[Rob Banks]

(12-06-2016 02:50 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  

The only way you can verify these kind of things is if you grew up together with her. If you are in her social circle, that helps too.The guy above who claimed to marry a 28yr old virgin, sure I'm sure she is a technical virgin, but what about Anal, BJ,CIM etc etc.
Heck how do you know she didnt go to a surgeon and receive a hymenoplasty, that shit is huge in Thailand.
And as a farang there is no way he can verify her past.

You need to find a girl you trust. If a girl claims to be a virgin, but something feels off, it probably is. If you're not sure whether or not you can trust a girl, you probably can't trust her.

I'm sure you have at least one friend or family member, maybe a brother, who you are 100% certain you can trust and would never lie to you about something important. If he tells you something, you automatically believe it without question. The goal is to find a girl who you can trust in the same way. A girl who literally becomes a part of you, and considers lying to you about something this big to be an act of disrespect against herself (because she is literally a part of you, if she disrespects you, she is disrespecting herself).

Of course, this doesn't mean you should blindly trust a girl just because you feel a connection with her. Building that kind of trust takes time, and if you ever discover anything that makes you suspicious of her, don't take it lightly. But there should come a point, after some time together, that you don't even need to be suspicious of her anymore. If you've been with a girl for over a year and you still feel the need to be vigilant and verify the things she tells you, or you are not 100% convinced she is telling the truth about her sexual history, then she is probably not the right girl for you.

[John_Galt]

If there is doubt, there is no doubt.

If your gut tells you she's not a virgin, trust it.

A girl who's taken it in the ass and mouth is NOT going to be the same as the girl who's only kissed a man.

It changes the woman. The hymen is more metaphorical than physical in this sense. It's the act of BEING WITH a man SEXUALLY that changes her, not the busting of a hymen.

[StrikeBack]

@John_Galt: yes verified after a couple of months of dating. It only took that long because she was very physically tight and I took my time to open her up. She was extremely attracted to me at first sight and was both worried that I might be scared that she's a virgin and very happy to give me her gift.

She's never had a boyfriend before, never kissed anyone, never had even a male friend of any kind, gay or straight. She's never had a passport (extremely rare for Aussie girls), never even been on a plane or out of our state.

I know plenty of sluts and broken women before, even the ones who claim they're virgins. They give off vibes that are completely different and easy to detect. I don't need a doctor's certificate to figure that out.

When I was younger, I did not care for this too much, and I doubt I could understand how important it is either. I met my wife when I was in my early 30s, having had a fun bachelor life, established and ready to have a family. Like I said, I'd be happy to continue my bachelor life, and was very much anti-marriage, but I knew a great deal when I saw one.

I tell you guys, it feels amazing when you are the first of everything for your wife, and she tells you that you own her and she's your property, and you know every word is completely from the heart.

[John_Galt]

^
This.

If you think guys who want this are "insecure", you go ahead and do you. Keep driving the Kia. I'll enjoy the Audi.

[philosophical_recovery]

Christ.

I get the thing with virgins. Really, I do.

And I've met the "technical" virgin that takes it in the ass right before she lets me then put my dick in her mouth and jizz all over her pretty slavic face. Who then gets married to some schmuck.

But let's say you meet a girl. Introverted. Shy. Big, tight family. Hits all your belief qualifications for someone you would not feel bad about having kids with her. Except she's slept with a single guy. However, when she touches your dick, it surprises her because she's not used to it? She loves giving you massages and listening to your moans of pleasure because she likes pleasing you? She's not bitchy? She still has plenty of youth left? Her mother is still attractive and thin (after a lot of kids)? Who you can be around and doesn't annoy the fuck out of you, who you can be silent with and chill?

Would you cast her aside and say "go find another man" because she's had a single dick inside of her when you've been inside a few dozen slutty holes?

Come on, man.

[John_Galt]

^

Would I "cast her aside"? Nah, of course not. I'd bang her. Mini-relationship. Have my fun. Would I put a ring on it? Hell no.

Look up the stats. Failure rate increases 30% after ONE single cock. Period. That's not negligible.

The girl who's virginity I took, are still sucking and fucking like I taught her to, and she's still wishing I had married her. She will be forever fucked up because I left her.

A girl will never be "yours" if someone else fucked her first. You may be ok with that, but I'm not.

