Turn on thread page Beta

Virgin or non virgin, what do you want in a relationship. watch

  • View Poll Results: Do you prefer a virgin or a non virgin
    I'm male, and I want a virgin.
    64
    15.38%
    I'm female, and I want a virgin.
    46
    11.06%
    I'm male and I want a non virgin.
    13
    3.13%
    I'm female and I want a non virgin.
    40
    9.62%
    I'm male, and I don't care.
    72
    17.31%
    I'm female, and I don't care.
    71
    17.07%
    I'm male, and I want a low number at least.
    30
    7.21%
    I'm female, and I want a low number at least.
    61
    14.66%
    Jesus is my true love.
    19
    4.57%

    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    Yes it does matter, studies have shown that a woman'ssexual history is a big predictor of marital and relationship discord.

    If you are married to a virgin you are roughly 80-85per cent likely to stay married.

    This decreases RAPIDLY to about 50 per cent once you add 2-3 previous partners to the equation

    to below 25 per cent when you factor in 15+ previous sexual partners
    You know, I have heard something like this before. Some statistic that says that people who wait to get married to lose their virginities are more likely to have longer lasting marriages than those who don't. I'm not sure how true it is though :dontknow:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by olivia_w92)
    So guys instinctively know that a girl has slept with x amount of people and would stay away from her because their chances of staying married is 'below 25%' or whatever. I call B/S.

    The only people who place enormous importance on how many people their partner has slept with (within reason) are probably insecure and think that throwing the word 'slut' around makes them more righteous and comfortable in themselves.
    Actually, being insecure with yourself would be a reason to accept less than they want. You may have very specific likes but unless you're very secure in your ability to convince people of that sort to be with you, you'll settle for less.

    It'll often be based on anecdotal data.

    This poll assumes you have the choice- would you then prefer to go for someone with 1 past sexual partner, or 20? Would someone telling you about their past lovers make you tingly because they had now chosen you, or would someone telling you that you were their first make you tingly because they had chosen you?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    lol ok. But you don't propose any other possible reasons for the correlation. Even if the cause is not technically partner count, clearly a high partner count is correlated with divorce, or at the very least it is correlated highly with whatever is REALLY causing all these divorces which is good enough.....however you don't propose any other reasons......

    Bad driving causes accidents, accidents are correlated to bad driving, being drunk is correlated with bad driving.....and thus being drunk and accidents are correlated!!! simples
    I don't propose any other reasons because I have not been through marriage and divorce to be able to confirm what other factors may influence a couple.
    High partner count is correlated with and by so many other things and experimental studies cant reflect that with high enough validity. If you can provide a source of your study I can probably criticize it on several other grounds. However, my only point is that past sexual history is not the most powerful factor in a successful or an unsuccessful marriage.

    Lol, if only things in life were as simple as your logic. Bad driving is correlated with several other factors too - road condition, weather, condition of tyres, the state of the individual other than drunk like sleepy, unfocused etc, number of passengers in car and obviously, other drivers on the road too. Correlation indicates a somewhat link between the factors, but does not prove the link or for that matter, its significance. Not so simples.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeepStar)
    I don't propose anything other reasons because I have been through marriage and divorce to be able to confirm what other factors may influence a couple.
    High partner count is correlated with and by so many other things and experimental studies can reflect that with high enough validity. If you can provide a source of your study I can probably criticize it on several other grounds. However, my only point is that past sexual history is not the most powerful factor in a successful or an unsuccessful marriage.

    Lol, if only things in life were as simple as your logic. Bad driving is correlated with several other factors too - road condition, weather, condition of tyres, the state of the individual other than drunk like sleepy, unfocused etc, number of passengers in car and obviously, other drivers on the road too. Correlation indicates a somewhat link between the factors, but does not prove the link or for that matter, its significance. Not so simples.

