Support NeoGAF

[Vermillion]

Of course, you're also taking this as a bad correlation. I'd suggest that some divorces are actually good, and that one possible underlying cause here is that people who are less likely to have premarital sex are also less likely to seek divorce in a failed marriage.

Ah! I wanted to say this, too. Particularly of religious people - many don't believe in premarital sex or divorce.

And another thing - many people are assuming that these relationships go bad because of the person who had many sexual partners. It could easily be that the men in these relationships weren't comfortable with that fact - exactly as the premise of this thread.

Also the thought that a woman who is promiscuous is better at sex then someone with significantly less partners is laughable. My worst lays bar none have been the girls whomgot around a lot.

Well that's certainly odd.

EDIT:

But it doesn't say the reason for the divorce. People staying together in a marriage instead of divorcing doesn't make that a healthy relationship either. You'd need to list the reasons for divorce to clarify the issues with more sexual partners. It could be that the people with more sexual partners have perspective and don't feel the need to stay in a dysfunctional marriage. Without the real numbers on what initiated the divorce you can spin it any way you want.

Indeed - I said as much. Though yes, reasons for divorce is another thing to add.

 

[lmpaler]

Boyfriend says I have roast beef vagina...?

I'm going to assume this falls under when a woman tells you you have a small dick. It's just to hurt you because they want to essentially win a fight or hurt you so they feel better.


We all know when a girl tells you your dick is plenty big enough she's full of shit right? I mean as soon as you break up the truth will surface

 

[readLeader]

Third paragraph from the bottom.

That is in reference to the paragraph before it, where he says the results don't allow ruling out the second potential explanation he gives in his study, which basically are "girls who are predisposed to divorce with higher likelihood start having sex early on" (selection explanation) and "girls who start having sex early on develop characteristics that increase their likelihood of divorce" (causation explanation). He doesn't say that these cases are in traumatic context, he says that if there was traumatic context, then the causation explanation would seem natural.

 

[BamYouHaveAids]

Ah! I wanted to say this, too. Particularly of religious people - many don't believe in premarital sex or divorce.

And another thing - many people are assuming that these relationships go bad because of the person who had many sexual partners. It could easily be that the men in these relationships weren't comfortable with that fact - exactly as the premise of this thread.



Well that's certainly odd.

Not really my theory at least in my experience is that since they only had a bunch of casual hookups they never really learned what gets their partner off like someone in a long committed relationship does--they never adjusted to get their partners off. Also since they get laid at will they probably didn't have to put much effort into the encounters. I mean that is the only thing that made sense to me..

 

[To Far Away Times]

It's not the number so much, it's rather my parter was in a relationship or not.

 

[Vermillion]

That is in reference to the paragraph before it, where he says the results don't allow ruling out the second potential explanation he gives in his study, which basically are "girls who are predisposed to divorce with higher likelihood start having sex early on" (selection explanation) and "girls who start having sex early on develop characteristics that increase their likelihood of divorce" (causation explanation). He doesn't say that these cases are in traumatic context, he says that if there was traumatic context, then the causation explanation would seem natural.

Okay, I don't entirely know what he's getting at there, as he never gives examples of what sorts of behavior or beliefs that cause women to believe that having sex as a teenager causes predispositions to divorce or attitudes that promote divorce. Off of the top of my head, I can think of one - religious beliefs, and that... well.

That said, he did also say this:

A first sexual experience that was unwanted or not completely wanted was strongly associated with divorce. If the young woman chose to lose her virginity as a teen, the results were more nuanced.

And you can note the juxtaposition of unwanted/not completely wanted with choosing, implying that they did not choose to have sex.

Not really my theory at least in my experience is that since they only had a bunch of casual hookups they never really learned what gets their partner off like someone in a long committed relationship does--they never adjusted to get their partners off. Also since they get laid at will they probably didn't have to put much effort into the encounters. I mean that is the only thing that made sense to me..

...Interesting. Huh. I'll keep that one in mind.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

It's not the number so much, it's rather my parter was in a relationship or not.

Why, though?

 

[superpickleman]

People are entitled to enjoying sex with as many partners as they see fit.

 

[dekline]

Sex is fun.

