How do women, after having multiple partners, convince themselves that they are not 'unvirtuous' people...

How do women, after having multiple partners, convince themselves that they are not 'unvirtuous' people? Do they have any standards for themselves which would make them feel guilty or will they do literally anything?

Attached: tumblr_poget8lHLP1sls007o1_1280.jpg (1280x1050, 494K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Because virtue can be about morals, not sex. There’s really no reason to feel guilty about sex outside of religion.

Some women have no values, user.
No dignity nor Honor, no self worth, nothing.
They only care about being pretty, and their status.
They're really sad and empty people.
They have no other hobbies, no interests,they have nothing.
Some start to "wake up" when they get older, some never do.

Attached: 1552298179054.jpg (4094x5912, 1.9M)

The same way men do it

Looks like a bait thread, but those always get the most replies anyway, so I'll bite.

>How do women, after having multiple partners, convince themselves that they are not 'unvirtuous' people?
Firstly, this isn't a problem restricted to women (and to this day they remain slightly less degenerate than men both in professed views and actions).

But in those cases where there is delusion, there are two ways it manifests itself:

-The simplest case, most common among leftist and anti-religious elements, is they simply tell themselves it's either not wrong or good. You see troglodytic men do this, too, when they say stuff like "how can you want to marry a virgin, she'd be bad at sex". I.e. rationalizing away or even prioritizing degeneracy over higher things.

-The other way, unfortunately common among either the disinterested or professed 'conservatives', is where individuals invent arbitrary "limits" they conveniently meet without effort, and convince themselves that, so long as saying that they stay within THOSE limits, they aren't degenerate. An example of this would be the ubiquitous and unceasingly idiotic "nth date rule" for sex or "X or fewer" sexual partners; or "it's ok if you love them" rationalizations.

More broadly, the latter tendency can be described as the mindset of a fatass who says they aren't gluttonous because "they stop eating when their stomach hurts". No shit, but you're supposed to do so beforehand, but you didn't and now you're fat. If you don't have sex only when you feel horrible about it in the moment, you can still (and you usually will) be a whore. These artificial "standards" of all kinds are distinguished by a superficial resemblance to the original restriction, but all lack some or all of the beneficial result of the previous version.

tl;dr they do it because it's easy and they don't care

>There’s really no reason to feel guilty about sex outside of religion.
This would be an example, OP, of the first category. These people are thoroughly immune to both morality and reason (although the two terms are essentially identical) and should be avoided in all but the most passing of interactions.

Because not everyone defines the world the way you do.
Your morals =/= someone else's.
This isn't even about women, but that you were taught a very specific form of skin on skin friction is wrong and other people weren't.
And that you specifically expect women (and only women) to respect precisely what you were taught about skin in skin friction.

There are so many loaded questions here how do you even survive being this philosophically ridiculous.

I hope you find love and meaning someday user.

Yes, hopefully they'll wake up to a life of glory and virtue, much like the guy with pictures of scantily clad anime girls saved on his computer providing his bountiful wisdom on women on Jow Forums.

your first line is sufficient
but there are some people that literally can't process that

Women do a lot of mental gymnastics in general to convince themselves that they're not just useless cumbuckets. And yeah, I always found it funny how bitches want to get married and dream of weddings, yet they're not even virgins nor do they believe in God.

The same you convince yourself that, by being a virgin, you're above the men who collect notches under their belt.

Morals are, more or less, universal. Having a partner(s) through marriage has been the norm from about the start of human civilization. What's wrong is wrong for everyone and what's right is right for everyone. You cannot just explain away your shortcomings by making your own set of convenient morals and judging yourself against them. And no, I don't exclude men from these rules.

>hurr durr it's just skin to skin friction!
>what are stds
>what are unwanted children

Some people (me) just made mistakes when they're going through a tough time when they're young and don't know any better, but if there was no cheating/pregnancy/disease i dont see the problem with having "a past" as long as it stays in the past. For me, its been many many years since then and I've matured a lot, so i do think im virtuous. Now (after several years of volcel) im in a wonderful healthy LTR where we intend to build a life and family together.
Nice b8 by the way

Because if you think virtue is lost by the use of genitalia then you clearly have a different world view to them. This is how real life works.

People have always fucked and been degenerate. Today we are actually far more chaste than most of history.

>Didn't know any better
The lack of forethought and objective reasoning skills really adheres to that low iq you've got going.

>Morals are, more or less, universal.
Some are, like not to steal (if a concept of property exists) from- or kill members of your group, but you will find plentiful examples for promiscuity in a number of different forms and different models of marriage throughout time and around the world. To state that monogamy is a moral absolute seems very hard to find supporting evidence for.
While being responsible with STDs and unwanted pregnancies, are certainly responsible and morally good behavior (as they support the health and healthy development of humans, things that are universally regarded as good for people in-group). Those can be done by a reasonably smart person today, while still having more than one and possibly dozens of partners. The failure to do so can be logically judged as a moral short coming. I think you are simply subscribing to a moral code, that you have deemed good for personal reasons and without logical backup assume it to be universal. It is not and while it is your right to judge people based upon it and moderate your interactions accordingly, I doubt it will make you very happy in the long run or think it is a reasonable position to hold. You should Question why you feel this way and deal with the insecurities that are probably at the bottom of it.


