T O P
Reisiluu

Hypocrites are those whose actions contradict their beliefs. hypocrisy UK /hɪˈpɒk.rɪ.si/ US /hɪˈpɑː.krə.si/ *a situation in which someone pretends to believe something that they do not really believe, or that is the opposite of what they do or say at another time:* The reasoning matters. Does she think everyone who is unployed is a loser, but blames her 5-year long unemployment on her abusive ex or some other excuse? Hypocrite. If she thinks a woman's place is at home and a man's place is at work, she is sexist but not a hypocrite. Similarly, a man who incorrectly believes that men's promiscuous behaviour is not a sign that they are bad partners but believes that is the case for women, is sexist. If he believes women shouldn't sleep around and then encourages them to do exactly that, he is a hypocrite. One can be sexist and a hypocrite at the same time.


Novadina

I think it is, yeah. Wanting a partner who has similar goals and lifestyle as you would make more sense to me. Someone working minimum wage probably doesn’t really share the same goals as someone who is a high earner.


Notanothrshitthrow

Yea exactly, partner preferences should be about identifying shared values (at least imo) rather than an arbitrary requirement that you yourself do not fulfill.


JoeRMD77

Yup, nailed it right here. The OP, if he ever even got a low N-count partner, wouldn't be happy with that person and would probably cheat. That's what the n-count studies show us anyway and for him to contradict that would be absolute madness. What he's experiencing is the cognitive dissonance that a lot of men are facing with women gaining more power - that's all it is, and ever has been. Men are granted more sex these days but at the cost of having to perform mental gymnastics to feel superior to the "sluts" they don't want but manage to sleep with every chance they get. If everything could go back to the 50's where these guys could beat their stay-at-home wives whilst fucking the secretary on the side, they'd sign-up for it in heartbeat. Women going to work and being promiscuous shatters their narrow-minded worldview and they write it out on here for us to read daily. It's like a cry for help but they'll need an actual professional.


PaidByPutinBot123

wanting an equal partner in a unequal dating market isnt realistic.


Fleischpeitsch

>Wanting a partner who has similar goals and lifestyle as you would make more sense to me. Despite the virgins of the manosphere using their solipsism to claim that no man would want to date a woman with a high n-count, in reality it's actually just virgins that want virginal partners while studs prefer sluts. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2016.1232690 >For long-term relationships, in contrast, there was virtually no sex difference. Thus, contrary to the idea that male promiscuity is tolerated but female promiscuity is not, both sexes expressed equal reluctance to get involved with someone with an overly extensive sexual history. **Finally, participants with an unrestricted sociosexual orientation (high SO participants) were more tolerant than low SO participants of prospective mates with higher numbers of past sexual partners but were also less tolerant of prospective mates with low numbers of past sexual partners.** https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5964280_Matching_in_Sexual_Experience_for_Married_Cohabitating_and_Dating_Couples >Romantic partners showed a significant level of matching in the prior number of intercourse partners. Further, among the married couples, a higher discrepancy between men's and women's number of previous intercourse partners was related to lower levels of love, satisfaction, and commitment in the relationship. tl;dr: High n-count people are usually looking for and pairing up with other high n-count people, while virgins are looking for and pairing up with other virgins, which explains why the manosphere has such a strong preference for virgins.


ivy176

It's hypocritical if either of them demand that in a partner when they can't provide it themselves, yes. They're ultimately free to want that though and it doesn't make them evil for having a preference. I guess it depends on whether it's a hidden preference vs a demand. But I don't know why a high count man would want a low count woman in particular. It wpupd be a lot more work for him.


StacksFifthAve

There was a video of a podcast where this young black woman, I’d say about 22-26, said she deserved a millionaire because she had her own bag. When she was asked to clarify how much her bag was, she said she was making about $50k a year; it was ridiculously hilarious. If a woman making about $100-300k/year says she feels she needs a millionaire, then that’s one thing and I can understand why she may feel that way. If that isn’t passive income, or some manner of her finding a way for her money to work for her, then that means she’s working 40-65 hour weeks for that money, and starting a family with someone will be sure to slice her income down; she’s gonna want someone she can sure will be able to maintain the life she already built for herself along with being able to handle the bag that their life as a family will require. But, in my state, minimum wage is $7.25, which is $15,000 a year. No woman making that should have the audacity to think she’s owed a UMC anything. $7.25 an hour is why so many people would rather scam and sell drugs for a meager 15-30k a year, but that’s an entire other conversation to get off into.


CimZim

I think it is hypocritical, yes, with one caveat. The woman is in a minimum wage job out of her own choice, just like high N men are sluts out of their choice. The whole hypocrisy thing is due to not even trying to hold yourself to the same standard as your mate, and either not acknowledging or getting upset that your choices may have a negative effect on how you're perceived by the person you're wanting. High N men spent their sexual lives being sluts out of choice *but* fail to realize the majority of low N women have zero desire to be with a guy who fucked enough people to fill a movie theater. We want a guy who has a N similar to us. Typically the guy gets upset, saying that women "shouldn't care" or worse, keeps banging his head on the wall insisting we *don't* care. Lower class woman who spends their career lives being minimum wage workers out of choice *but* fail to realize that the majority of high earning men have zero desire to be with a woman whose greatest work accomplishment is being employee of the month at McDonald's. He wants a woman who has a financial motivation similar to him. So if she gets upset, saying a man making $200k shouldn't care that she's only making $20k, or worse, keeps banging her head on the wall insisting men are totally accepting of gold diggers, yes she's just as hypocritical.


Sorcha16

You summed up my thoughts on this so well it's scarey (way better put than I could but exact sentiment)


CimZim

Thank you!


dbz19

> We want a guy who has a N similar to us. but not a virgin guy, right?


Specialist-Crazy5899

I am against dating virgin guys after experience with 2 of them. Not because of their lack of sexual experience. Sex is instinct; men learn very quickly. The problem I had in my 1.5 year relationship with a 23yo virgin, was that even a year and a half into the relationship, he could not keep me off a pedestal. I was just that; his girlfriend. Not an equal, not a partner. Years later another virgin guy asked me out. He was insecure about the fact that I was “experienced” and he made everything about being a power struggle. He used words like “imbalanced relationship”, “inherently unfair”, and “upper hand”. Said I could brain-wash him using my experience as a weapon, and he’d just have to sit and accept everything I say as fact. Yup, he said that. He later turned out to be a toxic incel. Anyway, if virgins in general had a high sense of self-worth/self-love, less insecurity issues, and a healthier and realistic view of what a good relationship is, I’d have no problem. But it’s the “virgin mentality” that kills me.


dbz19

Huge essay to justify why you wouldn’t date a virgin and I’m guessing the same person would seethe when a guy doesn’t want to be a virgin but still wants a virgin wife Face it, a virgin man and woman are not the same. No woman wants a virgin man. Plenty of men want a virgin woman.


CimZim

Virgins are superior for a longterm, sexually faithful relationship imo.


dbz19

Well if you're talking about men, that's a view shared by like 0.00000000001% of the population. Virginity in men is regularly ridiculed and shamed.


Jamless_universe

That's maybe a U.S thing. I live in a country where virgin men and women are the standard for marriage.A non-virgin man or woman is considered having loose moral character therefore not marriage material.


CimZim

I know, I live in the US and am aware of social beliefs regarding virginity. Fwiw, I was a virgin until almost age 24...I saw how virgin men and women were looked down on, and would say my N was 3 instead of 0. Having a low number was better than people thinking you were a frigid or prudish woman. I don't care what other people think anymore.


DjangoUBlackBastard

Virgin women aren't looked down on by any stretch of the imagination. They're held up for their virtue if anything and looked at as the ultimate goal by plenty of men. I personally wouldn't sleep with a virgin, but I'm the only man I personally know that feels the same.


