The Promiscuity Widower.

Months ago I received an email from another female blogger who was concerned about one of her daughters marrying a man who had had previous sexual partners.  She said that the young man had repented of the sin of fornication and was living a godly life.  This female blogger and her husband are devout Christians and had raised all their children, both males and females, to maintain their chastity before marriage.  Their other daughters had married men who were chaste and their sons had maintained their chastity, so they were deeply concerned about their daughter’s marriage to this young man who had not been chaste.

There is an idea that pre-marital sexual activity is more damaging to women than it is to men, and I agree with this idea.  Women can easily become alpha widows after even one previous partner, whereas one or two previous partners probably isn’t going to be nearly as psychologically damaging to a man.  Of course, if he caught an STI or his fornication resulted in the out-of-wedlock birth of a child, then his sexual activity actually was quite damaging, but still I think women, even those with low Ns, are more messed up by fornication than men are.

Having said all that, I believe that there is a male analogue to the Alpha Widow, and that it applies whether the man is a Christian or an atheist.  Whereas a woman’s brain can imprint upon the most dominant man she has ever been with and make it extremely difficult for her to bond to her future husband, it is becoming increasingly clear to me that men who engage in heavy promiscuity before marriage must somehow imprint on the chasing of novel sexual partners and are at a much increased risk of being unable to bond to monogamy.

Although it probably isn’t true for every single man, I’m noticing more examples of this.  I will only list a few examples from comments men have left on my blog, but I could list more:

Example 1:

I don’t want to live in sin by being a man whore outside of marriage (my past). [But] I truly feel like a caged zoo animal that once knew what it was like to run among the prairie and hunt small game. What a precarious situation to be in.

Example 2:

I was married for 3 years (and together for 4.5), post-Red Pill, to a helluva woman. Game came easily in the marriage, in part because I selected a woman who was game “friendly” shall we say. We got along great.

Yet being in my mid-30s, after (I felt) the relationship had run its course, I realized I missed plate-spinning. I could not in good faith reconcile it with my marriage to my wife. I ended the marriage, and although she was heartbroken, we ended it mutually and honorably and with no ill will…It may sound twisted, but I’m proud of how I handled it …In short, I enjoyed the “comforts” of marriage, but missed the adventures of the single life.

Example 3: My husband.  He was quite promiscuous before marriage and committed adultery a number of times over the first thirteen years of our marriage.  He is a serious Christian now and strives to avoid sexual sin, but I know that despite enjoying regular sex with his wife, it is nevertheless difficult for him to live monogamously.  The temptation is always there.

Of course, almost all women like alphas and almost all men are somewhat aroused by the idea of a novel female sex partner, but those women who actually had sexual relations with an alpha and those men who spent a number of years chasing after (and often catching) numerous women seem to be at an increased risk of being unable to bond properly in their marriages.

Just as I would counsel a man to be very, very careful about marrying a woman who has had previous sex partners, so too would I counsel a woman to be very, very careful about marrying a man with a high sex partner count.  Alpha Widows and Promiscuity Widowers make poor marriage partners.

Edit 1: Please see this comment below for some of the biological mechanisms at work.  The desire for novel mates has a name: the Coolidge effect.

Edit 2: Please see another comment below for some data about the correlation between number of sexual partners and likelihood of cheating on one’s spouse.

205 thoughts on “The Promiscuity Widower.

  1. sunshinemary

    The problem with my advice to women on this subject is that, while men are turned off by the idea of marrying promiscuous women, women are not generally turned off by promiscuous men. Sometimes, in fact, I think women are sort of turned on by promiscuous men, but these men are not the best bet for marriage, so it’s important for women to work against deh tingelz in that situation.

  2. donalgraeme

    I stand by my assertion that assortive mating is the ideal. Unless there is no other option available, and you are convinced you must get married, a chaste Christian should marry another chaste Christian. There are really 4 types of marriages:
    1) One where both the man and the woman was chaste (virgins until marriage)
    2) One where neither the man or the woman was chaste before marriage.
    3) One where the woman was chaste before marriage but the man was not.
    4) One where the man was chaste before marriage but the woman was not.

    I have organized them in what I think is the healthiest/best order. That is, the order most likely to be happy/content. That chaste young daughter should marry a chaste young man.They do exist out there, although they can be somewhat hard to find (just as finding a chaste young woman can be hard to find). But I think that in the end the fact that both parties “know” only each other makes a huge difference.

  3. deti

    “Whereas a woman’s brain can imprint upon the most dominant man she has ever been with and make it extremely difficult for her to bond to her future husband, it is becoming increasingly clear to me that men who engage in heavy promiscuity before marriage must somehow imprint on the chasing of novel sexual partners and are at a much increased risk of being unable to bond to monogamy.”

    Yeah, this is the key concept. I generally agree with this, but would point out:

    1. An alpha widow (AW) gets hung up on one man, sometimes a couple of men. A “promiscuity widower” (PW) (in quotes because I’m not fully on board with this but working with it) gets hung up on the lifestyle and the thrill of chasing women, not a specific woman or women. The AW gets hung up on the guy; the PW gets hung up on the concept/lifestyle.

    2. I strongly suspect there are many, many more AWs than PWs, simply because more women have opportunities for promiscuous sex than men do. I also suspect that men are just more naturally inoculated against PW-hood because we’re more hard wired for sex with multiple partners. There’s a much greater risk that female promiscuity will create an AW than male promiscuity will create a PW.

    3. Alpha widowhood is much more debilitating to a woman sexually and relationally than promiscuity widowerhood is to a man. The AW has to have one particular man to get turned on sexually. She can’t bond to her husband because she isn’t attracted to him and thus is unable to give him anything. The AW is debilitated because she cannot have any of what she wants. In contrast, the PW can bond to his wife and is sexually attracted to her; he just has a very hard time giving her ALL of his attention. The PW is debilitated to a lesser degree because he can have SOME of what he wants. So I think the issue is one of degree in which the AW experiences the effects much more severely than the man experiences PW-hood.

    4. There might be some support for this notion that heavy promiscuity screws men up mentally, emotionally and sexually. Roosh has written some about this; it’s clear he’s experiencing “player burnout”. Roosh has described that at times sex is mechanical and devoid of enjoyment or novelty; he doesn’t like or care about most of the women he has or had sex with; and he has tired of the tedium and humdrum nature of the pickup.

    [ssm: Hmm, I wasn't even thinking of Roosh when I wrote this, but what you say makes sense. I know that he has talked about player burn out, yet he keeps on playin', which might be something akin to being a PW.]

    5. I’m going to quibble with some of your choice of words here. I think the lack of bonding on both sides between AWs and PWs is one of degree. I think the AW doesn’t find it “extremely difficult” to bond to a husband, at least not always. I suspect in many cases the AW is completely unable to bond emotionally and sexually. She can go through the motions of sex but it’s clear her heart is elsewhere. She might love him emotionally even, but isn’t sexually attracted to the husband, and this prevents bonding. The PW can also be “unable” to bond, but there are probably some who are happily married and faithful but wistfully reminiscing about their player days. Those PWs could be said to have lessened or reduced bonding ability, I suppose; and they aren’t completely unable to “bond with monogamy”.

    6. While we’re on this, I take issue with the idea that a man “bonds with monogamy”. What a man has to do is get himself on board with the idea that he must remain faithful in body and in commitment to his wife. He doesn’t “bond” to it, he simply does it because he decides to do it. He can bond to a woman; it’s just relatively easy for him to sever that bond should that become necessary. That doesn’t mean severing the bond doesn’t hurt; it’s just that once the bond is severed, the resulting wound is more readily cauterized and healed than it seems to be with a woman.

  4. deti

    One last thing: I said:

    “The PW is debilitated to a lesser degree because he can have SOME of what he wants. So I think the issue is one of degree in which the AW experiences the effects much more severely than the man experiences PW-hood.”

    To add to this, we know men’s attraction filters are naturally much wider than women’s filters. So men are more easily satisfied sexually and emotionally with a wider variety of women than the converse.

    What this means in this context is that many times, I think the PW getting SOME of what he wants is enough. Conversely, for the AW, nothing less than that special guy, the object of her undying affection, will satisfy her.

  5. Flaming Man of Iron

    Interesting thread SSM. I think you’ve got it right, that this young woman should likely not marry this guy who used to be a poon hound. How does she really know he’s ready for marriage? If the girl’s parents are concerned enough, they shouldn’t be giving their blessing to the marriage. There are surely other decent young men with better pasts available?

    I agree with Deti’s analysis too, that poon hound’s follow a lifestyle, whereas AW’s are hung up on a certain guy they never got. My mother I’ve now come to realize my has mild AW issues… My father has just never measured up to her past experiences.

  6. Emma the Emo

    deti,
    Not sure I entirely get it, but how to reconcile point 6 with the “war brides” idea, where women are supposed to have this ability to easily sever their bond with a man once the bond is no longer serving them?

  7. Martel

    @ donal: I’d switch up 2 and 3 in your list. A relationship in which only one partner is at risk of being a widow of either sort is preferable to one in which each has a past to live down. It might seem more balanced the other way, but I guarantee that marriage between a reformed player and a chaste bride has a better chance than one between a reformed player and a former slut. Male promiscuity can cause problems, but female promiscuity problems are more permanent.

    I think that the effect of male promiscuity also depends on how extreme it was. I’ve had my eras, and I know that the rush of a new conquest will always be missing, but I can handle it. What others describe as some deep longing of regret won’t quite be that for me. I’d be fine with one quality woman.

    Although Roosh has player burnout, he’s still doing whatever he can to bang as many women as possible. Once it hits a certain point, it’s an addiction, pure and simple, and it’s one that will always leave some serious regrets.

  8. deti

    “Sometimes, in fact, I think women are sort of turned on by promiscuous men, but these men are not the best bet for marriage,”

    I’m not sure why you used all the modifiers and qualifiers. It’s pretty well known in the manosphere (of which you’re not a part, SSM, no sirree, no way no how wink wink nudge nudge – [ssm: Oh quit, will ya? Who says I even want to be let into the boys' tree fort anyway? :)]) that promiscuous men benefit from preselection. A lot of women wanted to sleep with him which results in more and more women wanting to sleep with him. So yeah, promiscuous men do turn women on.

    [ssm: It may be common "knowledge" in the sphere, but it is not accepted outside the sphere, and a number of women have strongly disagreed that they are turned on by promiscuous men. Now, whether they are being honest and/or accurate is another matter, but nevertheless, I wouldn't put this in such strong terms because I'm not convinced that all women like promiscuous men. In any event, they are best avoided when it comes to marriage. Really, probably a woman should use caution with any man who has a double-digit N if she is marriage-minded.]

  9. Martel

    @ emma: Part of the reason that War Brides get over their men so easily and Alpha Widows never do is that in the former case, she’s following her hypergamic instincts and in the latter, he’s the one that left her. An Alpha Widow always feels like she’s downgraded from the One, the opposite of what her hypergamy wants her to do, so she’ll feel forever unsatisfied. The War Bride just went along for the ride.

  10. Professor Hale

    Mostly I just want to get a comment in before the list gets too long to read. You popular blogs drive me nuts with your hundreds of comments per post.

    [ssm: Ha! Well, I do my best to be difficult and disagreeable, but readers keep coming here anyway. :)]

    There is an element of truth to what you say but I disagree with the premise that men or women cannot control their behavior. The entire process of disciplining one’s self if to overcome the nature of wanting what you know is not good for you. The point of a marriage to one women is not just to enjoy perpetual sexual gratification with one women. There is so much more. The addition of children and being a father and then grandparents are deeply meaningful elements in life and maturity. People can choose. They can choose to do what they want, or to do what is good despite what they want. A man chooses to give up hunting small game because of all the benefits of monogamy, not just because he is sexually satisfied at every “meal”.

    [ssm: Excellent points.]

    If we decline to accept the traditional two-party marriage, then the man can be married and have those benefits, AND still hunt for recreation. It has been done before.

    Finally, unless they have been under constant supervision, even guarding them while they sleep, no parent can say with certainty that their kids are chaste. It’s not one of those things kids like to share with parents. Especially if they know you would not approve.

  11. Remo

    Wow. This is a very interesting problem in this day and age as its almost always the female who isn’t a virgin. I have seen it the other way many times and it always causes problems. I don’t believe this is nearly as serious. Whatever other thoughts may be going through his head the notion that he has a virgin, a girl all to himself, is going to be a very strong bonding agent for him especially if he is an honest Christian. Sociopaths don’t care of course and that would be the chief concern. Even if the other girls were better in bed the fact that he doesn’t have to share his current one will supersede his thought process. Likely the other girls he was with weren’t virgins when he met them so she will seem a lot more special.

  12. Professor Hale

    Sometimes, in fact, I think women are sort of turned on by promiscuous men
    –Sometimes?

    Yes. Only sometimes. A good woman will see that such men are lacking in virtue and thus not even worthy of being in the friend zone. Virtuous people choose to be with other virtuous people because it is more comfortable for them to be round other people like them.

  13. deti

    Emma:

    “Not sure I entirely get it, but how to reconcile point 6 with the “war brides” idea, where women are supposed to have this ability to easily sever their bond with a man once the bond is no longer serving them?”

    Paging Rollo.

    I’m thinking this through as I type it. But the main distinctions I can think of would be:

    1. The alpha widow hangs on to a man she was really hot for. By contrast, the war bride is presented with a man even more alpha than her previous man.

