Post: #1

How slutty is the average woman? By slut, I mean a woman who is interested in having sex with men solely for the sake of sex. Are they picky about who they fuck, or do they have bangathons when no one is looking?

Time to reveal your jaded side guys. Do you believe:

A.) All women are sluts, but just need the right circumstances.
B.) Most women are sluts, but some women are extremely prude.
C.) Most women are prudes, but some women are so slutty we perceive all women as sluts.


I'll start with my bias: I'm in the "A" camp. But let's make the case for each category.



A: Women are emotional creatures. They will fuck a man if he can make her feel the right emotions to do so, and the right logistical situations are provided (a private room for sex, etc.).

The evidence for this is provided by players who have experience with lots of women. Players all claim to get girls from all walks of life: married women, women with boyfriends, virgins, regular women you see on the street everyday - there is no pattern. By any measure of this experience, it follows all women are sluts.

And, as far the "counter" evidence goes, women who claim they aren't sluts are just liars, and surveys that measure total partner counts are bogus because women have strong incentives to lie - both to themselves, and to others. Also, some women have genuinely small partner counts because they are too damn ugly to attract any alpha males.



B: Although women are emotional creatures, they still can control their behavior. If they wish to stick to a principle, they can and will make a man wait for sex. She doesn't need to have sex just because a guy makes her feel good. She can also avoid situations that will leave her emotionally vulnerable and avoid the kinds of men who might be able to seduce her.

Thus, while most women lack self-control, there are still "good women" who choose their men based on logical decisions and stick to their decisions out of principle. These are the kinds of women you want to raise your children with.

It is also the case that as women age, they become more choosy with their men because they realize they are quickly approaching the wall and will need to settle down sooner rather than later.



C: Looking at average sex partner surveys we see that most women are extremely picky about the men they bang. Women keep their legs closed and only fuck a small handful of men over the course of their lifetimes. Men who believe women are really slutty are just in fact, subconsciously or not, really good at seeking out slutty women. These men then extrapolate their experiences to be the norm, when in fact it's completely abnormal.




Out of these three positions, where do you fall?

Post: #2

I'd say "A" in general, but my viewpoint is "B", which I voted. I still hope that there is a glimmer of hope, somewhere, somehow.

That said, I am not against women having high partner counts (the traditional sluttiness). C is misguided but does hold an important kernel of truth. Namely, that women on average don't have higher partner counts than men (how could they, globally speaking)? It's just that a woman who has an average number of partners (i.e. not slutty), yet gives it up only to alphas, is just as bad as the one who gives it up to lots of alphas, and is definitely worse than the one who gives it up indiscriminately to both alphas and betas. She is just extremely calculated (in the long run), but that does not make her any better, or make good men suffer any less.

I thus propose a new measure instead of "good girl" and "slut" labels that we now know: The Jerk Reward Score (JRS).

JRS = (# of partners who were alphas, players, thugs, criminals and other men that women generally claim they don't want) / (# of partners).
(Disclaimer: I don't equate players with criminals, ofc., I'm just grouping together men who generally don't really care about her other than for her holes)
Alternatively:
JRS = (# of times when she had sex with men who were alphas, players, thugs, criminals and other men that women generally claim they don't want) / (# times she had sex). This is a more forgiving and more realistic measure, that is not overly judgemental and that I can live with. I won't chew a woman up because she had a one-night stand in the past, provided it's not a pattern.

Barring a few exceptions, I'd hazard a wild guess virtually all modern, western women have JRS above 80%. And anything above 50% is already very disturbing, while anything above 20% is worrying. A 0% is ideal, but where do you find such a woman?

Post: #3

I'm somewhere between A and B. I've definitely known chicks who have a lot of hangups about sex for whatever reason (religion, neuroses, bad experiences, etc.), and although I understand the point that even they would probably give it up to the right man under the right circumstances, it doesn't seem like it's black and white enough to merit calling those girls sluts when the reality is that their attitudes toward sex will ultimately lead them to having very few lifetime partners. Sure, there are probably plenty of super-alphas that they'd bang if the opportunity presented itself, but realistically that's not going to be anywhere near a frequent occurrence for a girl who's generally very prudish and not regularly putting herself in those situations.

I guess if you wanted to nail it down, I'd say in theory A, in practice B.

Post: #4

I'm with gringochileno.

(10-07-2012 03:19 PM)gringochileno Wrote:  I've definitely known chicks who have a lot of hangups about sex for whatever reason (religion, neuroses, bad experiences, etc.),

We use the word "frigid" here (or at least in my circles) to describe that kind of behaviour.

