Body count

[Rpture]

There was a thread trending a few days ago about a Guardian article, Andrew Tate and body counts. Many posters saw no issue with sleeping around.

It got me thinking. Is being promiscuous really as simple as a little fun ? Considering the no.1 reason for divorce in Western societies is infidelity, is that a surprise ? Going from 3-4 short-term butterfly relationships a year to monogamy till death sounds very extreme and kind of boring.

Loved up dead beat dads who wife up a woman and then ditch her for another woman or women. A minority of whom don't even care about their kids, only concerned about their next "fix". In fact, this so normal we even have terms like "The script" to describe such behaviour.

Then there is also pornography, which is a natural continuation of a hyper-sexualised society.

Is it really as simple as having a little fun ?

Depends on your attitude, doesn't it? I have had a couple of one-nighters and I don't regret them, but by the same token, they weren't "satisfying" in that way because the people didn't have a clue how to satisfy me. And I'm one of the majority who don't go into bliss just from someone sticking it inside and waving it about for a while. (Porn has a lot to answer for. I don't demonise anyone who watches it, because hell, I watch it, but if you believed what you saw, then every bedroom encounter is all about the bj, every woman screams, and every woman goes off like a firecracker without even being touched anywhere near the magic trigger.)

Truth be told, I am insanely jealous of the women who DO see stars merely from a man pistoning things without even touching her. Because I tell you what, if I were that blessed, my body count would be in the thousands by now.

You can also turn it around and look at it from the other way. You seem to be asking in your first post whether this attitude to casual sex should be acceptable since it seems to contribute to infidelity, single parenthood, divorce etc. Maybe it should be looked at the other way and we should accept that clearly humans aren't innately monogamous creatures, and the society we've constructed around trying to promote / preserve monogamy might be futile or even stupid. Food for thought, no?

Incidentally, you've alluded more than once that porn is generally full of violence. It doesn't really sound like you've actually ever seen much. I'm not saying you should go and do so - you appear to be against it and horses for courses - but you're speaking incorrectly with attempted authority. I can tell you this, the vast majority of generic porn doesn't have any violence. It's very cookie cutter and as I suggested above (bj, woman inexplicably excited just by looking at it, then ridiculously over-the-top in enthusiasm for satisfying him, lots and lots of vocal noise on her part despite no attention to her most erogenous area, with the climax of the video being about his happy ending - hers is simply not a factor). It is so predictable that you could select probably any of the top 20 search terms in those sites and 19 of the top 20 results will be exactly as I described. One of them will be an outlier in which she appears to also see stars during the event (still without any effort on his part and almost certainly fake - but yet somehow, men who've viewed a crap ton of porn actually fall for these ridiculous theatrics). But violence? Generally you would need to search for that, because most mens' tastes are for 3-4 minutes of far more generic entertainment, mostly focussed on her mams and her mouth😆

If you enable such behaviour then it increases the probabilities that someone is going to cheat

Any evidence for this?

The same rule applies here - you are going from dating 5-6 people per year to 1 person for the rest of your life. For a significant minority that just doesn't seem to cut it hence the cheating

Or this?

A society that undermines the moralistic paradigms that regulate human sexual behaviour are going to give rise to situations where women are exploited and men are enabled. Rape is one such consequence

Or this?

Do you view sex as procreational or recreational? I tend to think that those who enjoy sex will have a very different outlook than those who don’t.
Historically sex has always been practiced, none of us would exist without it, there have been periods where attitudes have changed societal behaviour, but only on the surface Victorian prudishness just sent it underground and consequently resulted in a massive increase in prostitution.
As women, we are privileged to live in a time when female sexuality is no longer tabu and we come to relationships as equals. Divorce has increased because it is now an option not because of increase infidelity. Promiscuity is as old as civilisation.
II’m not sure why you use Pompeii as an example. It was a natural disaster that uniquely preserved the lifestyle of the residents. Their attitudes to sex were no different to the rest of the population at the time. We just have well preserved evidence. Am I right in assuming that your views are strongly influenced by religion.?

