community morals, for a lot of reasons. People who remained in close communities with the same people all their lives grew up not only with a base set of morals and mores (Christian, usually), but also local community mores centered around life routines, rhythms, community wide activities and holidays, nuclear and extended families, and so on. The basis of these community mores were to allow for basic societal functioning and a sense of belonging, a cohesiveness, that many wouldn’t otherwise have. People in the communities either adhered to the mores or left the community – there really was no other choice.
With increased liberty and individual movement, more and more people chose to leave their communities, and left behind the mores with them. When you leave a community, you can choose to join another community with mores you like, or remain on your own. Well, more and more people have decided to remain on their own and not part of a community; just drifting from place to place. Or they join a community and something happens to uproot them, so they never stay in one place long enough to become part of the community and allow its mores to mold and shape them.
One thing that has changed over the past 60 years or so is that the concept of community mores or morals has dissipated almost completely. You can’t have a set of “community morals” anymore, because that is exclusionary and judgmental. You can’t expect someone to adhere to a set of community morals anymore, because if you do, then you’re being unfair and infringing on someone’s individual rights. And sexual conduct is considered one of those individual rights that cannot be infringed in any way. People have the “right” to sleep with whomever they want, whenever and wherever they want. (Of course as a practical matter, that “right” extends only to women and to gay men, but I digress.) And our society’s laws and constitutional jurisprudence have been specifically crafted to maximize those rights. You really cannot enforce laws against fornication, adultery or sodomy, as a practical matter.
As an aside – sexual conduct is really the ultimate expression of female power. Advertising and entertainment recognize this implicitly. It’s why sex is used in advertising, television and film. A woman has no greater power over a man than when she “negotiates” with him for sexual access to her body. A woman’s setting out her sexual charms and assets gets attention, motivates and distracts. So women using their sexuality to have sex with the most attractive men they can muster is, in truth, a statement to men, individually and corporately, thus: “I can do whatever I want with this. It is mine, and I will decide if and when you can have it.”
So it’s not so much that we “split up” the extended family as it is that the individual members of the family are all doing their own thing, because the law and Western political/social/economic thought believes that individual rights are a political and social “good” which must be protected. By that I mean that individual rights are considered desirable, beneficial, helpful and so on, for the good of the people. You know, “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” and all that. Individual rights trump pretty much everything else, and is considered to be consistent with the Founding documents’ original intent and purpose. The problem is that it was thought that individuals would adhere to a basic common morality (usually Judeo-Christian) expressed and enforced within individual local communities, and that community standards and mores and morals would prevail. The original thought was that local communities could be trusted to govern their own morals. All that has gone by the wayside with indvidual rights prevailing over former communities.
The flipside of that is “identity politics”, in which new communities based on racial, ethnic or other shared characteristics now have precedence. The main purposes of these groups is twofold: (1) whip up public opinion and convince members of the group that they are getting shafted; and (2) guilt the government into giving them preferential treatment and/or money and/or handouts and/or largesse. So you’re no longer a married woman from Paducah. You’re a black woman. Or you’re a lesbian. You’re not a white man from Ankeny, Iowa. You’re a gay man in your 70s.
You’re not a guy from Las Vegas. You’re a white heterosexual college educated man working as a physician (in other words, a member of the oppressive privileged patriarchy that exists for no reason other than to keep everyone else oppressed and crushed and under your thumb).
And so that is the problem we have today – no more communities; and instead the country fracturing itself into special interest groups consisting of aggrieved minorities. But its being done of our own volition, not by our overlords. The government merely responds and reacts to it, joining in the frenzy.
if you marry for solace when times get tough you will be disappointed
diversity killed the notation a nation was an extended kinship group. That was true in the usa( and most of the world) until the White Ethnic migrations from Europe. We stopped being one people at that point
“if you marry for solace when times get tough you will be disappointed”
Heh. It used to be, even during my own lifetime, that some people did marry for solace, and then had someone with them when times got tough.
Because times ALWAYS get tough. For everyone. EVERYONE goes through tough times. Difference is, nowadays most people go through them alone.
