I think the only problem I have with this idea is that it assumes modern women are 10x sluttier than older generations of women. Which requires modern women to be fucking on a level that would require time travel to squeeze in considering the default sluttery of the average woman through history.
Because the only reason we think pre-modern women weren't is because no one talked about it until the sluts started shouting it out loud themselves a few decades ago.
Virgins until marriage were vastly more common, 25% of women in the 1970s were virgins until marriage, it was less than 2% by 2005. The sexual revolution completely changed the dynamics of modern women, whereas before there were known whores, but they calibrated a minority not an overwhelming majority.
25% of women in the 1970s were virgins until marriage
Unless the people compiling this list were going in with their fingers and confirming it, all we have to go on is girls saying "oh yeah I'm totally a virgin." Stat's don't only lie when it benefits the otherside.
Feminism didn't change women's nature, it just let them be more open about it. Before they'd take their summer camp sexual romps to the grave, now they will make sure everyone knows it.
Also, even assuming what you said was reality, 3/4 of all women being nonvirginal before marriage at a time when that was still a big deal is a much worse situation than 98% at a time when it isn't even considered.
To be fair, having virtually no limitations could have changed some of the women's nature's. Throw in birth control and other drugs altering women's perceptions and sexual desires, as well as the rise in mental illness amongst women and who knows how different they are now compared to a century ago. Lots of them are probably freaks and deviants.
That's certainly a possibility, but human instinct is a powerful thing. More powerful than any of us ever give credit for.
Women wouldn't have taken to any of that if it wasn't in their code to do so, and evolution being as slow as it is means that code has likely barely changed through all of recorded history. I mean, Lysistrata is a play from fucking 400 BC about how women are so unable to go without sex for mere days at a time, that they will tank an entire movement and all their loyalty and values just for it.
Trannies think that throwing drugs and hormones a blank check to do whatever you want at a human body can fundamentally change it, and they are quite obviously wrong there and we all know it. So I think its equally as foolhardy to think drugs and freedom can change women that much either.
Which requires modern women to be fucking on a level that would require time travel to squeeze in
I mean they basically are. The hook-up apps and social laxity have increased the mating pool of every woman to literally millions of people. And not just hypothetically, they can literally choose from every man within driving distance. Transcending time and space. It wouldn't surprise me if top users are going through three+ partners per day.
To her credit, she didn't go through with it, but to your point, if she wanted to she had 10 easy-made matches assigned for a week-and-a-half of disease-catching/spreading.
Just imagine what the slatterns in their youth are doing and the bodycounts they're racking up?
You guys are coming at this from a place of "modern women are such whores!" whereas I'm saying "older women were massive whores too, you just didn't realize it."
Probably because that would mean having to accept that your (general) mother and grandmother were whores too, and that's too hard of a pill for most guys to deal. So they just pretend the sluttiness just started.
You're just factually incorrect is the problem. You can say "women were whores in the past" sure, but you just can't say that it hasn't increased massively, because it has. It wasn't physically possible for a woman in the 70s to even meet as many people as the average tinderette is sleeping with. Like, she could not physically go to enough bars and encounter that many suitable men. The technology has enabled an unprecedented change in behavior and the STD infection rates reflect this.
The claim was that they are 10x more. There is a difference between "they are quite a bit sluttier because its so much easier to be" and "they are literally fucking plural guys a day every single day across the majority of them to reach astounding numbers."
Which requires both women of the past to be perfect prudes with minimal numbers and modern women to be doing absurd levels that would preclude basically any life outside fucking to reach.
average tinderette is sleeping with
You are assuming matches mean fucks, which is anything but reality and is also factually incorrect. I know most of my mid-sized big town's tinder sluts, the kind who have around 15 mean on retainer for instant calls whenever the urge strikes them and every single dude has matched with multiple times (because they delete them in a fit of some psychosis). I've seen their phone, its constantly blowing up with 20+ messages a minute and has hundreds of matched guys. You know how many times they are fucking those guys?
Around 1 every few days. Because they still have to have jobs, and lives outside of fucking, even if those lives are dumb slut things like drinking and partying that take up time. A limited resource that no amount of social changes can effect. Double so because after a short time frame they end up with a kid that takes up even more of that time, regardless of how shitty of a mom they are.
It doesn't have to be just one factor to get to the result.
Consider the state of health education. The number of uneducated or illegal immigrants who don't get treated. The spread of hookup culture, raising the number of sexual partners that some people are having and increasing the likelihood of transmitting STDs.
Right, I don't doubt the 10x STD increase is false. I just think "modern women are so slatternly they spread through sheer force of pussy" is giving women of the past a huge pussy pass and living under the optimism that women were innocent dainty things until feminism changed them to the core.
Like, WW1 and the "Summer of Love" are just two famous examples of something historically happening that made syphillis rates (among other STDs) skyrocket, with plenty of factors at play bigger than just whoring.