 

[goldenpp72]

Why, though?

Standards, self control, class, many variables can lead to someone finding this desirable. I mean, if I told you the girl you end up with could either be a virgin or someone who slept with 50 guys, which would you choose? I'm curious how many people would be able to say it truly does not matter to them in any way.

 

[params7]

Why, though?

Because he'd like a partner who isn't already emotionally attached to another - which is usually the case in relationships? Its really as simple as that.

 

[readLeader]

Okay, I don't entirely know what he's getting at there, as he never gives examples of what sorts of behavior or beliefs that cause women to believe that having sex as a teenager causes predispositions to divorce or attitudes that promote divorce. Off of the top of my head, I can think of one - religious beliefs, and that... well.

That said, he did also say this:



And you can note the juxtaposition of unwanted/not completely wanted with choosing, implying that they did not choose to have sex.

I probably should have gone to his bibliography and cited some other study that doesn't have ambiguous terms like "not completely wanted"/"completely unwanted" without going into details; but I couldn't find anything about the beliefs of the women involved being analyzed with regard to their correlation with divorce rates (although he lists some studies that analyze that), it's strictly about "first sex when, wanted/not entirely wanted/unwanted, more than one premarital partner?" Btw. I never linked the complete study itself, probably should've done that, so here it is.

 

[Derwind]

In all honesty, I'd be more affected by the quality of people shes been with over the quantity.

I mean when I'm told that I'm the best shes ever had, thats like life affirming stuff. I'm Superman the whole god damn day. Existence validated!

Standards, self control, class, many variables can lead to someone finding this desirable. I mean, if I told you the girl you end up with could either be a virgin or someone who slept with 50 guys, which would you choose? I'm curious how many people would be able to say it truly does not matter to them in any way.

Sorry but it really doesn't, at least for me, also class/selfcontrol/standards what have you are not representative of a person who has a sex life and a person who doesn't. All that you're doing is making blanket insults.

 

[subrock]

Too many for a girl is none of my fucking business.

 

[LuchaShaq]

As long as she doesn't cheat or have an incurable std I can't imagine giving a fuck unless I had massive massive insecurities and probably need time with a therapist.

Standards, self control, class, many variables can lead to someone finding this desirable. I mean, if I told you the girl you end up with could either be a virgin or someone who slept with 50 guys, which would you choose? I'm curious how many people would be able to say it truly does not matter to them in any way.

Having sex with a virgin is awful.

500 guys> 0 guys.

Why would I care if a potential sexual partner had sex with 1 guy 600 times over the course of a 4 relationship or 600 one night stands? (As long as STDs/cheating weren't issues).

My fiance has a much much lower number than me, but that is mostly because she only dated girls for years before we met.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Standards, self control, class, many variables can lead to someone finding this desirable. I mean, if I told you the girl you end up with could either be a virgin or someone who slept with 50 guys, which would you choose? I'm curious how many people would be able to say it truly does not matter to them in any way.

I'd choose the virgin, honestly.

I'm that weird guy that has no problem teaching a girl and being patient with lack of experience. *shrug* Just the way I am.

That and popping cherries is fun.

 

[LuchaShaq]

That and popping cherries is fun.

Spoken like a man who might have popped a cherry in highschool or never has.

Doing so with an adult are basically the only times I regret having sex with someone.

 

[BamYouHaveAids]

As long as she doesn't cheat or have an incurable std I can't imagine giving a fuck unless I had massive massive insecurities and probably need time with a therapist.

.

Saying someone who prefers their spouse has less partners needs a therapist is as stupid as saying someone who has a high number needs to see a therapist. Not everyone values sex the same way as you do (your world view isn't law or correct, it;'s just you personal preference). Most of you are being enormous hypocrites advocated people have the right to be promiscuous while chastising those that place higher value on sex and thus are more selective with their partners.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Standards, self control, class, many variables can lead to someone finding this desirable. I mean, if I told you the girl you end up with could either be a virgin or someone who slept with 50 guys, which would you choose? I'm curious how many people would be able to say it truly does not matter to them in any way.

It really doesn't matter to me in any way. I've slept with both a virgin and someone who's been with about 50 guys, and I felt exactly the same about both of them: completely in love. That's how relationships work. The past doesn't matter at all other than in that it has shaped the person into who they are while you are with them.