@ thedeti
Exactly. Virginity is a desirable trait, but there are other traits men generally care about more (mainly attractiveness and availability – i.e. not overly selective). To limit themselves virgins entails heavily compromising on other traits.
So yes, bottom line is that staying a virgin is not all that beneficial for women looking to get married. As long as the N is kept low, (or she racks up a high N but is able to effectively hide it), it’s not really a problem.
Deti, you had a lot to say there. But here’s the one thing on my mind: I don’t think America was all that nomadic until very recently. I wonder what made it that way?
In terms of virginity, I tend to think that you’re basically worth what you’re worth regardless of sexual status. Even with a high n-count. If you’re hot with a high n-count, you’ll get a line of guys proposing, same as if you’re a virgin. If you’re living a churchian lifestyle with a high n-count, you’ll have just as much selection as a virgin. I would even go so far as to say that there’s something sparkly about a woman who’s been sexually active and something dusty about a virgin. That’s why the men end-up making “mistakes.”
That’s not to say that men don’t value the appearance or aura of chastity. They do. That’s what Robert Greene calls “the Halo Effect.” If you look at female seduction through a PUA lens, this is a woman’s equivalent of “comfort.” A young woman who wears, for example, girly dresses, a cross necklace and listens to Christian music is going to seem like a safe choice. But she doesn’t actually need to be a safe choice to do all that. The women figure it out, same as the alpha male guitar players whose life before Jesus was “just, just, so messed up, N3748978.”
*The most energetic women I’ve seen at church have had high N-counts. The virgins I know are more laid-back.
Nope. MMV is affected by sexual history. Its true that a very attractive woman can have a high-N and still be desired, but only because she is good looking. Take a much less attractive woman, and that baggage becomes much more difficult to overlook. Men still do so these days, but mostly for two reasons:
1) They are told to overlook it
2) They believe they can’t do any better.
Yes, N-count doesn’t affect SMV, but it definitely affects MMV. It is just a matter of the more attractive the person, the easier it is to overlook defects.
So, a higher N-count = they try harder?
Does low N-count = virginity, or is it considered more desirable?
Not sure what you mean by this.
No. Virginity means N=0
Men who are honest will admit as much. The lower the N, the better (all else being equal). Men with the most experience with women vouch for this.
“I don’t think America was all that nomadic until very recently. I wonder what made it that way? “
Better transportation starting in the late 1800 with the prevalence of railroads, then in the 1920s with more cars and better roads. Much easier, faster and cheaper to move people and things.
Rapidly changing economy in the early 20th century, World War I, then Roaring 20s, then a depression, then WWII after which the US emerges as a world power.
Court decisions expanding the rights of the individual and the power of the government. More and more automation in, well, pretty much everything from work to home life to leisure time.
All this made it easier for individuals to depend less on community and more on themselves.
Higher N women who are still good looking, or the “hot slut”, still do OK. They can still marry, because of the thirst. Some men are so incredibly sex deprived, so beaten down, so starved for anything they can get, that they will take their chances with a high N woman alighting from the carousel for one reason or another.
Most other men are shamed and browbeaten into accepting high N women based on the messages they get from church, society, media, and everywhere else: “Man up and marry the sluts!” “A woman’s past is in the past and it doesn’t matter anymore.” “Jesus forgave her… why can’t you?” “You have a past too. You can’t judge her for her past. Judge not, young man.” ‘You’re just a judgmental hypocrite for judging her for her past.”
The high N woman isn’t ideal or even suitable for marriage. Number of problems.
1. They tend to have chronic STDs. The big ones are HPV and herpes. They affect fertility and can cause reproductive tract cancers. Almost certainly, she’s contracted an STD somewhere along the way.
2. Much greater chance of alpha widowhood.
3. Emotional baggage. Lowered ability to bond or unable to bond.
4. Hardened, jaded, cynical personality, a result of using men and being used by men.
______________________________________________
“Higher N count = they try harder?”
Sort of. They use differing strategies to rope men in. They ply lower value men with rapid sex and demands for commitment. They sell themselves as reformed, as “born again virgins”. They point up their domestic skills and “play wife” to a man for a while.
