So if I move to a tiny southern religious town, go to church every sunday, I can possible get an 18-25 year old virgin fiancee?
How do you convince their dad to marry them? I am already religious so I'm not coming to fake it. I'm pretty good looking and confident but I don't have money. I'm fresh out of grad school, planning to become a professor. Not rich at all.
>Possible
I meant possibly, don't know why auto correct did that. I'm not Indian, I swear.
>So if I move to a tiny southern religious town, go to church every sunday, I can possible get an 18-25 year old virgin fiancee?
Short answer, yes. It doesn't have to be a tiny southern town either. There are plenty of mid sized southern cities packed with girls like you describe.
But you have to bring something to the table. They're looking for husbands who are mature and can support them or at least provide the major support of the family.
If you want to do it the "Traditional" way, better accept taht its all about what you bring to the family economically. Whihc means you either have to own a large piece of land so her father can expand his agrarian (peasant) business with you, or own your own company.
Marriage used to be all about prooerty and both sides benefitting economically, so I would expect nothing less from people who insist tha the 17th century never ended.
I don't even mean this in a negative way, but traditional marriage has nothing at all to do with "love" , so don't go in expecting feelings to matter.
You're an idiot if you believe girls are more wholesome in the religious south.
And also this. She'll cuck the shit out of you once that cherry's popped and she can freely release all that pent up sexual desire.
Wo'd want to do it once a month in the dark with some cultist wierdo anyways
You're a dunce of the highest order if you think growing up in an emotionally and sexually repressed backwater religious community is a recipe for a sane woman.
Lol, not OP, but was raised in a homeschooled fundamental Christian community
80% of the girls I grew up with are like what OP wants.
>80% of the girls I grew up with are like what OP wants.
Oh, you're still in contact with 80% of the girls you grew up with and are up to date with all of the events in their lives?
>You're a dunce of the highest order if you think growing up in an emotionally and sexually repressed backwater religious community is a recipe for a sane woman.
I moved to a town like this about 15 years ago. I'm not a christian, but I have worked with, observed, and gotten to know these people over that period.
There are many girls like OP seeks here. You can believe that or not. Most of them, I think, remain religious. This is because they go to church all the time. Also, there are many churches in this town. It's what people do here. It's a lifestyle with these people.
They are all quite sane. These people are very business oriented and stable.
Now I know this seems like "sexually represses backwater" to some people, and the existence of places like this offends their sensibilities, but, nonetheless they do exist and the religious people who live here lead quite happy lives - as far as I can tell - and actually don't want to leave.
They seem pretty sane to me, but I know it pleases others to look at them otherwise.
It's like the difference between Trump supporters and Leftists. Leftists are just convinced Trump supporters are stupid fascist racists and etc.
Well, this is Trump country. Maybe that says it all.
>They seem pretty sane to me, but I know it pleases others to look at them otherwise.
Not really m8. I've lived both in metropolitan cities and places like these. THe thing with these "ommunities" is that most people stick to it because they can't imagine liveing any other way.
The second reason is, that you will be a complete and outter outcast if you deviate by even an Iota from wht the others are doing.
You're either happy with what the majority likes (just begrudingly playing along will also rile up the rest, you need to be HAPPY about it) or you can get fucked and have everyone avoiding you. Small towns and villages are literally hell on earth under that "friendly"veneer that only holds up due to incedibly tight social control.
I think you won't fit there. What makes you think you deserve one since you come into this shithole?
nah, southerners aren't into beta MRA faggot mommys boys
>If you want to do it the "Traditional" way, better accept taht its all about what you bring to the family economically. Whihc means you either have to own a large piece of land so her father can expand his agrarian (peasant) business with you, or own your own company.
>Marriage used to be all about prooerty and both sides benefitting economically, so I would expect nothing less from people who insist tha the 17th century never ended.
>I don't even mean this in a negative way, but traditional marriage has nothing at all to do with "love" , so don't go in expecting feelings to matter.
What the hell are you even talking about?
