Retrograde Jealousy

[paze]

Thanks for the last few responses. These are actually constructive and helpful, other than butt-hurt feminist hate which does nothing but ruin a relationship. Quite some "advice" you witches are dishing out there.

[Starnique]

Deep down she was always looking for love even if she let herself influenced by this crazy world. Women are incurable romantics and always will be. She was young, weak and stupid and didn't know better at that time, that's all. But women also have very little memory for guys who fail to make them happy even if the approach was maybe wrong on both sides. Any guy a woman could have met in the past has literally zero importance when she finally falls in love with someone. It's almost like an amnesia. And everything is like a first time again, so don't ruin it for her. She probably felt disappointed both by them and herself but was caught for some time in that game that people like to pretend and call fun nowadays. Love is what she's really been after but maybe she just needed some growing up to do and meeting you in order to realise it.

Valixy is such a sweetheart. This. I'm sure it stroked your ego a little bit too. = )

I still say that when it comes to guys with double standards. You get what you get. You're sloppy yourself so how are you any better?

[VincenzoG91]

Invent a time machine or dump her. Otherwise, I don't see how you're going to get past this. Next relationship, do not ask about her sexual history, because unless she is a virgin, you're clearly going to have a problem with it.

http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/556754-you-cant-handle-the-truth

[Wakeup]

You think you pissed off the angry ladies? watch what they say to me now. lol

Nothing double standary about your response, Horndog.

[Wakeup]

Thanks for the last few responses. These are actually constructive and helpful, other than butt-hurt feminist hate which does nothing but ruin a relationship. Quite some "advice" you witches are dishing out there.

Ya, remember how stupid what we're saying is when you think she's thinking about #21. That should help you get over your double standard thinking.. afterall, we're all just "butt hurt feminists" with nothing to say worth worrying about.

FI

[paze]

Ya, remember how stupid what we're saying is when you think she's thinking about #21. That should help you get over your double standard thinking.. afterall, we're all just "butt hurt feminists" with nothing to say worth worrying about.

FI

I don't worry about a pair of nutcases who go absolutely ape-shit at the mention of this subject.

I can just see how touching and hard this must be for some women. I'm glad that I encourage my woman to not be ashamed and she doesn't seem to be. She regrets it, sure, but she's not ashamed and I don't want her to be, seeing as I realize that the problem lies 100% with me and not her.

This subject must be very personal to you. I'm thinking that you lost a guy because of this..

You both have signatures that point to "The truth" and how we all need to "deal with it". I'm guessing you both had boyfriends who had problems "dealing with it" and your bitching and screaming didn't help them so they left.

I may be off, but I'll rest easy thinking that's what's up.

[Starnique]

You're an idiot and off. I guess that's why you came here looking for help. You clearly lack self esteem and you have insecurity issues.

[Wakeup]

lol... well, as long as you "rest easy" its all good.

Think on this while you're feeling "easy." I'd have nothing to do with a man who is as insecure and whacked out to the point that he can't stop thinking about who I was with before I got with him. He'd lose me upon the first indication that he was going to judge my number when he's been getting just as much "experience."

Look up the word "hypocrite" and maybe you'll learn what caused all the curfuffle... at least from me.

BTW: You're the only one who's gone "apeshit" in here.

[okwhat2013]

"I thought I was promiscuous with my 20+ partners but now my girlfriend, who logically should be more prude and reserved sexually (being a woman) as dictated by society"

Seriously? You know how stupid this sounds? Who the hell are all these men suppose to be sleeping with then to get their numbers up? Other men??? wait society frowns on that too....ok..well..I am pretty stumped then, how do all the men get to 30 without any women getting past 20?

[toknow]

I don't know what motivated her to TELL you about her sexual history; it really wasn't any of your business, but now that the cat is out of the bag, you have to decide if you can live with it or not. What you CAN'T do is to "accept" it, and then punish her indefinitely.

A lot of men react the way you do to a woman's sexual past. I suggest you never ask another woman about her history, except as it is directly relevant to you (does she have STDs, inability to conceive children, etc.).

It's absolutely his business and a person's past can reveal a lot about his future. But, if OP really wants this relationship and expects to be with her, then he shouldn't have asked as this will make it pretty hard to deal with if he cares for her on a deeper level.

[paze]

Look up the word "hypocrite" and maybe you'll learn what caused all the curfuffle... at least from me.

BTW: You're the only one who's gone "apeshit" in here.

I like how a lot of people in this thread are biologically inept. Do you seriously not realize why it's "the norm" for women to hold back while men are encouraged to hump all they want? As you seem quite illiterate on the subject and your ability to argue the point extends to yelling "MUH VAGINA" I will clarify with a quote:

The most popular answer to this question came from Symons in 1979. It concentrated on the fact that reproductive strategies are shaped by evolution. In his explanation he states that male investment in parenthood is minimal, but for a woman it is abundant. Therefore, he stipulated that sex for a man has ample benefits at little cost, however for a woman, the cost is substantial even if the pleasure is high, she risks possible pregnancy and pain during childbirth. She then may have to raise the child alone if the man is not good enough to be a father, or if he has left. The risk of high cost should be an incentive for a woman to hold back, and therefore the man must offer considerable benefits to counterbalance this.[5]

In case you don't understand the text, biologically, sex is cheaper for me than it is for you. As a species, we multiply faster by having me hump as much as possible while we multiply stronger by having you seed out the bad subjects.
This is the generally accepted theory of why society has women conforming to lay back on the sex and instead picking a good mate, while men should try their luck as much as possible but only eventually succeed.