Virginity means N = 0.
Then the question becomes “what is ‘sex’”? Some of this debate was settled during the Lewinsky scandal, when the consensus was that, yes, oral sex is, in fact, sex.
My general rule: If any part of a woman’s body has intentionally touched a man’s penis for the purpose of sexual gratification, then she has “had sex” and is not a virgin.
___________________________________________
“In terms of virginity, I tend to think that you’re basically worth what you’re worth regardless of sexual status. Even with a high n-count. If you’re hot with a high n-count, you’ll get a line of guys proposing, same as if you’re a virgin.”
No. You’re confusing SMV with MMV. A high N hot woman will get a line of guys wanting sex. They will NOT be proposing to her in any way, shape, manner or form. Any man halfway worth his salt will never propose marriage to a woman unless he is 99.9999999% sure the answer will be “yes”.
“ If you’re living a churchian lifestyle with a high n-count, you’ll have just as much selection as a virgin.”
Yes, for sex. The high N churchian is like any other high N woman. She can get lots of sex. She will be able to get an unattractive man for marriage. She will not be able to get an attractive man for anything other than sex.
“I would even go so far as to say that there’s something sparkly about a woman who’s been sexually active and something dusty about a virgin. That’s why the men end-up making “mistakes.” “
“Sparkly”, for sex. A woman who’s been sexually active can sometimes turn on the charm, but most of the time it’s an act, a defense mechanism, an overcompensation. Such a woman is interacting with the world in the only way she knows how – by using her body to get attention.
“They ply lower value men with rapid sex and demands for commitment. They sell themselves as reformed, as “born again virgins”. They point up their domestic skills and “play wife” to a man for a while.
^Yes, you got it. This exactly. Except, they still seem to get pretty good guys. I knew one girl who bff-ed a homeschooler, went to a ton of church things, and turned on the charm/played the wifey to the extreme. She was a 5.5 at best. She somehow managed to work the crowd into thinking she was attractive. Except a few of the women knew she was so full of it. She got married to a guy who was about her number, had all the bridesmaids she needed, and ended up in a ton of weddings along the way. I made it a policy that I wouldn’t date any guy who’d dated her. One of my friends, probably a 7 or 7.5, blonde, tan, endowed, ended-up dating a guy who’d dated the other girl. He finally “got the courage” to ask her out, after acting really interested in the other girl (which had lowered his value). I told her she should probably cut it off. He was dumb-enough to date that other woman, coupled with being raised beta, so she cut it off. However, this guy was tall, built, probably about a seven looks-wise. A lot of cute women would have dated him, just because he was so cute. I would have. But he seemed really arrogant, like you had to twist his arm or something. Beta and arrogance do go hand and hand, and I think what happens is the high-n girls see a giant neon “sucker” written on their giant foreheads, and move in with flattery and the rest of the act. Just like PUA with Evango princesses. It’s not just low self-esteem, either, it’s dorks strutting around, thinking they’re babe-magnets without putting in the effort. I think most Christian women would take the plunge and marry the dork and be fine, but add the “ladies man” thing, and it’s a nasty combination.
If a guy wants to reform himself from dating plain-looking, high N, born-again women, he basically has to reforge his entire identity. He has to start a multi-national business and get a group of cool new friends and make fun of his past self. Or just leave the country.
Virginity *means* N=0, and I go by your definition, but what I was asking is for all intents and purposes, all other things being equal, does the value of a virgin really differ from the value of an N= 1 or 2, technical virgin or otherwise, by that much?
“Beta and arrogance do go hand and hand, and I think what happens is the high-n girls see a giant neon “sucker” written on their giant foreheads, and move in with flattery and the rest of the act.”
Agree with the second part, not with the first. Betas aren’t arrogant. What you saw as “arrogance” was not anything like that. It was more like gratitude, I think.