    2. The alpha widow is in comfortable circumstances and doesn’t act out of duress. By contrast, the war bride severs that bond with the previous man out of sheer necessity. She’s got to move on so she (and her offspring) can survive.

  14. Pingback: When is the light going to turn on? | House-Wife Sexuality

  15. Zippy

    I would suggest that if the reformed studmuffin has demonstrated that he is not a slave of his passions by refraining from sex completely for a few years, he may be a good bet. Otherwise he is a high cheat risk.

  16. sunshinemary

    @ deti
    I don’t disagree with anything you wrote, but note that in my OP, I was referring to the effect of a PW on the woman who would marry him, not the effect that it has on him in terms of being able to get what he wants out of the relationship.

    One thing I didn’t say is whether or not one can enjoy being married to an AW or a PW. I think it’s probably mostly miserable for a man to be married to an AW, whereas being married to a PW is generally quite pleasant on a day-to-day basis, but when it does suck, it sucks really, really bad – dealing with hysterical women on the phone who thought they were the only mistress, for example, is a truly special experience. So it’s not the same marital dynamic, but in both cases, it’s better to avoid AWs and PWs if possible.

    Now, I am not sure that a hard and fast partner count can be assigned to a PW. More than 10? 20? 50? 100?

  17. deti

    Emma:

    What martel said.

    3. The alpha broke up with the woman and left her hanging, causing her to pine away for the great guy that got away (hence the alpha widow). By contrast, the war bride broke up with her previous man and moved on rapidly to a better one.

  18. Bike Bubba

    A man can imprint on the novelty, or–perhaps this is what’s really going on–he may be imprinted on the first one. My dad’s life since his divorce has mirrored the George Jones classic “He Stopped Loving her Today”–to a point, at least. He’s had girlfriends, almost remarried a couple of times, but when push comes to shove, it’s pretty clear that he lost the woman he really wanted back in 1983. Not a “frivorce”, either.

    I know other men who, despite loving their wives dearly, still think about that first one. So I’m not totally convinced that men are that different from women in this regard. For that matter, I also know women who, well, seem to be addicted to the chase as well.

    [ssm: Sure, it's not a hard and fast rule. People are always going to vary. Still, I think there are generalities that we can discuss.

    I'm interested in this the-first-one-is-the-most-special idea. Do other men agree with this? Does your first occupy a special place in your heart? Ladies: I'm sure I don't need to say this, but if your first was someone other than your husband, please don't comment on this question. It is unseemly for married women to discuss sex they had with other men.]

  19. earl

    It can certainly be imprinted…that’s why men who watch porn but never have sex with a flesh and blood woman can have sexual problems.

    Sexual sins messes up both genders…but like everything else the mess up is different.

  20. sunshinemary

    Zippy

    I would suggest that if the reformed studmuffin has demonstrated that he is not a slave of his passions by refraining from sex completely for a few years, he may be a good bet. Otherwise he is a high cheat risk

    Hmm, maybe. I would say that at least a couple of years of celibacy would be necessary to demonstrate that.

  21. DJ

    So sex wise women are the more forgiving gender very intresting

    [ssm: I don't believe forgiveness has anything to do with it.]

  22. Zippy

    Bike Bubba:
    I know other men who, despite loving their wives dearly, still think about that first one.

    As a hypothesis the idea that men imprint on the very first while women imprint on the very best is an interesting idea. And it is certainly true that some women become addicted to novelty.

  23. deti

    SSM:

    “in my OP, I was referring to the effect of a PW on the woman who would marry him, not the effect that it has on him in terms of being able to get what he wants out of the relationship.”

    Point well taken, SSM, but I think that the PW is not nearly as dangerous to a committed marriage as the AW is. Even if he’s a PW, getting SOME of what he wants is usually enough. Nothing less than the AW’s one and only alpha will satisfy her.

    If the object is to preserve marriage, wives are a lot more willing to forgive a man’s infidelity than men are willing to forgive a wife’s infidelity. This is because of the nature of infidelity, I think. When a man cheats on a wife, by and large he’s still committed to her and is attracted to her and doesn’t want a divorce. He’s just getting some on the side. (Not excusing it; I’m explaining his attitude.)

    But when a wife cheats on her husband, most of the time it is because she is not sexually attracted to her husband and she is 100% done with the marriage. She’s not looking for a guy on the side. She’s looking for a replacement husband.

    Marriages can more easily recover from husband infidelity than they can from wife infidelity.

    I also suspect that within marriage the AW is more likely to create intimacy and sex problems than the PW is. She’s much more likely to have medical and psychological issues resulting in sexual hangups than the PW is. And, I suspect the AW is much more likely to end the marriage because of all those problems than the PW is.

  24. earl

    “Hmm, maybe. I would say that at least a couple of years of celibacy would be necessary to demonstrate that.”

    I would say two things.

    1) Repentance for the sins committed.
    2) Proof that the person has gone and sinned no more.

    That’s why the born again virgin crowd is laughed at. They might have given up the sin (because they aren’t desirable anymore)…but they haven’t repented of their actions involved in it.

  25. Zippy

    sunshinemary:
    Hmm, maybe. I would say that at least a couple of years of celibacy would be necessary to demonstrate that.

    Well, puberty takes several years — that is, it takes several years to become a sexually mature virgin. So it makes sense that becoming a “born again virgin” would take several years of consistent continence.

  26. Farm Boy

    So sex wise women are the more forgiving gender very intresting

    Do not attribute to a virtue what is pure unadulterated hypergamy.

  27. Carlotta

    The main reason to beware of this situation is that these men will bond their emotional intimacy to a person seperate then who they have sex with. For example a player who is sexually promiscuous and overlly emotionally bonded to his mom. This wont rectify when married and can tear the marriage apart when he will have sex with the wife but will discuss his day with his Mother. In short, these type of guys have three people in the marriage and the chaste women gets her sexual needs met but not emotional. I think you can see how this could be horrifying. Especially when the guy refuses to connect emotionally only with his wife because hey, whats the big deal? Seen it several times.

  28. deti

    And the reason the AW has those medical and psych issues, is because she’s married to a man she doesn’t really want and isn’t bonded to.

    The AW is having these sexual problems because hubby doesn’t turn her on and she’s still pining away for that bull alpha that did her juuuuust right.

  29. Martel

    “I know other men who, despite loving their wives dearly, still think about that first one. ”

    Fortunately a problem I’ll never have; my first experience was downright awful.

    However, I suspect that even when a guy still thinks about that first one, he’ll never feel quite the attachment than some alpha women feel. I don’t know if anybody else remembers that article Heartiste referred to a couple of months back about the English chick who’s obsessed over the same guy for over 40 YEARS (I think it was a Telegraph UK article). I just can’t fathom a male equivalent with an individual.

    Though it does make sense that some rock star who’s had literally hundreds of women at his fingertips could never be satisfied with just one woman.

    [ssm: Oh, yes, that reminds me of a story van Roiinek (at least I think it was him) told about a man he knew who had been involved in the rock music scene and had a ton of chicks, who then became a Christian and got married but could not settle into monogamy and be faithful to one woman. If I remember correctly, he ended up divorced. That would be the extreme example of what I am trying to describe.]

  30. deti

    Carlotta:

    What are you talking about? I’ve never heard of a player who has lots of sex with girls but runs to Mommy for emotional release.

    [ssm: Yeah, that doesn't ring a bell with me, either. I don't think I've ever observed that.]

  31. earl

    “Especially when the guy refuses to connect emotionally only with his wife because hey, whats the big deal?”

    Because it seems to be seen as a weakness if a man emotionally connects with a wife….especially the negative emotions. I’ll connect emotionally to her if she wants to let me know her emotions. That doesn’t mean I give her several hours or that I have to agree with her emotions…but I will listen to them.

    Men go to other men to connect emotionally because we have a pretty good idea the struggles and crosses a man has to bear. Plus we don’t usually hold it against a guy if he has a bad day and needs to vent…we all have them.

  32. Martel

    “Because it seems to be seen as a weakness if a man emotionally connects with a wife….”

    When a guy’s seducing a woman, he’s got to be very careful about when and if he exposes any emotional vulnerabilities. A reformed beta will undoubtedly associate “emotional connection” with getting stuck in the friend zone. This can morph into going too far in the opposite direction.

  33. sunshinemary

    I think AWs exist in a binary state: she either is one or isn’t one. She’s either had a previous man who was much more alpha or she hasn’t.

    But I think PWs might exist along a continuum. Perhaps with each additional notch it becomes harder and harder for a man to settle into marriage and monogamy? I’m just hypothesizing. But if that is true, then women should be looking for as low an N as possible in their future husbands.

  34. Scott

    From a professional perspective, I would love to do/see a study to validate both the Alpha Widow and Promiscuity Widower constructs. It could be done, but no peer-reviewed journal would publish it. It would be seen as being laden with too much “ultra-conservative” a priori hypotheses.

    I truly am on the fence about the existence of both. It’s one of the red-pill concepts that I kind of scratch my head and go, “hmmm. Interesting.”

  35. Emma the Emo

    Scott,
    Sure, it exists, you can observe it in individual people. But whether it’s a pattern of anything or not, is not clear to me either. It’s not exactly a secret that some people can’t get over a certain person, or are unwilling to give the single lifestyle.

  36. Carlotta

    Well I have witnessed more then five.
    Guys who were all sexually promiscous and were very close to a female friend or relative but not the wife. 2 were real tight with a guy friend. The wife could talk to them, but if the guy needed to make a decision or wanted to talk things over he would call the other person and then make a decision and tell the wife.
    Very sad. The marriages either broke up or the wives turned to others to get their emotional needs met. Some turned to their own children. One became a lesbian.

  37. Scott

    “Sure, it exists, you can observe it in individual people. But whether it’s a pattern of anything or not, is not clear to me either. It’s not exactly a secret that some people can’t get over a certain person, or are unwilling to give the single lifestyle.”

    That’s true, but the baserate of it is important. Reading around these parts about it, you get the sense that you are absolutely doomed if you or your partner (or both) have high N. (And “high” doesn’t seem to have a clear consensus either).

    A phenomenon is not particularly dangerous if it only occurs in 1:100,000 couples with say, >3 sex partners each.

    [ssm: This is a good point. Some couples do have one or both partners come into it with high(ish) Ns but still have happy marriages anyway. Alte wrote something about this awhile back. I'll see if I can find what she wrote.]

  38. Carlotta

    @ Deti
    Ever seen the show the Jersey Shore. Saw it at a relatives and was disgusted how the “poon whisperer” Vinnie broke down in tears because his Mommie came to visit. Then went to clubs and banged random chicks.

  39. deti

    “then women should be looking for as low an N as possible in their future husbands.”

    I suppose that can’t hurt. And I suppose some men are PWs to more an extent than others. But relative to this discussion, what she really needs to do is figure out if the promiscuous man she’s considering getting serious with has a problem with PW-hood.

    I’d have to say that not many promiscuous men are PWs to the point that they just can’t be satisfied with just one woman. A lot of guys who were promiscuous were for a short time; or weren’t very good at it (deti raises hand on this latter point). They work it out of their systems. And the chances of promiscuity leading to PW hood are quite a bit less, I think, than the odds of female promiscuity leading to AW-hood. Because, with a woman, chances are that the more men she had sex with, there’s at least one bull jacked up mo-fo alpha in there somewhere that rocked her world and that you can’t compete with.

  40. donalgraeme

    But I think PWs might exist along a continuum. Perhaps with each additional notch it becomes harder and harder for a man to settle into marriage and monogamy? I’m just hypothesizing. But if that is true, then women should be looking for as low an N as possible in their future husbands.

    That is pretty much in line with my thinking as well. The lower the N count the better, for both men and women.

    @ Martel

    2 and 3 got mixed up on my list, thanks for pointing that out. Female chastity is important, but that doesn’t mean that male chastity isn’t important to the marriage, either.

  41. sunshinemary

    Yes, I agree that AWhood is probably more common. It’s not that the man even has to be the bull alpha you describe; he just has to have been more alpha than her husband, and that will set the hypergamy-whispers going. Her husband will never measure up. But it’s unlikely that a man who’s only got an N of 2 or 3 or so is going to be addicted to the chase. Of course, given that I’m not an AW but I live with a PW, or someone who at least used to be a PW, I naturally find that to be the more destructive situation.

    Either way, blown up marriages are bad for everyone. Even if one does not accept that the Bible was divinely-inspired, one might at least consider that it gives very good advice born of human experience, and the Bible tells both men and women to refrain from fornication while placing more emphasis on female virginity.

  42. Martel

    I think on certain levels we can compare male promiscuity to something like drinking a lot in college. Obviously, it’s not a good idea for anybody, and it can have some very serious consequences.

    Some people graduate and simply lose their desire to party like they did and move on. Others can’t give it up and they’re trying to relieve their twenties well into their fifties.

    But an added element with promiscuity is how it feeds the ego. In addition to the sexual gratification itself, a new conquest is a MASSIVE ego boost. Some guys eventually realize that they’re just repeating a tired old process or find another basis for self-worth. Others never do. The former group can reform more or less easily, for the latter it’s well-nigh impossible.

  43. earl

    “Bible tells both men and women to refrain from fornication while placing more emphasis on female virginity.”

    And how “odd” the secular world stresses that a woman should “have experience” before getting married. So naturally that means some men have to fornicate to make that possible….and the ones that do are the non Christians…or Christians who gloss over that part of the Bible. The propaganda messes up both genders.

    It is intentionally sabatoging women’s virginity and both gender’s souls.

