Sluts unhappy monogamously

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/10/sexual-partners-and-marital-happiness/573493/

Ah, he finally included men!
And look at that, virgin men at marriage (1 sexual partner, the marital spouse) are the happiest group of all!

Looks to be 73%! In the current year!
Logically, if you want your fellow men to be happy, you’d ask them to be chaste.
Is that in the Bible anywhere?
What would Jesus do?

Next he needs to do a divorce study and control for the other spouse e.g. yes 6% of virgin brides divorced but were their husbands virgins too? Otherwise it’s like studying half a swimming pool for depth measurements.
It is interesting he misreports this data in part, you don’t look purely at the self-reports like single data points, you compare the group by sections – i.e. all the men to men and all the women to women.
The drop for both sexes is comparable, implying the cause of both is the same (and it is, weakened pair bonding).
Men begin with more monogamous satisfaction and women a lot less, significantly less as a sex, so to compare their promiscuous ratings without controlling for that is intellectually dishonest. The drops are comparable.

Pictured:

WAS THAT SO HARD???

Basic descriptives, so simple a 5yo could see it.
There is little difference within women to push the female-centric finding he clearly wants to.

I’m going to be skeptical on this “study” as any other.

“In this latest study, women who have had one partner instead of two are about 5 percentage points happier in their marriages, about on a par, Wolfinger says, with the boost that possessing a four-year degree, attending religious services, or having an income over $78,000 a year has for a happy marriage. (In his analysis, he controlled for education, income, and age at marriage.)”

Five percent, I hate to say it, is well within chance. It’s barely significant, almost suspiciously close enough to make me suspect p-hacking… and “about”? Science, guys. Education, class (income) and religiosity would have more of an effect, especially combined. This is important information that shouldn’t be swept under the rug. It suggests breeding is a huge factor in the choice to be pure or the resultant satisfaction.
Men, by valid comparison, have a sheer drop of satisfaction far greater than women, look at that gradient!

Dat gradient, easier to see for normies with boxes I am too lazy to go back and colour-code.

Which box is bigger? None of the inter-female drops rival than initial male gradient of 1 sexual partner to 2, I checked.

If this is glaringly obvious to anyone with the slightest semblance of mathematical training (IE I am not a sperg) on first sight, why miss it out?

Men experience a VAST drop in happiness that seems to be almost double (about TEN percent! huge!) the female 1-2 drop and he just ignores that? He goes on about the half-drop instead? Are you kidding me?

This is why sociology isn’t a real science, kids. This bullshit.

Going back, you can see why his legends aren’t labelled properly.

Yes, that is Papyrus because people who don’t labels their legends must be punished.

It doesn’t even start at zero to exaggerate sizes, get your life in order.

So why the narrative focus on female sluts? Why nary a mention of manwhores? What bias, right?

Do you care about the science of your own marital happiness or the badfeels of shame for bad choices?

“In an earlier analysis, Wolfinger found that women with zero or one previous sex partners before marriage were also least likely to divorce”

Why hasn’t he published the data I KNOW he collected on the men? That isn’t scientific, they’re divorced FROM men, aren’t they? Or were all the divorced women he counted lesbians?
Are Americans really stupid enough to think male virgins don’t exist?! They try to suggest the virgin grooms were actually lying based on the survey writing but it doesn’t wash.

It suggests something important, however triggered broflakes might get that opening one hobbit-hole closes another.

Men happier under Patriarchy? Who’d have thunk it, right?

“And Wolfinger acknowledges that, because of a quirk in how the survey was worded, some of the people reporting one partner might have meant “one partner besides my spouse.”

Weaseling out of results you dislike?
Who wrote the survey? The spirit of Imhotep?

“The median American woman born in the 1980s, Wolfinger writes, has had only three sexual partners in her lifetime, and the median man six.”

So as science keeps telling us, men are the sluts. It’s simple mathematics.
Well, logically, how likely are chaste women to marry the slutty men in the first place? Isn’t that rather important than randomly assuming they’re all shacking up eventually to Have it all?

“They have never been interested in sex without commitment, and once married, they may be more committed to their spouses, and therefore happier.”

aka normal
Study the pair bonding in their brains, I dare you.
Ah, but sociologist, useless!

Scientists should be studying virgin brides and grooms as role models of pair bonding glue to help out the other lot with specialized marital therapies but noooooooo. Heaven for-fend they admit Christians might be superior! Moral authority, with a biological basis? The sluts might have their feelings hurt!