I live in a place like OP described. It's NOTHING like that. The difference between this place and others is that the culture is sort of stuck in the late 1950s early 1960s in many ways. People still say "sir" and "ma'am" to each other and younger people use "Ms." or "Mr." to address older people, or speak of them, as in "Hello Mr. Jack" or "There goes Ms. Sally"
So people are polite in a traditional southern way and they are religious. Marriage has quite a bit to do with love here. In fact, love is what marriage is primarily about here, that and raising children. It's nothing like the dystopia you describe.
But you keep thinking that. Guys like you aren't really the kind of people that would be wanted around here anyway.
>love is what marriage is primarily about here, that and raising children.
Marriage was always about property and how to distribute it. It literally serves no other purpose.
What's the problem exactly? Just move there are make your life the way you want it to be. Someone will marry you.
Just make sure you never date multiple girls at once. And don't date any girls that you don't seriously see yourself marrying.
this. A small percentage are, but many are just delusional degenerates who have shotgun marriages or just have lots of oral and anal sex because it "doesn't count". You'll have better chances there than anywhere else, but the odds are still against you.
>Small towns and villages are literally hell on earth under that "friendly"veneer that only holds up due to incedibly tight social control.
Despite social isolation being higher in cities, and public trust being far, far lower in cosmopolitan shitholes. And no shit, societies need social control, you degenerate. Libertines need to be shamed and booted out where possible. Also, need I remind you that leftists do this exact thing to anyone who expresses wrongthink?
>muh false consciousness
Possibly but the age difference might be a issue because of everyone I know 5 year max gap, everyone my age 2 year gap.
Having them believe you will be a issue too, you're not even close to the first guy to think this. If you're actually religious which I don't think you are, maybe.
The fact that you cant be bothered to type out “traditional” is highly disturbing to me. You deserve trash.
Churchgoing girls in tiny southern religious towns have been fucking their brothers since they were 12 "because that doesn't count"
Also, Anal, blowjobs, Rimjobs, the works.
There's a lot of suff you can do while "technically" remaining a virgin so Babby Jesah doesn't cry.
Why would you want to marry a 15 year old religious girl?
He's probably read the Quran and got some strange Ideas from Mohammeds sexual preferences
>who are mature and can support them or at least provide the major support of the family.
Never understood why women want to be treated like they're your children who sit around doing fuck all
>all the salty whores ITT
Reminder sexual promiscuity is a S I N
>Literally Hitler
Why won't you just go away I'm sick of your black pill shit.
Now THAT'S some spicy autism.
All men who say and follow this belief have never had much sex and despise those who do. They want to do this to project their insecurities on the women they date. People fuck other people, get over it.
>t. whore
Also if I wanted a woman who wasn't sexually promiscuous, wouldn't it be fair I wasn't sexual promiscuous either?
People fucking is fine but that doesn't mean it's right and it doesn't mean I have to date people who have fucked before
OP here, this is very accurate. I've had sex with one person and I fucking hate people that seem to magically be able to just go out to a bar and within a. Night or two be fucking a stranger. Or those guys who are only single for a month.
Caring for the home and children is hardly "fuck all". Add in traditional responsibilities in an agrarian lifestyle, and they have even more to do.
It's true. I wish you luck, but be realistic.
>All men who say and follow this belief have never had much sex
The overwhelming majority of those who condemn rape and murder also don't do those things. Your point?
>he's had sex before yet he wants a virgin tradwife
Wew lad, you do know if you want a tradwife you're supposed to be a tradhusband, right?
Very few agrarian lives anymore, "looking after" a house is idiots work. For children? Oh boo hoo you change diapers and get to play hide and seek all day.
Being a woman is life on easy mode.
They start out with an advantage, but try being a 50 year old woman who doesn't get free attention anymore.
> For children? Oh boo hoo you change diapers and get to play hide and seek all day
Please never reproduce
Please tell me where to move. Gimme some choices.
Have 3 kids already. The only hard thing is constantly worrying about them.
You are right about older women, that is very very hard.
Then do yourself and your future wife a big fucking favour and learn how to be one of those guys instead of lettig your insecurities rule your life.