    No i understand what you're saying. What i'm saying is it doesn't matter what you think and it's basically just a throw away attempt to discredit what i'm saying. I don't care for your opinion because the same can be said for ANY and every study pretty much and iv'e seen it myself, people will question the validity of a study because they don't agree with the outcome or conclusion, in other words they have a vested interested in the results and so their allegations are as corrupt as they claim the study to be. If the correlation is there, Men shouldn't ignore the evidence as well as their own opinion and feelings.

    Simple facts of life that have been known for thousands of years and instinctively by a large percentage of people, shouldn't require studies to prove, and yet still these studies still do exist.....the evidence is mounting.


    Also if you took a large enough sample from lots of areas, days and people and varied only between being drunk and not being drunk, you would get a good working knowledge of how alcohol effects driving.

    How many studies do you think the government did before banning drink driving? Do you think the government cares that some people may be able to drive very well whilst drunk? do you think the government cares about what the weather and road conditions are while you are driving drunk?

    The exact accuracy doesn't need to be confirmed for people to start taking practical action to protect themselves from the dangers of the world.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    No i understand what you're saying. What i'm saying is it doesn't matter what you think and it's basically just a throw away attempt to discredit what i'm saying. I don't care for your opinion because the same can be said for ANY and every study pretty much and iv'e seen it myself, people will question the validity of a study because they don't agree with the outcome or conclusion, in other words they have a vested interested in the results and so their allegations are as corrupt as they claim the study to be. If the correlation is there, Men shouldn't ignore the evidence as well as their own opinion and feelings.

    Simple facts of life that have been known for thousands of years and instinctively by a large percentage of people, shouldn't require studies to prove, and yet still these studies still do exist.....the evidence is mounting.
    I'm not trying to discredit what you are saying though, I'm simply explaining my point of view, which differs from yours. Neither, which is factual because statistics can never be taken at face value. I don't have any interest in the findings but the experimenters do so their conclusions may be based on their own personal bias and not necessarily the findings i.e. they saw what they wanted to find, with possibly an unrepresentative sample.

    Marriages fall apart and together for a wide range of reasons and factors but I don't think on its own, it has much, if anything to do with count of previous partners, but combined with other factors that end a marriage, it may play a role. Correlation is there for so many things but people choose not to act on it, so should this be any different?

    People get divorced because one of them has more previous partners than the other is not a fact of life, it is your opinion, which you are of course entitled to but implying its significance for every divorce is just absurd. Again, evidence lacks validity and does not reflect upon real life situations. Research has been done on how genuine a smile icon looks compared to another, that evidence shows one is fake and other isn't - the importance or significance of such mounting evidence in real life or on MSN users? None.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeepStar)
    I'm not trying to discredit what you are saying though, I'm simply explaining my point of view, which differs from yours. Neither, which is factual because statistics can never be taken at face value. I don't have any interest in the findings but the experimenters do so their conclusions may be based on their own personal bias and not necessarily the findings i.e. they saw what they wanted to find, with possibly an unrepresentative sample.

    Marriages fall apart and together for a wide range of reasons and factors but I don't think on its own, it has much, if anything to do with count of previous partners, but combined with other factors that end a marriage, it may play a role. Correlation is there for so many things but people choose not to act on it, so should this be any different?

    People get divorced because one of them has more previous partners than the other is not a fact of life, it is your opinion, which you are of course entitled to but implying its significance for every divorce is just absurd. Again, evidence lacks validity and does not reflect upon real life situations. Research has been done on how genuine a smile icon looks compared to another, that evidence shows one is fake and other isn't - the importance or significance of such mounting evidence in real life or on MSN users? None.
    you are repeatedly stating the obvious. Of course sexual history doesn't affect every divorce, just like drink driving doesn't cause every road accident. The question remains, when are you going to say something relevant?

    Also if you took a large enough sample from lots of areas, days and people and varied only between being drunk and not being drunk, you would get a good working knowledge of how alcohol effects driving.

