[Alb92]

I see. I asked this because I was surprised there is someone who actually managed to find a marriage material girl in the west. I thought that was possible by only targeting girls from migrant families that retain much of their traditional culture or in some specific cultural/religious communities.

[Teedub]

No. Absolutely not. It depends on the traditionalism the girl subscribes to.

[Slam]

armenia4ever - Cheers for starting this post. I remember I had read it and found it really interesting some time back but had lost it! Am subscribed to its updates now.

I totally hear you on what you are saying, and I applaud you for jumping in head-first! You will have two kids soon, and that is something that I (in my mid 30s having followed the stay-single/ avoid-serious-LTR route most of my life) really envy. Nothing like having your own kids!

I've checked out your blog, and it looks like you've done a lot of thinking about this. Are you partnering up with any other local guys who share the same worldview/ outlook / family plan?

[armenia4ever]

(11-18-2016 06:35 PM)Slam Wrote:  

armenia4ever - Cheers for starting this post. I remember I had read it and found it really interesting some time back but had lost it! Am subscribed to its updates now.

I totally hear you on what you are saying, and I applaud you for jumping in head-first! You will have two kids soon, and that is something that I (in my mid 30s having followed the stay-single/ avoid-serious-LTR route most of my life) really envy. Nothing like having your own kids!

I've checked out your blog, and it looks like you've done a lot of thinking about this. Are you partnering up with any other local guys who share the same worldview/ outlook / family plan?

I've been trying to find other guys in my area, but the Churches around here to some extent are heavily cucked. Churchianity as Vox Day puts it.

I work a lot so its hard for me at the moment to get out and find guys with a similar goal. Depending if I stay in Missouri, I may start an RVF tribe here.

UPDATE:

So me and my wife haven't been fighting as much. I've been using sex as a means to defuse fights when they start to escalate. I can't emphasize enough how important it is - especially when your wife is pregnant.

So with taking care of our son and another boy on the way, my wife stresses out easily and tends to download it on me when I get home from work. Now I'm the type that isn't going to put up with that shit.

When my wife does start going at me, its with nasty verbal attacks and the occasional physical shove attempts. (She was a bully in highschool) Sometimes, it's like shes out to get me and she doesn't even know why - which she confesses later.

Now when she does this, it makes me angry, sometimes livid. I don't want to have sex with her at that moment. In fact, I want to say something nasty back to her so she knows exactly how it feels.

On my end, this is a failing strategy. I can't argue with emotions, no matter how logical I am, and women of course hold grudges about things you say to them when they are pregnant.

So I swallow my pride and anger and transfer it to sexual aggression. I immediately initiate, grab her, and start taking her clothes off. So far, it's worked every damn time.

The fight is immediately snuffed out. Her raging hormone roller-coaster is reset at that moment. This is inspite of me and my wife already averaging sex twice a day.

Utilize this. I've never realized how effective sex is in ending fights and stopping escalation of the fights further.

During sex, I'll spank her in doggy and I'll say, and I quote, "This is for being a royal bitch babe." as I spank her.

I don't toot my own blog horn often, but I wrote a post about it that I figure could help guys here or at least give you some tactics for the future.

[John Michael Kane]

Sound insights. Inside each woman is the deep desire to submit to her king. Don't let her forget it. Carry on!

[262]

Great stuff, Armenia.

That's the direction the "manosphere" should go.

Regardless, I just subscribed to your blog.

[Rob Banks]

I think this is a great topic. I have said what I think about it in other threads. I have one question I wanted to ask:

What do you guys think about mandatory schooling for children? I am in a position where I will probably be starting a family in America without being rich enough to afford private schooling. If I have a son, I probably would just find a good neighborhood and send him to public school. The worst that can happen is he gets into a fight. I can teach him to ignore the leftist indoctrination. But if I have a daughter, I wouldn't want her in a co-ed public junior-high or high school with lots of teenage boys every day. Even if I raise her with the right values, I just don't feel it is appropriate for a young teenage girl to be around boys every day with no parental supervision, and I won't let it happen on my watch. To be honest, I wouldn't even want her in a public elementary school. I just don't trust public schools. I don't want to take any chances with my (future) daughter getting exposed to sex too early.

