Sloppy Tenths

I have the same double standard and have tried for years to adequately explain it to women who rarely, but sometimes, see the merits of my observations, so I’ll just stick my head in the sand and continue believing I am right without any regard for justification or actual truth on the matter. That’s what you do, right? You’ve done it to me twice now and have vowed to do it eternally more, so I feel justified in returning the favor.

There is a difference between a slut and a stud and it just is. I didn’t make it that way.

Women are innately turn on by male promiscuity because it signifies a man who has desirable characteristics and men are innately turned off by female promiscuity because it signifies undesirable characteristics since loose women are calling upon their sexual powers to compensate for lack of other perceived value.

Colloquially it has been said that women want one man to fulfill her every need while men want every woman to fulfill his one need.

With cats, it makes some evolutionary sense to slut-around since a female cat can give birth to kittens of several different fathers in the same litter, but women are not so and it makes no sense to run about collecting a variety of sperm. Whereas it makes sense for a man to run about fertilizing as many eggs as possible and it makes no sense to be chained down to only one egg. That’s just the way it evolved.

There is no double standard. Promiscuity is bad in both cases. The fact that men tend to be repulsed by female sluts and that women tend to be attracted to male sluts does not change that fact. What it indicates, if it indicates anything, is that men are more rational than women.

UR, you are coming across as rather insecure, and finicky, and I’m speaking of your general attitude here. I see that you hold many grudges against women, but those are also reflections of yourself, and your self image in relation to women, as well.

I think this kind of victim mentality stems from ignorance of women. You are asssuming that a woman’s first is her best match, and I don’t know where you’re coming up with that kind of reasoning.
It is a kind of insecure-possessive kind of thinking from a man’s point of view.
Maybe that’s why some of these women make it a point to tell their men that they are their “best’” or at least “really good”. But then it really just points to men comparing themselves to other men and about their own self image, and not the woman herself, who is used as a means. Is the man doing it for himself or for the woman? I think it’s all about himself, and so such women also play on it. So, a man gets an ego boost and the woman…whatever- ego boost, a power trip, influence, money, etc. Maybe that’s why certain men love prostitutes and tramps, in that they get to play the reciprocal pretend game. It’s all a lie but they both feel good doing it, kind of thing. Players and sluts - smears would understand.

Also, it’s not exactly pleasant for a woman to know about all the prostitutes a man she’s with has visited in the past. At least sluts choose up the ladder, not down. You speak of women being “dirtied” by other men, but which sex is the main transmitter of stds? Who brought syphilis to Europe? And would that happen if say women were the New World explorers instead?
Also, didn’t Nietzche die of neurosyphilis because of all the prostitutes he was visiting? Not very noble for a philosophy icon!

The Nietzsche scholar Joachim Köhler has attempted to explain Nietzsche’s life history and philosophy by claiming that Nietzsche was homosexual. Köhler argues that Nietzsche’s syphilis, which is “…usually considered to be the product of his encounter with a prostitute in a brothel in Cologne or Leipzig, is equally likely, it is now held, to have been contracted in a male brothel in Genoa.”[113] Köhler also suggests Nietzsche may have had a romantic relationship as well as a friendship with Paul Rée.[114] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich … _sexuality

I watched a video about syphilis where they concluded it’s usually a harmless strain residing in the population, but mutates in cities: the better hygiene, less sharing of utensils, the wearing of clothes, means the bacteria cannot move around, so it must mutate to survive. Civilization is syphillization.

youtube.com/watch?v=2bWNF_eNwvI

Is it a double-standard that men pee standing up?

Gender is not equal, and should not be treated equally.

Women reject anything that reminds everybody of their depreciated value (after they’ve fucked around with several or a dozen guys).

Women have a vested interest in claiming they have “equal” value as back when they were virgins and untouched. I’m a “woman-hater” for bringing this topic up.

No it’s not a double-standard.

Men find promiscuous women repulsive. Women find sexless men repulsive. There is no double-standard on sexual value. The more partners a woman has, the less value she has. The more partners a man has, the more value he has.

Quality is a factor too, obviously. A man who has a few, high-quality women, is doing better than a man who has a dozen average and below-average women.

Women can be judged by your first sexual partners. If young women let scummy, loser types of guys fuck them, then this indicates your quality, and whether you are worth pursuing or not. It signifies the quality of your filtering mechanism.