It could be that, Wilcox told me, “having more partners prior to marriage makes you critically evaluate your spouse in light of previous partners, both sexually and otherwise.”

Yes, promiscuous men have low marital satisfaction whoever they marry, because they were sexually spoiled.

as the University of Maryland sociologist Philip Cohen puts it, “you could have a lot of sexual partners not because you’re good at sex, but because you’re bad at relationships.”

Obviously promiscuous people are bad in bed, why run from a good thing? It can’t always be the other party’s fault, can it? Just survey promiscuous women, (they have) and you’ll find they don’t even orgasm once. There is a notable deficiency in sexual skill (prowess) compared to those same women with other, less slutty men.

Almost like monogamy evolved or something….

http://brembs.net/hamilton/

If only we had a parental unit investment formula…

“Moreover, this analysis is not peer-reviewed; it’s just a blog post.”

Yeah, submit it to any journal and they’ll insist on seeing your data, like how I want to.

Something doesn’t add up. One man ‘researches’ how women keep being the problem despite ignoring male data on contributions to the by default mixed sex problem….. hmmm….. and also ignoring other much bigger causes of divorce such as adultery and domestic violence…. where’s the red pill data on those? Why doesn’t it exist?

If you really want a controversial study, cross-cultural study of marital and sexual satisfaction versus castration status (circumcised or unmutilated) includes measures of sexual and bodily insecurity and mental proclivity to adultery.

Picture a boulder in a pond if you reported the truth on that one.

Distinguish Sex Ed from grooming

The new term for child grooming is Sex Ed, if you look into what they’re actively encouraging.

https://gab.ai/truthwhisper/posts/38494894

“A pamphlet/book called, ‘Happy, Healthy, and Hot’ pushed and endorsed by the United Nations says you DON’T have to tell potential sexual partners that you have HIV, in ‘It’s Perfectly Normal’, and the “It’s All One Curriculum’ that has and is being given out to tens of millions of children is recommended for kids under ten years old.

In these three pamphlets it shows graphic images of kids and adults masturbating,

Instruction manual

why do they need to know how to service an adult?

teaching five-year-olds that masturbation is not harmful,

tell that to A&E

porn really needs to be restricted completely from minors

it’s causing brain damage

gay sex, in the ‘It’s All One Curriculum’ they use the term “sexual pleasure” 62 times,

“consent” doesn’t make something moral and hedonism is mostly evil

I mean Satanism is just hedonism dressed up as a philosophy instead of being subhuman.

the term “abortion” is mentioned 112 times

get em while they’re young?

and it says “there is no right age to have sex.”

We need age of consent laws to be heavily enforced and set at age of majority, 18.

Classes now where nine-year-old little girls are taught how to put a condom on a plastic penis.”

The purpose of grooming is to shock and brainwash the child about what’s “normal” (said to be common) and implied to be expected of them, called gaslighting. This is how you’d raise a prostitute. Mental abuse and confusion forced about a range of depraved sexual acts people decades ago never heard of.

They’re raping the child’s innocence first. Rape as in to seize, this is abhorrent. We need shame in culture again. If you aren’t mature enough to have children, you shouldn’t be babymaking. This goes for the potential fathers too. Pregnancy is not a disease nor an accident, it’s the intended result of sexual activity.

Calling it “sleeping with” is another weasel term of theirs, call it baby-making because Darwin.

I saw one guy who was sleeping with a woman but too scared of the word “lover” to introduce her as such. He shouldn’t be so much as touching a woman with that immaturity. Take responsibility for your slutting, manwhores.

There’s no research into whether child masturbation is harmful (or not) but it probably is. Odds are it triggers premature puberty and that messes with the genetics’ signalling. Female menarche used to occur around age 17, 18. Premature anything is bad news for development.

You may remember abandoned children, m/f, hit puberty early and it does mess them up.

We really need to segregate schools by sex, mixed schools were a terrible idea.

I hope Trump makes it that parents can sue teachers, starting with the groomers.

Ishtar energy and sexual ruin

Roughly speaking, something to bear in mind.

As for married couples, I’ve noticed a process.