  44. earl

    “But an added element with promiscuity is how it feeds the ego. In addition to the sexual gratification itself, a new conquest is a MASSIVE ego boost.”

    Well of course…people wouldn’t sin if there wasn’t at least some incintive in it.

    Problem is that incintive evaporates very quickly…and you have to go to greater lengths to feed that ego. The wise ones figure out it isn’t worth it and give up that lifestyle…others turn it into a business and get butthurt if you call out their erronous ways.

  45. deti

    “I’m interested in this the-first-one-is-the-most-special idea. Do other men agree with this? Does your first occupy a special place in your heart?“

    Are we talking about male “first sexual experiences”?

    If that’s the subtopic, it’s not the first one; it’s the really, really good ones that imprinted on me. But the sex was “really, really good” because of the entire experience. I cared about these two girls and I got attached emotionally to them fairly quickly. That’s why the memories stuck.

    Others from my old Hooking Up Smart days will remember me talking about First College Girlfriend (FCG). Sex wasn’t great, but it was special and emotionally bonding for a number of reasons. I really cared about her and we broke up pretty nastily. Hurt for a long time. I had just turned 18 when I met her and was 19 when we broke up.

    There was a second college girlfriend (SCG) I haven’t written about publicly who I met about a month after breaking up with FCG. I was 19. SCG’s body type and physical appearance were EXACTLY what I like. I couldn’t have found a more perfect physical specimen if I had special ordered her. We just clicked. And we had a lot in common, from similar backgrounds and interests. (The fact that she was smoking hot helped matters in that regard.) Before SCG I had experienced sexual attraction before (almost hourly); but I couldn’t recall, and still can’t recall, anything that powerful. The sexual attraction was damn near irresistible. (It wasn’t until I met Mrs. Deti six years later that I would feel anything like that level of sexual attraction.)

    The result of all that was amazing sex that I can still remember in vivid detail today.

    I don’t know if FCG and SCG have special places in my heart, but the memories are powerful and are imprinted in my head. I like to think I’ve “gotten over” them, but I never have forgotten them and probably never will.

  46. Flaming Man of Iron

    On the subject of promiscuous men being a turn on for women, I think it’s a short vs long term selection thing.

    I know my wife and her sister who were raised in a very religious household, both mentioned that they just never went near any guy with a rep as a player or who slept around with women easily. It wasn’t a turn on for them because they were always looking at the long term prospects of a man “is he marriage material or not?”

    So for my wife, the fact that i’d even slept with one woman before her was a DLV.

  47. earl

    “It wasn’t a turn on for them because they were always looking at the long term prospects of a man “is he marriage material or not?”

    Here’s a funny thought:

    Women of virtue pursue virtuous men…and ignore the others. Get married young and keep their passion with their husband.

    Women who aren’t virtuous pursue men who aren’t virtuous…and only notice the others when the unvirtous men quit pumping and dumping them because their looks have faded. But remember virtuous man…while you didn’t get her rewards early in her life…it is your duty to man up for her.

  48. nightskyradio

    SSM – I’m interested in this the-first-one-is-the-most-special idea. Do other men agree with this? Does your first occupy a special place in your heart?

    My first is the one I really wish I had never met. But then, this was a bit of an extreme case, so may not apply. A tip of that iceberg – http://nightskyradio.com/2012/12/10/sticking-the-knife/

    As for the first girl I really liked a lot as an adult (and tried to pursue in the proper, virtuous way, which naturally fizzled after a while), it hurt for a few months – I had to see her regularly at work – but I got over her. I also realized I dodged the bullet. One example – http://nightskyradio.com/2013/02/13/broken-premises/

    I saw her once about ten years after that. Time (and who knows what else) had not been kind to her.

  49. Scott

    I guess what I am getting at is culture is a powerful force.
    I grew up in standard, normative American dating culture. I graduate HS in 1989. By that time, it was perfectly normal for boyfriends/girlfriends to move in together. In fact, my first experience with this was with my (3rd) HS girlfriend. (The one I was with at graduation). We lasted about 1 ½ years.
    The normative trajectory of which I speak, is a component of Dalrocks “sacred path to marriage.” Namely, have a girlfriend, (which by definition means “have regular sex”) it doesn’t work out, break up. It’s painful for a while. Start dating again, have regular girlfriend. Maybe live together, maybe not. If it doesn’t work out, break up. Repeat. (And in-between girlfriends, possibly have sex partners that do not develop into full-girlfriend status) . I have been the recipient of the break-up and the breaker-upper at about an even distribution. I bet you this seems totally normal to the average 42 year old American—male or female.
    This was basically the model I lived under between my first girlfriend at 16 years old, to when I got married the first time at 23. That marriage lasted 6 years, and fell victim to HER infidelity. Incidentally, she was a virgin when we got married, I was obviously far from it. It was hard to wait, but I felt she was “the one” so I did.
    Fast forward to the end of that marriage, and the cycle essentially continued—meet, date, have sex, maybe a have a few ONS or F-buddies in between, maybe it turns into something, maybe not, maybe live together a while, maybe not. Break up. Pain. Start again.
    This is exactly the process for which I met I met my current wife, and I was 36 at the time. She was 33. Hers was essentially the same process, but with no divorce.
    I feel totally bonded to my wife. When I read around here, I think “My God. this bond I have with my wife must have been forged IN SPITE of everything that led up to our meeting.” Or maybe the bond is based on many other non-sexual things: our children. Our renewed desire to construct our marriage and family unto Gods purpose. Commitment to each other during deployments, and illnesses that have already occurred, etc.
    Either way, I have the distinct impression that we are the exception so far. Otherwise, we would not be so committed to our website. We get attacked regularly (I don’t let them through moderation) for being hypocrites. “You have a divorce. She had a child out of wedlock. And now you want to teach your kids courtship and abstinence? What nerve!”
    Where does our situation fit into the AW/PW spectrum? We both are convinced that dating (the process described above, basically) is a failure. I’m not sure it’s because of the danger of Alpha Widowhood though. There doesn’t always have to be scientific explanation for why God has determined to label something a sin. He says promiscuity and fornication are wrong, so they are.

  50. Bike Bubba

    Regarding men obsessing over a woman for a long time, it’s noted that when Goethe’s “Die Leiden des Jungen Werthers” came out–a story about a man so obsessed with the love of one woman he couldn’t have, he took his own life–that young noblemen by the thousands did exactly the same. And my dad, and rightly so in his case. For that matter, what about David’s son Ammon?

    I’ll grant there’s another thing going on with the culture of promiscuity, though. To which Kings David and Solomon, both of whom had “n in the double digits”, might be able to speak. I think Jerome’s paraphrase was “Vanitas, vanitatum, et omnia vanitas”–all us utterly meaningless.

    Someone let Roosh know that Solly had him beat 3000 years ago, K? :^) (some people never learn….)

  51. donalgraeme

    @ Scott

    Some people escape the worst consequences of that lifestyle. Most don’t. There are a few others in these parts who have managed much the same. Doesn’t mean that anyone should take the chance, however. I for one applaud your efforts to provide your children with something better. The present system chews people up and spits out battered husks most of the time.

  52. Scott

    “Some people escape the worst consequences of that lifestyle. Most don’t. There are a few others in these parts who have managed much the same. Doesn’t mean that anyone should take the chance, however. I for one applaud your efforts to provide your children with something better. The present system chews people up and spits out battered husks most of the time.”

    I guess that is related to my point. If you grow up with that all around you (TV, Movies, all your friends do it) it doesn’t occur to you that there is something wrong with it. And I grew up in a “Christian” home.

    You have to go looking for something else. I was tangentialy aware of other forms of mate selection. It’s not like I never read classic literature or watched an old movie. But that’s exactly how it was seen–old fashioned and out dated. Had I gone to one of my girlfriends dads and asked for permission to date their daugther THEY would have laughed at me for being so weird.

    I’m just still trying to get a handle on the scope and breadth of the problem of AW/PW in the context of 50+ years of the system I described. I can’t put my finger on it, but I think the two are related in a more meaningful way. I look back at it now and think, “what a stupid way to pick a partner.” If i escaped really painful damage as you say, I should be even more grateful to God.

  53. hurting

    Martel September 6, 2013 at 12:12 pm

    Agree 100% about switching 2 and 3. The typical man who for whom marriage is a possibility (the upper 80%) has likely had just a relative handful of partners. If you exclude the top 10% of men in terms of sexual experience, my guess is that these guys regularly endured long dry spells and settled quite a bit at certain times to get what comparatively little the got vis-à-vis the top dogs. They are therefore far more likely than women with sexual experience (of any SMV level) to recognize the value that marriage offers in terms of sexual relations and therefore far less likely to jeopardize the marriage.

    Put another way, promiscuity on the part of the woman is probably a necessary and sufficient condition to create problems for the marriage in almost every instance.

  54. Red

    I’ve believe Dalrocks researcher showed that the harm that sleeping around for men is 1/4 the harm for women when it comes to bonding. Unfortunately a man sleeping around actually increases his attractiveness to most women and thus it’s easy for such a man to find a wife. Now if a women had her father selecting a mate for her there’s no way he would allow a cad to marry his little girl.

    I know of a guy who’s slept with probably 500 or 600 women. After 10 years of sleeping with a new girl once or twice a week he got married. The first couple of years was pretty good. They had a kid, she loved him dearly, but he was getting bored with the relationship. He returned to sleeping with a new girl every week on the side and his wife nagged him constantly about not having sex with her. He admitted that he found her boring and is only staying with her because of his son.

    Lesson of the story: Marriage to a cad is almost as bad as marriage to a slut.

  55. Martel

    It could be pure BS, but I like playing with the 1/4 idea. That woud mean that they guy Red mentions is the male equivalent of a woman who’s slept with over 125 guys.

  56. deti

    red:

    Interesting story. The 500-600 partner guy is definitely a PW.

    But recognize too that he’s an extreme outlier (assuming his story is true). He is in the top 0.00001% of men. I know a lot of men who have slept with a lot of women. Not one of them has slept with anything like 500 different women.

    I’d say that to create a PW it probably takes a very high, extremely high, N, probably in excess of 100, with a proven track record of being able to effortlessly pull strange poon.

  57. tbc

    if I may add some pop theology / psychology, the issue seems to be one of lust & idolatry for both the AW and the PW. For the AW you describe, there is a potent lust factor tied to her experience with the alpha she’s pining for. Her ability (at least temporarily) to be possessed by him (and in a *sense to conquer him) is an extremely powerful feeling — so powerful in fact that is the main idol venerated in most women’s fiction (taming the alpha). For the PW, it is the same lust, though in his case it is expressed through his power to control / master women — to dominate them to the point that they give themselves to him. It is not in fact a lust for sex — sex is simply the means by which their idol is fed. And in both cases (AW and PW) it is addictive – and ultimately unsatisfying.

    The AW is really not longing for the lost alpha anymore than the PW is longing for more and varied sex.They are in fact both idolators — worshipping the creature rather than the creator.

  58. masonkramer

    Don’t forget about porn, ladies. From the point of view of “I want my man to sexually bond with me, and I am worried about obstacles to that process”, watching porn is much worse than having slept with other women in the past.

  59. Farm Boy

    watching porn is much worse than having slept with other women in the past.

    Can you explain more fully?

  60. Christina

    My husband has a high n-count and before we got serious, I asked him outright how many partners he had had, how old was he when he started, and if all his sexual encounters were in established relationships or were they one-night stands.

    I was satisfied with his answer – established relationships. Where it still makes me slightly uneasy, he has proven to have the personality of a home-body who just wants to be in a relationship with someone who makes him comfortable… he wasn’t a skirt chaser and his personality as I know him seems to confirm that.

  61. masonkramer

    Farm Boy: Porn can provide a new novel experience three times a day, and there’s virtually no end to how “novel” it can be. It’s best to think of a guy’s “Bonding N” as the number of novel experiences he’s had. Since porn is more effective at delivering novel experiences, it’s more effective at killing satisfaction.

  62. Miserman

    I think about men who converted to Christianity and left behind the homosexual lifestyle (before Exodus International confessed that doing so was wrong and they were sorry). If a man is a new convert and wants to marry a woman (you know that whole Adam and Eve standard), just how careful should a Christian woman be then?

    Sometimes the line between redemption and reality is hard to find.

  63. feeriker

    ometimes, in fact, I think women are sort of turned on by promiscuous men
    –Sometimes?

    Yes. Only sometimes. A good woman will see that such men are lacking in virtue and thus not even worthy of being in the friend zone. Virtuous people choose to be with other virtuous people because it is more comfortable for them to be round other people like them.

    Point taken. But as a practical matter, just how many “good” or “virtuous” people, of both sexes, are there as a percentage of the general population?

    Yep, exactly. Yankee Stadium should be able to hold them all, with some box seats to spare.

    Yes, a “good woman” (more accurately, a woman with even slightly more common sense than a female ally cat) will see that rooting cads are NOT good marriage prospects, just as any man capable of even occasionally thinking with anything other than the head beneath his belt will not even consider a slut as a prospective bride.

    All of those things being as they may, we have only to look around us to know that the majority not only are not bothered by promiscuity, but wallow in it as life choice. So no, the NAWALT label does NOT apply when it comes to women and their preferences for the promiscuous (near) Alpha. Were a female preference for rooting cads not the norm in today’s society, we would not see the MASSIVE numbers of AWs and BabyMammas (which are very often one and the same) that we now do.

