2784. Well-liked Article (#51 posted in January 2008)


Regardless of her sexual history, virtual virginity is the strategy of acting virginal sufficiently close enough that it enables a woman to uncover what a man is really after—conquest, conquer and dump, frequent and convenient sex, or her above all else.

Virtual virginity means to the Dating Man either (1) he’s not good enough for her, (2) he’s not good enough yet, or (3) she has religious, moral, or other reasons for not yielding. All three reasons present challenges to draw him back to her. If he’s just after sex instead of her, he’ll find a way to dump her shortly.

Thus, a virtual virgin produces dump-before-sex, which is better than dump-after-sex for four reasons: (a) She wins by making ineffective his camouflaged, disingenuous, and perhaps dishonest motivation. (b) She won’t have him lingering in her closet of forgotten sex partners who were never worth her anyway. (c) She can slam him into the ‘Thank God’ corner of her memory bank. (d) She doesn’t have to explain him to a future husband.

Provided he’s after her instead of just conquest, a virtual virgin forces him to more patiently look for her weaknesses that might enable conquest. In the process, over time, he learns by absorption about her strengths, qualities, and potential for wifehood. What he admires is a virtue and men seek to marry a virtuous woman. So, the longer he looks for weaknesses, the more he sees of her and her accumulating virtues. Her magnetism grows as he fails to get what he wants.

Once she yields, however, he quits looking for weaknesses. Consequently, he fails to recognize and learn to appreciate more of her non-sexual assets. That is, after conquest, he quits looking so hard at what all she has to offer him.

Virtual virginity makes a female unique and highly worthy of pursuit. Conquest makes him the competitive superior to other men, and the greater her perceived worth as chaste, the more eagerly he bends to her expectations—provided his pursuit is hampered by her refusals for a lengthy time. That is, she adds value to herself by being more insistent about dedicating herself to something or someone higher than she. (To save herself for husband weakens hope and scares off present dates; to save herself for another man opens more doors for him to argue her down off her pedestal.)

Feminists claim men should not be that way, and they try politically to change the male nature. Male behavior changes long enough to conquer another woman, but masculinity eventually trumps both politics and female wishful thinking. Individual women pay the price by losing a man they hope to keep or find out more about him.

A man’s natural pursuit of other females does not stop until one woman so captures his respect and captivates his imagination that he devotes himself to her alone. Virtual virginity provides the best strategy for winning this battle of the sexes.

All the above begs the question about acting virginal after a previous marriage. Not to worry. It’s not the virginal condition that holds a man’s interest, it’s how many guys got there before him that turns a man off? Who were they? Will I meet them someday and not know about it? It’s not the vagina that wears out. A large number of lovers wear her out for staying with just one. Thus, a previous marriage is usually no issue.

35 Comments

Filed under boobs, courtship, feminine, Her glory, How she wins, marriage, sex differences

35 responses to “2784. Well-liked Article (#51 posted in January 2008)

  1. CartieB

    Hi Sir Guy,

    Hope you’re feeling well and in high spirits!

    When a guy decides he wants to marry a virtuous girl, is his walk to the alter a smooth process? As in he goes out to buy the ring and plan the proposal soon after deciding he is ready for the alter? Or does he still waver back and forth on his decision? Could his disappearance on his girlfriend be a manifestation of his wavering back and forth, especially if he has discussed getting married and picked out a ring with her? If the girlfriend directly bought up marriage how does it change a man walks to the alter?

    Many thanks in advance!

    Your Highness CartieB,

    If your last sentence happened, it changes everything for him to consider. If he had brought it up, he would have already been mostly committed to continue to the altar. Since you initiated, he has to review once or twice again everything that was settled in his mind.

    Your bringing it up says three things. 1) You don’t trust that he knows what he’s doing, and so you feel a need to supervise. 2) If you’re so anxious about something so big, how much excess supervision will you deliver on small things after marriage? 3) Reminds him that post-altar is a dark unknown to him; it’s been your imagination that has shaped what your future together will look like. He either goes along or has to overrule. None of such thinking is in a woman’s long term interest.

    Guy

    • CartieB

      Two months before the one year anniversary, he mention marriage and settling down with me so I felt he was already mostly committed to the alter at the time. Would you say he initiated there? As a result I was motivated to supervise wedding discussions when I didn’t get a proposal after the one year mark. That’s where i started initiating. I eventually realized what I was doing was wrong so I apologized to him and he has since picked up the baton by going ring shopping, putting a date for the wedding, location for honeymoon, and meeting his family. He did all of this without my help or hint. However, would you still say he is going along at this point?

      I also told him I want to be a house wife which he agreed to but I guess this only adds to the dark unknown post alter.

      I feel really sad about how the quality of the relationship has deteriorated ever so slightly even despite my apology and falling back on initiating and supervising. Is there more I can do? Would be easier to just break up after 1.5 years and start new with a different guy especially since he is MIA at the moment.

      Thanks again Sir Guy!

      Your Highness CartieB,

      If MIA means absent without your knowledge or his suitable explanation of why, then after two or three weeks start dating others. Let him come back to break up, if he will. Otherwise, put him back in the parade and get on with life and other men.

      The difference is this. If you break up it gives him hope that you’ll still be there if he wants you later. So, don’t announce breakup, just walk away silently. It takes away his hope that you are still his, and it forces him to decide right away: going or staying with you.

