what are some books that argue against women being promiscuous?

The Bible

>>8585480

If sex is very enjoyable for both parties, then what is the harm in some women being promiscuous? It literally is just adding happiness to the world.

>>8585525
this

You should read Freud OP maybe you'd get a better understanding of how desiring to change the sexual life of others is projection of your own psychosexual complexities.

>>8585480

>women being promiscuous?
>women

You forget a gender there chief? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

>>8585480
Any important work of any major spiritual tradition.

If you realise the problems of promiscuity you should be able to grasp the problems of all sexuality and embrace celibacy though.

>>8585525
THAT'S ONLY SHORT TERM, BRAINLET PSEUD PLEB

>>8585525
Something being enjoyable doesn't mean it lead to happiness. Smoking crack is very enjoyable, but ultimately the negative consequences outweigh the positive ones.

The same goes for sex.

>>8585535
Start with the Greeks.

>>8585550
>>8585551

Alright, and sex is a healthy and natural activity. Also, there aren't any negative effects assuming birth control is used.

>>8585525
>>8585528
>>8585563
itt: people who have never actually studied psychology

>>8585563
>Alright, and sex is a healthy and natural activity.
Sex is more likely to harm one's health than to increase it.

> Also, there aren't any negative effects assuming birth control is used.
There are negative psychological and social effects. There's also the risk of disease. Birthcontrol can fail.

There are good reasons why contemplative and compassionate people have traditionally refrained from indulging in sexuality.

>>8585582
>Sex is more likely to harm one's health than to increase it.
Bullshit. Cite some studies which correlate sex with ill health outside of disease.

>There are negative psychological and social effects. There's also the risk of disease. Birthcontrol can fail.
Going for a walk can result robbery, assault, and injury due to falling.

>There are negative psychological and social effects
>psychological
Like what? There are people who can't leave the house because they are so psychologically unstable. Normal people are not going to be traumatized by sex. Unless you only mean to say that pathetic people can feel bad about it but then who gives a fuck?

>social effects
So women shouldn't be promiscuous because of social effects? Without any further argument it just rings completely hollow. Also it only can have, not will have those effects. I'm a tradey, should I give a fuck about being a vegetarian and liking literature because it can have ill-social effects?

The best arguments you will be able to find will be on /r9k/ (and that should tell you something about the point that you are trying to argue)

Friendly reminder that since /lit/ is unmoderated, self-moderation is required. Hide and ignore off-topic threads instead of replying to them.

The Qua'ran

>>8586615
There are studies that show a correlation between the number of sexual partners a woman has had and self reported unhappiness. Also studies that show an inhibited ability to form close relationships when women have more sexual partners.
Look them up yourself, I don't care enough to convince you.
Having lots of sex isn't unhealthy, but having lots of different partners is. At least for women.

>>8586634
Something related

Study: The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness

“By many objective measures the lives of women in the United States have improved over the past 35 years, yet we show that measures of subjective well-being indicate that women’s happiness has declined both absolutely and relative to men. The paradox of women’s declining relative well-being is found across various datasets, measures of subjective well-being, and is pervasive across demographic groups and industrialized countries. Relative declines in female happiness have eroded a gender gap in happiness in which women in the 1970s typically reported higher subjective well-being than did men. These declines have continued and a new gender gap is emerging — one with higher subjective well-being for men.”

http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969

>>8586634
None of those studies make the claim that the women sleeping with lots of men is made unhappy because of doing so rather than it being unhappy women do so, in which case it wouldn't matter if they didn't because they would still be unhappy. The studies do not give us that sort of information.

Also these studies only look at very specific circumstances and ignore the anthropological evidence that most societies up to a certain point in development have viewed promiscuity in women as a good and desirable thing. If those studies are doing what you say they are doing they still only context dependent to sexually repressive societies like our own.

>>8586662
You are right, that is why I said correlation not causation. But, if it is the reverse, being promiscuous doesn't make unhappy women happy.

Which societies thought female promiscuity was desirable? And why? Genuinely curious, I have never heard of this.

>>8586634
>Having lots of sex isn't unhealthy, but having lots of different partners is. At least for women.
That's a different thing to saying lots of sex is bad. That's something I could believe but I'd need a proper source.

I expect there is a correlation/causation issue here as well. If number of partners is correlated with unhappiness I personally think it's more likely that promiscuity is a symptom of unhappiness than a cause. I think the bigger issue is the quality of the partners than the quantity.

>>8586646
Female happiness is declining but so is the average number of sexual partners. There's no link there

>>8586698
It's not which, it's which are not. Monogamy marks the stage of development in a civilization as it allows for better bonding of opposing groups (as in warring tribes can be brought together through the marriage of their leading families). So if we look at what we know about societies before this point in development there is a marked tendency to short term monogamous relationships, to long lasting relationships where people are sexually free or of polyamory. To be fair I did learn all of this from Durant who was writing 60 years ago, so perhaps this information is outdated.

>>8585525
>>8585528
>>8585563
DUDE JUST FUCK THESE SLUTS BRAINS OUT LMAO
HUMANS ARE JUST ANIMALS ANYWAY
FEELING GOOD IN THE MOMENT IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS
LMAO!!!!!

>>8586754
sad.

>>8586754
You sound like you need to get laid

>I want books that cater to and reinforce my narrow world view

>>8585525
Women in nature get pregnant from sexual intercourse, they have to carry around and eventually take care of the result of an sexual intercourse, which makes it natural for them to be as selective as they can be when it comes to who they let use their womb since men don't have the same problem.

>>8586764
>i want these threads to continue to be posted indefinitely and express that desire by endlessly replying to them