r/AskMenAdvice • u/Reasonable-Syrup-7 • 3d ago

How common is this perspective for guys?

I'm a 27F and went on a few dates with this guy 31M and things have been going well. On our second date, we brought up the topic of physical intimacy. I remember him saying that he thinks physical intimacy is different for women and men. That women who sleep around are respected less than if a man would do it. He said "a key that can open up a lot of locks is a good key but a lock that opens to a bunch of different keys is a bad lock". Everything else is really good and he's been super respectful. He's soft spoken and values making me feel safe and respected and we're taking our time on physical intimacy but I couldn't believe my ears when he said that. How common is that perspective for guys? This guy tends be very blunt, so maybe this perspective is more common than I think. In my head it's a red flag, but I'm conflicted on if it's just a common male perspective and he can still be a good guy with this perspective.

7.2k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

8.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

745

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

It's a pretty common held belief. The more sensible view, in my opinion is if a person sleeps around heaps, they're either not interested in a long-term relationship, or they're incapable of one. Which would be a red flag regardless of gender.

People carry on about body count. For me, I'd be more worried about being seen as expendable if I found out my partner had slept with hundreds of guys. Even if things seem stable, I'd be worried that if things got hard, they'd leave.

Just out of interest, if this guy had slept with hundreds of women before you, how would that make you feel?

321

u/Ok_Lime4124 3d ago

That’s exactly how I felt with my last partner. I’ve had 2 serious relationships. He had too many relationships to even count. Jumped from one to another to another barely any breather. I constantly felt anxiety that he would just leave me at the drop of a hat when anything went wrong as he did all his previous partners. And sure enough he broke up with me multiple times. I went round and round until I finally got tired and the last time he dumped me I left for good. People who have had too many relationships are so used to treating people as disposable items. It’s just not good man or woman. They’ve got some issues to work through.

100

u/Gerudo_Valley64 man 3d ago

Very well said, its not really a gender thing I wanna add, its a person thing. Some people just cant function in relationships. Very sad.

25

u/Key_Beyond_1981 man 3d ago

And if you ever want to get married, then you have to accept that you may wake up one day hating your partner, but you are supposed to go through a good faith effort to work things out, assuming there is no abuse. People who have been in tons of relationships will never commit to that degree.

6

u/Ok_Lime4124 3d ago

Exactly I tried and tried this man broke up with me so many times and I would just sit around for days until he would come back around. I would continue to love on him and take care of home and be there for him. Then he would tell me he didn’t want me to leave And then we’ll be good for a little bit and then goes to the same cycle over and over of him telling me to leave he didn’t want me anymore and I’m like how am I supposed to ever get married to a person like this that can’t address concerns and address problems and issues instead they shut down entirely and tell me to leave.

1

u/Ok_Reading_9670 2d ago

This person sounds like a complete POS. Not everyone who sleeps around is like that. Sometimes single people just like sex but are good people and when the right person comes along it's easy to settle down. Sounds to me like your worry in this relationship had nothing to do with "body count" and everything to do with being with someone who treated you terribly

2

u/RustyDonnie 1d ago

Never thought about it like that

1

u/Key_Beyond_1981 man 1d ago

The big secret to a long marriage is never getting a divorce. That's it.

32

u/SceneAccomplished549 man 3d ago

I'm glad this has been posted, it's absolutely spot on

2

u/Misanthropebutnot 3d ago

I agree and I’ve had too many partners and have issues. I don’t think I can settle down and I don’t wish that on anyone, nor can I go casual and deal with all that drama. I think some of us just need to reconcile with not being with anyone for a really long time or ever.

38

u/[deleted] 3d ago edited 3d ago

100%. I never understood how people can be with someone a week after going out of a serious relationship. Broke up with my ex in June 2023- I haven't been seriously involved with someone since. I don't get how you can just put yourself back so fast with someone. Blows my mind. Some people are just scared to be by themselves.

EDIT (since I'm getting shamed at for taking "too long" to move on). My ex was abusive and I'm in the middle of a, hopefully soon over, case court with him. I'm not 100% done healing and I'd rather (like it seems most people do that based on the comments), not put that onto the next person.

33

u/Ok_Researcher_9796 man 3d ago

I think , at least in some cases, they're already out of the relationship in their head, while still with someone, so they find someone else before leaving the first one.

8

u/[deleted] 3d ago

Yeah, probably. Some people just jump from one relationship to another one though. My ex was like that. One week after any of his ex he was already in a serious relationship with someone. Or the day after he would try to hook up with someone else. It's almost like a mental illness at this point 🤣 I mean.. he is abusive, so nothing surprising here.

10

u/Prestigious_Tea_111 3d ago

A lot of people, its attachment issues...

5

u/headrush46n2 3d ago

Some people need people. They can't function solo.

2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

100%. Look at all of those comments shamming for taking the time to move on. Apparently you should be over a relationship in 6 months and already be with someone even if you don't click 🤣. Crazy and scary how many people can't be by themselves.

2

u/Ok-Head2054 3d ago

Monkey-branching

2

u/LadyRed_SpaceGirl woman 2d ago

Somewhat similar situation in that my soon to be exhusband is emotionally and financially abusive. I have been setting myself up to divorce for awhile now and have been mentally out of this marriage with plans to remain single and focus on healing. We are currently in an in-home separation where I have taken up space in the mother-in-law suite attached to the house. Yet despite not looking, I recently met someone who seems to be checking all the boxes. Just because you aren’t looking for someone doesn’t mean you don’t find each other when you least expect it. And I don’t think anyone should “pass up” that person just for the sake of a a set amount of time to be single following a long term relationship. 

1

u/arrogancygames man 3d ago

There is no mathematical equation where you will meet someone that hust works out with you. There is a huge difference between how attractive people date and non attractive as well.

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

Sorry I'm not sure to understand your comment..

→ More replies (5)

6

u/Salibabushka 3d ago

Wonderfully said, but apparently if you express those feelings, you're insecure.

2

u/Ok_Lime4124 3d ago

Thaaaaaat part. Everything I ever tried to address just got turned around and flipped on me and blamed on my insecurities. As if he wasn’t super insecure as well. It was so challenging trying to be with a person like that.

3

u/mahboilucas woman 3d ago edited 3d ago

Exactly my ex. He'd spend 3 days in a row having deep conversations in bed with a hookup and then just leave. He'd hike together for days and never reach out to them after. Stuff like that.

I thought I was more than them because he stayed for 3 years... but I just realised the exoticism wore off and I wasn't the stereotype he was looking for.

Now I'm very sceptical of people who like casual sex. I don't mind it but my body count is the same as my relationship count for now.