And yes, with a bit of work you can become one of those guys. There's nothing magical, not even anything special about it.
Just
>Do not look like shit, groom, wash, work out, dress well
>Have a modicum of social skills
>Be willing to be rejected
There you go. Practice talking to women for a month or two, and you'll be able to fuck to your hearts content. Unlike trying to cope with it in a really creepy way (muh virgin wife), this will not lead you into an unhappy grave.
Fuck off, Hitler.
>that doesn't mean it's right
And what about it is "not right"? Does it concern you in any way what other people do with your genitals? Does it hurt you in any way what others do and with whom?
The answer to that can only be yes. If you wouldn't hungrily stare at others having fun from your basement window, secretly wishing to have the same, you'd just live and let live instead of spilling some bs how people having sex "isn't right" (whatever the fuck that actually means)
You'd have no need to construct some crappy delusions about you being superior to those "whores" who get love and affection from others while you don't. All the while you can sit in your basement and not improve while dreaming about a pure virgin waifu appearing and taking away all your troubles. It's so incredibly pathetic I'd have pity on you if you weren't a judgemental cunt.
>le mom's basement
Opinion discarded
Somone who thinks like that is not able to properly function in society. Where else would you find people like that? Well, maybe between a dingy studio apartment and the Graveyard shift at the gas station. Still fits well in with the meme.
You're just mad that someone you view as lower than you looks down on you as well
Not really. I just get pissed at people who aim at dragging down vulnerable people instead of fixing their own mess.
We both know that you’re just some skinny geek with too much time on your hands.
>vulnerable people
??? How am I dragging down "vulnerable people"
I could probably get thots like everyone else but I want a shrinking violet christian virgin
THIS
This is my biggest problem here
and people hate you for wanting this too
It doesn't have anything to do with hate. You want a kind of person that isn't actually a person. You want all the individual parts about a woman that you enjoy but not an actual woman; not a real, inherently flawed human being. The truth is the whole "shrinking violet christian virgin" is an amalgamation of the least challenging characteristics in a woman. She's submissive so she won't challenge you with assertion. She's inexperienced so she won't challenge you with any boundaries or requirements she learned from past relationships. She's a christian so she already comes with a fixed set of lifestyle parameters and she won't challenge you with any contradictory notions of morality and values. I don't know who you are as a person but, on average, its pretty easy to see that guys lust after unrealistically naive, submissive christian girls they see in movies and anime because nothing about them is a challenge; nothing about them will actually force you to confront the real life things that come with dating a human person; discomfort, pride, conflicting values, ego, anger, selfishness, jealousy, masculinity. A "shrinking violet christian virgin" will just sit there and be perfect and not remind you of any of the things you're insecure about. Its easy to be with a girl that needs you and will stay with you because she just hasn't known any other men and doesn't know any better. You've been her only exposure to men and relationships so for all she knows you're the perfect guy. Being with a woman with her own thoughts, desires, and worldly knowledge of people and relationships is scary because she chooses to be with you even though she has other options. Anyway, I'm done ranting.
>. You want all the individual parts about a woman that you enjoy but not an actual woman; not a real, inherently flawed human being. The truth is the whole "shrinking violet christian virgin" is an amalgamation of the least challenging characteristics in a woman.
Fuck you. There are plenty of sluts where you are. Concern yourself with them degenerate.
>It doesn't have anything to do with hate. You want a kind of person that isn't actually a person. You want all the individual parts about a woman that you enjoy but not an actual woman; not a real, inherently flawed human being. The truth is the whole "shrinking violet christian virgin" is an amalgamation of the least challenging characteristics in a woman.
Thanks for your deep philosophical musing on this. Now kindly take them and shove them up your faggot liberal ass where they belong.
>Being with a woman with her own thoughts, desires, and worldly knowledge of people and relationships is scary because she chooses to be with you even though she has other options. Anyway, I'm done ranting.
Well we know you like a challenge desu, so we leave those THOTS, I mean ladies, for U
not if it's tiny. you'd also be poor in a tiny town.
otherwise, your idea of relocating to find women with specific qualities you're seeking does make sense. just remember that the grass is always greener. don't expect any group of people to be perfect.