I don't mind "renting". I really don't. I just don't want to buy a rental.

It's common knowledge you should avoid purchasing rental cars. Do you know why? Because people abuse them. It isn't their car, they only have it for the weekend, etc etc. I'm not going to shit on a guy for purchasing a rental---you can get some great deals on them. But personally, I'll buy mine off the lot with 0 miles.

Remember gentlemen: It's no hymen, not DIAMOND, not "no hymen, no dick."

[Travesty]

^^ By saying "only 1" and putting a laundry list of virgin-like attributes you are making the argument to score higher and go for the real deal.

[Travesty]

John_Galt may have a more unbreakable frame on virginity than my frame against Craft Beer drinkers. Quite amazing.

[John_Galt]

"She only had ONE cock."

is like saying "He only shot me with ONE bullet."

Or "I only had ONE bottle of vodka. (Before stepping behind the wheel of a car.)

It's MARRIAGE. It's for LIFE. You ultimately have a PART OF YOURSELF (your children) that you're trusting this person with. If you don't think that's reason enough for high standards, I don't know what will convince you.

I don't know about you guys, but myself, I only planning on getting married once. Known enough men and read enough stories here to recognize it's not something you want to repeat.

[Rob Banks]

(12-06-2016 10:37 PM)John_Galt Wrote:  

A girl will never be "yours" if someone else fucked her first. You may be ok with that, but I'm not.

This.

A girl will never fully belong to you if another guy banged her first. A part of her will always belong to the other guy. And that applies regardless of whether or not she is loyal, loves you, never thinks about the other guy, etc. It is simply natural for men to desire to own a woman, and that includes owning her virginity.

It is not only the risk of disloyalty/cheating/divorce from non-virgins that causes men to want to marry virgin women. Even if there was a nice girl with only one or two dicks in her past, and you were 100% sure she would not betray you through divorce or cuckoldry, the fact that another man penetrated her before you (regardless of which hole he used) makes her undesirable for marriage, in my opinion.

The simple fact that it physically happened is enough to turn me off, regardless of the girl's personality or how she feels about the situation.

Even if a girl was legitimately raped by a stranger in her own house, and that was the only sexual experience she ever had, I would not recommend considering a serious relationship with her for the simple fact that she was physically penetrated by another man, and therefore could never be fully yours.

Now, before anyone misunderstands me, I am not saying that virginity is the only thing that matters. Obviously, a virgin chick who was fat or had a bitchy, disrespectful attitude would not be desirable for marriage. Virginity is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for a woman to be considered marriageable.

[John_Galt]

I'm not so much obsessed with the physical aspect, as I am the mental/spiritual "cost" of sex for women.

We ALL recognize the reality of the "thousand cock stare". Most of us are also familer with the "law of diminishing returns". Suffice it to say that the first cock does the most damage, and every subsequent cock does less and less damage to her being/mental health/soul. However you want to describe it, women are not built to "compartmentalize" sex like men are. To men, sex is just sex. To women, it's giving a part of her person to another human being. Until there is no soul left, hence the "thousand cock stare".

TL;DR: The biggest part of her "soul" gets torn away the moment a man penetrates her. That part will always and forever belong to that man.

Would you pay full price for a box of Twinkies from the store if the box had been ripped open and someone took a third of them?

[StrikeBack]

(12-06-2016 10:54 PM)John_Galt Wrote:  

"She only had ONE cock."

is like saying "He only shot me with ONE bullet."

Or "I only had ONE bottle of vodka. (Before stepping behind the wheel of a car.)

It's MARRIAGE. It's for LIFE. You ultimately have a PART OF YOURSELF (your children) that you're trusting this person with. If you don't think that's reason enough for high standards, I don't know what will convince you.

I don't know about you guys, but myself, I only planning on getting married once. Known enough men and read enough stories here to recognize it's not something you want to repeat.

(12-06-2016 11:16 PM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

A girl will never fully belong to you if another guy banged her first. A part of her will always belong to the other guy.

(12-06-2016 11:26 PM)John_Galt Wrote:  

I'm not so much obsessed with the physical aspect, as I am the mental/spiritual "cost" of sex for women.

Before meeting my wife, to be honest I did not think about those things as much as the two gentlemen here do. I did have some serious non-negotiable criteria including virginity but they served more as a reminder for me to NOT get married in this day and age. During my single days, except for serious cases like BPD or histrionic feminist nonsense, I overlooked a lot in women because I knew I wouldn't want it to last more than a couple of months anyway.