So the OP's friend is into this girl for two months, wanting to be with her for who she is now, and then finds out she's done 30 people, and he now decides he has a problem with that despite being fine with her before? Total bullshit.

The very first word of your post: "standards." I consider my partner, no matter how many people she's been with, to have high fucking standards because she's picked me. That's all that matters.

 

[Derwind]

My fiance has a much much lower number than me, but that is mostly because she only dated girls for years before we met.

Go on...

 

[User 100115]

Saying someone who prefers their spouse has less partners needs a therapist is as stupid as saying someone who has a high number needs to see a therapist. Not everyone values sex the same way as you do (your world view isn't law or correct, it;'s just you personal preference). Most of you are being enormous hypocrites advocated people have the right to be promiscuous while chastising those that place higher value on sex and thus are more selective with their partners.

But if you loved someone and they loved you, why would matter how many other people they have slept with, ya know? Breaking up with someone over it kinda weird. Sure, if it upsets you in the beginning, don't date that person.

 

[dekline]

I would love to spend a day with louise and martine fokkens.

 

[params7]

Standards, self control, class, many variables can lead to someone finding this desirable. I mean, if I told you the girl you end up with could either be a virgin or someone who slept with 50 guys, which would you choose? I'm curious how many people would be able to say it truly does not matter to them in any way.

It truly wouldn't matter to me in any way whatsoever. Sex is an extremely important part of most relationships out there. One of the girls I know loves having sex, the other I have no fucking clue about but it could turn out she loves it just as much. It makes no difference in the end. From here I'd just see if our chemistry and interests align and that's all there is to it.

I don't see why people who associated standards and class with how much sex a person has and with how many people. Respect and Class should come from the nature of the person and how they help the society around them. There are nuns and priests out there that are despicable human beings but hey - they never had sex so they must be people of fucking immense standards and class!

 

[FrostuTheNinja]

Honestly, if you're trying to squeeze someone else into some sort of "partner rubric", I'd argue that maybe the relationship isn't for you.

People can impose such strange and crass rules on each other...

 

[Vermillion]

I probably should have gone to his bibliography and cited some other study that doesn't have ambiguous terms like "not completely wanted"/"completely unwanted" without going into details; but I couldn't find anything about the beliefs of the women involved being analyzed with regard to their correlation with divorce rates (although he lists some studies that analyze that), it's strictly about "first sex when, wanted/not entirely wanted/unwanted, more than one premarital partner?" Btw. I never linked the complete study itself, probably should've done that, so here it is.

Is it possible that you could tell me the page number of the relevant parts? Where does he define "not completely wanted and unwanted"? Why does he suggest those traumatic experiences as examples if they're irrelevant to his study? Why does the study focus on women? Why doesn't he mention that divorce could be positive? How much is the "some" when it comes to increased risk?

 

[Evolution_1ne]

Plenty of things people look for in a partner don't really matter in the context of a relationship but people care about anyway, with height as an example.

It all just comes down to personal preference for whatever reason, so I don't understand why we're being so aggressive about people having preferences in their partners.

ehhh I don't look at physical attractions the same way, after all a short woman can or wont have as much sex as a taller woman.

how much sex a female has had has no effect on her quality as a human being so why should you care. Hmmm maybe it's just me.

 

[BamYouHaveAids]

But if you loved someone and they loved you, why would matter how many other people they have slept with, ya know? Breaking up with someone over it kinda weird. Sure, if it upsets you in the beginning, don't date that person.

Because it shows fundamentally they have different values? Some people have a romanticized notion of sex as if it is the ultimate form on intimacy others like me see it as something that is just fun I don't hold it as particularly valuable or cherish it just as something fun to do. If you're planning on spending your life with a person it' best to find someone as closely as compatible to you as possible--especially on important matters like religion, sex, politics etc...

Also I think it's way too early to say you love someone two months in. That is still the honeymoon phase.

 

[Colocho]

My ex is 19 (I'm 24 if that matters) and by the age of 18 she had had 12 guys, I thought it was a bit too much for her age, but I still didn't really care about it when she was with me. She has had at least 2 more that I know of since we broke up around march, fucking bitch.

