Go on..

I’m not ur pal buddy

Sociosexuality is the willingness to have uncommitted sex with different partners. This has been studied in depth and all findings point to men being higher in it than women - which makes perfect sense given our biological differences.

wrong.

>The Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI; Simpson & Gangestad 1991) is a self-report measure of individual differences
in human mating strategies. Low SOI scores signify that a person is sociosexually restricted, or follows a more monogamous mating strat-
egy. High SOI scores indicate that an individual is unrestricted, or has a more promiscuous mating strategy. As part of the International
Sexuality Description Project (ISDP), the SOI was translated from English into 25 additional languages and administered to a total sam-
ple of 14,059 people across 48 nations. Responses to the SOI were used to address four main issues. First, the psychometric properties
of the SOI were examined in cross-cultural perspective. The SOI possessed adequate reliability and validity both within and across a di-
verse range of modern cultures. Second, theories concerning the systematic distribution of sociosexuality across cultures were evaluated.
Both operational sex ratios and reproductively demanding environments related in evolutionary-predicted ways to national levels of so-
ciosexuality. Third, sex differences in sociosexuality were generally large and demonstrated cross-cultural universality across the 48 na-
tions of the ISDP, confirming several evolutionary theories of human mating. Fourth, sex differences in sociosexuality were significantly
larger when reproductive environments were demanding but were reduced to more moderate levels in cultures with more political and
economic gender equality. Implications for evolutionary and social role theories of human sexuality are discussed

https://www.psy.uq.edu.au/~uqbziets/Schmitt2005%20crosscultural%20sociosexuality.pdf

You're vastly underestimating the amount of uncommitted sex (with different partners) men would be having if women were equally as willing as them to do it. Women are the gatekeepers of heterosexual sex, and they are generally more selective than men are.

This shouldn't be news to anybody.

>You're vastly underestimating the amount of uncommitted sex (with different partners) men would be having if women were equally as willing as them to do it. Women are the gatekeepers of heterosexual sex, and they are generally more selective than men are.

Well you'd want to try to be one of the guys that women select for. i.e. higher value than the general riff-raff

>Pass.
well don't be surprised if your genes don't get passed on. there's no way around this if you want to reproduce.

Every woman will have sex with every man that she considers to be desirable.
Every one of these most desirable men has the freedom to choose which of these women he has sex with, and will be selective.
Ergo, women are only selective by social norm. Men are selective as individuals. Men who are not selected by women under social norms, remain selective and commited as individuals despite the situation of the modern day where they receive no attention from women at all.
This fucking meme that women are more interested in commitment is a misrepresentation of the facts and needs to be put to death.

>This fucking meme that women are more interested in commitment is a misrepresentation of the facts
No, it's generally true that women are lower in sociosexuality than men are. That doesn't mean that women don't want sex, or that lots of women don't want some casual sex. It just means the average levels aren't the same for men and women.

Like other mammals, males humans have the potential to reproduce far more often than women can (one load of sperm vs a 9 month pregnancy). It shouldn't be at all surprising to anyone that women are generally more inclined to be selective about sex than men are.

Not the anon I quoted, but I agree. A man's biological imperative is to take care of his kids and their mother. So the more you impregnate, the more 'work' you have. Meaning, impregnating one mother and having two kids is relatively easy to defend and take care of compared to impregnating ten women and having twenty kids.

keep coping m8.
This shouldn't be news to anyone with eyes to see.

>that she considers to be desirable.
And the male counterpart of that is way more people.
Women marry up, only find men with a "higher score" than them attractive. (Eg: a "6" female only finds "8 and up" males attractive)

Men like pussy.
Women like status.

>And the male counterpart of that is way more people.
The male counterpart of that is adherence to a ethical, deontological, categorical imperative to find exactly ONE woman, raise a family with her, establish a household, and grow old together in holy matrimony.
Therefore, men as a sex are not more interested in uncommital sex than women, and the sexual numbers provided by the collection of men that women have selected as their preferred cum donors are not proof of anything.
Men do not want to fuck strangers. Men want to marry, build homes, and raise families. If it wasn't for men, monogamy would not exist, let alone the rest of civilization.

