What Do Women Want? #8 - Courtship

How to avoid future heartbreak.

This series started by noting that many highly-visible marriages have suffered from public problems.  Our society's views of marriage appear to be inconsistent.

On the one hand,  marriage contracts are no longer enforced; it's easier for a woman to get out of being married than to get out of paying for a refrigerator and the judge will award her both alimony and child support.  Nobody seems to criticize a woman who leaves her husband, but there's great indignation when a man is caught playing around even if he has no notion of leaving his wife.

This article discusses ways by which the trauma can be avoided.  Benjamin Franklin defined insanity as doing the same thing over again and expecting the results to be different.  When people are hurt in relationships, doing the same thing again without thinking about what happened is not likely to lead to success.

Finding A Husband

If a woman really wants a husband, there's a simple way to get one, but it's not easy; it requires discipline on her part.

Violent rape is pretty rare, but natural selection means that a man will generally go as far as a woman lets him go, and push to see if he can get her to go all the way.  Natural selection has always favored men who try to have sex with as many women as possible.  Expecting men to stop pushing for sex because sex without marriage damages women is futile; it's up to women to protect themselves.

The first step is for women to recognize that they've been lied to.  When the pill arrived, women's libbers gleefully decided that women could have as much fun with sex as men did, but that's not realistic.

Generally speaking, women are driven to form relationships, not to have sex, and having sex strengthens their need for relationships.  Being taught only about sexually transmitted diseases as opposed to being taught about whiplash of the heart leaves women vulnerable to being too damaged to try again.

The second step is to recognize that being happily married for a long time is a lot of work.  To be practical, if you're married, it is simply not possible for you to make yourself happy because your spouse's happiness or unhappiness has a strong effect on your happiness.

Thus, if you're contemplating marriage, it's important to consider whether you are able to make your spouse happy.  If you can, and if you're willing to do whatever it takes to make your spouse happy for the rest of your life, marriage has a good chance to work; but if you can't or won't make your spouse happy, you're going to be miserable.

Suppose a woman is willing to put a lot of work into her marriage.  Suppose she wants to find a man, settle down, and have children.  How does she fight sexual liberation?  How does she persuade a man that she's a treasure, not a toy, and get a man to respect her enough to stay with her instead of playing with her?

The answer is just as simple and just as difficult as avoiding drugs: "Just Say NO!"

Some women are beginning to figure it out.  For example, USA Today published "A neo-feminist's view of abstinence" by Elizabeth Sandoval.

She begins, "I don't want to have sex.  Clarification: I do want to have sex, but only with my husband. And I don't have one of those yet." In concluding, "Women give it up as if it's nothing, when in fact, it is everything," she stated the issue well.

A man worries that a woman he marries will foist other men's children off on him.  The "power of virginity" helps a woman deal with this suspicion:

Against this system of mutual exploitation stands the more compelling alternative of virginity.  It escapes the ruthless cycle of winning and losing because it refuses to play the game.  The promiscuous of both sexes will take their cheap shots at one another, disguising infidelity and selfishness as freedom and independence, and blaming the aftermath on one another.  But no one can claim control over a virgin.  Virginity is not a matter of asserting power in order to manipulate.  It is a refusal to exploit or be exploited.  That is real, and responsible, power.

But there is more to it than mere escape.  There is an undeniable appeal in virginity, something that eludes the resentful feminist's contemptuous label of "prude."  A virgin woman is an unattainable object of desire, and it is precisely her unattainability that increases her desirability.  Feminism has told a lie in defense of its own promiscuity, namely, that there is no sexual power to be found in virginity.  On the contrary, virgin sexuality has extraordinary and unusual power.  There's no second-guessing a virgin's motives: her strength comes from a source beyond her transitory whims.  It is sexuality dedicated to hope, to the future, to marital love, to children and to God.  Her virginity is, at the same time, a statement of her mature independence from men.  It allows a woman to become a whole person in her own right, without needing a man either to revolt against or to complete what she lacks.  It is very simple, really: no matter how wonderful, charming, handsome, intelligent, thoughtful, rich or persuasive he is, he simply cannot have her.  A virgin is perfectly unpossessable.

People who scorn the idea of a woman "saving herself for her husband" forget how possessive men are and how concerned a man is that his wife belong to him.  Virginity helps a man believe that a woman would be faithful if he married her.  It also gives her leverage in asking that he postpone sex until after they're married.  Natural selection has favored possessive men.  If she has sex without marriage, his worst suspicions are aroused and he's less likely to marry her.

Getting Him to Settle Down

To get a man to stay with her in marriage, a woman must convince him that she's a treasure instead of a toy.  The best way to do that is to put marriage on the table BEFORE THE FIRST DATE! When a man asks her out, a woman could say something like:

"Before you spend any money on me, I want you to know that I want to get married. I'm looking for a husband; I'm not looking for a good time. I'm not saying you have to agree to marry me before we go out at all, but I want you to agree that the purpose of being together is to decide whether you and I should get married."

