2172. Mid-life Dating — C7: Her Sexual Past

NOTE: During proof reading this sounded like an alibi for men. Not intended. I labor for truth and clarity and hope my writing confirms each.

Men don’t respect others until they earn it. Women lay the foundation for earning  masculine respect through usage of their sexual assets.

The male psyche is guided, albeit unattractively to women, by this conviction. Respect for females begins with respect for how they handle their sexual assets. It’s not the only but most important female behavior that impacts respect early in relationships.

The conviction is stimulated by the male primal drive to compete with Nature and men and to shape human events. Every discouraged conquest means a competitor failed, which adds respect for her. Every conquest means a competitor succeeded, which reduces respect for her. Marriage provides the only exception, because a husband earns his conquest; it wasn’t given to him.

The fewer her experiences and closer to virginity, the more respect is due a woman. His sense of significance is partially based on his ability and success of beating out his competitors for conquest or nearest thing to it. Men mostly fear insignificance. Discovering their woman to have been promiscuous activates those fears, and spikes his interest in restoring his significance, which could be at considerable cost to her.

Consequently, men have an insatiable appetite to know their woman’s sexual past. However, the more details they hear about, the more details they want. It becomes ‘not enough’ once she starts to reveal her history. As she describes whoever and whatever preceded him, his curiosity grows to determine how many, meaningful, lovingly, and legal were her experiences.

He’s really in pursuit—however clouded by disguised intentions—of how his performance ranks in her mind and heart relative to his predecessors. He starts from the conviction that he’s by far the best lover, and so every revelation of hers that enables him to think otherwise sinks their marital ship just a little deeper in the waters of separation. A man can’t live very long with the thought that his woman thinks more of another man’s sexual abilities. He can even be jealous of a dead husband.

Modern women have had enough sex partners that it clouds future relationships. A woman’s next man wants certain reassurances that flow from knowledge about her past. She may provide it, she may withhold it, or he may find out from others.

Political activists and political correctioneers declare it unfair. Her sexual history is none of his business. However, modern sex practices change the dynamic of what’s best for each woman with each man.

Her man wants to know her past. He knows she’s been active. So, he probes until she reveals the details. Even counselors preach mutual candidness. That does not make it good, only acceptable to continue whatever relationship they have.

Advantage accrues to her, if she can keep her sexual history secret or as nearly so as possible. The less he knows, the less he can judge her in jealous or other incidents. The fewer the details, the fewer the thoughts that energize more inquiry. The less he knows, the less he can use against her in future squabbles.

The more he knows, the more likely he will make her pay some price for her past. She may never know or understand what’s happening. Yet, her man may strike back because of her earlier sexual events. It takes very little for reminders of her past to grow into self-generated humiliation for him. Her history affects his sense of significance, whether she knows it or not, accepts it or not. And he’s always eager to restore any loss to his sense of significance; saving face, as it were, by blaming her. 




Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, How she loses, The mind

35 responses to “2172. Mid-life Dating — C7: Her Sexual Past

  1. That Horse Is Dead

    Sir Guy,

    My ex-husband’s reputation is that of a playboy, finding out after my marriage he has had hundreds of sex partners (many during the marriage). How does this reflect on me to a man of interest? We live in a large city but social circles are quite small and gossip abounds. My concern is that either I’m seen as dirty/contaminated because of his actions or man of interest will feel he can’t compare as a lover. Would either of these be accurate? I read in one of your prior posts that it’s better for a husband to turn to prostitutes than porn because it keeps her respectable, but I struggle with this.

    Your Highness That Horse is Dead,

    That you chose poorly the first time bodes well for you with next guy.
    Your caution gives you more time. You to screen him, plus it enables him to look for your weaknesses and learn to admire more qualities (aka virtues), have time for virtues to compound into fascination, and study your fascination until it morphs into promise that shows he can’t live without you.

    Dirty and contaminated is your mind at work. Drop it. If people talk, that won’t be what they mention. As to how he will compare as a lover, you determine that with your reactions to his actions without any comparison to anything or anyone.

    Don’t bad mouth your ex or explain why you separated. The less you talk about him, the less next man figures you will talk about him if things don’t work out. Also, the less likely you will bad mouth him at coffee with girlfriends.

    As to prostitutes and porn, the former is physical infidelity; the latter is emotional infidelity. It makes all the difference in the world to the female nature.


    • Eric

      Sir Guy:
      I’m not sure about male reactions here, but given the proclivity of many/most women today to pursue worthless and dysfunctional males, I would have a greater fear of being cuckolded for a thug/playboy type than I would being compared by sexual performance.

      In the case Miss THID mentioned, she would have to be more proactive and try to prove that her choice in men had changed.

      Sir Eric,
      Both points well taken.