      Guy

      • CartieB

        To confirm I understand what your wrote: whenever this guy reaches out to me after two or three weeks of being MIA, instead of breaking up with him directly by saying “I’m taking a break” or “This relationship isn’t working for me,” break up with him indirectly by keeping silence and ignoring him. He is then forced to decide whether he is going or staying with me.

        At that point, only a grand gesture will do to keep me.

        Your Highness CartieB,
        You’re right on. And he figures it will take a grand gesture. Then, you will find out just how important you are to him, or not. You’re choice. Leaves you in the driver’s seat.
        Guy

        • CartieB

          I really appreciate how generous you are with your time and knowledge Sir Guy. I really can’t thank you enough :)! Out of curiosity, why do you advise waiting a few weeks before dating others instead of at the first sign of disappearance?

          Your Highness CartieB,
          Not a rule, but you need some time to get your feet back on the ground for other men. Imagine first date and you start complaining about your ex, accidentally of course.
          Guy

  2. “All the above begs the question about acting virginal after a previous marriage. Not to worry. It’s not the virginal condition that holds a man’s interest, it’s how many guys got there before him that turns a man off?”

    1. My concern about a previous marriage would not be the lack of virginity, but the reason the woman is no longer married. Except for widowhood, previous marriage would be a red flag. How much did she contribute to the problem? As to the number of previous guys, some of us believe one is too many.

    “Virtual virginity makes a female unique and highly worthy of pursuit.”

    2. Acting virginal today would make a female unique and appear to be worthy of pursuit. However, only true virginity (outside of a few exceptions) makes a woman worthy of pursuit. In contrast, “virtual virginity” without full disclosure makes a woman even more deserving of rejection than the non-virgin with full disclosure. In my case, I was an ignorant, naïve man who didn’t ask the right questions, and she did not choose to provide the answers of her own accord. I wonder what the result would have been if I had known the truth before marriage.

    Sir Okrickety,

    I numbered your paragraphs for reference.

    1. I agree. Right on with the male nature.

    2. Methinks the male nature differs here: “only true virginity (outside of a few exceptions) makes a woman worthy of pursuit.” Your statement above, “As to the number of previous guys, some of us believe one is too many” confirms my point. It’s not her purity that men pursue in virgins, but the absence of other guys.

    “virtual virginity’ without full disclosure makes a woman even more deserving of rejection than the non-virgin with full disclosure.” That’s an opinion that surfaces after the fact, from looking back. During the pursuit process, it’s not an option he faces. Is her disclosure full or not? A man doesn’t pin his decision to reject her on lack of disclosure; his hopes keeps him in pursuit.

    Had you known the truth before marriage, my knowledge of the male nature is that you would have separated before marriage.

    Guy

    • Beloved

      Are you a virgin? If not, how are you worthy of any woman who is? Believe it or not, a virtuous woman wants a virtuous man. No woman who has been controlling herself wants a man-whore. How could she respect him or trust him? We are all raised in this messed up, immoral society. I think finding a good woman (at this point in her life) not based on her past is the more mature and forgiving thing to do. Or maybe you can read that Bible passage about “casting the first stone.”

      • “Beloved”,

        You seem to have presumed that I accept the so-called double standard, the one where it is okay for men to have sex before marriage, but women are expected to be virgins. Wrong! I believe that all Christians should be chaste, with sex only acceptable in a marriage.

        No, I am not a virgin. More importantly, however, I was a virgin, not a “man-whore”, before I married, unlike my now ex-wife who was far from a virgin, only having the decency before our engagement to tell me of one “previous guy” (God only knows how many “previous guys” there were; she certainly didn’t know, when ten years into our marriage, she did tell me her full past). So, in fact, I did do the “mature and forgiving thing”.

        I thought I had found a “good woman”, but my opinion has changed because she blindsided me with a divorce (for unbiblical reasons). I have been celibate since that time, and I plan to remain that way until I die, as I have no desire to marry again.

        That is the truth, not in line with what you seem to have presumed. I believe that you owe me an apology, although, based on the attitude exhibited in your comment, I do not expect you to make one.

        I would certainly expect that a virtuous woman would want a virtuous man, and vice versa. It’s my perception that finding a “virtuous woman” is quite difficult today. Perhaps you recognize this, too, as you say “We are all raised in this messed up, immoral society.” and “a good woman (at this point in her life) not based on her past“. Those quotations seem to imply that women today are also likely to have sinned sexually.

        There is significant inconsistency in your thoughts about forgiveness, a double standard of a different sort. Specifically, you want a “good woman (at this point in her life)” to be considered as a potential wife in spite of “her past”, supposing that a man could respect or trust such a woman. However, you seem to consider that a “man-whore” could never change to be a good potential husband, one that could be respected and trusted. Now, who needs to be “mature and forgiving”?

        Your response has attacked me specifically, and men generally, while being forgiving toward women but not men. That attitude only supports my belief that all men (maybe all women, too) should avoid marriage today.

        • Beloved

          My point was this; what difference does it make if someone is a virgin or not if they are living their life rightly at the present time? And what business is it of yours what someone does in their past that they have since repented of? if God Himself has forgotten a person’s sin once they turn away from it who in the world are you to judge them based on it? And what grabbed my attention in your first statement was this ” only true virginity (outside of a few exceptions) makes a woman worthy of pursuit.” What makes you so arrogant that YOU determine what makes a woman worthy of pursuit? So, your marriage ended because your wife had more partners than you originally thought or because she wasn’t a decent person (who YOU chose to marry)? Maybe you need to recheck your standards of qualifying a woman for marriage and not sound like a typical hypocritical male regarding virginity. And what exactly am I supposed to be mature and forgiving about?? I would forgive a former man-whore if I knew his heart had totally changed from his previous ways. But I was talking about a woman who wasn’t a virgin but still virtuous at the present time and a man who was judging her for her past.