In today's modern "hookup" culture, that'll boggle his mind, so she might do well to explain:

I want to be a treasure for some man. I want to be such a treasure for my husband that he'll value me so much that he likes being with me and enjoys talking to me. If you're not that man, we can part friends, but I'm not a toy.  I want a man to stay with me; I don't want a man to play with me.  You're a very nice guy and I could easily fall in love with you.  If I end up loving you and you won't marry me, I'll be hurt.

The marriage vows say, "to have and to hold."  I expect my husband to have me; I plan to belong to my husband.  If that's you, I'll do my best to be a real treasure for you, but I don't want a man to just take me.  Being your treasure means that I want to give myself to you whenever you want me because I know that giving myself to you makes you happy with me. You'll want to make love five times before breakfast and start in again when you get home from work. That's a bit much from my point of view, but that's what men think "to have and to hold" means.

But if I'm yours, I expect you to be mine.  I want to have my husband, but men don't like being taken any more than women do.  Your being mine means that you want to open your heart to me because you know giving yourself to me makes me happy with you.  I want you to open your heart to me five times before breakfast and talk more when you get back from work.  I want to know what you're doing and how you feel about it.  I want to know your feelings, I want to know what's on your heart.  Opening your heart to me bores and humbles you just as opening my body to you bores and humbles me.  My emotions are made so that it's hard for me to be yours if you aren't mine.  Opening my body to you makes me yours; opening your heart to me makes you mine.  That's how we float each other's boats.

If you belong to me while treating me as your very own special treasure, I'll be glad to be yours.  If I enjoy giving myself to you and being yours, you'll be glad to belong to me.  Being glad to belong to each other will bring us great joy all our days. But if you aren't willing to at least consider marriage, please don't waste my time.

I know a few women who've done that and it worked.  When their husbands tell the story, most other men agree that they'd be interested in a woman who wanted to be a treasure for her husband.  A treasure they'd marry; why marry a used toy?

It's interesting to list some of the natural selection hot-buttons which are addressed by this little speech:

  • Her not sleeping around addresses his fears of raising other men's children.  Traditionally, there were "bad girls" men used for pleasure and for stress relief and there were "good girls" whom men left alone until time to marry.  With most girls acting like bad girls, men have a hard time identifying women who're worth marrying.  Putting herself in the "good girl" category makes it more likely he'll marry her.  Jewish writings quote a man who was glad to marry a woman because she wasn't dating around (9-10).
  • Stating that she plans for him to have her whenever he wants her addresses his possessiveness.  Men kinda know that most women feel that most men are too possessive.  By telling him that she plans to not only uphold his possessiveness but to encourage it, she makes him more willing to promise to give up his right to pursue all the other women in the entire world and focus on her alone.
  • She also addresses her fears of his paying attention to other women.  It's inherent in human sexual geometry that women have far more sexual capacity than men do.  A man is always interested in sex, but he can't have sex for a while after making love.  By taking everything he's able to make, she makes it harder for other women to get his attention; he won't be interested in them because he's had all his energies drained off by his wife.  A man turns to pornography, other women, or other men when he's sexually frustrated.  If his wife takes all the desire he has, he won't be tempted, but if she lets him leave home every morning with his shirt soaked in gasoline, he'll eventually get too near a fire and they'll both be burned.
  • Making love a lot brings out his protective instincts.  Men aren't bound to women by having sex nearly as strongly as sex binds women to men, but a man's reproductive success increased when he took care of his children's mother. Some bonding occurs when a man makes love, particularly if she welcomes his possessiveness and thanks him for wanting her.  The more often they make love, the stronger his bond.
  • By putting talk on the table, she addresses her need to communicate and to build her relationship with him through talk.  Men talk to teach; they build relationships through shared experiences.  By telling him how much she expects to talk, she can use the dating period to make sure he's glad to open his heart to her.  Opening his heart to her makes him hers as opening her body to him makes her his.  Natural selection has made women sensitive to whether men are happy with them; an unhappy man is likely to walk away.  She needs him to open his heart to her so that she can be confident that he is happy with her.  If he can't or won't be happy to be hers, she can back out before she's gotten too emotionally involved to walk away.
  • Talk also serves her instinctive needs.  It does a woman no good to have a baby if the baby dies.  Before infant formula, women had to nurse each child for a year or two so that it could eat solid food.  A baby spent its first year with the mother.  When it cried, she had to relate to it to find out what was wrong, keep it alive, and make it stop crying.  Men think women think about children all the time.  This isn't true, women monitor children and respond to crying babies by instinct.  Noticing a problem and starting to respond doesn't require thought; figuring out what to do usually requires a lot of thought.  Women respond to interruptions by trying to relate.
  • Getting him used to talking to her before anything else happens also makes it easier for the couple to make decisions peacefully.  Historically, women had a lot more to lose when a relationship broke down than the man did - he'd be lonely, she'd starve.  Natural selection not only made women care more about relationships, it selected for women who were inclined to go along with men.  We see this today - when a man and a woman are together in a car, the man's usually driving, even if it's her car.  Having had to guard their women closely to avoid raising other men's children, men are selected for wanting to be in charge, or at least to cast the tie-breaking vote.  Getting a man used to talking to her means he'll understand her better, which makes it more likely that she'll be able to put up with his wanting to lead.