Madonna/Whore comes from the male inability to reconcile the woman he loves with the woman he fucks. They view the wife like a replacement mother and feel disgust or rejection of their desire projected onto the wife, especially if she’s dutiful – they see her fussing over the business of the home and childcare. They disgracefully think lust and love are meant to be separate and always kept separate (this stupid false belief literally causes men health problems inc. impotence and it’s also why they marry sluts). It’s like they think they’re corrupting her with their conjugal rights. It becomes a serious turn-off, like she’s tainted or impure for desiring him (repulsed by her lust) or it isn’t “safe” to sexually express – with their SPOUSE. Husbands CANNOT repress their sexuality and basically rob their wives of that cherishing experience. It ruins marriages, sex is the glue that holds marriage together and while ebbs and flows are normal, either depriving the other, while bad, isn’t as bad as seeking it outside the union (always adultery). That’s a divorce category because it ruins the union, spoils the trust, the connection itself is divorced between the parties. No splitting or the woman senses this and retreats, in passive femininity and trust (how women solve problems), assuming he needs his own space, he’ll come back soon and then he feels abandoned when actually, she’s waiting for him to be the Man first. Because he is. A wife is the most sexual woman. It’s the total experience including fertility, modern men fear the completion of the cycle is the “wrong” thing but actually it’s postmodern sterile sex that’s incomplete* sexuality (and likely causes most of the psychiatric issues associated with promiscuity). Men experience the fulfillment of their sexuality when they become a father, this is why their hormones change for about a year after the wife gives birth!**

Husbands also stop flirting with their wife in modern times, a fact I am certain is a divorce risk… like, no? Why would you think that’s a good idea? The Bible says if you don’t get everything at home you’ll be tempted outside it. Flirt with your damn wife, women are verbal creatures! Women need that verbal affirmation, or society will replace it. Missionary work, crash dieting, various passive-aggressive unconscious punishments that take her energy outside the union and onto worldly things (so not cheating but damn close and it seriously raises the odds she’d escalate to that).

Women get (passive) the verbal (flirting) then men get the physical (sex).

It’s a very simple process and I have to keep explaining this to people. This is old common knowledge. Usually there’s nothing actually “wrong” in the initial stages of marital “problems”, they just don’t flirt! It doesn’t occur to them!!

It isn’t something you do for courting or that kids do.

It’s verbal glue.

You have fewer arguments. Seriously. This is so simple so a therapist (if they know) will NEVER EVER tell you because it’s FREE. Free puts them out of a job.

A husband who wants his wife to be less sexual shouldn’t have married her, frankly. And he can’t expect her to degrade herself, (stares at America) sexuality isn’t doing everything, that’s a sign of a problem where the lust is covering it. There isn’t any shame in marital sex, American Christians need this hammered into their skulls. It isn’t dirty if you’re married. Sex is marriage glue. Repeat this until you know it in your bones.

*Imagine you kept eating and eating and eating food but were never satisfied and actually got more frustrated. Congratulations, sexually, that’s hook-up culture. Nobody says this because they don’t want to offend the single or infertile but sorry, that’s evolution. It’s like saying we need air to breathe, it could offend people with breathing problems but so what? Doesn’t change the fact.

Ancient times measured sexual encounters as satisfactory based on whether or not they were “fruitful”. They knew. Those were incredibly patriarchal societies, well, this is the kernel of truth behind all patriarchy.

You don’t see the father of five wishing he had two.

It’s also why broody men in our culture are shamed as patriarchal.

**And miscarriage or infertility can provoke divorce. In biological terms, you fall in love for two years to conceive and then the parental bond is the heightened connection, the sight of proven fertility, parental oxytocin from interactions. I wonder if childless marriages (by choice) are also a divorce risk, I’d assume so since it replicates infertility.

Random but I wonder if a Roe v Wade repeal would include the Pill abortifacient? Biologically, it must. It’s a chronic Morning After pill, another chemical abortion. Both are given to minors, more grounds.

Video: 10 arguments against pre-marital sex

or fornication, if you dislike PC terms.

Pleasantly surprised by this logic.

Yes, promiscuity x divorce risk must be studied more, actually. Much more. One major issue mathematically is how few promiscuous marry AT ALL to even qualify for the studies so marital rate too (since that’s important information for people). Then psychological issues round out the methodology for the ones that predispose to those behaviors in the first place (not a free choice, a compulsion) and muddy the waters in the non-pathological population (i.e. not personality disorders).

It seems to operate by weakening pair bonds until the person is incapable of making them.

I know AC would agree with me that an amygdala atrophy study in the promiscuous and also divorced groups would be illuminating. Imagine if you can check divorce risk with a brain scan before marriage!