CimZim

Dude, no. I'm willing to believe you haven't personally seen anyone mocking or being condescending to a virgin woman, that's fine. But you've never been one, whereas I have. Don't completely disregard my lived experiences.


DjangoUBlackBastard

>Dude, no. I'm willing to believe you haven't personally seen anyone mocking or being condescending to a virgin woman, that's fine. I've seen people being condescending to literally any and every type of person ever for any type of thing. I've seen people be condescending to other people because they did community service regularly. This isn't a standard by which I judge things and I'm thinking because you have a personal stake here you're unaware of your bias. If you weren't a virgin you would've been judged for that too, some people are just assholes. Most men would prefer a virgin woman to a non virgin. Most women would prefer a non virgin man to a virgin man. This is just basic observable reality.


CimZim

I'm not saying that I've only been judged for being a virgin, there's a shit ton of other traits I've been judged and ridiculed for. My point is don't say that women aren't negatively judged for being virgins, because we are. I'm not the only one...go make a post about it if you want more answers. But saying >Virgin women aren't looked down on by any stretch of the imagination. Is indicating you don't believe it.


DefiantPirate9248

im a woman and i was shamed for being a virgin as well, lol. Guarantee these dudes would never have the courage to post and ask. there's the type of people who love to talk hyperbolic none sense but never seek even a reasonable baseline for the truth. they wouldn't be able to talk hyperbolic shit to each other anymore without feeling stupid lollll


DjangoUBlackBastard

>My point is don't say that women aren't negatively judged for being virgins, because we are. If someone says you're not discriminated against because you're white and you mention this one time a Mexican man refused to serve you at a single restaurant as an example otherwise most people will rightfully point out one person doesn't not represent society at large. Calling a woman a virgin (for example) isn't an insult. It's a common insult to call men virgins. That's what virgin shaming looks like. On the other hand women are shamed for being sluts - the exact opposite, >Is indicating you don't believe it. Sure singular people might look down on it but (and I mean this whole heartedly) who cares?


Sen_ri

> Most men would prefer a virgin woman to a non virgin. Most women would prefer a non virgin man to a virgin man. This is just basic observable reality. I don’t think this is true at all based on my observations. Most of my friends are guys and they don’t want to marry virgins. Guys in this sub are not representative, honestly more insecure people here. Virgin women prefer virgin men or a guy who’s been in a few LTR’s not promiscuous men is the > However, perhaps surprisingly, the two sexes agreed on the "optimal" number of partners for long-term relationships-- about 1-3 makes you the most attractive. Another source: > Ed found three partners to be the ideal. Men in their 20s saw 7 or more partners being "too high" for a woman; women in their 20s gave a little more wiggle room, labeling 10 or more partners as too high. In the 2017 Superdrug survey, men put the limit at 14 sexual partners maximum, and women drew the line at 15.


DjangoUBlackBastard

>I don’t think this is true at all based on my observations. Most of my friends are guys and they don’t want to marry virgins. They don't want to marry the women that are virgins because most women that are virgins are religious. They'd be happy if the woman they liked was a virgin though. >Virgin women prefer virgin men But they don't care too much anyway. Wealthy men prefer women with the ability to make money if needed but they don't care if she does. Also 1-3 partners means virgin to barely not virgins. Women don't want men with that little sexual experience.


Mobrowncheeks

The bulk of men would NOT prefer virgins, especially after a certain age. Most men find themselves being validated by the desire of their partners, and you will not be getting this from someone who is 25 and a virgin. Most men won’t wait for her. They would rather be with women who have had a few long lasting relationships with no one night stands sure, but they don’t want sexually inexperienced women


DjangoUBlackBastard

>The bulk of men would NOT prefer virgins, especially after a certain age. I know this is immediately about to get in disingenuous territory. >Most men find themselves being validated by the desire of their partners, and you will not be getting this from someone who is 25 and a virgin. So what you really mean to say is most men would not like a woman that doesn't have sex with them. The reason men wouldn't want to be in the situation you're describing is that she's not having sex with him. If a woman is going to have sex with a man do you think a man would prefer a virgin or non virgin? You're comparing totally different things to each other here by including the fact that she wouldn't be giving him what he wants in a relationship. >Most men won’t wait for her. That doesn't mean they don't want her. I know a man that married a virgin. He didn't wait for her but I can tell you he definitely liked the fact she was a virgin. I'm the only man I know in real life that doesn't feel the same. >They would rather be with women who have had a few long lasting relationships with no one night stands sure, but they don’t want sexually inexperienced women In my experience talking to men this isn't true. 99% of guys would just say "I can teach her". A woman's sexual experience is 99% of the time meaningless at making her a better sexual partner and usually more experienced women are the worst to have sex with. Even in my case the reason I don't want a virgin has to do with the attachment not sexual experience. I don't want someone that forever sees me as the one because I don't want to hold they type of power over someone because I try to stay aware of power dynamics so communication stays open. In my experience less experienced women get very clingy. Most men I know do not care about clingy women (or better yet prefer it) so a virgin is a win win situation for them.


Jamless_universe

Virgin women are never looked down upon lol Virginity and abstinence are still some of the most valued virtue in woman no matter whatever else the Sex Positive Pick mes say. Only promiscuous women will shame a virgin woman to drag her down to her level.


notsofriendlygirl

If he looks like brad Pitt and is a virgin, that is something women desire. Because we KNOW he could get it, but chooses not to put of respect for himself…


dbz19

Lol, yeah most guys aren't brad pitt. A whiny college nerd with the "virgin walk" isn't giving off "this guy is saving himself" vibes.


notsofriendlygirl

Well because he’s unattractive. Unattractive men aren’t desired…


dbz19

Yeah but like I’m pretty sure a mid 20’s virgin guy is more likely to be that than Brad Pitt saving himself


[deleted]

Someone once asked the SBs on a SB subs if they would be honest about their past sex lives with their future fiancé or husband. 100% of those that answered said “no” they would not. It is a moot point to talk about counts when at least women if not also men are not being honest. Most men will never know if their fiancé used to be a SB or an escort or is just a person with a high count.


flapperfemmefatale

Is that really a shocking thing to hear from women who would be on that sub?


[deleted]

That is a good question. Probably not. It is very easy to make broad assumptions from small sample sizes but when that is all you have it is all you have. They fill a need. My niece is a SB and she has a pretty rock star lifestyle. But she is in the top 1% of those able to pull that kind of lifestyle. Can a person be a good person and also want the SB lifestyle because it suits them? I would answer yes to that question. That leaves me to suspect that most women would probably lie to a significant other by omission or directly about their sexual past. Especially if they were born after about 1990.


flapperfemmefatale

Where I'm from, being a sugar baby is incredibly niche. And I don't really see them as any different from prostitutes. So from my perspective, it's a lie told for customer service (like pretending to care about a customer's day for a better tip). It's not a question of ethics, but of what will make them money.


DjangoUBlackBastard

Every decent looking girl at my college was on the pole or a SB for a while. Other than the girls that had BFs they came to campus with.


flapperfemmefatale

You went to a weird college. Or I did lol


DjangoUBlackBastard

Nah it's the college I went to. Kinda known for that (tons of rappers rap about messing with girls at the school).


flapperfemmefatale

Still a better chance that your school was the more normal one. Mine had no Greek life, we were best known for our lacrosse victories, and our biggest annual event was a drag ball lol We liked to party, but we weren't the stereotypical college kids. A few former classmates went on to do burlesque, but because they genuinely enjoy it. It wasn't about money


DjangoUBlackBastard

IDK. My college is in the middle of downtown in a city known for their strip clubs, bachelor life, and nightlife.


modidlee

Georgia State is that you???