Sex and speech are the two sides of the arch which holds up a family.  When a man encourages a woman to talk and thanks her for her speech, he makes her feel loved, valued, honored and appreciated.  When a woman thanks, or at least affectionately respects a man for their sex life, she makes him feel loved, honored, valued, and appreciated.

Talking helped women share tips on keeping their babies alive and keeping their men from running off; natural selection favors women who're driven to talk.  Talking scares away the game, natural selection favors men who don't talk.  Talking enough to satisfy a woman is learned behavior; making love enough to satisfy a man is learned behavior.

Being pregnant and nursing a child until it can eat other food takes a year or two; having babies more often than that hurts a woman's reproductive success rather than helping.  A woman can reach her full reproductive potential having sex only a few times every two years.  There's no reason for natural selection to favor women with a strong sex drive.

It's a different story for men, of course.  A man gains reproductive success by getting as many women pregnant as possible; some of them might raise his children.  Natural selection favors men who're always interested in sex.

A man can rise to the occasion only so fast and he isn't able to make love for a while after doing it, but the faster a man can recover and the more often he's able to have sex, the more reproductive success he can have.  Since reproductive success is the only goal of natural selection, it's no surprise that men have been selected for a strong sex drive coupled with extreme possessiveness toward women they support and a reluctance to settle down.

By encouraging her husband's possessiveness, a wife helps support her home and children.  Natural selection favored men who shared food with women and children; the less a man consumes himself, the more resources are available for taking care of children and the more children he can raise.  Natural selection favors men who don't want much for themselves.

Women have a hard time finding birthday and Christmas gifts for husbands and brothers because selection favored men who want only one thing.  If a man's wife belongs to him so that he can't have sex any more often, he doesn't want much else and they can spend all the money on their house and children.

Jewish wisdom literature records King Solomon's observation that if a man's wife doesn't belong to him, he'll be so unhappy that his soul is empty (7:28-29).  King Solomon had life and death power over his harem.  His women belonged to him, there was none of this nonsense of "I have a headache," or "I'm not in the mood," but a man can't possibly relate to that many women closely enough to keep them happy, and their unhappiness made him unhappy.

Solomon spent vast sums on building projects, music, wine, wisdom, and on other toys trying to make himself happy, but this didn't work (2:1-11).  Solomon taught that a man's only hope of joy was to rejoice with his wife (9:9)  All a man has is his work and his wife, and if his wife's not happy to belong to him, his work isn't worth much to him.

As we've seen, natural selection made it possible for a charming "lady killer" to have reproductive success without settling down.  Thus, men generally don't value homes as much as women do and they don't value talk as much as women do.  If she wants a man at all, a woman wants that man to hang around the house and pay attention to her and talk to her.

Men know that women are better at talking than they are.  Talking as openly as a woman wants goes against a man's nature, so she needs to guide the way she talks to him based on ancient advice:

She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and the law of kindness is on her tongue (31:28).

A woman's manner of speaking to her husband has a lot do with how her marriage turns out.  Jewish history points out that a woman has the power to vex a man's soul unto death. (It's off-topic, but this story also illustrates the proverb, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."  Taking the account as written, Sampson betrayed Delilah first.  What she did wasn't nice, but he betrayed her first.)

Natural selection favors a woman being able to irritate a man for the same reason that a baby's cry has to be irritating and penetrating.  It does a mother no good to give birth if the child dies before reproducing.  A baby has to have a way to get the mother's attention.  Natural selection favors babies who can really irritate their parents and it favors mothers who're sensitive to crying; women appear to pay closer attention to crying babies than men do.

Similarly, a woman has to be able to get a man's attention when she's in danger.  Most men aren't smooth enough to achieve reproductive success by taking other men's women, so natural selection favors men who hear and respond to a woman's cry for help.  Keeping his wife alive helps a man's reproductive success.  Thus, men are selected to pay attention to a woman's voice when she's in extremis.

Some women take advantage of this; we call it "nagging" when a woman pesters a man to get her way.  That's a way to deal with a man, but does it promote her long-term security and happiness?

If a woman speaks kindly and wisely to a man, he's going to want to hear what she has to say.  A man can always get another job and tell himself he's staying away from home out of love for his wife.  A man doesn't have to hang around the house, but if his wife makes the ten-foot area around her the most pleasant place in all the world for him to be, that's where you'll find him.

Truth in Packaging

Stating her desire to marry up front process facilitates the "quick no."  Most prospects aren't going to buy whatever you're selling.  If someone isn't going to buy, the faster and cheaper you find out the better.  The more time you waste with a "no," the less you'll sell.

A woman isn't going to marry most of the eligible men she meets.  Given that the answer's going to be "no" most of the time, the quicker she finds out the better.  Telling men up front that she wants to get married before having sex may send a lot of men away, but why should a woman get herself involved with a man who doesn't want to get married?  There's no possible gain for her, it only leads to hurt.