      • That Horse Is Dead

        Sir Eric,

        It sounds like you are saying she is more likely to fall prey to another playboy in the future and be unfaithful to Mr. Good Enough. Would the same hold true if the situation were reversed? If I am dating a man of interest whose wife cheated and left him for another man, should I conclude he may be susceptible to a playgirl in the future and not likely to be faithful to me?

        • That Horse Is Dead

          Just to clarify, are you saying she is likely to choose the same thug/playboy or a new thug/playboy? And what kind of proof or proactivity would be enough to show you otherwise?

          • Eric

            Miss THID:
            I don’t think it’s necessarily more likely, she may have learned from her mistakes (as you have). But the tendency of men is going to be to suspect otherwise. A good way to do it is follow Sir Guy’s advice and not mention your ex; but make a point to men in whom you’re interested to say things like” I don’t know what women see inthese thugs, &c.” You mention that you’ve been there and done that and know you know better if it comes up.

            • That Horse Is Dead

              Sir Eric,

              I appreciate your reply, but bear with me because I’m still not seeing the connection to her being unfaithful with her poor choice in men. Her choosing a cheater/thug/playboy affects her future happiness but doesn’t imply that she herself is a cheater. Poor judgment, yes. Undeserved loyalty, absolutely. High risk for emotional issues such as poor self image (without recovery), yes. Inability to recognize a quality man, yes. But, cheater…no. I never “cheated” — ever — and remained loyal to him from the age of 16 when I should have been dating other boys.

              • Eric

                Miss THID:
                The problem is that, in our culture, men have been heavily conditioned to believe that women really prefer bad boys to good men. A lot of us are haunted by this kind of fear that any thug could take away a woman very easily. IOW, men need a measure of reassurance that this isn’t going to happen.

  2. Some Other Guy

    The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. So of course a man will judge a woman’s past behavior. If she slept with hundreds of men in the past and found nothing special about those men that would bond her to them, then how is this woman supposed to bond with me, her 101st lover?

    This male psyche trait is not unattractive as Sir Guy characterizes. It is an asset to men in their quest to find a partner who will be faithful.

    Would we criticize a woman who feels squeemish about marrying a man who has not held a job in the last 10 years. Would we expect her to overlook this trait and hope that somehow miraculously the man finds his mojo and gets a great job after marriage? I think not.

    To be fair to Sir Guy, he is not criticizing, he is explaining. But many other people like to pounce on men for caring about a woman’s notch count.

    Sir Some Other Guy,

    Welcome back, Long time no see. I’m sure the ladies also missed your admirable contributions.

    Thanks for tip. It now reads “The male psyche is guided, albeit unattractively to women.” And, I agree it’s a masculine asset.


    • anonymous

      We did indeed 🙂

    • That Horse Is Dead

      Sir Some Other Guy,
      So, if one woman has had one or two boyfriends over a period of 10 years versus one that hasn’t had any serious relationships during that same time period (but dates regularly), which one is seen as better potential? Or are they both equal till he figures out her sexual history? Also, thank you Sir Guy for your explanation above.

      • Some Other Guy

        That is a fine question Ms. Horse Is Dead. In the world according to Some Other Guy, a woman’s notch count and sexual history are just parts of the equation that go into determining her potential for serious relationship. I am married so this is hypothetical, but this is how I see it. I will date anyone, who’s looks and attitude are attractive to me, but whether I commit to them is another matter all together. And that is where notch count comes into play. It is a woman’s personal attributes that attract me to her and notch count plays no factor in that. It is only when I am considering any kind of commitment that notch count comes into play.

        This would be one reason why a high notch count woman will often have no problems getting dates, but can have issues in getting commitment. Guys can’t commit to somebody who can’t commit and makes poor choices.

        In your examples, having a few serious boyfriends and lovers over the course of 10 years is not excessive at all. Normal people date, fall in love and have sex. This is what we are meant to do. what would matter to me here is I would be looking for how she described those relationships and how she described the process of breaking up for clues as to whether she would be capable of bonding to me or not. As for tHe woman who has not had a serious relationship in 10 years, she maybe more ‘virginal’, but you have to wonder why nothing ever worked out with her and the other men.

        A woman’s attitude towards her sexual past can be more important than her actual history would suggest. Sir Guy references this in his article. Sexual history is something men use to judge how likely you are to be faithful. If you can demo your capacity for faithfulness in other ways and downplay your history, then your history will have less importance. Said a different way, act like a virgin and he might just think you are a virgin.

        • That Horse Is Dead

          That answers my question as I wasn’t sure whether the woman’s relationship status during that period would be an issue or whether it is mainly disclosure of promiscuity. Ultimately what I hear you say is that it’s best to keep her sexual history in the past either way:)

        • Tooconfused

          You mention in the 2nd to last paragraph;

          “As for the woman who has not had a serious relationship in the last ten years, she may be more virginal but you have to wonder why nothing ever worked out with her and other men.”