With a username hinting at "rapture" I think it's probably a given. Glad I'm not the only one who caught it. And as Jesus said about porn...

...

... "He who searches for feet-washing on pornhub shall be sorely disappointed", was it?

I don’t think the cause and effect argument works. There’s no clear mechanism. And some cultures don’t have the kind of readily available pornography that is so accessible here, but infidelity still occurs.

In my own experience, I had lots of sexual partners in my youth, because I enjoyed it. I don’t use pornography because I think it’s unethical and I haven’t cheated on my partner because I know it would hurt him.

I also think there has always (or at least since the development of agriculture) been a double standard in which men are ‘allowed’ to have multiple partners while women are shamed for it. I’m quite glad to see women rejecting that. I’m especially glad that divorce is easier now. It’s really important for women to be able to leave a relationship.

Pre marital body count has been proven in studies to correlate to likelihood of divorce. Women witj body counts above 15 have the highest likelihood of divorce. Those with 1 or 2 lifetime sexual partners have the lowest likelihood of divorce.

Your name is @Rpture - as in "rapture"?

I don't really need to read more to understand your evangelical slanted views on "promiscuity", thanks very much!

Had enough of these views growing up.

Where's the corresponding chart for men?

The ginormous CDC 1995 publication this was taken from goes to some pains to stress that co-variables cannot be separated out - in fact, this chart isn't in it as far as I can see. I may be wrong, it's a huge study! But it's also possible the chart you show was drawn from extrapolated data by someone with an agenda. It seems to have first appeared in something called "alpha muslim" although I've only done a very quick search.

Six 😬

Body count is such a shit term for this.

I hate how it's becoming the norm.

@GarlicGrace @echt

The data on promiscuity and infidelity is overwhelming, and is well understood in psy circles.

approximately half of women in the top quintiles of sociosexuality [def. willingness to engage in sexual activity outside of a committed relationship] had been sexually unfaithful to a steady partner; this was more than a tenfold increase over the corresponding rate for people in the bottom quintiles.
Bailey, J. M., Kirk, K. M., Zhu, G., Dunne, M. P., & Martin, N. G. (2000). Do individual differences in sociosexuality represent genetic or environmentally contingent strategies? Evidence from the Australian twin registry. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(3), 537–545. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.78.3.537

In illustration of this, the odds ratio of 1.13 for lifetime sexual partners obtained with the face-to-face mode of interview indicates that the probability of infidelity increased by 13% for every additional lifetime sexual partner,screenshot
Regarding the correlates of infidelity, results indicated that on the basis of both methods of assessment, the probability of sexual infidelity increased with higher number of lifetime sexual partners
Whisman, M. A., & Snyder, D. K. (2007). Sexual infidelity in a national survey of American women: Differences in prevalence and correlates as a function of method of assessment. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(2), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.2.147

Our findings demonstrate that infidelity and number of sexual partners are both under moderate genetic influence (41% and 38% heritable, respectively) and the genetic correlation between these two traits is strong (47%). The resulting genetic correlation between the two traits was .47, so nearly half the genes impacting on infidelity also affect number of sexual partners. The correlation of the unique environment between the two variables was .48.
Cherkas, L., Oelsner, E., Mak, Y., Valdes, A., & Spector, T. (2004). Genetic Influences on Female Infidelity and Number of Sexual Partners in Humans: A Linkage and Association Study of the Role of the Vasopressin Receptor Gene (AVPR1A). Twin Research, 7(6), 649-658. doi:10.1375/twin.7.6.649

A truism in psychology is that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. This is no less true in the realm of sexual behavior. Indeed, one of the strongest predictors of marital infidelity is one’s number of prior sex partners (Buss, 2000). Deception about past sexual promiscuity would have inflicted greater costs, on average, on men than on women
Haselton, M. G., Buss, D. M., Oubaid, V., & Angleitner, A. (2005). Sex, Lies, and Strategic Interference: The Psychology of Deception Between the Sexes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271303