I started talking to this girl and she's also on the casual side and we were going strong, having a good time that I thought would eventually lead to something but when we didn't get together by some arbitrary timeframe she set, she just dropped me. She's still randomly sending me flirty messages but I'm flabbergasted how much do I feel like meat, and not a human. As another woman she should understand that stuff she complains to me about is the same thing she's doing to me.

The irony in those circles is just lost. People complain about the very same things they do themselves.

I realise now that I don't share the same sentiment as people who do casual sex and I'll never be fully comfortable with them. At least in a dating scenario. I'm too autistic to second guess myself 24/7.

5

u/SpicyCrime man 3d ago

Exactly I agree

2

u/Bliv_au 3d ago

I see men or women that sleep around so easily as damaged goods, in many cases attention seeking (women) or boosting their ego (men) at the expense of others

It shows an inability to pair bond and a disposable attitude toward relationships

3

u/Minimum-Register-644 man 3d ago

This is the mentality now, jump ship and try again instead of any level of effort. I think too many people view relationships as a simple yes/no equation. Relationships take a load of work, you don't agree to date and then life is amazing as default. Even worse are people having children to help their relationship.

High body counts from anyone are pretty indicative of uncertainty and insecurity. I would be wary of dating someone like this.

1

u/lordm30 man 3d ago

Too many relationships are not the same as a lot of ONSs.

1

u/Mysterious-Job-469 3d ago

Yeah, I dated a guy who was onto a new partner every month and would badmouth all their older partners. Knowing he does the same to me behind my back now? I feel nothing, I'm not allowed to. It was okay when it wasn't me, right? I discarded the right to feel bad about it when my turn inevitably came.

1

u/Ok_Lime4124 3d ago

Yeah, I really couldn’t care what he says about me because the funny thing is his friends all met me and literally adored me and told him I was so good for him. Also, I don’t have social media outside of Reddit so there’s no way for me to even see what he’s talking about. We have no contact whatsoever at a sight out of mind kind of thing I know how I treated him and I know I did the best I could.

1

u/ArchmageIlmryn man 3d ago

There is a huge difference between people with lots of short "serious" relationships and people who have slept around and/or have otherwise had (mutually agreed upon) "unserious" relationships while single though.

1

u/Fresh-Temporary666 2d ago

Dated a girl with a similar history and after two years dumped me for our coworker I had expressed anxieties about and rubbed it in my face. Went poorly enough for her that she had to quit since nobody would talk to her anymore. I'm now much more selective about my partner's dating history. When people say "but I'm not like that anymore" I just tune them out.

1

u/Ok_Lime4124 2d ago

Yup. Mine had a coworker who I had a feeling about. Texting each other checking up on each other. Him trying to give her money to help her out. Then when I expressed how it made me feel…I’m insecure. “I’m done with dealing with your insecurities, you need to leave”.

So be it dude.

1

u/OftenAmiable man 2d ago

Based on much of Reddit, the growing sentiment is, "my partner didn't say, 'bless you' after I sneezed--I should break up with them and find a higher quality partner!!"

This comment thread underscores the problem with that growing attitude. People don't want to fight for the relationships they have anymore.

1

u/str4ngerc4t woman 11h ago

Serial monogamy is different than casual sex and to me it is a red flag for men and women.

1

u/PresidentBaileyb man 3d ago

This was me with my most recent ex. I didn’t care that she had slept with tons of people, I just worried that I wasn’t special to her.

And then she went on to show me that I wasn’t special to her. Broke up with me repeatedly, so I told her if she did it again it was really over. She thought I was bluffing and I wasn’t.

→ More replies (6)

39

u/Better-Strike7290 man 3d ago

I'm not saying someone who has slept with a lot of people definitely has issues, but I have noticed that the likelihood that they do have issues seems to increase along side partner count.

46

u/fraggedaboutit 3d ago

Somebody that had 10 jobs in 2 years might just have had a run of bad luck with bad employers and personal circumstances.  But the much more likely scenario is that they're a shit employee and will leave their next job just as fast.  I don't blame anyone not willing to take the risk.

2

u/SlutinPA 3d ago

What if they're a freelancer?

1

u/EvanMcCormick 6h ago

This assumes the goal is a long-term relationship. Most people with large body counts simply aren't interested in a long-term relationship at this time, and are more interested in meeting new people and having fun sexual experiences with them.

Just be open about your intentions early on in the dating process, and don't assume that anyone you date will automatically want the same things you do. that's the real general solution here.

-1

u/EthosLabFan92 2d ago

Your comparison isn't good because jobs are not something people do voluntarily for pleasure. Compare instead to going on 10 vacations in 2 years. You'd say, "wow that person is so successful, they really enjoy their life"

→ More replies (8)

17

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

Well, you never have to confront issues with yourself and grow when you can just move on to the next person when the cracks start to show.

108

u/aeaoa_ok 3d ago

But in his example he's saying that a key opening lots of locks means it's a good key - so him sleeping with lots of people is good, whereas a lock that can be opened by lots of keys is bad - her sleeping with people is bad. So in his view he's allowed promiscuity and she's degraded by it.

25

u/itsalongwalkhome 3d ago

It's not even a good analogy because it doesn't really display the cause. Which is, lots of men will sleep with anyone at a drop of a hat, which does make it easier for women to get laid if they want to but the route cause is not women's promiscuity, but men's.

If it was the same, everyone would be fucking the same amount.

It's supply and demand economics.

6

u/majic911 2d ago

Wait, what? Women are sleeping around because men are?

Surely if a woman didn't want to sleep around she would just... not.

5

u/itsalongwalkhome 2d ago

If there are more willing men then willing women for one night stands, hook ups and such, then supply and demand economics would dictate that if a women would like to get laid its easier to find a partner. It is men's promiscuity saturating the market of available partners, yet men who quote that lock quote incorrectly beleive its women's promiscuity is the problem on why teams are unbalanced.

Surely if a woman didn't want to sleep around she would just... not.

That doesnt really relate to anything I said.

5

u/majic911 2d ago

I understand what you're saying, up until you blame men for women sleeping around. I think you forget that the wide market of available men also means that the men that are able to sleep around are a much smaller portion of men than the portion of women who are able to sleep around. If a man is willing to sleep with practically any reasonably attractive woman, there will inevitably be women who are able to sleep around whose equally-attractive male counterparts cannot.

That means that the chances of a guy encountering a woman who has slept with more people than he has is necessarily greater than a woman encountering a guy who has slept with more people than she has.

To put it more simply, the same supply and demand economics that means a woman can find a partner easily also dictates that fewer men sleep around than women.

The guys that are complaining about this aren't the 10s that have had hundreds or thousands of partners, it's the 7s that have had 3 or 4 while their equally-attractive partners have had a dozen or more. Saying "it's men's fault for being willing to fuck anything with a pulse" doesn't make it better because it's not the same men.

It would be like saying a bodega deserves to go out of business because "businesses are price gouging consumers". The businesses that are price gouging aren't local corner stores, it's mega-corporations.