After meeting my wife, I could not agree more with those strict standards including virginity. We are facing enormous risks today with marriage and LTR. If we are to sacrifice our bachelorhood and be married FOR LIFE, might as well go for top quality. What else are we improving ourselves so much for anyway?

It's not just me who want this, my wife also is extremely happy that she only belongs to me and I'm her first for everything.

Like someone said earlier, our fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers etc. minus all of our knowledge and self improvement efforts had better wives. We too can get the same if we refuse to back down on standards.

[John_Galt]

I honestly don't believe the guys arguing "settle for what you can get easily" have ever given serious thought to living the rest of their lives with one woman and having children, raising them, etc.

Anyone who has ever seriously considered this lifestyle, who knows what we know collectively, couldn't possibly in good conscious advise another man to lower his standards for a womans character.

No one is here saying "If she's not a 9, don't even bother". That is NOT realistic for most men. But a womans CHARACTER is something in FAR less demand (even though it's MUCH more valuable in the long-term), thus every man who WANT'S it can get it, if he's willing to invest the appropriate time and effort.

BTW, I recognize this is a players forum. It's completely fine that some of us have never given serious consideration to a lifelong partnership with one woman, having children, etc. Play on playa! I'm doing that myself. But ultimately, I don't want to use and dispose of women I don't really care about for the rest of my natural life....eventually, I'd like something deeper and more meaningful. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate or value fucking random girls. It just means I see the other side of the picture too.

Some of you will never settle down, and will be married to the game. More power to you, and a lot of respect. It's not easy to do. The "weaker" of us will eventually settle down, get married, and pop out little crim-midgets. That's just the way it is.

[Rawmeo]

That makes me remember when my car was broken and I had to rent a car - I was driving like a madman, because it wasn't mine and they have insurance that pays for whatever I might cause. The car had the "check engine" light always on because other customers were doing the same thing than I.

Like John_Galt said here, there's nothing wrong with renting. I have several non-virgins in my rotation and they often get "perks", such as dinners, nights out, etc. I treat them like a gentleman should, but while reminding her that I might find someone else in the future so they shouldn't get attached too much. They'll get treated good, but no ring. A girl wanting a white dress wedding ceremony in front of 100 people with photographers, buffet, cake, etc. needs to deserve it, and the criteria is to not have had previous partners.

Quote:

But let's say you meet a girl. Introverted. Shy. Big, tight family. Hits all your belief qualifications for someone you would not feel bad about having kids with her. Except she's slept with a single guy. However, when she touches your dick, it surprises her because she's not used to it? She loves giving you massages and listening to your moans of pleasure because she likes pleasing you? She's not bitchy? She still has plenty of youth left? Her mother is still attractive and thin (after a lot of kids)? Who you can be around and doesn't annoy the fuck out of you, who you can be silent with and chill?

Would you cast her aside and say "go find another man" because she's had a single dick inside of her when you've been inside a few dozen slutty holes?

Alas, yes I would. However I'd probably keep her as my main mistress all along until she gets bored. It's a small mistake, but with consequences. Once enough girls start seeing their friends struggling to get married because they aren't virgins, they'll realize the importance of keeping it for the right man. You need to have experienced it to understand the phenomenon.

All my ancestors married virgins, because it's the way it should be. It also helps teach people about "female accountability". The female body, apart from hymen tearing, undergoes some transformations after the first time, which make her a "different person".

In exchange, I will never bang a virgin without commiting to her, in order to play in an ethical way.

[Rob Banks]

(12-06-2016 11:26 PM)John_Galt Wrote:  

I'm not so much obsessed with the physical aspect, as I am the mental/spiritual "cost" of sex for women.

We ALL recognize the reality of the "thousand cock stare". Most of us are also familer with the "law of diminishing returns". Suffice it to say that the first cock does the most damage, and every subsequent cock does less and less damage to her being/mental health/soul. However you want to describe it, women are not built to "compartmentalize" sex like men are. To men, sex is just sex. To women, it's giving a part of her person to another human being. Until there is no soul left, hence the "thousand cock stare".

TL;DR: The biggest part of her "soul" gets torn away the moment a man penetrates her. That part will always and forever belong to that man.

