A look at how women might view their sexual identity within a sex drenched culture.
Author’s Note: This post is based on a conversation between TheDeti and NovaSeeker and is coauthored by Jack. Links to original comments are listed under References.
Reader’s Note: The theme for the month of August is Snickerdoodles! — Studies of Female Failures.
Length: 3,000 words
Reading Time: 10 minutes
Warning: Explicit language ahead.
“Never dishonor your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the whole country will turn to prostitution and be filled with people who are perverted.”Leviticus 19:29 (GW)
In the last couple posts, we examined the Sexual De-Evolution in the 20th century, and The Advent of Polysexuality. From this brief review, it should be duly noted that the purpose and applied practice of Christian ethics and morality were lost sometime in the late 1980s. Christian ethics are no longer taught except as “rules” (which are presumably made to be broken). So in a practical sense, there is no such thing as “sexual morality”. Even within the church, the elders and congregation alike turn a blind eye to all forms of illicit sex, divorce, and wifely insubordination. “Kids will be kids. Let them have their fun while they’re still young.” Meanwhile, abortion continues as a covert “back up plan” should any “accidents” arise.
Members of the younger generation who are growing up in this kind of environment are getting the implicit message that nearly anything goes. As such, young women, being the “gatekeepers of sex” that they are, have a smorgasbord of options to choose from.
Given this cultural setting and the ever present pressure to flirt with fleeting pleasures, the only things left to guide the young set in terms of their sociosexual choices are social conventions, family/peer influences, personal values, conscience, and conviction. The first two can be quite dark and immoral, while the last three (or four, in many cases) are fading from view.
The herd gathers at the feeding trough. So let’s consider how women might see this.
Motivations to Feed
Sex is central to the human experience for both men and women.
For men, because it is the primary way we connect to another human, and because it brings singular pleasure to us. We’re driven to have sex. The male sex drive is incredibly powerful. For us men, it’s fun, it feels good, and it connects us to the women in our lives.
For women, because motherhood is central to almost all women’s desires and experience, and we all know how almost all women become mothers. Women are as driven to procreate as men are to spread the seed far and wide. Most women have at least one child, and most childless women are not so by choice.
That’s all well and good, but that’s not all. From a nether’s eye view, there are a multitude of motivations for young women (and some men) to enter into various forms of sexual immorality. Following each motivation is the reason translated into colloquial statements.
- Affirmation, (N/A)
- Attention, (N/A)
- Burgeoning maturity coinciding with one’s life schedule, AKA “It’s The Right Time.“
- Dopamine + Norepinephrine + Oxytocin, AKA “Feeling loved”
- Drugs/Drunkenness/Partying, AKA “Messing Around”
- Ego Rush/Validation, (N/A)
- Enticing/Controlling/Manipulating Men, (N/A)
- Feeling accepted/humbled/included/needed/wanted, etc.
- Having children, sometimes stated explicitly.
- Ignorance/Lack of agency, AKA “It just happened!”
- Making Money (e.g. OASIS, OnlyFans, prostitution, etc.), (N/A)
- Opportunity with a hawt Chad who pushes all her buttons, (N/A)
- Peer Validation, (N/A)
- Rebellion/Revenge, AKA “Just want to get back at _____.”
- Relaxation, AKA “NetFlix and chill”
- Releasing Anxiety/Tension, AKA “Get it over with.”
- Self-knowledge, AKA “Finding one’s self”
- Sexploration/Sexperimentation, AKA “Getting experience”
- Subcultural/Sociosexual Pressures, (N/A)
- Testing one’s SMV, (N/A)
- The raw pleasures of illicit sex, (various)
- YOLO / FOMO, (implicitly stated)
That’s an impressive list of reasons to have sex! What kinds of reasons or motivations are Christians giving their daughters NOT to have extramarital sex? I doubt it can compare to this list.
Celibacy isn’t the worst thing we might ever have to live through, but it is very difficult. It is a lot to ask of a young woman in her early 20s to abstain, because they very much want sex with attractive men, and it is pretty much readily available to most of them. Most women can find men attractive enough, even if they’re very low betas she can get herself to “willing” for and she can use as beta bux plowhorse providers. But increasingly, more and more men are having to live as involuntary celibates, and (I suspect) more and more women are choosing to live as voluntary celibates (volcels). Male incels are such because they’re unable to attract women for one reason or another. Female volcels are such because they judge all their options as undesirable or unsuitable.
So if celibacy is insufficiently valued to attract some takers, then that opens the floodgates of sexual activity and engaging with the polysexual environment. Let’s take a look at what’s on the menu.
Polygyny is currently entrenched as the core feature of the SMP. Polygyny runs rampant in the form of soft harems**, but simply goes undiscussed. Some women don’t like soft polygyny, while some actually like it (they see the preselection as validating the man). Most women simply don’t mind it. They don’t prefer it, because their dream is to have that alpha guy become an alpha bux, and have him all to herself. Many women will cling steadfastly to this dream, even to their own demise. But most women know they can’t have that. As a result, most women view soft polygyny/soft harems as simple reality, as a cost of “doing business” in the SMP. Sharing an attractive man with other women is far more preferable to having an unattractive man* all to oneself – at least, when she isn’t getting either man’s resources. Her price for settling for an unattractive man is immediate, unfettered access to all his resources, for life, even if she chooses not to stay with him (as about half do).**
* An “unattractive man” is any man who is not a top 20%er alpha fux or alpha bux.
