Am I the only one not bothered by the past sexual experiences

>>18609454
I met one other dude. Its not normal, but I'm not gonna talk you out of dating sluts. Thats your business man. Everyone has preferences.

>>18609454

if you love, you don't care

>>18609467
Enjoy that naive side of life bro. Says a lot about your character.

>>18609454
Because the people who come to this site are a bunch of retarded faggots (literal autistic gay kids) who are too afraid to speak what's on their mind. God forbid those mean internet strangers hut my feewings :- (

If you don't mind high-mileage beat up cunt then more power to you dude. It doesn't matter.

>>18609483
What are you trying to say exactly?

File: Screenshot_9.png (318KB, 530x348px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 530x348px

OP here:

I just think it's stupid to focus on the past.

Females in this era are very open to sex. You'll have girls banging at the age of 12. It's very common.

If the girl you're dating has been with 5 guys, that's not going to change wether you're upset or not, so you shouldn't let it bother you.

Will you even find a virgin?

And, even if you do, are you not afraid that all of her sexual repression will explode and she'll just cheat or something?

>>18609514
Okay, like I said, good for you. It will make dating easier for you. You're obviously insecure because you called me naive and lashed out and me when I literally said "thats fine, but not everyone feels that way"

>>18609520
OP here:

I'm not the one that called you naive. There's 5 posters in this thread.

OP Here:

I really want to discuss this. Maybe you guys can prove me wrong, show me why I'm in the minority.

All I see are people bashing eachother

File: vhofi2glnnez.jpg (159KB, 1900x569px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1900x569px

>>18609532
My bad

>>18609543
I don't care what you do and I am not going to try and convince you that you are in the wrong or anything, because I think it's preference, but I like to explore sexuality together and not jump into a made bed, if that makes sense.
Naturally, that goes both ways and I wouldn't expect anything I can't offer myself (except for tits, I don't have those)

File: 1412503514383.gif (933KB, 245x285px) Image search: [Google]

933KB, 245x285px

>>18609467

>Any girl that has had sex before is a slut

because when you have a lot of something you value you it less.

Im not hooked on virgins, but I don't care if a girl fucked like 20 guys and shes in her mid 20s. But if you're talking like gang bangs and a shit ton of guys, that is off putting.

>>18609731
ah yes that must be why I don't care about food or water then. I have so much of it so it's so easy to just drop! Food simply isn't the same as when I was a toddler and nothing can compare.

>>18609773
I don't mean in extreme cases.

Look at countries like India that lack clean drinking water and they shower with a 5 gallon bucket. Go watch a youtube video how they get water. How much do you think they value clean drinking water? In America we pour it on the ground (water our lawns and golf courses) and swim/shower in it.

It doesn't mean you don't care about it.

>>18609790
You're shifting the argument from frequency to scarcity. I don't stop enjoying the act of eating because I've been eating my whole life.

This isn't about the availability of sex, it's the sexual history of the person.

>>18609823
Not the guy you're replying to, but your food and water comparison is a shitty comparison because it's a false equivalency. Eating and drinking aren't an intimate moment for a person, they are absolutely vital for life. Sex isn't. Sex is a "need" because intimacy is an important part of human nature and interaction.

Studies show that the less sexual partners you've had, the more likely a marriage is to last, and vice versa. Some people don't like the idea of a person who has been intimate with many people because it can show personality flaws like a lack of commitment.

If you want to have sex with a whole bunch of people, and don't care how many people they've had sex with, then go right ahead. And if someone wishes for sex to be more intimate and do care about how many partners someone has had, then they're fine to do that too. I really don't know why a personal preference is such an issue for people on this website.

>>18609823
Not the guy you're replying to, but your food and water comparison is a shitty comparison because it's a false equivalency. Eating and drinking aren't an intimate moment for a person, they are absolutely vital for life. Sex isn't. Sex is a "need" because intimacy is an important part of human nature and interaction.

Studies show that the less sexual partners you've had, the more likely a marriage is to last, and vice versa. Some people don't like the idea of a person who has been intimate with many people because it can show personality flaws like a lack of commitment.

If you want to have sex with a whole bunch of people, and don't care how many people they've had sex with, then go right ahead. And if someone wishes for sex to be more intimate and do care about how many partners someone has had, then they're fine to do that too. I really don't know why a personal preference is such an issue for people on this website.