A woman can follow this plan even if she's given away her virginity.  If she stops having sex, she can explain, "I made a mistake.  Giving myself to a man who wouldn't marry me tore me apart; I won't do it again.  But if we get married, you'll have me whenever you want me and I plan to be yours forever."  Secondary virginity won't be as persuasive to a man as the real thing, but making a man think that sex means nothing to her makes it hard for him to trust her enough to marry her.

If a woman lets a man take her without committing himself to her, there's no reason for him to marry her.  Having had her without marrying her, he's aroused her emotional desire to preserve the relationship so he can probably have her again.

He reasons that she gave herself to him so she'll probably give herself to other men when he's away.  If she wants a man to stay with her and belong to her, she's got to let him know that her price is that he treat her as a treasure and take her to wife instead of just taking her.

This isn't as strange as it sounds - any serious man should be interested in a woman who declares that she wants to be a treasure for her husband.

Our society teaches girls to be toys, but the divorce rate shows that being toys doesn't make anyone happy.  Marriage prospers if the man treats his wife as a treasure and she acts as a treasure.

Old-fashioned? Perhaps, but the modern method is damaging women so badly that they want nothing to do with men or with children.  As Ms. Sandoval pointed out, a girl chooses whether to be a toy or a treasure by when she gives herself.  Toy or treasure, play or stay.  Which is best for women?

The Wind-Up

So far, we've discussed natural selection, courtship, and mating patterns from the point of view of what women want.  We don't have much to say about members of the National Organization for Women, they're more interested in gaining political power for themselves than in improving the lot of women.

Natural selection isn't destiny, but it sure shapes the odds.  Both men and women are able to disregard their instincts when they have to - most men can control themselves enough not to urge sex on all the women they meet and women are able to suppress their instincts to form relationships and ignore crying babies for a while, but going against your instincts is a losing game in the long term.

It is not at all reasonable for a man to expect his wife to have sex with him as often as he wants it if he consistently frustrates her deep, instinctive need for a relationship.  It's not reasonable for a woman to expect her husband to remain faithful to her if she consistently frustrates his deep, instinctive need to have sex.

The next article in this series summarizes what natural selection says about the deep, underlying instincts of men and women.  If you don't know what you want, you're unlikely to get it.  If you do know what you and a prospective long-term partner need, you may be able to back out of a doomed relationship before you're badly hurt.

Lee Tydings is a guest writer for Scragged.com.  Read other Scragged.com articles by Lee Tydings or other articles on Society.
Reader Comments
How do you define being a free agent? There is an interesting documentary about this subject http://www.sundancechannel.com/series/flying_confessions Flying: Confessions of a Free Woman, which I watched on Sundance channel that dwells about the modern female life, a real "Sex in the City" serial about a 40 something New Yorker struggling to comprehend her "free" lifestyle. The director not only turns the camera on herself, but also passes the camera to various women facing the same issues around the globe. This is a really intriguing take on culture expectations and other female topics. The movie will continue to air on May 12, and May 15.
May 9, 2008 1:15 PM
You're saying basically the same thing over and over again. Allow me to summarize: "Women and men are slaves to their instincts like animals. Neither can be happy (or even survive in the case of women) unless they realize this and return to living in the way people did hundreds of years ago. Men - huting/gathering. Women - managing children and sexually servicing their husband." I wonder how many other women (other than yourself) would agree with this, considering how much more independent their lifestyles have become.
May 11, 2008 1:27 PM
The issue isn't that people are slaves to their emotions and instincts, it's that they aren't. People often try to operate contrary to their instincts. This is OK provided that they understand that what they plan to do will be in conflict with their in-built drives and that it's difficult to sustain conflicts over time.

For example, a lot of husbands expect their wives to be willing sexual partners even if the husband doesn't meet her need for a relationship and many wives expect their husbands to be faithful even if she doesn't have sex very often. Expecting someone else to deny their drives over a period of years is unrealistic.

The point is that each couple MUST work out some arrangement that works for both parties. Unless the deal meets at least the minimum threshold of both parties needs, it won't last. The more each party knows about the other's needs, the easier this becomes.
May 13, 2008 11:10 AM

I do not even know with strong your blog greatly that warned me. Thank you “Love is like a virus. It can happen to anybody at any time.” - Maya Angelou

March 23, 2011 9:03 PM

Perfect article. I have been telling others about this long before i read this article. Way to go!

June 15, 2015 6:47 AM

Perfect article. I have been telling others about this long before i read this article. Way to go! I hope many others will read this.

June 15, 2015 6:48 AM

I agree with this for the most part. But I have been following similar advice most of my life, and remained a virgin because I was "waiting for my husband," and that guy never showed up. Over the years I became more and more frustrated, so finally, at age 34 I started dating a non-Christian guy who pursued me (I rejected him at first), and spent several nights with him. I'm still technically a virgin, but we did "everything but." I realized the relationship wasn't going anywhere and broke up with him. Now I fear that I'm not as "pure" as I was, and on top of that, I'm older and less attractive, and at almost 35 my fertile years are declining. I did date in my 20s-early 30s, but never found a man who seemed the right fit for me. I really don't want to be alone or remain a virgin much longer, but if I do happen to find a husband, I don't want him to value me less if I'm not a virgin. I'm not sure what to do.

