… while for a man to be promiscuous is a sign of his value, for a woman to act loose with her sexuality devalues her
Continuing with our last post, we would like to elaborate on why promiscuity damages women more than it damages men, and why sexual morality is far more important for women than for men.
There are five reasons for this.
- The Argument from Ease: Women are the gatekeepers and the “sellers” (in economic terms) of sex. A reasonably attractive woman can with a flick of her finger or a glance invite any man to have sex with her. And he will, in the overwhelming majority of cases, accept her offer. That is, it requires no special effort for a woman to indulge in promiscuity. This means that the ease and opportunity is far more for women than for men. Hence, if promiscuity is considered a destabilizing force for society, the restrictions must be stronger for women than for men.
- The Argument from Contract: A man needs to feel certain that his family, for which he is breaking his back at work and for which he is ready to lay down his life, is his own and that he is not being cuckolded by another man. A man needs to be assured of his paternity of his children. Even if the woman is using birth control during her affairs (by the way, no form of birth control is foolproof), or is willing to put her children through paternity tests, it introduces a dangerous element into the relationship which is absent if the male indulges in promiscuity.
But we can go further than mere paternity: Even today, the role of the male as the primary breadwinner and that of the female as nurturer stand in almost all societies. That means, a man needs far more reassurance that his wife is offering her sexuality only to him in return for his efforts, and is not giving it away for free to other strange men. Would a wife accept it if her husband wills his property to another woman that he met before or after his wedding? Of course not. Similarly, a self-respecting man will not and should not accept the fact of his wife’s premarital and extra-marital sexual dalliances.
He married her, and more than at any time during the courtship, became responsible for her lifelong protection and maintenance. It is a fraud on him if his wife offers herself for free to another man without any such commitment from him.
- The Argument from Emotional Involvement: Women, pathological sluts excepted, cannot have sex without a feeling of trust and without at least some emotional connection with the man. A man, on the other hand, can have a purely physical sexual interaction and still feel satisfied. That is why men are willing to pay for a brief encounter and then go home. That is one reason why female prostitution is everywhere, and male prostitution is minuscule by comparison. Females want more than just “sex”. A male prostitute cannot simply have sex with his female client and go away. That will leave most women feeling empty and used. She can get sex anyway quite easily, as we wrote earlier in point 1.
If women ignore this fact of their biological persona and become promiscuous like a man, they will quickly and surely chip away at their sexual bonding instincts and become damaged goods for any man. If they have had many partners, their ability to love and be loyal will become so diluted as to be non-existent. Though too much promiscuity harms men as well. But due to the lack of emotional entanglement, its effect on their ability to love a single woman is much less.
- The Argument from Availability: Women are the gatekeepers of sex. If you strengthen the gatekeeper (moral strictures) and the fortifications (social oversight), robbers will think many times before even attempting a break-in. If, like at present, women are promiscuous, have no overseeing guardian, and are willing to sleep with married men, then men, having innately stronger sexual urges, will sooner or later take advantage of the availability of such willing women to have affairs. But if female promiscuity is shamed in a society, men will find it difficult to find a woman with whom to have an affair, and will have limited options. If women are loyal to their future or current husbands, the only choice available to men who wish to be promiscuous is to go to a prostitute. That doesn’t diminish the institution of family, despite what you might be told. In traditional societies, it was acceptable for a man to visit a prostitute if his wife was indisposed or pregnant, or for an occasional celebration.
Female chastity and fidelity therefore are guarded far more carefully than that of men. It is even simpler to understand if you acknowledge that sex is a female resource, and needs to be guarded or protected by/on the female. A male has nothing to guard. He is the user/buyer of sex.
- The Argument from Expenditure: A female needs pre-coital and post-coital effort. She needs to be wooed before, and she needs to cuddled after. She needs gifts and romantic gestures and sweet nothings. Her tantrums need to be tended to. Her jealousies and hormonal states need careful handling. A promiscuous female, not wanting to produce a child, is an energy sink and provides no corresponding economic value to society. She leads to an explosion of wasteful effort, rampant consumerism and expenditure at bars and hotels and clubs by men who are courting her. A man available for courtship requires no such effort from a woman. Hence, a female being promiscuous costs the society far more in wasted resources than a man.
There are many more arguments that can be made which validate the ancient wisdom that female promiscuity needs to be more firmly controlled and shamed than male promiscuity.
Women being more interested in careers and promiscuity are a biological aberration and lead to the downfall of a society. Such women do not want to be mothers, but due to their serial monogamy or sluttiness, become little more than social parasites and drain men and social institutions of their resources.
One might say that a promiscuous man needs to be shamed just like a promiscuous woman. But the danger to society posed by the former is mild, while the danger posed by the latter is enormous.