Would you pay full price for a box of Twinkies from the store if the box had been ripped open and someone took a third of them?

You put it better than I did, John.

When I talk about the physical aspect, it is obvious that the psychological aspect is connected to it. I did say that the physical aspect by itself would bother me, even if it did not affect the girl psychologically. But that is never the case. Any girl who has been with a guy is psychologically affected by it to some extent. As you said, she gives up a part of her soul to the guy.

Obviously the physical and psychological aspects are connected and can never be viewed as separate from one another. My comment was more towards the guys who say things like "if a girl has only had one dick and her personality is exactly the same as a nice virgin girl, then it wouldn't matter that she had sex once." And my response to that is "I don't care if she supposedly didn't change at all and still has the personality of a virgin. I still wouldn't recommend marrying her, just solely based on the fact that she's been fucked before." Obviously, in reality, it is not possible for a girl to lose her virginity and not be affected psychologically and personality-wise.

[philosophical_recovery]

I'm in agreement with you guys on the marriage thing.

I'm also not Christian. This will be a fundamental source of disagreement among us. Most of the virgins I know are all from good Christian families that I'm 99% sure would not permit a non-christian to be part of their family. This isn't something I ever want to lie about. However, the virgins that I've actually banged were fallen Christians at some point so this was actually a non-issue and never a source of strife. But, clearly, I didn't marry them or knock them up. One of them still won't leave me the fuck alone when I told her I was banging other girls. She hid her virginity from me after I flat out stated that I didn't want her as a girlfriend and she did everything she could to have sex with me anyway.

I'm of the mind that I would be willing to have kids out of wedlock. It's a point of agreement between VV and I that caught my eye. This may change, but the current state of a government boobytrapped marriage makes me skeptical of it ever being a good idea. Especially with the thought that's been brought up on the previous pages of having a side piece that could railroad you in ANY marriage, doesn't matter if a girl if a virgin or not. I haven't made my mind up on the secretly banging other side pieces being a good idea for a marriage.

Marry a woman and risk getting fucked in the ass by lawyers and the court in a divorce for having a side piece? But adamantly refuse to have kids with a non-virgin? Pick your poison, I guess, but there's a heavy amount of risk in either situation. Not married, you can still fuck up your family and get fucked by child support, but overall the penalty is probably less severe.

I still haven't fully formed my thoughts on this, but I am taking your points in consideration. I'm a bit torn, as I don't think I've ever met a non-believing girl worth marrying or having kids with, but I also can't say that I believe in God, or particularly care that much, but do have some respect for Christianity as damn near a necessary tradition.

[Rob Banks]

(12-07-2016 12:29 AM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  

...I'm of the mind that I would be willing to have kids out of wedlock. It's a point of agreement between VV and I that caught my eye. This may change, but the current state of a government boobytrapped marriage makes me skeptical of it ever being a good idea. Especially with the thought that's been brought up on the previous pages of having a side piece that could railroad you in ANY marriage, doesn't matter if a girl if a virgin or not. I haven't made my mind up on the secretly banging other side pieces being a good idea for a marriage.

Marry a woman and risk getting fucked in the ass by lawyers and the court in a divorce for having a side piece? But adamantly refuse to have kids with a non-virgin? Pick your poison, I guess, but there's a heavy amount of risk in either situation. Not married, you can still fuck up your family and get fucked by child support, but overall the penalty is probably less severe....

If you're worried about a woman divorcing you and taking half your shit (a legitimate concern), then how are you not just as worried about that same woman having your children and raising them as a single mother if she leaves you?

On the other hand, if you do trust the woman to have your children and stay together with you to raise them, then why not marry the woman and make it official? Why worry about divorce if you know the woman won't leave you?

In my opinion, I wouldn't have children with a woman I wasn't virtually 100% sure would stay with me to raise them. I wouldn't risk having children that end up getting raised in a broken home.

As for the idea that a sidepiece would railroad any marriage, I don't think it necessarily works like that. At least it shouldn't work like that. It's not in a woman's nature to leave a man she loves and belongs to just because he cheated. I realize male cheating is a sin, and women have a right to legitimately be mad if their man cheats, but in the past, famous and powerful men, many of whom were happily married with children, had mistresses and their wives didn't leave them. It is only recently, under feminism, that women are leaving men over cheating, because they want to be "equal" to men (a man will generally leave his wife if she cheats). Also, women are able to financially support themselves nowadays, so they are more likely to leave their husbands.