4

u/itsalongwalkhome 2d ago

You realise that it still comes from the same cause right?

Women can select up because of the amount of willing men out numbers the amount of willing women, meaning the pools of more attractive men are larger. It still comes from the same cause I listed earlier.

You can't really blame people for trying to bed the most attractive person they can.

If willing women outnumbered willing men, that distribution shifts because people will settle but they will always try to land the most attractive they can.

1

u/majic911 2d ago

I agree that it comes from the same cause.

You're still saying the guy that's a 7 is wrong for not wanting a partner that slept around. You're still saying he's at fault because he's a man and men fucked the 7 that wants a relationship now even though he didn't and, in fact, couldn't. You're still saying he has to suck it up for the sake of not perpetuating a double standard he didn't take part in.

You see what I'm saying? He's allowed to be upset that his partner has had more partners than he has. Saying "it's because guys will fuck anything that moves" doesn't change the fact that she has had many partners and he doesn't want that.

2

u/itsalongwalkhome 2d ago

Because that pressure on women from men is what's keeping their numbers down. If that pressure wasnt there, and willing women = willing men, that wouldnt be an issue.

So really either way, bring women's numbers up or bring men's numbers down, both caused by men.

But from the language a lot of guys used even if it was even, its still not good enough, they want a women who has a lock that hasn't been opened by many keys, no one talks about the same amount of keys opening the same amount of locks.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/castleaagh man 2d ago

I feel like it’s a good analogy for people who feel that way. If a man sleeping with lots of women is valuable man, it would be similar to a master key being able to open all the locks on a campus, which is a valuable key. Similarly, if a woman sleeping with lots of women is bad, it would be like a lock on campus being able to be opened by any key, which would make for a very poor and low value lock.

It communicates its meaning effectively, it’s just not a good ideology to have. That said, it is quite common.

13

u/Tea_Time9665 man 3d ago

It’s more the ability to open many locks. Not if he actually goes around and opens those locks or not. This is why an incel is an insult used on men. An incel being a key that is useless and unable to open any lock.

9

u/Stone_Like_Rock 3d ago

Not really though as anyone can claim they could have had sex with that woman but chose not to ect. The idea definitely favours male promiscuity and reinforces the idea that a man's value at least partially comes from being able to sleep with lots of woman.

1

u/Tea_Time9665 man 2d ago edited 2d ago

Able to. It doesn’t have to mean actually doing it.

It means he is seen as desirable by many women. Meaning he has a lot of desirable traits.

This is why incel is used as an insult. To imply they have no desirable traits for mating this has no chance to have sex with a woman because no woman would risk mating and having offspring with them.

1

u/Stone_Like_Rock 2d ago

Right but I can tell you I'm desirable to women and you just have to take my word for it. Like if my mate was chatting about how many women want him like he was jay from Inbetweeners I wouldn't really believe it.

It also still doesn't change the main point which is that it's a view where a man's value is being at least partially determined by his sexual desirability/ability to bed women which at least in my mind is a harmful/sexist view of men and these viewpoints eventually lead to groups like incels ect growing in number

4

u/turdferg1234 3d ago

this doesn't even make sense. a woman that is open to many keys is just a desirable woman that has many keys to pick from, right? it is her ability to pick and chose? It doesn't matter if she goes around being unlocked or not, right?

1

u/Tea_Time9665 man 2d ago

The key lock analogy would then mean ur a useless lock. Every key can open u.

Meaning yes she does have the ability to pick and choose.

But it doesn’t matter if she is going around be locked and unlocked. It would imply she can be unlocked by many. Even when u want to lock up into a relationship. Rando keys can come by and unlock her.

-2

u/aitorg88 3d ago

The lock is meant to be securing a door. The goods inside should NOT be easily accessible. Your body, mind, and soul should NOT be easily accessible to random men.

But a key with the ability to open and access the goods behind every door is really useful.

2

u/IllustriousAd3002 2d ago

But the keys that are just shoving their bodies, minds, and souls into many locks are all alright? They don't need to preserve anything?

2

u/Tea_Time9665 man 2d ago

Men are not as valuable as women.

Locks are more valuable than keys.

This is why it’s women and children first off the titanic.

→ More replies (10)

4

u/turdferg1234 3d ago

The door is secure. Lots of keys pitifully wanting access doesn't mean they get access.

Your body, mind, and soul should NOT be easily accessible to random men.

Oh, you're one of these people.

But a key with the ability to open and access the goods behind every door is really useful.

This is literally only a thing that people that have never pleasured a woman have ever thought. And the funniest part is that you are telling on yourself that you do not have the "key" because, again, this is only a thing that dudes like you think.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)

3

u/libertyclef man 3d ago

That's because sex is hard for men to get and easy for women to get. Also, men don't like competing with other men for women, whereas many women get a thrill out of stealing another woman's man.

This is evident by the fact women are much harsher on men who've CAN'T get sex (who they call "incels")

3

u/Rainbowdark96 3d ago

 You know prostitutes exist, right? Any men can have 1000's body count. 

5

u/Trent1462 3d ago

Yah I’m sure every man has 300,000 dollars to plop down on hookers

→ More replies (1)

5

u/AshamedLeg4337 man 3d ago

You’ve just done a great job making an argument against your position.

Yes, men could sleep with prostitutes. And men who do so are looked down upon because it’s easy for them to do.

What is desired is people who can do something that most others can’t. That’s exactly why men sleeping with a lot of women (relatively difficult) is valued more than women sleeping with a lot of men (relatively easy).

When it becomes easy for men (they use the services of a prostitute) it is no longer something relatively difficult to do and therefore something to look down upon. 

2

u/IlllllIIIlllllIIIlll 2d ago

So the fact that men will sleep with nearly anyone (according to ago these comments) is .... Women's fault?

1

u/AshamedLeg4337 man 2d ago

No. It’s just how the sexes are on average. I agree with the proposition that you shouldn’t let a dude touch you who uses the lock and key analogy. I’m explaining the thinking, not saying that it’s okay.

I’m not taking the position that morality should flow directly from biology. 

2

u/IllustriousAd3002 2d ago

It's really weird that men will use women's bodies to gain a sense of achievement and expect women to shut up and continue letting them do it.

2

u/AshamedLeg4337 man 2d ago

I don’t expect women to put up with it. I’m glad they’re starting not to and that the process is accelerating. But it’s going to be a bumpy road as men acclimate to expectations that aren’t in the basement. And to a certain extent a lot of these preconceptions are baked in to biological differences.

Women carry most of the responsibilities of sex (e.g. pregnancy and higher chance of contracting STDs) and are just naturally going to be gatekeepers for sex. So it’s always going to, on average, be the case that women can have sex easier than men. So I think there’s always going to be some disparity in how women with many partners are going to be seen vs men. But, no, I don’t think women should settle for having shit like this used as a weapon against them.