          • Amen!

            Your Highness Thankful,

            I shall take the following as Beloved’s quote to which you give an Amen.

            “My point was this; what difference does it make if someone is a virgin or not if they are living their life rightly at the present time?”

            It makes a huge difference to the male nature, especially someone pursuing you, Beloved, or someone else. You follow your beliefs, which is just fine, but you won’t last long in the relationship arena by believing sexual history makes no difference.

            Guy

            • Beloved

              I’m so glad to be part of the superior gender. As such, I would never think that I could go out and de-virginize as many men as I could get my hands on and then when I was finished with that say to myself, “ok, where’s my virgin for marrying?” Not only would that be completely ridiculous it’s such a sad statement on how the male nature apparently is also extremely hypocritical and detrimental to their own cause! A female would never be that illogical. And, also, if men like this one don’t grow up and realize how futile this is they are going to be very, very disappointed and lonely. None of us is perfect. We’ve all done things we regret at a young age, you don’t get any do-overs. You forgive yourself, forgive others, forget the past and move on. Or, you end up sulking in the corner (ALONE) because “she’s not as virginal as I want her to be.”

            • Beloved

              But Guy, men won’t last long in the relationship arena either because nobody would ever be good enough! And if the man did try to discuss this with a woman, and he was honest about his own past sexual indiscretions, she would be just as upset as he is about hers. I can’t say I agree that the female nature somehow doesn’t mind her man’s past just because she puts up with it. HUMAN nature says, “I don’t want to share!” It’s just that she is more forgiving and has the sense to realize you can’t undo the past. So this is truly something, male nature or not, that men will have to deal with. In a large part, they created this problem. They are truly reaping what they have sown. Sorry but while you guys were screwing around there weren’t virgins waiting around for you when you were ready to marry. They were too busy having their own fun by screwing your friends!

            • Beloved

              Just one more thing; because I just had a revelation that ends this discussion once and for all (for me anyway). When any man claims a woman isn’t good enough (because of past relationships) what he is really saying is this; “I am totally incapable of loving you because you are not perfect. I completely disregard my own past mistakes because I am so wonderful and forgiving (of myself at least) it isn’t necessary to give them a second thought. Besides, I know all the reasons I did what I did, and they are VERY GOOD reasons. BUT YOU!!! How dare you sleep with another man before you even knew I existed because you were (fill in the blank)…lonely, confused, misguided, thought you were in love, didn’t know you’d regret it someday, drunk, pressured by someone, etc.”. This type of man is completely worthless to any good, loving, woman because love is unselfish and sacrificial. Love doesn’t keep a record of wrongs.But I am grateful to these hypocritical males who so boldly voice their opinions on this. You are only serving to call yourselves out as men that we don’t want anyway!

            • Oooh! Just saw this. A paradigm shift. Thank you. I was mixing up my own cheery, forgiving nature, belief in redemption and in sins forgiven and presuming a Christian male would think the same. See how I learn! Thank you. Men are never more handsome than when they patiently explain the same point over and over again to benevolent femininity.

          • “Beloved,”

            As I predicted, you did not apologize. Instead, you have doubled down on attacking me. That’s part of the attitude I referred to.

            “what difference does it make if someone is a virgin or not if they are living their life rightly at the present time?”

            I believe it makes far more difference than your implication that it is irrelevant. Forgiveness of sin does not remove consequences. For example, God can forgive a woman who has chlamydia as a result of her promiscuity, but she may still have a consequence of an inability to bear children. Similarly, there can be behavioral consequences to sin. For example, a “man-whore”, even though he has repented, is more likely, I think, to repeat his sinful behavior after marriage than a virgin husband.

            “… what business is it of yours …”

            If I was considering a woman as a prospective wife, it would absolutely be my business to consider the entirety of her life before I commit to her in marriage. The same is true of a woman looking for a husband.

            “What makes you so arrogant that YOU determine what makes a woman worthy of pursuit?”

            There is your attitude again. In fact, you are judging me when you accuse me of arrogance. It doesn’t bother me that you are judging, but I do disagree with your understanding of my statement. It is not arrogance, but choosing to be wise and discerning in the choice of a mate. I agree that I failed to make a good choice of a wife, and I have experienced the consequences. I have learned the hard way.

            Your beliefs about judging are impacted strongly by the world’s view. The New Testament teaches more about judgment than the oft-quoted “Judge not ….”. For example, in John 7:24, Jesus said to “[J]udge with righteous judgment.”. We are to “test the spirits”, to “examine everything carefully”, and “be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves”.

            “And what exactly am I supposed to be mature and forgiving about?? I would forgive a former man-whore if I knew his heart had totally changed from his previous ways. But I was talking about a woman who wasn’t a virgin but still virtuous at the present time and a man who was judging her for her past.”

            Your previous comment was absolutely one-sided in presuming the worst of men and the best of women. For example, you describe a repentant sinful man as a “former man-whore”, but you refer to the equivalent woman as “a woman who wasn’t a virgin but still virtuous at the present time”. That is not consistent, that is, it is immature. Your forgiveness seems to be strongly skewed toward the woman, but not the man.