 

[readLeader]

Is it possible that you could tell me the page number of the relevant parts? Where does he define "not completely wanted and unwanted"? Why does he suggest those traumatic experiences as examples if they're irrelevant to his study? Why does the study focus on women? Why doesn't he mention that divorce could be positive? How much is the "some" when it comes to increased risk?

Relevant parts: I don't really know how to answer this. The section on methodology seemed relevant to me, I didn't read the parts on observation bias and his statistics constructions. I assume the last two pages along with the first four or so will give you a somewhat decent picture. He doesn't define "wanted" etc. beyond those terms, he says those were the possible answers to the question the study group was asked with regard to whether they wanted their first encounter. Traumatic experiences are suggested as a possible influence on why earlier first experiences have a higher correlation with divorce. Why he focuses on women is somewhat loosely described in the introduction, but it basically says "there's immense interest in that in academia and society at large because teenage sex is linked to STD spread, unstable marriages and early, unwanted pregnancy and there's little literature on this". He doesn't mention that divorce can be positive but I don't really know why. From the language that is used, I had the impression that divorce in general (though not in every specific case) is considered sociologically undesirable. How much is "some", I didn't filter out the specifics for that from the tables he gives; I'm not sure it's quantifiable from those, though.

 

[SteveWinwood]

I knew this thread was gonna be great.

 

[lmpaler]

As long as she doesn't cheat or have an incurable std I can't imagine giving a fuck unless I had massive massive insecurities and probably need time with a therapist.




Having sex with a virgin is awful.

500 guys> 0 guys.

Why would I care if a potential sexual partner had sex with 1 guy 600 times over the course of a 4 relationship or 600 one night stands? (As long as STDs/cheating weren't issues).

My fiance has a much much lower number than me, but that is mostly because she only dated girls for years before we met.

Hot

 

[TacticalFox88]

My ex is 19 (I'm 24 if that matters) and by the age of 18 she had had 12 guys, I thought it was a bit too much for her age, but I still didn't really care about it when she was with me. She has had at least 2 more that I know of since we broke up around march, fucking bitch.

:lol

I'm fucking dead.

 

[Evolution_1ne]

that there Jezebel don't follow dem Christian values, gotta cut her loose and pray that she overcums her wicked ways. AMEN



btw: is it A-MEN or AH-MEN?

 

[Unbounded]

how much sex a female has had has no effect on her quality as a human being so why should you care. Hmmm maybe it's just me.

I agree, how much sex anyone has had doesn't have any effect on their quality as a human being and we shouldn't care. BUT there are other factors that we as human beings tend to care about that also have no effect on their quality as a human being and they have absolutely zero control over. (In this case, being all of the physical attractions.)

We completely accept that despite it making little sense, that people WILL prefer partners who fulfill a set of uncontrollable traits, so why is it so hard for some of us in this thread to accept that some people may prefer a set of traits completely controlled by the person?

 

[SteveWinwood]

that there Jezebel don't follow dem Christian values, gotta cut her loose and pray that she overcums her wicked ways. AMEN



btw: is it A-MEN or AH-MEN?

X MEN

 

[FyreWulff]

that there Jezebel don't follow dem Christian values, gotta cut her loose and pray that she overcums her wicked ways. AMEN



btw: is it A-MEN or AH-MEN?

All Men

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

We completely accept that despite it making little sense, that people WILL prefer partners who fulfill a set of uncontrollable traits, so why is it so hard for some of us in this thread to accept that some people may prefer a set of traits completely controlled by the person?

It isn't that as much as the shaming and ridicule that come with it. I won't support making people feel like shit for living a good life that hurt no one.

 

[Ken Masters]

Marriage material? 5 TOPS

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Marriage material? 5 TOPS

I'm marriage material!

 

[Chance Hale]

The amount of partners a woman has had doesn't really bother me morally at all. Things like amount of partners and potential for infidelity or character aren't really related. I will admit though I might be a bit nervous if I was with a woman who had over 30 partners at first just because I would worry about being able to compete given I haven't been with many. Ie I'm sure someone among that group of 30 men is a sex god who gave her 5 orgasms in one session or something of that nature. That's my issue to deal with though, and something one would work out with the women in question in terms of learning what gets her off.