The obvious alternative is an all-girls school, but like I said, I don't know if I'll be able to afford it. If I am able to afford it, that's great, but I need a backup plan unless I can't.

As for homeschooling, I'm not sure I would want to homeschool my kids. I was homeschooled from kindergarten through 7th grade, and outside of a few youth sports teams I was on, I didn't have much contact with other kids (my parents weren't exactly the most social people), and I feel like it affected me negatively growing up. It stopped being an issue when I started attending regular school in 8th grade. I wouldn't want to risk doing the same to my children.

I suppose if anything, I could always go back to the country where my wife (who I've referred to as "my girl" on other threads) is from. I speak the language, I have family there, and I've lived there before; and the private schools are way more affordable. But it would be a shame to have to move my whole family out of America just because I can't afford an expensive private school.

[John Michael Kane]

I was home-schooled, but my parents made sure that I had plenty of interactions with other home-schoolers so that I didn't turn into a social misfit. You can't beat the long-term value of choosing your own curriculum and a proactive approach as to which kids (and parents!) you let into your children's' social circle. Remember, we are all products of our environment, and if you can't get them into a fantastic private school, then save up and school them at home. It is a multi-million dollar industry here in the US, there are tons of resources and if you want to know more about it, just hit me up here in this thread.

[Rob Banks]

Well I don't have any kids yet, but I most likely will within the next year or so. My wife is 26 and we are in agreement that we don't want to wait until she is too much older.

I would probably homeschool a daughter if the only other option was public school. It wouldn't be my first choice because of my own experiences with homeschooling (discussed in my previous post), but that was most likely due to my parents being quite anti-social, and doesn't mean homeschooling in general is a bad idea.

When I was homeschooled, I remember my family was a member of the local home-schoolers organization, but it was a very small group of families, and they were all new-age ultra-liberal types. Then again, this was New York City, so I would imagine it's not like that in other parts of the country.

To be honest, if I had a son, I would probably just send him to public school, as I could just teach him to ignore all the leftist bullshit. With a daughter I would be more protective, though. I could teach her all the red-pill ideas I want, and I still wouldn't be comfortable with her being around boys every day during her teenage years. One mistake could ruin her chances at a happy marriage, and cause me lots of (rightful) shame as a father.

I really hope I don't have a daughter.

[John Michael Kane]

(12-12-2016 12:19 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

Well I don't have any kids yet, but I most likely will within the next year or so. My wife is 26 and we are in agreement that we don't want to wait until she is too much older.

Start networking now. Hit up Facebook and search the Groups section to see what homeschooling groups are in your area. It is so much easier to do it with the support and guidance of the been there, done that crowd that just winging it. Especially if you or your wife have no previous teaching experience.

Quote:

I would probably homeschool a daughter if the only other option was public school. It wouldn't be my first choice because of my own experiences with homeschooling (discussed in my previous post), but that was most likely due to my parents being quite anti-social, and doesn't mean homeschooling in general is a bad idea.

There is a negative stigma about home schooled kids being these socially awkward weridos. Yes, they are out there. But also keep in mind that the larger culture is full of truly messed up kids, thanks in large part to their "normal" public school education. When "normal" is to have 58 gender pronouns and all other manner of faggotry, trust me, you want your kids to create their own new "normal". Besides dedicating time for interacting with other children in their neighborhood or other homeschoolers, get them involved with community organizations that will build up their leadership talents. 4H Club, Toastmasters, Farmers Markets, etc. Home schooled kids are locked up and unsocialized only if their parents didn't expose them to the right kind of socialization. I would HS both the boys and girls. If you don't, a daughter runs the risk of being very rebelious for her brother getting special treatment. Your son would have a whole new level of friends that she wouldn't have access to. Better apply it across the board. Not to mention, 80+ percent of school teachers and staff are liberal women and flaming fags. These are not the masculine role models you want for a son. Likewise, for obvious reasons you don't want to send your daughter to public school with the circulum asking her to "explore her sexuality at age 14" providing she has "safe" sex and the boy gets a consent form signed. These nutters have the nerve to call home schooled kids whack in the head? Please! Get the hell out of here.