            Here, you claim you would forgive a former man-whore, but you add this convenient caveat: if you “knew his heart had totally changed from his previous ways”. Just how are you going to be certain of that? What qualifies you to judge his heart? How would a man know that a woman has truly repented of her sin? It is written that “… You (God) alone know the hearts of all the sons of men,….” 1 Kings 8:39. You are not God.

            • Beloved

              I’m sorry (that’s NOT an apology as I have nothing to apologize for) but you are talking in circles and are difficult to communicate with. Bottom line is this; Jesus doesn’t accept us because we are pure and sinless. He loves us as we are and then He purifies us through His love. A man is supposed to love his wife as Christ loves the church. Hmm…now that doesn’t sound to me like a man who is more concerned about counting up her past partners. Does it to you? And don’t twist my words or meanings because I said man-whore instead of a man who has changed his ways as I did with the example of the woman. I meant the exact same thing. I think you owe me an apology for that. But, I know I won’t get it because I know exactly who I am dealing with here; an MRA, MGTOW, whatever you want to call yourself who spouts Bible verses as if he’s an actual Christian. But, guess what? If you want to talk Bible stuff I can promise you, you have no idea who you’re dealing with. I know what the Bible says. It speaks of people like you. They’re called Pharisees. On a side note; I am sorry that your marriage ended. But “My concern about a previous marriage would not be the lack of virginity, but the reason the (man) is no longer married. Except for widowhood, previous marriage would be a red flag. How much did (he) contribute to the problem? As to the number of previous (girls), some of us believe one is too many.” See what I did there?

              • “Beloved,”

                “You are only serving to call yourselves out as men that we don’t want anyway!”

                The more you write, the more you show your true character. You remind me of the panhandler I met years ago. He claimed to be Christian and behaved accordingly until, after he had eaten the meal I bought him, his language, behavior, and general attitude degenerated greatly to show his true character. Your attitude is becoming more evident, but, thankfully, you haven’t gone down to his level.

                By the way, if you happen to be married, please ask your husband to read these comments and give you his honest opinion on them. If, instead, you are single and become engaged, please ask your fiance to read these comments and give you his honest opinion. If your thoughts are as good as you believe, his response should be a confirmation of your worth and his wisdom.

              • A.GuyMaligned

                Sir Okrickety,
                I apologize for letting Beloved’s immature screeching bother your eyes. I was not alert enough to see it coming; she was setting up for someone like you. Sorry, but I enjoyed your mature and well-tempered responses. Thanks.
                Guy

              • A.GuyMaligned

                Beloved,

                Looking back at previous animosities you showered on me as author, I should have been more alert. Instead, I gave you much leeway and politely answered your questions in 125 comments. But then you attacked a reader. Tsk,tsk!

                You’re very far off base with Okrickety. You exaggerate and claim wrongly and he debates points. Also, your screeds are unseemly for my blog.

                Just as blame poisons relationships, your immature blaming of men poisons your welcome here. You may blog elsewhere as befits your feminist anger.The antidote is to argue with facts and truths about how humans are born differently instead of opinions and propaganda to dramatize getting in a man’s face.

                Guy

    • Guy,

      ‘“virtual virginity’ without full disclosure makes a woman even more deserving of rejection than the non-virgin with full disclosure.” That’s an opinion that surfaces after the fact, from looking back. During the pursuit process, it’s not an option he faces. Is her disclosure full or not? A man doesn’t pin his decision to reject her on lack of disclosure; his hopes keeps him in pursuit.

      Had you known the truth before marriage, my knowledge of the male nature is that you would have separated before marriage.’

      If the relationship reaches the point that it is serious, I would then consider lack of full disclosure (not necessarily all of the details, but admission of the full extent of the behavior) by either party to be egregiously dishonest. This applies to other areas, too. Suppose any of the following has not been disclosed: one has a life-threatening illness, or one is opposed to having children but the other wants them badly, or one wants to start their own business, etc. As far as I’m concerned, failure to disclose these before marriage is lying, not trusting the other to love you for who you are. How can there be a good marriage when it is founded on an unstable foundation?

      There is even more that she withheld from me before marriage. When she told me about her promiscuity ten years into our marriage, she also told me that she had been raped on two unrelated occasions, and also had had an abortion. Perhaps I would have broken up before marriage, but I’m not certain that I would have been smart enough to have done that.

      • That Horse Is Dead

        Sir OKRickety,
        WWNH advises against full disclosure when it comes to her sexual past as a man will surely judge her for it. This quote is from post 2172, “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.”

        Your Highness That Horse is Dead,
        Ahhhh! What a delightful surprise to have a reader outdo the author. No wonder I missed you a short while ago. Thank you. (I’m reminded of my definition of high quality when that was hot in the management scene: delightful surprise)
        Guy

        • That Horse is Dead,

          While I recognize that full disclosure of sexual history could be used against a woman, I disagree with Guy’s belief that this is almost certain. In my case, I don’t think I ever used it against her. Instead, I felt greatly disrespected that she had not been willing to trust me.

          If a man would use it against her, I would think it would be far better to find this out before marriage than afterward.

          The obvious logical conclusion is that the best long-term approach for women is to be a virgin at marriage. Then there is nothing to hide.