>>18609874
>>18609877
I don't know why it did the reply twice, but I guess it just emphasized my point lmao

>>18609877
>>18609874

Sex isn't a need at all. I'm making the food comparison because I don't usually eat or drink on the basis of "vital need", it's usually due to my desire. I'm not on the brink of starvation or severely dehydrated when I'm getting these things and it's mostly just an allegory. I value these things because they quell my desires based on internal drives. You can also have intimacy without sex, and sex without intimacy.


>Studies show that the less sexual partners you've had, the more likely a marriage is to last, and vice versa.

Show me some evidence rather than just throwing out a claim like this.

I don't mind too much because I'm not an insecure fgt but after she has to much bodies on her its more of a hygiene thing more than it is her being slut. Like that's gross a stupid amount of dicks being in the same girl

Because you're probably not sxually repressed yourself, and that's why you can live with a person who wasn't either.

People here want virgins or """low mileage""" women because that's what they are themselves. From observation I can say thay the amount itself isn't really what bothers people, it's the diffefence in the amounts. People who had X partners can live with partners that had X+Y%, where Y% is lower than 100 and is what really bother people.

As long as people are on the same level, they're usually happy.

>>18609903
I'd figure you'd do a little bit of your own research, but here you go:
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5698440

http://www.medicaldaily.com/sex-marriage-premarital-sex-divorce-rate-sex-partners-first-comes-loves-then-390269

https://winteryknight.com/2016/06/07/new-study-women-who-have-fewer-premarital-sex-partners-have-lower-risk-of-divorce/

I gave you multiple sources stating the same thing, so it should be sufficient.

>>18609981
And I don't say that to be facetious, but people have the tendency to say fake news for everything now. Again, I really don't give a fuck what your sexual activities are, but there's also sound logic to keeping your body count down.

File: 1495218659825.gif (2MB, 270x188px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 270x188px

>>18609454
I wouldn't want my gf to have a long sexual history, but that's only because I'm not interested in casual sex, or FWB's, or any of that. To me, sex means a bit more, so I'd only have sex if I was in a relationship, so I'd think it would be nice to be on the same page when it comes to sex and stuff.

If she's had partners in the past (during a relationship) I wouldn't mind, unless she just had a string of very short relationships. I'm pretty long term oriented, and I would rather not have my first relationship to be a really short one; but I'm just and idealist and who knows? Maybe I end up sleeping with some random chick one day; I'd hope not; but in the case that I do engage in things I look down upon, I can't look down on others for doing the same. I'd be a hypocrite.

But for now, I just want someone similar to me.

I always find discussing past experiences to be awkward

I am married now but my rule was I was not going to marry anyone with more sexual partners than me.

>>18609454
Definitely not specifically attracted to virgins. However, I do believe that trying to have a relationship with someone who holds a different view on sex is a bad idea. Obviously someone who wants to save themselves for marriage and someone who is willing to sleep on the first date are incompatible.
Sex to me is intimate and meaningful and I wouldn't want a partner who thinks otherwise.

>>18609454
Most people feel that way. But look where you are. Most people aren't here.

>>18609981
>Inferring causation from correlation.

>>18610237
Correlation=Causation.

>>18609454
Well Im a 21 year old virgin and I've only ever had one girlfriend. I would prefer a virgin because I would feel so much more connected and confident. See girls by my age have already pretty much been there done that when it comes to sexy stuffs. I'm too awkward to make something sexual. Some girl I knew from high school tried to devirginize me but I wasn't really feeling it and was too nervous to even get a boner so after I left she just lit me up on snapchat telling everyone about my small ass dick not even being able to get hard. Nice way to add insult to injury. So after that experience I stopped paying attention to girls and more attention to spanking the cock. No way I'm ever getting humiliated like that again.

>>18610258
Hahaha. No.

Anyone who claims to only bother with virgins clearly hasn't been with a virgin yet. They're awful in bed and I'd honestly stay away if a girl told me she's never been in the sheets before.

>>18609454
Virgins are great if you know what you're doing and can teach them to cater to what you like and when you do that they end up looking the same stuff which forms a great sexual relationship.

Lazy people dislike virgins because they just want a quick fix.

>>18609454
Because sex means different things to everybody.

Some people enjoy the physical contact.
Some enjoy the intimacy and aftermath of it more.
Some people may want to be on the same level of experience as their partner.

Because of that, people from those groups feel differently and it directly affects the sexual compatibility with others.

How is this hard to understand?

>>18610258

Yeah. No.