And once developed, can it ever shrink or is gain permanent?

comment

This is an old truth that has been only relatively recently abandoned. The reasons for all Christian principles are entirely practical. There is a saying ‘you are not punished for your sins, but by them

The big lie spoken by manwhores in particular is that ruining themselves emotionally (and physically) will make them better husbands for the right woman. The feminists carbon copied that rationalization, it’s still bullshit. How does adding psychological issues make you better in any way? And why should your spouse have to clean up the messes left by a trail of people who hurt you? And if you were remorseless and mistreated, abandoned them, what’s to stop you doing it to your spouse? Why reward that with love and fidelity?

Some people are incapable of loving and therefore don’t deserve to be loved.

Unequal yokes are abusive.

In romantic/sexual relationships, what doesn’t kill you makes you weaker.

“Muh Experience” is the idiot’s way of claiming that learning everything wrong will make them right. It’s insanity. This isn’t a pop quiz you can redo, it’s your life; it isn’t a game you can respawn into ad nauseum, you are learning patterns and reactions and if they don’t work, you’re far, far worse off than the person with NO “experience” – this is Dunning-Kruger.

Experience of failure means you’re wrong. You’re the common denominator.

The definition of insanity is the man who fucks around and wonders why he can’t find marriage material.

Hook-up culture has trained men into being useless husbands, they have the opposite required qualities.

To put it crassly, they’re saying “I shit in the pool, why is the water brown?”

Where have all the good women gone? Well, how many women have you slept with? Subtract those from the communal pool. Now extrapolate.

No, you can’t Have It All. You never could, it was a Boomer marketing gimmick. But the economy (and GDP) make more money from cads than dads. The politicians are playing them. They don’t care about you. They don’t care if you’re a genetic dead-end.

These useful idiots would literally argue the man who fucks 100 women and finds no love (0/100) is better husband material than a man who fucked zero women and also found no love yet, the unproven quantity. Narcissists lie.

Lust doesn’t lead to love, it leads to personal disgust. Hollywood lied so you’d sell your soul buying their stuff to fill the emptiness of your single life. They can’t admit it without the self-loathing attacking them so they blame the “thots” in standard projection and denial of agency. If you’re so easily led into temptation, you’re too weak to call yourself a man.

If you treat your love life like a game, women will see you as a joke.

Fornication discouraged in men, 1892

I don’t like it when SJWs lie about sexuality and pretend men could be the biggest sluts they wanted, forever, without consequence.
I don’t like it when men lie about their historic sexual habits either. There’s no excuse.

I was going to quote but screencaps deter liars. This was the common opinion and backed by the doctors of the time. They just can’t stand the idea their ancestors would be ashamed of them and think of them as just as slutty as the women they insult.

I guess their red pill got stuck?

Continence (sexual control) and sexual hygiene were the rule throughout history, we hear about exceptions because they were exceptions.

(And rich, usually rich and insane, it’s still fun to read about those).

https://wellcomelibrary.org/item/b28050964#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&z=-0.6656%2C0.8599%2C2.8112%2C1.4224

Act like a savage, think like one. Pretty straightforward. Lust isn’t a virtue for men either. Giving in to any desire is a huge display of weakness.

The energy is meant to go to your development. Wasting it elsewhere stunts growth permanently. Degenerate is quite a physical phenomena. If you took identical twins, one would be taller, better-looking and healthier for abstaining compared to a profligate twin.

It does stunt the growth, they’re right. Neuroscience is finding (supernormal) stimulation is really, really bad for you, especially if you’re still developing – the development time is cut prematurely short because the energy gets burnt up. You have a finite supply. Puberty is meant to take many years. Telling men to masturbate, that it’s good for them, might be the first nail in the masculine coffin (same applies for women).

A retardation of your mature sex’s qualities. It’s horrendous.

The best-looking and sounding men I’ve ever seen simply had no desire to masturbate as teenagers (they were busy doing other things). They turned out really well, the so-called “late bloomer” just used to be… normal. By comparison, we all know plenty of people who peaked physically age fifteen then weirdly aged at speed.

Guess what they have in common.

It’s also no coincidence the best geniuses are virgins.

To this day, the life outcomes of those with impulse control are superior, including general health.

Suck on that.

If you want a biological mechanism for this, look into how caloric restriction works. Your body has finite life processing power. Don’t waste it.

Most self-help books for men came in the form of morality lessons.
https://archive.org/details/dangersignals00clar
https://archive.org/details/advicetoyoungmen01cobb

Because they needed it.

No man is beyond reproach.