          What bothers me most about Guy’s advice is the idea that hiding the truth long-term is good.

          Sir ODRickety,
          I responded separately.
          Guy

          • A.GuyMaligned

            NOTE: I RESPOND IN CAPS TO your lower case comment.

            SIR OKRICKETY,

            YOU CONTINUE WITH CLEAR AND WELL UNDERSTOOD POINTS. THANK YOU. REGRET MY DELAY, EXCEPT THAT IT FOSTERED YOUR WELL-WRITTEN AND RELEVANT COMMENT TO SALINA. THANK YOU AGAIN.

            YOUR AND MY DIFFERENCES ARE CAUSED BY ME COMPARING THE MALE AND FEMALE NATURES THAT PEOPLE INHERIT AT BIRTH AND YOUR DESCRIBING LESSONS LEARNED AFTER BIRTH. WE WON’T LIKELY AGREE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT WE CAN COMPARE AND LOOK FOR WAYS TO MORE CLOSELY EXCHANGE UNDERSTANDING.

            IN WHAT FOLLOWS, I’M NOT TRYING TO WIN A DEBATE WITH YOU. I USE THE FORMAT TO DISTINGUISH HOW WE ARE THINKING ABOUT OPPOSITE THINGS, OUR NATURES AT BIRTH VS. LESSONS LEARNED IN LIFE.

            While I recognize that full disclosure of sexual history could be used against a woman, I disagree with Guy’s belief that this is almost certain. I BASE IT ON THE LARGE NUMBER OF MARITAL DISPUTES THAT END IN BREAKUP OR NEARLY SO. IF A MAN FEELS THREATENED BY A WOMAN HE HAS CONQUERED, HE FULLY EXPECTS TO WIN HIS WAY AND TO USE EVERY BIT OF KNOWLEDGE HE POSSESSES TO GET THERE.

            In my case, I don’t think I ever used it against her. A TRIBUTE TO YOUR GENTLEMANLY CHARACTER, WHICH ISN’T AS COMMON AS IT ONCE WAS.

            Instead, I felt greatly disrespected that she had not been willing to trust me. THE MALE NATURE FUNCTIONS THAT WAY TOO, AND WITH LOSS OF TRUST GOES LOSS OF RESPECT.

            If a man would use it against her, I would think it would be far better to find this out before marriage than afterward. YES, I AGREE. BUT IN THE OVERALL BALANCE OF A WOMAN PROTECTING HERSELF AGAINST FUTURE DISADVANTAGES, YOUR POINT IS LEGITIMATE BUT LESS IMPORTANT IN MY DESCRIPTION OF TWO GENDERS COMPETING. OTHER BENEFITS ACCRUE TO HER, NAMELY:

            • IF UNKNOWN, WHETHER A FEW TIMES OR PROMISCUOUSLY, HER HISTORY CAN’T BE THROWN IN HER FACE TO JUSTIFY MASCULINE DOMINANCE.

            • MAKING IT PRIVATE MAKES SELF-FORGIVENESS AND FUTURE SINCERITY MUCH EASIER. BOTH ARE ESSENTIAL TO FEMALE MATURITY, SATISFYING TOGETHERNESS, AND HELPING A MAN REMAIN SATISFIED WITH HIMSELF IN MARRIAGE.

            • BY CONVINCING HIM TO HONOR HER DESIRE ABOUT ONE THING, IT BECOMES EASIER TO GET HIM TO HONOR HER FUTURE DESIRES ABOUT OTHER MATTERS. IOW, TO HONOR HER WISHES ONCE IMPROVES HER RESPECT OF HIM, WHICH ENHANCES HER TRUST OF HIM, WHICH ENHANCES HIS RESPECT OF HER. MUTUAL RESPECT COMPOUNDS FROM HIS HONORING HER WELL JUSTIFIED WISHES.

            • MEN RESPECT WOMEN ACCORDING TO HOW THEY GUARD THEMSELVES FROM THE INTRUSION OF OTHERS IN THE COMPETITIVE PERIOD BEFORE MARRIAGE.

            • WOMEN ARE BORN WITHOUT SELF-RESPECT, HAVE TO EARN IT IN LIFE, AND GUARDING THEIR REPUTATION REINFORCES WHAT THEY HAVE ALREADY EARNED.

            • MEN CAN’T LOVE A WOMAN THEY DON’T RESPECT. WOMEN EARN IT THREE WAYS—BY LISTENING AND HEEDING WHAT HE SAYS, BY KEEPING HERSELF CHASTE, AND BY ACCOMPLISHING/ACHIEVING THE UNEXPECTED.

            • DIVULGING HER LACK OF CHASTITY COSTS HER THE RESPECT OF A MAN. THE VARIANCE DEPENDS ON THE REMAINING LEVEL OF HER CHASTITY AND EACH MAN’S ABILITY TO RESPECT WHAT HE FACES DEALING WITH HER.

            • MEN BELIEVE WHAT THEY FIGURE OUT ABOUT A WOMAN BETTER THAN WHAT SHE TELLS THEM. SO, HER SILENCE ABOUT HER HISTORY KEEPS HIM PREOCCUPIED WITH WHO AND WHAT SHE IS TO HIM. BETTER THAT THAN SPUR HIS MIND TO WANDER FOREVER THROUGH HER BACKGROUND. WHO SHE IS DWARFS WHO SHE WAS, UNLESS HIS MIND DECIDES OTHERWISE.

