Sex and the unmarried Red Pill Couple

KathrynthegreatKathrynthegreat TeamAmazonWarriorPrincessPosts: 3,770Member
edited August 2012 in Singles
When does a Red Pill couple have sex?  After the marriage?  After the engagement?  After they start getting "serious," whatever that means?  Does a red pill man value sexual choosiness in a woman when he's not married to her?  Is there ever a place in an unmarried red-piller's life for casual sex?  What do you folks think?  
«134

Comments

  • Joskin_NoddJoskin_Nodd AshwanPosts: 4,060Silver Member
    @Kathryn: "When does a Red Pill couple have sex?  After the marriage?"

    Yes.

    " After the engagement? "

    Yes.

    "After they start getting "serious," whatever that means?  "

    Yes.

    The minute you know this looks like a potential long term relationship. If you both agree it's potentially a long term relationship. After that. 

    "Does a red pill man value sexual choosiness in a woman when he's not married to her?"

    To a degree, I think. You don't want a sexual partner fond of one night stands. But sex is an important part of any romantic relationship, so if it looks like this might be an LTR, you might as well start working on your compatibility in that area ASAP. 

    "There are no right biscuits." – Mandrill

  • DancenyDanceny Ft. Collins, COPosts: 998Silver Member
    A Red-Pilled woman would save herself for marriage (or marriage imminent) IMO.  She'd be aware that (1) it shoots her SMV through the roof, and (2) she's almost certain to be unhappy in her marriage if she's sexually experienced.

  • KathrynthegreatKathrynthegreat TeamAmazonWarriorPrincessPosts: 3,770Member
    Danceny, out of curiosity would you commit to spending the rest of your life with someone when you didn't even know if she liked sex?  Not trying to argue with you, I'm just curious.
  • pastorgeekpastorgeek Dodgeville, WI. USAPosts: 752Silver Member
    out of curiosity would you commit to spending the rest of your life with someone when you didn't even know if she liked sex?  Not trying to argue with you, I'm just curious.
    @Kathrynthegreat I did. Mrs. Geek was a virgin (and I was slightly used goods), but I was (and still am) delighted to commit myself to her. Of course, this was before red pills, but she seemed lively enough in every other aspect of her personality and came from a loving family, I figured I was making a reasonable decision.

     "Get slim, get fit, be manly! But mostly, be the guy your wife thought she was marrying!" - me.

    Now blogging at simonpeter.org

  • KathrynthegreatKathrynthegreat TeamAmazonWarriorPrincessPosts: 3,770Member
    edited August 2012
    I hear you, @Pastorgeek.  I was raised Southern Baptist and also waited until marriage.  Didn't turn out as well for me as it did for you.  Talking to other women and men in the church, it seems about 50/50 as far as the actual satisfaction with the decision.  I've spoken with several men in the church who say it's a great idea for a woman to come to the marriage bed a virgin, but they themselves don't actually want to wait.  
  • KathrynthegreatKathrynthegreat TeamAmazonWarriorPrincessPosts: 3,770Member
    edited August 2012
    Full disclosure: I started this thread because right now I'm not remotely interested in re-marriage.  I'm not sure if I ever want to get married again.  But I for sure don't want to spend the rest of my life sexless.  
  • Joskin_NoddJoskin_Nodd AshwanPosts: 4,060Silver Member
    I still say as soon as you think it's going to be serious. Why waste time?

    "There are no right biscuits." – Mandrill

    Version3
  • Version3Version3 Posts: 1,880Silver Member

    I think women being virgins at the start of a marriage is a horrible idea. Two people definitely need to figure out beforehand if they're sexually compatible. Hopefully both can keep partner counts low.

    For us older, post-divorce adults, I'm leaning toward the idea that partner counts matter less, but don't go away completely. I worry about partner counts from younger days here, still. And I don't want to end up with some lady, however nice, who shagged her way through most of the eligible guys in Match.com, but I also don't want to wait for the tenth date or for some limited- or full-exclusivity contract to be negotiated before testing the waters, so to speak, with ladies I'm dating.