 

[Madness]

Regular sex and for pleasure is a new concept. Modern contraceptives didn't always exist, and in the past, sexual intercourse almost always ended in pregnancy unless you were smart.

It's not my place to judge how many sexual partners someone has, or whether I think 5 is enough, 10, 50 etc.

In all honesty, is a girl having sex with her boyfriend 200 times in a year better or worse than a girl who had sex only 4 times, but they were all one night stands? What makes the one night stand so much different? Because it was different guys?

People need to just be smart. There is reason STD's are an epidemic now, where 1 in 4 has herpes, and 1 in 5 will contract an STI at some point in their adult life.

 

[SteveWinwood]

she'd have to have a negative amount of people for me to marry her

super pure

 

[Pumpkin King]

The thread title alone is a total double standard. Are women expected to have less than their male partner? The past is the past, that is where it belongs. As long as neither partner brings a disease from the past into the present, it is a non-issue. These discussions between couples is always about jealousy and insecurity anyway. One partner will almost always be more "experienced" than the other partner. That does not make one person better or worse than the other. Some people will have in their head a limit between normal and being too promiscuous. For your friend, to be just a few months into this relationship, he should probably bail. He will never get over her number. This is not her fault, but his. Dating a couple months anyway, nothing really lost.

 

[LuchaShaq]

Regular sex and for pleasure is a new concept.
\.

You don't know much about history do you?

There's a reason that prostitute's have been around since basically as long as society

 

[BamYouHaveAids]

It isn't that as much as the shaming and ridicule that come with it. I won't support making people feel like shit for living a good life that hurt no one.

One CAN believe everyone is entitled to have sex with whoever and as often as they like but they aren't obligated to be in a relationship with that person.

 

[Derwind]

I agree, how much sex anyone has had doesn't have any effect on their quality as a human being and we shouldn't care. BUT there are other factors that we as human beings tend to care about that also have no effect on their quality as a human being and they have absolutely zero control over. (In this case, being all of the physical attractions.)

We completely accept that despite it making little sense, that people WILL prefer partners who fulfill a set of uncontrollable traits, so why is it so hard for some of us in this thread to accept that some people may prefer a set of traits completely controlled by the person?

I think its been suggested(certainly by me) that having a preference such as "I like some who is inexperience or has been with x amount of partners" is okay. Everyone has there preferences and its their prerogative.

Now suggesting that a person who has been with x amount of people is somehow classless, dirty, irresponsible..ect...is extremely insulting.

Its like suggesting I don't date Y ethnicity because they're [insert negative qualities].... that would be considered borderline racists or hell, it is racists....

Or [short/tall] people are x,y,z(negative adjectives) type of people and therefore off limits....

Its one thing to simply say you have a preference, its start attacking people and imply negative connotations with their sex life/height/ethnicity....

:/

 

[Ken Masters]

I'm marriage material!

Will you...

 

[Evolution_1ne]

Marriage material? 5 TOPS

what, afraid she might know too much? Come to think about it this is probably why most marriages fail

I agree, how much sex anyone has had doesn't have any effect on their quality as a human being and we shouldn't care. BUT there are other factors that we as human beings tend to care about that also have no effect on their quality as a human being and they have absolutely zero control over. (In this case, being all of the physical attractions.)

We completely accept that despite it making little sense, that people WILL prefer partners who fulfill a set of uncontrollable traits, so why is it so hard for some of us in this thread to accept that some people may prefer a set of traits completely controlled by the person?

because it's silly.

that's like saying you know religion is bullshit and is detrimental to the overall progress of our species but you choose to believe in it anyway becasue "reasons"

 

[BeerSnob]

she'd have to have a negative amount of people for me to marry her

super pure

So, Extra Virgin?

 

[readLeader]

Its like suggesting I don't date Y ethnicity because they're [insert negative qualities].... that would be considered borderline racists or hell, it is racists....

Or [short/tall] people are x,y,z(negative adjectives) type of people and therefore off limits...

For what it's worth, that's not the same at all. Ethnicity and height are things you have no control over, they are not a result of your choices. Promiscuity is.