    How many studies do you think the government did before banning drink driving? Do you think the government cares that some people may be able to drive very well whilst drunk? do you think the government cares about what the weather and road conditions are while you are driving drunk?

    The exact accuracy doesn't need to be confirmed for people to start taking practical action to protect themselves from the dangers of the world.

    If you drive drunk you are disproportionately likely to be involved in a traffic incident. If you marry a slut you are disproportionately likely to end up divorced. Whats so hard to understand?

    Also it's very unintelligent to suggest that these marriages are failing BECAUSE of sexual history. It could simply be the case that sluts tend to have other undesirable traits. But the correlation is strong enough to suggest that a man could benefit by not involving himself with such women. explanations do exist as to why sluts are such bad marriage material, look up the bonding effects of oxytocin for instance.....but even that is still irrelevant to real world action, the numbers alone are enough to play with in the game of life.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    Also it's very unintelligent to suggest that these marriages are failing BECAUSE of sexual history. It could simply be the case that sluts tend to have other undesirable traits. But the correlation is strong enough to suggest that a man could benefit by not involving himself with such women. explanations do exist as to why sluts are such bad marriage material, look up the bonding effects of oxytocin for instance.....but even that is still irrelevant to real world action, the numbers alone are enough to play with in the game of life.
    This is what I have been trying to get across.

    Also, once a slut does mean a slut for life either. People change, people move on. Unless the man in question has an impeccable past sexual history, which will not be the case in the majority, he has no right to point fingers. The vice versa is true for women too - she can benefit from not getting involved with a guy that gets around but I doubt either will be thinking about the other's past when deciding to marry or whatever.

    Additionally, when two people marry - surely, they are aware of each other's past? In which, case getting divorced over it later does not make any sense.

    Anyway, my point and my opinion stand opposing to yours clearly. Neither invalid but neither factual. Lets leave it at that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    i didn't comment on the size of the sex drives, simply that they are different.
    They're not necessarily different though.

    It depends on the context of the opinion, i'd be your friend, respect your opinions/knowledge, spend time with you. Just not marry you. Well actually i would consider it if we earnt similar money and was willing to sign certain custodial agreements.
    In my opinion, that's really childish, because you shouldn't be marrying someone you don't trust. And you can't judge someone's personality on whether or not they've had a penis in their vagina. Wtf?

    I simply alert men to the fact that TRADITIONAL marriage is dead and that a woman with less money, who wants to be a housewife etc is a very bad bet for marriage and cohabiting arrangements due to the current legal landscape, especially if she has had pre-marital sex.
    Divorces don't always favour the woman actually (I'm a law student, and believe me, you start with 50/50 and then depending on other factors, you have a departure from equality. It's often based on things like how long the marriage has lasted, who gets custody of the kids, earning capacity etc, which doesn't always go the womans way).

    Pre-marital sex doesn't always indicate the same thing. Take two women who have had premarital sex, one may have had over 30 one night stands, and the other may have had sex with one person whilst in a loving relationship. You can't really generalise.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeepStar)
    This is what I have been trying to get across.

    Also, once a slut does mean a slut for life either. People change, people move on.
    It would be an interesting study to investigate how true this was. There's a mix of cultural, upbringing, and genetic factors in people's behaviour. It could be that the majority of people change, or it could be that they don't.

    Additionally, when two people marry - surely, they are aware of each other's past? In which, case getting divorced over it later does not make any sense.
    The issue with it is the consequences of the person's past behaviour. If the person has a yearning to return to their party life and then cheats on their partner when in a club, obviously it has effected their marriage later.

    It's like a ticking time bomb.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeepStar)
    This is what I have been trying to get across.

    Also, once a slut does mean a slut for life either. People change, people move on. Unless the man in question has an impeccable past sexual history, which will not be the case in the majority, he has no right to point fingers. The vice versa is true for women too - she can benefit from not getting involved with a guy that gets around but I doubt either will be thinking about the other's past when deciding to marry or whatever.