Think of it in terms of marriage, making a family, and having children. What kind of man would want to look at his wife, and know, that she’s the town bicycle? Or that she’s fucked some pretty low, scum types of guys?

Your sexual discretion, as a woman, is a primary means of judging you, your character, and your intellect. A smart woman, hypothetically, will have very high standards of men, and will only entertain the flirtations of “the best” types of men.

That’s my point. And you agree with me. So don’t pretend that you’re not.

Men do possess women. Are you not the property of your husband? Or does any man have rights to you? Can any man sleep with you? No? Then, again, don’t pretend you’re disagreeing with me.

Obviously women try to, or do convince the “sloppy tenths” that “you’re the best guy by far”. It’s a lie. But most men have a weak ego and will buy into it. Most men, being desperate, will settle for sloppy-tenths. According to the rationale of most males, “better last then nothing at all”. But according to Pride, I reject that reasoning. Why not go for more? Why not do better than sloppy-tenths?

Most men, having low standards and low quality, will settle for less though.

Irrelevant.

If women really cared about sexual disease and male promiscuity, then you would simply not have sex with promiscuous men. But most women cannot deny a promiscuous man, and I don’t mean buying prostitutes, but easily seducing women.

Here’s the rule. Most women, especially western women (including you), would rather have a stud (fucked a dozen high-quality babes) than a loser, a sexless male. This also drives the single-mother phenomenon. Women would rather be single-mothers, have the children from studs, than be stuck in a relationship or relationship with a lesser man. Women absolutely detest the sexless-male, beta-male.

So no, you and the others are completely wrong about “double-standards” here.

And it has nothing to do with personal resentment. I have had several successes with women, and several failures. I’m content with my personal life. But concerning who to chase after, as mentioned, I find it repulsive the thought of sloppy-tenths. I refuse to be last place. And more men throughout the western world should also refuse. Have some pride and dignity. Higher quality of men requires higher quality of women. A high-quality woman is one difficult to seduce and win-over. She won’t have many sexual partners, as average women (like you) do.

When I was younger, 20-ish, I believed in love. I believed that it signified something special. But that has since faded. Rather romance and seduction is mostly a numbers game. Women are not special or unique. So you have to pursue, up to a point, and then try a different woman. There is no “one-woman”. While it’s true there are higher qualities of women, they are rare. Women with intellect are rare, and most heavily guarded. They are most difficult to get at, seduce, and win-over. But those are the ones worth “settling-down” with.

When it’s too easy to win-over average women then, yes, a man’s general opinion of women will go down. It’s all about standards and quality. Holding women (or men) to higher standards, is good. That’s my principle. So you can’t say I don’t respect women. Respecting women (or men), means exactly that, holding others to the highest standards.

Let’s face the facts, again. I’m one of few men who actually cares about a woman’s intellect and her mind. Most men settle for beauty, alone. Beauty is enough, for most men. But that’s a lower standard. Having beauty and brains, that’s a higher standard. Who here even talks, or cares about, a woman’s mind??? I’ve never heard it, really. Of course, women are very defensive about their intellectual quality (or lack thereof). Because women invest so much in sex, revolve around sex, a woman’s mind is attached to her sexual judgment and proclivity. If a woman is fucking dozens of losers then how is this not a reflection of her deeper intellect? How does her standards, whether they are low or high, not reflect her reasoning and inner qualities?

That’s exactly what they reflect. What decision in life, is more important than with whom to mate with and give birth to?

My positions seems rare. Holding others to higher standards and also holding yourself to higher standards, is how you respect people, men or women. So as a man, if you “respect women”, then that means you ought to seek out women of higher quality. And the same for women, you ought to seek out men of higher quality. Any dissatisfaction, represents personal failure. Few or none can achieve higher standards. Therefore failure is always expected, and realistic. People settle for “second-best”, and “last-best”, very often. Men settle for sloppy-tenths. None of that contradicts what I’m saying.

There’s nothing wrong with me, or anybody else, promoting “first-best”. But the reaction is expected. Most people have given up on “first-best”. They’ve lost faith a long time ago. They’ve lost pride in themselves. Most people believe they don’t deserve it. But you can’t know unless you really go for it.

And before the next female responds to this thread, yes I “hate women”, I’ve “never been laid”, and “I have mommy issues”.

So your responses are no longer needed. They’ve been preempted. Try something new.

