Post: #1

http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/03/19...y-results/

Quote:4. Female infidelity was strongly correlated to lifetime number of sex partners:

1-3 partners: 0% cheated

4-9 partners: 20% cheated

10+ partners: 43% cheated

Quote:6. Male infidelity and being betrayed by one’s wife were both strongly correlated to the male’s lifetime number of sex partners:

1-3 partners: 3% cheated, 14% betrayed

4-9 partners: 12% cheated, 30% betrayed

10-19 partners: 28% cheated, 31% betrayed

20+ partners: 43% cheated, 43% betrayed

If you have a high notch count you're a lot more likely to cheat (duhh) but you're also a lot more likely to be cheated on by your wife.

Why? Perhaps it's because "alpha" men with higher notch counts marry far hotter women and since there is a correlation with physical attractiveness and number of sex partners and therefore infidelity. It might also be because the men marry the same kind of woman they were slaying as a bachelor, rather than switching to a "good girl".

Quote:35% of the men with 20+ partners were divorced.

I also know that women with over 50 notches have a divorce rate of 90% It's 10% for women with only one (their husband).

All in all, if you date a or marry a slut you will get fucking cheated on and probably divorced. Don't think you won't get cheated on because of how alpha or "awesome" you are (this argument was used by the white knight manginas on a local lair, in trying to convince a guy to stay with his slutty girlfriend). It is total bullshit.

The next time somebody doesn't like you using the word slut, point out these statistics to them and own them completely.

Post: #2

Define slut. It's 2012 now. A woman who knows what she wants and goes out and get it is wrong for doing that? That word has fucked the game up. Women want to hold on to their pussy just so they don't want to seem like a "slut" but they wanted to fuck you the first or second night.

I had a female roommate in '09-10. She was 26 and valued her pussy. During her younger years she was a little wild but calmed down while she was my roommate. Her cock count was in the 30's easy and that year she smashed maybe 5 dudes. Does that make her a slut? She did the ONS once. Players on this forum notch counts are ridiculous. Are all the women we SNL sluts? I don't know.

Point is the game has changed since the 90's. Back then you had to "go together" to get that pussy. Early 00's the legs started to open up. Now 2012, the value of pussy has plummeted because women are so free with it. They are getting theirs just like we are getting ours. +10 for an American girl isn't shit. Anything less and she's probably a Christian.

Post: #3

Was that Beta? Haha. I hate having to put in work longer than needed just because a lizard doesn't want to seem like a slut. I guess I need to step my game up even more.

Post: #4

Strong post.

(03-22-2012 05:16 AM)P Dog Wrote:  If you have a high notch count you're a lot more likely to cheat (duhh) but you're also a lot more likely to be cheated on by your wife.

Why? Perhaps it's because "alpha" men with higher notch counts marry far hotter women and since there is a correlation with physical attractiveness and number of sex partners and therefore infidelity. It might also be because the men marry the same kind of woman they were slaying as a bachelor, rather than switching to a "good girl".

It's mostly myth that the more prolific men shack up with innocent nice girls. People are going to marry from among the people in their circles, for the most part, so there will be some positive correlation in partner counts. I was surprised by the betrayal rates though, I'll have to look into that.

(03-22-2012 05:16 AM)P Dog Wrote:  All in all, if you date a or marry a slut you will get fucking cheated on and probably divorced. Don't think you won't get cheated on because of how alpha or "awesome" you are (this argument was used by the white knight manginas on a local lair, in trying to convince a guy to stay with his slutty girlfriend). It is total bullshit.

Disagree - there is always going to be variation. Sure, a virgin bride is better than Miss Three Digit Notch Count. But there are things you can do to lower the risk, most notably in choosing wisely. Get together a representative group of girls with say, a count of 10, and they won't have uniformly bad, adulterous marriages. A virgin is the best option if you can get it, but if you can't, there are still things you can do to lower your risk.

(03-22-2012 05:16 AM)P Dog Wrote:  The next time somebody doesn't like you using the word slut, point out these statistics to them and own them completely.

I've done just this before, and people are slightly floored. "Wait, whaaaat?"

Post: #5

As usual, people have a difficult time interpreting stats. Just to remember, however, the amount of participants in this survey:

Quote:There were 232 male and 59 female responses that were usable

Is too small to be significant.

Also,

Quote:Thanks to HUS readers who participated in the Fidelity Survey.

There's a huge selection bias, since Susan Walsh sent over Hooking Up Smart readers to participate. These readers all have an ideological edge to grind out.

