5 Reasons Why You Should Never Experiment With Casual Sex

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
I'm really not into confusing or distracting by these comments, but in studying the Old Testament scriptures I always found it curious that so many of the patriarchs had multiple wives and concubines. As christians we are certainly called to higher things, but our culture has been subverted and marriage or becoming a husband or wife is no longer a priority. The reason I find threads like this interesting is because I come from the other side of the commonly referred to (PUA) paradigm, where most thankfully have changed their ways, but from always being the old rvf type or pua guy, or traveler (or all of the above). The society was always the society, I now see (let's say the last 40-50 years), but being orthodox in america I guess during this time didn't easily produce any more matches or connections than you may have otherwise thought - I was the other side of it. I always had my sins, but I didn't focus on any of the player or pua stuff for years, and all that led to was a type of drought or saltiness that you do all this work and so few connections were really possible. Perhaps the small number of potentially suitable women I had were my fault in not capitalizing on, but being a religious person and wanting that for your family limits you in a mostly faithless society. Ehh, perhaps it's good it worked out that way. We don't know what's going to happen this decade and how having a family might, in certain ways, involve far greater pain. Things to think about.
 

Mrs.Coffey

Chicken
Woman
Protestant
To the men who argue with you that they want just a little experience to make them confident, let me suggest they experiment under the hood of a car and learn how to do minor repairs and change oil. That they google some simple recipes and get familiar with how to make a few dishes. Go to Home Depot, buy some basic tools and learn how to repair general things around the house. And if they want to go the extra mile in confidence building, take a dance class and learn how to properly dance at social functions.

I promise you that these are the kind of experiences that will begin to build confidence.
 

SlickyBoy

Hummingbird
Men are shamed for being virgins. That not fornicating makes them "losers".
They aren't shamed for not fornicating so much as being shamed for their inability to choose not to fornicate. Big difference. Women like the idea that a guy has options and may choose not exercise them, but the last thing they'll respect is a guy who has, or at least appears to have, zero options.

On a somewhat related note, I've noticed a tone among celibate men who try to follow the right path - they run the risk of being seen as an easy mark by manipulative harpies with devious plans.

I say this not to discredit their efforts at leading a virtuous life, I'm simply pointing out that men on the path need to be careful that they don't become too eager to immediately accept "the one" when she conveniently shows up one day in his church.
 

Going strong

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
To the men who argue with you that they want just a little experience to make them confident, let me suggest they experiment under the hood of a car and learn how to do minor repairs and change oil. That they google some simple recipes and get familiar with how to make a few dishes. Go to Home Depot, buy some basic tools and learn how to repair general things around the house. And if they want to go the extra mile in confidence building, take a dance class and learn how to properly dance at social functions.

I promise you that these are the kind of experiences that will begin to build confidence.

Yes to all this to, as you say, begin to build confidence.
Then you need more, to consolidate confidence. It might be, learning to really repair cars and complicated stuff, not just "minor or basic things".

Also I would advise, learning martial arts or even better, learning firearm shooting. That really builds strong confidence.

Regarding dance, I'm not sure a virgin man could be super confident at it, if the danse involves holding a woman.

In any case, all this confidence building without a girlfriend or wife, is I think only possible if the man is really, profoundly religious. If not, his confidence will falter at some stage. So, a strong faith is really needed. And yes, many manly, useful skill-learning, sports and activities.
 
Last edited:

Vigilant

Kingfisher
Woman
Protestant
If only you would tackle male culture as much as you tackle feminism... We would be living in a completely different world! Roosh has apparently changed, but his audience not so much. As much as I hate feminism, it isn't exactly it's fault that secular men are whores. This has been the case since before feminism or even the 70s sexual revolution. The first Playboy edition was lauched in the early 50s, a time where double standards were still very strong, most women were still highly expected to be virgins while promiscuity among men was not only accepted but even encouraged. Promiscuous men are not whores or whoremongers anymore but "womanizers", "chads", etc. It is ridiculous to blame women for secular men being whores. Porn was created by and for men. Men make up 70% of porn consumers. Depravity and promiscuity are rampant, encouraged and deeply rooted in male culture much more than they are in female culture. Promiscuity among women is only recently starting to become accepted. I've come across statistics that show that men apparently also cheat on at higher rates than women. The double standards when it comes to promiscuity is not only pathetic but also useless. You're never gonna have a christian society or traditional women as long as promiscuity among men is accepted, because it is an inevitable outcome that a time will come where rates of promiscuity are also gonna increase among women in such society
Satan is the original feminist, whilst men were and still are the first version of feminism. Female feminism is a reflection, mirroring feminism in men.
 