Quote:

I really hope I don't have a daughter.

A daughter, just like a wife, is a long-term test of a man's resolve. A man who productively shapes the lives of the women is surrounded by has done himself and others a great service, not the least which are the women. Game can work for daughters. The most benevolent alpha fathers I've met at the same time put their foot down, but also run cocky and funny game on their girls to make them laugh and soften the blow. Making a daughter laugh is very important to getting her to listen to you. Just like you should be finding fun ways to tease your wife to keep the romance and fire alive, do the same for any girls you may have. Girls just want to have fun, make sure it is the healthy type you approve up. One part firmness, one part mirth.

[Slam]

This x1000.

The system turns kids against their parents, and this is assumed to be 'normal'. I don't know about you guys but I'm gonna raise my future kids to be my allies for life, and I will be their ally for life.

Raise good kids and they will love you. Outsource them and you'll wonder why they don't care.

Quote:

There is a negative stigma about home schooled kids being these socially awkward weridos. Yes, they are out there. But also keep in mind that the larger culture is full of truly messed up kids, thanks in large part to their "normal" public school education. When "normal" is to have 58 gender pronouns and all other manner of faggotry, trust me, you want your kids to create their own new "normal". Besides dedicating time for interacting with other children in their neighborhood or other homeschoolers, get them involved with community organizations that will build up their leadership talents. 4H Club, Toastmasters, Farmers Markets, etc. Home schooled kids are locked up and unsocialized only if their parents didn't expose them to the right kind of socialization. I would HS both the boys and girls. If you don't, a daughter runs the risk of being very rebelious for her brother getting special treatment. Your son would have a whole new level of friends that she wouldn't have access to. Better apply it across the board. Not to mention, 80+ percent of school teachers and staff are liberal women and flaming fags. These are not the masculine role models you want for a son. Likewise, for obvious reasons you don't want to send your daughter to public school with the circulum asking her to "explore her sexuality at age 14" providing she has "safe" sex and the boy gets a consent form signed. These nutters have the nerve to call home schooled kids whack in the head? Please! Get the hell out of here.

[armenia4ever]

(12-13-2016 09:41 PM)Slam Wrote:  

This x1000.

The system turns kids against their parents, and this is assumed to be 'normal'. I don't know about you guys but I'm gonna raise my future kids to be my allies for life, and I will be their ally for life.

Raise good kids and they will love you. Outsource them and you'll wonder why they don't care.

Quote:

There is a negative stigma about home schooled kids being these socially awkward weridos. Yes, they are out there. But also keep in mind that the larger culture is full of truly messed up kids, thanks in large part to their "normal" public school education. When "normal" is to have 58 gender pronouns and all other manner of faggotry, trust me, you want your kids to create their own new "normal". Besides dedicating time for interacting with other children in their neighborhood or other homeschoolers, get them involved with community organizations that will build up their leadership talents. 4H Club, Toastmasters, Farmers Markets, etc. Home schooled kids are locked up and unsocialized only if their parents didn't expose them to the right kind of socialization. I would HS both the boys and girls. If you don't, a daughter runs the risk of being very rebelious for her brother getting special treatment. Your son would have a whole new level of friends that she wouldn't have access to. Better apply it across the board. Not to mention, 80+ percent of school teachers and staff are liberal women and flaming fags. These are not the masculine role models you want for a son. Likewise, for obvious reasons you don't want to send your daughter to public school with the circulum asking her to "explore her sexuality at age 14" providing she has "safe" sex and the boy gets a consent form signed. These nutters have the nerve to call home schooled kids whack in the head? Please! Get the hell out of here.