However, let's go through the stats:

Quote:1. Married, admitted to cheating:

Females: 8%

Males: 15%

2. Married, betrayed by spouse:

Females: 14%

Males: 23%

Women lied about their cheating at nearly 3 times the rate that they actually cheated on their husbands.

Right away, we know everything that women say is bullshit on this survey. Total skepticism is required.

There's also the added complication that most husbands never catch their cheating wives, so the amount of males that report being cheated on is probably too low. 23%? I bet that number is closer to double.

Quote:4. Female infidelity was strongly correlated to lifetime number of sex partners:

1-3 partners: 0% cheated

4-9 partners: 20% cheated

10+ partners: 43% cheated

How can anyone reasonably believe this? Those in the 1-3 part might be cheating and not admitting it. Their reputation is too important.

They will lie to anyone, even themselves. I don't doubt that they cheated at a lower frequency than the higher partner count, but to say that 0% cheated is a lie.

Quote:6. Male infidelity and being betrayed by one’s wife were both strongly correlated to the male’s lifetime number of sex partners:

1-3 partners: 3% cheated, 14% betrayed

4-9 partners: 12% cheated, 30% betrayed

10-19 partners: 28% cheated, 31% betrayed

20+ partners: 43% cheated, 43% betrayed

This statistic is misleading as fuck.

Notice, that as the man's partner count increases, the % chance of the woman cheating on him increases. That's because as his sexual experience with women increases, so does his ability to spot female infidelity.

What it shows is that the men with more partner counts are more likely to catch female cheaters, not that men with lower partner counts are less likely to be cheated on.

Remember what we know:

- A man with 1-3 partners is most likely a beta.
- All women have the same nature.

A beta is unlikely to catch his woman cheating. None of the girls with boyfriends I've fucked have ever let their boyfriends know about it, nor do they catch her.

Betas are clueless.

Quote:7. 35% of the men with 20+ partners were divorced.

Because men with game have more options, and are less likely to put up with bullshit in a marriage.



In summary, these statistics were a meaningless blog experiment with too low of a sample size and biased participants.

Because of the inability for females to tell the truth on sexually related matters, there's zero credibility on what can be said about women in this survey. Do sluttier women make for worse wives? Maybe, but you can't tell from the liars on this survey.

And what this survey says about men is that Alpha males enjoy the company of more women in their lifetime, and deal with less abuse from the women they are with. Since they can recognize a woman for who she is, they are more likely to have a higher quality of love life.

Post: #6

(03-22-2012 10:41 AM)Samseau Wrote:  As usual, people have a difficult time interpreting stats. Just to remember, however, the amount of participants in this survey:

Quote:There were 232 male and 59 female responses that were usable

Is too small to be significant.

Also,

Quote:Thanks to HUS readers who participated in the Fidelity Survey.

There's a huge selection bias, since Susan Walsh sent over Hooking Up Smart readers to participate. These readers all have an ideological edge to grind out.

However, let's go through the stats:

Quote:1. Married, admitted to cheating:

Females: 8%

Males: 15%

2. Married, betrayed by spouse:

Females: 14%

Males: 23%

Women lied about their cheating at nearly 3 times the rate that they actually cheated on their husbands.

Right away, we know everything that women say is bullshit on this survey. Total skepticism is required.

There's also the added complication that most husbands never catch their cheating wives, so the amount of males that report being cheated on is probably too low. 23%? I bet that number is closer to double.

Quote:4. Female infidelity was strongly correlated to lifetime number of sex partners:

1-3 partners: 0% cheated

4-9 partners: 20% cheated

10+ partners: 43% cheated

How can anyone reasonably believe this? Those in the 1-3 part might be cheating and not admitting it. Their reputation is too important.

They will lie to anyone, even themselves. I don't doubt that they cheated at a lower frequency than the higher partner count, but to say that 0% cheated is a lie.

Quote:6. Male infidelity and being betrayed by one’s wife were both strongly correlated to the male’s lifetime number of sex partners:

1-3 partners: 3% cheated, 14% betrayed

4-9 partners: 12% cheated, 30% betrayed

10-19 partners: 28% cheated, 31% betrayed

20+ partners: 43% cheated, 43% betrayed

This statistic is misleading as fuck.

Notice, that as the man's partner count increases, the % chance of the woman cheating on him increases. That's because as his sexual experience with women increases, so does his ability to spot female infidelity.

