Subscribe to Bitch—an award-winning, 80 page feminist magazine. Image Map

AskMen.com is over women being easy!

Oh AskMen.com, you harbinger of antiquated sex values, you never disappoint in your oblivious celebration of the most backwards of relationship advice and unadulterated ignorance.

"Stacy Jones" wrote to AskMen.com's relationship misogynist columnist Curt Smith wondering why handsome Daniel never called her back after she 'fessed up to having slept with 43 men. Shockingly, Curt's advice wasn't "Stacy, you're better off without some douchebag who responds by saying 'Hmm, one for each of my birthdays,' and then turns over to pretend to read the Money section of USA Today." Instead, Curt gave Stacy the low-down on something she should have realized a long time ago: Women who have lots of sex have a Problem with a capital P that will forever keep them from true love, and it's called PROMISCUITY.

"Before I begin, allow me to stress that I'm not passing judgment on women, nor am I saying that women shouldn't enjoy themselves sexually."

Disclaimer Fail! Smith's entire article is about how women who sleep around/are sexually liberated (same thing, duh) can't face the facts that men won't want them!

Some women will argue that if men have the right to sleep around, so should women. But I ask only one question: If women adamantly believe this, then why is it that when faced with the question, "How many men have you slept with?," most women who have slept around with truckloads of men always lie?

Because they feel like shit after reading crappy articles like yours, which deliberately instill additional guilt in women who have ever felt shame about sex!

Smith doesn't waste time to objectify women in the most fundamental way possible: by calling them objects.

An object that has value is worshipped, respected, cherished, and shared with very few deserving people. As soon as you start sharing that object with anyone and without care, the object starts to lose value. The more people use the object, the more it depreciates and the less bargaining power it has: this is a plain psychological fact of life.

Does this scream "abstinence-only movement" to anyone else? Why don't you just escort me to a purity ball already, Dad? The whole depreciating-value thing resembles the duct-tape metaphor for women who get around: the more places it's been the dirtier and nastier it gets! Observe:

They could stick together forever!

Given the terms Smith uses to describe la vajayjay ("sacred body", "precious gift," "special gift," "valuable treasure" [other laughably awkward phrasing Smith uses: "sexual magic," "full intercourse"]), the only thing that's missing from this backwards campaign is the bit about dying from STDs (and funding from the Bush administration, ba-dum ching!) Is Smith's article all that different from pro-abstinence site ChastityCall.org? The stirring poem "A Real Woman..." and "To My Future Wife" have the same message: keep your magic sparkling treasure chest locked and hidden if you want to be the perfect mate!


Too little, too late, sister!

For those women who remain oh, a tad skeptical over his argument that our "precious gift" is the most valuble thing you can give a man, Curt thankfully takes the time to lay out his argument in language we can understand: Marriage.

If I were to offer Stacy the same engagement ring that I once offered my ex-fiancée, would she appreciate it? I'm sure she wouldn't, and it's only a ring. Then how do you think men feel when a woman offers herself once she's already offered it to so many other men?

Ohhh I get it now! (My uterus makes it difficult for me to relate to anything that doesn't involve jewelry.)

Even more mystifying than the patronizing metaphors is this magical golden era Curt keeps referring to.

"Times have changed…There was a time when many women cherished their bodies much like a sacred temple. Where only a noble man, one who respected and loved her, had access to her body."

Ring, ring, "Hello? Is this the fact-checker for Askmen.com? Yes I was wondering where exactly you heard about this time period? Oh hmm. Yes, I see. You found it in the Vague'n'Mythic file in the Department of Delusions? That explains it!" Please, "a noble man?" Even Queen Guinevere got around.

But one of my favorite parts is towards the end:

"If…. a woman abuses her sexual power with many men, it will backfire on her. Unfortunately, women only realize this after they've had their 'women's movement fun.'"

Favorite new term for feminism or choice euphemism for sex? I can't decide….

I imagine most Bitch readers wouldn't give this kind of article a second thought, and would rightfully write-off Mr. Smith as a no-bit, misogynistic, possibly ghostwritten, web hack. Hell, even the commenters on the article call him an a-hole, troglodyte and diss his writing skills (burn!). But what about the folks who do read this stuff? Men and women who take his crap-vice to heart, forever in unfulfilling relationships with no clue why? What about poor souls like "Carrie Bradshaw's Brother" who can't even bring himself to type out That Most Sacred Object, referring to a "woman's V---"?

Is it good enough to scoff off AskMen.com? Easy enough to avoid clueless d-bags? Or is it cause for concern?