The high correlation for females (r = .79) between reported numbers of sex partners and EPC partners [extra-pair copulation partners def. sexual partners other than primary partner while in a monogamous relationship] may bear on questions of both paternity and abandonment in the face of infidelity. Throughout recent human history, males have often placed a premium on female virginity for a marital partner (e.g., Ford & Beach, 1951). This is commonly thought to be an expression of a paternal assurance strategy, i.e., sexually inexperienced females are assumed to represent a lower risk of cuckoldry..
But the question remains: does promiscuity predict infidelity? Our data are consistent with those of Essock-Vitale and McGuire (1985) in suggesting that a substantial proportion of the variance in infidelity can be accounted for in terms of number of sex partners, but this conclusion is compromised by the fact that the number of sex partners is confounded with the number of EPC partners. To correct for this, we subtracted reported EPC partners from total reported sex partners for each respondent to create an estimate of promiscuity apart from EPCs. The resultant number (reported non-EPC sex partners) was still highly correlated with number of EPC partners (females: r = .67, n = 56, P < .01), suggesting that promiscuity is in fact a good predictor of infidelity. Indeed, promiscuity among females accounted for almost twice as much variance in infidelity (r2 = .45) as it did for males (r2 = .25).
Hughes, S. M. , & Gallup, G. G. (2003). Sex differences in morphological predictors of sexual behavior: Shoulder to hip and waist to hip ratios. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(3), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00149-6

Sexual promiscuity was significantly positively correlated with emotional promiscuity [r(356) = .261, p < .001], as well with sexual infidelity [r(323) = .595, p < .001] and emotional infidelity [r(323) = .676, p < .001], indicating that sexually promiscuous participants also tend to be emotionally promiscuous, and sexually and emotionally unfaithful. In terms of the sexual domain, results showed that there is also a positive correlation between sexual promiscuity and sexual infidelity, stating that individuals that tend to be more sexually promiscuous also tend to be more sexually unfaithful. These results support our second hypothesis.
Pinto R., Arantes J. (2016). The Relationship between Sexual and Emotional Promiscuity and Infidelity in Proceedings of the Athens: ATINER’S Conference Paper Series, No: PSY2016-2087, Athens, 10.30958/ajss.4-4-3

Women’s number of pre-marital partners: percent [of wives] who cheated once married2: 10.4%
3: 14.9%
4: 17.7%
5: 21.6%
6-10: 26.0%
11-20: 36.7%
21+: 46.8%
NORC General Social Survey. (2011, October 02). Female Infidelity Based on Number of Premarital Partners — Statistic Brain. Retrieved July 5, 2015, from http://www.statisticbrain.com/percent-of-female-infidelity-based-on-number-of-premarital-partners/

Contrary to the myth, partners who’ve had many partners have a harder, not easier, time remaining monogamous. They are significantly more at risk of straying than those with little or no prior sexual experience.
Staik, A., PhD. (2019, March 28). 10 Predictors of Infidelity and Gender Differences: Why Do Partners Cheat? Retrieved July 15, 2020, from https://blogs.psychcentral.com/relationships/2014/08/a-look-at-infidelity-why-do-partners-cheat/

For people in this survey who reported four or fewer lifetime sexual partners, the rate of infidelity in the current marriage dropped to 11%, while for those who had five or more sexual partners the number was nearly double (21%). The break between the 54% of people who had five or more lifetime sexual partners vs. the 46% who had four or fewer total partners illustrates the lessons from the study. This breakpoint is validated by the fact that when asked straight out, 68% of those with more sexual partners in their pasts agreed that, “I am always faithful to my sexual partner” (whether currently married or single), compared to 82% of those with fewer sexual partners who said the same.[I]nfidelity is also often the fruit of a lifelong approach to mating that involves seeking and practicing short-term mating encounters that encourage sexual variety at all stages and into marriage.
McQuivey, J. L., PhD. (2019, October 14). The Road to Infidelity Passes Through Multiple Sexual Partners. Retrieved July 16, 2020, from https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-road-to-infidelity-passes-through-multiple-sexual-partners-