CimZim

What is SB? Also, that's horrible and more than a little terrifying.


[deleted]

Sugar baby. Typically a young girl that is a side chic of multiple older wealthier men that are probably married for an allowance


CimZim

Oh, okay. I know what a sugar baby is. I still think it's sad, and kinda scary, that they would hide a part of their life away like that. While by modern standards it's considered old fashioned, I firmly believe that you and your partner should be open and honest about your background and life experiences. Not only have they helped form you as you are today, but knowing what you've been through...good and bad...can give your partner valuable information on how to treat you/understand any quirks you have. And likewise, you towards them. This idea of "the past is the past, my man/woman doesn't need to know everything about me" is very weird imo. Other people obviously have their own opinions, which is fine. But if suddenly I decided to get married I'd want to know as much as possible about my husband, and for him to know as much as possible about me.


[deleted]

I agree. That changed my outlook on a lot of things about human relationships. There were some well written responses on why they would not be candid and why they would keep that from their significant other. However, you could sum all of them up as “the past is the past” and that “it is really none of their business”. I grew up in a two parent household where my parents stay married even though they had massive marital issues. I was told over and over that marriage was sacred. When I read that it was unanimous and adamant and that they had pre-rationalized it to themselves that made me lose faith in humanity as far as relationships. I am jaded and I don’t think there is really much sacred anymore as far as human relationships. The idea that a young person could marry a complete fraud that feels like the past is the past is not good. I would bet money that people with high body counts will shave numbers off to seem reasonable. Any discussion about counts is useless because a person wont know the truth


The_Meep_Lord

That is why you need to learn body language. We say a lot more with our bodies then you think.


[deleted]

Please tell me what body language signs there are that enlightens you to one’s count? This should be comically entertaining


The_Meep_Lord

Open body language, more confident, better at sex, read body language to determine when someone is lying, etc. It is more comical that you think body language is not important when it is everything in terms of emotional intelligence.


[deleted]

I disagree and your comment is very vague. If I lined up ten women I bet you could not guess even one of their counts


Intrepid_Place5390

The past gives you insight into the person in the present. I think most people pushing the past is past, none of your business, have a past that is something not to proud of for example. If a woman did not give me some insight into her past, I would not consider her for LTR. Now, of course she can lie. I'm pretty good at filling blanks in. Lying also is grounds for removal from LTR , IMO, also.


Prismatic_Symphony

>I firmly believe that you and your partner should be open and honest about your background and life experiences. 100%. People who say "the past is the past" have something nasty to hide. The past matters.


CimZim

Exactly. And it may not even be something that is their fault, but it's still very important for your partner to know.


Jamless_universe

I live in a third world country with lots of disadvantages. Still I'm happy we don't have to deal with such problems since staying virgin till marriage is the norm here. Wondering about whether your woman was a chaste woman or a prostitute in the past looks like a headache for me.Worrying about if your man is fucking prostitues behind your back also looks like horrible experience for me. Why sex work is so common in the US btw?


[deleted]

Because our wives don’t put out and think sex is only on their terms


caption291

"The whole hypocrisy thing is due to not even trying to hold yourself to the same standard as your mate" Having different standards for different things is not hypocrisy.


CimZim

It is saying you're allowed to do something your partner is not allowed to. You're literally saying that the behavior is 100% fine or good if you do it, but horrible if they do it. That's hypocritical.


SylvestorTalone

>It is saying you're allowed to do something your partner is not allowed to. It's really not 'saying' anything. The other party can hold you to whatever standards they wish, that is their business. A lot of women seem to think that its men's job to hold ourselves to the same standards we hold them to. If you want the standards to be the same, you need to apply them yourselves, but that would mean rejecting otherwise attractive men purely on the basis of notch count, which is not in your nature, genrally. The reason women don't sweat the success standard is because men don't generally care, any man is free to care and say ''I want a woman who makes minimum 6 figures'' if he wants, it's just not in our nature to do so. One of my male friends actually did run into this in OLD, a woman he was chatting with immediately said she was no longer interested upon discovering his body count, so it does happen. It's just that on balance your value is going to go up more by being a proven winner in the mating game (which means having a high notch count basically) than it is by being ''pure'', as a man that is.


DjangoUBlackBastard

>It is saying you're allowed to do something your partner is not allowed to. My GF can carry a child for 9 months and I will ask her to do that at some point if we're lucky. Am I a hypocrite for it? She likes going out on dates and I don't, is she a hypocrite for expecting me to take her out on dates even though she doesn't take me out (keep in mind I don't like dates)? Like come on now. Men and women don't have the same standards and requirements for each other at all. You're pretending men and women are the same here when we aren't.


CimZim

Lol why are you bringing up biological impossibilities? Males can't get pregnant, you're being ridiculous. That has nothing to do with *allowing* your partner to do X, or saying "you cannot have this trait but I can", you cannot do this activity, but I can".


DjangoUBlackBastard

>Lol why are you bringing up biological impossibilities? Here's another biological impossibility. Men can't carry children to term and women can. As such men are vastly more concerned with women being chaste than women are with men. I mean you have zero doubts that any kid you could possibly have will be yours. On the other end of things you can get pregnant and be that vulnerable and he can't. So you'll want a man that can financially support and protect you while most men don't care about those things. Men and women have different sexual organs so they have different sexual requirements.


CimZim

That still doesn't have anything to do with saying a behavior is good for you but bad for your partner. Nobody is saying cheating is good here. Let's kick sex out of the discussion altogether. Do you see how it would be hypocritical to tell your girlfriend "it's okay for me to take a week long vacation with the boys every few months, but you're not allowed to do the same thing with your girls"? Or how about telling your wife "it's okay for me to spend $3000 without asking you, but you're not allowed to do the same thing"?


DjangoUBlackBastard

>That still doesn't have anything to do with saying a behavior is good for you but bad for your partner. First off idk anyone saying sleeping around is good for them. I know people that think it doesn't matter for them and it doesn't. Women don't care about that and women are judges that create the standards for men. On the other side men create the standard we used to judge women. If men and women by virtue of their sexual organs and roles have different standards then it makes sense a man would judge himself by what women want and women by what men want. Hypocritical to me is a woman that thinks because she makes money she should get a wealthy man, or a man that thinks because he is attractive and chaste he should get an attractive and chaste woman. >Do you see how it would be hypocritical to tell your girlfriend "it's okay for me to take a week long vacation with the boys every few months, but you're not allowed to do the same thing with your girls"? Yes, but this isn't the same by any stretch of the imagination. >Or how about telling your wife "it's okay for me to spend $3000 without asking you, but you're not allowed to do the same thing"? This isn't at all hypocritical for majority of relationships where men outearn the women. Do you think it's hypocritical for a masculine man to want a feminine partner? They should want a masculine partner if that's the standard they hold themselves to, right?


CimZim

>Women don't care about that and women are judges that create the standards for men. Do you at least acknowledge that a significant minority of low N women want absolutely nothing to do with high N male sluts? >Hypocritical to me is a woman that thinks because she makes money she should get a wealthy man, or a man that thinks because he is attractive and chaste he should get an attractive and chaste woman. So a woman who is low N shouldn't want to have a low N man? A man who is low N shouldn't want to have a low N woman? >Yes, but this isn't the same by any stretch of the imagination. It is. The guy is saying the same exact activity for him is allowed but not for his girlfriend. >This isn't at all hypocritical for majority of relationships where men outearn the women. I was thinking of one where they earn the same amount. So he makes 40k, she makes 40k. He's allowed to make significant financial decisions, she isn't. Is that hypocritical to you, yes or no? >Do you think it's hypocritical for a masculine man to want a feminine partner? They should want a masculine partner if that's the standard they hold themselves to, right? That's just a personality type, not an action.