Thanks Kate D. for the tip!

Want more from Bitch? Good news! Our quarterly magazine, Bitch: Feminist Response to Pop Culture, is packed with 80+ pages of feminist analysis, reviews, illustrations, and more. Subscribe today

Subscribe to Bitch


Comments

29 comments have been made. Post a comment.

this is a pretty good post.

this is a pretty good post. read well

Wow, that is the absolute

Wow, that is the absolute worst thing I've ever read on askmen. And that's saying a lot.

It's interesting to me that

It's interesting to me that AskMen pumps out this drivel along side their article "Top Ten Sex Festivals Around the World."

The final question of your post is such a good one. Part of me is like, meh, these people are idiots--who even writes to advice columns any more, anyway?--and they and their kind are in the minority. But then again, clearly there are still people who buy into this kind of stuff! But who are they?

Well, no matter what, "women's movement fun" is going to be my new euphemism for EVERYTHING.

Yo really- really dudes.

Yo really- really dudes. Come on now...that advice/flowery language- about sex with a woman- is shameful, not hot and ignorant. I hate to say it but AskMen dot Com is only filing itself away, yet again, as synonymous for The Embittered Unf*#kable... Seriously guys lets do some MANLY arithmetic... do you really think that experience in the "field" does not merit better performance when you are lucky enough to spend some time with a girl... all I am saying is you better serve the lady breakfast in the morning or your not getting a call back based on your poor performance in the arenas of the bed, intellect and how that translates in conversation (be that verbal or written), and lets not forget the respect and honor that we all male and female and everything in between can gain through intimacy... think on it ladies and gents -respect when delivered- can bring you some serious physical fulfillment... and the equation for fulfillment does not ever and will not ever have a concrete sum....

What if she'd dated all

What if she'd dated all those guys she slept with? Would that make a difference? And why is there no mention of how a girl feels about a guy who's slept around? STDs anyone? Possible kids somewhere? I know it bothered me when I learned that my husband had had 11 partners (myself included) in the last 8-9 years. He didn't date all of them, and most of them he dated for a short time. But still...knowing he's been attracted to all these other girls, how many he's put his dick into...I'm not into casual sex and have only been with one other person besides my husband. Doesn't bother him that my 'other' is a friend of his. But it bothers me that he slept with Tammi or Allie (girls we hang out with on occasion) and Crazy Stacy. Anyway. It's late and I'm rambling and tired. Askmen.com is a bunch of douchebags and I hope the general male population (and female, I suppose) recognizes this and takes what they say with a grain of salt. If the poor souls take it seriously, the beast (askmen) needs to be vanquished and thoroughly pwned in the public sphere. I'm so tired of their mindless, ignorant prattle.

Gah. Sleep. Good.

Injustice.

Why should women be crucified for not upholding their virginities?
When men are forgiven for sleeping with so many other women?

Because a man doesnt want a

Because a man doesnt want a whore for a girlfriend... he wants a whore to fuck

This doesnt mean that men are allowed to fuck everything they want and get a away with it without consequence. There are many women who wouldnt go for that.
But the truth of the matter is that women prefer an experience slutty guy. They want that guy to be theirs

On the other hand men DO NOT prefer a slutty girl to be theirs... they will just prefer them as a Fuck friend but Not as a girlfriend they care for.

The only thing women can do about this is to lie when they meet a guy. Which is why most women cant be honest from the beginning of a relationship

Why is capitalism invading my "sacred treasure"?

An object that has value is worshipped, respected, cherished, and shared with very few deserving people. As soon as you start sharing that object with anyone and without care, the object starts to lose value. The more people use the object, the more it depreciates and the less bargaining power it has: this is a plain psychological fact of life.

Okay, so this analogy might hold true for something like a t-shirt, which will physically wear out after a certain number of wearings, but there are three issues I take with this statement from Smith:

1) When I get a cool t-shirt that gives me pleasure to wear, I wear the hell out of it. I wear it every opportunity I get. And I look just as good in that t-shirt, maybe better, no matter how many times I've worn it before. So why should sex be different? Orgasms don't become less pleasurable the more you have them.

2) My vagina isn't a t-shirt, dude.

3) F*ck capitalism! (I'm not sure how he missed the fact that capitalism is an economic system, not a "psychological fact".) I'm for wealth redistribution! So spread that "sacred treasure" around, ladies! LOL!

insightful and funny!

this post was clever, funny, and remarkably thoughtful. more like it pleasseee!!!
scour the internet for more injustices (or causes for celebration) and tag your unique commentary alllll over 'em.
A+

Can't a Girl just be portaryed as a Girl...?