I think this is why its essential parents spend more time with their kids than their educators do. It's hard to do this nowadays, but if progressive harpies at the public school are getting 40+ hours a week with your kids, it's going to be hard to counter all the propaganda your kids are getting soaked with.

An emphasis on family cant be understated. If we raise our kids with a familial mindset, they wont stray from it. This means we must lead by example, so they can see the difference between a functional, close, and happy one vs the broken ones that cause so many problems in this world.

[Lunostrelki]

Neomasculinity aids globalism and communism as long as the focus is on banging sluts and not raising patriarchal families. I don't care about having a hundred women and possibly ruining the five of that bunch who may have been wife material. That's hedonism and those who pursue it are wasting their lives and the lives of others while spiritually conditioning themselves as accomplices to social degeneracy. I had one girlfriend and made her my wife. I checked out her family and character before we married, and apply the principles of game and self-improvement in our relationship. In addition to voting for right-wing politicians, redpillers need to vote with their behavior.

[John Michael Kane]

Well said. There's no real masculinity without patriarchal influence, which only happens when men form stable marriages and family.

How about a datasheet/background on how you met and vetted your wife before you married her? What are your thoughts on married game?

[StrikeBack]

For me it was the opposite.

When I was getting into Game and Red Pill stuff, I became anti-marriage.

As I got older and into neo-masculinity, I started to think hard about being a patriarch.

Now I'm on track to becoming one.

I'm in strong favour of homeschooling my future children because the schooling system here is rotten to the core. It ranges from flat out evil programs like Safe Schools (written by pedophiles to support more kids coming out as gay or trans) to just terrible teaching of Reading, Writing and Arithmetic.

[John Michael Kane]

Home schooling or an exceptionally well-run private school is the only way to go. Greater than nine times out of ten you will lose your child if you send them to the mental prison that is the public school system. Throughout the West, it is run by fags, feminists and mangina cucks. It is simply no place to send a child, male or female. I consider sending a child to public school tantamount to child abuse.

[Rob Banks]

(12-21-2016 02:38 PM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

Neomasculinity aids globalism and communism as long as the focus is on banging sluts and not raising patriarchal families. I don't care about having a hundred women and possibly ruining the five of that bunch who may have been wife material. That's hedonism and those who pursue it are wasting their lives and the lives of others while spiritually conditioning themselves as accomplices to social degeneracy. I had one girlfriend and made her my wife. I checked out her family and character before we married, and apply the principles of game and self-improvement in our relationship. In addition to voting for right-wing politicians, redpillers need to vote with their behavior.

This.

I see so many supposed red-pillers in the comments section of Youtube videos or the ROK comments section (but less so here on the forum) who say things like "AWALT," complain about "trad-cons," and call people like me "manginas" and "pussy pedistalizers" because we're not anti-marriage and don't genuinely hate women.

One guy was recently arguing with me in the ROK comments section and saying that if men are drafted into military service, women should also be drafted into the military as prostitutes. I thought he was joking, but when I called him out on it, he actually defended his comment.

The only slight disagreement I have with your comment is that if a girl gets "ruined" by riding one too many dicks, I don't think you can really blame the guys she slept with for "ruining" her.

It is in a man's nature to try and fuck young, beautiful women, and it is not in a man's nature to turn down sex with a willing young woman. In the past, patriarchal societies were well aware of this, and had a system of checks and balances to deal with this aspect of man's nature. Society demanded that a man marry a woman before allowing him to have sexual access to her. Men did not allow their daughters to spend time alone with a man (unless they were married), knowing full well that it is in every man's nature to want to fuck his daughter.

If a modern woman puts herself in the position to be defiled and "ruined" (as you put it) by a man, it is her own fault and her father's fault, but it is not the man's fault. You can't really blame him for taking the pussy that is right in front of him.

