Discussing my last post on Twitter, some objected to the following:
Only sluts will succumb to them [PUA’s], and the sluts they are hurting would have simply slutted it up with someone with ‘natural game’ (or less game) and been hurt anyways.
When posting this I thought it was almost tautological. If a women is sleeping with a man within the PUA’s 3-date rule she’s most definitely a slut. If a women is in the PUA’s natural habitat, the club, looking for love, it’s almost guaranteed she’s a slut. As I’ve already noted, when the PUA moves outside the club into daygame, his success rates are very low (even accounting for only selecting girls in the top 11-23% of women), so the gaygamer is only getting the sluttiest girls.
The question then became, what of good girls that go bad due to incentives. These aren’t natural sluts, but only sluts of circumstance. Aren’t the PUA’s ruining them?
To which the answer is, maybe in a few exceptional rare cases yes, but the PUA is using a number of selection filters, the two most important fo which for this discussion are the club, alcohol, and the 3-date rule.
A woman having sex within 3 dates is already ruined. A women in the club or getting blitzed around strange horny men is either already ruined or will be ruined in very short order whether there’s a PUA present or not.
To describe the ruining of girls, I coined the term slut event horizon. If you aren’t familiar with TV Tropes (or astrophysics), an event horizon is the point of no return, past which something/someone is irredeemable.*
So, in this case, past a certain point of sexual activity a certain women is most slut, no question.
A women having sex within 3-dates is already past the slut event horizon. A women at the club or frat party getting wasted is almost assuredly past the slut event horizon, and in the rare case she isn’t she is willingly putting herself so close to going over the edge that for any practical purpose you should treat her as such (ie. a slut is not a wife).
The PUA’s natural fodder is the woman already past the event horizon, or, rarely, so near the edge of the event horizon that to say the PUA ruined her is to blame the straw for breaking the camel’s back rather than the 400-lb obese man.
****
Here’s a chart on lifetime number of sexual partners:
About a third of women have had 0-1 partners, we can safely say these are good girls. About a quarter had 7+ partners, we can safely say these are sluts, they’ve passed the slut event horizon. Less than a tenth of women had 2 partners, we’ll call these the oops women, the ones who have probably not passed the event horizon, but made a mistake or had a boyfriend before marriage. About a third of women had 3-6 partners, we’ll call these marginal girls, they may or may not be past the slut event horizon.
69% of women are virgins at 18, that number drops to 15% by age 21. So, over half of all women lose their virginity from 18-21 years of age.
Something major happens between 18-21.
Some can be chocked up to marriage, a bit under 20% of people marry by age 21. Given that women generally marry about 2 years younger, we could estimate that about a quarter to a third of women are married by age 21. But some of those would not have been virgins at 18.**
But even given that some women are marrying, that is a lot unmarried women losing their virginity in their college-age years. Many of these are among the marginal women.
As well, over half of women aged 17-40 have had one night stands. We’ll assume nearly all n>7 women had a one night stand, which means about that a good portion (about two thirds) of the marginal women and a few of the oops women have had a one night stand, as well.
(I’m not going to get into trying to figure out how many ONS’s are caused by PUA’s, but remember, PUA’s are a very small minority of men, I would be surprised if they made up even a large minority of ONS’s).
****
When men speak of a women being ruined by PUAs, they are talking of the oops and the marginal women. The ones with a premarital sex partner or three, possibly a one night stand.
A marginal women having a one night stand, has not been ruined by the PUA, she’s either had a number of ONS’s, making the choice to repeatedly ruin herself, has had other sexual activity besides an ONS and stopped when the ONS showed her how far she sunk, or she had a one night stand and decided to continue on, choosing sluthood and ruining herself (depending on where the ONS falls).
The only group that could be said to be ‘ruined’ by the PUA would be the oops woman whose oops was a one-night stand or short-term fling. Oops women make up less than a tenth of women, and I’m betting the large majority of oops women lost their virginity to a boyfriend rather than a PUA.
So, in all, maybe, about 3% of women could be honestly considered ruined by a PUA rather than by their own choices. Not good, but hardly a major problem that must be solved right now.
On top of this, almost a third of women have sex before they are even old enough to legally be fodder for a PUA; 85% of women have had sex before they are even of age to legally allowed to be in the PUA’s natural habitat, the club. To say the PUA’s are responsible for sluttiness is asinine.