          In my case this is nearly true. I’ve been single for 7 years after 1 relationship but have dated a lot in between. Nothing sexual, due to the contents of this blog.

          You wonder why a woman would be single for that long. It could be that I’m not the best version of myself I could be, but I work on it. And you know, the guys I dated all bolted after months of not being able to get what they wanted. Which was sex. They immediately dumped me and dated other girls who would put out. During courtship I did nothing to scare them away, they just figured out what my bottom line was.

          Maybe I wasn’t good enough for them to give me a ring, or maybe I am and it’s their loss. One never knows. I’m not going go sit here and act like I’m a prize because I’m flawed. I’ve got both positive and negatives to my personality. But I think it’s a stretch to say that there must be something wrong with the woman if she’s been single for long. Maybe she’s strong and doesn’t want to put up with less than Mr. goodEnough. Maybe she has friends who put up with Liars and cheaters, marries them anyway, and would prefer to be single than waste time.

          So when you say that, it’s also fair to note that maybe the men aren’t worth dating a lot of the time. For example I’m taught that I’m single until I’m married, anyhow. I’m not married and during dating I won’t be, there’s no point in a relationship because that means free sex for the guy until he feels like giving me a ring and until then it’s words of commitment. How does being in a relationship benefit a woman? It doesn’t. She’s single until she gets the ring. For women like me that means no relationships of the drawn out nature. Most guys my age won’t wait a year or two for sex. We have to remember a man’s sex drive at 30 ain’t what it is at 45.

          I hope this doesn’t come off as nit picky, honestly I know I’ve got lots to work on when it comes to personal development. But trust me a lot of women with pride and high standards will stay single for that long because the market is divided into dutyfree sex, relationship sex, and no ring no booty types. The market is flooded right now with duty free sex and relationship sex. Being single if you choose to be chaste during this decade is not easy.

          Again, my screen name is “Tooconfused” because a lot of men think the way you do in 2015. Something is “off” if the girl hasn’t had several serious relationships in years. We’re told men marry as close to virginity as possible, and yet I see men doing the opposite. On my Facebook list the higher the notch count the girl has, the faster she gets married.

          Your Highness Tooconfused,

          Darling, I admire your character and determination. ‘Stay the course’ in Navy lingo.

          “We’re told men marry as close to virginity as possible, and yet I see men doing the opposite.”

          Men WANT to marry close to virginity, because it reduces the odds of discovering his friends aka competitors had her first (clearly described above by Some Other Guy) or disproving his satisfaction for getting a good woman as each man defines ‘good’. Both demean his sense of significance, which brings out his greatest fear. So, fear prevention stimulates uncovering her history.

          As to men doing the opposite. She sees the promise of romance. He sees the promise of convenient and frequent access to sex. Those promises eventually crumble unless his respect and loyalty and her love and devotion have morphed into enduring love. So, keep track of those guys. See how long their marriages last.


          • Eric

            This is because of attitudes instilled by pop culture: women are taught to conquer men sexually. Men who buy into this lie and marry the women with the high notch counts are really setting themselves up for disaster.

    • Some Other Guy

      I have been mostly able to read your work all along Sir Guy, just been too busy to comment. I have to say that I am always impressed with your ability to explain how men work, and how you get it right. Men are always portrayed as the lazy oafish dad or as the raging angry lunatic or sometimes the greedy CEO type (or any of a number of other flawed stereotypes). Very refreshing to read your nuanced take on manhood and the reason behind what we do.

      Thank you, sir. Coming from you, it’s gold plated.

    • My Husband's Wife

      Good points, Some Other Guy!
      By-the-way, I always appreciate the insights from the gentleman who frequent this site. A lot of value and education is added being able to hear the male response to the topics and articles. It’s very helpful. Many times I will ask my husband’s take on things too. It makes the blog even more interesting 🙂

  3. anonymous

    Nice post! Very clear articulation of a difficult-to-explain phenomenon.

    relevant: http://madamenoire.com/342430/sexual-past/

  4. Cinnamon

    With respect to “mutual candidness,” Sir Guy teaches that some things are best left unsaid, and he is correct. The popular obsession with “honesty” as central to a marriage is quite troublesome in that honesty is held almost universally today to mean full disclosure. Elsewhere Sir Guy explains, however, that honesty means accuracy, NOT full disclosure.