    “Good and virtuous” men and women who remain chaste and save themselves for marriage are the white Bengal tigers of the SMP – rare and on the verge of extinction. By pointing this out I’m not excusing what the cads and sluts do; I’m merely pointing out that they’re the norm, not the exception.

  64. Farm Boy

    “Good and virtuous” men and women who remain chaste and save themselves for marriage are the white Bengal tigers of the SMP – rare and on the verge of extinction

    There was a time when they were far in the majority. Then, it was determined that we could “afford” some changes.

    Now we are in a race: can technological progress outpace the costs of poor behavior among the populace?

  65. feeriker

    When a guy’s seducing a woman, he’s got to be very careful about when and if he exposes any emotional vulnerabilities. A reformed beta will undoubtedly associate “emotional connection” with getting stuck in the friend zone. This can morph into going too far in the opposite direction.

    Yep. I have to believe if Game was ever to be codified into a formal rule book, Rule Number 1 would read “Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should you EVER show ANY emotion that can be construed as a weakness.”

  66. sunshinemary

    Hahahahaha…Frank, *whew* We laughed so hard at that video. I like her little upside down ass-jitter move there. Did she post naked selfies from the burn ward, I wonder?

  67. nightskyradio

    Maeve – And she posted it? She didn’t eliminate all evidence?

    People will post anything, They are proud of these things. 15 seconds of fame uber alles.

    This one has been around a while but it’s a classic. Note how this kid acknowledges the camera at the beginning.

  68. Farm Boy

    Guys “compartmentalize” better than chicks. When I am at work, I am focused on work; when I am on my farm, I am focused on that.

    A good example of this is Bill Clinton. He twirled Hillary, Monica and being President all at the same time, focusing on what ever was “context switched in” at the time.

    Women are different. Everything is more integrated, and if something bothers her in one aspect of her life, it bothers her in all aspects of her life.

    As a homework assignment, consider how this applies to the topic at hand.

    [ssm: This is really true. Sometimes HHG will tell me several days after the fact about this or that issue he had at work. I'm like, "How was this not uppermost in your mind? How did you come home and not need to tell this to me right away?" I can never leave work at work (or home at home).

    Now, applied to the topic at hand: woman will spread their dissatisfaction out all over the relationship. Men will mostly mope about the sex but function okay in the rest of the relationship. But I'm not sure I believe that.]

  69. Maeve

    Don’t do that Frank. It’s dangerous. I gave up espresso one year for Lent and my children made me swear I would never do it again.

  70. Farm Boy

    Speaking of bears, here is a question: which one of the following is dominant and which one is submissive?

    Obama
    Putin

  71. Maeve

    @NSR – I really hate to say this, but this song reminds me of “In a Big Country” – there’s just something about the sound

  72. nightskyradio

    Maeve – Yeah, the Bears song came out not too long after that one. There is some basic similarity between the two, but I think that’s more because of the sound that was prevalent around that time.

  73. FuzzieWuzzie

    Farm Boy, in terms of selling out his country’s interests to further feminism, there’s no question. To add to that, aren’t bears symbolic of Russia?

  74. Red

    “It could be pure BS, but I like playing with the 1/4 idea. That woud mean that they guy Red mentions is the male equivalent of a woman who’s slept with over 125 guys.”

    Any takers on a women’s ability to bond after 125 different guys? That’s whore territory.

    I can’t find it right now but Dalrock did a big write up marriage rates and the number of partners. For women having sex with more than one guy marriage success rate dropped pretty quickly and men sleeping around suffered a similar drop at a 1/4th the rate of women. I’m guessing that build up of resistance to bonding chemicals released during sex with that proportion between women and men being the primary cause. Hard to commit long term if you can’t bond properly. So if you’re going to marry an experienced man you may have issues if he’s had more than 3 partners.

  75. FuzzieWuzzie

    On another thread, SSM noted that I was the only one to condemn Sam Spade’s dumping his wife to go back to the player lifestyle. I’ll do it again. What a jerk! Now, as an alpha widow, she’s stuck.
    Maybe it’s just me. All I want is one sweetie. Any more would be pig greedy.

  76. Farm Boy

    Farm Boy, if Maeve’s comment is the only response you get, let it stand as the last word.

    Well, I have to admit that the bear doing the laundry seemed more natural than two guys posturing for the camera.

  77. FuzzieWuzzie

    Maeve, that one got me in a little trouble a while ago. SSM asked for a fantasy image of her as a warrior queen. That was the only image that I could find that included a bear. Any way, SSM looks more like the gal in the foreground than i look like the bear in back.

  78. Hannah

    Hey FarmBoy thanks for the emoticons voucher! I’ll use them up right here if that’s ok
    :)…………………………………………………………………….. :)

    FuzzieWuzzie in the same post that you called a Spade a spade, SSM mentioned that you’re not a christian… really?! I totally assumed you were! If not, what moral code do you live by then cos there clearly is one….

  79. FuzzieWuzzie

    Hannah, I’m a fallen away Catholic boy. Seven years of nuns who looked liked penguins, then away to an all boys school. Lost faith with the onset of puberty.
    What worries me about going back are the “churchians”.

  80. Mr Darlings

    I agree with donalgraeme on this point, that these are in the order of healthiest from 1-4.

    “1) One where both the man and the woman was chaste (virgins until marriage)
    2) One where neither the man or the woman was chaste before marriage.
    3) One where the woman was chaste before marriage but the man was not.
    4) One where the man was chaste before marriage but the woman was not.”

    I also have to completely agree with my wife’s post on her website.

    Housewifesexuality.wordpress.com

    It seems to me like men were designed to be polygamists, while women were designed to be with polygamists.

    Since entering these forums, I have just been more and more convinced of that, because of the way women and men click. Women are fulfilled by not being the only sexual obsession her husband has, and also from competing for his sexual attention in the long term // while men are fulfilled by having many to share his sexual desires with, and having the leadership over and respect from the wives and children. (Number wives and number of children depends upon his wealth)

    The important thing in polygamy is that the man actually provides for (financially, emotionally, physically) and protects his wives and children completely, as should be expected from men in any marriage – and that all of his wives are entered into the marriage by common consent of the other wives. (Yet, I do have to admit the man would still be in charge of the number of wives, because of the submission expected from the wives)

    Not many are ready for these kinds of marriages, but it provides the greatest long term solution (in a country where allowed) for marital sexual bliss.

    So monogamy is a great start to prepare for what is to come.

    Isaiah 4:1 “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach”

    It seems to me strange that these forums do not speak of this more oft, as it provides great solutions for the future, when polygamy is again allowed by law.

    – and for all wives save one – he will have plenty of experience. And all the wives will experience competition anxiety, giving them emotionally highs and lows, just the way they enjoy life.

    Btw:

    There are tons of virgins left in America and the world. You just have to be acquainted and associate with stricter religions. Islam, Jehovah’s witnesses and Mormons only to name a few.

    the more virgins there are in the religion, the closer to the truth that religion is.

  81. Mr Darlings

    Actually, reviewing it now – I believe point 3) in my post is healthier/better than point 2).

    Women’s virginity is way more important, than the man’s for reasons already commented on by the group. As long as the man is not in higher N counts than 5.

    If he has less than 5, he probably isn’t addicted to that lifestyle, unless he is 18 when getting married. Haha

  82. Pingback: Sign of the Times: The Old Order is Broken | Donal Graeme

  83. Höllenhund

    That “bear” looks like some body-builder wearing bear skin. And what the heck is she holding in her left hand?

  84. Höllenhund

    Now that the subject of “sword and sorcery”-type fantasy has been raised, I see it fitting to to re-post one of my older comments at Dalrock:

    “Something completely off-topic: I was looking at the TV guide the other day and found this animated series, directed mostly at young girls, entitled „Mia and Me”. The characters have bodies looking like something straight out of some soft porn flick:

    toonbarn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Mia-and-Me.jpg

    I thought it’s just further proof of the media phenomenon I lately noticed, namely that female media characters are more and more likely to have physically impossible bodies – big butts and tits with flat tummies, long, slender legs – while the physical condition of average Western women has been gradually worsening for decades due to the obesity epidemic, sedentary lifestyle etc.

    Look at any American TV series and you’ll find that the actresses playing average characters are normally rather hot – no excess weight, slender bodies, nice butts etc. – even though it’s common knowledge that the average American woman looks rather crappy. Judging by the stuff you see on television, the USA is chock-full of beautiful women that aren’t fat. Look at ’Criminal Minds’, for example. Two out of the three female characters could pass as photomodels, even though I’m sure most of the women working for the FBI are fat, ugly or just plain-looking broads. Fashion models also have higher and higher physical standards (little body fat etc.) while average women are more and more crappy.

    An interesting contradiction, isn’t it?

  85. lavazza1891

    I don’t have time to the read all comments, but if someone else hasn’t already said it:

    An alpha widow is caused by a woman having sex with an alpha and the alpha leaving her.

    But what causes a promiscuity widower? Why doesn’t he stay married to promiscuity? The only reason I can think of is him having commitment thrust on him. Yeah, that might happen quite often through “accidental” pregnancies.

    But if a woman is not forcing commitment on a man with a promiscuous history my guess is that he has decided to leave that lifestyle, or at least keep it in check enough to have a functioning marriage.

    An alpha widow has good reasons to fool herself and her potential husband that she is not an alpha widow, but what reasons does a promiscuous man have to fool himself or others that he wants to give up that life style?

    [ssm: In all three of the examples I sited above, the men voluntarily entered into marriage with no coercion or pregnancy. Presumably they had found women they loved and wanted to build a life with her but then found that monogamy was much harder than they had expected. Many promiscuous men want the other benefits of marriages, as example 2 showed, such as companionship and comfort, but promiscuity seems to change men and make it harder for them to give up the chase.]

  86. Cail Corishev

    While there are parallels, I’d say the biggest difference between the Alpha Widow and the Promiscuity Widower is that the AW could have an N as low as 1. It’s all about that one perfect relationship that got away, so if her first one was that guy, she can be bonded to him and unable to ever be satisfied with a replacement. So any woman who’s not a virgin has the potential to be an AW.

    The PW, on the other hand, needs to have been with a large number of women — enough that he’s become utterly confident that he can go out and get more whenever he wants them. He’s not attached to any particular woman from his past (that’s kind of the point); he’s attached to the variety of promiscuity itself, and the excitement of having a new woman for the first time over and over. Every attractive woman he meets is seen as a potential conquest, and only by choosing to deprive himself does he forego sex with her. Only a very small minority of men have ever been successful enough with women to develop that kind of expectation. We’re talking an N in the triple-digits here, I think.

    It’s also possible for a man to act like an Alpha Widow, imprinting on a particular woman and spending the rest of his life pining for her and writing poetry about her, but that’s rare enough to be enshrined in a few literary examples. That’s actually the opposite of the Promiscuity Widower, because this guy may have never had another woman — may have never even had sex with his obsession! This guy should be easy to spot, assuming he approaches women at all: look for missing ears, that kind of thing.

    On the ability of war brides to adjust: there’s a difference between knowing that your former husband is dead and you’ll never see your former home and family again; versus knowing that the man you pine for lives across town, and you could possibly have him again if you blow up one or two marriages. Women are good at adjusting to reality when they have no choice. When they have choices, that’s when you get trouble.

    [ssm: I disagree that men need to have triple digit Ns to experience the PW effect. My husband's is double, not triple, digit. I don't know what the men in examples 1 and 2 have for partner counts, but if I had to guess, I'd say it's not triple digit. How many men get into the triple digits? That has to be pretty rare unless he's a hardcore players who is single through out his twenties and thirties.]

  87. Cail Corishev

    lavazza1891, you make a great point: why would the AW or PW seek to marry in the first place? After all, that’s what we’re concerned about here: an AW or PW marrying and then blowing up the marriage or making it miserable because they aren’t haaaaaapy.

    I can see a few reasons for the AW. First, she probably doesn’t realize she’s an AW. After all, she’s only had sex with 3 guys (not counting blowjobs or times she was drunk), so she’s a good girl — practically a virgin by the standards of her social circle — and awesome marriage material. Her fond memories of Guy #2 are just that, she thinks: memories and experiences that have made her the super-interesting Special Snowflake that Mr. Right Someday will adore. She wants to be married to Guy #2 but can’t be for some reason, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t want to be married at all. So she tries to settle, or tells herself that Guy #4 is better than he turns out to be when the honeymoon period is over, and then her feelings for Guy #2 come back in force.

    Promiscuity, on the other hand, is pretty much the opposite of marriage. The promiscuous man who’s attached to the next conquest is not likely to go anywhere near marriage. He won’t often stay with one woman long enough for the subject even to come up. He also knows he’s promiscuous; he can count. So if that man finds himself proposing to a woman, it’s probably because he’s has a conversion experience and is truly trying to change his life. He’s not settling for one woman as a replacement for promiscuity; he’s switching from an anti-marriage mentality to a pro-marriage one.

    Conversion experiences don’t always stick, though, so the PW may find himself drifting back to that desire for variety or conquest. Or he may keep flirting with all the women he meets out of habit, and get in trouble that way when some of them respond positively. But it should be fairly easy to see that danger when you’re dating the guy: is his N in the triple-digits? Do women swarm around him and touch him whenever you go places? (Of course, that’ll only make him more attractive to the woman trying to judge him. That’s why she needs a father’s help.)

    I think it’s a lot harder to spot an Alpha Widow, though perhaps not impossible. Unless she’s a virgin, her N won’t tell you, because it only takes 1. Does she have mementos of a particular guy — not just something stored away like a real memento of the past, but something she carries around or keeps where she sees it every day in the present? Does she have an ex that she talks to regularly and says she’ll always be good friends with? Run away.