Blaming the PUA’s is, at best, scapegoating. Focusing on PUA’s will be destroy any attempt to establish a proper reactionary view of sex and the sexual marketplace before it even begins.
****
A woman does not just see a PUA then become a slut. Taking it from a PUA may be her final fall over the slut event horizon, but PUAs do not have some sort of magic power to turn women into sluts. Rather sluts come from circumstances.
There are two types of slut, the natural slut and the circumstantial slut (similar as the to the two types of slave). Keep in mind this is not an dichotomy, but a sliding scale.
The natural slut is an r-selected woman who is naturally inclined, whether by genetics or childhood environment (ie: sexual abuse or father absence), to be a slut. She will slut it up unless there are very strict societal controls over women’s sexuality, and even then she might become a harlot outside of proper society. You can not ruin this women, she is pre-ruined; she is beyond the slut event horizon. She is bad marriage risk no matter what and nothing but the overwhelming grace of God could ever make her wife material. Most of the n>7 sluts are of probably some degree of this type.
The circumstantial slut is a woman who may be slutty if the circumstances or incentives are right. Some of the sluts and almost all of the marginals and oops are of this type. Many of the good girls could become this is the circumstances were wrong.
The reason the circumstantial slut becomes a slut is because she is in the wrong sexual culture providing the wrong incentives.
In the reactionary society holding the positions on sex I outlined in my last post, these girls would never become sluts because circumstances would never be such that they would want. They would all be wife material.
She does not just fall over the slut event horizon she moves to the verge of the event horizon through small slutty behaviours and eventually one of those behaviours throws her over the edge.
Those small slutty behaviours are mostly not ONS’s, ONS’s are often the final leap over the horizon. Rather they are trained in a women through long- and short-term sexual relationships.
She loses her virginity to her boyfriend, her friend-with-benefits, or the man she wants to be her boyfriend because she sex outside of marriage is a societally accepted. She does this a few times with a few different boyfriends and maybe with that man she just met who’s really hot and at some point she, more or less accidentally, crosses the slut event horizon.
She may not start out intending to be a slut, but once she starts moving along that path it is very easy to go over it without noticing. There is no clear social line of sluttiness.
At what number does it become sluttiness? Most men and women would overlook a mistake or two. What about three? four?
If it’s not slutty in a long-term relationship, then it shouldn’t be with a short-term one? Three dates is a short-term relationship, right?
Is an ONS an automatic cross over the horizon, or can one ONS count as a mistake? two? What’s the difference between three dates and one?
There is no clear threshold of where the horizon is. Hence why some women are good girls, some are sluts, but the plurality are marginal and oops.
They’re trying to stop before the slut event horizon, but many are still turning into sluts because it is not clear where the slut event horizon sits.
This is why I say PUA’s are less destructive than LTR’s and STR’s. What a PUA does is clearly degenerate and an ONS with a PUA is clearly over the slut event horizon. Only those women already over the horizon or so close to it it doesn’t matter for any practical purpose will be a PUA’s +1, and the circumstantial sluts who do so will have been lead down this path by slippery slopes and an unclear slut event horizon.
Meanwhile, as soon as you accept the validity of STR’s and LTR’s there is no clear line of sluttiness and degeneracy. The slut event horizon is not something seen until it has already been passed. These relationships are simply training grounds for sluttery and ruin far more women than PUA’s ever have or will.
If you want to preserve women, if you don’t want women being hurt by a brutal sexual marketplace, if you want women to be wives rather than sluts, you must make the culture so it is not so easy to slide over the slut event horizon.
You have to culturally keep sex in marriage and marriage alone. Some natural sluts will still slut it up and there will still be oops women, but if you make clear that sex outside of marraige is the slut event horizon, you will have less sluts, more wives, more marriage, happier women, and more productive men.
The only reactionary attitude for sex is to confine it to marriage alone.
Anything else is degeneracy.
****
* I should note that I don’t believe in the concept of absolute irredeemability. Every person no matter how fallen can be redeemed by Christ’s blood and have a regenerated new self. So, no matter how much you have sinned, God will forgive you if you repent. Do so.
In this case, irredeemability is used to simply show someone who has allowed themselves to act in a way that would permanently mark them a material and objective slut.
** Good news for men looking for a virgin wife. About a fifth to a quarter of unmarried 21-year-olds are virgins once you take out the quarter to a third of women married at 21. 20-25% is better odds than 15%.
Top post.
