Promiscuity

[Anonymous No.11067238]

I've seen a lot of graphs like pic related thrown around, and there's also the "having sex with multiple partners lowers women's pair bonding ability".
But how much of it is actually true? Is this topic even studied thoroughly? What are the effects of promiscuity in men and women (if there are any), and are there any differences?

[Anonymous No.11067241]

>>11067238
>"having sex with multiple partners lowers women's pair bonding ability"

why put it in such complicated terms? people have behavioral inertia. if someone's promiscuous and unfaithful before marriage, they'll probably continue to be promiscuous and unfaithful after marriage.

[Anonymous No.11067245]

>>11067241
This is false

Many women date assholes when they're young, but they get burnt out from them because they're assholes, so they decide to date nice guys when they open their eyes.

[Anonymous No.11067247]

>>11067238
It's not that much studied because it's hugely taboo in our feminist and sex positive society.

[Anonymous No.11067250]

>>11067241
This. It's not necessarily a causal link.

[Anonymous No.11067261]

>>11067245
>ride the dick carousel then settle for some beta cuck when she becomes an old hag
cringe

[Anonymous No.11067268]

>>11067245
look at dis nigga

[Anonymous No.11067272]

>>11067238
It's true. You know what also completely fucks you ability to have decent relationships with people? Spending all day on 4channel

[Anonymous No.11067277]

>>11067245
Kek

[Anonymous No.11067290]

>>11067245
>, but they get burnt out from them
more like: they age and can no longer get the chad so the only option they have is settle

[Anonymous No.11067291]

>>11067245
>when they open their eyes.
They never open their eyes. They will keep fucking assholes and cheating on regular men.

[Anonymous No.11067295]

who the fuck even does this kind of "research"

[Anonymous No.11067299]

>>11067295
You can do it if you do a bachelors of science in gender studies or something. Or maybe a minor in gender studies

[Anonymous No.11067306]

>>11067238

lmfao who made this graph? the vatican?

[Anonymous No.11067327]

>>11067245

people change but they don't change on a dime. of course there's an association between promiscuity after marriage and promiscuity before marriage. it would be shocking if there wasn't.

my point is that no, it doesn't destroy their "pair bonding ability". they were just unfaithful and promiscuous to begin with and never broke the habit.

[Anonymous No.11067339]

>>11067238
These graphs got popularized by Lauren Southern and Molyneux the right wing yourubers and in turn those come from the Heritage Foundation or rando blogs.
They are misrepresenting data by doing things like playing with the definition of non marital vs pre marital like the graph you posted. Furthermore these "studies" don't account for many factors such ar religious beliefs.

[Anonymous No.11067518]

>>11067339
I kind of wonder if there's any Muslims in the data, if I had an agenda those would be the first people I surveyed.

[Anonymous No.11067766]

>>11067268
XD

[Anonymous No.11067782]

>>11067339
It doesn't matter, you cant argue with redpilled common sense. The study isn't even necessary but at least it serves as a visual.

[Anonymous No.11067788]

>>11067238
>"having sex with multiple partners lowers women's pair bonding ability".
i'd think it was the other way around, women with low pair-bonding ability and desire just fuck around till they can't due to old age and settle with some betabuxxer to support them.

[Anonymous No.11067804]

>>11067339
Is a girl or
>>shu-shut the fuck up, my girlfriend wasn't a whore before we met! Just because I let her talk with her ex boyfriend in private on Saturday evenings doesn't mean anything! Do you know how difficult it must be away from your partner then exercise so much you come back sweaty and musky with hair messed up? You guy's got some growing up to do.

[Anonymous No.11067811]

>>11067245
Lmao. If those old hags could still fuck 20 year old chads, they would never settle.

[Anonymous No.11067839]

>>11067804
this

[Anonymous No.11067924]

>>11067839
Kek

[Anonymous No.11068032]

>>11067804
>>11067782
Truly top notch arguments

[Anonymous No.11068609]

>>11067272
Actually this place really helped me in that regard, because it helps me understand other people's perspectives.

[Anonymous No.11068622]

>>11068032
Shit arguments don't deserve good counterarguments.

[Anonymous No.11068680]

>>11068032
I think youre a girl. And a rape victim. You are aren't you? Pathetic cunt. You deserved it.

[Anonymous No.11068682]

>>11068680
>he thinks there are women on /sci/
Who hurt you, anon?

[Anonymous No.11068687]

>>11068682
Nobody. Anyone else could tell because I don't go around saying cringe, faggy canned internet humor phrases like "who hurt you"

[Anonymous No.11068689]

>>11068682
>i'm not a vagina
responds with the most generic vaginal response. lmao.

[Anonymous No.11068761]

>>11067238

It's basically indoctrination via ignorance from experience. Females who find themselves in "virgin" bride territory are usually dissuaded or isolated from situations that lead to multiple sex partners. This is because of either religious reasons, heavy social pressures and/or high economic value of a untouched young wife. If a female is allowed to experience sexual relationships on her own terms she will usually explore multiple men. Mostly because non-committal relationships are fickle with nothing depending on the outcome. But also because our biology isn't exclusively interested in commitment. Obviously this will lead to her being devalued by men looking for marriage (not necessarily sex) and society to varied extent.

There's also the fact that some of the women could be lying in such studies. A virgin bride could have one partner on "record", maintain a "stable" marriage but have a lover on the side (which has been recorded in history multiple times) be it male or female.

Personally I don't trust such graphs too much. It's way to easy for someone to lie about sex partners even assuming they are in a stable marriage.

[Anonymous No.11069159]

>>11068680
holy shit thats a lot of projection
>4chan
>women
best case traps, which still doesn't count

[Anonymous No.11069164]

>>11068689
see>>11069159