What it shows is that the men with more partner counts are more likely to catch female cheaters, not that men with lower partner counts are less likely to be cheated on.

Remember what we know:

- A man with 1-3 partners is most likely a beta.
- All women have the same nature.

A beta is unlikely to catch his woman cheating. None of the girls with boyfriends I've fucked have ever let their boyfriends know about it, nor do they catch her.

Betas are clueless.

Quote:7. 35% of the men with 20+ partners were divorced.

Because men with game have more options, and are less likely to put up with bullshit in a marriage.



In summary, these statistics were a meaningless blog experiment with too low of a sample size and biased participants.

Because of the inability for females to tell the truth on sexually related matters, there's zero credibility on what can be said about women in this survey. Do sluttier women make for worse wives? Maybe, but you can't tell from the liars on this survey.

And what this survey says about men is that Alpha males enjoy the company of more women in their lifetime, and deal with less abuse from the women they are with. Since they can recognize a woman for who she is, they are more likely to have a higher quality of love life.

If you are worried about getting cheated on, it might help to remove "cheating" from the equation.

I've had to learn to not take rejection personally. I chalk it up to bad game. And, we know that bad game can be improved upon.

So, when a girl "cheats" on you, she's really just rejecting your bad game. If you want to argue that even with the best game, a woman will stray, then you have to accept that as part of the game and not give yourself oneitis.

Post: #7

I didn't look into the source, as I was posting quickly. A survey of HUS readers is close to worthless, if you want to make generalizations about the population at large. Who knows what kind of mindfucked delusional ex-sluts read and lame men read HUS.

Samseau's point about more experienced men being better at discovering cheating is a good one.

Here's a much better source:

The Social Pathlogist I, II, III, The Virgin Bride

Quote: a link between promiscuity and infidelity was statistically established. The mean number of lifetime partners was 4.67. The unfaithful had a mean of 7.73 whilst the faithful had a mean of 3.78. (p<0.001) all have their faults. But with regard to promiscuity, all studies show an increase in the risk of divorce and infidelity correlated with cumulative partner count. People may legitimately argue about the degree of the effect but no study shows a protective or indifferent effect.

(03-22-2012 10:56 AM)soup Wrote:  I've had to learn to not take rejection personally. I chalk it up to bad game. And, we know that bad game can be improved upon.

So, when a girl "cheats" on you, she's really just rejecting your bad game. If you want to argue that even with the best game, a woman will stray, then you have to accept that as part of the game and not give yourself oneitis.

Martyring yourself for the failures of others is no way to go through life. You don't give the girl any responsibility for her actions. She fell and tripped onto a guy's dick? Whoops, your fault.

Attributing failure to your game and her character is a balancing act. I wrote a post on it here.

If a girl cheated on me, I would probably try and identify factors which contributed to her cheating. But at the end of the day, she'd still be a worthless whore to me, while I'd be 100% blameless.

Post: #8

(03-22-2012 11:41 AM)basilransom Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 10:41 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

I didn't look into the source, as I was posting quickly. A survey of HUS readers is close to worthless, if you want to make generalizations about the population at large. Who knows what kind of mindfucked delusional ex-sluts read and lame men read HUS.

Samseau's point about more experienced men being better at discovering cheating is a good one.

Here's a much better source:

The Social Pathlogist I, II, III, The Virgin Bride

Quote: a link between promiscuity and infidelity was statistically established. The mean number of lifetime partners was 4.67. The unfaithful had a mean of 7.73 whilst the faithful had a mean of 3.78. (p<0.001) all have their faults. But with regard to promiscuity, all studies show an increase in the risk of divorce and infidelity correlated with cumulative partner count. People may legitimately argue about the degree of the effect but no study shows a protective or indifferent effect.

(03-22-2012 10:56 AM)soup Wrote:  I've had to learn to not take rejection personally. I chalk it up to bad game. And, we know that bad game can be improved upon.

So, when a girl "cheats" on you, she's really just rejecting your bad game. If you want to argue that even with the best game, a woman will stray, then you have to accept that as part of the game and not give yourself oneitis.

Martyring yourself for the failures of others is no way to go through life. You don't give the girl any responsibility for her actions. She fell and tripped onto a guy's dick? Whoops, your fault.

Attributing failure to your game and her character is a balancing act. I wrote a post on it here.

If a girl cheated on me, I would probably try and identify factors which contributed to her cheating. But at the end of the day, she'd still be a worthless whore to me, while I'd be 100% blameless.