Kek. Someone's a little mad. I'm guessing I struck a nerve huh?
Alright, I'll take your "intellectual" ramblings and unwarranted condescension, and raise you 3 sources:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
>Bivariate results suggested that delaying sexual involvement was associated with higher relationship quality across several dimensions. The multivariate results indicated that the speed of entry into sexual relationships was negatively associated with marital quality, but only among women."
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
>"I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution."
psycnet.apa.org
>"Both structural equation and group comparison analyses demonstrated that sexual restraint was associated with better relationship outcomes, even when controlling for education, the number of sexual partners, religiosity, and relationship length."
did you samefag as OP, you faggot?
there's always one of these things with you in it
>Kek. Someone's a little mad. I'm guessing I struck a nerve huh?
Not sure. Why don't you spend another half hour writing another essay about it? Then I could be sure.
>Alright, I'll take your "intellectual" ramblings and unwarranted condescension, and raise you 3 sources:
Don't waste your time with degenerates. Degenerates gonna degenerate and try to take as many people with them as possible. It's what they do.
>wanting a virgin christian girl = wanting a submissive doll that does nothing and has no thoughts
No
>A "shrinking violet christian virgin" will just sit there and be perfect and not remind you of any of the things you're insecure about.
Yeah, that's it. So insecure. Need shrinking violet christian. Damn you have us figured out
It's actually very hard for people to be so one-dimensional.
It sounds like you've never actually known any such people.
Also, limiting romantic and sexual experience is a viable strategy for *both* parties for the purpose of increasing likelihood of LTR/marriage stability and decreasing likelihood of failure/divorce - not just for women.
If you remember, this is how our grandparents' generation did things, and divorce was relatively rare for them.
You seem like you have some things you're angry about that doesn't have anything to do with me. You're the one who engaged with me. The fact that you're so viscerally upset by the opinion of a stranger that wasn't even talking to you obviously means that something I said resonated with you. Good luck with whatever you got going on with you, user.
Very poor strawman. That isn't what I said in the slightest.
>You seem like you have some things you're angry about that doesn't have anything to do with me.
Playing psychobabble game degenerate? No thanks. Fuck off
>It's actually very hard for people to be so one-dimensional.
I don't see what is one dimensional about shying away from things in life that intimidate us. Its a pretty human reaction.
>If you remember, this is how our grandparents' generation did things, and divorce was relatively rare for them.
>Also, limiting romantic and sexual experience is a viable strategy for *both* parties for the purpose of increasing likelihood of LTR/marriage stability and decreasing likelihood of failure/divorce - not just for women.
This is, of course, running on the assumption that the length of a marriage is equal to its quality; that just because two people have been together for 30 years that they are happy. I don't run on that assumption. The institution of marriage is not necessary the same way it was 50 years ago. Divorce wasn't an option and now it is. The necessity of marriage, both legal and societal, has decreased therefore the number of people who stay married has decreased. There are no video stores anymore because the way we consume media has evolved. The institution of marriage is not immune from this evolution.
>This is, of course, running on the assumption that the length of a marriage is equal to its quality
SeeSources one and three. Also see the benefits of marital stability for families and mental health.
>Divorce wasn't an option and now it is.
Garbage. Pic related.
>Very poor strawman. That isn't what I said in the slightest.
That's what it sounded like to me
Those things I described are my ideal woman and I didn't describe any flaws because I haven't met said woman
>The necessity of marriage, both legal and societal, has decreased therefore the number of people who stay married has decreased.
Legal, sure. But societal? I don't think so. I don't agree with your previous statement that marriage existed solely for economic purposes - i think it existed for economic, and procreational purposes equally. That is, the propagation of society over time via paradigms of 1. Healthy psychological development of children and 2. Transmission of societal/cultural values over time. Marriage and subsequently nuclear families are almost by definition required for this.
I would say there is also one more level of analysis in which marriage is necessary, which is 'civilizational' - which is essentially a scaled up version of society.