Just to clarify, I am not excusing all men who engage in hedonism and/or cheat on their wives. It is obviously best if men control their animalistic urges. But if we as a society choose not to give young men access to our unmarried daughters, then any man who wants to engage in hedonism would have to go to a whorehouse. There would be no issue of men "ruining" the women they sleep with. It is far wiser for a society to simply deny young men sexual access to their unmarried daughters than to expect men to control their natural urges and turn down pussy.

[262]

One benefit of homeschooling that we haven't touched on here is that you'll likely be able to teach your kids more than a school can.

My dad did that with me on math. As a result, I pretty much killed it in high school, leaving almost everyone in the dust.

[DamnShame]

(12-22-2016 02:37 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

(12-21-2016 02:38 PM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

Neomasculinity aids globalism and communism as long as the focus is on banging sluts and not raising patriarchal families. I don't care about having a hundred women and possibly ruining the five of that bunch who may have been wife material. That's hedonism and those who pursue it are wasting their lives and the lives of others while spiritually conditioning themselves as accomplices to social degeneracy. I had one girlfriend and made her my wife. I checked out her family and character before we married, and apply the principles of game and self-improvement in our relationship. In addition to voting for right-wing politicians, redpillers need to vote with their behavior.

This.

I see so many supposed red-pillers in the comments section of Youtube videos or the ROK comments section (but less so here on the forum) who say things like "AWALT," complain about "trad-cons," and call people like me "manginas" and "pussy pedistalizers" because we're not anti-marriage and don't genuinely hate women.

One guy was recently arguing with me in the ROK comments section and saying that if men are drafted into military service, women should also be drafted into the military as prostitutes. I thought he was joking, but when I called him out on it, he actually defended his comment.

The only slight disagreement I have with your comment is that if a girl gets "ruined" by riding one too many dicks, I don't think you can really blame the guys she slept with for "ruining" her.

It is in a man's nature to try and fuck young, beautiful women, and it is not in a man's nature to turn down sex with a willing young woman. In the past, patriarchal societies were well aware of this, and had a system of checks and balances to deal with this aspect of man's nature. Society demanded that a man marry a woman before allowing him to have sexual access to her. Men did not allow their daughters to spend time alone with a man (unless they were married), knowing full well that it is in every man's nature to want to fuck his daughter.

If a modern woman puts herself in the position to be defiled and "ruined" (as you put it) by a man, it is her own fault and her father's fault, but it is not the man's fault. You can't really blame him for taking the pussy that is right in front of him.

Just to clarify, I am not excusing all men who engage in hedonism and/or cheat on their wives. It is obviously best if men control their animalistic urges. But if we as a society choose not to give young men access to our unmarried daughters, then any man who wants to engage in hedonism would have to go to a whorehouse. There would be no issue of men "ruining" the women they sleep with. It is far wiser for a society to simply deny young men sexual access to their unmarried daughters than to expect men to control their natural urges and turn down pussy.

Excellent comments from both of you. I see the merits to both sides of this argument and have always found myself stuck a bit in the middle.

On the one hand... I agree with Lunostrelki. Pumping and dumping those starry eyed, 2-3 notch or below "good girls" really can ruin them for future guys and leave them thinking "why be good to my man when he's going to just leave me". I'm in that boat now.

On the other hand... Rob banks is spot on when he says:
"It is in a man's nature to try and fuck young, beautiful women, and it is not in a man's nature to turn down sex with a willing young woman. In the past, patriarchal societies were well aware of this, and had a system of checks and balances to deal with this aspect of man's nature. Society demanded that a man marry a woman before allowing him to have sexual access to her. Men did not allow their daughters to spend time alone with a man (unless they were married), knowing full well that it is in every man's nature to want to fuck his daughter."

If a modern woman puts herself in the position to be defiled and "ruined" (as you put it) by a man, it is her own fault and her father's fault, but it is not the man's fault. You can't really blame him for taking the pussy that is right in front of him.