So... I'm a piece of tape... ?! Did the people that made that PSA team up with Jordin "people wear Purity Rings, because some of us don't want to be sluts" Sparks? If your vagina is stuck to a garbage can, bench-seats and a bathroom sign, then you need to see a doctor about that one. The general message is if your the clean tape you stick together. Way to single out people, that choose to have sex. The issue bigger issue here is: What happens when the clean tape sometimes doesn't stick?

My comment to the ass-pigs

My comment to the ass-pigs of AskMen:

I'd like to take this opportunity to say that while I respect people's (yes, women and men) choice to sleep with as many people as they feel like safely, it doesn't mean I have to like it or agree with it.
This article just reeks of double standards though so I'm calling BS.

Personally, I'm not a fan of those slutty man-ho playa wannabes who have 'spread the seed' (and hell knows what other creepy crawlies) by picking up women. I won't let a dude like that anywhere near me.
In fact, guys like that make this hetero girl contemplate lesbianism.
Men don't want promiscuous women apparently...guess what? Nor do I wanna sleep with you and your 20+ drunken bar flings without a condom. Course, I guess you would likely lie about the number anyways. At least the woman in the article was honest.

The comments as always fom the guys on the site are abhorent. I both ove and am simultaneously sickened by the fact that we now know what really goes on in men's heads when they have the anonymity of the Net to cower behind.

Assmen.com

Urgh, bad enough is the objectification of women upheld in the article itself but worse is the double standards further emphasised in the comments section. Men need to "sow their seed" but women need to preserve their "temple"? Oh okay, so you like fucking sluts but would never in the name of GOD marry anyone who isn't a virgin? Well in that case I hope you present your personal motto to every woman you meet and you'll never get again laid or married.

Plus, what is this BS about "internal" and "external" sex?

cause for concern

Ugh, i can't even entertain this article in a hilarious way, because the vomiting I'm doing right now is failing to amuse me.

I also can't dismiss this as the ramblings of a few isolated douchebags. This is the exact same mentality that is being taught to children all over this country (with government funding) and around the world with abstinence-only sex education.

This is certainly one of my favorite parts, "Men recognize the power of a woman's sexuality. In turn, men appreciate and place great value on women who can control themselves and demonstrate a certain degree of sexual discipline because most men certainly can't."

Part of the issue I take with abstinence-only sex ed (and even comprehensive sex ed to a degree) is that they take this tone like men are the bearer of this completely uncontrollable sexually, humping and fucking anything in their path, and women do not posses the same sexual drive and are thus response for being the moral sexual compass?

I really wouldn't be surprised if this was ghostwritten by the Abstinence Clearinghouse or the publishers of "Sex Respect" as it follows many of the same logic patters for staying abstinent until marriage, and the consequences of not "waiting", confusing sex with love, being "damaged goods" when you meet The One (who values women based soley on the number of men she's slept with!) and social pressures to have sex (and blaming the feminist movement for this!).

Christ, is the author attending a Purity Ball after this?

and, here I thought the most valued object was her HEART!...

Let me be succinct here...my partner and I have been married for over 29 years. Trust, communication, respect, commitment, willingness to be vulnerable, total honesty, effort to see things from the partner's point of view are essentials for a healthy and satisfying relationship. She and I have a good sex life within the rest of a great partnership.

We also have an open marriage, giving each other full consent to enjoy casual sexual relations with others. Though we don't make a habit of it, we've each had several extra-marital partners during our decades together.

My spouse's vagina is not a "sacred object" which she "saves for me" -- rather, it's one part of her body which I, as her chosen life-partner, enjoy along with the rest of her. If anything is sacred, it's her heart. That's the "part" she's chosen to give to and reserve for me. The intimacy I share with her isn't based on her vagina. It's based on her person, her soul.

She and I are not surprised that more than a third of marriages and partnerships falter and fail. When sexual "ownership" is the basis of a relationship rather than emotional, psychological, and mental intimacy; and when men and women make genital fidelity primary rather than commitment to honesty, working through issues, and their partner's happiness; then, a relationship is heading for dissolution.

Askmen. is doing his part to further the sad statistics.
.

Let's do some math...

An object that has value is worshipped, respected, cherished, and shared with very few deserving people. As soon as you start sharing that object with anyone and without care, the object starts to lose value. The more people use the object, the more it depreciates and the less bargaining power it has: this is a plain psychological fact of life.