May 12, 2017 4:35 AM


"Everything but" is not a sin as I read the Bible, although it is not the best course.

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. I Corinthians 7:1-2

The only place I know where God gives us a reason for a command is children obey your parents because this helps them live longer. All I can give you about WHY God told us this is what I've gathered over the years by talking to people of both genders.

1) It seems that men are a whole lot more driven toward intimate interaction than women are. I've given theories why this might be so in the article about natural selection.

2) Because they're fired up and ready to go all the time, men have to learn to control their drives.

3) A woman tends to be far more interested when she's fertile, which for some, can be as little as 15 minutes per month.

4) Because they're so seldom really "in the mood," women don't get as much practice holding back their urges.

It's very hard for a man to resist temptation to take a woman he likes even when she's not in the mood. If he touches her when she's fertile, she can become overwhelmed with desire.

Older women tell girls not to kiss because it gives men ideas. That's wrong, men do not GET ideas, men HAVE ideas. The problem with kissing, or with "everything but," is that it gives YOU ideas. When both you and the man have the same idea, it is VERY HARD to stop.

Does this make sense?

May 13, 2017 1:34 PM

What do I do in my situation? I have always believed in being a treasure for my husband, not a toy. I never had a one night stand, never participated in the party club scene, and never cared to. I married my high school sweetheart and after over a decade together and starting many successful businesses, he left me. He is now married to someone 15 years younger than him. I remarried some years later, a man I loved even more. But he struggled with incredible jealousy and couldn't get over the fact I had slept with my first husband, as well as a few boyfriends I had in the interim when I fell apart and lost my sense of self worth after my first husband abandoned me. So my second husband abandoned me too, divorced me, saying I was "used goods". I have given up on love and have lost heart that there are any godly, loyal, faithful men out there, at least one that the Lord intended for me. I am still madly in love with my second husband and can't even imagine the idea of another man touching me. I feel heart broken by the consumer love, the disposable love prevalent today. If men were honorable, they would not try to toy with a woman at all. That is what an honorable man would do. It doesn't matter if they could get away with it.

June 22, 2017 2:05 AM


There is much to discuss with respect to your comment. If you've filled in an email address to be notified of my reply, please say so in another comment and we can start the discussion.

There are many causes of the situation you describe. Men have always abandoned women, but not nearly as often as they do now. There were very few single-parent children 50 years ago when the welfare system made it more lucrative for a lot of women to go on welfare than to depend on husbands, to name but one issue. There are many causes, and I'd very much like to know your thoughts and how you react to mine.

Please let me know.

June 24, 2017 10:22 PM

Sexual purity is not about doing "everything but". Nor is sexual sin only deemed sin when it is sexual intercourse. I believe it is anything physical beyond kissing outside of marriage, and even that is questionable. This is why forming a legalism around "only intercourse is sin" and "everything but" is not sexual sin is a ridiculous line of thought. Sexual purity has to do with what is going on in the mind. People can cultivate sexual desire, or not cultivate sexual desire. Whether they have gone all the way hs nothing to do with whether they have cultivated the desire for it. Someone is not "pure" merely because they have not gone all the way.

This ridiculous line of thought has done a gigantic amount of damage --- a form of abuse -- being used by a measuring rod against people for what they have done or not done. Who is the person? Are they a person consumed with sexual lust, or have they guarded their heart, and sought purity? Again, it's about cultivated thought-- not merely being a sexual being as a part of being human. Cultivated thought is willingly and freely choosing to think on sexual acts, as well as and to put oneself in situations to act on them. Porn use is a good example of cultivated sexual lust.

The question is whether a person is wanting to do to will of God, or not. It's not about pleasing God, as if He is an evil dictator. It's about loving Him and seeking after His goodness and holiness for one's life, from pure love for Him. It is about actually believing sexual purity is a good thing for spiritual reasons, not merely because of what another human will think.

If a man told me he is a virgin because he's done everything but intercourse, I would laugh. It's like he wants a badge of honor. I don't want to think of him kissing all those other girls, touching their body parts, etc, any more than I want to think of him having intercourse with them. Seeking to differentiate between sexual activities is ridiculous.

July 10, 2017 8:08 PM

I'm subscribed and tracking your posts.

There may be "causes", but they are not legitimate. A lot of wrong is done for a lot of reasons, and they are never legitimate. At the heart is lack of character. Lack of integrity. Honor is something that is not known these days. It is exceptionally rare. Instead, people seek to use each other. Real love does not use another. Real love cares about the other's good. Real love does not abandon, ever. Real love is not selfish. Whether humans have animalistic tendencies doesn't mean they should behave like animals. Nor do I believe in reducing either sex down biologically. A man of character could be surrounded by a swarth of beautiful women and he would never sleep with them, nor care to. This doesn't mean he may not find them attractive, but he is not controlled by his impulses and desires. A person controlled by their impulses and desires is not a trustworthy person. They are not trustworthy in a business relationship, as an employee, and certainly as a spouse.

