The supply of virgin twentysomethings will stay roughly the same regardless of how old the OP gets. As long as he concentrates on these younger girls, he will be good to go.
People talk about how hypocritical the OP is, in demanding qualities of a partner that he himself does not possess. I disagree. Women are attracted to experienced men, and men are attracted to chaste women, due to evolutionary reasons. For purposes of successful copulation, the two sexes require different qualities of one another. A woman wants a man who can become erect and impregnate her quickly and effectively, which requires experience at having done so over and over. A man, on the other hand, wants a woman who is not likely to be pregnant at the time – who has not had, or does not currently have, sexual partners – so his emission can successfully result in pregnany. These evolutionary urges may no longer be relevant in our age of cheap, widely available and effective birth control, but one cannot undo millions of years of evolution with thirty years of feminist propaganda.
In short, it is no more hypocritical for a man to require a virginal partner (when he himself is not a virgin) than for him to require a female partner (when he himself is not female).
I think the most potent emotion motivating the posters to spew undue hatred upon the OP is because he is obviously getting to fuck attractive AND virginal girls, and you people are not. It is thinly-veiled jealousy.
OK. Im 26 year old male. I’ve never once had a virgin and I’ve been having sex since I was 16. Ive slept with well over 40 woman and not once caught a sexual disease (from what I know of) and never use a condom. My point is I GET OFF ON DIRTY BIRDS as they are much more fun in the bedroom. However I can’t back this statement up as I’ve never had a virgin. Maybe thats just me but, who wants vanilla when you can have chocolate. When you go to a bar do you demand a brand new pint glass, or do you simply drink from a cleaned one that other men/women have used?
Evolutionary “just so” stories make for some of the lamest justifications for human behavior. This is primarily because such stories can inevitably be stretched to fit an explanation for nearly any scenario. Most often this manifests as an attempt to show how “right” and “natural” the given behavior must be as compared to more recent “aberrations.” Even so it’s hardly an excuse; man has the faculty of reason and is quite capable of rising above evolutionary impulse to meet the world as it is rather than how it once was.
This isn’t about ensuring that his genetic legacy is unambiguously passed on. It is about the stigma that many societies attach to sexually experienced women. The OP is being attacked at the very least for perpetuating this hurtful and sexist attitude. It is more than that however; the preference stinks of insecurity about comparisons being made between present and former lovers. But that comparison is irrelevant because it is who she is with now that should truly matter.
This is complete bullshit. First of all, evolutionary pressure has nothing whatsoever to do with males preferring virginal women. Most males, in fact, have no such preferrence. Males tend to be attracted to women with qualities that demonstrate their fitness to carry, give birth to and raise a child, such as large breasts and wide hips. Females tend to prefer males who demonstrate physical strength and aggressiveness, characteristics which make (or once made, at least) for a good provider for her and her child, as well as being desirable traits to pass on to her offspring. Preference for virginity is likely a more modern phenomenon–it’s certainly not evolutionary.
Azael, yes, that is one of the two reasons I had in mind when I said the OP appears to be a very insecure individual. But beyond the illusion of control and the ensuing problems you describe, I also think the virgin-fixation the OP describes has much to do with his own insecurity as a lover. See, by picking virgins exclusively, he is assuring himself that his partner has no frame of reference for comparison – his performance unlikely to come into question. Obviously, he forgets that sex is only part of the equation in a well-rounded relationship. And as others have mentioned, fixing solely on one aspect of a human being as a qualifier for relationships also shows a high degree of inmaturity. For pragmatic reasons alone it’s obtuse. Because he is excluding the majority of the adult female population, thus lowering his chances of finding the “ideal” mate for the sake of an intact hymen. Secondly, he is stunting his own sexual growth, for the possibilities that he’ll learn something new from coupling with virgins are low to say the least. Which of course, will only heighten his original insecurities. A self-fulfilling prophesy if you will.
To say nothing of the inherent hypocrisy of perpetuating the blatant double-standards. Machismo at its worst.
