Wednesday, June 8, 2016

N matters, a lot


Some might look at this increase in women's premarital N-count and celebrate the sexual liberation of women. But it actually represents a fairly serious social problem, as the next chart will demonstrate.


The chance of finding yourself divorced after five years is presently 560 percent greater if you marry a woman with 10+ partners than if you marry a virgin. Of course, there are one-quarter as many virgins marrying as there were in the 1970s, so it is a considerably more difficult challenge to find one.

The interesting thing about this study is the way that it shows how the second-greatest risk is marrying a woman with only 2 partners; the researcher's theory is that this might be the result of over-emphasized comparisons; the woman has just enough experience to realize that there is something else out there, but not enough to realize that most of it isn't an improvement.

In any event, it is important to recognize that despite one might assume, a woman's premarital sexual experience is actually more of a risk factor with regards to divorce than it was in previous decades.

32 comments:

bob k. mando said...

i'm guessing Kristine Scalzi is pretty much guaranteed to have an N < 2.

so, at least John made a good choice in that regard?

Michael Maier said...

"The interesting thing about this study is the way that it shows how the second-greatest risk is marrying a woman with only 2 partners; the researcher's theory is that this might be the result of over-emphasized comparisons; the woman has just enough experience to realize that there is something else out there, but not enough to realize that most of it isn't an improvement."

Then why would the odds double for 10+ partner broads, getting worse over time? Is that the "crabs pulling the others down in the basket"? IOW: "misery loves company"?

VoodooJock said...

The odds doubling for the 10+ set likely is due to a woman who has that many partners has some other mental short circuit that causes her to either seek personal validation through sex, daddy issues, follow and unquestioningly accept some nonsensical ideology like slut feminism, is bipolar, or has some other issue not listed here. Where the n=2 may be a relatively normal woman who has a basis of comparison, the n=10+ is a strong indicator of some kind of mental/emotional instability.

Cataline Sergius said...

There is also the question of how strongly does a virgin bond with the man who takes her virginity.

I suppose that depends on the value she placed on her virginity as well as and (I know this will sound goofy here) whether his semen came in direct contact with her womb.

The second part is purely speculative but I think there is something to the Genetic Cascade Effect Hypothesis. That there is a micro-physiological as well as emotional bonding that takes place.

Patrikbc said...

I would be willing to bet that the age at which a woman acquired multiple partners also figures into the equation.
For example, a girl who had 10+ partners in her HS years is more likely just validating herself sexually because Daddy issues, and is more likely to plateau and settle into a long term relationship after she matures, as opposed to a woman who steadily acquired 10+ partners into her 30's through a series of 1-2 yr relationships. Of course I think faith would be a huge factor in every case.

RmaxGenactivePUA Mgtow said...

As a man, I’m sick of beating & raping women, it’s about time women learned to start beating & raping themselves

Women need to find a career so they can beat & rape themselves, men beating & raping women is so 1950’s

Women rights are the worst, women beat & rape men & get away with it, while men have to beat & rape women in silence & shame …

#DoubleStandards

#BringBackEquality

DCThrowback said...

This assumes the survey respondents are honest and what constitutes sex from a woman. A BJ is not sex for some, but is for others. Did no one hear watch American Pie?!?

VD said...

This assumes the survey respondents are honest and what constitutes sex from a woman.

Wow, that's a criticism of social science no one has ever heard before! Do tell us more, Captain Obvious.

S1AL said...

I wonder if "2 prior partners" is the sexual equivalent of "just 2 beers".

swiftfoxmark2 said...

Sending your daughters to college destroys marriage.

dc.sunsets said...

I know it's sacreligious to say it, but men can suffer from too many partners, too.

I doubt my divorced friend J is unique. He once told me his wife was not the woman with whom he'd shared the greatest sexual passion. I have zero doubt that the wild-in-the-sack girl he described intentionally put on a porn-inspired act expressly to put her face on every one of his subsequent orgasms. A college acquaintance of my wife used this exact phrase to describe her intentions. Is a great sex experience worth sharing it with a witch?

Did J's stained memory of a Linda Lovelace sex partner help doom his marriage?

praetorian said...

I wonder if "2 prior partners" is the sexual equivalent of "just 2 beers".

Yeah, I'd take the N and double it, just like you take N for men and halve it.

Fathers who can keep their daughters chaste until an early marriage are modern day saints.

dc.sunsets said...

We never escape a single one of our experiences. I counseled my sons to be damn careful what experiences they embedded prior to marriage.

dc.sunsets said...

Can daughters be taught to value what they have, without encouraging more feminine arrogance?

I ask from a state of ignorance. I only raised sons, but now have tiny granddaughters.

Amy said...

Dunno, d.c. Virginity is ridiculed by boys and girls in high school. You'll have to work hard to get a girl to prize it, but she'd probably hide it to avoid humiliation with her peers, cutting the arrogance factor down.

dc.sunsets said...

Amy, as you know, virginity is even more ridiculed for boys. I don't know what my sons' history was for sure, but it's reasonable to infer they all were extremely choosy and turned down multiple opportunities.

I hope they are able to inculcate a high level of low time preference with regard to each girl. Only time will tell.