DjangoUBlackBastard

>Do you at least acknowledge that a significant minority of low N women want absolutely nothing to do with high N male sluts? Yeah. Can you acknowledge no one cares about them because they're a significant minority like you said? >So a woman who is low N shouldn't want to have a low N man? A man who is low N shouldn't want to have a low N woman? You can want what you want. I'm saying what they should expect. An attractive chaste woman is rare and highly valued. A high earning man is rare and highly valued. A high earning man since he is valued by women can expect to get a woman that would be valued by men. Opposites attract, no one wants to be in a relationship with them but in a reversed gender. Most people look for partners that thrive where they fall short. >The guy is saying the same exact activity for him is allowed but not for his girlfriend. But that activity isn't something that's inherently gendered like sex is. By virtue of being a woman your sexual life and my sexual life have nothing in common. We have totally different sexual organs. We're not the same. >I was thinking of one where they earn the same amount. So he makes 40k, she makes 40k. He's allowed to make significant financial decisions, she isn't. Is that hypocritical to you, yes or no? Yes but again you're insinuating men and women are the same sexually. We literally aren't. Actually our sex is the only difference between us. >That's just a personality type, not an action. It's both. Masculinity defines all of societal expectations of men. A woman that's a girly girl but in the military is seen as masculine societally. A manly hairdresser is seen as feminine. You can't be masculine without doing masculine things.


[deleted]

[удалено]


DjangoUBlackBastard

Explain? Do you believe women care as much about n count as men do? If you don't how does my example not apply? You live life to be a good partner to whoever you find, not to be what you want in a partner. What you want in a partner is not necessarily what that partner would want in you and you're not hypocritical for holding yourself to the standard THEY would want and holding them to the standard YOU would want. If women generally wanted men with low n counts men would keep their n counts low. Instead in the real world men mostly artificially inflate their n count if asked and women lower there's.


Redpillisposion

Yes it is hypocrisy because it is a rule for thee not for me behavior. If you can't hold yourself to the same standards, why should anyone take you seriously?


meme_lords_unite

>We want a guy who has a N similar to us. I've never met a woman who cares about a man's n-count. This is bullshit that the women here like to lie about.


CimZim

Exactly how many low N women have you spoken to about this directly?


Wash_your_mouth

High count men have high count for a reason. Women don't give themselves up to be fucked just like that. Men earn that privilege by having many high value qualities that for every healthy minded woman is much more important than men's N count alone.


CimZim

A slut is still a slut. I am not saying that a slut is a bad or immoral or unethical person. I still think they deserve common courtesy as a human being. But I do not think that they are the best choice for a faithful long term relationship.


Intrepid_Place5390

I agree, it doesn't rule them out, but you should vet them harder. High N count don't like that, but it is what it is. The background around the High N count is important. ONS, or long term relationships, type of sex, 3 somes, and so on. You have to look at the whole picture.


CimZim

I don't care about the type of sex, unless it's something I'm not into whatsoever like hard-core bdsm. But that has more to do with sexual incompatibility than N. >High N count don't like that, but it is what it is. Yup, there's always a bunch of men here who keep trying to say their pasts don't matter lol.


Wash_your_mouth

I mean slut is often times defined as a girl who gives up her pussy nigh for free. "Eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap" analogy. Since men are repulsed by promiscuous women then having sex with lots of men will lose her value points, hence giving up her n-count for free is high risk no reward behaviour. Any average (and some below average) looking girls can sleep with 100-300 men per year no effort required. While men can't rack up numbers like that (excluding with prostitutes) if they don't bring value elsewhere. The term "gatekeeper of sex and relationship" basically means that it's on men to get a girl into relationship (seduce and charm her to become his girl) while it is on the girl to charm her now boyfriend to stay with her and not stray.


CimZim

A slut is anyone who sleeps around with many partners and treats sex as just another thing to do. Sluts can be male or female, it's not gender exclusive.


meme_lords_unite

Not all of them were low n but 15+.


CimZim

Well forget entirely about the women who were not low N because their opinions don't count for this conversation. So what is the number of only the low N women? Now how many of the actual low N women that you spoke to said that they would be perfectly fine marrying a man who had a high N? Do these women actually care about Fidelity?


meme_lords_unite

Most of them didn't care. My ex was a virgin and even she didn't care.


CimZim

I like how you didn't actually answer any of my questions. Your ex girlfriend was a virgin and said she didn't care about the higher lack of sexual loyalty of her hypothetical future husband who was ridden more than a bike-for-rent in Indianapolis?


meme_lords_unite

Yes.


CimZim

She's either an outlier or was lying to you. I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say she was probably the former.


meme_lords_unite

Doubt it. She practiced what she preached by dating me.


CimZim

Well forget entirely about the women who were not low N because their opinions don't count for this conversation. So what is the number of only the low N women? Now how many of the actual low N women that you spoke to said that they would be perfectly fine marrying a man who had a high N? Do these women actually care about Fidelity?


ivy176

I'm low count and was only interested in dating/marrying similar count men


Jamless_universe

I see plenty of women being angry towards fuckboys lol


mwait

Ditto. And a friend group of mine had this discussion a while back. Out of the 4 women present, none corroborated this idea that women sought low N partners.


meme_lords_unite

Not only that, women make fun of low n guys. Look at all of the women calling men virgins or incels.


TemperateSloth

You need to remember that the most promiscuous people are the ones that you (man or woman) are most likely to interact with when you have hook ups or even relationships, simply because they invest a great deal of time into dating. Of course promiscuous people don’t care, because then they would have to face the same revelation that they have done something wrong that society told them was okay. They absolutely refuse to do this, especially men.


DjangoUBlackBastard

Exactly. It's not hypocritical and it's insane to assume that even though male and female sexuality is vastly different both genders should look for the same things in their partners. We're not the same. It's not hypocritical for a woman to want a man taller than her with better grip. It's not hypocritical for a man to want someone that can birth children when he can't.


tonyghow

> He wants a woman who has a financial motivation similar to him. I agree with most everything you say except this. A lot of men, I’d argue most, don’t care if the woman has similar financial ambitions. Heck, some of those men find it detrimental. A highly ambitious woman tends to be more competitive, aggressive, masculine. That is not preferred. On the contrary. A high earning man seeking marriage often prefers a kind woman who has her own hobbies and a nice little job to handle her own debt. That’s all that is needed. And probably lower N than him. So yes, you can call it hypocritical, but men and women have different standards for each other. It’s more of a ying and yang.


CimZim

If you're talking about the middle class sure. But upper class and wealthy men do not want to be dating the barista down the street. They want a woman who is going to help add to their wealth and status in society.


tonyghow

Sure, upper class men won’t stoop down to someone on fries at McDonalds. But that’s more concern about the image he portrays to his peers. > They want a woman who is going to help add to their wealth and status in society. Status yes, wealth no. High earning men don’t need help financially. They want to come home to peace, understanding, and sex. An equally highly ambitious woman won’t have the time to be there for her man. That is the opposite of the “help” that men want.


CimZim

>They want to come home to peace, understanding, and sex. An equally highly ambitious woman won’t have the time to be there for her man. You do realize how weird this sounds, right? Do you think that all wealthy men work 9am-5pm and all wealthy women work 5pm-9am so they never see each other? Most wealthy men and women I know (doctors, lawyers, models, architects, engineers, programmers) have similar jobs or work the same/extremely similar hours. The idea of "she won't be there when he's home!" would also mean *he's* not there when *she's* home. That kind of relationship would fall apart in a year or less.