    I've only slept with one of the ladies I've dated, and that was after about 5 dates.


    "The pain of discipline is a tiny thing compared to the pain of regret."
     
    It's an obstacle. Get over it.

    technovelist
  • BenBen Posts: 2,783Silver Member
    I'm interested in this topic too, from a slightly different perspective.  I'm a recovering Nice Guy (in the Dr. Glover NMMNG sense) and, unless things take a rather dramatic turn, soon to be single again after nine years of what my woman and I have both come to consider a "marriage without the paperwork."

    In NMMNG, Dr. Glover says that recovering Nice Guys in my situation should be wary about jumping back into a sexual relationship too soon or too early in a new relationship, because sex tends to be a deeply emotional experience for us that can bond us to the other person so strongly (read: one-itis) that we find it difficult to objectively assess whether the relationship is a healthy one that we want to continue.  In Athol's terms, it's as though we get a triple-dose of that pair-bonding oxytocin.  Looking at my past history, all this seems to apply very strongly to me.  For me, sex has always been an instant one-itis engine.

    The standard PUA solution to one-itis is to fuck ten other women.  That solution is probably a good one for someone who has decided on lifelong bachelorhood, but from the perspective of someone who would be dating with an eye toward finding a partner for an LTR and eventually kids and marriage, it seems to involve some pretty obvious down sides when it comes to maintaining a low partner count (I'm currently sitting at two, and don't really want to quintuple that just to prove a point).

    There seems to be a bit of a dearth of good "middle ground" advice between your PUA stuff which is concerned with racking up notches, and MMSL and related blogs which assume the reader is already in a committed marriage.

    For someone in my situation, how serious is serious enough to start having sex?  How does one maintain frame and keep from succumbing to one-itis after the relationship becomes sexual?  If the woman expects things to become sexual before I do, how do I let her know I prefer to wait without turning down a "sure thing" becoming a Display of Low Value?

    None of this is likely to become an urgent concern for me for some time-- in the short term, I'm more concerned with making the final determination that an exit from my relationship is necessary and then making that break as clean and free of complications as possible-- but it's the sort of thing I'm thinking about when I consider the future.

    ---

    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  • DancenyDanceny Ft. Collins, COPosts: 998Silver Member
    Read this.  Basically, a woman ruins her ability to pair-bond if she has any significant past experience.  My little pet theory is that she can only pair-bond to the most "alpha" man who has had her.  You may choose to be a nice, progressive Beta and refuse to hold her past indiscretions against her, but she can't help holding them against you.

    technovelistTPoke
  • BenBen Posts: 2,783Silver Member
    @ichabod:  Well, that's part of the problem: how likely are you to meet "the one" if you're confining your search to college girls who'll put out on the second date?  And while plowing through ten or twenty such women might be a lot of fun and a big ego boost, is that a good trade-off for the potential damage you're doing to your own ability to pair-bond with "the one" once you find her?

    @Danceny:  I'd be careful about drawing such broad conclusions from that study.  There's a pretty obvious causation / correlation problem there.  Is there such a sharp dropoff in marital stability between 0 and 1 premarital partners because having ANY premarital sex permanently destroys the ability to pair-bond, or because women who stay virgins until marriage are likely to 1.) have a strong religious aversion to divorce, 2.) live in a rural area with strong community pressures against divorce, 3.) because they live in such a rural area, have fewer options for "discreet" extramarital flings?

    I'm not saying there's NOT a damaging effect to one's ability to pair-bond when one has multiple partners before marriage, I just think it's an exaggeration to look at that study and conclude that non-virgin = lost cause.