There is so much stuff out there that almost exclusively talks about why men are promiscuous and unfaithful, and almost nothing that talks about why men should seek not be promiscuous and unfaithful. If someone were to suggest that they not give in to their desires, this person would be branded as a lunatic, unaware of evolutionary theory, etc.

July 10, 2017 8:23 PM

It is as if evolutionary theory is used as license for men to be promiscuous--- that is how warped it has gotten. Because that is exactly what men want to do--- to be promiscuous without any responsibility--- you are not going to see men resisting the pop-culture mis-application of evolutionary theory in that way.

It's disgusting. Men acting like dogs. Loose. No woman wants to be with a man who can't govern his own body, but instead is ruled by it. Men who say they aren't the marriage type and need multiple relationship partners aren't a different type of breed.

They are just sex addicts.


Just like any other type of chemical addiction.

July 10, 2017 8:44 PM

I'm afraid it's pretty unlikely that "No woman wants to be with a man who can't govern his own body." If that were truly the case, the men would shape up in short order - as was the case throughout most of history, in which the only ways to get laid were to pay a professional or get married.

For every man who can't keep it in his pants, there is - by definition - a woman who can't keep her legs closed. Are not they both equally at fault?

July 10, 2017 8:47 PM

Hi Patience,
I am feeling too lazy (exhausted after a long days work) to look it up right now, but the CDC issued a report that showed that women on average had something like 8-10 sexual partners, whereas men had something like and average of 16-18 sexual partners. The difference in the discrepancy? After all, if what you were saying is true, you would expect to have the SAME number of sexual partners between the sexes. It's thought to be the sex trade--- prostitutes, and why it goes unreported.

August 18, 2017 1:09 AM

Hi, Faithful4Life, you're making some trenchant comments. Besides the sex trade, which seems credible, there's the possibility that some men exaggerate their level of conquests.

August 18, 2017 7:06 PM

Face it things have changed. Men have more brawn than women. So, naturally , they built institutions that
valued brawn. Think the Catholic Church ...built as a response to the brawn dominated Roman Empire. But dominated by men...not women.
The problem ( for men) is that 1st World economies favor brains over brawn. Men have no advantage there. Oops ! Sounds good for women...until you realize that the next generation counts. And only women can create that.
Best solution I've heard is that let women in the army at what they do best... apparently some of The deadliest snipers are women. A lot of jihadusts in Afganastsn have been sent to their virgins quota
by an American female sniper. Best shot so far is about 2 miles. Make 'em heros and celebrate their success. Give em a big GI Bill and let them breed.

August 18, 2017 7:53 PM

I found this very interesting. too bad this wasnt required reading in our younger years.

November 21, 2017 8:12 AM


Than for your friends' sake, pas it on. Teaching young women bout men before they crash has been an older woman's responsibility for many generations:

The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, Titus 2:3-4

It's counter-intuitive, but young women do not know how to love their husbands OR children without being taught. You'd not expect to know how to balance a checkbook or drive a car without being taught, why would women expect to know how to relate to men without being taught?

Women have only one reproductive strategy, men have two. Unfortunately for women, natural selection favors the man's strategy that makes life hard on women. I hope the articles on courtship and on natural selection will help you understand why this is so.

November 21, 2017 8:46 PM

"Secondary virginity won't be as persuasive to a man as the real thing"

I lost mine 12 years ago and it was the only time in my life and I still feel big suicidal tendancies when I hear this. I try my best everyday to be the best daughter, sister and future treasure of my future husband but what's the point ? No man will take me seriously since I am not a real virgin anymore... I cry everday since 12 years, it doesn't help to hear that :-(

February 27, 2018 5:59 PM

@Lili There is forgiveness in Christ. Also, the Bible teaches:

Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Given that you stopped having sex outside marriage, Christ will forgive you if you ask Him for forgiveness and the blood you have shed since then will purify you.

Men tend to push to see if a woman places a high enough value on herself for him to consider marrying her. In your case, you can state:

1) God made me to be a treasure for my husband.
2) God tells us not to have sex outside marriage. I made a terrible mistake doing that once, and I am totally convinced from that experience that God meant what He said. I've learned my lesson. Even though I've suffered for that, I still want to be God's treasure for my husband.

Then you could use the rest of the suggested statements in the article.

If you're posting profiles on a dating site, what about saying:

God made me to be His treasure for my husband. I'm not saying you have to agree to marry me before we go out, but I want you to agree that the purpose of being together is to decide whether you and I will marry.

I want a man to stay with me, I don't want a man to play with me. If you aren't willing to at least consider marrying a woman who strongly desires to be a treasure for her husband, please don't waste my time.

That might weed out some of the non-serious types.

March 1, 2018 9:18 PM

The problem is that women are retarded. If they called the shots (as they have progressively been calling ever since the advent of feminism), all men would turn into little talkative hermaphrodites.