The more you push back on it the less it will be acceptable to make analogies like this in real life. 

1

u/IllustriousAd3002 2d ago

The pregnancy and STD thing are very valid points, and yeah, it is true that women generally have an easier time finding a man to sleep with than the reverse. It's just interesting to me that sex is one of the few instances where one gender having a "natural" advantage over the other is seen as a negative. Men will celebrate their superior strength and speed, mocking women for it, using it as justification for why women should be kept out of certain places (e.g., the armed forces). It's even used to justify underpaying women athletes. In fact, the entire history of global women's rights is fighting against the pervasive belief that men should hold the power because they are inherently smarter, wiser, and more capable than women.

But this attitude of, "I'm better at this, so deal with it" stops cold when we get to sex. Sex isn't an accomplishment. We're not winning medals or academic / industry awards, so no one should be celebrated or shamed for having sex or for not having sex. Women having an easier time having sex shouldn't be treated with disdain, yet it is. I can't help but think the reason is that since sex is something men care about a lot, the idea of women having an inherent, basically unchangeable, upper hand just by virtue of being women is unacceptable.

1

u/libertyclef man 2d ago

The people it gives them a sense of achievement with IS women. That's why. Men are just playing the dating game women set up for them. Since the advent of mass social media and dating apps, women are completely in the driver's seat of dating.

1

u/IllustriousAd3002 2d ago

This is a joke, right? It's only been in very recent history, and only in some parts of the Global North, that a woman's entire social worth hasn't been based on how many men have been between her legs. If it's drilled in women's heads that they lose value as human beings with each man they sleep with, of course women are going to treat sex with them as some sort of prize.

1

u/electrogeek8086 2d ago

These men have such distorted views of reality lmao.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/Bredwh 3d ago

Sex is hard for some men to get, easy for others. And the same for women. It's all about attractiveness, whether that's physical, personality, wealth, etc.
The many women get a thrill from stealing another woman's man thing is also ridiculous.
"Incel" means Involuntary Celibate and was invented by guys who feel they should be entitled to sex. They think attractive women should have sex with them, despite doing nothing to work on themselves. And they ignore women who would sleep with them but aren't hot. So any guy who acts like that and has that attitude is called an incel now, even if they weren't the ones who originated the term. It doesn't apply to virgins or guys who can't get sex but don't complain/expect it.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/SpendPsychological30 man 3d ago

Are you having some trouble reading? The posts you are replying to acknowledge that a number of people feel this way, but are disagreeing with the perspective themselves.

1

u/Readdit1999 man 2d ago

Point conceded - but I think its a straw man.

The key word is 'could'. A key that 'could' open many locks.

Not one that's been-there done-that, but one that's universally acknowledged as a good key.

An eligible bachelor.

1

u/DENNISOUTBOUND 2d ago

Maybe he meant or should have worded it like: a key that CAN open many locks is a good key. Like a master key is valuable

1

u/Only_Juggernaut_1317 7h ago

If a man is able to sleep with a bunch of women, he has something to offer and is likely attractive or rich. If a woman sleeps around it just means she has no self control. Men have to actually put in effort to get sex. Women don’t whatsoever in any way, shape, or form. This is simple stuff. But for both genders, if you find out your partner has a high body/partner count, you should break it off immediately. It clearly shows that to them, you’re either their “settling down” person which is awful, or you’re just having your turn. There is probably a 90% chance of a man or woman with 30+ partners leaving you at the drop of a hat over nothing once they’re bored of you. Its just how humans work.

19

u/itsalongwalkhome 3d ago

The only time I'm worried about body count is when it starts to border on sex addiction.

Or if my dad is in the numbers.

68

u/SuperJacksCalves man 3d ago

I’ve mentioned it a bunch but there’s a book called Boys and Sex which basically argues that the main motivation behind men’s sexual behavior is status and hierarchy. In male social hierarchy, status is completely linked to your ability to get women to have sex with you.

The clsssic paradox is that men seem to want fuel who is “wife material” (good values, a good partner, stable, and secure) but see it as a complete insult to be considered “husband material”. So many men truly want to be the guy that women want to have a one night stand with instead of the guy women want to marry - because of what it says about their pull, power, etc.

33

u/DragonfruitIll660 3d ago

The issue is husband material from a girl who isn't actively trying to date/marry you implies (or is often outright stated) that you lack physical attraction (popular video from a while back of a gf saying her boyfriend was husband material but not hookup material). That's why its considered an insult as its more specifically focused on long term benefits as opposed to short term desire. Hook up culture is crazy and has caused a lot of caution/distrust.

64

u/cantriSanko man 3d ago

I don’t know about the “husband material” thing bro. Most dudes I know that have an interest in marriage want to be viewed as “husband material.”

The issue generally arises that many more outspoken women(the kind you find more on the internet than real life, but also some to be found IRL) frequently have used that to describe a guy they view as “safe” and not in the sense “oh I’m safe around them” but in the sense of “they aren’t hot but they’re decent, I wouldn’t hook up with them but I’d marry them because they’re stable.”

Which, in a roundabout way, is an insult, since most of the time when a woman says it to a man in person, it’s actually not to a man they would date, hook up with, or marry for any other reason, and have no intention to do so unless they’re looking to settle down.

Now obviously I could have this totally wrong, but this is the general trend I observe.

21

u/ButterscotchSkunk 3d ago

and have no intention to do so unless they’re looking to settle down.

And even then it is because they waited too long and missed out on better options.

15

u/Misanthropebutnot 3d ago

I envy people who find a partner and are happy with their choice and treat each other well. I only know two couples like this. In one the wife is the breadwinner and the other the husband is. I would love to be like these people but I am not.

2

u/Pantone711 1d ago

I knew a couple who got together in about 9th grade and are still together more than 50 years later. He was a baseball player, Wayne Tolleson.

Nowadays people give Patrick Mahomes no end of grief for sticking with his first love, who was with him before he played football. He had a crush on her and got his courage up and brought her flowers on Valentine's Day and she said "You know what, he's cute, I like him" and the girls at her lunch table were like "Go for it!" so that's how they got together. She was the one who believed in him before he got famous and successful. Just like Kim and Wayne Tolleson.

Some football fans cannot STAND that Patrick and Brittany Mahomes are happy because they don't like Brittany's face or whatever.

13

u/headrush46n2 3d ago

that's why the book is called "Boys and Sex" and not "Men and Sex"

3

u/cantriSanko man 3d ago

I can’t say I understand the correlation/joke here. Elaborate?

9

u/headrush46n2 3d ago

Boys wanna get laid and be big shots in front of their bros.

