I will address a few of these points in order. Sorry for mangling posting, having quotes upon quotes overwhelmed me ![[Image: biggrin.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
There are several studies about human sexual behaviour that have been done with great detail and with really large samples. This has allowed us to confirm what almost everyone knows from observational evidence:
http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-10656-...#pid165761
- Most women are not "slutty". 90% have 0 to 3 partners a year. A very small proportion has more than that, evenly divided mostly between 4, 5 and so on, very rarely up to 13.
- Only about 75% of men, on the other hand, have 0-3 partners a year. What happened with that 15% difference? These are the men filling out the top. Unlike women, their partner counts grow much more steeply - unlike for women, there is a very sizable chunk of players with partner counts of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and so on. And whereas each of the most promiscuous 1% of women have racked up 14 partners a year on average, each of the most promiscuous 3% of men have racked up 20 partners a year - that's 5 times more!
- The most "slutty" men are far more slutty than the most "slutty" women, and there are far more of them (although they're still just a very small part of the general population).
- The only way this disparity can exist is if players are getting most of their bangs not from sluts, but from "good girls" - those girls that have only 1 or 2 partners a year.
- In other words, even when a "good girl" goes out to lose her virginity or get a LTR with a guy, 75% of the times she does it with a guy who has banged 10 women before her that year - a player, Alpha, or whatever you want to call it. She doesn't go to the sexless Beta pining after her and writing her love messages on Facebook. And girls with high partner counts are far worse in this regard. A crazed bar slut will sleep with a player instead of a Beta 99% of the time.
Sadly, we are not. This seems to be empirically proven. The same study that I explained above was also done 10 years earlier. Average numbers were slightly lower 10 years ago, and the divide was not nearly as great as it is now. It is clear that the growth in available sex has (along with other things) resulted in an ever bigger share going to Alphas. The more promiscuous the society, the greater the divide. This is seen everywhere in the world except in some Scandinavian countries.
There is no, there never has been, and there never will be, some sort of utopian tricke-down society where women sleep with a different man every month and make sure that no man is left behind and sexless.
The myth of a happy slut freely letting all men get sexual satisfaction from her is just that - a myth. "Good girls" are already very selective for Alpha, and sluts are even more so. The more partners a girl racks up, the more Alpha she requires.
Because this explains in detail why more sex doesn't equal less sexually frustrated men, the points B, C and D don't need to be elaborated on. I wish that were true though! I think everyone would be happier, just like you said!
Look at the number of thirsty Betas willing to wife up even the most wretches land whales, sluts, serial divorcees, feminists and other women who will bleed them dry for the chance to access their vagina once a year.
I don't see those "most men".
What men want and what men settle for is very different.
The scene has become so brutal that we have large numbers of men dropping out now instead of marrying (note: dropping out, being celibate with porn, not being players), but most of these men would come back in a heartbeat if old marriage was brought back and women started liking and rewarding the provider Beta again. Men instinctively understand that this is a reasonably good deal.
This part is just speculation because, obviously, we are never going to be able to fully analyze 100% of reasons why some old societies disappeared or were consumed by others. There are always so many other factors at work. But slut shaming is one of those factors.
Proponents of this theory have recently pointed out a very interesting liberalization of marriage (allowing no-fault divorce, promoting liberal attitudes and other stuff) in the Roman Empire just before its decline and during it. I can't find it anywhere on the forum, though - maybe someone can help out.
Still, it should be telling that there is no society like the one you speak of, not now, not ever, not anywhere. If absence of slut shaming wasn't a strongly detrimental factor like I claimed, one would surely find it in 50% of cases, or at least somewhere in history of the entire planet. But instead, all that we have are the 40 000 Mosuo people in one isolated mountain valley in China. That's not a very convincing case.
High-five on that. I completely agree with all your points there. I think we call that approach "I'll be poolside" after Roissy. Enjoy stuff, bang girls, and let things go because either it's not worth it or it's not fixable anyway. That is what I'm doing too.
Still, the thought that most of the West is probably going to collapse and be replaced by the Muslim world simply because the Muslims didn't encourage sluts - depresses me sometimes. It's not that I have anything against Muslims (other than a minority of extremists), it's just that it's such a stupid reason.
Quote:Gio Wrote:
Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote: A) Allowing and encouraging sluthood results in extreme Alpha/Beta divide as far as sexual resources (women) go.
How would you know this? What is this theory based on?
There are several studies about human sexual behaviour that have been done with great detail and with really large samples. This has allowed us to confirm what almost everyone knows from observational evidence:
http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-10656-...#pid165761
- Most women are not "slutty". 90% have 0 to 3 partners a year. A very small proportion has more than that, evenly divided mostly between 4, 5 and so on, very rarely up to 13.