Post: #5

I don't see how the options are so opposed to each other.

Post: #6

(10-07-2012 04:54 PM)soup Wrote:  I don't see how the options are so opposed to each other.

Mind elaborating?

Post: #7

I'm in the A camp. A few years ago before my game was honed I would have said B. My opinion changed somewhere between banging girls who would pick up their boyfriend's calls while I was inside them and having a friend's girl grab my cock under the table at a dinner.

Post: #8

(10-07-2012 10:53 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(10-07-2012 04:54 PM)soup Wrote:  I don't see how the options are so opposed to each other.

Mind elaborating?

As far as game is concerned, these assertions are all implying the same thing: regardless of how often they have or want sex, all girls have a buying price, it's just a matter how good a salesman you are. Sex is based on a bartering system. The better the salesman, the easier it is to buy/bang them.

Not believing that all women are whores is flirting with the blue-pill: "Maybe there are some pure ones out there." Nope. I'd bet the greatest players can "buy-out" the biggest "prudes."


A.) All women are sluts, but just need the right circumstances.

This is pro-game

B.) Most women are sluts, but some women are extremely prude.

Also pro-game.

C.) Most women are prudes, but some women are so slutty we perceive all women as sluts.

Pro-game.


Do girls really have "hang-ups" about sex, is there such thing as a "prude" or is that we haven't yet discovered the right game technology to deal with this resistance?

The more pressing question is "What are the limits of the game?"

Post: #9

soup Wrote:As far as game is concerned, these assertions are all implying the same thing: regardless of how often they have or want sex, all girls have a buying price, it's just a matter how good a salesman you are. Sex is based on a bartering system. The better the salesman, the easier it is to buy/bang them.

Call me supplicating, but given that the (relatively) widespread emergence of Game is just a reaction to a shift in female preferences, I think it could be the opposite of this. Men don't conquer unwilling or even prudish women with great game, they just give those women what they want. A woman who really doesn't want game because she has other preferences simply won't be swayed because those things wouldn't excite her or seem valuable to her, no matter how great of a salesman you are. Of course, such women are extremely rare nowadays - practically extinct.

Post: #10

I'm in the B camp.

Quote:I mean a woman who is interested in having sex with men solely for the sake of sex.

Most women can get sex *and* other things at the same time, whether that's commitment, gifts, money, whatever.

In general though, I have a hard time saying all girls are sluts, since there are plenty of girls out there who aren't down to fuck. 'Deep down,' they may want to, but what if they live with their parents, and they'd be completely ostracized if they banged someone outside of marriage? Does it really matter how they are 'deep down' if it won't be expressed? Are some girls very reluctant to have sex with men who won't be their boyfriends? Promiscuity is hugely dependent on context. I can't claim to know how girls are deep down, I can only judge them by what they do.

I was reviewing some travel threads about a place that I'm going to be visiting... and several guys said, 'most of the locals are just not DTF. Avoid them.' I trust this over the game equivalent of the 'big baller troll' who insists if you can't get laid in every context, your game is inferior to his. That all these religious/conservative girls are secretly sluts - sometimes they are, sometimes they're legit.

Eel, I was thinking about sluttyness, and how I end up banging girls. If you've banged strange girls more than a few times, you know it's a crapshoot. It's almost random which girls you sleep with and which you don't - eg you banged Laura because she had an apartment nearby, but you didn't bang Jenny because she had a flight to catch in two hours. I find it far sluttier when a girl sleeps with random men who happened to be in the right place and the right time, than a girl who slept with more men, but each choice was a rational, thought out decision, in the context of an ongoing relationship. A decision that she would've made regardless of the momentary logistics and persistence that are so essential in getting same night lays. Nowadays, girls are so flakey and flighty that many of their lays are random, like I've described.

Post: #11

(10-08-2012 10:11 AM)soup Wrote:  

(10-07-2012 10:53 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(10-07-2012 04:54 PM)soup Wrote:  I don't see how the options are so opposed to each other.

Mind elaborating?

As far as game is concerned, these assertions are all implying the same thing: regardless of how often they have or want sex, all girls have a buying price, it's just a matter how good a salesman you are.

On the contrary, what I'm saying that some girls have no buying-price.

Handsome Creep Eel Wrote:It's just that a woman who has an average number of partners (i.e. not slutty), yet gives it up only to alphas, is just as bad as the one who gives it up to lots of alphas, and is definitely worse than the one who gives it up indiscriminately to both alphas and betas.