>>18610541
>awful in bed
who fucking cares, it's not about performance

Im the same, Dont get me wrong I hate the thought of her fucking another dude but its a reality, Even been in a threesome with 2 dude but can I really judge her seeming ive been in a threesome with 2 girls?

>>18610650
Sex is also about performance.
You can put whatever higher meaning you want on it, but if you don't get orgasms out of it you'll do it less often.

>>18609454
Honestly I hold no reservations against people that aren't bothered by a girl's sexual past. Your dating pool is significantly larger, thus you'll have a far more diverse dating experience as opposed to those that restrict themselves to virgins.
This is about the only real benefit to not caring about a girl's past though. It's a good mindset to have in the social sense (no one will shame you for it), but otherwise it's no better or worse than giving a shit about a girl's past.

>>18610718
Being unwilling to date a girl because she won't be good in bed is retarded as fuck though. If the most important thing to you is performance you're just a whore.

>>18610237
>"g-give me evidence for your claims!"
>gives evidence
>"your evidence was flawed and I'll provide absolutely no evidence to prove this assertion!"
Yeah, I figured that's how this conversation would go, which is why gave multiple sources. It's all just #fakenews though, right?

>>18610921
It's because faggots that are virgins when they are married don't divorce since they are sexually repressed retards and can't get other girls so they are stuck with that one.

File: giphy (3).gif (3MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x270px

>>18610576
Can you not have intimacy with someone who has had several partners?

Can someone who has had several partners not love you?

>>18610718
>>18610819

If you buy a new phone, you'll love it, even if it's a piece of shit iPhone. After a few months, to a few years, you'll be fed up with how shitty it is.

Yeah, to you virgins, a chick that lays on her back in bed and lets you use her like a fleshlight is appealing, but it gets boring.

You want someone who knows how to use their hips, who has the right friction/suction/enthusiasm for a bj.

>>18610937
You're right, virgins never gain experience because they have sex with the same person. Women who have sex with a lot of men are instantly born with that experience and were never virgins.

Also, virgins are ALWAYS terrible at sex, and experienced women are absolutely always great at it. And if they don't perform to your liking, it's absolutely impossible to talk to them about your sexual desires. No, you need an experienced woman to do that for you. Because experienced women were never virgins who learned how to have please someone with sex over time. They were always experienced, and virgins are always in experienced. You're absolutely right.

>>18609454
One of the worst lays in my life was with a girl that had over 40 partners. It got better over time but at first she was awkward, couldn't move it and blowjobs unimpressive. She told me most of her sexual experiences was one time with a guy and they crawled on, pounded away, got a nut and gone. She was a hole connected to a good looking girl and she learned nothing from each encounter.

Thanks for taking the used up cum dumpsters so I don't have to

I appreciate it, op

>>18610937
>women are like phones
>strawmanning this hard
Just kill yourself.

>>18611048
No, you're wrong. Women are merely objects like an iPhone. They're not loving creatures who can share the same values and hobbies as you, and anyone that thinks otherwise is just a repressed virgin.

No cherry, no marry.

Whores don't get to be loved they chose it themselves LMAO

>>18611027
thats kinda sad & hilarious at the same time..
why would she continue doing it tho...

File: 1481366851197.jpg (3MB, 4920x4161px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4920x4161px

>>18609514
Virgins are actually far less likely to cheat, you autist.

tl;dr: Non-virgin women are absolute trash, they have nothing to offer anyone, and only a moron would date them.

>>18609454
Virgings are like new toys you get that nobody has. If you know what your doing you can train them and teach the Virgin new things. Remember someone had your slut girlfriend as a Virgin and taught her well.

>>18611511
what the fuck, the chart right (non-marital partners/long marriage) in the middle cant be right, Im all for slut shaming, but those figures are scary, huh

>>18611511
Have you actually had sex before? If so how often?

>>18611524
It's probably pretty accurate. Very few people get married earlier than 25 and stay married for long, marriages early in life have very high chances of divorce.

The only people who get married that early and are still virgin when they marry are usually extremely religious and they don't really divorce, even if the marriage is unhappy.
While volunteering with a christian organisation I've met a few people like that. This dude, for example, told me him and his wife hadn't had sex in 7 years (had been married for 10) and don't talk since 5 years ago but they can't get divorced because they're deeply catholic, even if they hate the shit out of each other.