Sitting Bull

Woodpecker
Trad Catholic
Satan is the original feminist, whilst men were and still are the first version of feminism. Female feminism is a reflection, mirroring feminism in men.

And a point that is too often overlooked in today's discussions about feminism is why it is by and large chosen by men. Very few people realize the apparent benefit men get from it, just like there is an apparent immediate benefit in porn consumption. Today's male anti-feminists too one-sidedly describe feminism as a "mass male oppression" phenomenon (a sort of transposed feminist discourse).
 

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
And a point that is too often overlooked in today's discussions about feminism is why it is by and large chosen by men. Very few people realize the apparent benefit men get from it, just like there is an apparent immediate benefit in porn consumption. Today's male anti-feminists too one-sidedly describe feminism as a "mass male oppression" phenomenon (a sort of transposed feminist discourse).
It was a method to debase and abuse women, which had multiple beneficial effects for the overlords ... while at the same time providing the mirage of a chance for collectivist/weaker men that were produced by the biggest baby bomb in history (that we're aware of) and/or their children which never had to suffer a culling or a markedly diminished status as in times of old. That's the reason why it continued.
 

Vigilant

Kingfisher
Woman
Protestant
I was wary of marriage, and it was a contract with the State, not a religious ceremony,

"4. The marriage license invades and removes God-given parental authority.​


When you read the Bible, you see that God intended for children to have their father’s blessing regarding whom they married. Daughters were to be given in marriage by their fathers (Dt. 22:16; Ex. 22:17; I Cor. 7:38). We have a vestige of this in our culture today in that the father takes his daughter to the front of the altar and the minister asks, “Who gives this woman to be married to this man?”

Historically, there was no requirement to obtain a marriage license in colonial America. When you read the laws of the colonies and then the states, you see only two requirements for marriage. First, you had to obtain your parents permission to marry, and second, you had to post public notice of the marriage 5-15 days before the ceremony.

Notice you had to obtain your parents permission. Back then you saw godly government displayed in that the State recognized the parents authority by demanding that the parents permission be obtained. Today, the all-encompassing ungodly State demands that their permission be obtained to marry.

By issuing marriage licenses, the State is saying, “You don’t need your parents permission, you need our permission.” If parents are opposed to their child’s marrying a certain person and refuse to give their permission, the child can do an end run around the parents authority by obtaining the State’s permission, and marry anyway. This is an invasion and removal of God-given parental authority by the State.

5. When you marry with a marriage license, you are like a polygamist.​


"See the State and the lawyers know that when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, you are marrying the State! You are like a polygamist! You are not just making a vow to your spouse, but you are making a vow to the State and your spouse. You are also giving undue jurisdiction to the State."


^. Now, this is interesting!
 

The Beast1

Peacock
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
If only you would tackle male culture as much as you tackle feminism... We would be living in a completely different world! Roosh has apparently changed, but his audience not so much. As much as I hate feminism, it isn't exactly it's fault that secular men are whores. This has been the case since before feminism or even the 70s sexual revolution. The first Playboy edition was lauched in the early 50s, a time where double standards were still very strong, most women were still highly expected to be virgins while promiscuity among men was not only accepted but even encouraged. Promiscuous men are not whores or whoremongers anymore but "womanizers", "chads", etc. It is ridiculous to blame women for secular men being whores. Porn was created by and for men. Men make up 70% of porn consumers. Depravity and promiscuity are rampant, encouraged and deeply rooted in male culture much more than they are in female culture. Promiscuity among women is only recently starting to become accepted. I've come across statistics that show that men apparently also cheat on at higher rates than women. The double standards when it comes to promiscuity is not only pathetic but also useless. You're never gonna have a christian society or traditional women as long as promiscuity among men is accepted, because it is an inevitable outcome that a time will come where rates of promiscuity are also gonna increase among women in such society
Soon
 