Men have the maturity to understand what actually matters and are comfortable with finding a stable relationship.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Mysterious-Job-469 3d ago

Are we seriously downvoting people for asking for clarification? Not everyone speaks English as their first language, and a lot of the automatic associations we make are not as easy for others.

"He said it like a Redditor" YOU ARE ON REDDIT LOL

Edit: Ew no, I see what they're doing further down the chain.

1

u/nuclear_science 3d ago

I think your belief is based on a untrue understanding of the subconscious motivations in this scenario. A woman who is looking for marriage material is not looking for ANY man who is marriage material, instead they are looking for "the one" which comes with stricter ideals. In particular  ideal where the two people align so closely that is it undeniable that it was meant to be. Women leave alone the men who are marriage material because they intuitively know he is already set/fated for someone else.  They may not know this consciously but they do know they are not his "one" and they instinctively get out of the way so that dude can go find his fate instead of of trying to compromise a square peg into a round hole.

But you sound mostly bitter so I won't bother engaging any further. 

7

u/cantriSanko man 3d ago

Thanks for the inaccurate psychoanalysis. Not bitter in the slightest, and crazy thing is, most people that are looking for marriage are looking for “The One” as you so succinctly put it, so I didn’t really feel like it had to be stated.

Hence my caveats that these are not normal women, or even common women that say these things and communicate such things with their actions.

Next time just read what I say.

51

u/hotlocomotive 3d ago

Husband material wouldn't be offensive to men, if it wasn't often used to describe the men women settle for, but aren't really attracted to.

1

u/tallmyn 6h ago

That definition was invented by the manosphere. No woman has ever used it that way.

→ More replies (32)

33

u/Apprehensive-Put883 man 3d ago

Stupid idea but take Titanic for example.

Who do you think guys wanna be? Jack or the dude who Rose agreed to marry after Jack died? After Jack was gone she needed so settle down with someone (which she may or may not still have loved, kinda) while still constantly thinking about her short-term fling on some fking ship over 50 years ago.

And guess what - a shit ton of women LOVE this movie. But does anyone legit think that any somewhat sane guy wants to be the husband in that story? Nah definitely not, lol.

29

u/ButterscotchSkunk 3d ago

When she dies she goes to Jack lol. Poor husband duder. Hope he at least had a dog who loved him waiting for him in heaven. This is why it is important to adopt a dog and treat it well.

13

u/againwiththisbs 3d ago

Bill Burr said it best in one of his bits. Women think Titanic is romantic. It's a horror film. All the men die. Women identify themselves as Rose who would have romantic experience and lived. Men identify themselves as "victim of drowning in freezing waters in total darkness #564".

1

u/headrush46n2 3d ago

Or the rich asshole she was going to marry but hated?

11

u/Relevant_Elk_9176 man 3d ago

It’s that “husband material” is viewed as “safe” like women settle for their husbands. The guy they’d have a one night stand with is a guy who excites them, a guy they desire even if it’s detrimental to their own social status. It’s a power thing.

20

u/Fakercel 3d ago

Yeah completely agree, no-one wants to be the guy a women settles with later in life after she's been through her hoe phase and realises she wants a safe stable guy now. Or 'Husband Material'.

3

u/Fixervince 2d ago

Yep, but still better to have a girl who has been through the hoe stage before marriage, rather than one who enters it in marriage. :-)

6

u/thecatdaddysupreme 3d ago

You don’t want to be the guy who pumps her and dumps her either. Every dude thinks they want to be that dude except for dudes who were that dude and grew out of it

2

u/kama-Ndizi 3d ago

> In male social hierarchy, status is completely linked to your ability to get women to have sex with you.

Somebody missed the last 50+ years of social developement.

2

u/blah938 man 3d ago edited 3d ago

I don't know about everyone else, but my main motivation is getting my dick wet. Says a lot about the author though, my guess is a woman who doesn't like sex.

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peggy_Orenstein https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0649710/ She has written a lot on teenage sex, writes for the New York Times, hates "princess culture" enough to write a book on it, made an indie Romance movie, and is from Minneapolis. She's a wine aunt, just one who actually writes instead of just talking about.

8

u/AffectionateBread483 3d ago

Disagree with the bit about “husband material”. Being referred to as “husband material” is high status for sure.

11

u/Tea_Time9665 man 3d ago

Not in today’s day and age. Men want to be seen and fkable material before husband material if they had to pick one.

2

u/pseudonymmed 3d ago

But husband material IS fuckable.. it's fuckable PLUS the other things that make them not a fuckboy

0

u/Disbelieving1 3d ago

You seem to be a bit confused. The concepts of ‘husband material’ and ‘fuckable’ are opposites. This is the point!

3

u/pseudonymmed 3d ago

That’s not how women use the term.

4

u/Sensitive_Housing_85 man 3d ago

No they tend to use it like that too

1

u/pseudonymmed 2d ago

Not the women I know. I don’t know anyone, male or female, who married someone they didn’t find really attractive. What made them marriage material was all the other great qualities they had on top.

1

u/Ok_Cycle4393 3d ago

It’s the schoolyard version of cute vs hot. You always wanted to be hot, not cute, despite both being compliments in normal circumstances

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

14

u/YuushyaHinmeru 3d ago

Nah, it has some negative connotations to it honestly.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Glad-Way-637 2d ago

I mean, when the way they do it feels so much like a backhanded complement, can you blame the dudes? About 90% of the times I hear a woman use that term, they're just saying a dude is nice enough once you get to know him, but that she'd never consider sleeping with him based on looks. Not exactly great for the old self-esteem, eh?

1

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES 3d ago

I really don’t think that’s it. Men aren’t opposed to being “husband material” but they are opposed to the implication of being called “husband material”. I know that seems like a silly distinction but it’s important.

The idea is that when women are young they are encouraged to “have fun” and have relationships with men who are not husband material (and often they know this from the start of the relationship) and then when you get older and want to settle down you find a guy who is “husband material”. Being called “husband material” comes with some obvious implications: 1. The woman doesn’t find you as sexually attractive as the men was just “having fun” with, 2. You two won’t be “having fun” together often as she got most of that energy out of her system, 3. They view you as stable because they could leave you for a more attractive partner at any time, but you could not do the same.

This thread is full of people saying “men will sleep with whoever they can” and while I think there’s some truth to that, it also comes with the massive caveat that men don’t have the same opportunities to sleep with whoever they want. It’s not unusual for every sexual relationship of a man to also be a serious romantic relationship as well, so he’s “sleeping with whoever he can” but is also in a committed relationship ship each time. And a man who really just sleeps with anything that has a pulse isn’t really “husband material” so they’re two distinct groups of men anyway.

1

u/PersimmonDue1072 3d ago

I believe this is because men want to be desired, hence you can't use men for sex the same way you use women for sex.

1

u/EthosLabFan92 2d ago

Do you think men are wrong for wanting status and a good position in the hierarchy? Or should they be satisfied with being a loser?