What difference does it make if she gives it up just for betas or alphas? If she's still banging lots of guys, does it matter?

Gringochileno Wrote:Sure, there are probably plenty of super-alphas that they'd bang if the opportunity presented itself, but realistically that's not going to be anywhere near a frequent occurrence for a girl who's generally very prudish and not regularly putting herself in those situations.

Well you believe in A then. According to B's theory, there are women out there who would NEVER succumb to the most alpha of alpha males...

Mujeriego Wrote:I'm in the A camp. A few years ago before my game was honed I would have said B. My opinion changed somewhere between banging girls who would pick up their boyfriend's calls while I was inside them and having a friend's girl grab my cock under the table at a dinner.

Yep... even worse is when there's a picture of the boyfriend next on the bedstand next to the bed you're banging her on.

basilransom Wrote:I find it far sluttier when a girl sleeps with random men who happened to be in the right place and the right time, than a girl who slept with more men, but each choice was a rational, thought out decision, in the context of an ongoing relationship. A decision that she would've made regardless of the momentary logistics and persistence that are so essential in getting same night lays. Nowadays, girls are so flakey and flighty that many of their lays are random, like I've described.

Good point. You know when you get a "proximity bang", due to good logistics and such, that the girl was just in the mood for a convenient bang and you happened to be best penis closest to her.

Post: #12

I tend to think that guys who say ALL women are sluts have a selection bias. They screen for dtf women or only pick them up in certain venues etc. No doubt there are a lot of sluts out there though, in Western countries.

However, I think most girls are not sluts by nature. They are not polygamous like men, simply because they cannot procreate with more than one member of the opposite sex at the same time (unlike men). They know that any man that has reason to doubt the child is his, will be less likely to take care of it. Therefore they are more likely to pick ONE guy that is capable of providing for her and the child (hypergamy).
Furthermore, frequents wars and famine etc historically reduced the number of men so the remaining alphas could form harems. Women typically outnumbered men so they couldn't be sluts even if they had wanted to.

Male and female sexuality are different from each other. Example: A guy who is dating a Vicoria Secrets perfect 10 model, will still feel tempted to bang an 8. A girl who is dating George Clooney will hardly feel attracted to a B or C-list actor. Also, a man's value increases for every (attractive) partner he has, while a woman's value decreases.

Media, feminism, the welfare state, culture and other factors definately changes women's slection criteria though in the West. It used to be exclusively about physical strenght etc but now it's arguably more about fame. Since they get everything handed to them on a plate and there are more men alive, you see more sluts today. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a welfare state, it's the other factors I have a problem with.

Post: #13

Personally I think the time frame of life and living situation is more relevant for women than men. Am I wrong on this? I think it's possible that a girl could have a period of a few years of slutting it up and then go relatively monogamous. For instance while off at college or living far away from family and friends. Granted some will continue to try to ride the carousel until they are dried up.

People's brains change according to their environment.

1. Urban vs. rural life
2. Social/family support structure
3. Mental age
4. Friends and social norms
5. Financial stability

I'm sure there are a bunch more, those were some big ones off the top of my head. As all these factors change so will the degree of expressed "slutty" behaviors.

Post: #14

Quote:I think it's possible that a girl could have a period of a few years of slutting it up and then go relatively monogamous.

The next question becomes: To what extent is every hot girl in her prime a slut?

Post: #15

(10-08-2012 05:51 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:I think it's possible that a girl could have a period of a few years of slutting it up and then go relatively monogamous.

The next question becomes: To what extent is every hot girl in her prime a slut?

Almost every hot girl in her prime I have known has a guy who they are in a relationship with and then an ex/new guy ready up to bat after that. They don't stay single. So the question becomes how many dudes are they banging at the same time. I'd say 67-75% have cheated on someone they were with in their prime. Or in girlspeak made a "mistake." There's probably a subset that have only cheated once or twice, maybe 15-25%. The other 50% ride the carousel with abandon in their prime.

Post: #16

basilransom Wrote:Eel, I was thinking about sluttyness, and how I end up banging girls. If you've banged strange girls more than a few times, you know it's a crapshoot. It's almost random which girls you sleep with and which you don't - eg you banged Laura because she had an apartment nearby, but you didn't bang Jenny because she had a flight to catch in two hours. I find it far sluttier when a girl sleeps with random men who happened to be in the right place and the right time, than a girl who slept with more men, but each choice was a rational, thought out decision, in the context of an ongoing relationship. A decision that she would've made regardless of the momentary logistics and persistence that are so essential in getting same night lays. Nowadays, girls are so flakey and flighty that many of their lays are random, like I've described.