Women lack the long-term abstraction capacities needed to understand that without MEN (=balls) our species will die out.

Human beings need men, because without balls and drive and even violence, we'd all just end up sitting on the grass talking all day while staring at the flowers not doing anything.

So what is happening in this modern world is that women are becoming more masculine and men are becoming more feminine -- but make no mistake, however useful to society these ambiguous creatures are (and they are extremely useful), our species still needs PROPER men and women.

We don't want to "correct" anything. We just want to call reality by its name. I applaud the author for having the courage to speak up her ideal of femininity. I am a violent, self-controled, driven, hard-working, educated modern man and nearly melted after reading that letter. THAT's how you "beat" men, women! We men will love you and will protect you with our lives.

May 22, 2018 7:19 AM

As for the Anonymous 35 year-old woman, here's my advice: you don't have much time left to find a decent man, so don't get too selective. Most men nowadays don't care if you're not a virgin, and possibly no one will even believe you are one at such an advanced age. I am assuming you are attractive, dress well, etc.

You seem to be christian. I'm sorry, but it is a stupid religion that has already been refuted nearly two centuries ago. It's time to let it go. If you CAN'T let it go, then at least try to grasp that you must take action yourself in finding a good man. Go to places where good men hang out. Try going to: gyms (there are many kinds of gyms, from the regular lifting ones, to boxing gyms), libraries or universities. You will have to TAKE ACTION.

Formerly a great girl like you would find a great man just through family connections. Your father would even set himself up to finding a worthy man for you. But he didn't. So YOU have to do it. Good luck.

May 22, 2018 7:46 AM

I think this article is a too simplistic, a bit moralistic. :)

Isn't a bit facile to pretend that women mainly want a relationship and men mainly want sex? I think both seek the euphoria which love can bring. I'll give some evidence.

I met my ex at work where she was very excited with me. But as I never saw when she was not in my company I did not realize that I was the cause and that she was developing feelings. Those euphoric feelings were noticed by others, and she transferred them to another and eventually married him. She never told me. The marraige did not last and later, we did start a relationship. Sex was delayed until we were both in love. Why? Because the man also needs the thrill of love. Sex can be just overstimulation of the brain!!!

She gave a few indications she was not looking for a permanent relationship. This was disconcerting, but I was patient. I believed she loved me even as she hid our relationship on social media, at work and from friends and family. Red flags of course and she dumped me after losing interest. I remember 1 morning when I phoned and she said she couldn't talk as she was puting groceries in the refrigerator! She didn't call back.

What have I learnt? Well firstly, even sincere love may not last and that some women initiate relationships without real committment, knowing they are temporary but pretending commitment from their man. And the proof is that women initiate 70% of divorces (in USA). When I was married, I loved my wife until the very day she left home and we kissed for the last time at the airport... Unlike women, a man usually remains committed long after euphoric love has calmed down.

Changing the subject .... The article states, "A woman can reach her full reproductive potential having sex only a few times every two years.". This is not relevant. If reproduction were the major purpose of sex, then a woman would only desire sex when she was fertile (like most female animals). The major purpose of sex is to keep a couple together. When sex is lacking, separation is not far behind. This is rrue whichever gender is witholding intimacy. Indeed in the 30% of cases where a man initiates divorce lack of emotional and physical intimacy is usiually the reason.

Clearly something distinguishes humans from animals and that is probably the fact that our offspring require the support of both parents for a large proportion of their lives. Reproductive success is not the number of pregnancies but the number of healthy children who in turn become parents and pass on genes to future generations. Nature has a long term view.

And talking about purposes, the purpose of dating is not to dependent on whether you aim to get married!!! That would be selfish wouldn't it? It reduces the other person to mere merchandise to haggled over. That disgusts me. The real purpose ought to be to learn about the opposite gender, to learn about oneself, to fall in love, to see if committment will work. Ethically, marriage should never be an objective but a consequence.

Virginity... Modern man doesn't need to trust his wife to be faithful. He can check the DNA of her offspring if he feels so insecure that he doubts her fidelity. So modern women ought to have more reason to be faithful! For both men an women there are only risks in marrying a virgin, namely that you may be incompatible. We don't have to base sexual morality on the customs of primitive peoples.

June 30, 2018 4:13 PM

You have good points, but we're talking primarily about instincts. You are correct, for example, in saying that a man can get a DNA test if he's suspicious, but his instincts and possessiveness do not know that. His instincts want evidence of fidelity.

We can, of course, overcome our instincts, and people differ in the strength of any and all feelings, but knowing what they are is a decent place to start.

As for sexual compatibility, it';s like Ikea furniture - tab A fits into slot B. Men are OK with pretty much any partner. For a woman, her enjoyment is in some measure, and often large measure, dependent on how she feels about the man and how he feels about her. If she's convinced that he is extremely fond of her and appreciates her, it will be OK. If not, it probably won't.

July 8, 2018 6:15 PM

Wow this article has so many generalizations it doesn't even fit into this comment thread!

July 24, 2018 3:57 PM

Hogwash article.