    The “full disclosure” so popular amongst psychologists and counsellors today has permeated widely into larger societal consciousness, but it can actually backfire and even poison a marriage irretrievably. I know two professional psychologists, both of whom are licensed and who accept a hefty fee per hour in order to dispense so-called empathy and relationship expertise to struggling people. In both cases, their own marriages are in shambles. Too much focus on “total honesty” (anything less than full disclosure is deemed “inauthentic.” Hmmmmmm……) and “my needs,” “my feelings,” etc. if you ask me, and not enough on elevating the other gender, and their spouse in particular, higher than one’s self.

    • My Husband's Wife

      Dear Cinnamon,
      You made some great points. I totally agree and have seen the same problem as you indicated, especially with counseling / society in general. It seems as though this philosophy of “being honest, full disclosure” operates on a wrong assumption: “every feeling/desire that one has is good.” Unfortunately, all of us have desires that aren’t so hot or beneficial to our spouse/family member/neighbor—and is best if not exposed. No one even thinks about protecting their reputation or the reputation of anothers which causes loss of dignity. Any relationship requires “sacrifice” and I believe that means sacrifice your own desires/feelings in favor of the overall good of another…and sometimes that means keeping a desire/feeling quiet. Many times these feeling pass as they are fleeting. Honestly, what woman wants her husband telling her about every woman he finds attractive with the excuse, “I’m just being honest!” or a mom saying “I never wanted to have you…” It’s quite selfish behavior in my opinion.
      It also seems as most couple’s counseling sessions are just venues where each spouse comes to “dump” on the other and wants to make the counselor see how awful the other person is behaving and convince them to change their ways. How can this be helpful?

      Your Highness My Husband’s Wife,
      You and Cinnamon have the proper perspective on certain counselor practices.

      • Cinnamon


        I agree completely. Yes, it seems that the question, “How will this effect the person I am saying it to?” is never taken into consideration with this push toward “total honesty.”

        Yet this kind of selfishness is deemed sophisticated whilst Sir Guy’s perspective about mastering the fine art of saying nothing is considered old fashioned and unsophisticated! Instinctively we know this is wrong, but we have ceded authority to “professionals” who are quite misguided in their beliefs about many aspects of human nature. It’s rather amazing just how backwards things have become.

  5. Re your comment “A man can even be jealous of a dead husband”—-if a widow had a good marriage with a positive sex life etc but chooses to date/marry again some time later should she never bring up her previous private life even if questioned by a suitor (Same as Virtual Virginity?) Can’t a widow express good thoughts/feelings about a beloved departed husband, have pictures up etc,? After all it is important isn’t it to honor the one who has gone and wouldn’t a new suitor want to know that the marriage had been a good one? Or should privacy be the rule rather than the exception….sort of a sad subject Sir Guy and if you don’t want to address this question I will certainly understand. I doubt that if my marriage ended I would ever want to remarry but….on the other hand some folks in my family have gone on to do so.

    Your Highness MeowMeow,

    “Can’t a widow express good thoughts/feelings about a beloved departed husband, have pictures up etc,?”

    Absolutely, except she should not mention anything about his sexual ability or performance. Or, if both like to cook or DIY or something else such driving the car or flying a plane where men are eager to compete, don’t give out comments new guy can use for comparison to the departed. It’s nowhere near sex as a bad issue to bring up, but no use letting new guy even think that he’s being compared. It will accumulate to her disadvantage.

    Most everything else should be okay, unless she overdoes it, which if she’s alert she can detect and pull back.


  6. JuJu

    Dear Sir Guy, what if you refuse to disclose this info (being a virgin) and the guy assumes because of that, you must be hiding something and badgers you constantly?

    Your Highness Juju,
    I respond with today’s article, #2173. Thanks for the inspiration.

    • That Horse Is Dead

      Lady JuJu,

      If a man “badgers you constantly” to disclose your sexual history and you’ve made yourself clear that the topic is not up for discussion (no ring, no booty), I believe he disqualifies himself as Mr. Good Enough. Your actions speak to the fact that his accusations are unfounded especially when he can’t conquer you himself. He’s fishing for your weaknesses, so allow him to go fish somewhere else, preferably back into the parade of men you will never regret.

      • Cinnamon

        I agree with you That Horse is Dead, it is a serious red flag. The goal ultimately is to find a Mr GoodEnough that will respect you completely, and for you to return the respect to him.

        Part of respect is honoring each other’s innermost core, one’s soul, which is ultimately unknownable (St. Paul speaks to this in 1 Corinthians). There is a mystery at the core of the deepest human love that is only a dim reflection of a greater love, and which we cannot penetrate. I believe we cultivate it, in all its mystery, through reverence of the other, even in the midst all their weaknesses and frailty and, ultimately, their mortality (and ours). This sounds lofty, but when it truly underlies one’s view of love this is where the deepest and closest human love, however imperfect, will quietly grow and flourish. At least this is what life, and WWNH, have taught me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s