>>18611524
>slut shaming
>even using that as a term
Shoot yourself in the face holy fuck

>>18611524
They're absolutely terrifying. Keep in mind, too, that 69% of marriages in the U.S. are initiated by women, and 'dissatisfaction' is one of the most cited reasons for it.

>>18611545
I learned after dealing with White Knight nationalists on /pol/ that my answer to this doesn't matter.

If I say I'm not a virgin, you'll simply accuse me of being a hypocrite and needing to have the same standards for others that I have for myself. Conversely, if I claim I am virgin, you'll simply tell me that I have a romanticized view of sex that will change after actually having it.

How is that relevant to the data posted? It seems you just want to move away from that.

>>18611578
Have you actually read the studies you're citing?
Out of curiosity.

>>18611574
chill brah,
I'm using it as an encompassing verb, I've never shamed anybody for their sexual past,
though I usually don't even attempt to maintain any relationship with they spill the beans. I simply don't find them interesting as a demographic :^)

>>18611582
Yes, I have. I had to for a Psych term paper. I also made the chart on the left, some other anon compiled it into a nice image. Is there something in the internals that you'd like to try and nitpick?

>>18611578
divorces** rather.

>>18611578
Right so you're a virgin who has no idea what your spouting. Got it
Post more christian studies you nerd

File: 1467381823051.jpg (50KB, 520x336px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 520x336px

>>18611611
>muh Christian studies
Please, feel free to find studies that disagree with me. It's worth pointing out that researchers like Kinsey et al. all have massive flaws with their methodology, and every study they've put forward can be picked apart fairly easily.

Great argument though, cuck.

>>18611621
>expecting reasoned arguments on 4chan
I hope you enjoy being call a virgin, because that's about the extent this conversation will go to.

>>18611596
Not trying to nitpick, just find the mere statistics a little superficial and stupid.
When you read the actual studies, I feel like they give some actual perspective on the reason why there is a correlation between the number of partners and the marriage stability and it feels extremely simplistic to just quote the statistics.

Also, a lot of people don't realise that unless you wait till marriage you're not in the high happiness/never getting divorced ever category. Just pointing that out.

>>18611048
That's an analogy. It's not a strawman.

Don't use fucking terms you don't understand you special needs motherfucker.

>>18609478
This. I used to want to only date another virgin but my current boyfriend is perfect even if he's had sex.

>>18609454
>Why are you guys hooked on virgins?

because they absorb the DNA of their past sexual partners and this includes women without sons.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3458919/

>>18612008
Goodbye I'm sick of seeing that shit everywhere it's not true

>>18612018
so you are saying a scientific article with 56 reference is not true?

>>18611741
The two greentexts were unrelated you fucking mongoloid. End your life.

>>18612008
Have you read the article you linked?
Traces of DNA in their brain, and they got them from the male fetuses.
Nothing to do with past sexual partners.

>>18612039
this is exactly why I said this included women without sons.


"Besides known pregnancies, other possible sources of male microchimerism include unrecognized spontaneous abortion, vanished male twin, an older brother transferred by the maternal circulation, or sexual intercourse."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16084184

>>18612049
Again, there's no proof.

It says that they found traces of microchimerism but that they don't know the cause. That the most likely cause is bearing a male fetus.
No proof that it is in any way linked to past sexual partners.

>>18612008
So?

>>18612008

I don't think you actually read this study. I mean, maybe you did and you just didn't understand it but the study never confirmed what you're claiming.

>>18612008

Not only does this study provide no evidence for your claim but the concept of virginity has been an evolving theme in human sociology for thousands of years, much much longer than the existence of this study that doesn't even prove anything.

Claiming that men are hooked on virginity because of some unsubstantiated claim you made up about a study they've never heard of is absolutely asinine.

File: Autism-Organic.png (58KB, 853x572px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 853x572px

>>18610921
The links you posted are just two studies that were self-reported surveys. That's not really showing any evidence, and the results can't really be spread thinner to apply to your point.

>>18611511
>throws a bunch of charts out without any actual links to the studies

pic related to you guys throwing out junk studies as evidence.

>>18611511
Dude, your charts are all over the place. It's all correlation, without examining why the results are as they are. The charts on the left account for 12 years and younger being miserable, but it could likely be they were sexually abused as kids, so of course those chicks end up crazy. Also, these charts don't really account for why the virgins are happier and stabler. A lot of them are probably religious, which is a good stablizing factor for anyone. You're assuming that promiscuity causes unhappiness, unfaithfulness, and poor character, but it could be that the latter qualities cause the former. Also, assuming I'm reading it correctly, the chart in the top middle is about men who cheat, not women.