>The institution of marriage is not immune from this evolution.
'Evolution' implies that developments effect a greater adaptation or successful functionality given changing environments. But, I am not so sure that whatever marriage is changing into, is good at all (compared to what it used to be). You mentioned happiness, but by that very metric our society is largely terribly unhappy and depressed. Is that specifically because of new structures for relationships? Maybe, maybe not, but there are statistics showing higher rates of unhappiness in relation to greater number of sexual partners.
That was really fucking well said. And that is why I will always call these people Basment dwellers. Such fucking limp cuckolds they cannot even imagine being together with an actual human being.
>Go to a board filled with people who mostly have social problems
>Try to convert them to your ridiculous (see:) Worldview
Yeah, maybe you go tothe biggest Chad you know and call him a whore to his face. THEN when can talk.
He said what you wanted to hear, not what is actually true--he just listed projections of his own disdain. Let me offer some examples.
>She's submissive so she won't challenge you with assertion.
Women in general are more agreeable and "submissive". This doesn't mean unconditional acquiescence. In fact, a woman who doesn't have moral standards in the direct opposite of a "christian virgin". It takes commitment and will to wait.
>She's inexperienced so she won't challenge you with any boundaries or requirements she learned from past relationships.
This implies that relationships equal sex. A typically troglodytic assumption, and one which is incorrect. In any case, traditional values also emphasize the role of parents in raising good, moral children. She'd again have to enforce boundaries to remain a virgin, as well.
>She's a christian so she already comes with a fixed set of lifestyle parameters and she won't challenge you with any contradictory notions of morality and values.
Yes, generally people want a partner who shares their values. How the fuck is this a valid criticism?
>implying advocating for better behavior is "dragging down" anyone
Still awaiting sources to the contrary of what I've already posted ITT, degenerate.
>Marriage and subsequently nuclear families
Funny thing is, the "nuclear family" wasn't athing before the 20th centuries. Before, a household normally included several generations from Great-grandparents to great-grandchildren, tons of siblings,plus household staff and helpers if it's an agrarian household.
The family consisting of two people and their children alone is already dependent on a shitload of techonoligical and econimical advances to be viable for the majority.
>Healthy psychological development of
children
Then you certainly can show even one page of proof that having two monogamous parents is a requirement for that. And no, children suffering under divorce is no proof, as having one parent disappear is more emotionally straining than not having exactly two parents in the first place.
>better behaviour
According to whom? You? What exactly qualifies you to ordain what is best for other people? A mandate from God? Visions? Voices in your head?
Blow it out your ass, you preening faggot.
Some study or other that shows a general trend that may or may not be there (considering how fickle especially psychological studies are) is some sort of manual that every individual has to slavishly follow?
You know as well as me that that shit is a really fucking thin base to claim knowing whats best for everyone. Especially when you cite scientific studies while calling others "whores" and whatnot
You expect you can call for raped women to be shot and then post some scienftific study andsuddenly be accepted as asane, rational person who founds his beliefs in reality?
>autists are considering actually moving and preying on some small town's church community in a quest for muh pure white traditional Christian virgin wife
You can't make this shit up
>javascript:quote('19550191')
>Some study or other that shows a general trend that may or may not be there is some sort of manual that every individual has to slavishly follow?
No, but I am claiming that degenerates have no backing whatsoever to justify abandoning both statistical observation and thousands of years of social tradition just because they like getting their dicks wet.
>You expect you can call for raped women to be shot
I never did that. Getting drunk around a bunch of men you don't know before doing something stupid you regret is not getting "raped".
>and then post some scienftific study andsuddenly be accepted as asane, rational person who founds his beliefs in reality?
Who I am is irrelevant, the data is there regardless, and so are historical customs.
I openly concede that I don't have perfect, immutable justification. If anyone had that, then there would be no arguments whatsoever. However, I have far more justification on multiple levels than anyone who has opposed me so far. They treat modern society as an intrinsic truth, and offer nothing to back up the radical shift which occurred decades ago to create what we live in.