“Junior Psychologist”? Hardly, for I am not talking about root causes. It’s simply a logical conclusion on the face of what was said by the OP. Whether he grows out of it or not, who’s to say? Although not to his extreme, society is full of men with similar double-standards.
Upon review, just wanted to make clear that my last paragraph was not directed at Azael, but rather to the other posters that have made the ‘Jr Psyc’ charge.
Upon review, just wanted to make clear that my last paragraph was not directed at Azael, but rather to the other posters that have made the ‘Jr Psyc’ charge.
Also, add “and manifest insecurities” to the last line.
First of all, you’re twisting my original statement. I was talking about men and women who are virgins i.e. who have never had sex.
If you take a survey among men regarding their first sexual experiences, you will find that the majority of them experienced some symptoms of erectile dysfunction in that first experience. The combination of an unfamiliar challenge and performance anxiety will cause any man difficulty in getting and maintaining an erection. And no, unless the man is sportin’ wood, you ain’t makin’ babies.
As in most things, practice makes perfect in this regard. Men cultivate confidence as they familiarize themselves with the act of sex and let go of performance anxiety as they consistently perform to their (and others’) expectations.
Reason doesn’t substitute for wood. If your body is not sexually responding to a stimulus, if you’re unable to get an erection, if you’re simply not excited, it doesn’t matter how many theses you write in support of why such-and-so should be sexually exciting.
Granted. These factors also matter. But the first and foremost concern for a man who is attempting to impregnate a woman is that his seed take. If she is already pregnant, then all his efforts, as well as the risks he is subjecting himself to, are for naught.
One values aged wine, but fresh fruit. This is because wine is not fruit.
One values older sages, but younger athletes. This is because sages are not athletes.
One values virginal women, but experienced men. This is because women are not men.
Different standards legitimately apply to different things as long as the criteria of differentiation is relevant in the classification of the two classes under inquiry. Women and men are significantly different in how their sexual biologies operate, therefore differentiation between them in this regard is perfectly legitimate.
I hope this is true and the supply doesn’t diminish, but I’m not so sure.
I disagree as well, though for very different reasons. Maybe I’m just playing with dictionary definitions here, but is possessing a double standard always the same as being a hypocrite?
What?
If this were true, wouldn’t it have been “evolved out” - and rather quickly, at that?
This is specious reasoning. There is zero evolutionary advantage for males preferring virginal females, and in fact, such a hardwired preference would be detrimental to a population and thus bred out rather quickly. A male who only prefers virgins will be much less successful at spreading his genes, since there would be fewer opportunites to impregnate females. A male with no preference will reproduce at a much higher rate, and again the preference trait would disappear. You need to study up on evolutionary theory, because you are sadly lacking.
The fact that it may be so for some increasingly smaller segments of society, doesn’t make it right or the default postion to defend or justify. For starters, who is “one”? 'cuase you’re certaily not speaking for myself, most definately an “experienced man” of 47. Yes, I may have added value as some sort of mentor, but from a purely physical standpoint, I was much better as a “young wine.” Which brings me right into my next point:
If anything, said experience has taught me that what’s important in relationships is the whole package and ultimately a meeting of the minds, not a virgin hymen, a well-used cock or vice-versa – ignorance-wrapped lore. Beyond that, in the case that occupies us here, doesn’t make a bit of difference what the sex is, basing attraction/rejection on something you can’t possibly see or know untill you actually get to know the person [i.e., virginity or experience] is an obviously absurd qualifier on its face. In fact, I dare call it a malfunction of the largest sexual organ we posses, the brain.
**
Ah yes, the age-old difference between man and woman. Remind me again of what it is? Because I am not claiming that we’re the same as we obviously have different triggers, needs and desires. But I think that has more to do with compatibility and communication than a clean sexual divide between men and women.
Bottom line: I maintain that needing virgins to perform and calling the rest “used-women” is neither healthy nor normal.
No, it is because with aged wine comes better taste and more alcohol. With older sages comes experience. If I said “I want my wine to be aged, specifically because it’s not fruit.” People would look at me strangely.