>implying they are seperable
probably the same way most men do
>it's fun, why should I feel bad about having fun?

It's coping, pure and simple. Rather than admitting they're objectively less valuable each time they bring a new dick into their wormhole, they simply abolish their standards.

Then they wonder how they end up with abusive partners. Gee, maybe because shitty decision-making is a constant in their lives.

I don't think having dozens of partners is really good for your mental health you know. Also, morals must be objective. If you try to change them and make them subjective by telling yourself that it's 'good for people and doesn't hurt anyone' you will inevitably fall deeper and deeper into hedonism until you reach a point where your conscious won't care and you won't even bother convincing yourself of your actions supposed 'benefits'. This is why an absolute, rigid moral code is necessary even though some people may believe such a thing is outdated for our 'modern' world.

I refuse to believe anyone thinks this way, man or woman.

Do you know what's like fucking a chick who has never had sex? boring. They have no idea what to do.

>Then they wonder how they end up with abusive partners.
But they don't end up with incels?

>Abuse is propagated solely and exclusively by incels
Whatta zinger
You did it

Remember this forever:

Women do everything based on emotions then backwards rationalize.

I banged and dated many women. I'm now married with kids. There are no exceptions to the above. Best case scenario you get a woman that uses some logic and has some integrity.

Confirmed for truth. You find the ones who acknowledge the function and value of rationale and logic.

Not all abusive men are incels, but all incels are abusive men.

This would have been nice before it was asserted that ending up with abusive partners immediately implies they're incels

You're stating the obvious to me, that was my original point, I don't know why you're staying this or correcting this to me

you don't, you just accept that you're a whore and pray forgiveness.

Why? Is being a whore a bad thing?

Not everyone has the same moral values and standards as you have.
I had sex with multiple partners and don't feel bad about it at all, or ashamed about it.

It's fair to have different standards for yourself or your partner, but you can't expect everyone feels the same way you do.

morals and religion?

many moral people grow up without religion in their lives.

>There is no forgiveness. For women. A man may lose his honor and regain it again. But a woman cannot. She cannot.

Most are no less virtuous than the virginal autists judging them desu.

One of the most bigoted thing you can say is that actions have consequences. Most people (specifically women here) are so afraid of owning their actions that they say they are not responsible for what happened, or excuse their actions in other ways. No, there is nothing inherently *bad* about having sex with 100 different guys before you leave high-school, but when it comes time to "settle down," the potential partner has every right to not touch that blown out pussy and emotional trainwreck. Convince the stable men that unfaithful women are good, and there won't be any questions about slut shaming, because every woman will be a slut

True. The sad part is that many of these so called religious folk on this board have no problem espouting hate and exclusion, not very Christly if you ask me.

Do you think that every woman who had more than one partner is a slut or unfaithful? Because that's the OP. "multiple partners" = 2+.

I don't really care. If she did, I'm probably not interested unless she's a 2x widow or something

Meanwhile incels are so afraid of owning their actions that they say they are not responsible for being high school dropouts living in the basement who never go outside. It's all women's fault.

Are you attacking me, or? Because yes, you're right. It also applies to the nazis who are ruled by jews, and blacks who are niggers.

Yeah, so you see how your morals about "unless you're a pristine virgin who never saw a dick in real life you're a slut" speech might not sit well with most people who live normal lives?

I have no problems being rejected by guys who think that my sexual history is too much for them, because I've never done anything I'm ashamed of, but really putting it as if to be a slut by your standards you had to fuck a thousand dudes and you have to be an "emotional trainwreck" is a little insulting for everyone's intelligence.

I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't fuck as many dudes as you want. I'm saying I'm not interested in the kind of person who would, and am more interested in people who don't need a new dick every week to "find themselves" and instead place more stock in emotional and intellectual development

But why would any girl have saved her virginity for a garbage tier male like you?

I don't expect them to, and this is why women aren't the end all be all for me. No need to get worked up, my dear

It’s always one extreme or the other with you people.

Again, you're putting it as if I need to fuck a new dude every week to be considered a slut by your standards when I clearly don't. I had sex with two guys. I was with one for 8 years, and with my current for 2. I had multiple partners and am, by your standards, a slut.
I don't care about how you judge me, because I don't regret any of my decisions about sleeping with my ex boyfriend or my current boyfriend, so your judgement really doesn't phase me much.
But I hope you understand that the world isn't divided in girls who wait for marriage and girls who fuck a different dude every week.
And while I personally don't care if you think I'm a slut, or if you don't want to date a girl who has been around, or whatever really, you're really being insulting of my intelligence if you think that the only possible scenario in which a girl had sex with more than one guy is that she is the kind of person who fucks a dude every week.