[T]here was a correlation between female pre-marital promiscuity and higher rates of divorce. The research, conducted by Jay Teachman, found that women with 16 or more sexual partners prior to marriage had an 80% rate of subsequent divorce.Wikipedia contributors.
(2020, June 20). Female promiscuity. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 12:06, July 27, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Female_promiscuity&oldid=963578370
Teachman, J. (2003), Premarital Sex, Premarital Cohabitation, and the Risk of Subsequent Marital Dissolution Among Women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65: 444-455. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x

Pre marital body count has been proven in studies to correlate to likelihood of divorce.

Women who marry as virgins are more likely to be from cultures where divorce is not acceptable. So it does not necessarily mean they want to stay in their marriages or that the marriages are better and happier. But of course many men don't care about that, as long as they have their cook and cleaner available.

The problem is its a very large minority, and moving towards a majority.

Source? The studies I have seen quoted claim it's about 20% of married men who admit cheating on their spouse and 13% of women. So considering that men are the ones significantly more likely to cheat, then according to your theory, men should be the ones who are encouraged to limit their premarital sexual experiences.

But that's not what you mean, is it?

The corresponding chart doesnt exist because there was not the same statistical correlation for men.

It would appear that men have a strong preference for women with few or no prior sexual partners.

I suspect married men with wives who have a high number of premarital sex partners wonder why they should put effort towards sex with their wives when others have had it freely given to them. Ergo, they value their marriages less.

Do you have link for this? The table is impossible to read.

And please please please stop using "body count".

The women aren't killers and the men aren't dead. And yes, I know what metaphor is and this one is disgusting.

Interesting survey, out of date and potentially skewed to fit an agenda. That's the trouble with surveys, they largely depend on who you ask (and who you don't) so flaws are baked in.

Anecdotally in my 50s, I can safely say that every single one of my divorced friends and family had very few or no sexual partners prior to marriage and went into it young with a 'married for life' attitude, and notions that marriage was more about a romantic fairy story than being something that takes work and compromise, and can at times be a bit of a slog. Also the idea that their love would somehow 'change him' (or her). Looks and money played a big part in their choices, but when you make a major life decision prioritising a handsome face, height, broad shoulders and a nice bum, but neglect that the object of your affection is dumb as a box of rocks, has a drink problem or is an arrogant wanker you are heading for problems, those things don't go away once you have a ring on your finger. Meanwhile I had plenty of sexual partners in my 20s, had a lot of fun and got it out of my system at college but took time to find a compatible life partner who I've been happily married to for 23 years, as did many of my friends.

To answer the OP question, this body count stuff is a load of old bollocks, a Tik Tok trend with a massive dollop of misogyny, designed to shame women and send them back to attitudes that belong in the dustbin of history not the present day. Fuck who you want if they'll have you, or don't. Get married if you want, or don't. Just don't police others via faux outrage or religious claptrap for making different choices.

Being promiscuous is fine as long as it's safe.

Cheating isn't fine. If you want to be promiscuous, don't get married.

I can't see myself ever being in a monogamous relationship as I don't think it's natural. So I won't ever marry. I'd never lie and cheat.

Your name is @Rpture - as in "rapture"?

I just assumed it was "Rupture" - as in the damage to a blood vessel trying to form a coherent paragraph and understand the points that other people are making.

I just tested GarlicGrace disappointment theory. I visited pornhub and searched "feet washing". What a nightmare, from an occupational health POV. Some of those employers clearly don't have a health and safety officer. Loads of trip, slip and bad posture related injury potential 🤔

I noticed Rapture seems to suggest misogyny must be 100% down to men in her objection to misogynistic society, some women absolutely play an enforcement role and benefit or at least feel they do.

Body count as a description 🤮 It's a lesser experience if my own sensations are everything, might as well just use an actual object.