** The most common way this transfer of resources occurs is through legal marriage. This is why men have come to the conclusion that marriage is a bad deal.
Buffet Dining without a Smorgasbord
Polyamory is becoming something that an increasing number of people are willing to experiment with, simply because it is getting more and more “airplay” from the culture-shapers, and because of the ever growing permissiveness of the culture. However, it appears to be a lifestyle that only a select few are cut out for in the long term. This is because the requirements for continuing in this lifestyle include ALL of the following.
- The person must have a sufficiently high SMV to attract partners. This rules out a significant number of men and a sizeable number of women.
- Men know that dating is expensive and time consuming, but the polyamorous must possess enough money and leisure time to be seeing two (or more) other people in a similar fashion. So we’re talking about the UC and UMC now.
- The person must have very high developed social and time management skills and the discipline that can enable them to hurdle the daily obstacle course of scheduling meeting times and other arrangements with two (or more) partners.
- The person must have the ability to engage in sex without becoming too terribly attached to any one person. This rules out a large number of women.
- The person must possess a great amount of emotional maturity to cope with continual drama, multiple heartbreaks, times of doubt when meetings are cancelled, and moments of jealousy when one partner prefers to spend more time with the other.
- The person must have the social dexterity to successfully navigate the desires and jealousies of not just one, but two (or more) people.
- It also requires one to find more than one partner with ALL of the above qualities — disciplined, leisure class, mature, skillful, suitable to one’s liking, agreeable about being involved with each other, and willing to engage in a polyamorous arrangement. This is a rather tall order, which is why most people who get involved in a polyamorous relationship meet each other at venues contrived specifically for this very purpose.
To look at polyamory positively, we might think it would provide the impetus for one to grow in all of the above areas, which would be beneficial for one’s personal growth, but the fact is that the grand majority of people just can’t make the cut and get their foot in the door.
Beta with an Alpha Appetizer (or Having Dessert First)
Polyandry, especially covert, longitudinal polyandry in the form of serial (pseudo) monogamy, is the core feature of both the sexual revolution and the AF/BB sexual stratagem, which has probably been going on since the 1950s or earlier. Rollo has covered this dynamic in excruciating detail, so I won’t elaborate too much here. The basic idea is that most women are more than attractive enough for most men, but most men are not sufficiently attractive for most women. Most women will get caught up in a series of sexual relationships with a few hawt chads (i.e. polygyny as described above), become alpha widowed, and then cannot find men of the same caliber, men they’re attracted to, who will marry them. Because the female drive to “nest” and reproduce is as strong and all consuming as the male drive to have as much sex as possible with as many women as possible while expending the least amount of effort possible, most women will eventually settle for a beta provider. Most women can get to “willing” and can settle for a beta provider long enough to marry and produce one or two children. This is why most men will eventually marry as well – because taking a wife ostensibly means as much sex as possible as effortlessly as possible, and he is willing to compromise variety for the ‘sure thing’.
Alpha with Beta on the Side
Open Polyandry is when a woman has more than one man at the same time. To varying degrees on a case by case basis, this is what is happening with the Online Amateur Sex Industry and Socialization (AKA OASIS, e.g. OnlyFans), which is a form of prostitution. OASIS is, by it’s nature, a transactional, open polyandry relationship. But whether men and women will be willing to enter into an arrangement of open polyandry, coupled with expectations of enduring love, sex, romance, and provisioning, remains to be seen. For more clues, you may want to read Why is the online amateur sex industry attractive to men? (2021-01-08).
From a woman’s point of view, I think open polyandry (that is not explicitly transactional) would be quite acceptable, depending on a few things.
- The woman can accept having two men in her life.
- The woman can find a man who passes her filters and who is agreeable to the arrangement. Rare.
- The woman has the upper hand in the relationship.
From what I have seen, some women can accept open polyandry, while others simply cannot. Opinions on this run strong, and there doesn’t seem to be a middle ground. However, I can see how some women would want to keep one man for romance, sex, and procreation, and keep the other as a work horse that stays under her thumb and out of her bed. But this would not be true open polyandry, but rather her having an Alpha with a personal (and literal) Waiter. Of course, this arrangement strays into the imaginary, as there is hardly any man who would agree to be a sex deprived lackey.
Her having a dominant role in the troika would of course screen out all the most desirable men, which is not preferred. So the possibility of a woman entering into non-transactional open polyandry may require some kind of compromise on her hypergamous filters, and this would depend strongly on individual traits and opportunities.
Dining Out or Eating Alone?
Our last post outlined the deep, drastic changes that are currently enveloping the SMP. The above discussion gives us a deeper understanding of the ins and outs. The people of any age who thrive in this kind of environment conform to one of the following.