Today, this "filter" is broken (which may account for the stupidity in this world and the fact that idiotic fraternity boys are reproducing faster than mathematical geniuses). Women don't sleep with feminist men. They are mostly repulsed by them. If they would, all men would be feminist as everything they do is dictated by the urge for some lovin'. But no, that's not what women want. They are still primitive to the point where "alpha attitude" comes in front of intellect and yet they expect us to understand that they are now intellectually adept to sleep around as we men do. We don't understand, because the majority of men that you sleep with are ****ing douchebags (or 'threats' while we are talking on a purely biological level) to other men. It's only after you've been ridden to the point of failure that you find a decent guy and expect him to take care of you. Am I sounding harsh? Probably. Does it ring true? Absolutely, in overwhelmingly many cases. But of course, I'm not going to speak for all women (or men), there are exceptions. But before you tell me that I'm a ****ing hypocrite, you need to actually read up on what the hell we are talking about and understand the ACTUAL reasons behind insecurity and anger in men directed towards women who have multiple partners. You can't just ****ing cry and moan that it's "unfair" and that it's "based on no grounds". Of course it's based on sound grounds, it's the fact that I am willing to look past them for her sake that actually saves the relationship, not me blaming myself for the way I feel. That would be going against my natural instincts and should not be expected.

[Wakeup]

trolling troll trolls.

Anyway, I will add: By all means, dump the "slut" and find yourself someone less like yourself. Simple.

[paze]

trolling troll trolls.

Anyway, I will add: By all means, dump the "slut" and find yourself someone less like yourself. Simple.

No. I am still waiting for more women to chime on how they feel about their past. You think about previous partners and how they satisfied you better, while your husband sits by, oblivious to your filthy fantasies. That is your opinion and that is okay (for everyone else).

Another reader stated that every experience was like her first and she had forgotten everyone else.

I'd like to hear more and if it's generally accepted that women think the way you do, then, yes, I would dump her. I wouldn't like the thought.

In case you hadn't figured (I don't suppose you would) I am looking for a silver lining here. Something good in this bad to cling on to.

[horndog]

I like how a lot of people in this thread are biologically inept. Do you seriously not realize why it's "the norm" for women to hold back while men are encouraged to hump all they want? As you seem quite illiterate on the subject and your ability to argue the point extends to yelling "MUH VAGINA" I will clarify with a quote:



In case you don't understand the text, biologically, sex is cheaper for me than it is for you. As a species, we multiply faster by having me hump as much as possible while we multiply stronger by having you seed out the bad subjects.
This is the generally accepted theory of why society has women conforming to lay back on the sex and instead picking a good mate, while men should try their luck as much as possible but only eventually succeed.

Today, this "filter" is broken (which may account for the stupidity in this world and the fact that idiotic fraternity boys are reproducing faster than mathematical geniuses). Women don't sleep with feminist men. They are mostly repulsed by them. If they would, all men would be feminist as everything they do is dictated by the urge for some lovin'. But no, that's not what women want. They are still primitive to the point where "alpha attitude" comes in front of intellect and yet they expect us to understand that they are now intellectually adept to sleep around as we men do. We don't understand, because the majority of men that you sleep with are ****ing douchebags (or 'threats' while we are talking on a purely biological level) to other men. It's only after you've been ridden to the point of failure that you find a decent guy and expect him to take care of you. Am I sounding harsh? Probably. Does it ring true? Absolutely, in overwhelmingly many cases. But of course, I'm not going to speak for all women (or men), there are exceptions. But before you tell me that I'm a ****ing hypocrite, you need to actually read up on what the hell we are talking about and understand the ACTUAL reasons behind insecurity and anger in men directed towards women who have multiple partners. You can't just ****ing cry and moan that it's "unfair" and that it's "based on no grounds". Of course it's based on sound grounds, it's the fact that I am willing to look past them for her sake that actually saves the relationship, not me blaming myself for the way I feel. That would be going against my natural instincts and should not be expected.

Hmmmmm, ok. Then using your theory on male evolution about the male being encouraged to "hump" as much as possible, unless these males are humping sheep or other men then that would mean that there would also be a lot of females getting "humped". Your girlfriend is then therefore nothing more than a by-product of the theory of male evolution that you subscribe to. Get over it and appreciate her or go "hump" somebody else. Your theory created her and with the theory that you subscribe to monogamy appears to be out the window anyway so why are you even in a relationship?. Go!, Go now! hump away.......... far away.

[Wakeup]

Newsflash, sport. you're insecurity about who came before you (pun intended) makes you a piss poor choice for a LIFEpartner for someone who has as many or more then you. Your inability to bond without judgement makes you "Next-worthy." The fact you've been promiscuous will make it harder for a chaste woman to trust you. So: Lose/Lose for you.

There is no silver lining unless you stop keeping on defending your hypocracy and accept her for who she is now. If she's not the chaste chicky you wish she was then end it now and let her find a man who isn't a hypocrite and can love her for who she has become rather then judge her for it.

You think about previous partners and how they satisfied you better,

Don't put words in my mouth, please. no one said *I* think about prvious partners, I said she (your partner) will be doing that and I said it to spite your hypocratic ass.