- Only about 75% of men, on the other hand, have 0-3 partners a year. What happened with that 15% difference? These are the men filling out the top. Unlike women, their partner counts grow much more steeply - unlike for women, there is a very sizable chunk of players with partner counts of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and so on. And whereas each of the most promiscuous 1% of women have racked up 14 partners a year on average, each of the most promiscuous 3% of men have racked up 20 partners a year - that's 5 times more!
- The most "slutty" men are far more slutty than the most "slutty" women, and there are far more of them (although they're still just a very small part of the general population).
- The only way this disparity can exist is if players are getting most of their bangs not from sluts, but from "good girls" - those girls that have only 1 or 2 partners a year.
- In other words, even when a "good girl" goes out to lose her virginity or get a LTR with a guy, 75% of the times she does it with a guy who has banged 10 women before her that year - a player, Alpha, or whatever you want to call it. She doesn't go to the sexless Beta pining after her and writing her love messages on Facebook. And girls with high partner counts are far worse in this regard. A crazed bar slut will sleep with a player instead of a Beta 99% of the time.
Quote:Gio Wrote:
There is already a huge divide between alpha and beta.
I think more sluts would make it easier for betas to get laid.
More betas getting laid would REDUCE the alpha/beta divide.
But.. It's hard to say exactly what would happen. We are both just speculating. Right?
Sadly, we are not. This seems to be empirically proven. The same study that I explained above was also done 10 years earlier. Average numbers were slightly lower 10 years ago, and the divide was not nearly as great as it is now. It is clear that the growth in available sex has (along with other things) resulted in an ever bigger share going to Alphas. The more promiscuous the society, the greater the divide. This is seen everywhere in the world except in some Scandinavian countries.
There is no, there never has been, and there never will be, some sort of utopian tricke-down society where women sleep with a different man every month and make sure that no man is left behind and sexless.
The myth of a happy slut freely letting all men get sexual satisfaction from her is just that - a myth. "Good girls" are already very selective for Alpha, and sluts are even more so. The more partners a girl racks up, the more Alpha she requires.
Because this explains in detail why more sex doesn't equal less sexually frustrated men, the points B, C and D don't need to be elaborated on. I wish that were true though! I think everyone would be happier, just like you said!
Quote:Gio Wrote:
Quote:Eel Wrote:Isn't this a trend that is rapidly changing?
E) In lieu of above, most men have an understanding that it's generally better for them to have one stable wife
Nowadays, men are not so eager to find one stable wife.
They want to play the field for as long as possible. They want sexual options and variety.
Look at the number of thirsty Betas willing to wife up even the most wretches land whales, sluts, serial divorcees, feminists and other women who will bleed them dry for the chance to access their vagina once a year.
I don't see those "most men".
What men want and what men settle for is very different.
The scene has become so brutal that we have large numbers of men dropping out now instead of marrying (note: dropping out, being celibate with porn, not being players), but most of these men would come back in a heartbeat if old marriage was brought back and women started liking and rewarding the provider Beta again. Men instinctively understand that this is a reasonably good deal.
Quote:Giovonny Wrote:
Quote:Quote:
Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote: Conclusion: absence of slut shaming is devastating to civilization.
What civilizations have been devastated due to a lack of slut shaming?
This is just how you see it in your imagination right?
Or is this based on some other research?
This part is just speculation because, obviously, we are never going to be able to fully analyze 100% of reasons why some old societies disappeared or were consumed by others. There are always so many other factors at work. But slut shaming is one of those factors.
Proponents of this theory have recently pointed out a very interesting liberalization of marriage (allowing no-fault divorce, promoting liberal attitudes and other stuff) in the Roman Empire just before its decline and during it. I can't find it anywhere on the forum, though - maybe someone can help out.
Still, it should be telling that there is no society like the one you speak of, not now, not ever, not anywhere. If absence of slut shaming wasn't a strongly detrimental factor like I claimed, one would surely find it in 50% of cases, or at least somewhere in history of the entire planet. But instead, all that we have are the 40 000 Mosuo people in one isolated mountain valley in China. That's not a very convincing case.
Quote:Giovonny Wrote:
I think "Slut Encouraging" already happens on a mass scale. Young girls are already brainwashed with images of sex 24/7 in the western world. They often define themselves based on sexual value and sex appeal.
At this point, I say -- "Let the sluts be sluts!"
I think our current "civilization" is already Orwellian and many times insane. I don't feel a strong need to preserve it. I think it might do mankind some good to become less "civilized" and return to a more primal way of living.
High-five on that. I completely agree with all your points there. I think we call that approach "I'll be poolside" after Roissy. Enjoy stuff, bang girls, and let things go because either it's not worth it or it's not fixable anyway. That is what I'm doing too.
Still, the thought that most of the West is probably going to collapse and be replaced by the Muslim world simply because the Muslims didn't encourage sluts - depresses me sometimes. It's not that I have anything against Muslims (other than a minority of extremists), it's just that it's such a stupid reason.
"Imagine" by HCE | Hitler reacts to Battle of Montreal | An alternative use for squid that has never crossed your mind before