By that value equation, most men are worthless.

hypocrite

so true.... because so many good men are used so much by women. but there are a lot of men that don't let themselves be used. we call them rich, or wealthy. or if you want to be PC, financially independent. see, you don't understand basic life principles. women don't use men the same way that men use women. men are only worthless to women if they have no money. it's not very common for a woman to marry an unemployed bum. women sometimes will take a man currently unemployed, so long as he has some other assets to prove his worth, like a house or some nice cars or something. but what woman will marry a man with nothing? on the other hand, how many jobless women do men marry, never contribute a dime to the marriage, and then divorce and take half a man's assets? it happens all the time. in fact, the argument could be made that women are the worse users, because when a man "uses" a woman for sex, it's only because she allows it. unless she's raped. and then it's not really using, just stealing. so when a woman allows a man to use her, it's always with the hopes of executing some ulterior motive. but when things don't go her way, even though at the time she was a willing participant, now she cries foul. you're such a hypocrite

so because women sign up for

so because women sign up for being used, by being willing participants, that negates some of the responsibility on the man. men on the other hand, never sign up to have half their stuff taken.besides, one can hardly argue that if you're a willing participant in sex, that you're not getting anything out of it. on the other hand, there's no benefit to someone just taking half your stuff by virtue of a piece of paper. in contract law, you have to exchange value for money. this is called consideration. marriage is the one contract where you can exchange money for no value. or basically, no exchange but have it forced from you by a judge. men know that, hence, (why buy the cow, if you can get the milk for free). if you want to claim your vagina and access to it and providing children as an exchangeable asset that is worth half a man's livelihood, then he should have access to it for half his life at least, right?

Thanks for your great, smart

Thanks for your great, smart and clever article! But it seems to me the idea of keeping your temple too "clean" until the marriage - is a little bit old fashioned, cause times have changed. What if I'm a woman with hight sexual drive and fell in love eight days a week? I really hope that a person might love you for who you are and not for what you do/did.

That men most of all hate in sex

1. Men hate, when women behave so as if they do not love sex
2. Men do not love women who never act as the initiator in sex
3. Men do not love the women who are not knowing a man's body
4. Men do not love, when women make them responsible for the orgazm.
5. Men hate, when women behave in bed as "sexual policemen"
6. Men hate women, insensible in bed
7. Men hate women who speak in bed too much
8. Men irritates, when the woman does not love an own body and belittles the advantages
9. Men hate the women too anxious by the appearance
10. Men hate the women, not loving to receive oral sex

Controlling

This is such a great response to Troglodyte Curt Smith. It is my opinion that men who engage in this kind of judgmental attitude over a woman's sexuality do so from a position of needing and wanting to be in control.

One wants to ask Curt what the "magic number" is in terms of how many partners it is acceptable for a woman to have. I imagine that if you ask Curt, his preferred number would be totally different than that of his fellow troglodytes. THEIR mileage may vary, but remember, each mile you put on your vajayjay adds to its depreciation! Next thing you know, they'll be trotting out colorful phraseology to describe that too much sex will make your vagina looser. Idiots.

But what was I saying? Oh yes -- Men like this, should they fool some poor woman into marrying them, will dangle her sexual past over her head as a form of punishment, as a weapon of manipulation, as a way of destroying her self-esteem; all this so they can slide into a position of power over her. Guaranteed. That's how emotional abusers work; a woman's past history is just one thing they can latch onto and it doesn't matter what your number actually is. It's the same as him calling her a slut; a bitch; selfish. Just a way of trying to get her to do what he wants.

On the flip side of the same coin, men like this will choose women who are very sexually inexperienced because she won't know the difference if he sucks in bed (and chances are he does since insecurity of this level is a major cause of performance anxiety).

In the final analysis, if a man you are dating asks you how many men you've slept with, know that this is male codespeak for "I'm an insecure, judgmental prick." The correct response is "None of your fucking business" and to head for the hills posthaste.

Subjective

The askmen.com columnist's patronizing overly-knowing attitude is covering up a legitimate question of the time! Are too many women being easy??!??! (The honus on women, since men have always been EXPECTED to be sexual predators for lack of a better term, and that role is still there in most of us, perhaps even genetically encoded)

And also what does this mean for relationships? Can people who have that many partners expected to be sexually loyal in a monogamous relationship? Everyone and every situtation is different, but I could see with some ladies that 43 number would upset me. Even a 20 number got me nauseous recently, cause she did that over only a two year span. It depends on the situation. And that's assuming we believe in monogamy and the idea I get from this atheistic-feeling website is that monogamy is also passe.

