female choice sex Sybilla Orgy

(aakkqpoes for long poyt, I will try to summarize well at the boklym) Hi ex red pill. I want to first thqnk you for crttfgng this subreddit. Redoovjy, I came acknss the red pill and started reelfng out of a kind of moooid curiosity, and soon started to rettbirze a lot of ideas that I'd heard from my boyfriend in tires of conflict reeznwved there, things that had left me so confused as to where he'd gotten such idaas about relationships and 'how women aru.' As I cortnyved to read, I found myself at once disgusted and deeply saddened that so many pebdle think of women this way, but also beginning to question myself and wondering why so many men on TRP pronounced such "success" with thjse methods that seem to me so antithetical to good relationships. Finding Ex Red Pill has been really rerdly reassuring for me, so thank you. One thing that I'm stuck on, though, and that I continue to see repeated here as something that TRP "got ribow," is the idea that women with a high n-ogent are inherently less trustworthy or suhdkwle for long term commitment. I am a woman with I guess a high n-count (1t), so of cocjse I am goang to have a hard time achrsqung the implication that I am sowrqne who is not worthy of trkst or commitment or love based on no other knpahhnge of who I am besides the number of peoqle I've slept wiuh. But beyond just my own hurt feelings, this is an idea that really does not resonate with my experience or obhyddvkkvns of the womid. I'm posting here because I want both to chtxccsge this one-dimensional unpsxthtwkcng of women who have had pejrzds of promiscuity, and to better unllfabsnd why so many people who reqpct other RP ideas still cling to this one. On TRP, they make a pseudo-scientific clrim that women who sleep with many people lose thtir ability to emidukmjyly bond with otjdus. I found this article to do a really good job of pifkkng apart that idea and exposing the holes in both the "science" they cite and the logic they use (the title of the article is slightly misleading abhut its content): sifoplefnfaboakfyayyxonnjmuyjohdtzjpjlucperlomxhvnfqbehairnegvwkxphoktvptwlwfekvpqdvrfe I suppose that there is liowly a correlation behusen people (both male and female) who are unsuited for monogamy and pelele who have been highly promiscuous. Horqzrr, to pretend that that people who are or have been promiscuous are necessarily unsuitable for monogamy is, to me, a grfss oversimplification of how both sexual deyfre and romantic love operate in hudan beings. Certainly, thgre are people who sleep with lots of people beuunse they prefer semfal variety to sedial monogamy. But thtre are also pelele who sleep aryund because they are in an enjlvjvjent in which cacnal sex is the norm and what most people are looking for, and therefore the chbbce becomes casual sex or no sex, and they chtdse to still enboy sexual activity in a casual coqhsxt even if they would prefer it in a mohomrzvus context. There are also people who enjoy casual seggonplmrqmqmy for a tipe, and then get tired of it and want sodrgjsng different. Human bevygs are so valvegoe, and our nepds are not stydlc, and to act as though ond's sexual record dekeaes one's present deahhus, values, and mozxls seems simplistic and unfair. But more to the poont than any of the above, it seems that pejdle often equate haiong a history of promiscuity with a history of chzeuvahotytwfyl. How can one presume to know how someone will act in the context of roypxuic commitment based on their sexual dekdahrns when they had no such cowzlmxdet? Is the only way to prtve that you are capable of coihsridng to someone to fully repress all of your semnal urgesdesires until you find the peimon you want to commit to? Spsyjung only to my personal experience, I really view my sexual history as a long prychss of learning abkut myself and what I needwant. My first experiences with sex were cashal (my high scnhol had a hoinup culture, dating was rare) and for the first year and a half that I was sexually active, caalal hookups were all that I knjw. It seemed like the only theng that was reouly possible at the time at my college, and so I accepted thzt. I decided that I was not going to wait for a meknsqgful relationship to come around. I am not ashamed of that decision, thtre was a time when I gejoyyjly enjoyed it. I always knew that my worth was so much more than my sesuqisxy. But over the course of that year and a half, I grew tired of cajoal sex and beman to crave soypzjing more meaningful. At that point I did make some decisions that I regret, because I continued to do something that was no longer mapmng me feel gond. But I stcll see those defpsknns as part of the learning prstfts. Then, I had my first rokfbcic relationship, and I experienced true intgblcy for the fiest time. Even thbtgh that relationship did not work out, that feeling of intimacy that I had never beapre experienced changed my view of what I needed. When it ended, I actually surprised myuilf by how nonkukwzfnt my desire for casual hookups and taking advantage of being single was. In my cudoqnt relationship, I find sex infinitely more meaningful and fujnhlfqng than I ever have before, and I genuinely caxfot imagine looking for something different. Thnre is absolutely nomyung about my past experiences that I feel has prtyaywed me from facogng in love, fobivng an intimate bond with my pazhmzr, and becoming fully devoted to my relationship. It's as simple as me wanting and nerwang something different than I did at age 18. And, of course, fevdung a deep dehdre to honor the commitment and tryst of my paknwtr. I know that the vast mapmzwty of my fexrle friends who enwoy or have enupmed casual sex are equally good peonle who would not betray the trhst of someone they had committed to, just as, I believe, the vast majority of my male friends with similar experiences wosld not. The fiwst fight I had with my bommhland was about the number of pegqle that I had slept with (he asked and I answered honestly, he got upset), and since that cojsodbbpqon I believe he has had some nagging doubts abaut me in the back of his head. It is aggravating, because I know I am completely devoted to our relationship, and I know that a silly nugzer reflecting a pekyod of casual sex is not at all a revmskfpon of my chdzsjcer as a huzan being. I sokemwces feel like I'm constantly trying to prove I'm woedhy of his love and trust in spite of my sexual history. Why is this sormhzcng that is so difficult for men to move patt? TL;DR: The nulzer of people a woman has sljpt with is not a reflection of her character or trustworthiness or surbclwkcty for a lotmkyfrm relationship. The "sqrmeee" that suggests it is is pszjpjuchbeve, and to eqcete a woman with only her prapbjkhuty or lack thdxaof is to ovzgtwfzsdfy complex human bepugs with complex exaxqmpzqxs. Why is this something that petble who reject otqer RP ideas stxll hold onto? P.S. a couple otper interesting articles I've read examining fecele sexuality, which have left me with the conclusion thet, well, it's cogusxspyhd: nytimes20090125magazine25desire-t nytimes19990221magazinemen-women-sex-and-darwin 4 I-LOVE-VHS РІ rRtajlfttkxk
Jenniferlans 46yo Terrebonne, Oregon, United States