You know, Colinmarshall, you still haven’t answered WHY you feel this way-in that what you like about virgins, and what repulses you about non-virgins.
Care to answer?
Eh, I’d just rather not get involved with a girl that some dude has already “had his way” with. It grosses me out, is what it does.
… and I’m kind of curious about the responses to my “what-if”'s.
It may have nothing to do with the virginity issue at all. From what he says, Colin might just be homophobia taken to an extreme…
Jack Batty’s what-if’s:
Q. What if a woman isn’t quite up front with you and lets you believe she is a virgin when she is not? If you find out later, do you dump her? What if you’re in love with her by that point?
A. I’ve never had that one happen, but I tend not to let lies slide.
Q. What if a woman is a virgin, but wants to seem wordly so she says she isn’t? If you find this out later, do you run back to her?
A. Again, I’m not exactly cool with that kind of dishonesty. Maybe – maybe – if the was otherwise perfect.
Q. What are your criteria for “touched”? Making out okay? Is a little heavy petting okie-dokie? Fellatio is out but cunnilingus is marginal?
A. It’s all pretty much the same token.
It grosses you out?
That’s the weirdest thing I’ve ever heard.
Dude, you ain’t cut out for sex.
I don’t know if it’s wong, but in this day and age, and I suspect any other age, it is unrealistic.
That kind of thinking is as out of date as high button shoes, I don’t want to burst your bubble but today, it can bleed and still be used if the woman wants to fool a man for any reason, she can go to the doctor and have something done.
Unless the woman is a total tramp, don’t sweat it, leave it alone, but you sound like the kind of guy that would ask “who’s your daddy” or “was it good for you”.:wally
I think you need to delve a little deeper. Why does it gross you out? I think the answer to whether it is wrong depends a lot on the reason behind your preference.
Why?
Come on, how many guys actually say “Who’s your daddy?” and/or “Was it good for you?”
Those are questions you should probably know the answers to without having to hear 'em verbally.
Do you think about the man that might follow you? Do you have to have the first slice of bread from a loaf? If the lady in question is not a tramp, you should be able to tell, then what’s the problem? Men start peaking at around eighteen, while women don’t start peaking until they’re thirty-five. What I’m trying to say is, quit worrying you’re wasting time.
Besides, the only sure virgin is an ugly ten year old.
You’re seeing only half the story here. A man can fuck all the women that he finds, but if these women are sleeping around with other men as well as with him, they’re likely to be pregnant a lot of the time (assuming lack of consistently effective birth control, which has been the case for the overwhelming portion of human history) so the man isn’t doing himself any good by sleeping with these women. His seed isn’t taking, he’s wasting his time and energy seducing and fucking these women, and what’s worse, he’s risking a variety of dangers (STDs, retribution from other jealous and vengeful partners of the woman, disapproval from society, and so on).
A virginal partner isn’t a necessary factor for a man who is wanting to sire a child, but it’s sufficient, relatively risk-free, and easily identified as such. For much of history, it was impossible to ascertain whether a non-virginal woman was pregnant or not (no effective pregnancy tests) but it was easy to ascertain whether a woman was virginal, therefore necessarily not pregnant. (Immaculate conception notwithstanding.)
When you compare the expected value of sleeping with just any woman (which requires computing the various risks and rewards multiplied by probabilities thereof) versus the expected value of sleeping with just virgins, your argument suddenly sounds hollow.
In sum, a lot of you may have been able to tone down the yuck factor associated with sleeping with a non-virgin woman, but it’s very real, and an evolutionary heuristic that served/serves a useful end for men.
Just how old are you? I am only asking so I can place the above answer in context.
Surely you realize virgins go potty and have periods too? But in the off-chance you hadn’t, think about that next time you’re going down on the object of your fetish. Because that’s obviously all women are to you.
Here’s hoping you swallow a dingleberry or three and/or run into a used tampon.
Life: welcome to it.
C’mon Giggle Gaggle
you’re sure of yourself. Respond as asked!
Well, no. There are numerous biological signals that indicate whether a woman may or may not be pregnant. Certainly a menstrual flow is a clear indicator that the woman is not pregnant. Within a few months, pregnancy becomes fairly obvious from the distended belly, in most cases. And the biggest hole in your theory is that there is no sure way to identify a virgin. The hymen is often ruptured during strenuous activity and self-exploration, and there is no other physical indicator of virginity. Thus no way for such a preference to have evolved.
Of course you should know the answer to quetion such as “Who’s your Daddy” and “Was It Good For You”, but from what you’re saying, you sound like the type that would ask those questions.
First, if you actually ask a girl up front if she is a virgin, then I suspect you spend a lot of time by yourself, second, today, with womens lib, there is not the stigmatism that use to be attached to a woman having a child out of wedlock, so check off all of them, the nice ones too, and what about the women that were married before, they’re gone also according to you, like I said, you spend a lot of time by yourself.
Having said all that, you have a problem, even if you want to call it something else.
Men, unless they co-habitate with the woman in question, are not in a position to track their menstrual cycles effectively. If asked, the woman could simply lie, and the man has no way of knowing.
Granted. Which is why men are most often not sexually attracted to pregnant women (through there are a few fetishists who are). Men’s lack of attraction to pregnant women derives from the same heuristic that motivates attraction to virginal women i.e. maximizing chances of his seed taking.
A woman with an intact hymen is a sure virgin, and is sure to not be pregnant. A woman without an intact hymen might or might not be a virgin, might or might not be pregnant. In the absence of effective pregnancy tests and a complete medical history, it is anybody’s guess.
If a woman claims that she is a virgin, but she is not verifiably so, she is treated as nonvirginal. This is the same standard that we apply to scientific theories, and equally valid in that context as in this one.
As I pointed out before, the heuristic that I outlined doesn’t promise men complete and accurate answers for every woman all the time. It simply provides complete and accurate answers in some cases – in the cases of verifiably virginal women – ensuring that the man spend his time and energy wisely and not take undue risks rashly.
True, but you’re arguing in circles. As I said before, which you have not responded properly to, men who are not choosy about a woman’s virginity will be far more successful breeders than those who are. So, can you explain, given that fact, how evolution is meant to work against such a strong pressure to select against the genetically-inbred trait you are positing?
Okay, then, what if a girl has been raped? Does that make a difference>
Google “pregnant intact hymen” and you’ll be surprised at what you find.
There are numerous cases of a woman having sex and becoming pregnant with an intact hymen.
“sucessful breeders”?
“maximizing chances of his seed taking”?
Can’t a guy just get a hand-job anymore.
These evolutionary arguments about who people are attracted to are a bit ridiculous.
Evolutionarily speaking, I should be bounding naked across a field to chase down and kill a wild hare with with my fingernails and gnawing on the raw flesh with my canine teeth.
Personally, I prefer cheeseburgers.