Betas are quite assiduously trained and accustomed in the arena of intersexual relationships to losing out, to rejection, to getting absolutely nuked beyond all recognition. In fact, they’re so used to it that when they finally get some decently attractive girl with an N north of 15 who’s retiring from the carousel to give them a looksee, they’re extremely pleasantly surprised to see their beta methods “worked”. They believe that all their “hard work”, all their patient waiting, all their “training”, their beta supplication and pedestalization, all of it, has finally paid off. It has finally happened for them — at long last, a “great” girl sees him for how wonderful and magnanimous and relationship-ready he really is.
So I think it’s the above phenomenon, not “arrogance”, that you’re seeing.
@ thedeti
Fingering?
“But what I was asking is for all intents and purposes, all other things being equal, does the value of a virgin really differ from the value of an N= 1 or 2, technical virgin or otherwise, by that much?”
The value is different as between N = 0 and N=1. But the differences between the results a woman gets on the open market are negligible. As a practical matter, an N < 2 might as well be a virgin in the MMP. She'll still be able to marry assortatively as if she were chaste. Because in this market, N < 2 IS "chaste", relatively speaking. She probably isn't an alpha widow unless her sole prior partner was a 4-year long boyfriend who was 3 SMV points above her. The only men who will reject her are those few men who insist on N = 0.
It's a myth that women over 30 with double digit Ns are completely unable to marry. It's just not true. The numbers don't bear it out. There are increasing numbers of women marrying for the first time at 32, 35, 38 and up. Reason? The thirst. Men are so desperate for sex and affection they will wife up literally any woman willing to have them.
Nemesis: If she’s been penetrated, she’s not a virgin.
I don’t think it matters all that much, except for some christians and for conservative asians.
Virginity is a Christian thing, primarily, in the US — yes some Asians and other small groups like Muslims also care about it, but otherwise it’s a Christian thing, and even among Christians, a very small minority of people care about N=0.
Beyond that, there is a sliding scale among people as to what they do care about and what their tolerance level is — it varies quite a bit. Some people truly don’t care if their spouse had a prior N=50+, but most are a bit put off by that, if they are aware of it. Most average, secular people are okay with N (age) you really see who is an “insecure judgmental asshole with a small penis” and who isn’t!
Keep in mind, it isn’t hard for a “non slut” but attractive secular woman, who typically doesn’t have even chastity as a virtue/goal, to get a significant N before marriage, If we take a woman who marries at 28, and assume she has been sexually active since age 15, that is 13 years. Let’s assume she was involved with her husband for 2 years and that she was exclusively active with him for those 2 years, so 11 years otherwise. In that period from 15-26, let’s say she had 4 longer term (more than 6 months) BFs, all of them sexual of course. She had dates with about 20 other guys over those 11 years (two yer year), and had sex with the ten of them that went for more than a couple of dates (the other 10 never got that far), although these relationships only lasted a month or a few months. She also had a couple of ONSs when she was drunk or “girls night out” or what have you which she regrets (let’s say 3 over 11 years). And then maybe 1-2 times with “between guys” after breakups with one of the 4 previous BFs. When you add that all up, you get to a total N, at 26 when she meets the man she will marry, of 18-19, depending. And what I just described is in no way considered slutty or promiscuous by the general secular culture in 2014. So she would fall slightly over the N < (age) * (0.5)" rule of thumb, but still comfortably below the "N = (age)" limit. And, if this woman avoided the ONSs and other "in between guys", her N goes down to 14-15, which is still above the rule of thumb of 13 for her age, but only very slightly, so would probably get a pass even from people using the rule of thumb, really. She would then be very comfortably below the "N = (age)" flag.
Of course, for many (not all) Christian men, N = 17-18 by 26 would be a deal breaker, but for the more secularized ones, and certainly in the secular culture as a whole, N = 17-18 is within the normal range and not considered slutty or promiscuous.
The key text, which appears to have been eaten up when I edited it, should not read:
“Most average, secular people are okay with N (age) you really see who is an “insecure judgmental asshole with a small penis” and who isn’t!”
but
“Most average, secular people are okay with a rule of thumb of “N (age)” that you really see who is an “insecure judgmental asshole with a small penis” and who isn’t!”