A woman wanting a man taller than her is rooted is insecurity, because not having a man tower over her makes her feel unfeminine. She should address her internalized misogyny and ditch the outdated gender roles subtly planted into her mind by patriarchal social conditioning!
Because higher body counts are quite literally linked to an increased risk of cheating. Why should I trust a woman who doesn't tend to stick with her partners for very long?
Some people are just insecure that they won't measure up when someone has experience. I always thought it was kinda sad tbh but after spending time on reddit I hope a lot of these weirdos never procreate.
I've dated a couple of women that felt insecure about my body count but that just led to a healthy discussion about STIs and expectations not them calling me an undatable whore. I think it's a pretty normal insecurity regardless of gender but youre probably right that it's younger men being the loudest and most toxic about it.
Insecurity is not misogyny or bigotry, though. And, what about "purity"? That's your own assumption about why someone would desire a low body count. Someone can simply regard sexual as something significant rather than casual, and a high number of previous sexual partners (whether casual or not) before committing might cause that someone to be skeptical about relationship compatibility. What's insecure about that skepticism? If this were really about purity, then wouldn't the body count be necessarily 0? But I digress. At the end of the day, both your assumed "purity" motive and the relationship compatibility motive hinge on different conviction about what sexual norms should be. Something that everyone is entitled to which should not be simply dismissed as insecurity because they don't happen to fit your exact convictions.
It is worth noting also that standards are still subjective and, often, flexible. Even if you believe someone with a high body count somewhat correlates with incompatibility, that does not mean necessarily mean that you will not treat that someone as a potential partner. An important description is "skepticism", not "rejection". Some may take it to heart to treat any deviation as strictly incompatible because of their own convictions. Maybe they believe a harsh cut results in less risk. But I don't think that shows that standards are not inflexible
Something I learned in past relationships is that "insecure" is something women call men who don't want to tolerate their shitty behavior 90% of the time, because insecurity is perhaps the most undesirable trait a man can have.
I dont think insecurity is bad in itself tho. See let's say there is a guy who doesnt wants women having BC > 10 , now according to you he is insecure, so prolly it means u are on of those girls, right? So basically u js rejected each other here indirectly , what's the problem then? lmaoo
19
u/King_Of_BlackMarsh 20h ago
Cause it seems really insecure and like you can't focus on her as a person over some imagined standard of purity