- They insulate themselves from the process of constant change somehow by creating their own “arrangement” that shields them from the most austere and vexatious influences, at least in some ways, and for some time (nothing is bullet-proof against this culture). In the past, the family, church, and small community provided this shelter. But now, these backstops are compromised for the majority of people.
- They fashion themselves so as to be optimized for quick adaptation to constant change. Individuals who can do this must have the kinds of qualities (portable attractiveness vectors, portable abilities and skills that transcend economic and technological changes, portable personality factors that tend towards rising to the top of the froth in any context) which lend themselves to thriving in the precise circumstances where many will sink under the churn and flow of change. In doing so, they receive a double-return (at least) on their efforts, precisely because the constant waves of change are swamping and crippling so many who are not so agile, a situation which redounds to the benefit of the super-adaptive.
So again, we see the potential for a woman having a polysexual relationship devolve into the personal and occidental.
No 4 Star Dining Seats Available
It goes without saying that all of these options, aside from celibacy and monogamous marriage characterized by Headship, are non-Christian arrangements. Some would argue, based on the Old Testament, that polygyny might be acceptable, but separating this particular arrangement out of the rest and making it functional and acceptable is a long shot. Of note, polyandry constitutes adultery by the fact that the woman has multiple men, and most likely involves an inversion of Headship with at least one of the men. This would most definitely make it a non-Christian type of relationship.
I doubt that a majority of men or women will live this way for the foreseeable future. Marriage is slowing down a little and is being pushed further and further down the road for more and more people, but most people are still marrying at some point. The charts at Dalrock pointed this out. We still don’t have a marriage strike. Most men are marrying because that’s the only way they can get sex; and most women are marrying because that’s the only way they can have the lifestyles and child(ren) they want to have.
The bottom line is, I think, that among the religious class, they will still marry. But they will have to compromise, deeply, to do so. They will also have to get past their prior sexual experiences. Most Christian men and women have already succumbed to premarital sex and there are entire false theologies to justify it. Those who haven’t will be pressured relentlessly to have premarital sex.
From Soup to Nuts
As was described in our two previous posts, our culture has changed rapidly, within the living memory of those 50 and up. Dalrock has covered the postponement of marriage over the last decade or two. The economic pressures on women who are doing without have led to creation of the Online Amateur Sex Industry and Socialization (OASIS), which we covered in January and February of this year. The relational pressures have increased incidences of single motherhood and divorced women raising children. The uncertainty of it all has raised the frequency of cohabitation. Sexuality has been unmoored from relationships, from Christian sexual morality, and even from its prior cultural guardrails.
Since the 1990s, the SMP has been without any sort of sexual restraint, and screening criteria is mostly limited to carnal SMV markers with an ideological wish list on the side. Almost all women expect sex within the first few dates and lose interest and move on if the man does not push for sex within a certain timeframe ranging from days to weeks. Some women will even raise the issue and tell you that they do not want to wait to have sex. Of course, this interest is directed at the top 20% SMV men — only.
This has the effect of squeezing unattractive men out of the sex market (which is embedded in the marriage market). In essence, “Women’s Liberation” has led to “Men’s Liberation”. As the remaining majority of men find themselves without sex or women, they have no need to prepare for marriage or fatherhood, so they simply don’t.
What this means for women is that as they age, men of all stripes are increasingly unavailable for relationships, and competition for the few preferred men in any relationship market becomes fierce. This presses women in the marriage market either to do without or settle deeply — and as time goes on, more women are doing without. The quickly rising alternative for women is to establish their own economic independence somehow, and play around in the Polysexual Market Place (PMP) as long as possible.
Moreover, the current culture is one drenched in sexuality, and with every passing year, there is an ever-increasing degree of sexual “liberation”. Literally anything goes in sexuality now, and that will only increase as time goes on.
None of this will get better until women compromise more and until men see sufficient reason to give women anything. But in the meantime, the Biblical adage continues to apply.
“Never dishonor your daughter by making her a prostitute…”
In modern English, this verse could be translated as,
“Never dishonor your daughter by sending her off to a liberal arts college nor allowing her to open an OnlyFans (etc.) account…”
The risk is that if you do, she’ll likely be “converted” to feminism,* and/or be swept away in the poly/pan/demi/trans sexual marketplace that is slowly gaining transcendence.
“…or the whole country will turn to prostitution and be filled with people who are perverted.”
We are presently seeing the truth of this passage being played out in the west,* as was described in the previous post.
- TheDeti’s comment 5550
- NovaSeeker’s comment 5556
- TheDeti’s comment 5559
- TheDeti’s comment 5560
- NovaSeeker’s comment 5573
- NovaSeeker’s comment 5574
- Σ Frame: A Study of Open Relationships (2015-09-08)
- Σ Frame: What is the difference between Open Relationships (OR) and Friends With Benefits (FWB)? (2015-09-10)
- Σ Frame: Why do humans conceal mating? (2021-01-27)
- Σ Frame: Revealing the motives behind unconcealed sex and nakedness (2021-01-29)
- Σ Frame: The Future of Intersexual Relationships is Transactional (2021-03-12)