DjangoUBlackBastard

>You do realize how weird this sounds, right? Do you think that all wealthy men work 9am-5pm and all wealthy women work 5pm-9am so they never see each other? No. Both wealth men and women mostly work 24/7 and aren't constrained to any hours. So they might have time for each other but they might not. CEOs work an average of 62.5 hours a week. If they take Sunday off that's 10.5 hours a day. Two people working those types of hours have no time for a healthy relationship. Most wealthy husbands have wives that work part time or not at all. Only 30% of wives of men in the top 20% of earnings work full time. This is also without getting into the men that employ their wives fulltime (every man I know that's wealthy with a full time working wife employs his wife as an assistant or desk clerk - besides my great aunt and her husband that work together at a doctor's office they both co-own). The only men that want their wives to work for the most part are middle class men. Lower class women don't commonly work full time (childcare is too expensive to pay someone else to raise them) and upper class men needs someone that has time for them (that or they'll have mistresses to do it in place of their wives). >The idea of "she won't be there when he's home!" would also mean he's not there when she's home. That kind of relationship would fall apart in a year or less. Which is why most wealthy men (over 65%) have wives that work part time or not at all.


Expensive-Guitar3609

All, and I mean ALL upper class men cheat on their wives, so they don't give jackshit about who they marry unless she has some massive debt, can't bear any children or... She's a massive slut. Wealthy men fuck lots of sluts but they don't marry them. I spend my day sorrounded by wealthy men of all ages, women kiss their asses all the time and give them plenty of oportunities to cheat and they just take it. That's why I always say I'm more forgiving of female infideliry than male infidelity, women have dick thrown at them just like wealthy good looking men walk everyday on a pussy-mined field, and women actually cheat a lot less than men in that same position.


redheadbeauty15

being the wife to a upper class man is not really the prize people think it is unless you only care about money or status and not being respected as a spouse.


TemperateSloth

Some upper class people really don’t care that much if they like you. Fools are born to rich parents too. Look at Jeremy Minks.


Emervila

This is so based but I'm afraid you're being ironical here... if not the only issue is ratios: only 20% of these women are available for 80% men


CimZim

Where are you getting these ratios?


redheadbeauty15

almost every single person is hypocritical about what they want in dating, I want a boy with a moustache but I don't have one is a stupider version of that. It's obvious men and women are different. That being said there are also common expectations of someone being on your "level" not just looks wise. This can account for a lot of these being seen as hypocritical. Sometimes though what you look for in a partner is not what they are looking for in you so it sort of works. I think the problem comes when your preference now becomes this public expectation you place onto all of the opposite sex. Men and women do this they try and shame each other cuz they don't meet the standards they were not even trying to meet. Also just because you have a right to have a preference others also have the right to criticize it. For example rolling their eyes when a fat guy or woman says they don't want to date someone fat. Fools can look like fools. I personally find the low n count want to be a bit insecure ( unless they also have low) considering they consider the max for low to be like 3. They still can have that preference though, I just find it insufferable when they constantly try to rationalize why this should apply to the value of all women, even ones they aren't dating. FDS does this too in some ways. It's human nature to contradict yourself. You also owe it to yourself to reflect on why you do and maybe you can resolve some of it if you feel it hinders your relationships.


healththrow345

It's about shared values. I would never settle for a former male hoe. That's gross to me and I'd feel dirty.


[deleted]

They are both hypocrites


MMAjambo

Its hypocritical if they chat about getting rid of gender roles then still think a man has to treat a treat a lady to a night out and pay for her stuff


dbz19

I don't think either is "hypocritical". People can have whatever preferences they want. Leave them alone. If you want a virgin, want a virgin. If you want a millionaire, want a millionaire. You're allowed to want what you want. Don't let anyone shame you out of it.


SaBahRub

Yes. Unless you plan to do most of the childcare


hermione88992

Both are hypocritical.


princessxmombi

The way you wrote this is unclear. Do you mean low income women expecting high income men? Yes, that’s hypocritical too.


Fleischpeitsch

Despite what the virgins of the manosphere claim in reality most men don't care, and they are just trying to come up with any justification for their insecurities that put the blame on women. https://www.bustle.com/articles/97433-more-women-than-men-care-about-a-new-partners-sexual-history-says-new-study-and-over >Far more women than men want to know about their partner's sexual past, according to a new study by sex toy company Love honey. >Not only do 36 percent of women want to know the intimate details of their partner’s sexual past, but women are also more likely to talk about their past partners. Of those surveyed, 44 percent of women were more than happy to volunteer information about their exes, compared to 39 percent of men who did the same, and 76 percent of women talk about lovers from their past with their current partners. Men, at only 66 percent, are still in the majority, but definitely less chatty. >According to the results, 45 percent of men “deliberately avoid” talking about their exes, while only 38 percent of women also do. >For 27 percent of women a partner’s sexual history has complete and total bearing on whether that person will make a good partner. You know, because forget qualities like honesty and kindness. At 21 percent, men aren’t too far behind women in this thinking. >According to the survey, 29 percent of women and 21 percent of men would be “put off” if someone they're dating had a high “number.” >But while there are those who lie by decreasing numbers, there are also those who lie by increasing numbers. Of those surveyed, 31 percent of men and 12 percent of women actually inflate the number of their past sexual partners as a means to impress the new person they’re dating. >As a spokesperson for Lovehoney explains, “All our research shows that the happiest couples are those who are open and honest with each other, particularly in the bedroom. A significant number of men and women do tell white lies about their sexual pasts, but the overwhelming majority are honest.” >For 27 percent of women a partner’s sexual history has complete and total bearing on whether that person will make a good partner. At 21 percent, men aren’t too far behind women in this thinking. >According to the survey, 29 percent of women and 21 percent of men would be “put off” if someone they're dating had a high “number.” And despite the virgins of the manosphere using their solipsism to claim that no man would want to date a woman with a high n-count, in reality it's actually just virgins that want virginal partners while studs prefer sluts. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2016.1232690 >For long-term relationships, in contrast, there was virtually no sex difference. Thus, contrary to the idea that male promiscuity is tolerated but female promiscuity is not, both sexes expressed equal reluctance to get involved with someone with an overly extensive sexual history. **Finally, participants with an unrestricted sociosexual orientation (high SO participants) were more tolerant than low SO participants of prospective mates with higher numbers of past sexual partners but were also less tolerant of prospective mates with low numbers of past sexual partners.** https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5964280_Matching_in_Sexual_Experience_for_Married_Cohabitating_and_Dating_Couples >Romantic partners showed a significant level of matching in the prior number of intercourse partners. Further, among the married couples, a higher discrepancy between men's and women's number of previous intercourse partners was related to lower levels of love, satisfaction, and commitment in the relationship. tl;dr: High n-count people are usually looking for and pairing up with other high n-count people, while virgins are looking for and pairing up with other virgins, which explains why the manosphere has such a strong preference for virgins.


[deleted]

Please make this comment into a post👏🏻👏🏻🏆


fakingandnotmakingit

Yes. Women are hypocritical if they want someone who earns more than them. The only times it isn't hypocritical is when it is almost unavoidable. Like for example physical strength. Obviously it would be borderline ridiculous to expect that the man is not physically stronger than the women or to demand that the man be able to get pregnancy. Both of those are biological and physical functions that's part of dimorphism. Last I checked n count is not physcially mandated by biology. Neither is wealth. Therefore hypocritical.


rivetcitymayor

Is it hypocritical that women want men taller than them ?