I would be surprised if a traditional, virgin girl you marry would leave you (the only man she will ever truly belong to) and go find another man just because you fucked some slut. It would not be in her best interest to leave you, assuming she really loved and respected you in the first place.

[John_Galt]

I agree with Rob Banks.

Nothing is a sure thing in life. But you wouldn't give Power Of Attorney to someone you didn't trust. Why would you do something MUCH bigger with someone you didn't trust?

If you can't trust the woman you're with, don't even bother. The issue then becomes finding a woman worthy of your trust.

They exist. Certainly there must be external parameters in place to keep them in line (such as Christianity, as previously mentioned).

[philosophical_recovery]

(12-07-2016 12:53 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

If you're worried about a woman divorcing you and taking half your shit (a legitimate concern), then how are you not just as worried about that same woman having your children and raising them as a single mother if she leaves you?

I wouldn't lose half my shit so I'd have a larger springboard to recover.

Quote:

On the other hand, if you do trust the woman to have your children and stay together with you to raise them, then why not marry the woman and make it official? Why worry about divorce if you know the woman won't leave you?

In my opinion, I wouldn't have children with a woman I wasn't virtually 100% sure would stay with me to raise them. I wouldn't risk having children that end up getting raised in a broken home.

It's always a risk. One that can be mitigated, but people change over time. Can't get around it. Stable family backgrounds are a good predictor of stability, as well as # of partners. You're always going to deal with uncertainty.

Quote:

As for the idea that a sidepiece would railroad any marriage, I don't think it necessarily works like that. At least it shouldn't work like that. It's not in a woman's nature to leave a man she loves and belongs to just because he cheated. I realize male cheating is a sin, and women have a right to legitimately be mad if their man cheats, but in the past, famous and powerful men, many of whom were happily married with children, had mistresses and their wives didn't leave them. It is only recently, under feminism, that women are leaving men over cheating, because they want to be "equal" to men (a man will generally leave his wife if she cheats). Also, women are able to financially support themselves nowadays, so they are more likely to leave their husbands.

I would be surprised if a traditional, virgin girl you marry would leave you (the only man she will ever truly belong to) and go find another man just because you fucked some slut. It would not be in her best interest to leave you, assuming she really loved and respected you in the first place.

This is a nice theory, but there have been stories of girls who lost their virginity with marriage who then went on to cheat on their husbands. Or girls who are so shattered by their husband's infidelity that they divorce their husbands and get showered with alimony, rewards, and all that crap. It is not a guaranteed thing.

As a counterpoint, there are prominent, popular members of this part of the internet that have met and married women that I'm pretty sure are in their late 20s or early 30s and knocked them up. I'm also pretty sure a late 20s woman is not going to be a virgin or single except in extreme cases of not being attractive. Not saying that I would do that, but it begs the question of why these decisions are being made instead of the man continually holding out for a better offer.

There's always going to be prettier girls, another virgin girl, you have it. You can continue learning game, stacking bills, and improving until your body actually starts to give out. But if your value systems are in line, your families are intact, I truly wonder what the risk really is. It's not something amenable to statistical analysis. Is she going to help you continue to improve? Is she going to be supportive? These are the questions worth asking to me.

And your time here is ultimately limited. You don't have infinite choices and opportunity. You will have a lot of it over the years, and it will seem infinite, but at some point the sand in the top part of the hourglass runs out.

[McCarthy]

New guy here.

I see lots of virgin praising here. It is fine, much better virgin that a slut, we all agree.
However, what really matters is not the virginity itself, but the legal framework and the cultural environment in which the relationship develops. You could marry a non-virgin 80 years ago in Europe and no divorce would happen. Why? Divorce simply was not a possibility.

For all the folks here who praise virginity. Make sure you control (almost impossible IMHO) the female environment of your super virgin brides until menopause, because the day your unicorns (I see lot of pedestalizing, here) get inside the idea that they did not enjoy their lives enough, you will bite the dust as the guy who married the slut.

And BTW, you guys are not virgin either... in your minds, the diminishing returns is there. I still remember my first ejaculation (with no condom), but I cannot remember the face of the last tinder girl I fucked in NYC. Let’s tame the male hamster for a while.