Internal would say that cheating is a giant shit test, whereas external would say it's out of your control. Either way, you can't take it personally.

Come on, do you really expect girls to actually be able to carry any kind of responsibility in these matters- most of them are mechanically-caving-to-their-emotions, attention-whores.

Post: #9

(03-22-2012 05:16 AM)P Dog Wrote:  1-3 partners: 0% cheated

Mathematically impossible.

As for your use of the word slut, its just a shaming word for women that don't subscribe to your view of what they should do with their sexuality.

As such, its your problem, not theirs.

Post: #10

(03-22-2012 02:13 PM)Lumiere Wrote:  As for your use of the word slut, its just a shaming word for women that don't subscribe to your view of what they should do with their sexuality.

As such, its your problem, not theirs.

No. Slut is shorthand for 'higher risk for exclusive relationships.' That's the point of mentioning these studies - they prove that designating girls as sluts has a useful purpose.

Partner count per se isn't everything. But girls with high counts tend to be more lax about about fidelity. Which is apparent from the statistics in the posts I linked.

(03-22-2012 01:12 PM)soup Wrote:  Come on, do you really expect girls to actually be able to carry any kind of responsibility in these matters- most of them are mechanically-caving-to-their-emotions, attention-whores.

If you never hold them responsible, they will never behave responsibly. If they can't behave responsibly, I wouldn't be mooring myself to them.

Post: #11

(03-22-2012 02:13 PM)Lumiere Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 05:16 AM)P Dog Wrote:  1-3 partners: 0% cheated

Mathematically impossible.

As for your use of the word slut, its just a shaming word for women that don't subscribe to your view of what they should do with their sexuality.

As such, its your problem, not theirs.

and are we shaming the fatties by calling them fatties? and i guess its my problem not theirs

Post: #12

Basil, nope there are extensive studies of couples still in long term relationships (think 30 years plus) that show that 2 third of men and 3 quarters of women are not faithful meaning almost nobody is faithful in the long term.

Human being are pair-bonders. Not lifelong monogamists.

Slut shaming is an out dated and outmoded form of expressing paternity concern (the fear that you may be cuckolded into raising someone else's child) a fear that has no foundation in an era of DNA paternity testing.

Slut shamers are operating on old programming that is obsolete. They just have not relaised it yet.

Post: #13

(03-22-2012 02:21 PM)lurker123123 Wrote:  and are we shaming the fatties by calling them fatties? and i guess its my problem not theirs

So your question is are you shaming them by shaming them?

Erm, yes you are.

Strange question.

Post: #14

(03-22-2012 02:18 PM)basilransom Wrote:  If you never hold them responsible, they will never behave responsibly. If they can't behave responsibly, I wouldn't be mooring myself to them.

Truth spoken.

Female sexuality has a tendency to run rampant when it goes unchecked.

All of us players here at the RooshV forum are eating up the feast that this has led to, but the now-sexless males that build civilization are less inclined to produce.

Concerning females, fidelity, etc. as this thread focuses upon, the only female I've been with that I'd consider a keeper, is one whose virginity I got.

Non-virgin, non-keeper.

Post: #15

it's about calling a spade a spade. its not "my problem" when i call a slut a slut and a fattie a fattie. sounds like feminist-speak

Post: #16

(03-22-2012 02:27 PM)Lumiere Wrote:  Basil, nope there are extensive studies of couples still in long term relationships (think 30 years plus) that show that 2 third of men and 3 quarters of women are not faithful meaning almost nobody is faithful in the long term.

Human being are pair-bonders. Not lifelong monogamists.

Slut shaming is an out dated and outmoded form of expressing paternity concern (the fear that you may be cuckolded into raising someone else's child) a fear that has no foundation in an era of DNA paternity testing.

Slut shamers are operating on old programming that is obsolete. They just have not relaised it yet.

Sluts have a damaged ability to pair bond as well, which these stats demonstrate. The Virgin Bride link I posted shows that virgin brides have a much lower divorce rate.

And there's more than just child paternity at stake. It's also about emotional fidelity, divorce risk, adultery. The risk of all these is higher with sluts.

Your logic goes like this - "hey man, you could get shot when you're living in a swanky part of town too. So you might as well save money and live in a gangster-ass ghetto." You can never entirely eliminate risk, but you can reduce it.

I don't need to prove that non-sluts, whatever that is, never cheat. Just that they cheat demonstrably less.