    Additionally, when two people marry - surely, they are aware of each other's past? In which, case getting divorced over it later does not make any sense.

    Anyway, my point and my opinion stand opposing to yours clearly. Neither invalid but neither factual. Lets leave it at that.
    I think you are misunderstanding me. They don't get divorced over the issue. What the study showed was that they are more likely to get divorced for ANY reason. In other words slutty women are overall worse partners, more likely to divorce you and less capable of maintaining a civil and caring relationship.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nepene)
    It would be an interesting study to investigate how true this was. There's a mix of cultural, upbringing, and genetic factors in people's behaviour. It could be that the majority of people change, or it could be that they don't.



    The issue with it is the consequences of the person's past behaviour. If the person has a yearning to return to their party life and then cheats on their partner when in a club, obviously it has effected their marriage later.

    It's like a ticking time bomb.

    It would be interesting but it would be near impossible to control all variables, ones you have mentioned plus more. I know from my experiences, some people change and some do not but it may not be the case in a representative sample where variables are controlled for.
    Some people cheat in marriages, when they have never had the lifestyle in question so that can work both ways. I don't think either is a ticking a bomb, I believe everything happens for a reason. If a marriage comes to divorce, then it is because of the choices and decisions the couple make whilst being together, more so, than their past. But again, that is my opinion, each to their own in this subjective topic.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    They're not necessarily different though.

    In my opinion, that's really childish, because you shouldn't be marrying someone you don't trust. And you can't judge someone's personality on whether or not they've had a penis in their vagina. Wtf?


    Divorces don't always favour the woman actually (I'm a law student, and believe me, you start with 50/50 and then depending on other factors, you have a departure from equality. It's often based on things like how long the marriage has lasted, who gets custody of the kids, earning capacity etc, which doesn't always go the womans way).

    Pre-marital sex doesn't always indicate the same thing. Take two women who have had premarital sex, one may have had over 30 one night stands, and the other may have had sex with one person whilst in a loving relationship. You can't really generalise.
    Yes but the statistic take that into account and thus women with 15+ partners and 1-2 are in distinct categories from eachother, with differing percentage success rates to boot.

    Yes SOME women tend to lose out in divorce, but assumed custody as well as the fact that women have a way of making sure they marry someone who makes more money or scale down their jobs after marriage means that 90-95 per cent of cases involve a net transfer of wealth from the man to the woman.

    Also if the man earns considerably more than the woman, then 50/50 is still an unequal split, especially in the case of no fault divorces filed by the woman(over 70+ per cent of divorces).
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    I think you are misunderstanding me. They don't get divorced over the issue. What the study showed was that they are more likely to get divorced for ANY reason. In other words slutty women are overall worse partners, more likely to divorce you and less capable of maintaining a civil and caring relationship.
    Because if a couple gets divorced, it's clearly because of something the woman did? :curious:

    Also, I can't believe it hasn't occurred to you that people with traditional views about sex (no pre-marital sex) are more likely to have traditional views about marriage (no divorce). :facepalm:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    Yes but the statistic take that into account and thus women with 15+ partners and 1-2 are in distinct categories from eachother, with differing percentage success rates to boot.
    There's nothing wrong with a woman who's had sex though. Unless what the statistics show is that women who are experienced, strong willed and know what they want are less likely to take any **** from a man than a fragile, naive virgin. I personally won't put up with any crap from guys, but I know some girls who are happy to put up with anything.

    Yes SOME women tend to lose out in divorce, but assumed custody as well as the fact that women have a way of making sure they marry someone who makes more money or scale down their jobs after marriage means that 90-95 per cent of cases involve a net transfer of wealth from the man to the woman.
    Not always true. Some women have ambition, some of us want to make money in our own right. Also if the man and the woman have children, it's only right that she'll get more money, as they are his children too, so he should pay for them.