I am far from an emotional trainwreck, I sought after emotional and intellectual development and am happy where I am in life. I managed to do that while having sex with 2 different guys without having any major issues.

incels by definition are people who cannot get laid no matter what. therefore an incel has no partner to abuse and therefore cannot be abusive. QED

What are you on about? I already conceded I won't find someone 1) attractive and 2) attracted to me. One or the other may happen, but I won't be sad if they never match

Incels by definition are people who choose to not get laid and lie about it. It is literally impossible in today's world to not get laid if you want to.

First misconception is that I'm whatever guy said 2+=slut. However, I have said in other threads that 1< partner = slut, so even stricter. Regardless, I'm glad you found something that works for you. My life doesn't revolve around other people, or how many wet holes have been on my dick. I'm not judging you, just saying I am not interested in dating you, which is fortunate because you wouldn't want to date me either.

>people who choose to not get laid and lie about it.
Those are called volcels.

Yes, incels. Incel means volcel in denial.

What he's implying is that the option DOES always exist, just that a lot of people don't like the options they have available to them

I have no particular hard feelings about you not wanting to date me. It's probably mutual.

I'm arguing against your idea of how a woman who had more than one partner is like, because I am frankly nothing like that and I think it is silly, reductive and extremely simplistic to have that kind of preconceived notions about how a woman is.

>I don't think having dozens of partners is really good for your mental health you know
That is an interesting hypothesis, but not one that will be easy to prove even if correct. Unless you have quite a bit of research and data that I don't, I'd say that is something you want to be true and not something that can be conclusively proven or even assumed. The only data I can find points to a certain relation with marriage stability and nothing else, even that is not conclusive in any way, since causation and correlation can not be clearly determined. In my opinion it is probably related to the third variable religiosity or just general conservatism.

You are for some reason assuming a moral code based on absolutely nothing, but faith and your desire for it to be true, regardless of what it may cause, is more objective than the unchanging moral principles that have always been found and only been limited by who is seen as human. To assume morality not based on no more than faith to lead to hedonism is questionable at best, if not flat out bullshit. Morality that is logically true and could be objected on little ground other than faith, like the categorical imperative, can hardly be seen as leading to hedonism.

It seems like you are simply trying to justify your beliefs, despite them lacking logical groundwork. Stop hoping for things to be true, because you want them to be true.

>thinks morality and reason are the same
>tries to rationalize own petty frustration and insecurities into a righteous morality battle
>proudly proclaims intellectual and moral superiority over imagined targets of your self-righteousness
This is what makes you a loser. You project blame other people as the problem rather than own up to your issues.

Lol not judging her? What's that condescending "find yourself" assumed reason. And you judged her for not valuing emotional and intellectual development because she's had more than 1 partner in her life. You're bullshiting SO hard

Yes, I added that for effect. I don't think everyone who has several partners is inherently wrecked. I think there should be room and reason for doubt about their character, but the base of the position is that I am unattracted to such people, not that I am unattracted to them because they are X,y,z

Why would someone feel guilty about having sex? Why would someone feel guilty about enjoying their body with someone else? Why would someone feel guilty about fulfilling their prime directive as a lifeform?

Just because you personally find sex to be something best practiced in secret with extremely selective people does not mean it's that way for everyone. Some people, women included, simply enjoy sexuality and everything related to it.

When you make religious arguments against sex, imagine it like this. Why do you think the humans who wrote the Bible (and yes, humans most definitely wrote and rewrote every single religious text on Earth) would make premarital sex a sin?

Do you think they wrote it in there because the legitimate creator of the universe finds sex a repulsive act, or do you think that maybe, just maybe, in a pre-contraception society, it would be useful not to have a bunch of pregnant women and kids with no fathers there to provide for them. Waiting until marriage for sex was a social necessity, not a divine neccesity.

They see themselves as victims and it clears up all that moral guilt.

Objective morals are shit like "it is bad to murder because murder causes negative stimuli in humans"

Your social ideas like "sex requires a lifetime partner" hold no objective grounds. The fact that human societies created the concept of marriage does not define objective morality.

She isn't doing it for a specific man, she's doing it for the concept of her husband and most importantly for herself, since she is maximizing her own potential success in a relationship she has full choice in beginning.
>In my opinion it is probably related to the third variable religiosity or just general conservatism.
Except studies specifically control for this and the patterns still remains. Conservative evangelical areas of the US also have very high rates of divorce, not low, since you have degenerates either not caring (i.e. they disregard waiting) or trying to get around restrictions through ill-fated shotgun weddings.

>"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."

>thinks morality and reason are the same
Morality flows from reason, in the sense that where you have a desire outcome the moral structure appropriate to it is revealed by reason. Hence if two people profess to desire the same thing, they cannot both be correct if they hold different views on how to achieve it (they can both be wrong, of course).
>tries to rationalize own petty frustration and insecurities into a righteous morality battle
Nice armchair psychology, but this misses the point. I could be doing this to distract myself or others from anything, it doesn't reflect on the value of the arguments and information as such.
>proudly proclaims intellectual and moral superiority over imagined targets of your self-righteousness
Intellectual? Not necessarily. While I am so far unimpressed with the rank idiocy of most hedonists, it's hardly a requirement for the immoral to be stupid in their activities.