That is a good thought as far estimating unrealiability goes. But at least an excuse could be made that she just wanted sex and didn't know the man any better. In relationships, I often see girls staying with and sleeping with guys who make it completely obvious (sometimes even very directly) that they don't see her as more than fuck-buddies, yet make her wet and thus the girls conveniently rationalize everything about them for years. Of course, my argument relies on the assumption that it is at least a bit important whom the woman sleeps with, which leads us to...

Samseau Wrote:What difference does it make if she gives it up just for betas or alphas? If she's still banging lots of guys, does it matter?

A) For a Beta, getting some easy, casual sex is an extremely rare occurrence with high marginal benefits (happiness) simply because it otherwise never happens to him. It simply feels better to feed a starving beggar, who might really need help, than someone already swimming in food.
B) The civilization (not just Western) is generally built on the principle that Betas will be able to get some reward for working in it. I don't know why I still care about civilization, but still. The idea of a girl sleeping with criminals, murderers, rapists, and etc makes me seriously mad. Of course players are not criminals of any kind, but the female motivation for sleeping with either group is the same (dominance).
C) Betas on average rank more highly in "positive" character traits, such as empathy, agreeableness, kindness, humility. All of this of course makes them failures with women when you consider those as sexual (anti-)attractiveness traits, but in the general, human sense, who wants to hang out with the opposite?
D) It means that a girl is simply very sexual, but doesn't require lots of game, being dominated, etc. I would call her "giving". This is in contrast to girls who require lots of game (that is, the majority nowadays) and almost never sleep with Betas, except for those few times necessary to hook them up for marriage and alimony / child support.

I'll be the first to admit that these arguments are flimsy, and simply a nostalgia of someone who has been suffering for years before discovering game. I can't say that I'm not satisfied now, but it's obvious that I'd have been happier if I had lived in a world that was kinder to Betas and never have been forced to learn game. Survival of the fittest is necessary, but I don't think it makes anyone happy.

Or in other words, the size of the sexual market doesn't really bother me. It's the extreme re-distribution towards the top that does. And I adapt and find lots of joy and pride in it, but I still think that I'd have found a lot more if I had never been forced to adapt. Kind of like a survivor of World War might feel.

Post: #17

Quote:A) For a Beta, getting some easy, casual sex is an extremely rare occurrence with high marginal benefits (happiness) simply because it otherwise never happens to him. It simply feels better to feed a starving beggar, who might really need help, than someone already swimming in food.
B) The civilization (not just Western) is generally built on the principle that Betas will be able to get some reward for working in it. I don't know why I still care about civilization, but still. The idea of a girl sleeping with criminals, murderers, rapists, and etc makes me seriously mad. Of course players are not criminals of any kind, but the female motivation for sleeping with either group is the same (dominance).
C) Betas on average rank more highly in "positive" character traits, such as empathy, agreeableness, kindness, humility. All of this of course makes them failures with women when you consider those as sexual (anti-)attractiveness traits, but in the general, human sense, who wants to hang out with the opposite?
D) It means that a girl is simply very sexual, but doesn't require lots of game, being dominated, etc. I would call her "giving". This is in contrast to girls who require lots of game (that is, the majority nowadays) and almost never sleep with Betas, except for those few times necessary to hook them up for marriage and alimony / child support.

I see. I guess there is a difference between an altruistic slut and a selfish slut.


The WW2 comparison is very apt, by the way, at least in cultural terms...

Post: #18

None of the above.

Women are emotional creatures. Of those, some will be more emotionally attached to the idea of chastity than they will be to attracted to any individual cock...so naturally the stronger force wins out.

Post: #19

Related thought:

Regardless of a girl's score on whatever metric one uses for sluttiness, is she PRESENT during sex?

Is our sex a two-way interaction? Are they fucking ME or are they just fucking?

I'm not even talking "starfish" syndrome -- some girls work their asses off but still exude a "not fully present" vibe.

