We strongly affirm the red-pill truth that while for a man to be promiscuous is a sign of his value, for a woman to act loose with her sexuality devalues her.
This truth is often paraphrased as: “A key which can open every lock is a valuable key. A lock which can be opened by every key is a worthless lock.”
The fundamental insight to understanding this “double standard” is this:
A heterosexual community can be analyzed as a marketplace in which men seek to acquire sex from women by offering other resources in exchange. Societies will therefore define gender roles as if women are sellers and men buyers of sex. Societies will endow female sexuality, but not male sexuality, with value (as in virginity, fidelity, chastity).
Modern women who want to act like men and open their legs to whoever gives them the tingles are only doing themselves, and womankind in general, a disservice. Men are only too happy to take advantage of a woman putting a low price on herself. Here’s an illustration of the woman’s devaluation of her own sexuality (from Dalrock, the original blog post referred by Dalrock has since disappeared):
In 1965 you could get a husband without sleeping with someone
In 1975 you could get a fiance without sleeping with someone
In 1985 you could get a boyfriend without sleeping with someone
In 1995 you could get a date without sleeping with someone
In 2010 you’re lucky to get a phone number if you don’t have sex first.
Women’s promiscuity undermines the whole society because due to the sluts, the price of sex on average goes down. And when the price of sex is tingles above all else, all kinds of superficial clowns get to score above men with depth.
Sexual recklessness also severely diminishes the possibility of emotional bonding in the woman (necessary if she is ever to be a loyal wife and a good mother), while it doesn’t in the man. We will write about this in another post.