“Meanwhile, as soon as you accept the validity of STR’s and LTR’s there is no clear line of sluttiness and degeneracy.” Money shot.
I think the unwritten problem with PUAs isn’t that they’re sullying good girls and creating sluts rather the sort of guys that become PUAs are prime relationship material guys. They’re intelligent, daring, hardworking, self aware, desire female intimacy, sociable and independent.
Every successful PUA is a desireable LTR guy removed from the market and that narrows the available field, I see PUAs in the same light as women who want to marry after 30. They are simply a male inversion of what females are already doing, which of course apparently makes them worse than the devil.
We have to be honest and admit that PUAs are primarily self selected and very few Omegas or high moral Betas will ever become PUAs.
Lots to chew on in this post. Wish I had the time to do so. Will address the end point real quick though:
Assuming the stats are right (and I’m not sure they are, but such is the nature of all stats), that doesn’t mean though that a fifth to a quarter of unmarried 21-year-olds would make for good virgin brides. To begin with, many of those women aren’t interested in marriage at that age. Also, many might not be suitable for other reasons, such as being grossly overweight or being utterly unfeminine. And that leaves aside the whole issue of faith and the role of marriage.
Oh, and by the way, I’m going to steal that idea of yours of the “Slut Event Horizon”.
No offense meant, one knows very very little about women and why they sleep (see have sex with) men.
What happens is, they reach their 30’s and reality hits them ie, the “wall” and then there is a tremendous amount of guilt that slaps them constantly so much so the man they do hook up with, and they do, then becomes not a partner with their own past rather someone whom they cannot be a good wife to b/c their past is beating them up
This is what Paul meant when he spoke about wolf’s in sheeps clothing that take advantage of wives..it’s their guilt and feeling “I messed up my life so badly, no one can ever love me” even while married to a man who is madly in love with her.
This is why Christ and His Redemption is so needed today
I wanted to add a few points. First, please keep in mind that the data you are using is from personal interviews with people. There is no controlling for peoples’ lying to benefit their social standing. In general, women under-report their lifetime partner count, and men over-report their partner count. I don’t really have a different data set, and perhaps the only way to achieve this would be through the use of polygraphs. Even then, I think a lot of women are capable of believing their own lies about partner counts. But I think it’s safe to say that these numbers are very conservative, and that should be taken into account.
Also, like Donal Graeme mentioned, a lot of virgins are that way for a reason. Many of them are involuntarily virgins as a product of being grossly overweight or disgusting. A female equivalent to the “omega male” phenomenon, or militant tatted feminists come to mind.
So I think there is another important element than simply N-count, and that is taking into account how much attention she gets due to her beauty. I met a woman who would easily be considered a “9”, recieved non-stop attention from men to the point where she preferred to mostly stay inside, and only slept with her (now ex) fiancee under the belief that they would soon be married. Obviously, that last part was a mistake, but I would argue that it is immensely more difficult for women receiving constant male attention to avoid romantic opportunities. You can’t judge the degree of self control from a girl who is a virgin, but also receives zero male attention. In this sense, I tend to view gorgeous women with relatively low N-counts like 3 or 4 to be roughly equivalent to average and below average women with N-counts of 1 or 2.
Either way, if you want a virgin and a Christian, you should be looking in the Philippines. If you’re apprehensive about interracial dating, look in Poland.
Great article, as usual. I’m glad you’re engaging the Manospherian view of the SMP and adjusting it for neoreaction and traditionalism. This is a crucial step we need to take if ‘good’ Manospherians are to be absorbed into any reactionary movements.
The problem with your stats is most of the women are lying, you’ll find damn few since the 1970’s that have not slept with someone by the end of highschool.
“On top of this, almost a third of women have sex before they are even old enough to legally be fodder for a PUA; 85% of women have had sex before they are even of age to legally allowed to be in the PUA’s natural habitat, the club.”
I operated out of school parties back when I was picking up girls in high school. In college, I did day game and frat parties in my pre-Christian days.
“Either way, if you want a virgin and a Christian, you should be looking in the Philippines. ”
Naah, I think that there are still plenty of attractive white and Asian virgins in the States. They don’t advertise their virginity, of course, but if you advertise that you are will accept a virgin and are seeking someone with a low partner count, they will probably respond.
The rejection of NAWALT relies on a classic distribution fallacy. Studies have shown that White and Asian women are much more likely to marry than black and Hispanics. Upper middle class college-graduate women are much more likely to have successful marriages than blacks, Hispanics, and lower class whites. Socioeconomic and ethnic differences among women _are_ important.