MartyMcFly

Ostrich
Other Christian

"4. The marriage license invades and removes God-given parental authority.​


When you read the Bible, you see that God intended for children to have their father’s blessing regarding whom they married. Daughters were to be given in marriage by their fathers (Dt. 22:16; Ex. 22:17; I Cor. 7:38). We have a vestige of this in our culture today in that the father takes his daughter to the front of the altar and the minister asks, “Who gives this woman to be married to this man?”

Historically, there was no requirement to obtain a marriage license in colonial America. When you read the laws of the colonies and then the states, you see only two requirements for marriage. First, you had to obtain your parents permission to marry, and second, you had to post public notice of the marriage 5-15 days before the ceremony.

Notice you had to obtain your parents permission. Back then you saw godly government displayed in that the State recognized the parents authority by demanding that the parents permission be obtained. Today, the all-encompassing ungodly State demands that their permission be obtained to marry.

By issuing marriage licenses, the State is saying, “You don’t need your parents permission, you need our permission.” If parents are opposed to their child’s marrying a certain person and refuse to give their permission, the child can do an end run around the parents authority by obtaining the State’s permission, and marry anyway. This is an invasion and removal of God-given parental authority by the State.

5. When you marry with a marriage license, you are like a polygamist.​


"See the State and the lawyers know that when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, you are marrying the State! You are like a polygamist! You are not just making a vow to your spouse, but you are making a vow to the State and your spouse. You are also giving undue jurisdiction to the State."


^. Now, this is interesting!
I agree that the government should get out of marriage completely. There are legal contracts if people want to give power of attorney or other rights to a person they are close to (often the argument given as why we need the government involved in marriage). Involving the government has turned marriage into a business partnership and has made it colder in a way.

Getting the government out of marriage could also reduce fraudulent marriages including marriages where a person marries with the plan to divorce the other person to get a lot of money once a few months or years have passed (I know this wouldn't completely stop these but it would be a start).
 

dasDude

Chicken
Keeping virginity as a man is not the same as being virgin as a woman. Assuming both have some value (a decent look, a masculine man and a feminine woman), they won't face the same challenge. For the man, providing he's geniune, has faith and with minor adjustment (remove all distractions like social media, avoid checking out women, spiritual life..) it's easy to stay virgin since he is the initiator of the seduction process.

Conversely, the virtuous woman face a bigger challenge, since she receives propositions from multiple men, there's a social pressure for her, unless she's living in a strong christian (or muslim) environment where families protect the kids since childhood from secular values.

Though this pressure is true and exists, a young and feminine woman who keeps her virginity still has a high value. This is the paradox. She has a tremendous choice among men of value. It's a burden that is rewarded.

The man, on the other hand, cannot rely on his virtue alone. Adding to the burden of virginity, he must carry the performance one. He must proof himself as a good and masculine provider, specially if he wants to marry a virtuous woman (since she's rare and has value). Unfortunately, being virgin as man is not rewarded per se.
 

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
I dispute that it's harder to stay a virgin as a woman, but this is my (biology based) speculation: women don't have testosterone, and have far more to lose by being pregnant. Without social pressures or a bad culture, women would barely have sex otherwise. Heck, I've often said, if not for men's testosterone, the human race would hardly exist - let's be honest.
 

02Hero

 
Banned
Other Christian
I dispute that it's harder to stay a virgin as a woman, but this is my (biology based) speculation: women don't have testosterone, and have far more to lose by being pregnant. Without social pressures or a bad culture, women would barely have sex otherwise. Heck, I've often said, if not for men's testosterone, the human race would hardly exist - let's be honest.
They do have testosterone. Birth control will kill it to 0% though. Although yes men have way more testosterone. Plus womens high estrogen can increase libido as well, especially in combination with a little testosterone. It is just a different type of libido.
 

Suburban Yahoo

Robin
Protestant
I agree that the government should get out of marriage completely.