As someone who has always agreed with the phrase "it takes two to tango", I simply cannot ignore the point in bold. However, if I end up banging a naive young girl who wouldn't know any better anyway... I can't help but feel like I'm potentially taking something away from another guy that really wants to settle down and find a good wife. Then again, maybe I'm giving these ladies too much credit.

[Rob Banks]

↑ ↑ Well, let me ask you this:

What if you met a nice virgin girl, got to know her, and decided to marry her. She had only dated one guy before you, and nothing sexual happened between them.

Then, you find out that during one of her dates with the other guy, she had made it very clear to him that she wanted to have sex, but he turned her down because he didn't want to "ruin" her.

How would you feel about this? Would this affect how you feel about the woman?

[John Michael Kane]

Quote:

On the one hand... I agree with Lunostrelki. Pumping and dumping those starry eyed, 2-3 notch or below "good girls" really can ruin them for future guys and leave them thinking "why be good to my man when he's going to just leave me". I'm in that boat now.

Quoted for truth. I didn't intend to pump and dump one girl that I was in a relationship for a very short period of time. Turns out her parents hated me, and never got a chance to actually know me. Too much conflict. Still the girl was a real sweetheart and we had lots of passionate sex. We broke it off two years ago, I'm still her alpha widow. She hasn't gone on any dates or seen any new men. I really crushed her soul, something I've asked her and God for forgiveness. I've finally wrote her a message to her and encouraged her to date to find a good man who she can marry. Her notch count is 2, including me. She'd make a great mom. These types of girls getting pumped and dumped really hurts society. That's why if we want to be patriarchs, we have to moderate our own sexual desires to focus on the women worth marrying and having kids with.

[John Michael Kane]

(12-23-2016 10:31 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

↑ ↑ Well, let me ask you this:

What if you met a nice virgin girl, got to know her, and decided to marry her. She had only dated one guy before you, and nothing sexual happened between them.

Then, you find out that during one of her dates with the other guy, she had made it very clear to him that she wanted to have sex, but he turned her down because he didn't want to "ruin" her.

How would you feel about this? Would this affect how you feel about the woman?

Well, if the man was an otherwise decent man and treated her well, it isn't unnatural to want to make love to someone. It isn't like women don't have sexual urges or desires, especially when they are in love with a man. It is hypocritical to shame women for wanting to have sex, when we obviously want it. A better method is encouraging daughters to screen for men worth marrying, then sanction them to have a wonderful, happy sex life with their future husband. If I have daughters, I will talk to them about sex from a man's perspective, as well as a woman's. If you are a charming, attractive man who treats a girl well, why wouldn't she want to sleep with him? The incentive should ideally be to encourage the couple to marry if they are compatible, that way the sex is procreative instead of just pleasure-focused.

[Rob Banks]

↑ I agree. I don't think it is unnatural for a woman to want to have sex. Nobody wants a woman who is cold in bed and has little desire for sex. But I, like you, also think it is best for a woman to choose a man who is worth marrying and willing to stay with her long-term.

DamnShame had said that if you pump and dump a nice young girl who is not a slut, you are taking something away from another guy who wants to find a wife. And while I agree with that, the mere fact that the girl is making herself available to get pumped and dumped kind of "ruins" her in my eyes. Furthermore, if she is making herself available to you for casual sex, you're probably not the first guy she has ever messed around with casually, and you probably won't be the last.

If you turn a girl down for casual sex because you don't want to "ruin" her, you're most likely turning down a girl who is already ruined (or will be ruined by another guy).

Obviously, if you're a young guy dating a high school girl and you're her first boyfriend, and then you dump her, then you're possibly ruining her. If a girl is a virgin and believes you are in love with her, then you should definitely think twice about pumping and dumping her.

In general, though, why should a man turn down sex with a willing young woman knowing full well that she will just end up having casual sex with some other guy (and probably already has at some point)? Is it really worth giving up the bang just to ensure that the girl ends up with one less notch?