Novadina

No, because men want women shorter than them, and that’s just a matter of biology that males are bigger than females in humans. It’s like saying it’s hypocritical to want a partner with boobs when you don’t have them…


InfiniteEating

Is it hypocritical for tall women to want men taller than them?


rivetcitymayor

And men want partners with low n count , what’s the issue? That’s biology , men want to not wonder if they are the father of the child


Novadina

N count says nothing at all about who the father of children are, people with previous boyfriends can be loyal and virgins can cheat. Men are free to be hypocritical if they want, but they shouldn’t need to pretend they aren’t. If they actually want to not be hypocritical, and they care about n count of their partners, then the solution is quite simple - they should care about their own n count also and keep it low as well. This means looking for partners with similar lifestyles and ethos and makes much more sense than holding your partner to different morals than yourself.


DjangoUBlackBastard

>N count says nothing at all about who the father of children are, people with previous boyfriends can be loyal and virgins can cheat. High n count men and women cheat more. This sentence isn't accurate.


HotDamImHere

Women with low body counts to alot of men is attractive. It has minimal to do with themselves and their reasons for that standard is irrelevant to argue about.


Novadina

That’s fine. If they care about not being hypocritical, they can keep their own count low. If they don’t care, then they can just be hypocrites. (It might be possible holding themselves to different standards than their partners might make it harder to find someone, but maybe they can find another hypocrite or something, like a broke women who only likes rich men.)


HotDamImHere

Its not hypocritical unless you carry it as a moral standard. I don't think any less of women who likes to sleep around. That is their choice. I am just highly attractive to low count women. It has nothing to do with myself and my body count which can be high or low. I also like women with big butts, I am NOT a hypocritic because I do not have a big butt myself but am attracted to big butt. Or here is a finer example, what if I am a low body count guy looking for a high count partner, does that still make me a hypocrite since I keep my body low while expecting theirs to be exceptionally higher?


ruRIP

Having a big butt compared to hypocrisy from a man when it comes to sleeping around is apples and oranges. One can’t change the size of their butt (typically) without intense workout/surgery. Now a better comparison would be, a man who’s on roids and got his abs sculpted wants a woman with a “natural” gym figure instead of a “fake plastic barbie”. That’s hypocrisy because he is holding her to a standard that he doesn’t respect for himself. Now infer this to n-counts. A man has the choice to keep his low if he wants a woman with a low n-count. But instead if he sluts around yet demands someone with a low n count that’s a classic “the rules only apply to you not me” that’s hypocrisy. Just like how the man could’ve chosen to put in the work naturally and bulk up but he chose the other “easier” option, and now if he demands a woman who worked for it instead of taking the “easy” route as well,,, textbook hypocrisy.


HotDamImHere

Its not textbook hypocrisy. As ive stated before, its what "he" is attracted to, not a moral standard. If a guy claims otherwise, then you have a point. But for the most part it is highly unattractive to LTR a woman with a "high" body count hy·poc·ri·sy /həˈpäkrəsē/ noun the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense. If you have nothing against people sleeping around, and you see nothing morally wrong with the sex culture (which I don't), then it is not hypocritical to want to date a woman who does NOT have a high body count. Im choosing not to date (or continue to date) because i am now unattracted to the fact she has a high body count. Now if I start preaching some shit about pair bonding or most likely to cheat if they have a high body count, THEN it becomes a moral standpoint at which if i myself practiced in promiscuity then im a hypocrite. There is slight but huge difference. Shoot it can even be both situation at once. Nothing really black and white.


Intrepid_Place5390

one of the issues men have with women with High N counts, is the ONS that typically go along with it. Men generally can't go up in SMV with a woman Woman can easily get a high SMV for a ONS Again, you may say, who cares. Many men do care, you can't change that. why do some 5 foot 4 women, want guys 6 foot 2 or taller? It just is


Novadina

It can be “it just is” and still be hypocritical. If men don’t want women who have casual sex *and* don’t want to be hypocrites - they can just also not have casual sex themselves.


JollyRoger66689

Its also Arguably a part of biology for men to be less particular about their "mating" partners, so wanting a woman with a lower body count would be similar. As for the height thing ill straight up agree with the at least taller than part, but even short girls want the tall guys, I always find it funny when they justify it by saying "I'm already short, so I need a tall guy" but the tall girl needs a tall guy more 😆


Novadina

> Its also Arguably a part of biology for men to be less particular about their “mating” partners, so wanting a woman with a lower body count would be similar. Another part of biology is the brain being able to do things consciously and understand things like “hypocrisy”. If they want a women with a low count, but the conscious part of their brain knows that would be hypocritical if they were a slut themselves, and they don’t want to be hypocritical, then they can just make the conscious decision to keep their own count low.


JollyRoger66689

True, but if they know that the biology is different and believe women think differently about a man with a high body count (on average) than a man does about a woman with a high body count, it doesn't make a lot of sense to worry about keeping their count low. Just like a woman doesn't necessarily need to worry about making more money to attract a man. (Both of these things within reason)


Novadina

I’m skeptical a virgin woman wants a man who has had 50 partners. If he manages to find someone like that, then great, no one is trying to ban hypocrisy or something. Just because some people will be ok with it doesn’t mean it’s not hypocrisy.


healththrow345

You should be skeptical. I'm a virgin woman and wouldn't even date (let alone marry 🤢) a man with 15+ partners and that's being generous. Ideally another virgin or less than 5 bodies.


JollyRoger66689

I did specify "on average", and a virgin woman in this day and age is definitely not the average 🤣 Technically yes its hypocrisy, but hypothetically that would even include a masculine man wanting a feminine woman (and vice versa). Men and women want different things and act differently, trying to make those things equal on an individual basis is just not feasible/wanted. Im totally blanking on the term but there is a concept in video games where you try to make characters/teams with unequal stats become equal in likelihood to win, unequal equality kind of a thing, thats more of how I see things should be.


Additional-Project28

In my opinion, neither is hypocritical. Like you said men and women are not the same which means each gender is going to want different things. It just so happens men don't want women with a past and women want men with a future.


The_Meep_Lord

This. Men and women just want different things. Women do not care about n counts as much as men do for various reasons. Men do not care about her income as much as women do for various reasons. What is hypocrisy is things like demanding that men be what women want while believing that men are not owed anything from women.


tonyghow

> It just so happens men don't want women with a past and women want men with a future. ^^^ best way I’ve seen it put in a while.


WilliamWyattD

It's only hypocrisy if on subscribes to the idea there are no gender differences or roles. That said, even if not hypocritical, ones ideas about gender balance could be unfair. Or one's ideas can be wrong.


AquaChip

You except your partner to have higher moral standards than you while you give them lower morals in return. The amount of money someone makes ebbs and flows. You can’t take back how many people you’ve slept with. That goes for men too. Men with high n-counts are more likely to cheat. Why would a woman who’s been “good” (by society standards) want that for herself?


bilberberbers

>The amount of money someone makes ebbs and flows. The strongest determining factor in income is general intelligence, which is genetic and stable throughout the workspan and through most of the lifespan until the very end. If a person is a high earner, odds are they will be a high earner for life. Pretending that this is not a fact known to women is infantilizing and insulting to them. Whether or not you believe women who are chaste should be attracted to sexually successful men, they are. It doesn't matter that you find it offensive, its how women are hardwired.


AquaChip

> If a person is a high earner, odds are they will be a high earner for life. You must’ve been living under a rock during the 2008 recession and the massive pandemic layoffs. This is what mean by ebbs and flows. A economic crash can have you laid off, going from 100k+ to 0 in a day and unable to find another 100k paying job for months sometimes years. Nothing can take away your n count.


alialahmad1997

This is not the argument Women with lown are free to anf should regect high n men The question is if men are hypocrate for wanting that


NarniaFox

Having different standards for yourself and your partner(s) is hypocritical if we're talking about morally-based preferences and in some other cases. If a man believes that casual sex is inherently wrong, he's a hypocrite if he engages in it himself. If he thinks that casual harms only women, he's still a hypocrite if he doesn't refuse from casual himself as in this way he harms women by having casual sex with them. Income preferences aren't exactly morally-based though.


bilberberbers

He's no more wrong for having lots of casual sex and judging women for it than a person who drives a gas car to get to work 100 miles away when there is no alternative means of transportation is a hypocrite because they judge polluters. Men need to have sex to signal to any potential partner no matter how virginal she is that he is a normal, good partner. This is a system determined by women. As evidenced by their revulsion to male virgins and their frequent use of male virginity as an insult. This is the simple reality.