1. The state has to deal with the contract implications of a pair of married individuals doing business as a single unit with other entities. Because the state deals with contracts between all sorts of entities.
2. The state has to deal with the fallout of failed marriages.
3. The state gets to deal with the fallout of the death of one of the couple (wills, etc.).

This doesn't mean the state has reduced marriage to a contract, although a ZOG probably would just because.

You can still get married and not get a license--is the state going to stop you? **--but good luck with that when it comes to things the state is involved with (see above). And if your cheatin' wife leaves you and takes the children, you're going to form a church posse to get them back amirite.

** do you realize there are polygamous Mormon sects still doing their thang?
 

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
They do have testosterone. Birth control will kill it to 0% though. Although yes men have way more testosterone. Plus womens high estrogen can increase libido as well, especially in combination with a little testosterone. It is just a different type of libido.
I agree with this but you can just look at married couples on balance and understand that generally speaking, men desire sex a lot, and women are fairly indifferent about it. It's not very controversial to state it as such. And women typically don't pair up with guys who are that much higher in SMV than they are, so as to look forward to submitting to them constantly in the same way that men would just like it to be fairly voluminous and not some production that requires a lot of energy to accomplish (a supposed date, a night out, a vacation, etc).
 

get2choppaaa

Hummingbird
Orthodox
I agree with this but you can just look at married couples on balance and understand that generally speaking, men desire sex a lot, and women are fairly indifferent about it. It's not very controversial to state it as such. And women typically don't pair up with guys who are that much higher in SMV than they are, so as to look forward to submitting to them constantly in the same way that men would just like it to be fairly voluminous and not some production that requires a lot of energy to accomplish (a supposed date, a night out, a vacation, etc).
In general I'd say you may be correct, women like to be made to feel special but I would not necessarily say women are indifferent about sex. Not to be crass, I've found that women's libido can be just as high as men's .... even in (or especially in) marriage. They usually are not going to be he ones who initiate it overtly in the same way a man would but they want to be loved and receive that love physically as much as a man. It has been my experience ( even in 1 failed marriage and now 1 very happy marriage) that as long as a man is leading and doing their job (still doing very basic things in romance... like being assertive but kind, actually listening to your wife, and not letting yourself go physically...) sex with your spouse is not that big of a production requiring special thought and attention. In fact if you are having to do some planned event to get into the bedroom you're failing in all the other areas of your relationship that need to happen for intimacy's.

Really its quite simple : If you are setting the conditions for your spouse to want to receive your affection, they will crave it when you do.

Something you don't learn when you're having casual encounters is that the physical bond experienced with your spouse is much more enjoyable not just physically but also emotionally/mentally than any of the random hookups or casual flings. I think if men understood that prolonging the need to just get your jollies off because you're hormones tell you its a good idea vs realizing that if you do wait for a real partner whom you can bond with... things are incalculably more enjoyable. The more casual encounters you have, the further away you are from what will really bring you happiness... which is a woman you can feel respected by and in turn you want to give your love to. Finding that, while rare already, is not likely to happen among the bar flys and people you meet on tinder. I know it has happened... but frankly its very far from the norm.
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
I dispute that it's harder to stay a virgin as a woman, but this is my (biology based) speculation: women don't have testosterone, and have far more to lose by being pregnant. Without social pressures or a bad culture, women would barely have sex otherwise. Heck, I've often said, if not for men's testosterone, the human race would hardly exist - let's be honest.
Women don't have as much testosterone, but there seem to be plenty of libidinous women regardless.

HOWEVER, the bit about social pressure holds true even for women who ARE sexually-driven, I think.

I had a libido from an unfortunately young age (due to early childhood trauma not well remembered), but was otherwise very much raised in a bubble away from the vast majority of social programming. And even without any particular social or religious pressure to remain chaste, that (admittedly quite strong and confusing) desire was NEVER stronger while I was growing up, than the fear of consequence for indulging it without the safety net of marriage.

It took four straight years of deliberate "reprogramming" by my first husband to convince me to delve into sexual degeneracy with him.

About the same amount of time young women spend in college these days.