  88. Maeve

    I miss out on interesting stuff when I fall asleep

    NSR – I loved that cartoon. Funny how husbands often end up in the roll of sacrificial penguin.
    FB – I thought there were polar bears in Antarctica
    Fuzzie – I’m not exactly sure what a chuchian is (someone who fakes it?), but your comment has definitely added a little Jake & Elroy vibe to your online persona
    Hi Hannah – I think we’re on opposite time zones
    Hollenhund (I can’t do the cool “o” thingie), I have no idea what she’s holding – I thought maybe her hand was hidden behind whatever that thing is. The bear is cool tho.

  89. sunshinemary

    I just found an interesting article that may explain the biological basis of PWhood. The article is about pornography usage but talks extensively about the brain chemistry involved in the male desire for novel mates.

    What you evolved to do.

    I won’t quote the whole thing, but some of it makes sense in terms of men who have trouble giving up the chase. I’m not saying it’s an addiction, I just think that, like the alpha widow, promiscuous men have probably altered their brain chemistry/neural circuitry so that the typical male desire for novel mates is a stronger neural pathway for PW men than non-PW men. Here are a few quotes from the article:

    What happens when you drop a male rat into a cage with a receptive female rat? First, you see a frenzy of copulation. Then, progressively, the male tires of that particular female. Even if she wants more, he has had enough. However, replace the original female with a fresh one, and the male immediately revives and gallantly struggles to fertilize her.
    You can repeat this process with fresh females until he is completely wiped out. This is called the Coolidge effect—the automatic response to novel mates.

    Dopamine surges for novelty. A new car, just-released movie, the latest gadget…we are all hooked on dopamine. As with everything new the thrill fades away as dopamine plummets. Here’s how the Coolidge effect works: The rat’s reward circuitry is squirting less and less dopamine with respect to the current female, but produces a big dopamine surge for a new female. Does that sound familiar?

    Not surprisingly, rats and humans aren’t that different when it comes to response to novel sexual stimuli. For example, when Australian researchers (graph) displayed the same erotic film repeatedly, test subjects’ penises and subjective reports both revealed a progressive decrease in sexual arousal. The “same old same old” just gets boring. Habituation indicates declining dopamine.

    Again, I don’t think people like Bill Clinton are addicts in the same sense that someone is addicted to booze or porn. But it kind of makes sense that someone who has used the chase-catch-copulate sequence with a lot of novel mates has strengthened those particular neural pathways. The article describes it like this:

    Learning, memory, and habits can be summed up in the old, but true, saying – “Nerve cells that fire together, wire together”

    Now, how many mates it takes to cause that fire-together/wire-together effect, I don’t know. I do know that it doesn’t have to be triple digits. I also know that men can desire to choose to be monogamous and find that they either cannot or that it is extremely difficult to.

    And finally, none of this is advice to men. Follow whatever course of behavior seems right to you (of course, if you are Christian, the Bible, not I, should be your guide to all behavior, including sexual). Here is the only advice I have given, and it is directed toward women:

    Just as I would counsel a man to be very, very careful about marrying a woman who has had previous sex partners, so too would I counsel a woman to be very, very careful about marrying a man with a high sex partner count. Alpha Widows and Promiscuity Widowers make poor marriage partners.

  90. Farm Boy

    Bi-polar bears of course!

    Better that than borderline bears.

    That would be both the cuddliest and nastiest thing on earth.

  91. Ton

    Roosh is an extreme case, it’s his living, he’s travels the world to chase tail and write books about/ earn some cash. It’s probably best to throw out the extremes poles of such things when trying to plot a good general course of action for life. Laws and what not should be based on statistical norms/ average/ median and not outliers.

    I don’t miss the thrill of the chase or new conquest when I’m with one girl for an extended period of time. The danger for the woman is, I have a broad frame of referance to calibrate who is and who isn’t commitment worthy and experience lets me accurately predict how things will play out with limited intell.

    As.for sex, I don’t want to speak for all men, but it seems to me enthusiasm trumps technique. If she’s into him, wet and willing, he’s happy and the more into him she is, the better she is perceived to be at sex. The more skilled she is the more he should worry. Not counting a woman in a long term relationship who has worked out how to rock his world.

    I never remember my 1st unless folks mentioned it and I go to searching my database. I may be the extreme on this one, as my various ex’s don’t exist unless something brings it to my attention. Hell random plates I’m spinning don’t exist unless they text me.

  92. KB

    I’m wondering if a chaste bride or groom (who’s truly thinking about a relationship) can really ignore their future spouse’s past behavior?

  93. Cail Corishev

    SSM, perhaps triple-digits is too high. I’m trying to separate the real “player,” the guy for whom getting laid seems almost effortless, who suffers from almost no fear of scarcity and prefers the chase to the destination; from the guy who has always wanted to be with one woman, but his pursuit of that in our libertine society has led him through a dozen or two relationships and one-night-stands. The first guy obviously could have gotten married; some woman along the way had to be marriage minded — probably several were — so he chose promiscuity over marriage, and might again. The second guy didn’t want to be promiscuous, but just like a woman who proceeds through multiple relationships and one-night-stands via serial monogamy, hoping each will be the last, he builds up an N that would have been shameful in a past generation.

    I don’t know where the line would be between the two. Maybe it’s not 100 (though I think a guy over 100 can safely be called a PUA); maybe it’s closer to 50. I’m also looking at it from my 40s’ if he’s 28 years old it’d be lower. Obviously it’s also about attitude, but I think no matter how confident a man is, he has to have a certain amount of actual physical success with women to become a Promiscuity Widower.

    Let me try it this way: a woman who’s been with 1 or more men can be an Alpha Widow, and 10 men gives her 10 times the chance of 1 man, since it takes one “perfect” man to make her an AW. And a woman might be with 100 men without ever meeting one who made her an AW. As you said, it’s binary: she is or isn’t, based on whether that one man came along or didn’t. On the other hand, a man can’t become a PW at one woman, and probably not at 10. But some number indicates that he’s basically gotten sex easily, and preferred sex over relationships. That number probably varies from man to man, but I tend to think it would be dozens, at least. Or perhaps time should figure into it: more than the number of months he’s lived since his 18th birthday, or something like that.

  94. Tacomaster

    I agree with pretty much everything Ton just posted above regarding enthusiasm and not chasing.

    Ugh, that comment one about being into animals on the prairie or something—is that guy into beastiality? Lol. Since I wrote that let me explain further. Let me preface this by saying that when I lived in sin I had a lot of guilt about my decisions. I wasn’t as bad as Roosh but I never had a terribly hard time getting women. By the way my rationalization hamster wants everyone to know I was in a lot of LTRs and we were in love!!!! so it wasn’t all that bad. Anyway, when I go periods of time without sex from my wife I feel like one of those zoo animals from my quote. Like on the show Scrubs with the flashbacks and daydream sequences I see little bunnies and antelopes running by…. it was pretty easy in the past but it’s challenging to get available, reliable, (meaning I can depend on her being willing) sex from my wife. That’s what I was saying.

    I do believe virgins should marry virgins.

  95. deti

    “ssm: I disagree that men need to have triple digit Ns to experience the PW effect. My husband’s is double, not triple, digit. I don’t know what the men in examples 1 and 2 have for partner counts, but if I had to guess, I’d say it’s not triple digit”

    Maybe not triple digits are necessary. But can we agree that for a man to be a PW he has to be proficient at pulling poon? I mean not just a good weekend player. I mean picking up the strange is effortless for him, easy as falling down stairs or breathing.

    And wait a minute. I’m not sure HHG is a PW. He might have been a player, and he might have been really good at it, but that doesn’t mean he was or is a PW. A PW pines away for the lifestyle, misses it, feels vaguely incomplete without it. From your description in the OP, HHG doesn’t miss it. He might have enjoyed it while he lived it (who wouldn’t), but once he was done with it for whatever reason, he was done. He got over it. You say it’s difficult for him to live monogamously, but… how so? Doesn’t sound like that from your description of HHG as he is now. .

    Temptation, and recognizing that that temptation is there, aren’t the same things as wanting really badly to succumb to that temptation.

  96. sunshinemary

    But can we agree that for a man to be a PW he has to be proficient at pulling poon? I mean not just a good weekend player. I mean picking up the strange is effortless for him, easy as falling down stairs or breathing.

    We can agree that he has to be capable of getting women to sleep with him, but I disagree that picking up is ever effortless or even particularly easy for any man, including Roosh. I’ve read enough of the player sites now to know that they work really hard at getting women into bed, and if they are off their game, they don’t get the notch. This is not my opinion, it is what the most experienced players themselves have written. Furthermore, they make their living teaching other men how to do this, so according to them, it’s a learnable skill and not some weird genetic quirk that these guys were born with. Now, I won’t swear that any of the above is accurate, only that it is what the most experienced players themselves have reported. If you disagree, take it up with them.

  97. earl

    Women’s virginity is very important. Not only physcially…but the more partners she’s had the worse her personality becomes. Basically she starts to hate men and masculinity…but I suppose getting pumped and dumped all the time by players will make you jaded.

    If virginity wasn’t important…why do feminists get all in a huffy when masculine guys say that’s what they are looking for in a marriage partner? Why won’t they ever give you a straight answer about their N? Nothing brings out the wailing and gnashing of teeth better than bringing those up.

  98. sunshinemary

    And wait a minute. I’m not sure HHG is a PW. He might have been a player, and he might have been really good at it, but that doesn’t mean he was or is a PW. A PW pines away for the lifestyle, misses it, feels vaguely incomplete without it. From your description in the OP, HHG doesn’t miss it.

    I don’t think he was a player, but he was promiscuous. He was definitely a PW; he missed chasing and sleeping with novel women and thus continued to do it. Is he one now? I don’t know. I would say to some degree he probably does miss it. So far as I know, he’s faithful now.

    I’m sure that the neural pathways that develop from promiscuity will eventually atrophy if unused, but I doubt it’s quick and I highly doubt it’s ever completely gone. But there is no way a woman can ask her husband whether or how much he misses sleeping with other women – what man is going to honestly answer that question if posed by his wife? In any event, I think PWhood really is a continuum and that it probably increases a tiny bit with each notch but doesn’t become a real issue until some threshold number is reached. The threshold might be different for each man, but at that point it probably becomes more difficult for him to be monogamous and probably significantly increases the possibility that he’ll stray.

    I can’t assign a hard and fast number to that threshold, but I would counsel women to be pretty careful about marrying a man whose N > 10. I realize that describes most of my male readers, and I’m not saying any of you are or would be bad risks for marriage, but just like you would be really hesitant to marry a woman with more than a couple of past partners, so too do I think women should use caution with double-digit N men.

    Scott’s comment way up thread, and Cail’s recent comment, describes the problem with our current SMP perfectly. The entire dating and having sex scene is destructive to both men’s and women’s abilities to pair bond. It’s more destructive to women’s ability to do so, but it affects men, too, even those who probably wouldn’t qualify as PWs.

  99. Ton

    I would think it’s more then a raw number that leads to a man being a PW. Not sure it occurs often enough to be a wide spread problem but even 1 out of 100000 could mean misery for some lady/ family. Anyrate, a guy who bangs 30 chicks in two years then settles down probably doesn’t carry the same risk factor as a man who banged 30 chicks over 10 years. Not sure which would carry the greater risk, or they might each carry the same risk factor for differing reasons.

    Interesting observations SSM on effortless or not. I tend to say effortless but really it’s an attitude of being quick to next which made things easy and not some super secret you can learn this too skill set.

  100. Ton

    I’m a bad marital risk. I have 0 tolerance for poor behavior or performance. I don’t tolerate disrespect and there is no 4th strike. Etc etc.

  101. deti

    @ SSM:

    “We can agree that he has to be capable of getting women to sleep with him, but I disagree that picking up is ever effortless or even particularly easy for any man, including Roosh. I’ve read enough of the player sites now to know that they work really hard at getting women into bed, and if they are off their game, they don’t get the notch.”

    Everything’s relative. For Roosh, Roissy and LaidNYC, pick up is relatively effortless when you compare them with the average guy.

  102. sunshinemary

    I poked around online a bit to see if any statistics are available. Here is what a I found.

    This study found that having a higher number of sex partners increases likelihood of cheating:
    Treas, J & Gieden, D (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabiting Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(1), pp. 48-60.

    I found that reference here:

    http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/resources/FAQ.html#number

    I couldn’t view the actual paper, though, so I don’t know exactly what the parameters were.

    Also, oddly enough, I found these charts on Susan Walsh’s site.

    The first chart is how likely a husband is to cheat based on number of pre-marital sex partners (the red line is the percentage who have cheated on their wives):

    The second chart is how likely a wife is to cheat:

    I don’t know where she got that data from. I will ask her, but for the sake of argument, let us suppose those statistics are true. My gosh, look at the risk of marital infidelity from a man who has had 13 previous partners – it’s 50%! Wow, can that be correct? That seems very high. And a man with only 1 previous partner appears to have only a 2% likelihood of cheating. I’m not sure I believe those stats. I’ll report back when I find out where they originally came from.

  103. earl

    “I’m a bad marital risk. I have 0 tolerance for poor behavior or performance. I don’t tolerate disrespect and there is no 4th strike. Etc etc.”

    That makes two of us…our marriage odds would be bad…however I don’t think that is a bad.