In my experience there are two types of girls and these types are orthogonal to sluttiness:

1. Present During Sex -- deep eye contact, sensuality of touch, her actions and sounds dance with mine, truly enjoys sex, allows for a true moment of animal bonding

2. Distant During Sex -- some eye contact, but defaults to closing eyes, seems elsewhere, her moves seem "pre-dialed-in", her sounds may mirror mine but aren't furthering the "conversation", likely uses sex as an escape or for validation, enjoys what the sex represents, less so the physical act

Caveat: type 2 is easily confused with a Girl Who's Not That Into It. But there is a distinct type 2 who IS into it, but has a low ceiling on her ability to share a "pair bonding moment", which in my experience, can occur in non-love, casual sex.

A true type 2 turns me off more than a high-notch-count type 1. The "JRS" score above does matter to me, but far less so than a girl being a solid type 1 as described above.

Post: #20

For me, even though B appears to represent day-to-day life the most accurately, I believe that ultimately A is true.

Post: #21

Some interesting thoughts about slutiness in this thread.

I voted A.

To me a girl is a slut when:
1)she has the chance (logistics, deniability) to have sex with a man she is sexually attracted to, and she takes that chance without asking for commitment in return.
2)she cheats on her boyfriend/husband.
3)she uses sex as a tactic to obtain what she wants (except for a stable marriage and children).

Point 2 and 3 are straightforward.
Since it requires absolutely zero effort for even a very plain girl to have sex with attractive men, a women who gives away her most valuable possession (her body) for free is a slut as well, hence point 1.

A girl who has never done one of the three points above has only abstained because:
-she is too ugly to get picked up by attractive men, no matter how drunk they are.
-she is restricted by her situation (living with the parents, religious person who is afraid of witnesses). If these restrictions are removed (logistics improve, zero chance of others finding out), girls in this category slut up as well.

If she is alone in the room with Brad Pit (or whatever other guy they drool over nowadays), he wants to fuck her, and the chance of someone ever finding out is zero, then every single girl will allow it to happen. Doesn't matter if she is religious, engaged, married, has children,...

Post: #22

A. Reason being there's almost always a certain guy (or girl). somewhere, that will make just about any girl drop everything to fuck him/her in the moment, on the spot, if she could. Guaranteed.

This is why so much of game points back to logistics. Logistics is by far the #1 element that's stopped me from sealing the deal.

Here's a little BI story the girl I took to a bar to watch a band told me last night.

"OMG, I went out to smoke a cigarette just now and this girl walks up at side of club into smoking area and says to another girl:"Holy shit, the craziest shit just happened to me. I was just about to get into my car, this girl is walking by, says I'm hot and walks over and starts coming onto me, we make out, get in the car, and she ate my pussy so good I just had 3 of the most intensely powerful orgasms I've ever had in my life. Then she just left my car and walked away."

Mind you, this rock club has a strip club in the same strip mall a few addresses down. So maybe a feral stripper. Haha. But yea, that's about how slutty I consider most women, just like the girl telling this story to my date.

Post: #23

I voted C.

The discussion is centered around females post birth control. Women will avoid sexual contact if there are consequences biologically or conditioned socially. That being said... I think in the current day and age, in the absence of all normalcy, A is probably more true than the other options.

Post: #24

I've been mulling this over for the last few days. Maybe because of vestiges of residual beta are fighting red pill, but here are my thoughts.

It really depends what we consider 'slut'. Guys having replied to this thread seem to differ. Does it mean fucking a dude on the first date? Does it mean cheating? Is it notch count? Will any woman spontaneously have sex with someone she finds very attractive, given the right circumstances (logistics, single(?), not a virgin, not religious, etc)? For me, probably.

Will any woman cheat? Will any woman have sex before marriage? Will any woman be convinceable to have a ONS? In my mind, of course not (Hence my 'B' vote).

I can't help but think that the guys (even the veterans much more experienced than me) have a bit of confirmation bias going on. Yes, you can always find wives that'll cheat. Yes, it might be surprisingly high, and a shame. Yes, a lot of religious girls are freaks. But don't forget that you're nexting all the girls who AREN'T going to do that.

The more pro the player, the faster the next - and hence you're getting a biased sample of what women are like. We train ourselves to skip the ones who AREN'T going to cheat, to be sluts, whatever. We think all girls are willing to drop their panties to the right guy, because we only bang girls who have been willing to drop their panties when we've demonstrated we're the right guy.

No serious player says he can get any girl. A serious player just says he's got good, reliable statistics given enough approaches. That's a definite limitation on sample size. And yet many here are saying that any girl is inherently slutty.

Would appreciate comments.

Post: #25

I think it's mostly sampling bias, and I agree there's not a good definition of slut that we all agree on. We next all the girls who we think won't bang us quickly.