NarniaFox

A person who claims to worry about environment and still changes their phone/car each year is a hypocrite. A job is a need, sex isn't. If you're talking about the word "incel", it doesn't mean a virgin, it means a person who subscribes to this ideology. "Virgin" as an insult I've never really heard.


C4yourshelf

""Virgin" as an insult I've never really heard" And there goes all your credibility down the drain. It's the classic male insult(remember incel is a relatively new term) .


NarniaFox

Maybe not in Russia? Honestly I haven't heard it used as an insult.


DjangoUBlackBastard

I say again this sub makes zero sense because most of the women here aren't from the US and don't deal with US culture. People just speaking past each other here. In the west there's tons of insults to men and 75% of them have to do with being a virgin. Of you want to insult a woman you call her a slut if you want to insult a man you call him an incel.


NarniaFox

I don't think that most women here aren't from the US. I'd say in Russia the most common insults for men are "gay" and "woman", but a very rude versions of these words.


yodreadd

Do you live in a cavern? How can someone in 21st century never heard virgin as an insult? Lol, no. Edit: ok, you're from Russia. I don't know how different is east from west in this topic.


Tobinaor

A good amount of incels are probably virgins at this point. I know it’s mostly a mindset or attitude. Still funny how the main insult is “Nyah Nyah Nyah Nyah Nyah Nyah, you can’t fuck us!


NarniaFox

Incels have created a really bad image for themselves, so now it isn't just about being a virgin, but about being a hateful miserable person who can't get laid. When you get called an incel, people don't imagine a sad lonely guy, they imagine a man who praises mass shooters, fantasizes about the world where women don't have any rights and probably faps to loly-hentai. It's an exaggeration, it's probably not correct, but I guess most people mean this extremity when they use it as an insult.


JoeRMD77

I've had a lot of sexual experience and I expect the women I date to be on a similar level. I think I'd be pretty bored with someone who wasn't. I've known women who look at promiscuous men as unworthy dating prospects because they know he just offers himself as a cock carousel to whatever woman finds him attractive. To think it doesn't work both ways is shortsighted.


chubbybutt22

Yes. They are both hypocritical. Most people are hypocritical about a lot of things. Own it.


wtknight

No. I think that it’s hypocritical for a person who doesn’t do any work at all, including domestic work, to want a partner who is willing to work. Wealth is not always reflective of work level.


flapperfemmefatale

It depends. If the attitude is that the behavior you want to avoid damages a person, then yes it'd be hypocritical to engage in that behavior yourself. So if a woman sees being poor as damaging, I would expect her to not be poor.


Flightlessbirbz

I would say sort of yes, it is similar though not quite the same. In both cases people have expectations for a partner that they aren’t even trying to live up to themselves. They’re also somewhat delusional to think that most low n women want a slutty man or that most wealthy men want a minimum wage woman. While the genders do have different priorities, the reality is that similar people tend to get together. Rich men being willing to marry poor “hypergamous” women and virgin women being willing to marry high n player type men are nowhere near as common as red pillers seem to think. The difference is that in the case of n count, men are making moral judgments on women for behavior they engage in themselves. Which is basically the definition of hypocrisy. With women and income, it’s not a moral judgment, more like a hope of getting lucky. So just delusional.


Ruben_the_Fish

Literally no one cares how much money I make.


HumanNumber348

Yes. Especially if she goes around calling male minimum wage workers worthless trash not deserving of love, like many of the it’s-just-a-preference men do.


notsofriendlygirl

Hookup culture is damaging to both men and women, but moreso for women.


sarkington

Yes, unless you are planning on a traditional or unequal setup to begin with.


Ppdebateismental

Is it hypocritical for a minimum wage earning woman to want a high earning man? Yes, imho, especially if she is a low ambition woman who has no plans for financial success, other than marrying into it.


PoMansDreams

Definitely hypocritical. But women will never admit something like that. Personally I don’t mind them being hypocritical tho. Everyone is.


No_Exercise_8670

What people who advocate here for "equality of n-counts" fail to mention is that women are usually perfectly fine for settling at say 30 for a man who has less experience than her and think that he should also be fine with her experience. When woman is more experienced then suddenly "the past is the past". When man wants low count woman - it's somehow hypocrisy. At this point it's ironic to read stuff like this.


CimZim

Except that in those cases the woman is now the hypocritical one, and should be called out for it. If a high N man wants a low N woman, yes it's hypocritical because he's saying "what's great for me is horrible for thee...I should be free to fuck the population of a small town, but you need to be as sexually inexperienced as possible". There's nothing wrong whatsoever with a virgin or low N man wanting a virgin/low N woman. In fact, I think that's probably the healthiest kind of partner for them both to have, in general.


The_Meep_Lord

All the happiest marriages I know have been between virgins. The only exception is one where the man was pressured into marrying the girl by other selfish people, and that is more because he never loved her in the first place (I feel bad for him, he had an abusive past and only woke up around 30).


CimZim

That is really unfortunate for him, and I hope life gets better despite other people sticking their noses where it doesn't belong.


dbz19

They say stuff like only virgin men are allowed to want a virgin woman because they know nobody wants a virgin man anyway, so its like, yeah let that loser want whatever he wants, we don't want him anyway. They fail to grasp that there are almost no women who value virginity in men, whereas virginity in men is shamed and ridiculed. The opposite exists for women. Creating an equivalency between the two is false.


NarniaFox

I think there are quite a lot virgin/low n-count women here who want to date men with similar experience (or a total lack of it). When I was looking for a partner, I didn't want to date guys with lots of experience, as I didn't have any myself. I wanted to date someone with similar values.


The_Meep_Lord

Here? This place is not exactly filled with what would be considered average in any respect.


Gigamon2014

What people "advocate" here is mostly horseshit and indicative of the fact that women here aren't well socially calibrated. The problem with all this "n-count" rubbish is that in real life, among women especially, it just doesn't matter all that much. We can complain about redpillers obsession with "Chads" but desirable men do exist and those men will often have higher sexual experience. However, chaste just isn't something women take all that seriously in men. After all, its virgin men who end up being publicly shamed, not the opposite. Notice how "fuckboys" in the celebrity sphere are almost always bad boys with a significant female following. The irony of both here and FDS is that women on boards like this have very, very little experience with desirable men. That much is obvious. This talk of "n count shaming" is as pathetic as incels who opine about the proverbial "wall". Its their way to feel a semblance of power and choice over attractive men who ignored them...because which sought after female with a healthy social media presence is going to be on fucking Reddit unless she's soliciting attention or customers? If you really want to believe a young woman is turning down 6'4 muscular and/or educated and professionally accomplished because of his "n-count" then you're letting the loser females on here sell you horseshit. Honestly this is why I implore any dude struggling with the opposite sex to go out and real life and befriend some older women, even casually date some...they'll be far more insightful than the ones on here.


The_Meep_Lord

> The problem with all this "n-count" rubbish is that in real life, among women especially, it just doesn't matter all that much. All the data we have days the opposite and it doesn’t even matter if it matters much. Women love a ton of shit about men that do not matter. Stronger men make her feel more safe? A weak incel who cannot even lift 20 pounds can kill twenty strong men before they even know what is going on with a gun. Lower n-counts are more attractive to men and always will be, deal with it. Men have to do the same for things they think are stupid that women want all the time too. Nobody can negotiate attraction.