Imagine that.
 

Ah_Tibor

Pelican
Woman
Orthodox
In general I'd say you may be correct, women like to be made to feel special but I would not necessarily say women are indifferent about sex. Not to be crass, I've found that women's libido can be just as high as men's .... even in (or especially in) marriage. They usually are not going to be he ones who initiate it overtly in the same way a man would but they want to be loved and receive that love physically as much as a man. It has been my experience ( even in 1 failed marriage and now 1 very happy marriage) that as long as a man is leading and doing their job (still doing very basic things in romance... like being assertive but kind, actually listening to your wife, and not letting yourself go physically...) sex with your spouse is not that big of a production requiring special thought and attention.

The only difference between being younger and older is suddenly you have a lot more responsibilities that can interfere, like baby or work. I don't think the "drive" is decreased at all (if anything it just gets worse haha).
 

Alexander_English

 
Banned
Protestant
Mrs.Coffey:
https://www.rooshvforum.com/goto/post?id=1547866
To the men who argue with you that they want just a little experience to make them confident, let me suggest they experiment under the hood of a car and learn how to do minor repairs and change oil. That they google some simple recipes and get familiar with how to make a few dishes. Go to Home Depot, buy some basic tools and learn how to repair general things around the house. And if they want to go the extra mile in confidence building, take a dance class and learn how to properly dance at social functions.

I promise you that these are the kind of experiences that will begin to build confidence.
Yes to all this to, as you say, begin to build confidence.
Then you need more, to consolidate confidence. It might be, learning to really repair cars and complicated stuff, not just "minor or basic things".

That's exactly right. Men need to focus energy on developing mastery, because in real life men hunt, build things, plan, communicate, trade, defend, invent, and many other things requiring thousands of hours of dedicated mental and physical effort, as well as inspiration from God, to become good at. The poor, lost Western woman's idea of faking her way along, trying to appear like a man, has infected even most men nowadays, until the idea of "just learn a few simple things, no need to try too hard" probably seems like a good idea to most of them. With the rotten culture and now the forced isolation and separation, sometimes I'm amazed when I think back and remember the genius, talent and virtuosity in many different areas the men around me displayed, just in their normal lives, when I was a child and younger adult.
 

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
In general I'd say you may be correct, women like to be made to feel special but I would not necessarily say women are indifferent about sex. Not to be crass, I've found that women's libido can be just as high as men's .... even in (or especially in) marriage. They usually are not going to be he ones who initiate it overtly in the same way a man would but they want to be loved and receive that love physically as much as a man. It has been my experience ( even in 1 failed marriage and now 1 very happy marriage) that as long as a man is leading and doing their job (still doing very basic things in romance... like being assertive but kind, actually listening to your wife, and not letting yourself go physically...) sex with your spouse is not that big of a production requiring special thought and attention. In fact if you are having to do some planned event to get into the bedroom you're failing in all the other areas of your relationship that need to happen for intimacy's.

Really its quite simple : If you are setting the conditions for your spouse to want to receive your affection, they will crave it when you do.

Something you don't learn when you're having casual encounters is that the physical bond experienced with your spouse is much more enjoyable not just physically but also emotionally/mentally than any of the random hookups or casual flings. I think if men understood that prolonging the need to just get your jollies off because you're hormones tell you its a good idea vs realizing that if you do wait for a real partner whom you can bond with... things are incalculably more enjoyable. The more casual encounters you have, the further away you are from what will really bring you happiness... which is a woman you can feel respected by and in turn you want to give your love to. Finding that, while rare already, is not likely to happen among the bar flys and people you meet on tinder. I know it has happened... but frankly its very far from the norm.
I agree with this but the main problem keeps coming back to the fact that if you don't put social and other pressures on women to be married at a relatively young age, you set up scenarios of men not only getting distracted or starved (think of it, it can be YEARS) to the point of being quasi monks, you create a situation where both sexes lose big time because of all that collateral damage where the women learned bad things and the men were starved out only to be served/have suggested to them ... older women who want to be bailed out for their, or society's mistakes, and on top of that, have rapidly decreasing value. That's the point.
 
Top