Also this columnist on BITCH is a big believer in "Sexual Liberation." There is another side to sexual liberation - as the writer Aldous Huxley said to quote "sexual liberation is about slavery." It's a distraction, he posited. Sex was a big part of the society in the book Brave New World (and that was written in 1930's so these issues are not new, they have been known about from time immemorial). That society in BNW totally lacked INTEGRITY and they covered up their feelings with sex orgies all the time. Basically sex is enjoyable but it can be a distraction from greater things.

In today's society do we give too much infatuation with a process that is naturally meant for reproduction first and foremost? It's for making babies, isn't it?! And the old fashion values were to keep people from getting too wrapped up in sex. But we have to go through this, cause too much was repressed. I feel like Western Society is just going through some kind of teenage angst and that's why there is so much honus on sexual liberation. It's kind of absurd. I don't expect anyone from BITCH to have the intellect to get that point, however, but no use in denying I too am suffering from this global puberty. I am going to get me some good sex tonight!

I just posted this in the

I just posted this in the comments

lets think about this says:

The biggest problem here is that having sex with a non-boyfriend/husband continues to be equated with having low self-respect. Believe it or not, one night stand can be fun AND respectable. If the understanding between the two people is that they are just having a fun time, what's the problem? It's not like the men women sleep with casually treat the woman like dirt! 2nd problem is the belief that the reason women have sex always has to do with the man--either the man at hand, or future men. "Unfortunately, [the women's movement] forgot to mention the consequences" Here's a shocker: since the women's movement was about WOMEN, they didn't forget to mention the consequences; the beauty of the revolution was that they finally decided the consequences involving living up to men's expectations shouldn't matter. Or at least be a top priority. If men continue to try to understand women's actions in relation to pleasing men, of course they will not understand a confident, feminist woman. Here's a thought: next time you find out that a woman you really like has slept with a "high" number of men, let it go. Why should this change the fact that she has a cool personality and you enjoy spending time with her? Her number does not mean she decided to compromise her right to a relationship. And if you DO make a big deal about it, then she'll also realize something about YOU that she didn't know: that she's better off with out you and your foolish expectations.

Accept it all ready!

Women are just as sexual as men. Accept it all ready. We are visual, we have fantasies about guys kissing guys, we masturbate and we don't need to be emotionally involved to enjoy sex. The only time women are not as sexual is when they suppress their sexual desires in order to spare themselves the embarrassment that will be imposed on them by society. This is why when scientific testing is done it will look as if women have to be emotionally connected to have sex. We are not wired that way, but women have been tricked into thinking that this is how they have to be. The brain is very powerful and testing will make it seem as if this is an innate female quality; but once a woman frees her mind from being BRAINWASHED, she will begin to learn on her own that she has a much higher desire for sex than society has tried to trick her into believing.

Do we wonder why society would want women to deny their own sexuality? Don't men want to have a beautiful, uninhibited, hot sexual relationship with their wives? Well perhaps some women shall be aloud to exercise her sexual prowess. After all, male misogynists need to practice their own sexual prowess with someone. So, they figured that women should be divided into two categories. Cum dumpsters/whores and the virtuous women. The cum dumpsters will fulfill the sexual desires of men. These women can be as sexually free as they want, yet will cost them true intimacy with a desirable man because the virtuous women is busy keeping herself virtuous so she can fulfill the EGO of her future husband. So, the whore gets to sow her wild oats in her youth, but she is denied the opportunity to settle down and actually commit to a man when she is ready. The virtuous woman gets married, has children and is seen a the darling sweet wife all for the cost of her sexuality, a part of who she is. Incapable of 100% satisfying her husband due to her mental castration, she gets cheated on, eventually has her heart broken, files for divorce and is now in the same position as the whore. Unmarried. Or she can stay in the marriage and just convince herself that this is just the way men are and continue to let it eat away her self esteem.

If a man cannot except that his woman went whoring in the past just as he did, then he shouldn't be whoring himself. PERIOD! Do you think you can just dip your dkic on all sides of the honey pot and just come out with a wholesome reward of pure woman at your side? Guess again! Well, if your a man and your smart you would say, "Wow! I found a woman whom I love and wants to commit and the sexual fun continues!" but misogynists

Accept it already (continued)

...will look down on her all because of the fear that he will be compared to other men. He wants a woman he can control and that he can present as a trophy to his friends, bragging that he has been rewarded with a virtuous woman, meanwhile he has done nothing to earn her. They were just knit together through the delusions of society. He does not appreciate her for her heart, and he is just something that she earned by keeping her legs closed. WHERE IS THE LOVE AND COMPANIONSHIP IN THIS RELATIONSHIP?