    If men didn’t put up with that type of girl’s behavior…they would abandon it and go back to feminine behavior.

    Better to be single, alone, and at peace…than to be married to a woman who wants to try and be a man.

  104. Zippy

    SSM:
    My gosh, look at the risk of marital infidelity from a man who has had 13 previous partners – it’s 50%!

    Looks like N=2 increases the chance of cheating fivefold or more for both sexes vs virginity at marriage, assuming that 1 in the N=1 column means one’s spouse.

  105. Zippy

    I’m pretty skeptical of the idea that promiscuity doesn’t destroy men’s ability to pair bond to a similar general extent as it does for women. Possibly for different reasons and in different modalities, of course.

  106. Ton

    My virginal ex wife was unfaithful, so was another commentators. Secular agonist chicks have been better to me an for me then any church girl.

    Point being; Not sure how much of this carries weight in the real world of human interactions

  107. deti

    SSM:

    I have no doubt the stats are accurate. The only thing I have a question about is whether we’re getting accurate reports from people (men and women) who cheat during marriage. I suspect there are some who cheat and are never discovered and take it to their graves. I suspect there are some who lie to researchers and don’t cop to cheating even anonymously.

    Anecdotally it’s my experience that a spouse discovers the other’s cheating accidentally – through finding notes or text messages or facebook chats; or through finding other evidence such as morning after pills or condoms; or through word of mouth after being caught red handed by someone else.

    But that being the case, cheating during marriage isn’t necessarily an indication he’s a promiscuity widower. It could be; but isn’t necessarily.

    And yeah; it’s probably a good idea for women to be careful of marrying men with very high Ns. Maybe it’s a distinction without a difference, but the figures you have say a man with premarital N of 13 statistically has a 50% chance of cheating.

    There are oft-cited statistics from The Social Pathologist which talk about women with ANY history of premarital sex exponentially increases the chance of divorce.

    Draw your own conclusions as to whether to a woman, the risks to a wife that hubby might cheat on her are similar in degree and life effect to risks to a husband that wife might frivorce him. She’s a lot more likely to forgive his cheating; than he is to be able to stave off a wife absolutely determined to wreck his life and those of his children through frivorce. Yes, SSM, HHG was previously unfaithful; but it didn’t end your marriage. There are hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of men who got frivorced with nothing to say about it.

    Keep in mind here – I am NOT excusing male cheating and I am NOT saying that male premarital promiscuity is somehow “better” or “less sinful” than female premarital promiscuity. I am, however, saying, that it appears that male premarital promiscuity is less damaging to later marital health than female premarital promiscuity. I am saying that it appears that the effects of male premarital promiscuity on marriage (both the ability to have a good marriage or a marriage’s longevity) are not as detrimental as a woman’s premarital N. It appears that a woman’s premarital N is far more likely to eventually torpedo her marriage than the man’s premarital N is to torpedo his.

    [ssm: I agree that female promiscuity is almost certainly more damaging to marriages in terms of likelihood of divorce, but that wasn't the topic of this particular post although that has been the topic of many other posts of mine.

    It really makes you guys tense when I talk about anything having to do with men that might in any way be construed as making guys look bad, doesn't it? Yet I made no value judgement in my OP and did not advise men to do or not do anything in particular. I simply observed that promiscuous men seem to have a harder time bonding and being monogamous, and then in the comment thread I posted some (tentative) data to support the veracity of that observation. Yet many of my regular commenters are trying to rebuild the mound (apparently women aren't the only ones who do that) by changing the topic back to women and divorce. It's really odd.]

  108. Ton

    I agree promiscuity has to have an affect on men’s bonding. What people are arguing is degree. Myself, not sure if it’s because novel seeking becomes a way of life or because promiscuity in a man leads to him learning the truth about women or a little of each.

  109. Zippy

    Ton:
    My virginal ex wife was unfaithful, so was another commentators.

    I don’t doubt it for a second. Intuitively I might even suspect a virgin bride to be more likely to cheat on general “grass is always greener” terms, whereas a woman with N=2 or 3 might know better.

    But it seems like that intuition, and the reality of one out of a hundred virgins-at-marriage or so cheating, doesn’t falsify the five-out-of-a-hundred infidelity rate for non-virgins-at-marriage.

    All presuming valid data, of course.

  110. sunshinemary

    @ Zippy

    I’m pretty skeptical of the idea that promiscuity doesn’t destroy men’s ability to pair bond to a similar general extent as it does for women.

    I used to believe it didn’t. Now I suspect that it does at some point. Maybe not to the same degree as it does for women, though. Rollo has written a post about how having a lot of previous sexual partners sort of “gets it out of a man’s system” so that they can settle into faithful marriage if they want to. Does anyone remember that post? I’d like to read it again, so if someone could link to it, that would be helpful

    @ Ton and Earl
    We are talking about whether or not men with high partner counts can pair bond. Why do the two of you keep changing the subject? It’s weird, but I notice a lot of men from the manosphere become very anxious if anyone tries to discuss anything other than the fact that women, in particular Christian women, are eeeeeevil. Yes, yes, we know women are evil. But could we try real hard to make most of our comments relevant to the actual topic of the given post?

    @ everyone else
    Enough with the videos of tap dancing bears and stuff. Seriously. I’ll make a separate thread for you guys to post that stuff in so that all the other threads don’t keep getting glutted up with a ton of extraneous comments. If it were only once in a while, it wouldn’t be a big deal, but it’s like dozens of comments in every thread now. It makes it hard to follow the conversation.

  111. Zippy

    Sorry, numbers should be two and ten, though I’m getting it from eyeballing a graph. The important thing is that non-virgins are five or ten times more likely to cheat.

  112. Deep Strength

    Don’t forget about porn, ladies. From the point of view of “I want my man to sexually bond with me, and I am worried about obstacles to that process”, watching porn is much worse than having slept with other women in the past.

    [...]

    Farm Boy: Porn can provide a new novel experience three times a day, and there’s virtually no end to how “novel” it can be. It’s best to think of a guy’s “Bonding N” as the number of novel experiences he’s had. Since porn is more effective at delivering novel experiences, it’s more effective at killing satisfaction.

    Incorrect. 1 Corinthians 6

    12 “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything. 13 “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14 And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! 16 Or do you not know that he who is joined[d] to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.” 17 But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. 18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin[e] a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

  113. Zippy

    SSM:
    Rollo has written a post about how having a lot of previous sexual partners sort of “gets it out of a man’s system” so that they can settle into faithful marriage if they want to.

    Could be, but it would be astonishing if the cheat rate for that group was lower than the cheat rate for virgins, or even folks with low N of 2-3. So someone who gives up their virginity gives up 80% of their intrinsic insurance-against-cheating value with that very first act of fornication.

  114. sunshinemary

    @ deti

    But that being the case, cheating during marriage isn’t necessarily an indication he’s a promiscuity widower. It could be; but isn’t necessarily.

    Well, the term “promiscuity widower” is just something I made up yesterday morning, you understand, so it’s not like we have hard and fast parameters on that yet. :) But in the OP, the way I have defined it is as someone who was promiscuous before marriage and then found that he couldn’t deal with monogamy. Specifically, I wrote:

    men who engage in heavy promiscuity before marriage must somehow imprint on the chasing of novel sexual partners and are at a much increased risk of being unable to bond to monogamy.

    and

    …men who spent a number of years chasing after (and often catching) numerous women seem to be at an increased risk of being unable to bond properly in their marriages.

    People cheat for all kinds of reasons beyond sexual novelty, but I think there is something relevant going on IF those statistics are accurate. The correlation is too startling obvious.

    If those stats are correct, then I would strongly counsel women (and men) to avoid marriage partners with over ten previous partners. Oh, and as an aside, I received an email from the female blogger I referred to in the OP. Her daughter will be marrying the young man, but they have discussed some of these issues with them. Her daughter also has now read this post, so they are going into things with eyes wide open.

  115. sunshinemary

    For those of you who rode the short bus over to my blog today, the topic of this post is male promiscuity’s effect on pair bonding in marriage and ability to be monogamous. The secondary consideration is whether women should marry formerly promiscuous men. That’s all.

  116. deti

    “People cheat for all kinds of reasons beyond sexual novelty, but I think there is something relevant going on IF those statistics are accurate. The correlation is too startling obvious.”

    All well and good. But all I’m saying is that it appears to me, that the way premarital N and effect on cheating actually plays out over time, is that woman’s premarital N is more predictive of eventual divorce than man’s premarital N. So the woman’s premarital N appears to affect her more deeply, and for longer, than the man’s premarital N.

    [ssm: I agree.]

  117. lavazza1891

    [ssm: In all three of the examples I sited above, the men voluntarily entered into marriage with no coercion or pregnancy. Presumably they had found women they loved and wanted to build a life with her but then found that monogamy was much harder than they had expected. Many promiscuous men want the other benefits of marriages, as example 2 showed, such as companionship and comfort, but promiscuity seems to change men and make it harder for them to give up the chase.]

    This is the first time I here something like that. The most promiscuous men (30 + or so) I know are either still unattached (two 35-40 YOs) or in stable relations since at least six years (three 45-55 YOs, attached since 30, 40 and 50 respectively).

  118. sunshinemary

    One last thing before I skedaddle. I have created an Open Conversations page at the top of my blog in the menu bar. It reads:

    This page will serve as ongoing place to engage in some light-hearted banter and fun chit chat. Feel free to raise any topics you’d like to talk about in the comment thread. Post videos, tell jokes, flirt (if you are unmarried), or whatever you feel like doing. Have fun!

    I know it’s fun to engage in conversation with like-minded people, so feel free to talk about whatever you want up there. I’ll leave it open permanently. That will allow the threads to stay a little more on topic and yet give people a place to socialize with each other if they wish. Enjoy!

  119. deti

    SSM:

    I wrote my last comments before I saw your reply to my 1:06 comment.

    I’ll bow out here. I think (hope) I’ve made my point. I’ll go get on the short bus now.

    I’m not tense when you talk about anything that makes guys look bad. Believe me, I’m used to reading things from women that makes guys look bad. It’s the story of our lives. (Cue world’s smallest violin.)

    All I did was try to draw a comparison that I thought was relevant to the topic of how male promiscuity affects men and their ability to bond in marriage (which actually wasn’t the topic; you framed it somewhat absurdly as “bonding to monogamy”). But it’s obvious you don’t want to talk about what I believe to be a valid comparison between how male promiscuity actually plays out vis a vis how female promiscuity actually plays out. I don’t think the real world experience suggests that male promiscuity is as deleterious to marriage as female promiscuity is. You don’t want to talk about that for whatever reason. *shrugs* So be it.

  120. Ton

    No doubt Zippy, and I am not trying to say marrying a virgin is a bad idea, just that our well laid plans are still likely to fail. I understood the point you were making regarding numbers.

    Don’t be silly SSM, I have made a statement saying it impairs bonding and I think I make enough posts calling out men on a variety of issues. I value truth. Sometimes the truth is men suck. Sometimes. I’ve not come short on such things in the past.

    What I am driving at is, men come up with all types of ideas that will ensure success in their marriage and those plans fail the test in the real world. I am currently my happiest (relationship wise ) with a woman folks would consider a bad risk, her being none of the things men here seem to think will ensure their success. My point and warning being, things don’t play out in the real world like they do on paper. The Titanic was unsinkable,virgins cheat, no sex before marriage does not always serve men well etc etc

  121. donalgraeme

    Oh, and as an aside, I received an email from the female blogger I referred to in the OP. Her daughter will be marrying the young man, but they have discussed some of these issues with them. Her daughter also has now read this post, so they are going into things with eyes wide open.

    Well, I hope that he has been “clean” for at least a few years as a test of his discipline. Because I have a bad feeling about this.

  122. Tacomaster

    ssm: I disagree that men need to have triple digit Ns to experience the PW effect. My husband’s is double, not triple, digit. I don’t know what the men in examples 1 and 2 have for partner counts, but if I had to guess, I’d say it’s not triple digit. How many men get into the triple digits? That has to be pretty rare unless he’s a hardcore players who is single through out his twenties and thirties.]

    My brother played baseball in college. Pitcher. He got to triple digits. Pretty disturbing.

    FWIW I get tired of the all women are eeeeevil comments too.

  123. Zippy

    Ton:
    My point and warning being, things don’t play out in the real world like they do on paper.

    Those are wise words. Statistical models (stereotypes) have their place and can be useful. But life is not a series of steps along the mean of millions of normal distributions: it is a series of utterly unique moments. To circle back to statistics, it is a virtual certainty that a good bit of each of our experiences will wildly diverge from the mean.

  124. FuzzieWuzzie

    It might be tangential, but as Roosh has been mentioned and I read him occaisionally, he’s gone on record stating that what he’d really like from a woman is a stimulating conversation. I have to wonder that if he did find this, would he chuck the lifestyle? He’s more than tired enough.

  125. sunshinemary

    @ Deti

    I’m not tense when you talk about anything that makes guys look bad. Believe me, I’m used to reading things from women that makes guys look bad. It’s the story of our lives. (Cue world’s smallest violin.)

    I know, and I’m not trying to pile on with that. That’s why I really tried not to shame or judge. I’m just trying to figure out if there is a problem and if so what that problem is with male promiscuity.

    Susan Walsh’s data appears to be legitimate. As parents, that’s good information for us to have. Do we want our daughters’ marrying young men who have had 13 previous partners and thus have a 50% chance of cheating on their wives? It’s easy to read the words “cheated on,” but there is a truly sucky reality behind them, which I assume you have never experienced.

