Never underestimate the power of the hamster

An intriguing little survey on re-virginizing confirms a core Game concept:

Watts engaged in a lot of prayer and thought, and now declares herself a virgin once again. “The most important thing was to realize what my values were and what I want in the future and the bigger goals in my life," she says. "That’s why I can call myself a renewed virgin....

But whether this can literally make somebody a virgin depends upon one’s point of view. When Carpenter did a study about what she called “secondary virginity,” she found wide disagreement not only about the plausibility of secondary virginity, but also about whether “virginity loss should be understood as a physiological or an emotional-experiential phenomenon.” Interestingly, of the 61 women and men interviewed, “three-fourths of men adamantly declared secondary virginity to be impossible, compared to about one-fourth of women,” though men sometimes declare that they are born-again virgins, too.

The important point to take away from this is not whether surgical or spiritual re-virginizing is possible. Of course it's not. One can no more un-lose one's virginity than un-lose one's severed arm. And while both arms and hymens can be reattached, it is obvious that a reattached arm is substantively different than one which was never severed in the first place. The scars and the memories remain.

First, a caveat. The survey is tiny and statistically insignificant. That being said, it indicates 75 percent of the surveyed women and 25 percent of the men are willing to shamelessly reinterpret sexual history in the most extreme manner possible. Now, consider how many more people will be willing to do so when the historical revisionism is a little less glaring....

This is not to say that an unwillingness to provide accurate information about one's past necessarily matters a great deal. Honesty is wildly overrated in relationships; there are things we don't even want to know about ourselves, much less anyone else. While the past behavior is an indicator of future behavior, it is not a completely reliable guide. The correct response to any female assertion about her sexual history is little more than a dubious snort and a roll of the eyes, perhaps livened by some exaggeration and amplification. There is absolutely no point in playing sexual prosecutor, much less sexual inquisitor, in order to learn more about what you already know about a woman. In most cases, she's neither a saint nor a completely soulless whore, and over the course of time she'll drop enough references to her various male "friends" from the past - and they will inevitably be described as "friends" rather than "boyfriends" unless they dated exclusively for at least six months - that you'll have a pretty good idea of where she fits on the slut scale. If you lack the ability to read a woman this way, just ask one of your alpha or sigma friends what his estimate would be.

I don't recommend for men to broach the subject at all, because if she thinks her sexual history is something you might find alarming, she'll likely bring the subject up at some point, or alternatively, inadvertantly give the game away. Just listen, note the occasional contradictions when she regales you with her stories, and eventually the picture will become sufficiently clear.

But above all, recall that Alpha Game doesn't concern itself with being first, but rather with being current, and in the case of Married Alpha Game, being last. Men of high socio-sexual rank don't worry about the past; do you imagine Brad Pitt loses sleep over whether Angelina Jolie is secretly pining away for Billy Bob Thornton or some fat little director from her casting couch days? Of course not, because he knows a) Brad > Billy Bob, and, b) if Angelina does inexplicably decide to go back to Billy Bob, he will be free to move on to a younger, hotter woman who hasn't adopted half of Turkmenistan.