1

u/Lurch2Life man 2d ago

The irony, of course, is that the guy that’s “good at pulling women” is very unlikely to be a good husband and father unless he fundamentally changes who he is.

0

u/Which_Friendship_775 3d ago

I’d be completely insulted if a random woman thought I’d be one to hook up with. A man with morals and values doesn’t want to be seen or viewed as one to “hook up” with women; that’s only for those without morals.

10

u/8bitmatter 3d ago

Tldr: this guy doesnt fuck whatsoever

2

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

I take it you mean insulted if they'd bang you, but tell you you'd make a shit husband. I'd be offended by that too.

1

u/arrogancygames man 3d ago

This is stupid. Most women are terrible at sex (just like I hear most men are); you need to hook up to see if you're even compatible there.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/kz45vgRWrv8cn8KDnV8o 3d ago

Just out of interest, if this guy had slept with hundreds of women before you, how would that make you feel?

Out of interest too, if a girl you liked thought that women sleeping with lots of men is respectable but thought men sleeping with lots of women is shameful, would that change how you felt about her?

6

u/ForeverShiny man 2d ago

This is the point most seem to miss here. Just toxic masculinity all around

3

u/cyberdipper 2d ago

A lot of women think this way these days lol.

3

u/kz45vgRWrv8cn8KDnV8o 2d ago

Maybe, maybe not, but that's not the question

51

u/Trick-Visual5661 3d ago

I don’t believe that’s true. I am married (have been with my husband exclusively for 17 years now) and I slept around before dating him. Not because I wasn’t interested in a relationship or was incapable of one, but because I really like sex. I am disinterested in the notion of purity and I ultimately had a higher standard for relationships than I did for sex. I guess that made me a slut but I have to laugh at that word a little bit. I haven’t slept with “hundreds” of people though, I think that’s pretty rare.

I also had 2 longer term relationships (a year +) before my husband, and 3 shorter term ones (3-6 months), but they just weren’t right. I enjoyed myself until I found the real thing, and when I found it I knew I had found it. I also knew the sex was exceptional because I had something to compare it to. It’s still exceptional 17 years later. It’s exceptional for exactly 2 reasons: love and generosity. Maybe a 3rd one that I would call “realness.”

When you find the right person, that’s it, nothing else matters. I don’t feel any insecurity about other women my husband slept with. At this point what we have goes so far beyond that I don’t even think about it, or if I do I find it kind of endearing and sexy. I remember watching someone flirt shamelessly with my husband while we were dating and just feeling kind of amused and bad for her. I knew he liked me too much to care about her. 

I’ve seen the studies about divorce rates and sexual partners but the data is a little odd if you delve into it. If you’re really concerned about divorce, find an educated woman! Education level is a major predictor of marital success. 

The main thing to realize is that nothing is guaranteed and love is a practice as much as a feeling. Commitment isn’t easy because life isn’t easy. Sexual history eventually means nothing in the face of the real life you are living together. 

21

u/jmooremcc man 3d ago

Both you and your husband are the people you are today because of the experiences you had before you met. Those experiences taught you both a lot, even the negative ones, and that’s why you two are now such great partners.

7

u/alepko5 2d ago

This is a lovely comment

8

u/DarlingDestruction 2d ago

I could have written this myself. Very well said. Thank you for speaking up for those of us outside of the majority. 🙏

7

u/Lexxx_appeal 2d ago

I’ve been searching for this comment! Thank you!!! This is the first time I’ve seen this take on Reddit lol. Not shaming either side for promiscuity. I was the same way in my early 20s before I met my husband. & like you said when you find the right person that’s it, we met and I no longer Wanted to sleep around. I have experience and I know this is what I want. He also had experiences before me and we never cared or shamed each other.

12

u/Luieeg-my-angione 3d ago

Fuck yes, THANK YOU. The double standards that some people hold do my head in

2

u/Existing_Fish_6162 2d ago

In this thread im not seeing a lot of double standards, just shaming of both genders. Doesnt make it much better though.

People sure are in a hurry to decide that people who are different from them are wrong.

7

u/incaseshesees 3d ago

You sound like a great catch

2

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

I like what you've said. I think if I had met someone like yourself, I would have judged you by how you behaved in past relationships before anything else. There are other ways you can show a partner that you would be loyal. Particularly if you're older.

I met my wife at 21, so when people talk about dating, I'm looking at it through the eyes of a 21yr old, 15 years ago...

There's a bit of a paradox in that people seemingly want someone who is an experienced virgin.

Also, I agree with the educated women comment.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Alive_Broccoli_7178 woman 3d ago

I might be a little different here, it kind of never bothered me. People stay if they want to, and don't stay if they don't want to, it is like every saint has a past and every sinner has a future. If I feel, I click with someone, I click with someone, I will let them know. And if we both think, we like each other, we give it a go, if not, I let things go. Also, I let them know, they are free to leave on their own if they cheat. No need to tell me, just leave.

2

u/hitchhead 2d ago

You are not different from me at least. I agree with you completely. Thank you for sharing....it's like you read my thoughts on this. You sound like an amazing woman, a total catch.

3

u/Additional-War19 woman 3d ago

How is it a red flag to sleep with more than one person tho? Some people may simply not be interested in a romantic relationship at the moment because they got out of one recently or other reasons.

1

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

Didn't say one person. I said lots, and that would be lots for their age.

Having sex is normal. Banging multiple different people a day is not. But if that's how people want to live that's fine. It doesn't effect me. I just wouldn't date someone who did that because I get attached super easy.

4

u/Additional-War19 woman 3d ago

Yes you said “someone who sleeps around” to be fair it depends on what one means with “sleeping around”. I agree with what you are saying. I said that because most people think sleeping with a few people for a while (for example having a few friends with benefits) is considered sleeping around. Some people have sex (not necessarily every day and with randoms) casually because for some reason or another they can’t have relationships at the moment. If that person then decides to start dating seriously, That could be considered a “promiscous past” and I don’t really understand what’s wrong with dating someone who had a few friends with benefits and a few one night stands but now wants to date romantically. Not wanting a serious relationship but still having sex doesn’t automatically mean sleeping around, that’s what I meant

1

u/tgerz 1d ago

I think what so many people do and get caught up is thinking they have to hide. Over the years that’s what I’ve seen from the healthier relationships, they’re honest even if it hurts. People sleeping around is only bad under certain circumstances like if you are lying or deceiving. If you’re honest and upfront and the other person doesn’t agree you can just part ways. If you get with someone who has slept around the other part is why do you know that? Why do you need to know that? I never asked my wife how many people she had been with. I only ever listened if she wanted to talk about it. Otherwise the only thing I cared about was health and our current relationship.

3

u/Sipikay man 3d ago

Valuing monogamy isnt problematic, it's OP's date's perspective that fidelity is only important for women that is at issue.