How is that even similar to deciding on personal ethics of sexuality? A woman seems no different from a man in this respect. A woman wants to get laid and enjoys getting laid. So does a man. =

I still don’t see why a woman ought to be criticized for choosing exactly the same promiscuous behavior which you find admirable in a man. :confused:

Not too long ago, I opened the door to leave a store only to be confronted by an attractive woman coming in. Years ago I would have said, “Oh excuse me” and then moved out of her way so she could enter, but that time I just stood there blocking the doorway while staring at her until she moved to let me by. It wasn’t anything I had conscious control over because it all happened so fast, but there I saw a person who had a bazillion people kissing her ass, holding her doors, letting her out of speeding tickets, and the thought that I should be one of them made me unable to move and by the time I had finally made up my mind that I was actually going to hold my ground in protest, she had already gotten out of my way and I walked out letting the door do what it may. I’m sure she didn’t know what to make of the situation because I have every confidence that no man has ever treated her in such fashion. But now I’m making a rule of it. I hold doors for and give way to older women, children and all guys, but never attractive women because I genuinely feel they need a balancing force to offset the weight of all the lips on their asses. I’m sure that makes me an asshole, but I can’t help it; I’ve seen too much. Anyway, all the grandmothers think I’m sweet, so it balances out.

Without arranged marriages and with birth control, women run much less risk of incurring the costs of getting pregnant and are much freer to act accordingly. So what do they do with this opportunity?

Well I hear it’s been tested that women rate only the top 20% of men as above average, and since a man runs much less risk and incurs much less cost to their bodies when it comes to the possibility of getting someone pregnant, there’s never been much reason to hold back in trying with as many women as possible, so even just the top 20% have plenty to go around all the women who are actually going after them. And if a woman does get pregnant and give birth from such an interaction, at least they’re passing down a mix of their genes with those of someone in the top 20%. The other approach is to stably pair-bond with a male of similar to better socio-economic status, to better bring up any children who won’t necessarily have the genes of someone in the top 20%. But even if the second approach is being taken, an encounter of the first kind may still end up with the lower status male bringing up the child as their own and getting the best of both worlds - either without the male’s knowledge or more likely with a new male in a new relationship hoping to give the female a subsequent child of their own in exchange for their fathering of both their children and children who are not theirs. Seeing as 80% of the male population are not deemed above average, this is more often than not their best strategy to pass down their own genetic material. I think there’s an unequal proportion of genetic material passed down as it is, with children having more genes in common with their mother than their father. More men are actually born to richer families and more women to poorer families (not always, but on average there is apparently a difference) because being a male is more risky, passing down less of their genes, and only really if they have better resources to offer their mate. There’s also more variation in males, on the off chance that the risk pays off and makes them able to climb high enough in status to attract a good mate even if they didn’t start out with much of an advantage.

For all these reasons and more, there are going to be fewer outstanding females and they’ll still be successful, and moreso with the top 20% of men than the rest. It makes sense for them to risk pregnancy with higher status males, at least while they’re young as what they have to offer diminishes with age. It also makes more sense for them to lower their standards and get maximum potential to pass on their genes in their later years when they have less to offer, lower status males are more desperate to get anything at all, and they’re even likely to assist bringing up previous offspring they had with higher status males.

Basically, it all makes perfect sense, simply considering what works best in practice whether intentionally or much more likely unintentionally, and unless you happened to be someone who benefits from the whole thing, it’s gonna suck for you - sorry.

Older women and children, yes, open doors for them.

I would open a door for a pretty, chaste, conservative woman.

Inheritance can be financial, and genetic, it both works pretty much the same way.

If a father leaves $1000000 for his son and daughter, that could be the equivalent of another father, with no money, leaving good genes for his children. So inheritance works both ways, materially and genetically.

I’ve noticed that many people use money to compensate for what they are genetically lacking. So if somebody is stupid, ugly, short, etc. then they depend on money much more to compensate for their flaws. Somebody who is beautiful, smart, tall, they can easily “trade-in” genetic material for money. People are willing to pay big bucks for people with superior genes.

Are you holding out for a woman you consider to be of ‘high’ value?

Or are you afraid of being rejected by a woman you consider to be of ‘low-mid’ value?

Low-middle value women hit on me and pursue me. So I’m holding out. But I’ll settle down within a few years, for whatever I can get.

What sort of personality would your ideal woman have?

I have never thought about this: What sort of personality would my ideal woman have?

This post does not require an answer.