I think the only problem I have with this idea is that it assumes modern women are 10x sluttier than older generations of women. Which requires modern women to be fucking on a level that would require time travel to squeeze in considering the default sluttery of the average woman through history.
Because the only reason we think pre-modern women weren't is because no one talked about it until the sluts started shouting it out loud themselves a few decades ago.
Virgins until marriage were vastly more common, 25% of women in the 1970s were virgins until marriage, it was less than 2% by 2005. The sexual revolution completely changed the dynamics of modern women, whereas before there were known whores, but they calibrated a minority not an overwhelming majority.
Unless the people compiling this list were going in with their fingers and confirming it, all we have to go on is girls saying "oh yeah I'm totally a virgin." Stat's don't only lie when it benefits the otherside.
Feminism didn't change women's nature, it just let them be more open about it. Before they'd take their summer camp sexual romps to the grave, now they will make sure everyone knows it.
Also, even assuming what you said was reality, 3/4 of all women being nonvirginal before marriage at a time when that was still a big deal is a much worse situation than 98% at a time when it isn't even considered.
To be fair, having virtually no limitations could have changed some of the women's nature's. Throw in birth control and other drugs altering women's perceptions and sexual desires, as well as the rise in mental illness amongst women and who knows how different they are now compared to a century ago. Lots of them are probably freaks and deviants.
That's certainly a possibility, but human instinct is a powerful thing. More powerful than any of us ever give credit for.
Women wouldn't have taken to any of that if it wasn't in their code to do so, and evolution being as slow as it is means that code has likely barely changed through all of recorded history. I mean, Lysistrata is a play from fucking 400 BC about how women are so unable to go without sex for mere days at a time, that they will tank an entire movement and all their loyalty and values just for it.
Trannies think that throwing drugs and hormones a blank check to do whatever you want at a human body can fundamentally change it, and they are quite obviously wrong there and we all know it. So I think its equally as foolhardy to think drugs and freedom can change women that much either.
I mean they basically are. The hook-up apps and social laxity have increased the mating pool of every woman to literally millions of people. And not just hypothetically, they can literally choose from every man within driving distance. Transcending time and space. It wouldn't surprise me if top users are going through three+ partners per day.
A post-wall divorcee managed 10 matches to assign them to 10 days, almost instantly on Tinder -- all of whom were willing to do the deed: https://observer.com/2017/04/ten-tinder-dates-in-ten-days/
To her credit, she didn't go through with it, but to your point, if she wanted to she had 10 easy-made matches assigned for a week-and-a-half of disease-catching/spreading.
Just imagine what the slatterns in their youth are doing and the bodycounts they're racking up?
They can be, but that doesn't mean they are.
You guys are coming at this from a place of "modern women are such whores!" whereas I'm saying "older women were massive whores too, you just didn't realize it."
Probably because that would mean having to accept that your (general) mother and grandmother were whores too, and that's too hard of a pill for most guys to deal. So they just pretend the sluttiness just started.
You're just factually incorrect is the problem. You can say "women were whores in the past" sure, but you just can't say that it hasn't increased massively, because it has. It wasn't physically possible for a woman in the 70s to even meet as many people as the average tinderette is sleeping with. Like, she could not physically go to enough bars and encounter that many suitable men. The technology has enabled an unprecedented change in behavior and the STD infection rates reflect this.
The claim was that they are 10x more. There is a difference between "they are quite a bit sluttier because its so much easier to be" and "they are literally fucking plural guys a day every single day across the majority of them to reach astounding numbers."
Which requires both women of the past to be perfect prudes with minimal numbers and modern women to be doing absurd levels that would preclude basically any life outside fucking to reach.
You are assuming matches mean fucks, which is anything but reality and is also factually incorrect. I know most of my mid-sized big town's tinder sluts, the kind who have around 15 mean on retainer for instant calls whenever the urge strikes them and every single dude has matched with multiple times (because they delete them in a fit of some psychosis). I've seen their phone, its constantly blowing up with 20+ messages a minute and has hundreds of matched guys. You know how many times they are fucking those guys?
Around 1 every few days. Because they still have to have jobs, and lives outside of fucking, even if those lives are dumb slut things like drinking and partying that take up time. A limited resource that no amount of social changes can effect. Double so because after a short time frame they end up with a kid that takes up even more of that time, regardless of how shitty of a mom they are.
It doesn't have to be just one factor to get to the result.
Consider the state of health education. The number of uneducated or illegal immigrants who don't get treated. The spread of hookup culture, raising the number of sexual partners that some people are having and increasing the likelihood of transmitting STDs.
Right, I don't doubt the 10x STD increase is false. I just think "modern women are so slatternly they spread through sheer force of pussy" is giving women of the past a huge pussy pass and living under the optimism that women were innocent dainty things until feminism changed them to the core.
Like, WW1 and the "Summer of Love" are just two famous examples of something historically happening that made syphillis rates (among other STDs) skyrocket, with plenty of factors at play bigger than just whoring.