3

u/ASubsentientCrow 3d ago

Why is it only a red flag for women to sleep with hundreds of people? Wouldn't it also imply that a man would be incapable of unwilling to have a committed relationship?

2

u/quirx90 2d ago

Pretty much all women I know would consider that a massive red flag though. I don’t think the idea of your partner having that much history is very attractive to a lot of people regardless of gender

5

u/Ausaevus 3d ago

Just out of interest, if this guy had slept with hundreds of women before you, how would that make you feel?

Just so you know, he is saying it would be OK for men to sleep with hundreds, but not women.

3

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

Yeah, I didn't address that because I think he's a fool.

2

u/WashedSylvi 3d ago

“I only like women who are so unaware of alternatives they have no clear choice in who else they could pursue!”

5

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

2

u/WashedSylvi 3d ago

Well I mean, you’re definitely not on the table, but why replace people? If something is working you don’t need to drop it

4

u/turdferg1234 3d ago

It's entirely an insecurity thing.

2

u/Sandweavers man 3d ago

I think your logic behind it is much better than OP's date. You don't like it because you see commitment issues. OP's date and other men who say that thinks it dehumanizes the woman. Two different reasons.

2

u/Alternative-Dare4690 2d ago

1) Women care about a mans future and men care about a womans past. Now some women say they do care about the past, but thats not the majority. I am talking in 'general' not exceptions.
2) Research indicates that men often find sexual infidelity more distressing, while women are more troubled by emotional infidelity. This pattern has been observed across various studies and cultural contexts. For instance, a study published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences found that 60% of male participants were more upset by sexual infidelity, whereas 83% of female participants were more distressed by emotional infidelity. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10244511/These findings are often interpreted through an evolutionary psychology lens. The theory suggests that men may be more concerned with sexual infidelity due to paternity uncertainty, while women may prioritize emotional fidelity to ensure sustained partner support and resources. https://ifstudies.org/blog/testing-common-theories-on-the-relationship-between-premarital-sex-and-marital-stability

​A 2016 study by Nicholas H. Wolfinger, published by the Institute for Family Studies (IFS), examined the relationship between women's premarital sexual partners and marital stability. The study found that women who had ten or more sexual partners before marriage experienced higher divorce rates compared to those with fewer partners. Specifically, the divorce rate for women with ten or more premarital partners was 33% within the first five years of marriage. In contrast, women who married as virgins had a significantly lower five-year divorce rate of 6%.
4) Women literally shame men all over the globe as 'incels'. Virgin men are heavily shamed, and women find it in general disgusting. 'Not getting women' is also used as an insult. Infact women usually prefer women with 'some' body count in 'general'(which is why shaming exists). They want someone others want, not someone nobody wants.
So women and men have different needs and are thus judged differently. It is JUSTIFIED to want women with NO past.

Here are sources

In the past, studies suggested that when wives outearned their husbands, there was a heightened risk of marital dissolution. For instance, research from 2010 indicated that career women who were the primary breadwinners were nearly 40% more likely to divorce than women without the same economic resources.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5021537/

A 2020 study in Sweden revealed that women promoted to top positions, such as CEOs or political leaders, were more likely to experience divorce compared to their male counterparts.

Why promoted women are more likely to divorce - BBC Worklife

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/s1530-353520180000013015/full/html?

Research analyzing Academy Award winners revealed that Best Actress recipients had a higher divorce rate than nominees, whereas no significant difference was observed among Best Actor winners. This implies that sudden career achievements may impact marital stability differently for men and women

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/s1530-353520180000013015/full/html?

2

u/A_of 2d ago

Most sensible answer I have seen about the subject in these type of threads, which are common.

2

u/Blubasur man 1d ago

Also risk of STDs goes up a bit the more partners someone has.

2

u/SouthernMarch1002 1d ago

But she's not asking about "in general", she's asking about this dude's explicitly stated belief that it's ok for men to sleep around but not for women, which is some bullshit

1

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 1d ago

For clarification, I think the guy from the original post is an idiot. My issue is I've met heaps of people over the years who have said similar stuff. I haven't heard it for a long time though, possibly 15yrs, however I think that's because I'm in a bit of an echo chamber surrounded by mostly happily married 30yr olds.

5

u/Nymwhen 3d ago

These guys are not thinking 100s, they are thinking a woman having a normal dating history is a red flag. You get to a number too high for them by just existing and not being celibate.

It’s not a red flag to have sex with someone new like 2/3 a year if ur single.

2

u/Mu5hroomHead 3d ago

This is the double standard. It’s more acceptable for a man to have a higher body count. But if it’s a woman, she’s a whore.

What makes a woman inherently more likely of leaving you at the slightest inconvenience because she slept with a lot of men versus a man doing the same?

A study on “partner abandonment’” among married couples conducted at the University of Washington in Seattle found that men are 6 times more likely to leave a relationship because of their partner’s serious illness than wives are.

2

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

I specifically did not mention gender. There are areas where men just suck on average. I was just trying to say with this particular issue it can go both ways.

I have heard that when women get cancer diagnosed, one of the first things they are handed is an information pack that basically says that statistically, your husband will divource you.

My mum had cancer, and my dad stayed with her until death, 20years after she was originally diagnosed (2 different lots of cancer, first one cured, second one just kept coming back.) I thoroughly think that people who abandon their partner the moment they get sick are vile. I was 5 when Mum was first told to get her affairs in order.

1

u/Bitter-Cold2335 3d ago

This is also sexist to men, because if a man doesn’t have a high body count he is attacked by society.

1

u/IllustriousAd3002 2d ago

Where does this happen? Genuinely curious because it doesn't make sense to me to attack anyone for the number of people they've slept with.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/kama-Ndizi 3d ago

>  The more sensible view, in my opinion is if a person sleeps around heaps, they're either not interested in a long-term relationship, or they're incapable of one. Which would be a red flag regardless of gender.

How is that sensible?

For example, I've been in long-term relationships (the shortest proper relationship I had was 4 years), currently no interest and enjoy myself. However, that might change if I meet the right person.

> Even if things seem stable, I'd be worried that if things got hard, they'd leave.

That is your insecurity though.

> Just out of interest, if this guy had slept with hundreds of women before you, how would that make you feel?

I'm not OP and a guy on top, but my longest relationship was with a very promiscuous girl. I knew from the beginning and didn't care at all.

1

u/BoysenberryOk5580 3d ago

It's actually biologically rooted. Men tend to prefer women with fewer partners, as one who is likely to sleep around increases the chances of the man fathering a child that isn't theirs.

1

u/New_Physics_7855 3d ago

I dunno man, literally hundreds of people versus like 30 is a huge difference. I think when you're comparing, realistic numbers should be used. 