Just my 2c about this.

[philosophical_recovery]

(12-07-2016 01:30 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

I agree with Rob Banks.

Nothing is a sure thing in life. But you wouldn't give Power Of Attorney to someone you didn't trust. Why would you do something MUCH bigger with someone you didn't trust?

If you can't trust the woman you're with, don't even bother. The issue then becomes finding a woman worthy of your trust.

They exist. Certainly there must be external parameters in place to keep them in line (such as Christianity, as previously mentioned).

Virgin does not necessarily = trust
Not virgin does not necessarily mean untrustworthy

After dating/banging enough girls this is clear. To some extent, you can start reading people. Your spidey senses start tingling.

After being on the receiving end of girls calling you up after they get married, you start understanding signs of this behavior. But, ultimately, anything could surprise you if you do not admit the possibility. I have a more stoic attitude towards this than anything else. I acknowledge the possibility, prepare or adjust, and get on with my life.

Another virgin I deflowered at 18yrs refused contact with me completely after we broke up and got married and as far as I know still is, probably has kids now, for well over a decade.

[John_Galt]

^
Guarantee you could bang her again if you played it right. 100% guarantee.

[XXL]

What is going on with this VIRGIN thing, one of the most absurd nonsense I ever read here, only on RVF I guess

Anyway...

You think it's hard work simply because you want to be in relationship with your GF and live your single life at the same time. It won't work for healthy healthy relationship. You need to make a decision. You're either in or out.

Relationships are not "hard work", relationships are relationships. There is a innate nature of a relationship that you seem to neglect. The basic premise of any LTR is sharing everything, your time, energy, resources, problems, etc. That's how it works. That's the nature of it. When a chick needs your attention a lot, that's not hard work of LTR, that's something natural and expected. That's the default state of LTR.

It's like saying working out is hard work because you have to rip your muscle tissues, sweat, it hurts, it makes you tired, etc. Well, duh, it is like that, that's normal.

[McCarthy]

(12-07-2016 07:14 AM)XXL Wrote:  



What is going on with this VIRGIN thing, one of the most absurd nonsense I ever read here, only on RVF I guess

Anyway...

You think it's hard work simply because you want to be in relationship with your GF and live your single life at the same time. It won't work for healthy healthy relationship. You need to make a decision. You're either in or out.

Relationships are not "hard work", relationships are relationships. There is a innate nature of a relationship that you seem to neglect. The basic premise of any LTR is sharing everything, your time, energy, resources, problems, etc. That's how it works. That's the nature of it. When a chick needs your attention a lot, that's not hard work of LTR, that's something natural and expected. That's the default state of LTR.

It's like saying working out is hard work because you have to rip your muscle tissues, sweat, it hurts, it makes you tired, etc. Well, duh, it is like that, that's normal.

^^

What I see in this thread is a bunch of players who will always miss the player lifestyle. Not that different from cock carousel.

Any attempt to individually replicate our grandparents’ marriage conditions by taking some external aspects of it in (virginity) but others out ("having women on the side") is just trying to solve the quadrature of the circle.

70% of divorces initiated by women = 30% of divorces initiated by men. I wonder why those men may initiate divorce...

Oh yes, I think know it. One day, the virginal wife will get wrinkled, saggy tits pop out, vaginal dryness shows up and gets somehow fat. New young pussy walks around... playa does not want to miss it!... Men’s second youth? YOLO? It sounds familiar... Divorce + New marriage + kids with the second wife!

BTW, is any of the participants in this thread older than 40 or 50?

[eddie_7]

Very interesting points made about virginity. I agree with John_Galt that it is the mental/emotional changes women are likely to undergo when their virginity is taken by a man that are more pertinent than the mere physical aspects. I have a feeling that the woman is likely to be "imprinted" by their first man especially if he makes a strong "alpha" impression on her psyche. Perhaps other men who enters into a LTR/marriage with that women will have to remove that impression and imprint his own in order to garner her devotion to him.
I wonder if this also happens to a lesser extent in situations where even though she didn't give the man sexual access, she is nevertheless profoundly affected by the "alpha experience" of an interesting man letting her into his world which she will remember for many years.

Also agree with StrikeBack that considering the enormous risk and sacrifices of entering into LTR/marriage, having high standards such as virginity is quite understandable.