[John Michael Kane]

(12-26-2016 11:32 PM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

↑ I agree. I don't think it is unnatural for a woman to want to have sex. Nobody wants a woman who is cold in bed and has little desire for sex. But I, like you, also think it is best for a woman to choose a man who is worth marrying and willing to stay with her long-term.

DamnShame had said that if you pump and dump a nice young girl who is not a slut, you are taking something away from another guy who wants to find a wife. And while I agree with that, the mere fact that the girl is making herself available to get pumped and dumped kind of "ruins" her in my eyes. Furthermore, if she is making herself available to you for casual sex, you're probably not the first guy she has ever messed around with casually, and you probably won't be the last.

If you turn a girl down for casual sex because you don't want to "ruin" her, you're most likely turning down a girl who is already ruined (or will be ruined by another guy).

Obviously, if you're a young guy dating a high school girl and you're her first boyfriend, and then you dump her, then you're possibly ruining her. If a girl is a virgin and believes you are in love with her, then you should definitely think twice about pumping and dumping her.

In general, though, why should a man turn down sex with a willing young woman knowing full well that she will just end up having casual sex with some other guy (and probably already has at some point)? Is it really worth giving up the bang just to ensure that the girl ends up with one less notch?

I think that is a chicken or the egg, which came first, sort of argument. I'd say it is far more complicated than that. Many girls aren't total whores, nor are they frigid anti-sex virgins. Smooth talking men throughout the ages have genuinely convinced young and naive women that they were in love with them, only to use them for sex. Women who are sly have used men throughout the ages for resources and favors. This is not ethical behavior on either part. I say that as men, we can't predict what individual women will or won't do if we don't sleep with them. But if you have a nice girl that you have no intention of wifing up and you pump and dump her, it will be a black mark on your soul. That's hurting her, and the society we all live in. The animal side of me of course desires lots of sex with different women, but I'm not going to start pumping and dumping a bunch of cute girls just because I have the game skills to pull it off. Game is like a gun, it should only be pointed at what target you want to hit.

There are certainly girls who have casual sex and don't think twice about it. Most of the time though, they are fooling themselves and not understanding their natural desire to pair bond. Most women that sleep with men prior to marriage do it to try and get commitment out of a man. It is horrible strategy, but that doesn't mean women are always the most logical creatures, are they? That's why it is important to have male father figures around to fend off pump and dump interlopers with their daughters. Men need to help the women in their lives screen for good men and avoid getting played. Too many girls in this generation don't have that guidance. They aren't bad women, just lost without a strong, firm hand to help them. That's what we need to focus on with our own daughters as we raise them.

[Rob Banks]

↑ Well, I agree with pretty much everything you said.

Obviously, women are not all "total whores" or "frigid anti-sex virgins" (and I wouldn't want a woman who was either one). Men certainly need to put effort into keeping their wives/daughters away from other men who want to use them for sex. You're right when you say that some women who get pumped and dumped "aren't bad women" and are "lost without a strong, firm hand do help them." But, as you yourself pointed out, it is the responsibility of a girl's family to help her stay away from bad (non-committal) men. If you find yourself in a position where you could have sex with a certain girl, you are probably not the only guy who has found himself in that position with this girl. Nothing you can do or say will "save" her, whether her situation is her own fault or not.

I agree that many women end up in bad relationships and/or getting pumped and dumped because they are confused and don't have the proper guidance. I also agree that a man who lies to a woman and says he loves her and offers her his commitment, only to leave her after banging a few times, is a scumbag. But, if the man doesn't lie about his intentions and the woman chooses to sleep with him anyway, then I don't really think the man is at fault.

I believe that for society at large, it would be better if premarital and extramarital sex did not occur. However, as an individual, give me one good reason why I should turn down casual sex with a willing woman? Why should I treat her with more respect than she treats herself? If I were to turn her down for sex, do you think it would steer her away from this type of behavior in the future? I highly doubt it.