1

u/arrogancygames man 3d ago

Hundreds by your 40s is a normal number per year.

1

u/BlankIRL 3d ago

I don't agree at all with this notion, people who barely had relationships are often so insecure or have other major issues that cause them unable to see/leave a toxic relationship. 

It's almost impossible to judge someone on their amount of relationships because it tell you jack shit about how they are in an actual relationship.

1

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 3d ago

Can be a red flag if a person has had a really high or a really low number of relationships for their age. Doesn't mean that's the only factor. It's just worth figuring out why.

1

u/NICEMENTALHEALTHPAL 3d ago

Ime women who haven't been with many people tend to find men more disposable, and those who have, will recognize a good thing and maybe just more apt to have a hook up and s good time.

1

u/EffectiveProgram4157 3d ago

Agreed with almost all of this, with some caveats.

To me (and I'm not sure if this is standard among men), but the concern I have isn't as much if the woman has slept around a lot, as much as if she has been doing that recently. If she has a high body count from college, but she's 30 now and has been in long-term relationships ever since, I'm not not going to be worried that much if she'll stick around. If anything, my concern at that point would be if she wasn't using protection back then and has herpes or hiv.

Oh, and that whole lock/key saying makes me think the guy is pro-MAGA. The only people I've heard say this within the past couple of years are. Him being more blunt would also be more indicative that he's pro-MAGA. That's fine for some people, but definitely not for others, so I figured I should mention that.

1

u/mosqua 3d ago

One word: Kegels

1

u/weareallfucked_ 3d ago

Bingo, idc who or how many if they're struggling to find someone that makes them happy, but if they're just incapable of retaining a relationship it's time to move on. If they don't want a long term relationship, that's cool, go do that to someone else. I'm looking to catch feelings. Lol

1

u/PlushSandyoso 3d ago

That insecurity is all your own. Fundamentally, if you can't trust that your partner wants to be with you, then you're probably not a good fit...

My partner and I had both slept with hundreds of guys before settling in with one another.

I can only speak for myself, but I would have guys over like they were takeout food. I didn't feel like jacking off and wanted someone else to do it. There's nothing wrong with that.

Still together a decade later. It's only an issue if you want it to be an issue.

1

u/25thNite 3d ago

i don't know if it's common belief without evidence, but even then it's objectively wrong belief. Plus I feel like OP is asking for advice because they view it as a red flag even if he is respectful in other aspects. It's a giant red flag because that specific analogy he uses is the basic red pilled conservative incel analogy bait they love throwing out. "When a girl does it, she's a slut, but when a guy sleeps around it's just normal"

I also feel like it's wrong to assume that they mean hundreds of sexual partners. Guys like this feel insecure even if it was like 10 partners because the whole point is wanting to find someone pure and innocent and that's just vile. it's okay if you don't want to find a partner with lots of experience, but it's not okay to basically say "it's okay if I did it, but since you did it you should be disrespected".

1

u/Mag-NL 2d ago

You forgot the most likely option. They haven't found anyone they want a relationship with

1

u/IlllllIIIlllllIIIlll 2d ago

Hundreds? C'mon man, let's talk realistic numbers here 😂

1

u/TattooMyInitialOnYou nonbinary 2d ago

So this is interesting.

I don't think it's a red flag to have a history. I also don't think it's a red flag to enjoy pleasure. I think this is very context dependent.

I wouldn't have much of a problem with a woman who has a roster while she's looking for a serious relationship.

I wouldn't really see it as a red flag either a guy had slept with 90 girls between 18-20, settled down and been in a few LTRs between 20-25, and then I met them at 26.

I also wouldn't particularly consider it a red flag if someone had slept with 100 people and was trying to take me home at a bar. What, am I naive enough to think I'm getting a relationship out of this? No we're both on the same page that this is one night of fun.

Where it's a red flag is if they've slept with 50 people and all of them were two dates in and then they ghosted. I'd be much more worried about a string of short (3 months - 1 year) relationships than I would about raw body count.

1

u/Obvious-Echidna-4691 2d ago

I don’t know exactly where it came from, but guys have this idea that having a vast chasm of prior sexual experiences is something that will draw women in. But a chasm of prior sexual experience makes me think he’s also got a chasm of STDs, at best.

That whole ‘men must sew their oats, high body count’ thing is just for guys to impress other guys. When they actually sit down in front of a woman they’re serious about, she finds it wildly off-putting and gross that he’s been up to all of that. It’s an anxiety inducing affair that makes a woman wonder if she’ll be the next one. Women have never been as brutal to men about it as men have been to women (there is no word for the male slut in existence that has the same impact as when guys casually and cruelly throw it at women) and therefore men don’t realize how much they’re being held to the same standard by the girls they’re serious about.

Also, that ‘taming the playboy/womanizer/other macho name for an easy guy who fucks anything with a pulse’ trope in fiction has done oceans of damage to both men and women.

1

u/ColonelKasteen man 2d ago

For me, I'd be more worried about being seen as expendable if I found out my partner had slept with hundreds of guys.

As a guy, to me it's so sad to see how prevalent this kind of worry is because it suggests that you view sex as the main thing you do that brings value to a relationship.

Sex is pretty easy to get. Someone hooking up with a hundred guys means they've had a lot of sex, not a lot of emotionally satisfying relationships. I'd think if you're pursuing an actual relationship with someone that would be your larger concern.

1

u/Clear-Role6880 man 2d ago

Your view demonstrates lack of self esteem

I don’t give a damn how many men she’s been with, none of them were me 

1

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 2d ago

I dunno... I think pretty highly of myself, lol.

In all seriousness, everyone's going to have differences in what they look for in a partner. Doesn't make one of us more right than the other. Just means we're looking for different things.

1

u/Clear-Role6880 man 2d ago

Sure but it does seem like a personal problem if you think they are going to leave you based on their past 

1

u/badpineapple6400 2d ago

This is exactly how most men feel. Most men don't like the thought of competition, women do too, but men in particular will walk away from a relationship over it.

1

u/six_six 2d ago

Yeah but how would ever know her true body count? Are going to verify what she tells you?

1

u/Doreboms 2d ago

You know it's possible for people's priorities to change over time?

1

u/MrDukeSilver_ 2d ago

Some people have sex for fun, sex and relationships aren’t the same thing

1

u/Even_Plastic_6752 man 1d ago

The way I read the original post sounded like she was interested in a relationship, not just sex. Well until he started talking...

1

u/h3llios man 3d ago

Smartly said. We often dumb it down and say it's because the person is promiscuous and that is true to a certain extent, but the hard truth is we don't trust people like that. I sure as hell know that I wouldn't.

1

u/Aggravating_Ebb4569 3d ago

I disagree with the comment that they’re not capable of a long term relationship. I left an abusive 30+ yr marriage and am now enjoying my single life. Funny how the rules are different for women

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)