Post: #17

(03-22-2012 02:33 PM)lurker123123 Wrote:  it's about calling a spade a spade. its not "my problem" when i call a slut a slut and a fattie a fattie. sounds like feminist-speak

When you call a spade a spade you are stating a fact

When you call a fattie a fattie you are stating a fact

When you call a woman a slut you are expressing a fear that is rooted in something that does not exist any more.

See the difference?

Post: #18

(03-22-2012 02:38 PM)Lumiere Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 02:33 PM)lurker123123 Wrote:  it's about calling a spade a spade. its not "my problem" when i call a slut a slut and a fattie a fattie. sounds like feminist-speak

When you call a spade a spade you are stating a fact

When you call a fattie a fattie you are stating a fact

When you call a woman a slut you are expressing a fear that is rooted in something that does not exist any more.

See the difference?

slut (websters) - a promiscuous woman

pretty straight forward, but im not going to get into a definitional debate

Post: #19

(03-22-2012 02:32 PM)MSW2007 Wrote:  Female sexuality has a tendency to run rampant when it goes unchecked.

If you are a guy who enjoys getting laid then you should consider this a very good thing.

(03-22-2012 02:32 PM)MSW2007 Wrote:  Non-virgin, non-keeper.

Your self-limiting beliefs are showing here.

Post: #20

slut (websters) - a promiscuous woman

That's always been my definition. Has nothing to do if she is or is not "seeing" someone.

Granted, in general people use the term in a derogatory fashion. My own views are the more of a slut the better. Less work for me.

Post: #21

(03-22-2012 05:16 AM)P Dog Wrote:  http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/03/19...y-results/

It is worth pointing out that those are the results of an online survey run by a game blogger with a very limited attendance (232 male and 59 female responses). And their interpretation is indeed one-sided.

Quote:4. Female infidelity was strongly correlated to lifetime number of sex partners:

The correct interpretation is that "female reporting of infidelity was strongly correlated to reported lifetime number of sex partners". Which is a very different thing - for example it is possible that females with more lifetime sex partners are more open about their infidelities (i.e. will not lie about having them).

More, the correlation may be simply casual - surely a girl who had 20 partners had more chances to cheat than a girl who only had one.

In short, this is not necessary true.

Quote:I also know that women with over 50 notches have a divorce rate of 90% It's 10% for women with only one (their husband).

May be caused by different things. For example I'd expect a chick with 50 notches to be much more attractive/social than a chick with one. Same as in 4 - the chick with one notch may actually want to cheat, but being fat and ugly she simply has no such options.

Quote:The next time somebody doesn't like you using the word slut, point out these statistics to them and own them completely.

I really doubt anyone could be "owned" with this kind of statistics...

Post: #22

(03-22-2012 02:43 PM)Lumiere Wrote:  If you are a guy who enjoys getting laid then you should consider this a very good thing.

Yes. As I wrote in my earlier post:

Quote:All of us players here at the RooshV forum are eating up the feast that this has led to

However, I don't think it bodes well long-term for social harmony and the advance of civilization.

Post: #23

(03-22-2012 02:32 PM)MSW2007 Wrote:  Non-virgin, non-keeper.

LOL.
Every one of those girls with 20+ partners was a virgin once. Did it make her a keeper?

Post: #24

(03-22-2012 02:41 PM)lurker123123 Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 02:38 PM)Lumiere Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 02:33 PM)lurker123123 Wrote:  it's about calling a spade a spade. its not "my problem" when i call a slut a slut and a fattie a fattie. sounds like feminist-speak

When you call a spade a spade you are stating a fact

When you call a fattie a fattie you are stating a fact

When you call a woman a slut you are expressing a fear that is rooted in something that does not exist any more.

See the difference?

slut (websters) - a promiscuous woman

pretty straight forward, but im not going to get into a definitional debate

You did not answer my question.

As for your websters definition, a promiscuous woman simply means a woman who is having more sex than your approve of.

Which leads us to the inevitable question ... how is that your fucking business anyway?

It also begs the question of why you consider the root cause of the fear (being cuckolded) relevant in a DNA paternity testing world?

Post: #25

(03-22-2012 02:18 PM)basilransom Wrote:  If you never hold them responsible, they will never behave responsibly. If they can't behave responsibly, I wouldn't be mooring myself to them.

I'm not sure that holding them responsible is the best way to get them to behave in general. What exactly do you mean holding them responsible- calling them out on cheating? By then, it's over.

I believe with the right game, you can get girls to do anything, even not cheat. So, I guess that makes me an "internalist."