If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
But maybe those women who believe screwing any breathing male nearby is empowering really are referring to empowering their ability to divorce the dude who is unlucky or stupid enough to marry her.
You can read more here as well as see a graph:
http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
From the above link:
"Note, the really disturbing [finding] still holds. As soon as a woman has had more than one partner her long term marital stability risk drops to near 50%."
Thus, a woman's value for marriage or long-term-relationship really is tied to her chastity. Women instictively know this. That's why they always lie about their sexual history. They underreport by half.
Anyway, I figure women will react to this like Dracula to a cross. Hay, I'm just the messenger. It is Science!
I forgot to click the “excerpt” checkbox.
It is an excerpt. The linked pdf is a lot longer.
http://www.ncfr.com/pdf/press_releases/PRESS%20RELEAS2.pdf
OH yeah, the comments at the linked blog might offend some people, especially since we’re talking about sluts and how they have trouble with marriage.
It makes sense to me. For fun, you ought to post this on a liberal, feminist board, and watch the fur fly.
Maybe in gross statistical terms, number of divorces. However, any women who has had sex outside marriage, even if it's with her future spouse, has learned that sex and marriage are not related, that sex is not related to commitment or care for another, that sex is an expression of selfishness first and foremost. Bad lessons to take into marriage.
So basically people who are essentially married without the paperwork continue to do well once the paperwork is done? Meanwhile serial monogamy doesn’t work?
Does the study examine men?
Have you guys come up with a word for a male slut yet? They are equally abhorrent to God, you know. Just asking.
It would be interesting to see which of these women are the children of divorce.
Maybe divorce is an evil feedback cycle.
But you know, it was necessary to bring about the golden age of communism for the pleasure of the Prince of the World.
Moreover correlation is not causation.
People from traditional societies and/or religions tend to not cohabitate OR divorce. This fact will reveal a correlation between cohabitation and divorce, but is not in any way indicative that cohabitation makes divorce more likely.
I would go so far as to say that the majority of the problem, in a manner of speaking only, is a *lack* of cohabitation before marriage. Now, I did not say “sex”. Here is the predicament.
1) Boys and girls, and later young men and young women, are kept apart until they are of marriageable age. Then they are put together, told to marry and have children, and live in a balanced, stable relationship, knowing absolutely nothing about the opposite sex.
2) As bad or worse, boys and girls, and young men and young women, have unrestricted sex with each other for a great length of time before they would normally want to get married.
In *either* case, this sets them up for a failed marriage.
What they *need* is non-sexual socialization, hopefully under the watchful gaze of a chaperon. They have to learn how to work together, play together, exercise together, communicate with each other, learn how the other gender functions as human beings, and talk about their dreams and ambitions.
Today, children in public schools get nothing like this. They are “alone in a crowd” of the other gender. Girls segregate with girls, and boys with boys. At the same time, both genders get extreme and intense propaganda, starting at a very young age, that tells them they *should* be hyper-sexual, and in warm, loving relationships with multiple partners. Impossible goals, met by no one. But if they fail to achieve these things, they are “undesirable.”
Then along comes the charming brain tumor known as pornography, utterly twisting their expectations beyond any hope of normality.
So how hard is it, for society to set up some relaxed situation, where young people can just socialize, without *doing* anything, or being pushed and in a hurry, where politeness is the norm, and gender segregation is not encouraged?
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
The study says that the more sexual relationships a woman has before marriage, the more likely the marriage will end in divorce. Mens' previous sexual relationships were not part of the study. Interesting discussion on the thread. Considering that one of the unchangeable moral absolutes throughout history especially espoused by every religion, is that sex is for within marriage only, for men and women, I am sure that men with many sex partners also negatively affect marriage stability.
It seems that recently societies generally tolerate a bit more leeway with men; but the truth is that "whore mongers" should be condemned just as much as "whores" (courtesy of MichiganConservative). Can't have the one without the other. Also, this "toleration" is more general than personal - meaning, "whore mongers" in one's own family are a lot less congenial than theoretical ones in books. Sexual virtue is not only personally satisfying and gives self-respect, but makes it so that a person so acting sees others not as sexual toys or machines, but human beings apart from potential sex gratification.
This non-exploiting mentality colors a persons life in every way.
People are not merely meat animals; but eternal souls, and are expected to and enjoined to use self control - even in the face of temptation. This used to be the cultural standard, two or three generations ago. Now the cultural standard is:
"You're all animals, no God is in control, eat drink and be merry because tomorrow you die, the person who dies with the most toys (sensually gratifying experiences) wins, the only happiness that exists is what you can eat, drink or have sex with."
Oh, and this important one - I see this a lot on FR lately:
"If you practice or promote sexual virtue, you're psychologically weird, a closet homosexual, a prude, old fashioned, and a member of the Taliban."
The most salient finding from this analysis is that women whose intimate premarital relationships are limited to their husbands -- either premarital sex alone or premarital cohabitation -- do not experience an increased risk of divorce.Of course, a lot depends on whether the husband of such a woman remains faithful after marriage himself. Thanks MichiganConservative and grellis.
If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
It's not just women who are hurt by all of this, as even some MRA's are starting to point out.
do0d, i KNOW you want to get in on this one :)
Seriously??!! What in the world are you thinking? Do you realize that in order for the woman to become a “slut” as you so delicately put it there needs to be a man involved in the process? What about the man? What label does he receive? He probably be hailed as a hero for sleeping around with as many people as he can. Do you think he won’t have trouble staying true to whomever he marries?
Your logic is a major fail.