All that said, there's still probably some truth to charts, but I already spilled my autism everywhere

>>18609454
How many dudes?

>>18613048
>pic related to you guys throwing out junk studies as evidence.

Citations are linked m8. I even did you a solid and linked to Molymeme specifically who compiled them all on a web page where you can easily copy and paste.

Why should I care about your opinion on the quality of studies when you're too stupid to notice citations at the bottom?

lol i'm putting basically zero odds that any of the guys here talking about 'sluts' have ever had a healthy relationship.


Seriously, this is a stupid 4chan obsession. Normal people do not care, and I would be concerned if anyone I knew was this obsessed

>>18609487
are you a retarded faggot?

>>18609454
Tbh it does bug me a lot. Having lost my virginity to her, but she having lost her virginity to some other guy while she knew me kind of hurts. I know she loves me lots, but sometimes when life gets hard and I get insecure, I always end up feeling like I was just a shitty back up option/inferior. Also number of partners doesnt correlate to how good at sex someone is. A girl/guy doing nothing is just them not having done their research.

>>18613786

Question to think about -- do you date her because you get to have sex, or because you care about her? Do you think SHE dates you because she gets to have sex, or because she cares about you?

If anything, the fact she's had previous partners, left them, and dated you, demonstrates she cares about you, not about your agility with your dick.

>>18609454
Every guy I know in real life has the opinion that fucking virgins is too much work, and not worth the time. Why sirens so much time training someone when there are so many available women that already have some idea of what they're doing.
Honestly, the only thing I'm going to care about is if I'm better in bed than her previous lovers, but that's because I'm competitive about that sort of thing. Most people on here are insecure and inexperienced, so a woman with previous sexual experience is very intimidating.

>>18613804
Thanks anon, that's a really nice way to think about it. I date her obviously because I love her. Sex with her is great because I love her, but it's not that great that I'd stay if I didnt like her.

>>18613814

No problem!

>>18613774
>haha you don't want to date a girl who's literally had miles of dick in her? you must have issues

the only boys who want virgins are other virgins. that's the between the normies here and the wayward robots bringing their bitterness over to /adv/. they get mad over girls who fuck mostly because it reduces their pool of who they'd let themselves fuck (tho lets not fool ourselves, these virgins would fuck the first girl that let em)

>>18613894

Literally why do you care? You have issues because it says a lot that you care about that

>>18610819
I lost my virginity to a really good friend whom I still adored. It was absolutely terrible sex and because I realized how unsatisfying bad sex can be, I can honestly say that I will never date or marry someone who's bad at fucking.

One night stands aren't my thing, and I don't do random dicks or FWB, but if I date someone and things get serious, I'm going to want to sample them sexually to see if we're compatible. To me, spending the rest of my life with someone who will always leaving me feeling empty in that regard would be unbearable, because I want to spend the rest of my life with someone who makes me happy in every aspect of our relationship. I don't want to be a slut dumpster, but at the same time I'm not going to settle for someone who will leave me feeling like I'm missing out and wanting more.

I think the guys who are okay with someone having multiple sex partners probably feel the same way.

>>18609454
i think its bc it gives the man a superior feeling to know he is the first, and bc women are known as a heavenly temple

>>18614060
> women are known as a heavenly temple

Specifically, known this way by people with literal 0 experience with women

>>18614045
Your sexual promiscuity says a lot about who you are.
Why do you care that I don't want to date sluts? It's not like it affects you, in fact I'm the one who's penalized by it.

>>18614045
Not him but why do you think it's strange to want to date someone with a similar view on sex as yourself? If you're someone who thinks sex is a very intimate and personal thing it makes sense not to date someone who wants more than just one partner.

>>18614099

Calling people sluts because they aren't virgins says much more about you, sooooooo

>>18614223
I never implied non virgins were sluts.
>soooo
Is this bait?

>>18614050
It just seems kind if ridiculous to have that attitude to me. Sex is a skill and as long as my partner is enthusiastic and into me I don't care if the sex is kinda bad at the beginning. It's a smaller issue when talking about marriage than other factors that will have a bigger affect on your life.

>>18613978
>whore pretends to be smart: the post
Whores are really really really fucking dumb x100

>>18614223
You're definitely a whore can smell the odours through the screen