The thing about the hit of a new person is interesting, does nobody else feel any negative alongside it? I find it a mix of excitement and chore, and with the right person a comfort and pleasure that's desirable from knowing them better. Overall, I don't like new starts just try to make the most of them

A theory for why those who have had more partners being more likely to divorce is that they know what they are missing and they know they don't have to put up with an insufficient partner. Not that they are just slaggy slags who can't stop slagging.

That's why men want inexperienced women - they don't want them knowing if they are bad/selfish/lacking in bed and as a general partner and they don't want them to know there are options or that anyone else will want them.

It's pure male ego, entitlement and insecurity - so much so men have ingrained it in religion, 'morality' and law since they have had the power to - this is patriarchy. (And the stuff about bloodlines and inheritance which is why matrilineal lines, if any, should be used).

I visited pornhub and searched "feet washing". What a nightmare, from an occupational health POV. 🤣🤣🤣 @spookehtooth 👏🏻

Spot on, @NaughtyBoyGeorgeMichaelJacksonBrown. Male ego and entitlement, converted via male privilege into "truth".

From one of @howdeee's links, few of which s/he seems to have read:

"For human beings, beliefs are the most potent drivers of behaviors, ask any successful marketing company. Or, ask cellular biologist Dr. Bruce Liption. According to his research, published in a best selling book, The Biology of Belief, perception (beliefs) not only influence human behavior, they literally produce structural changes to the brain or new genes.

"The human capacity for imagination is a force like no other. What we focus on, and what captures and creates pictures in our minds, is behavior shaping energy that galvanizes and directs inner firing and wiring of neurons within us to, literally, produce the outcomes that shape our lives and future.

"Once thrifty Americans prior to the 50s, for example, were turned into shopping junkies within a few decades, by profit driven mass media and marketing campaigns. Their power to shape human behaviors by manipulating our beliefs is proven.

"Perhaps the most egregious impact on sexual behaviors of men and women are porn industries."

It wouldn't be out of court to remark that the hypothesis promoted in this thread is actually the result of rapists making the rules. I mean, lobby for rapists if you want but don't expect everyone else to see you as a moral authority.

Im a man in his mid 20s who has never been into the idea of sleeping around and I would never date a woman who has a history of sleeping around either. My current GF of six months has only ever had one BF and I only ever had one GF which was long distance (I never met her) but im so glad my GF isnt the type of girl to go out partying or has a history of sleeping around, We both lost our virginities and I think she is the sexiest woman on the planet (I dont even watch porn anymore as I only look at my GF in a sexual way)

But most modern day women do sleep around and I always hear my mates talk about hooking up with women, then they will call these girls "sluts" or "easy" behind thier backs. I was on a lads holiday once and I seen girls giving blow jobs to men in clubs, dancing on tables with no knickers, I also had a couple approach me once for a threesome which I found so fucking grim. Thank fuck my GF has never been on a plane before either so you just know she isnt like one of those girls who visits places like ibiza, zante, magaluff, ayia napa etc.

By the way I dont hate girls who sleep around and its thier decision, it doesnt mean they are a bad person but I just dont wanna date them lol. Lots of men care about body count and most want a woman with less milage, women might not care about body count but most men defiantly do (Im a man and I know this)

Always on thier phones, instagram selfies, love island, Following the same silly beauty trends, Bisexual, sleep around and get into debt after studying a degree, dont want kids etc thats a lot of women these days. Im glad I found a girl who never uses her phone, hasnt got a history of sleeping around, Is straight, works as a cook which is more attractive to me than a girl with a degree, wants kids, is very natural and hardly wears makeup etc.

Thats why I treat her right and im close to getting a mortgage so im planning on moving in with her in a few months, we work well as a team as well and we always help each other out.

Me personally I dont feel the need to sleep around and I dont think im missing out as I have my perfect woman

Or Maybe im more of a boring old school monogamous type who wants to provide for a wife and kids, who believes in chivalry and paying on dates, who thinks sex should only be with people who you have feelings for etc.

Btw I aint looking down on women who decide to sleep around, if you want to give men blowjobs in clubs or have threesomes then cool but thats not my type of woman

The language you use about women compared to men is interesting. You sound misogynistic.