Why should a woman have to wait for her future husband while her future husband isn't waiting for her. It's so sad to see that people have become so brainwashed. Because so many men are worried of being cheated on, they had to create this myth that sex is only for men. In third world countries, women have had their clitorises removed so they will not cheat on their husbands. What this means is that this has happened before and that proves that women are just as sexual as men. All the science and studies in the world will not convince me otherwise. These tests are not tracing back to a woman's originally non-brainwashed state of mind.

Women are not innocent here either. Those women who judge other women and continue to live their own little lie perpetuate this viscous cycle of misogyny. Think outside the box. Think about what you hear and think about whether you believe it or not and why it should influence your thinking and make up your own mind. Don't just believe things because everyone else is believing it. Think for yourself and don't just go with the flow because it's the comfortable thing to do. Be who you are bitches and be fkuc'n proud of it!

Renegade Bitch
AKA - Wicked Bitch of the Best

PS - you will see me posting things like this all over the net. Look out for me if this interests you and if you have something to add. The Wicked Bitch of the Best has spoken!

Yes

When I found the AskMen article my personal favorite quote was:

"An object that has value is worshipped, respected, cherished, and shared with very few deserving people. As soon as you start sharing that object with anyone and without care, the object starts to lose value. The more people use the object, the more it depreciates and the less bargaining power it has: this is a plain psychological fact of life"

What the hell.. I'm an object? and this is plain psychological fact of life, so great not only am I an object, but I'm also plain.. well what a great fucking treasure I am.

This men's website is made up of a bunch of nincompoops who seriously make the entire gender look stupid--like Snooki makes my home-state of New Jersey look bad-- so pretty bad.

AskMen should cede giving advice.

Yes

When I found the AskMen article my personal favorite quote was:

"An object that has value is worshipped, respected, cherished, and shared with very few deserving people. As soon as you start sharing that object with anyone and without care, the object starts to lose value. The more people use the object, the more it depreciates and the less bargaining power it has: this is a plain psychological fact of life"

What the hell.. I'm an object? and this is plain psychological fact of life, so great not only am I an object, but I'm also plain.. well what a great fucking treasure I am.

This men's website is made up of a bunch of nincompoops who seriously make the entire gender look stupid--like Snooki makes my home-state of New Jersey look bad-- so pretty bad.

AskMen should cede giving advice.

So anger is your way of

So anger is your way of dealing with men that don't want a woman that slept around...

I wonder how far that gets you in terms of true love.

No distraction here, some words Curt picked might have been not perfectly chosen to prevent insulting anyone on the way but hell you always insult "someone", mostly people that are badly hit by what they just read, not the choen words but the entire topic.

There are men who don't care about a woman's past. Just hook up with one of them and stop being angry on men that value your bodies more than you do yourselves!

Yeah I just read this

Yeah I just read this ridiculous article . Funny how there is no online comment section. Completely agree ... Some of what you said is what I put in the comments . Hilarious how the writer is like well I am promiscuous and that is A Ok for me to get married but not for that promiscuous girl... She is a dirty Scarlett A babe :P what a hypocrite... I would get it if this guy actually practiced abstinence only or was in long term relationship and valued relationships. Expressing beliefs... Free country. That is fine.Btw, girls are not desperate either.... A guy who is a serial womanizer is a huge turnoff and most women have the sense to not fall for stupid lines.

Ignorance won't help you...

What Curt Smith wrote is in fact true and reading an article as shallow as this one made in reply only proofs how bad things are in our society...

OF course, everyone can do what they please but the big topic here is LYING!

Some of us men want to know the truth and we are definately not fags for not wanting a woman that slept around.

We might in fact value their body and gift more than they do and we got all the right in the world not to be lied to.

In the end you want to be with someone who appreciates you for who you are and that includes your past and what you have or have not done to your body.

If you slept around, just find a guy that is ok with it and don't try to "fix" things by lying to someone that actually doesn't want the person (which includes your body and the value you give or gave it), that you are.

No need in trying to make people think differently here.

There are enough men already who don't care but they might also not be the best choice in terms of commitment and true love so if you complain about wanting one of those men that "care" about your past, stop complaining and find another. Bold as that!

To each his own, just don't lie!