July 24, 2018 4:07 PM

""Secondary virginity won't be as persuasive to a man as the real thing"

I lost mine 12 years ago and it was the only time in my life and I still feel big suicidal tendancies when I hear this. I try my best everyday to be the best daughter, sister and future treasure of my future husband but what's the point ? No man will take me seriously since I am not a real virgin anymore... I cry everday since 12 years, it doesn't help to hear that :-("

Virginity isn't the most important thing in life! Don't be pathetic and be suicidal over it! If it meant that much to you then maybe you shouldn't have given it away so easily! Don't punish yourself for it! No one will know outside those you tell! Your future husband (if he loves you) will NOT CARE! He will see you as a unique individual with great qualities that any real best friend would love to have in a partner!

July 24, 2018 4:11 PM

"Women have only one reproductive strategy, men have two. "

So IVF doesn't count?!! Or even just "randomly" sleeping around and then having the guy pay child support??!

July 24, 2018 4:27 PM

I would like to know how any masculine instinct can consider virginity as some kind of proxy indicator of fidelity arose. Why would primitive man, without the benefit of shared experience that only language brings, make any connection between having sex and having children?

The idea that virginity is a virtue is a recent (in historical terms) myth. In fact I don't know any man or woman who still believes this myth. That is not to say that a woman cannot give or withold sexual favours and that is fine.

I think in the modern world any woman of marriagable age who flaunts her virginity is probably advertising lack of self confidence or lack of sexual interest. As an example I once dated a plain girl in her twenties and I realized, just from the way she talked that she was a virgin. But her character was warm and attractive so I proposed we should go on holiday together but I would respect her virginity. She accepted. During our first dinner together she confessed she had never had an orgasm. Well I guess she scored points for good communication!! To cut a long story short she got her orgasm and remained a virgin.

The moral of this short story is even if women pretend that they are saving themselves for their future husbands, in reality their husbands are unlikely to appreciate the gesture and they may well be suspicious. Very few men today would consider virginity any guarantee of future marital happiness. I just wonder how women prefer a husband who is sexually inexperienced / or lacking interest?

August 2, 2018 12:03 PM

I think you are wrong in interpreting the fundamentals of a long-term relationship between a man and a woman. If a woman thinks that she might ever want children, and most women eventually do, the only type of relationship that makes sense is a long-term mutual commitment. If a woman is attracted strongly enough to a man to consider spending her life with him, it's essential that he be absolutely gone on her. Any sensible woman knows that the time will come when she's got the flu, she's pregnant out to HERE, the other kids are leaking at both ends, the house is hip-deep in diapers, and she's too sick to do anything about it at all. If he's really smitten with her, he'll stick around and help her through it instead of running off.

The only way she can be sure he cares that much about her is for him to be willing to marry her without having her first.

If he already has her, what would marrying her give him that he doesn't already have? Men know very little about women; how does a man know whom he should marry?

If he can have her without marriage, she isn’t worth marrying. If he can’t, he will marry her if he wants her badly enough.

Intimacy without commitment is like icing without the cake. It can be sweet, but it's going to end up making you sick. A woman sets her price by what she does. If her price is a few dinners or movies, she isn't worth much. If her price is that he dedicate his life to taking care of her before getting her, she can be a priceless treasure. What she does shouts so loudly that nobody can hear what she says.

The problem with short-term hookups is that many women become profoundly emotionally involved for biological reasons which are explained in http://www.scragged.com/articles/sex-lies-and-anti-science-feminists. Briefly, sex generates hormones which tend to bind the woman strongly to the man. It can be very upsetting if she finds out that he did not care about her at all.

There are only two possible modes when a girl interacts with a guy: 1) she can be his toy or 2) she can be his treasure. You've all seen a little boy play with a truck. He pushes it this way and that, then, when he gets tired of it, he throws it away and grabs another toy. It is hard on girls when boys get tired of them and throw them away. It is very wrong for a man to toy with a woman, but a lot of women permit this, so boys keep doing it. Being discarded is very hard on women; the book "Unprotected" by Miriam Grossman explains biological reasons why this is so.

August 3, 2018 10:03 AM

This obsession with virginity and imagined male insecurity over whether a father's children are really his is a bit exaggerated.

In the third millennium, no modern man expects the mother of his children to be a virgin. Indeed he wants her to be experienced for 2 reasons. Firstly she will be less likely to stray due to wondering what other men are like during a committed relationship. Secondly she will already know if she likes sex. Too many relationships fail over sexual incompatibility. Some anxious women (and men) hide behind sexual restraint because they don't want sex.

If a man were so paranoid as to wonder if his partner's offspring were his own, he can try reliable DNA testing. She doesn't need to be, nor pretend to be, a virgin before the relationship, which is hardly a guarantee of fidelity in any case. The vast majority of men wouldn't be able to distinguish a virgin from a non virgin in any case.

The argument in favour of virginity is an illogical fantasy, based on manipulation and anxiety, hardly a solid foundation for a serious relationship.

March 4, 2021 11:30 AM
Add Your Comment...
4000 characters remaining
Loading question...