    Furthermore, some of my readers, including you, have sons. Wouldn’t we want to mention to our sons that, in addition to the risks of STDs, unplanned pregnancy and false rape allegations, there also exists the possibility that they will have a hard time properly bonding and being monogamous if they marry after being promiscuous? Many women make a very different choice than I made if they are confronted with a cheatin’ husband. Many of them will opt to blow up the marriage instead, with all the loveliness that divorce entails. It’s worth it to consider these things so that we know how to advise our children.

    And I’m not even saying I’m 100% right about what I’ve written. This is something new that I am considering, based on observation, but now that I have seen actual data from several different sources to support the link between male promiscuity and infidelity, I think it is worth discussing. We can do so without shaming or judging men. If you notice me doing that, point it out, and I’ll apologize, because that isn’t my intention.

    All I did was try to draw a comparison that I thought was relevant to the topic of how male promiscuity affects men and their ability to bond in marriage (which actually wasn’t the topic; you framed it somewhat absurdly as “bonding to monogamy”). But it’s obvious you don’t want to talk about what I believe to be a valid comparison between how male promiscuity actually plays out vis a vis how female promiscuity actually plays out. I don’t think the real world experience suggests that male promiscuity is as deleterious to marriage as female promiscuity is. You don’t want to talk about that for whatever reason. *shrugs* So be it.

    I don’t mind talking about it, but it seemed to me like it was getting us off track. Also, it seems like I can never talk about anything having to do with men without men then hollering about how WDTT, and so we never actually get to discuss the topic. But as I’ve said a million times, I am not part of the manosphere. I want to be free to consider whatever topic is important to me. Most of what I write about concerns either women’s bad behavior or my suggestions on what women should be doing/can do to improve themselves. Once in a while, I’ll write something about men, and it’s always something about men that affects women. If it didn’t affect us, or wasn’t caused by us, it would be inappropriate for me even to comment on it. While I agree that a woman’s promiscuity is probably more detrimental, that doesn’t mean a man’s promiscuity isn’t also detrimental and worth considering before a young woman decides to marry – and more importantly, to have children with – him.

    I’ll bow out here. I think (hope) I’ve made my point. I’ll go get on the short bus now.

    OK, I was too snippy with that comment. I apologize. Please forgive me.

  126. HanSolo

    One note about those charts is that the N partners aren’t premarital. It’s total N (I believe) after 18 so those could have been acquired before, during or after marriage. Also, it’s sex with someone besides their spouse, not necessarily cheating, so some of those will be people in open marriages or swingers.

    Also, one should always take such statistics with a grain of salt. The lie detector test showed that women underreport their N, even when assured of anonymity. When hooked up to the lie detector it rose by about 30%, which still doesn’t mean that was the full number for all respondents (though many would presumably have been truthful).

    Likewise, for an even more shameful stat like cheating, some women will lie about it (as will some men). In the total N, because of the stud vs. slut mentality, men are more honest about their N. The question is who would lie more about their extramarital sex more, men or women?

    Just providing some context to the charts.

  127. sunshinemary

    @ Han
    Thank you. Of course, the fact that women lie about cheating is a separate issue from the one we are considering at present, which is what if any effect does past promiscuity have on a man’s ability to bond in his marriage and be faithful? Both topics are important, but both topics are not under consideration in this thread.

    Your point about whether the N was acquired pre- or post- maritally is a really good one. I am going to ask the creator of this table whether that data represents pre-marital N or overall N. Thanks for pointing that out.

  128. Zippy

    SSM:
    While I agree that a woman’s promiscuity is probably more detrimental, that doesn’t mean a man’s promiscuity isn’t also detrimental and worth considering before a young woman decides to marry – and more importantly, to have children with – him.

    The picture that is shaping up from that particular batch of data is that men’s premarital promiscuity and women’s premarital promiscuity are pretty similar (statistically) in effect when it comes to the link to adultery. That’s doubtless different from the link between premarital promiscuity and divorce, which could easily differ between the sexes.

  129. sunshinemary

    By the way, I keep using the word data with a singular verb. When I look it up, it seems that answers are evenly split between Data is the plural of datum, so use a plural verb and Data is a mass noun, so use a singular verb.

    Paging Cail Corishev…

  130. Zippy

    Han:
    It’s total N (I believe) after 18 so those could have been acquired before, during or after marriage.

    That’s how I interpreted/assumed it to be also — which means that the N=1 column represents spouse only, i.e. virgin at marriage. Might be worth verifying though.

  131. Cail Corishev

    I can’t assign a hard and fast number to that threshold, but I would counsel women to be pretty careful about marrying a man whose N > 10. I realize that describes most of my male readers, and I’m not saying any of you are or would be bad risks for marriage, but just like you would be really hesitant to marry a woman with more than a couple of past partners, so too do I think women should use caution with double-digit N men.

    Absolutely. I would counsel them to use caution with any past sexual experience, but the higher the number, the more concern on either side, certainly.

    I don’t trust those charts; they have a choppy look of being based on too-small sample sizes. Otherwise, why would men with 14 previous partners cheat so much less than men with 13 or 15? It should be more of a curve, and then the shape of the curve would be instructive. That just looks like sloppy polling.

    An Alpha Widow, as I understand the term, is a woman who has trouble committing to a new man because some Alpha in her past rocked her world so much that she can’t give him up emotionally. She’s convinced he was The One and she missed her chance to live happily ever after with him, and no one else will ever measure up. She may marry and be a dutiful wife and mother, but it will be a serious struggle for her.

    So a Promiscuity Widower, by analogy, would be a man who has trouble committing to a woman because his promiscuous past rocked his world so much that he can’t give up his yearning for it. All those conquests and variety make him feel like no single woman could ever measure up to that overall experience. He may marry and be a good husband and father, but it will always be a serious struggle for him.

    So a PW may not cheat if his commitment to fidelity is strong enough, and a cheater may not be a PW. The 30% of guys who had 6 previous partners didn’t cheat because they pined for the massive variety of their previous swinger lifestyles! They cheated for lots of other reasons; just not that one.

    That’s not an attempt to avoid any particular criticism of men. It’s an attempt to keep this term — which I think is useful — from being expanded beyond usefulness to refer to all unfaithful husbands. The PW is a particular kind of guy with an unusually high N, whom women should be wary of for that specific reason. They should be wary of the guy with N=6 too (and for that matter the guys with N=1 and N=0), but for different reasons and with different red flags to watch for.

    [ssm: Good clarifications. Thank you for this.]

  132. Cail Corishev

    The picture that is shaping up from that particular batch of data is that men’s premarital promiscuity and women’s premarital promiscuity are pretty similar (statistically) in effect when it comes to the link to adultery. That’s doubtless different from the link between premarital promiscuity and divorce, which could easily differ between the sexes.

    Great point. With an alpha widow, the worry isn’t so much that she’ll cheat (though she might), but that she will find it impossible to be fulfilled in her marriage, leading either to frivorce or to a sexless and mechanical marriage that’s held together for the sake of the children.

    With the PW — a man who specifically pines for his promiscuous past — I think the main worry is that he’ll cheat. He’s not pining for some woman from his past that he can’t have; he’s pining for conquest and hot sex with someone new, which he can have. He might even do it despite being very happy in his marriage and wanting to keep it together — while having that excitement his misses on the side.

    That’s why I tried to draw the distinction in my last comment. If a man has an N=6 at age 30, a woman should worry about many things: whether he picked up an STD or produced kids who will show up and draw on his income, whether he still pines for (or has the occasional booty call with) any of them, whether those relationships and breakups gave him wrong-headed ideas about women and relationships, and so on. But if he says his N is, “about 50; I didn’t keep count after a while,” then I’d say she should look more specifically at the PW idea, and wonder whether promiscuity itself has a hold on him that he won’t be able to break.

    SSM, I mostly use “data” in the plural, but probably in the singular sometimes when it seems to make sense. But I mostly use “media” as singular, even though it’s the same sort of thing (they’re both plural forms from Latin). So take your pick.

  133. Hipster Racist

    Women probably should stay away from wildly promiscuous men, but they seem especially attracted to them. I’d say it depends on why they had the past they did. Serial monogamy, or lots of hookups? I really think there’s a lot of people who underestimate just how popular the hookup culture really is.

  134. Hipster Racist

    Also, has it ever occurred to anyone that women pick men up? That women are often the aggressors? There’s this idea that it’s always men chasing around women, but never the other way around. Obviously you people have never lived in Manhattan or some other similar area. Sometimes a man gets a high N count for the same reason a woman does, can’t, won’t, or doesn’t want to say no.

  135. FuzzieWuzzie

    Since I’m low mileage, to put all of this into practical terms, as a prospective mother in law evaluating a candidate for son in law, I would suggest to you, SSM, that a steady eddie beta who’s confidence would be improved is a much better bet.
    The problem is, as a dance instructor told me at age 14, all the girls want to be swept off their feet. Only a guy with too much experience can do this.

  136. Chris

    Fuzzie — yeah.
    I’m crap and being a pickup artist. The Manosphere dudes would look at my N (one hand only needed and you don’t need all of that) and say that me beta, beta, beta. Ideally, my N would be less than 2, and to my shame it is not.

    SSM needs to find a boy who can be trained to sweep off feet but is still a steady and reliable lad. Who the girl can trust. HHG should be screening — as an ex player, he will be able to smell the player and hopefully screen ‘em, out.

    And this, folks, is why teenage girls need a man around. We KNOW what the agenda their boyfriends have is: we had exactly the same one when we were courting :-)

  137. FuzzieWuzzie

    Chris, you made me reminisce about my youth. To be honest, all I wanted was a girlfriend. I had some buddies who espoused a “love’em and leave’em” attutude and it kind of sickened me. What. throw away a perfectly good girl? Personally, I’d want to go back for more.

  138. Red

    “I’m pretty skeptical of the idea that promiscuity doesn’t destroy men’s ability to pair bond to a similar general extent as it does for women. Possibly for different reasons and in different modalities, of course.”

    Zippy, you have to remember for most of know history men would take 2 or 3 wives if they could afford it. Where as a women being bound to one man is the norm, men being bound to several women is the male norm. That’s probably where a 1/4 ratio comes from.

  139. DDDD

    Red:
    Yes, but sexual and physical torture was also “the norm” through much of history.

    But that is because people were sick sick sick back then! They called themselves “civilized” and the leaders and elders were the ones that got to do the honors of “punishing” the criminals (and you know they were getting off on it)
    So I don’t know that I’d refer to history as be “norm” we’d compare to…
    SSM- thank you for the post. Very insightful! Especially enjoyed reading through the responses. I love the debate that goes on in the comment section!
    As a woman, I may accept a partner’s high N past, if he showed the other signs of future faithfulness that you’ve all described above. But I’d still keeps eyes wide open!
    A person who had the ability to play a “slut” at any time in their lives, (male or female), does have different wiring than me, so I would have to keep somewhat of an eye out for auspicious behavior.

  140. HanSolo

    @SSM

    @ Han
    Thank you. Of course, the fact that women lie about cheating is a separate issue from the one we are considering at present, which is what if any effect does past promiscuity have on a man’s ability to bond in his marriage and be faithful? Both topics are important, but both topics are not under consideration in this thread.

    Your point about whether the N was acquired pre- or post- maritally is a really good one. I am going to ask the creator of this table whether that data represents pre-marital N or overall N. Thanks for pointing that out.

    The data of having sex with a non-spouse while married was introduced via the plots above. It’s important to understand what the data mean and any limitations on their accuracy in order to draw valid conclusions.

    So I wasn’t trying to derail the conversation. Just mentioning that self-reported data should be taken with a grain in salt in light of evidence of under-reporting.

    Cheers.

  141. freebird

    Posting to call to your attention you coined a misnomer as a genuine new term/label.
    “Andrist.”

    There is no ‘team man,’ thus there can be no ‘andrists.’

    However there is team ‘his woman,’ and team woman, and team, her name,all could be thus phrased as ‘gynists.’
    Sofie solipsism and her nuclear zombie hamster.

    Hehe.
    just sayin

  142. Hannah

    Wow topics come thick and fast here! Being on a different time zone I’m typically late to the party but still want to join in :)

    @Scott:

    “I feel totally bonded to my wife. When I read around here, I think “My God. this bond I have with my wife must have been forged IN SPITE of everything that led up to our meeting.”
    “We get attacked regularly (I don’t let them through moderation) for being hypocrites.”

    May the Lord bless you and Mychael and the work you are doing! You are fantastic examples of active repentance. It seems you’ve learned from your mistakes, and are willing to fight for a better way for your children and others. This isn’t hypocritical. It’s both humbling and powerfully influential.
    Never grow weary in doing good :)

  143. Hannah

    Hi Mr Darlings – I don’t believe we’ve met before but your lovely wife speaks highly of you :)
    Your comment promoting polygamy leaves me with a sickening feeling that’s hard to shake!

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/09/06/the-promiscuity-widower/#comment-25279

    In a previous post I discussed my intense horror at the concept:

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/women-are-not-smarter-than-men-and-it-would-be-nice-if-other-men-would-stop-telling-us-that-we-are/#comment-24426

  144. Hannah

    @Cail Corishev:

    “While there are parallels, I’d say the biggest difference between the Alpha Widow and the Promiscuity Widower is that the AW could have an N as low as 1. It’s all about that one perfect relationship that got away, so if her first one was that guy, she can be bonded to him and unable to ever be satisfied with a replacement. So any woman who’s not a virgin has the potential to be an AW.”

