>want a girl who is responsible with her cunt >suddenly

I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting that, and you don't have to defend it to me, but the fact simply remains that the reality of modern society makes that very difficult to attain.

>>35557405
I'm convinced it's just sluts who don't want to feel bad about their decisions. They make excuses that mean fetishize virgins when in reality we just don't want a girl who's been blowing other guys.

>>35557405
>unreaslistic standards

Anon, there are not unrealistic standards for women. I would dare to say, women are batshit crazy about things that the average male from 17-24 can't have (unless they are rich or work their asses off), and that's even less posible than a virgin girl. If you really want that, you'll have it. Just make an effort for it.

The burden of proof always lies on the positive claim. If you claim that something does matter then it's on you to argue why it matters, not on someone else to argue that it doesn't. It shouldn't be difficult or concerning to you. If it is, then maybe you're holding views that aren't correct.

>>35558335
>holding the view that humans have held for THOUSANDS OF YEARS
>maybe you're holding views that aren't correct
Think about this shit. Why is society falling now? Why didn't it fall in the last eight thousand years because of views that "aren't correct"?

>>35558335
It's incredibly simple. Look at divorce rates based on number of previous partners, and tell me that the virgin expectation is a bad idea. It's difficult to attain, for sure. But it sets you up with a stable base.

Granted, locking down other factors means a couple prior partners will stabilize your household, too, but shooting to start from your *ideal* base slate is your best option.

The 0 prior partners to 1 dropoff is very sharp, regardless.

>>35558572
Why are you people always bringing up statistics? Humans arent just data.

>>35558621
Actually, yes they are. As much as you would like to imagine it, humans do not transcend facts.

>>35558621
You're talking about social, political, economic, etc issues. We are not statistics, sure. But, if we want to have ANY sort of discussion on the grander scale than "Jane Smith and Bobby Sue's experience", we HAVE to generalize, using statistics. If one can't grasp that simple idea, he needs to go back to middle school.

Funny enough German girls during the 40s were sloots they would constantly ride dick to get pregnant because it was cool thing to do

>>35558692
You mean 20s

>>35558621
>give data backing up my belief as the burden of proof is on me
>get crappy appeal to emotion argument in response

>>35558442
>>35558572
Pretty defensive, guys. I only said the burden of proof lied with the positive claim. That's also a view that's been respected by logicians for thousands of years.

>>35558813
>quotes me
> is a simple laying out of general stats

C'mon guy.

>>35558621
>omg who cares if I fucked hundreds of guys, I am not just data I'm a human bean!

>>35558855
Yeah, sorry, you're right. Really should have only referenced the first guy. I was a bit too hasty with my reply.

>>35558690
Ugh people like you are why drumpf won. Facts are racist and sexist af

>>35557405
You were born in the wrong time.

The only place where qt virgins are the norm, and therefore a completely realistic standard, are in third world shithole Muslim countries

>>35558621
>why are you people always bringing up facts?