Amy said...

Well, try to get them to spend time with the girls as much as possible, now and later. Be a hard ass dad who keeps her so involved in sports and arts and studies, police her friends for the slightest whiff of bad behavior, and don't let them "hang out" alone with friends.

It's just too risky, you want to ensure virginity you have to be watchful all the time, and even that is no guarantee. Vet friends, vet boyfriends, steel the soul against the inevitable tantrums. By 20 or so, the anger will fade and a sens of appreciation for the guidance will style in.

VFM #7634 said...

Virgin divorce rates have gone down because in our society, only hard-core religious types who divorce very reluctantly are still virgins, whereas in the 1980s there were still some secular virgins.

Funny how sluts were the second-lowest divorce risk in the 1980s after virgins. Most likely because they knew they were ho-bags and they were lucky to get married at all. (As with the low rate that black women divorce white men.) But as the stigma of having high N has receded into the distance, their divorce rates have spiked to where they'd more "naturally" be.

The interesting thing about this study is the way that it shows how the second-greatest risk is marrying a woman with only 2 partners

Two theories:

1) Those may be fairly conservative religious girls who were brought up being told premarital sex and divorce was bad and held off sex to an extent, but went nuts with the divorce as an adult. But they didn't have enough time to accumulate 4-5 partners like the secular women did.

2) Women with 4-5 partners are less likely to get married AT ALL than those with 2 partners, choosing cohabitation instead. If marriage and cohabitation are considered together, those with 4-5 partners are still higher breakup risks than those with 2.

LibertyPortraits said...

I wonder if these studies control for race.

liberranter said...

The odds doubling for the 10+ set likely is due to a woman who has that many partners has some other mental short circuit that causes her to either seek personal validation through sex, daddy issues, follow and unquestioningly accept some nonsensical ideology like slut feminism, is bipolar, or has some other issue not listed here.

I think you've nailed it.

FPW said...

Having sex with a lot of partners becomes a habit for women. What makes men belief they will give up this habit when the meet them (“Mr. Right” – haha).

From: http://freedompowerandwealth.com

JP said...

Well think of it like this: Every time you buy a new car you like, it's because one or more features stand out for you. E.g. the BMW has a nice engine, the Mercedes has a nice interior, the Ford is cheap to maintain, the Subaru has a nice AWD system. Problem is, none of them have all the features you like and have grown used to. So now no one car is ever going to tick all those boxes for you, so you buy a Cadillac, but every now and then you go out and rent a BMW or a Corvette to get that thrill you're missing.

Only instead of cars, we're talking about dick.

Timmy3 said...

At least for a 5 year old marriage, divorce rape is not as much of a problem for a short marriage.

Mark Adams said...

Do you link to the study?

Jon M said...

Not even once.

Forget 9+ partners, once a single premarital patner quadruples the risk of divorce. In any other endeavor that kind of swing would make massive headlines. You maybe get one freebie, but that line from 2 to 10+ has a flat trend line.

'No hymen no diamond' isn't sexist, it's intelligent risk assessment.

tihald said...

Study can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/h6rdc7h
Interesting to note that the N "in most cases, (includes) their future husbands."

Michael Maier said...

What bothers me is how many women encourage this idiotic, whorish behavior in their daughters.

It's almost as though they want their kids as sullied as they were.

liberranter said...

'No hymen no diamond' isn't sexist, it's intelligent risk assessment.

IRA for men has been outlawed as misogynist, or soon will be.

What bothers me is how many women encourage this idiotic, whorish behavior in their daughters.

It's almost as though they want their kids as sullied as they were.


Many indeed do want their daughters to grow up to become angry, damaged, bat-shit-crazy sluts, or are at least indifferent to what their daughters become.

We need to remember something, folks. The last three-plus generations of kids, both male and female, have been "latchkey kids," abandoned by their careerist, feminist mothers (many of them promiscuous skanks like their daughters) to raise themselves. This pretty much guarantees that whatever character flaws mom has will be replicated and amplified in daughter. This certainly shouldn't surprise anyone who has been paying attention.

Bob Loblaw said...

I can't help but think for a woman who is a virgin at marriage, the qualities that made her a virgin are the qualities that make her a more reliable wife. Faith, probably, as well as enough character to delay gratification when it's appropriate.

VoodooJock said...

I'm not certain the average woman has either the agency or the capacity to understand anything other than the immediate consequences of a given course of action.

It wouldn't surprise me if you factor in single motherhood, high divorce rates, and a cultural absence of shame that women subconsciously encourage the same behavior they've engaged in because the single/divorced mothers are in competition for the same pool of alphas that their daughters are. Throw in the added "plus" of the older woman being at a distinct disadvantage due to her age and the fact she's had kids. It's a sordid way of leveling the playing field.

Male conflict is direct aggression and the application of violence. The female's is passive aggression and covert manipulation. A male dominated hierarchy, the guy that whoops the tail off the leader winds up the leader. In a female one, it's the one who's most adept at backstabbing the competition.

Jackie DeLister said...

Well how many of the N are N's is the more important question.

Jackie DeLister said...

Well how many of the N are N's is the more important question.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.