    ---

    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
    technovelist
  • sf64sf64 San FranciscoPosts: 1,901Silver Member
    Perhaps @athol_kay will weigh in... but there is the concept floating around in the Rep Pill universe of "alpha widows."  In the Rational Male blog, Rollo wrote:

    "as Katy Perry so adequately illustrated recently, even ONE prior lover (or even unrequited obsession) can be Alpha enough to upset that bonded monogamous balance. These are the Alpha Widows – women so significantly impacted by a former Alpha (or perceptually so) lover that she’s left with an emotional imprint that even the most dutiful, loving beta-provider can never compete with. A woman doesn’t have to have been an archetypal slut in order to have difficulty in pair bonded monogamy."

    I encountered this once early in my post-marriage dating life.  The woman I was dating had a very early sexual experience with a VERY strong Alpha guy.  She clearly, even 15 years later, still has strong feelings for him.  During the time we were dating, she consciously or sub-consciously was always comparing me to him.  I didn't have the vocabulary at the time to express it, but she was an alpha widow.  

    I think the question is not so much what is her 'n' but where do you stack up on the Alpha ranking of her past lovers / romantic interests.  If you aren't at least in the top tier of Alpha in her known universe, part of her lizard brain will always be wanting to find that again.  And I think the same is true in reverse.  As a guy, if you have slept (in the past) with a "10" who is just a rock star in bed, if you are in a relationship with an "8" who is just not that good in bed, your lizard brain is going to wondering... how do I get that back?

    Note - If you a FO with a Lazy Bear or Low-T husband, ignore everything I say. It probably doesn't apply
    "As he works on his MAP, he's going to do things that piss you off. He has to."  - Steu2817
    "In a world of Alpha's there is no peace for anyone.....welcome to Somalia enjoy your stay" - Highlander2




    ichabodTPoke
  • DancenyDanceny Ft. Collins, COPosts: 998Silver Member
    @sf64:  Yes, that is exactly what I was saying.  Had no idea there was a manosphere term for it.

  • Joskin_NoddJoskin_Nodd AshwanPosts: 4,060Silver Member
    @Ben: "Well, that's part of the problem: how likely are you to meet "the one" if you're confining your search to college girls who'll put out on the second date?"

    The only way to find out is to try!

    "There are no right biscuits." – Mandrill

    technovelistKarl_Hungus
  • BenBen Posts: 2,783Silver Member
    edited August 2012
    @Joskin_Nodd:

    It's just that there's a pretty obvious tension between dating to have sex and dating to find good wife candidates.  By definition, the women who are more likely to have sex with you earlier in the relationship are more likely to have done the same with other men, meaning that they're less likely to be good wife candidates.  So do you focus your efforts on getting sex, and view it as an unexpected bonus if you happen to stumble upon a good wife candidate?  Or do you focus your efforts on finding good wife candidates, and view it as an unexpected bonus if you happen to have some casual sex along the way?  (Or not-so-casual sex with women who seem to be good wife candidates but unexpected dealbreakers emerge before you make it all the way to the wedding day?)  How much casual sex is a nice unexpected bonus, and how much is too much?

    These are the questions I'm asking myself.  Would also very much love to hear @athol_kay weigh in on this.

    The former (go for the casual sex, if you happen to find a wife, hey great) seems to be a pretty common Manosphere M.O., and that sounds like it would work great if you really don't care one way or another if you ever get married.  In my case, though, the whole reason I'm strongly considering leaving my woman is because I want to have kids and she doesn't.  If it weren't for that, our other problems are probably fixable.  So going from that to "well, guess I'll go full PUA and bang some co-eds" seems kind of counterproductive to my ultimate goal of finding a woman worth having kids with.

    ---

    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
    leoslayer
  • sf64sf64 San FranciscoPosts: 1,901Silver Member
    @Ben -- it is a good way to get the one-itis out of the system.

