The war on men

[derspiess]

I think "slut" should be embraced not rejected. Nothing wrong with it if thats who you are.

Nah.  Deviants should be treated like deviants.

[Jacob]

Typical single-family house in the greater Montreal area sells in excess of 300 000$.  Actually, 200 000$ will get you a side by side duplex.

So, you get a house, 400 000$ in Laval.

10 years later, you divorce.

You owe the bank 300 000 of your 400 000$, you owe your spouse 200 000$ as her share of the house.
You can refinance the mortgage and pay your spouse, assuming you can afford the mortgage alone.
Then you need to pay him or her so the lifestyle remain the same.  It doesn't need to be much, but if you make 150k$ a year and she makes 75k$ a year, you need to pay her so she can live as if you were together.
I wouldn't call that very rich.

Yet, you now have to sell the house and find yourself a small apartment or a small condo.

Really? The ex gets $200K of the $100K equity? That sounds pretty outlandish. Here in BC, you'd have to sell the house and, assuming you can sell it for $400K, each partner gets $50K.

[merithyn]

Maybe those men trying to "prove the superiority" in fact don't want to feel they are left with the crumbs, haven't you thought of that? No one wants to feel he or she is the second choice, or the best choice "so far", or "the one he or she's settling for". That need is pansexual, in both men and women. People want to feel special and loved for who they are when they commit. They want to commit with someone who wants him or her for who he or she is, not because he or she's "settling for" as his or her partying time is done and the clock's ticking.

Can people change? Sure. I sure did, I was a man-whore before and I committed. But my girlfriend knew it all, and she chose to go past it. But it was well within her right not to accept my sexual past, and it is my responsability to make sure I am worthy of her trust.

Your insistence that people should never take the other partner's sexual past into account when taking a decision to commit is baffling. It gives a lot of information on the person's character, especially when things don't go his or her way. So yes, if a woman is perceived a "slut" men won't tend to commit with that person, because past is indicative of future behavior.

Yeah, I don't buy it. Sorry.

[merithyn]

Really? The ex gets $200K of the $100K equity? That sounds pretty outlandish. Here in BC, you'd have to sell the house and, assuming you can sell it for $400K, each partner gets $50K.

Same here. It would have been nice to get the full equity in my house with my ex, but I was happy with half.

[derspiess]

Yeah, I always considered a slutty past to be a deal-breaker in terms of any serious long-term relationship.  Way too much baggage and risk.

[merithyn]

So yes, if a woman is perceived a "slut" men won't tend to commit with that person, because past is indicative of future behavior.

This is the part that doesn't make sense. If this is the case, why wouldn't men be all over women who are considered a "slut"? I mean, doesn't "slut" essentially mean that she enjoys sex? How is that not a selling point?

[merithyn]

Yeah, I always considered a slutty past to be a deal-breaker in terms of any serious long-term relationship.  Way too much baggage and risk.

I have no problem with people who feel this way so long as they, too, were careful with who they had sex with. In other words, were you just as pure as you expected of your potential long-term relationships?

[Jacob]

This is the part that doesn't make sense. If this is the case, why wouldn't men be all over women who are considered a "slut"? I mean, doesn't "slut" essentially mean that she enjoys sex? How is that not a selling point?

Because that kind of man wants her to enjoy sex with him only, not with anyone else. All the past sexual history indicates that she enjoys sex with not-him. This sets him up for the worst-case scenario: what if she enjoys sex with all these other men, but not him?

Conversely, the best case scenario is already excluded: she turns into a sex-ravenous slut for him, but is uninterested in sex with anyone else.

AKA the virgin-whore complex.

Surely you must have heard of it before?

[derspiess]

Yeah, I always considered a slutty past to be a deal-breaker in terms of any serious long-term relationship.  Way too much baggage and risk.

I have no problem with people who feel this way so long as they, too, were careful with who they had sex with. In other words, were you just as pure as you expected of your potential long-term relationships?

Close enough.  I think a 2:1 or 1.5:1 ratio is fair.

[Viking]

Well indeed, such a woman would not be considered to be "wife material" by a lot of men, either. So yes, negative connotations do exist, and do matter.

I'm not saying that a woman's reputation doesn't play a role anymore. It does, as no sane man wants to commit with a slut, or a monkey brancher, or a woman that would pull her chips out and leave for the flimsiest of reasons. What I'm saying is that the negative connotation is not on the children being born out of wedlock, but their mother's lack of emotional maturity and commitment. Here in Quebec, a mother having children by more than one father is far from being abnormal, and far from being the object of gossip and social shinning as here reconstituted families are the norm more and more.

This from the man who's refusing to marry his girlfriend because it's important to her. 

substitute the words

"man" for "woman"
"marry" for "give blowjob to"
"girlfriend" for "boyfriend"
and
"her" for "him"

and please explain to me how saying the male version of that doesn't make me a male cheauvinist pig?

[merithyn]

Because that kind of man wants her to enjoy sex with him only, not with anyone else. All the past sexual history indicates that she enjoys sex with not-him. This sets him up for the worst-case scenario: what if she enjoys sex with all these other men, but not him?

Conversely, the best case scenario is already excluded: she turns into a sex-ravenous slut for him, but is uninterested in sex with anyone else.

AKA the virgin-whore complex.

Surely you must have heard of it before?

No, I can honestly say that I haven't. What a weird, bizarre world men live in.

[Drakken]

Yeah, I don't buy it. Sorry.

Funny how when a man tells you how quite a few men feel, suddenly you are "not buying it". Guess I'll use that line when you come over and explain how women feel about how double standards suck.

Telling you how it is, a lot of men are getting more and more jaded about women and commitment, because they are not buying it from women's mouth either.

[derspiess]

Because that kind of man wants her to enjoy sex with him only, not with anyone else. All the past sexual history indicates that she enjoys sex with not-him. This sets him up for the worst-case scenario: what if she enjoys sex with all these other men, but not him?

Conversely, the best case scenario is already excluded: she turns into a sex-ravenous slut for him, but is uninterested in sex with anyone else.

AKA the virgin-whore complex.

Surely you must have heard of it before?

A swing and a miss.

A slutty woman is more likely to cheat.  You're more likely to run into some guy she did circus acts with (awkward!), and I wouldn't want a woman of loose morals raising my kids. 

But I never insisted on virginity in a potential wife.

[Valmy]

Yeah, I always considered a slutty past to be a deal-breaker in terms of any serious long-term relationship.  Way too much baggage and risk.

Heh.  Tons of previous marriages or remaining a virgin until 30 strike me as also being situations with baggage and risk.

[merithyn]

substitute the words

"man" for "woman"
"marry" for "give blowjob to"
"girlfriend" for "boyfriend"
and
"her" for "him"

and please explain to me how saying the male version of that doesn't make me a male cheauvinist pig?

Well, if you were saying that the cause of that was "emotional immaturity", there would be a problem.

And if getting a blow job is that important to you, I strongly encourage you to find a woman who isn't averse to giving them.