    Cail Corishev your comments have much truth in them.

    I don’t believe in ‘the one’ but I AM in love with my ‘one and only’!
    In the previous post some people talked about compatibility….. well sheesh I figure any male and female is compatible enough! Jewish arranged marriages can attest to this no? Love is a verb.
    If less girls believed the magical nonsense of fairytales then maybe there’d be less alpha-widows out there. Less pining for the one that ‘got away’. (even a romantic notion of Mr Perfect from a chaste girl reading Christian Romance novels could create dissatisfaction with reality) More loving of the one she married.

    @Cail Corishev:

    “Promiscuity, on the other hand, is pretty much the opposite of marriage. The promiscuous man who’s attached to the next conquest is not likely to go anywhere near marriage. He won’t often stay with one woman long enough for the subject even to come up. He also knows he’s promiscuous; he can count. So if that man finds himself proposing to a woman, it’s probably because he’s has a conversion experience and is truly trying to change his life. He’s not settling for one woman as a replacement for promiscuity; he’s switching from an anti-marriage mentality to a pro-marriage one.”

    That would be me.
    That would be my man.

    I was forced out of marriage suitability at the age of 12. On some level I knew this immediately but I suppressed the awareness for several years. In the 4 years from 18-22 I made that boot fit.

    I firmly believe that what donalgraeme says about assortive mating is right.

    My husband and I have been together happily for nearly 14 years but you couldn’t take us to the bank (in more ways than one!)
    What Ton says about real life versus on paper is so true. If you were a betting man you’d know the odds were against us but I love my man with a passion and he loves me likewise. My husband gambled big by inviting me into his world and I will stay with him for the rest of my life.

    When God saved me, the trickiest business in it all was working out the morality of my current situation of living with my boyfriend as his common wife. Confusing times followed! The advice I got from churchy christians at Hillsong Australia was that I’d been “freed like a bird in a cage and I could receive the spiritual gift of born-again virginity….. therefore I ought to leave my unevenly yoked boyfriend and because I was a ‘beautiful girl’ I would meet a chaste christian man to marry instead.”

    yeah….

    …… I’ve always been somewhat rational and something that was being sold to me just didn’t add up. Well it added up alright. I can count. And unevenly-yoked? Well we were yoked alright – no putting that egg back together again!

    So I rejected their advice.

    I still do.

    Think about this – if a guy who’s had sex with many women ends up marrying one of the rare virtuous maidens available… who the $%&#? is the chaste christian man going to marry?!?!?! A woman like me?!??!?!?! Come on.

    Assortive mating is essential. What Earl said – “Women of virtue pursue virtuous men…and ignore the others” Plain and simple. Anything else is pure folly.

  145. Hannah

    Yikes that was another extremely long comment from me!

    So instead of all that, I could have just said this to the chaste girl considering marriage to the unchaste man…..
    To borrow words from Badger in Wes Anderson’s fantastic Fantastic Mr Fox:

    “In summation, I think you just got to not do it, man.”

  146. imnobody00

    @deti

    I simply observed that promiscuous men seem to have a harder time bonding and being monogamous,

    I think you are conflating two different aspects here. On the one hand, you have the bonding problem. On the other hand, you have the monogamy.

    It’s clear that, for women, these problems are one and the same, because women can’t separate sex from emotional bonding. They bond to the man they are having sex with. But men can separate sex from love. Men can bond to a woman and still cheat on her because he wants variety (Hey! Don’t shoot the messenger! I didn’t make the rules and I don’t like them at all. Please send your complaints to god@heaven.org)

    I think there are two N for men.

    – Love N (let’s call it “L”). Number of women you have truly loved (notice: I don’t say “women you have had a relationship with”).

    – Sex N. This is our usual N (let’s call it “N” so we don’t change terminology). Number of women you have had sex with.

    “L” affects the ability for bonding to a woman. “N” affects the ability for being monogamous.

    I guess I am a bad bet because I have a L of 3 and an N of more than 20. Curiously, for me, N is not a major problem. Promiscuity gets old and tiring. When you are young and you discover PUA, you are thrilled of bedding as many women as you want. But, at the end of the day, a p**y is still a p**y. And you become lazy with age. You don’t want to put that effort to bed a skank. It is easier to go home and masturbate.

    And with age, you tend to want more the companionship, the affection, having kids and so on.

    It’s L the problem. I know I would never love a woman the way I loved my first one. I was crazy about her. She left me and married a Frenchman (“Damned! Those charming Frenchmen!”) and I took me about seven years to be a normal person again. I loved the second one about 20% of what I loved the first one. I loved the third one about 3% of what loved the first one. Somebody in the manosphere said that love is like a Scotch tape. The first time it sticks great. The second time not so well. The third time very badly. The fourth time doesn’t stick at all (I have observed that it is not the same in women. They tend to bond to the man they are with)

    Now, when I am in a relationship, I don’t bond. I am monogamous and I don’t fantasize about promiscuity. I am reasonably happy. But I don’t bond so I can sever the relationship any time I want without problems. When the woman starts giving me sh*t, I dump her. It as simple as that (they are shocked). By contrast, my first one gave me a mountain of sh*t and I didn’t dump her because I loved her a lot. I was bonded to her.

    I think the function of bonding is that: making you accept all the sh*t a woman is going to eventually give you. Without this, the relationship does not survive. So this is why I think L is more important than N.

  147. masonkramer

    imnobody00

    What you say about “L” has been my experience as well, but I still disagree with your conclusions. I’m sure that I’ll never love like the first time again. That kind of intense passion would kill me. It would literally end my life if I were to experience that again, and I’m glad that I never will. I’ve experienced the entire cycle of romantic infatuation and falling out of love four times now. And so I know, at the gut level, that romantic love doesn’t last, just like I know, even at the height of summer with cicadas rasping and fireflies aglow, that the leaves will turn one day, because that is the natural course of events. I think that makes me a [i]more[/i] stable marriage partner, though, not less stable. People who get married for love often have problems (in this narcissistic age) because when they fall out of love, two or three or five years down the line, they often find that they have no further reason to be married. And if they find that they in fact have long term compatibility, that is just an accident, really, because it’s not why they married.

    In contrast, my expectation for marriage are far more realistic. I will be getting married for the long term, in full understanding of human laws of attraction and the complimentarity of the sexes. I would of course only marry a woman that I felt deep affection & love for, but infatuation is not necessary. I of course would want my wife to be in love with me when we get married. Women are more emotional. They need that kind of emotion. It’s right and proper that they feel it for their man. But I am no longer capable of being swayed by that kind of infatuation. That is also proper. When I go a’courting, because I don’t become so infatuated anymore, I am able to soberly evaluate long-term compatibility and goals, with a mind to how we’ll be in ten years, or thirty. I will ask a lady to marry me only when I am sure that both of us are going to have our needs satisfied by doing that. So even though she may not realize it, I will be taking her long term interests into account from day one.

  148. Amanda

    @ Hannah
    Yes I agree assortive mating is best. There is just a rightness and appropriateness to it that I can’t shake. I think Alte at Traditional Christianity called it “water seeking its own level” which seems very fitting to me.

    ANECDOTE ALERT:
    For what it’s worth (which is exactly $0.02),
    In my circle of friends (all conservative Christians), I know examples of all of Donal’s catagories. Some of them fit the mold: several virgin/virgin couples have very happy marriages by all accounts — probably the best of all (save for one who flaked on her husband and divorced him).
    Several I know have marriages where neither partner came in to the marriage with a perfect past, yet the marriages seem to be doing well (including my own which I thank God for every day).

    Probably surprising to me is the girl w/past and virgin guy. I know two couples like this, and they seem very happy. There could be things going on behind the scenes of course, but I know these people pretty well, see them a few times a week, and they have a good spirit about them, seem to get along with each other and genuinely like each other.

    I also know two couples where the guy was “in the world” until his late twenties, committed his life to Christ in the church, and ended up marrying a Christian virgin daughter raised in the church. I would say I am closest to the women in these marriages most of all. They do pretty well, but on the whole I just get the impression that they aren’t very passionate or really like each other. As Christian women, we don’t get into specifics with each other about our marital beds or anything, but some of the comments my two friends make about sex makes it seem like its a chore for them or they don’t have much interest in it. I also had to counsel with my closest friend who is in one of these two marriages as she was very worried about STDs like HPV which can take years to show up. She was afraid to ask her husband about it. I have no idea just how extensively “in the world” these two guys were before coming to the church, so I couldnt say if they are PWs or not, just that their wives don’t seem very excited about their husbands or their marriage beds. Worth exactly $0.02!

  149. donalgraeme

    @ Amanda and Hannah

    Thanks for the kind words. From my experience, marriages where the Woman had a high N and the Man a low N (or zero) tend to work only when the woman has a grateful attitude towards her husband. She has to believe that he “saved” her and that without him she would be lost. Otherwise, from what I can tell they will usually not end well.

  150. Je Suis Prest

    Before I comment on the actual post, I just wanted to say a big hello to everyone. I’ve been mostly away from the internet (aside from chatting with the gentleman who has chosen not to identify himself yet) due to some really bad food poisoning (sushi) and things going crazy at work. I hope you’ve all been well!

    I was just going to say something along the lines of what iamnobody00 said, from what I have observed, there is a very big difference on the effect of promiscuity for men depending on the level of caring involved outside the sex act. From what I’ve seen, things tend to break down along the following lines for guys who are promiscuous:

    1) Lots of sex with lots of caring: These guys tend to have a lot of baggage and may have trouble bonding because they are scared of being hurt again and have scars from previous relationships, but don’t seem to become PW as a general rule. Perhaps because they generally were seeking out a relationship as opposed to chasing down prey to bed?

    2) Lots of sex, minimal caring: These guys tend to go one of two ways, they either love the thrill of the chase and become PW (and either refuse to settle down or make very poor partners), or they decide to commit and choose regular access to one woman over a sea of randoms. The defining characteristic that has separated these two (at least the subset I’ve seen) is what prompted them to choose to get married. The ones who do well tend to come to come kind of recognition that their current lifestyle isn’t fulfilling all their needs and have the maturity to recognize that they can’t have it all. The PWs never actually seem to accept that they are making a choice; on some level they generally believe that they can have their cake and eat it too. They sometimes attribute their reasons for getting married as caving to social pressure or wanting to continue things with a particular woman. The group who settle successfully also tend to do so with very attractive women who are committed to keeping them satisfied to the best of their abilities. I’ve seen guys who had Ns in the 3 figure range settle down, but they were quite clear that they had no emotional attachment to the women they had slept with previously – one went so far as to describe them as being semen receptacles until his wife came along. I found it interesting that even before he met her, he planned on settling down at some point and saw his pre-marital activities as merely fulfilling a biological drive…

    To be clear, sin always has consequences; even the relationships where the man wasn’t a PW were affected by his previous activities. In an ideal world, both partners would save themselves for each other (and would live in a society where this was expected and supported).

  151. Escoffier

    Regarding SSM’s question upthread about “imprinting” and males, deti seems to be the only one who answered. Well, I have a similar story. Which I have also previously told on HUS.

    This was not my first (my first left virtually no imprint at all) but she was my first “serious” one and we were together for three years. I broke up with her because I knew she was not right for me as a wife (just not intellectually interesting enough, is the soft way to put it) and because I wanted to move around and fulfill various ambitions and she just wanted to move back to her hometown and become an elementary school teacher. (Which is exactly what she ended up doing.) She was prepared to make my first cross country move with me the fall after we graduated, and then enroll in an education program at school in a state she had never even visited. But I said “No, don’t do that,” and that was that. We spoke only one more time and it was acrimonious.

    So, we were not either one’s first in the decisive respect. However, in another sense, we were, in that we were both each other’s first serious and very long term “relationship.” All prior encounters, for both of us, were few and not that satisfying. When we got together, that changed, dramatically. It was, to be blunt, like what a honeymoon and the first months/years of marriage must have been like in the old days when pre-Sexual Revolution norms were taken seriously. I think you can all fill in the blank without needing further explication.

    At the time (and still today), pairing off like this was considered totally acceptable by the UMC SWPL culture in which we grew up. You just didn’t flaunt it in any parent’s face. But you didn’t have to go to any extraordinary lengths to pretend nothing was happening either. No sleepovers in the house, in the same room, when the parents were home. That would be too far. But going off for a weekend, no parents, no one seemed to object to that. At school itself, parents were not around at all so we could do what we wanted, short of living together, which we never did (and would have caught hell if we had).

    Basically, her parents treated me like a son-in-law. Which I was in so many respects. Except one big one!

    Anyway, I don’t regret not marrying her. We definitely wanted different things and it would have been a bad marriage, or a very dull one at best. I don’t “miss” her in any sense analogous to alpha widowhood in women.

    However, the “honeymoon” and “newlywed” experience definitely left an imprint that will never go away. At a certain age, I don’t remember quite when, I began to realize that this was a stupid way to arrange one’s love life, for either sex. It would have made a lot more sense to have shared that “honeymoon” and “newlywed” experience with my actual and eventual wife.

    There is something in the old wisdom after all.

  152. Pingback: I Me Mine | Alpha Is Assumed

  153. Pingback: 100th Post Blogapalooza | Donal Graeme

  154. Pingback: Shattering the Delusion | Donal Graeme

  155. Pingback: The Shrinking Gap- The Conundrum of Female SMV and Marriage | Donal Graeme

  156. Pingback: Marriage as a business contract and the case for sole child custody for fathers | Atavisionary

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s