            • HE WANTS HISTORY THAT INCLUDES NAMES AND PERHAPS ABILITIES. HE SEEKS TO DISCOVER TO WHOM SHE YIELDED. HE MAY KNOW OR ENCOUNTER THOSE MEN. IT CAN BE EMBARRASSING BUT WORSE, IT CAN TOO EASILY HUMILIATE A MAN.

            • KNOWING HER HISTORY IS SO IMPORTANT TO HIM, NEGOTIATING PRIVACY GIVES HER A BIG WIN AGAINST HIS DOMINANCE. IT BODES WELL FOR HER IN THEIR FUTURE TOGETHER.

            The obvious logical conclusion is that the best long-term approach for women is to be a virgin at marriage. Then there is nothing to hide. ABSOLUTELY CORRECT! VIRGINITY IS NOW UNDESIRED TO GAIN ADVANTAGE FOR FEMALES. IT’S NOW POLITICALLY INCORRECT AND EVEN SHAMEFUL IN THE EYES OF THOSE WHO RESPECT THE FEMALE NATURE AS BEING EQUAL OR SUPERIOR TO THE MALE.

            GOD DESIGNED, NATURE ENDOWS, AND HORMONES ENERGIZE WOMEN AT BIRTH AS INDIVIDUALS WITH FREE WILL, DESIRE TO GET THEIR WAY WITH MEN, AND RELATIONSHIP EXPERTISE THAT ENABLES THEM TO GAIN FAIR IF NOT MAXIMUM ADVANTAGE AGAINST THE DOMINANT GENDER.

            HOWEVER, MEN ARE FREE TO PURSUE THEIR BEST INTEREST. IN THE PAST HALF CENTURY, FEMINISTS AND THE POLITICAL CLASS UPGRADED THE DOMINANT GENDER BY TEMPTING FEMALES WITH MASCULINE-STYLE SEXUAL FREEDOM AND ENTICING THEM WITH SEX FOR PLEASURE OVER A GOOD FEMALE-CENTERED LIFE.

            THE LOSERS? WOMEN WHO TAKE THEIR BEST BARGAINING CHIPS OFF THE TABLE. LIFE IS FULL OF NEGOTIATIONS, AND WOMEN HOLD THE MOST VALUABLE CHIPS, WHEREAS MEN HAVE NO CHIPS EVEN CLOSE TO HERS EXCEPT PROVIDING/PROTECTING, ETC.

            “What bothers me most about Guy’s advice is the idea that hiding the truth long-term is good.” I PLEAD NOT GUILTY. IT MAY LAST LONG-TERM, BUT THAT’S MORE CONSEQUENCE THAN DESIGN, THE RESULT OF HER PERSUADING HIM TO HONOR HER WISHES FOR PRIVACY. LONG TERM IS GOOD IF IT KEEPS THEM FROM SEPARATING.

            NOW TO CLOSE, WE’VE NOT TOUCHED THIS VITAL KEY TO UNDERSTANDING HUMAN BEHAVIOR. WE’VE GIVEN MEN A WALK. WE SHOULD ASK OURSELVES WHY A MAN FEELS IT IMPERATIVE THAT HE HAS TO OR EXPECTS TO KNOW HER SEXUAL HISTORY?

            IT’S BURIED DEEP IN THE UNCONSCIOUS SIDE OF THE MALE MIND AND MEN WON’T FIND IT EASY TO EXPLAIN. WOMEN KNOW FAR TOO LITTLE ABOUT IT SPECIFICALLY, BUT THEY ACCURATELY SENSE THEIR SEXUAL HISTORY CAN BE USED AGAINST THEM. IT’S PROBABLY THE GREATEST DILEMMA WOMEN FACE IN COURTSHIP.

            • Cinnamon

              MEN CAN’T LOVE A WOMAN THEY DON’T RESPECT. WOMEN EARN IT THREE WAYS—BY LISTENING AND HEEDING WHAT HE SAYS, BY KEEPING HERSELF CHASTE, AND BY ACCOMPLISHING/ACHIEVING THE UNEXPECTED.

              Sir Guy,
              Would you please give some examples of how she can accomplish/achieve the unexpected in order to earn respect, both before and after marriage?

              Your Highness Cinnamon,

              Men admire those who achieve, especially the unexpected for both person and achievement. Admiration accumulated morphs into respect. Examples? Learn to fly. Earn honors in graduating. Have a baby. Get voted into office. Save money. Get a job over her head (but not more money than he earns). Write letters that influence powerful people. Write a book.

              If she continually whines or complains about one of those admirable feats or her life with him, she’s looking back, achieveing less, and producing little. Retreating that way from being admired, she may reduce his respect. It’s not the big things that hold a couple together, it’s the absence of small things such as whining, complaints, frustrations, irritations, and ability to forgive and forget.

              Guy

          • That Horse Is Dead

            Sir OKRickety,
            Two Biblical examples of women with promiscuous pasts for you to consider in prayer are Rahab, who became the mother of Boaz and in the line of Jesus, and Gomer, who God used to demonstrate his commitment to Israel, the wife of Hosea. My point being that there are many chaste single women who God uses for His glory who made poor choices and do not want to be identified by who they were. We are new creations in Christ. However, long term courting is necessary to assess her emotional and spiritual recovery and character. I feel it would be dishonest to wait until a woman is serious about you to tell her you will eventually demand full disclosure. This puts her in a bad position. Either dodge and avoid your questions in order not to look back and rehash the shame and wounds of the past that have been healed, or share these choices with you and risk losing someone she loves and thereby opening all the shame and wounds again. What are your thoughts?