There is a group of men who need to be shamed and punished. It’s Fathers. As long as fathers allow their daughters to be sluts the problem can’t be fixed.
@Red
Sorry, fathers don’t control their daughters with the FI running things. The problem rests squarely on the shoulders of the feminist slut community that promotes sluttiness.
“Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.”
-Mr. Ian Fleming
In other words, the girls who had the one night stand – oops. Shame on him.
A second one night stand? – oops again. Shame on her.
A third time around? All aboard. Next stop…..event horizon
I truly believe 3rd time has to be the charm. Again, as you said FN, these habits are the consequence of upbringing and environment, but I contend that whatever her circumstances and knowledge of the world, once she passes N>3 or even N=3 in some cases….you’re not looking at wife material. I sincerely doubt you’re even looking at LTR material.
Not a hard and fast rule of course, but experience has been and will continue to be our greatest tutor.
How could PUA’s be held in account under any circumstances? If the girls are deciding to sleep with him that is their choice. If in society women have that right to choose it is madness to holdbthose who they choose accountable. To me the whole idea sounds like sour grapes. Look at Roosh or Krauser, those guys will tell you about all the hard work in cold approaching women. Blaming men for womens actions when women are unrestrained is shockingly white knight. I agree with the article that PUA are not ruining girls, but the fact it has to be said stuns me.
Your basic premise is false. Sluts vs non sluts… There are only women, most of whom have inner sluts dying to go feral. Sure there are some who are just fridged etc, but the virgin is a virgin because some man has not set the tingles in motion.
@theasdgamer
Father’s can’t disown their daughters for bad behavior? They certainly can raise them in a good environment and marry them off young to decent man. Muslims fathers do this quite well in the middle of London. Are Muslim fathers better than Christian Fathers?
@Ton
You assume that all women have the same frame for sex, romance, and marriage. You assume that sex -> romance -> marriage. For some women, sex and romance only belong in the context of marriage. marriage -> romance,sex For others, romance leads to marriage, then sex. romance -> marriage -> sex
For these last two categories, women are not sluts. They are chaste, assuming no cuckoldry.
@Red
Sure, fathers can disown their daughters in the West, but they can hardly force marriage on them if the daughters refuse.
@ Donal: That’s true, but it’s not as hopeless as some, such as Mike below you, make it seem. Steal away.
@ Padre: Not sure how that contradicts anything I said.
@ Mike & freeman: At least the 15% CDC one should be fairly accurate. From the link:
“Unlike other surveys where people may be too embarrassed to be truthful, the researchers believe they have created one of the most honest assessments yet of sexual behavior and drug use because they used a new method to do the research. Each participant answered the questions in complete privacy in a computer-assisted self-interview using a headset and computer touch screen. This is the first time this technique has ever been used.”
@ asd: I’m sure a lot of sex happens in college, but I doubt there are too many 20-year-olds who have studied and mastered game in college.
@ Ton: The Bible makes a distinction between virtuous women and adulteresses. Just as not every male has sex with every woman willing, not every women does either.
@FN
I am a natural. I have petted somewhere between 10-20 girls/women, though N=2 because I am very picky. Let’s call the petting count P.
Many girls/women have found me appealing. 10 < P < 20 My fling (a 9, age 20) who was a friend was DTF when I (age 18) asked bluntly (and she was engaged to some guy far away at home). My college gf (an 8) instigated our first kiss ten minutes into our first study date. She also tried to seduce me, but I declined. My wife (a nurse and a 10 new in the box) asked me to several of her roommates' dinner parties and asked me on our first date (it was a double date and she was asking for her friend who had a crush on me, but she went out with me later and admitted that she found me attractive). So, maybe I had a natural advantage, Idk. Not a jock, musician, or rich guy. Average height. I'm a natural tease–maybe that's part of it. I'm also unafraid to approach and engage women, no matter their looks. Wife says my looks are an 8.
There was plenty to pick up about game from Playboy even four decades ago when I operated as well as stuff being in the culture, some of which I used. Surely, high school boys have access to game info and study it today. Game technology from four decades ago still works great today.
With all that background, I think that many guys may be using game in college, though they may not have mastered it. (I certainly haven't mastered game. The game that I used was easy to learn and practice. I was definitely geeky in college, though I probably hid it well.)