    Note - If you a FO with a Lazy Bear or Low-T husband, ignore everything I say. It probably doesn't apply
    "As he works on his MAP, he's going to do things that piss you off. He has to."  - Steu2817
    "In a world of Alpha's there is no peace for anyone.....welcome to Somalia enjoy your stay" - Highlander2




    Karl_Hungus
  • Joskin_NoddJoskin_Nodd AshwanPosts: 4,060Silver Member
    @Ben: "the women who are more likely to have sex with you earlier in the relationship are more likely to have done the same with other men"

    No, no, it's totally because you are so much more awesome than other men. She wouldn't be putting out like this for some loser. ;)

    "Or do you focus your efforts on finding good wife candidates, and view it as an unexpected bonus if you happen to have some casual sex along the way"

    I think it's probably best to look for good LTR candidates, and once that's established, find out if you're sexually compatible early on. While keeping an eye out for fitness tests that indicate she's planning on ratcheting down the sex the minute that ring is on her finger.

    "How much casual sex is a nice unexpected bonus, and how much is too much?"

    If you find yourself paralyzed from the neck down, it's been too much. Before that, YMMV. :)

    "So going from that to "well, guess I'll go full PUA and bang some co-eds" "

    Could be some diamonds in the rough there for ya. All I'm sayin'.

    Remember all advice I provide on any subject is worth approximately what you've paid for it. 

    @RedPillNewb: "I kind of feel like you can afford to spend a year being non-stop PUA, though."

    Or he can be a picky PUA. Find only the highest quality women that may or may not be good LTR candidates, but have things to recommend them well beyond a little physical attractiveness. Ones that are highly-challenging. Getting to pro-level A-game before you find the best wife candidate may be of seriously high value when it comes to the eventual marriage. In terms of the long-term quality of that marriage. And you can learn a lot with a little sampling, in relationships where you don't feel any fear of "losing the one' if you go overboard with the Alpha. 

    "There are no right biscuits." – Mandrill

  • BenBen Posts: 2,783Silver Member
    Let me phrase the core of my concern a different way, then:

    The common consensus (which I happen to agree with to a large extent) is that a woman with a high partner count represents a proportionally high marriage risk, unless the man she marries is higher-Alpha than the most Alpha of her previous partners by a high margin.  That even if she rationally believes that a partner with strong Beta qualities is a better fit for her current needs, subconsciously (or even quite consciously) she will constantly be comparing him to previous high-Alpha partners and finding him lacking, causing attraction problems.  That, therefore, a woman who wishes to be considered a strong marriage candidate down the road is well-advised to keep her partner count low, becoming sexual with a man ONLY when it becomes necessary for them to explore their sexual compatibility for the purposes of considering a potential marriage.

    My question is: do these same concerns apply to men as well?  If so, to what extent?  If not, why not?  If a man has a high partner count, will he run into the same problem in which he is constantly comparing his wife (who presumably has many strong qualities to recommend her as a lifetime partner, but may not be a perfect 10 in terms of physical attractiveness, or even if she is on the wedding day, is unlikely to remain so over the lifetime of the marriage) unfavorably with the underwear model he banged in his PUA days?  Or is there something specific to male psychology that makes that less of an issue for men?  If this IS a concern, to what extent are the drawbacks of a high partner count mitigated by the advantages (less susceptible to one-itis, greater pre-selection effect)?

    It's not that I'm doubting y'all's advice, I'd just like to see this issue explored a little more deeply.

    ---

    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  • DancenyDanceny Ft. Collins, COPosts: 998Silver Member
    @Ben:  In my experience, yes.  Most of my friends (surprisingly) are alphas who effortlessly got laid when they were young and single.  Almost all of them used the resultant confidence and experience to bag a nice, hot virgin -- you know, the girl from church who LJBF'd me.  All of them said they were glad they got it out of their system, that consequently they know what it is, and they're not missing all that much.

    Fast-forward 8-10 years, without exception they're bored, watching a lot of porn, and itching to cheat.  One has dabbled in swinging, at least one (and I suspect two) has already cheated, and another wants to badly and has hamstered it to the point where he really believes hiding it from his wife is not just OK but noble.

Sign In or Register to comment.