            • THID,

              I will first state that I do not believe women are more sinful than men; I believe both sexes are equally sinful. However, it is my perception that many attempt to portray the women in the Bible to be more righteous than what is stated in the text. Yes, Rahab and Gomer were used by God, but not by turning from their promiscuous pasts. Rahab chose to help the Israelites hoping to avoid her own death (with no statement of any period of chastity at any point), and Gomer was used as an example of repeated, sinful adultery (with no evidence she ever changed). In short, I don’t think they support your position.

              While I recognize that Christians are new creations in Christ and should not be identified by our pasts, the problem I see is that we are still subjected to temptation, and past behavior increases the likelihood of repetition.

              You say it would be dishonest for the man to wait before saying he will demand full disclosure at some point. I suspect the primary reason is that you think it is wrong for him to ask at all. I think that a potential spouse’s history of physical or mental illness, childhood abuse, long unemployment, crimes, domestic violence, etc. is important to know, especially when committing to marriage. Why would one’s sexual past get an exemption from such inspection? [I did some of that in a pre-marriage weekend, but the most comprehensive (but still incomplete) example I have found is the Personal History Questionnaire PDF from Dr. Willard Harley’s website.]

              How does a man “assess her emotional and spiritual recovery” if he is unaware that she has a “history” to recover from? As to assessing her character, I would consider avoiding or refusing to answer questions about her past (of any kind) to be a lack of honesty, a sign of bad character.

              “… rehash the shame and wounds of the past that have been healed, or share these choices with you and risk losing someone she loves and thereby opening all the shame and wounds again.”

              If those wounds have truly been healed, then this, although uncomfortable, would not open them again. Consider the Christian testimonies of those who share their past sin in order to demonstrate how God has changed them and encourage others to accept Jesus as their Savior. The willingness to share this openly is proof that they have changed. In the same way, a woman’s willingness to share this with a prospective spouse would be evidence of change. And, if the wounds have not been healed, it would be a blessing to have this knowledge.

              Could she lose someone she loves? That risk always exists, but this is why I recommended it be done when things get serious. If he loves her enough, then he can choose to continue. If he doesn’t, then she will not be wasting time and effort on a relationship that is lacking.

              • That Horse Is Dead

                Sir OKRickety,
                Men and women are so fundamentally different in the way we emote and process information. This is a good example. There’s no right or wrong answer, but there is definitely miscommunication of ideas here. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.

              • THID,

                Since I have no idea what you consider to be miscommunication here, I cannot try to clarify. Nor do you show interest in that, which I find disappointing, as it prevents either of us from learning how to better communicate with the opposite sex. Nonetheless, thank you for your comments.

              • Cinnamon

                OKRickety,

                I’m a nobody really, but as a long-term student of both WWNH and human behaviour, I am compelled to add my 2 cents; I hope it’s not too unwelcome.

                That questionnaire from Dr.Willard (which I find grotesque) takes a very modern approach to courtship and marriage by focusing on words. Sir Guy, by contrast, teaches a very old fashioned approach based on long courtships where actions/behaviour (including but not limited to words) are observed, and character discerned, against a backdrop of mystery, modesty, self-restraint, and discovery.

                Give me that old-time religion, please.

              • Cinnamon,

                I think the questionnaire appeals to me (at a serious point in the relationship) because it is straight-forward and it suits my personality. Perhaps that is common for many men.

                Seeing as my own experience included two years of dating/engagement which did not result in sufficient “discovery”, I consider the above to have great potential to help in choosing a good mate.

                Sir OKRickety,

                Re the questionnaire at Personal History Questionnaire PDF

                I applaud your discussions with the gals here. You contribute with a style that is clear, concise, and well thought out. Thank you especially for the invitation to learn “how to better communicate with the opposite sex.”

                Women routinely and verbally exchange questionnaire-like information with each other. They do it instinctively as the basis for trusting one another, bonding, getting along, and blending friendships. Women trust first and respect later; they have to, being they are made that way.

                Females such as Cinnamon sense the questionnaire objectionable, and it flies instinctively out of a sex difference that comes with birth and which I consider relevant here.

                The sex difference? Men keep personal info private and usable. They don’t have to trust; they can take care of themselves. They respect someone after its earned, and their trust follows to seal mutual respect. Men seek to conquer each woman who presents herself as challenge to his conquering spirit, and conquest sooner is better.

                Women are opposite. A woman craves to be romanced; it confirms her worth to a man. She expects his attention, appreciation, and affection expressed in many ways but especially orally. If his actions are not red flags, his words carry the day.

                She needs romance but he doesn’t. To buy his romance, mystery is her best strategy. A man believes what he figures out much more than what he’s told. If she fully discloses who she is, he has little interest left to convert her admirable qualities into virtues and thus evaluate her potential as his mate. (Admittedly, the questionnaire is partial disclosure, but her participation invites her to more fully describe who she is and what she does.)

                Moreover, if she fails to listen to him in their first few dates, she fails to start earning his respect, an absolute necessity, since men don’t love a woman they don’t respect. So, full disclosure has three sharp edges. He knows her too well to be lured by mystery, too easily discouraged of talking about himself in their early encounters, and too completely to spend enough time with her.