    Also if the man earns considerably more than the woman, then 50/50 is still an unequal split, especially in the case of no fault divorces filed by the woman(over 70+ per cent of divorces).
    Not always. Are you just terrified some woman will divorce you and steal your money or something? :lolwut:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeepStar)
    It would be interesting but it would be near impossible to control all variables, ones you have mentioned plus more.
    You don't need to control all the variables. You ask people at one point in their life how many sexual partners they have per year and if they've cheated in the last year, and then you ask them at a later point how many sexual partners they have in a year and if they've cheated in the last year. That way you see whether generally promiscuous people, people who have cheated tend to continue doing so.

    Some people cheat in marriages, when they have never had the lifestyle in question so that can work both ways. I don't think either is a ticking a bomb,
    If you don't think someone having a huge urge to go out to a club and bonk people other than their partner is a ticking time bomb, I'm not sure what you would think is one.

    If you have an inherent hate of generalizations, which you seem to, we can't convince you. You should be able to see though why we might want to avoid someone who's done something that means, for whatever reasons, we've twice as likely to get cheated on.

    I believe everything happens for a reason. If a marriage comes to divorce, then it is because of the choices and decisions the couple make whilst being together, more so, than their past. But again, that is my opinion, each to their own in this subjective topic.
    It's about as subjective as catching your love having sex with another man in your bed.

    So, generally you believe what happened in the past has little or no effect on the present? Interesting.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    I think you are misunderstanding me. They don't get divorced over the issue. What the study showed was that they are more likely to get divorced for ANY reason. In other words slutty women are overall worse partners, more likely to divorce you and less capable of maintaining a civil and caring relationship.
    I did understand what you were trying to say. And I still stand by what I said - I can't agree that the impact of sleeping with more than average men, will significantly increase the chances of a divorce, a decade or so later.
    People are shaped by their experiences, they learn from what they do and in phases like that, some people change completely and live a different life, whilst others don't.
    I disagree with the findings of the study in question - I don't think having more sexual partners, makes you incapable of maintaining a civil and caring relationship, assuming that the study differentiates between the number of those slept with in a relationship as apposed to one night stands etc. Just my opinion though...
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    Because if a couple gets divorced, it's clearly because of something the woman did? :curious:

    your question doesn't require an answer. Whether it's down to the man finding the woman lacking in some department or the woman finding him lacking, it is far more likely to happen with a slutty woman.

    I guess then the conclusion is, you are less likely to be satisfied with your wife if she is a slut, and she is less likely to be satisfied with you.

    So don't marry a slut simples....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    Because if a couple gets divorced, it's clearly because of something the woman did? :curious:

    Also, I can't believe it hasn't occurred to you that people with traditional views about sex (no pre-marital sex) are more likely to have traditional views about marriage (no divorce). :facepalm:
    THIS!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the realist)
    your question doesn't require an answer. Whether it's down to the man finding the woman lacking in some department or the woman finding him lacking, it is far more likely to happen with a slutty woman.

    I guess then the conclusion is, you are less likely to be satisfied with your wife if she is a slut, and she is likely to be satisfied with you.

    So don't marry a slut simples....
    It's annoying me that you keep referring to women who have had premarital sex as sluts.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    Because if a couple gets divorced, it's clearly because of something the woman did? :curious:

    Also, I can't believe it hasn't occurred to you that people with traditional views about sex (no pre-marital sex) are more likely to have traditional views about marriage (no divorce). :facepalm:
    yeah but the reasons don't really matter actually. My marriage being dissolved, children torn between the parents and my money stolen hurts just as bad whether it's by a traditional or non-traditional woman.

    I guess the answer is, don't marry a non traditional woman, simples...


    Funny how a non-traditional woman is just "non-traditional" enough to get a divorce, but not to avoid marriage in the first place, interesting......
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 13, 2011
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.