Gigamon2014

They are more attractive to men but I have run into so many stunning women who have fucked the whole block and still have a gaggle of men wanting to wife them. N-count matters if one has the luxury of selecting numerous potential partners. Problem is, the vast majority of people don't have this luxury. Women even less so. You can try to sell to me the idea that the typical struggling incel would legit turn down a legit 8/10 because she's slept around too much, I wont buy it. Not from the men walking around today.


C4yourshelf

True N count doesn't matter in that case but the 8/10's Target audience isn't an incel. She'd be looking to date other 8/10s. There they do have choice and yes they will go after low n became of said choice. If she wants to date down she'll have flocks of people wanting to date of course. Same goes for men who are willing to date down


No_Exercise_8670

Lot's fair points except from the last. Older women will still give you bad advice about relationships. But they are often easier to get if you want sex. You better ask other men about how to deal with women.


Gigamon2014

There advice is terrible yes but I said insightful and not necessarily knowledgeable. Every older woman I interacted eith was at least self aware enough to know what wasn't working for her. That is valuable information.


yodreadd

Why is perfectly fine for women to want a very experienced men, but it's somehow hypocrisy for men to want non very experienced women? It's kinda gynocentric. I mean, why what women want is ok but what men want is not ok? And it's not even only about n-counts. It's about almost everything in our society (but specially on sexual/romantic topics).


PlayfulLawyer

Neither is hypocritical to me, I just say good luck in terms of getting what you want lol, like I always say on here you're allowed to want whatever you want in a partner, just make sure that you yourself are desirable to somebody that matches your standards


CrazyBaby8891

I don't think I'd call it hypocritical, but I believe it's shallow to care that much about a man's salary. Work ethic though, that's different because it's about the man's integrity instead of shallow status symbols. For example, I didn't want to marry a lazy deadbeat (laziness is a character flaw) but I didn't want a workaholic either (being addicted to work can also be a character flaw and besides, a healthy work-life balance is important to me and I wanted someone like myself whose priority would be family over work.)


xQueen-Bx

who cares if anything is "hypocritical"


InfiniteEating

Who cares about anything?


xQueen-Bx

what is there about "hypocrisy" to care about exactly, whats the problem if soemoen is "hypocritical"


[deleted]

Either both are hypocritical or neither are, but more importantly anyone who would sacrifice their happiness for some autistic sense of objective consistency deserves every iota of misery and suffering coming to them and more.


Orange_Paisley

I mean, we already mock such women and call them gold diggers. What more do you want?


alialahmad1997

Gold diggers aren't women who date rich guys Or with preference to wealth They are women who date solely for money The avrage woman who prefer a rich husband isn't called a gold digger


Orange_Paisley

Sure they are.


AutoModerator

**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

Are penis-having men hypocritical for wanting someone with a vagina? Are vagina-having women hypocritical for wanting someone with a penis?


Shredddz

You are out of your damn mind to call this hypocritical. Its called biological differences. male high body count does not come with pair bonding issues due to biochemistry, it only correlates with the male natural urge to have sex and is possible through sex being chemically disconnected to "love" in men. The mans loyalty to provide for the women is not affected, therefore there is no negative consequence for the women. loyalty in men naturally doesnt encompass sex, because humans are hypergamous. In women its tied together, making the high body count a sure indicator of inability to love/bond/loyalty to the capacity necessary for a family. for women, loyalty does encompass sex. The natural gender "deal" is male resources vs exclusive access to the womans body. For the women to demand sexual exclusivity from men is unnatural, unjust and unequal, given the unfair deal and lack of biological need/ negative consequences. Also women with high body counts are sure to use sex as a tool to use men, since women naturally require bonding before sex and the sheer number and frequency of partners prohibits an actual relationship as a base. Its a sure indicator for bad persons/users on top of inability to bond. High bodycount women are just not fit for commitment. relationships with them are sure to fail, thats why men avoid it. and the reverse in true for the wages but only to a degree. Its natural for women to want to feel safe and the resources for that to be provided by the man while their earning power is irrelevant to men. Beyond safety though it is just greed and craving for material goods. Also men dont complain about having to earn money of the wage difference. They know and accept that this is their role and they are naturally better at earning and just accept that.women care about low body count though because of their inabilty to provide it and obsession with being able to act like men in a world where nature just doesnt allow that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


PopularBug5

Yes, it is hypocritical. I believe a man should also hold in high regard women who strive to better themselves and be proud and dignified grownups who don't have to rely on anyone else for a piece of bread. What, they say? That women who have careers are assholes? Guess what genius, people who are assholes don't last long in the workplace, man or woman. And they think men are excused from developing sociopathic traits while having a career? Hell, I've read far more stories than I can count of a boyffriend/husband treating his girl like shit because he's got monies and she should 'feel grateful' that he is even spending money for her. Similarly how the man is restraining her rights in the household because he is the sole breadwinner and that she has to listen to everything he says. Money makes right, after all.


JollyRoger66689

The argument isn't generally that they are "assholes" necessarily, its that they become masculine. Personally I think men and women are different and want different things. Doesn't mean we can't talk smack when people get a little too sexist with their ideas though (like not settling for anything less than a millionaire or virgin)


faptemp44

Depends, what does she offer? If she wants just sit her arse down doing nothing but keep draining my pocket, she can fuck off. If she agreed to bear the responbility of our house and staying with kids while I’m gone for work, aye. If the only thing the woman could offer is “my body”, straight to the bin. No one shall marry a living sex doll.


Notanothrshitthrow

I would say so, though I'm of the mind that wanting something in a partner that you yourself can achieve but don't (i.e. wanting someone who goes to the gym frequently yet you don't go yourself) is hypocritical in most cases.


Educational-Ad6210

The issue with n count is that it only goes up, while your wealth depends on (for the sake of the argument) how hard you work. Not hypocritical to want a low n count woman if he courts her properly and marries her so she can stay low n count before you provide her with security. Not hypocritical to want a high earning guy, though women should look at themselves and evaluate their chances objectively.


insertcredit2

There's an issue here that men and women are not the same. If you gave most men the opportunities that women have in terms of having casual sex with the top 10% of attractive people then men would be doing it. You need only look at the gay scene where male sexuality is untethered and there's a massive amount of promiscuity. What's a realistic expectation is for your partner to be more selective than other people of the same sex. Comparing men to women is stupid.


Redpillisposion

Women and men with high n count are likely to be cheaters. I know several men who are very promiscuous, and have had girlfriends but have a very hard time staying faithful.


_Oh_Be_Nice_

What you want, what you deserve, and what you think you deserve are not always the same, objectively. Many times, people paradoxically overestimate their worth to others and undervalue their own self-worth. Being self-aware is important to building relationships on trust, and, to me, an desirable and attractive quality in a partner.


quiturbitchn

Yes it does outside of both people being dedicatedly tradcon but they would also be likely to both have low n as well. If it’s a lifestyle choice you should be holding others to the same standards you hold for yourself. Personally my standard is financially independent and I care less about the exact amount being made. As a result I make nearly 2x what my partner does


cccccclairee

Yes it’s hypocritical where both are working and intend to continue doing so. If someone wants a housewife then imo they should support that person as though that’s their “job” though. (I can not in any way relate to agreeing to that arrangement from either side of the relationship though)


Liberal_On_Guns

Modern women look down upon minimum wage earning women. Don't believe me? Wait until one of these average or high-earning women get left for a woman without a job, or with a low-paying job. See how the tune changes from "I don't look down on poor people" to "He left me for some dumb bitch working at Kroger!"