                Full disclosure by questionnaire, self-description, or attitude to explain herself leaves him with too little to figure out about her. Mystery is missing and her ability to stir his romantic interest is compromised. The male form of relationship glue disappears, as he becomes uninterested in discovering how she makes him satisfied with himself.

                Guy

  3. mimi

    “Believe it or not, a virtuous woman wants a virtuous man. No woman who has been controlling herself wants a man-whore.”

    +100000000

  4. Beloved

    Guy, if speaking the truth is immature (in your opinion) then so be it. I’m not at all surprised to see you back a male over a female because I have taken note of your chauvinistic tendencies before. The only reason I view your articles is because I do see the wisdom in them. But I also see an adversarial view (yours) of relationships and this idea that it’s women who are solely responsible for the outcome of their relationships when God calls men to be the leaders and be unselfish and responsible and respectable toward women. When a man tells me that it’s women who invented marriage, praises his own son’s illicit relationship and says it’s ok for a married man to visit prostitutes I know I’m not dealing with a true Christian but a total fake. I pity the women who don’t see it as I very clearly could.

    Beloved,

    Your adolescent tirade continues without substantiation except feminist bias. Your opinions earn no merit in objective discussion. Also, you have outlived the polite courtesy showed you by Okrickety.

    “When a man tells me that it’s women who invented marriage, praises his own son’s illicit relationship and says it’s ok for a married man to visit prostitutes I know I’m not dealing with a true Christian but a total fake.” You imply that I’m to blame for three inaccurately described positions that I have taken, but none are accurate.

    “I pity the women who don’t see it as I very clearly could.” Then why not specifically cite evidence of what you claim? Quote me and then attack it. Do so and we shall see if women deserve your pity, which is faux for lack of proving yourself with anything but biased opinion.

    Guy

    • Miss Gina

      Sir Guy has said many times that he describes the male nature from birth and that it can be changed. Some Chritians might call this the “sin nature.” Female “sin nature” would include a critical, blaming, self-righteous, perfectionistic attitude. These are things that we ladies must let the Holy Spirit change in us to be like Christ.

      Lady Beloved, I wonder why God felt the need to describe perfect love in scripture? Do you think that maybe He knew we *all* need a picture of it, given that *none* of us is perfect in our natural state?

      None of us can live in perfect love by our own efforts. We must submit ourselves to the influence of the Holy Spirit to even come close. Does it surprise you that the male and female sin natures are so far removed from perfection? It shouldn’t.

      And it is helpful for us to know the forces of nature that drive men and women toward good and evil, don’t you think? I for one am grateful to know that my behavior can influence others for good. It’s much more effective than preaching to others about their faults.

    • Sarina

      Hi Beloved, I understand your point of view, but I really don’t think what you’re doing is right. Sir Guy has shown vulnerability in sharing with us aspects of his sons’ lives, he didn’t have to, he could have painted everything perfect in his family cause it’s not like anyone can verify. It’s not wise to attack a man when he has shown such honesty with his life.
      Sir Guy does have extensive experience on the subject given his own marriage plus his observing and discussion with various men during his life. I really think you’re misrepresenting him on the last point, he was talking specifically porn vs prostitution, anyway it was in a context in which he explained the matter. However, your point against him isn’t proof to call his beliefs as fake.
      Also the fact that Sir Guy allowed your post to rant about him shows me that he’s a man of integrity.

  5. As I have panned down this thread I have realised how long it grew whilst I was away. If I have offended anyone or piled onto an argument, I’m sorry. If I reacted quickly, it was due to an ignorance, now righted, about how men think (see earlier comment from Sir Guy) but most importantly I typed the ‘amen’ because I believe in a Saviour who turns all our flawed lives around by his sacrifice on the cross. This fact before all others shapes my todays and tomorrows. But I sure am learning a lot about others things, especially from this blog! 😉 Keep up the good work Sir Guy. Your patience is amazing and your thoughtfulness is appreciated.

  6. prettybeans

    Sir OKRickety, you have been hurt by betrayal and you must be conscious of the fact that this changes how you will view anything – I get it. At least some of it. It’s a difficult thing when you keep up your end of the bargain, you trust, and you give of yourself in good faith (as you rightfully should) and then you reap a bitter fruit. It’s distressing to put it mildly. Kudos to you for walking the talk..

    Lady Beloved, I do agree with many of your points. We do live in a world where a man will be more easily forgiven for his indiscretions than a woman will be. It is true and it is unfair and very painful.

    We are broken people with broken intentions and in a broken world. I think the Christian teaching is that only God can separate us from our sin and help us to walk as we should (albeit in a broken imperfect manner)

    In any event, I don’t think a relationship can survive where there is not a generous helping of forgiveness..for ourselves and for others. It is generally much easier to solve another persons problem than it is to address my own..perhaps human nature I don’t know.

    Yesterday I ran into the woman that my ex cheated on me with. It was shocking because we look alike. I didn’t do anything wrong but he betrayed my trust and I can see what change that has had on my outlook and disposition. I will get over the hurt eventually because he is the one with the weak character but I am now praying that whatever is innocent in my own heart remains so and that I do not give in to cynicism and hatred because then he will have taken more from me than just my time and my good intentions.
    We treat each other with such a casual disdain and it’s heartbreaking.

    But the cross remains the best bet for us all. Where sin was paid for perfectly

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s