Women of virtue do not exist at all.

> self reported
> 1991
C'mon dude get the fuck out of here with that

the fact that I'm not an anti-social shut-in who hasn't left the house since 1991 means I know you're wrong, and the fact that you cited a "self-reported" study to contradict an anon who said there wasn't any evidence EXCEPT for self-reported studies means you know we're right.
Women lie about their preference in men. If you weren't an anti-social shut-in you would know that. Try talking to a woman about what she wants in a man, and then try paying attention to the type of men she actually goes for and who she rejects. Do that and it's obvious we're right. What women claim they want is rarely what they actually want.

Neither one of us has any """""""studies"""""". Of course, your side has a monopoly on academic research, so the fact that the billions in government funding hasn't given you any evidence says something. And I'm the only one with real-world experience, since you haven't left the house since 1991 and have no idea how the real world works anymore.
There aren't any women under 30 who have any trouble finding sexy men to commit to them. So why are marriage rates going down? You can't answer that which is why you resort to 32-year-old bullshit """"studies"""" with methodology that we all know is bullshit because we all know women lie about what they want.

post even a single study that contradicts mine.

>So any woman who chooses casual sex is doing it because she doesn't want a committed relationship
you seem to be not grasping what this argument is about. Nowhere have I said there aren't lots of women that seek out casual sex. Are you familiar with bell curves? There are lots of black people who are smarter than most white people, but the average IQ of blacks is still lower than that of whites.

>Before feminism started destroying dating in the 60s, casual sex was rare.
it was rarer for men and women back then too. that isn't an argument against my claim about differing rates of sociosexuality between men and women.

post even a single (legitimate) study that contradicts what I said.
>when men and women had equal power in dating, casual sex was rare. When women exclusively got to decide whether we had casual sex or relationships, casual sex increased and relationships decreased
>this isn't proof that women are deciding to have casual sex instead of relationships
Yes it is you fucking retard which is why you can't argue against it.
>I'm a giant retard so I'm going to bring up some irrelevant bullshit about black people and IQ
LMAO you're even dumber than I thought.

>High SOI
ok i lost it good bait

Retarded gestation meme. I want to kill every gestation tard.
Human men are monogamous, are required to provide for their mate during pregnancy, and do not fuck other women while their mate is with child because of the intrinsic survival instinct and bonding necessary. If men only cared about having as much spread of their genes as possible and fuck every woman, they would not have the willingness to commit to protecting and sustaining their one mate, which is objectively how our ancestors actually survived in the prehistoric era.

Because one man can only raise one family you idiot. It's polygamy that's a social construct, because society allows for hierarchies where one man can coerce the lesser men to provide the material sustainment necessary for his entire harem, and let others do the child-raising.
A real man must raise his own children and in a prehistoric reality, this is impossible to do with multiple women. Especially the ridiculous discrepancy suggested by you gestationfags.

Says the material necessities of living in the prehistoric era. It was barely even possible to provide for one woman and her children. Multiple families is out of the question.

I have said so, and I say it is the truth.

>The majority of men under 30 consider themselves single
Lmao it's just fags and non-whites that are single.

As a nonwhite incel it matters to me

I was born here since my family were anti communist rebels that left their home
Country. I do plan on being a passport bro when I get more financially successful though.

I am a homo sapiens, my father is a homo sapiens, my late grandfather was a homo sapiens, and we are all monogamous.

I wonder if and what it is told in history/biology/archeology books about when men stopped raping and just leaving pregnant women: what made men care?

>The rape hoax is a complete fabrication with no roots in our sexual dimorphic biology
wrong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Natural_History_of_Rape

prove it's a hoax

Your dysgenic idiocy has no place in this conversation.

And the best post in the thread goes unnoticed...
Thanks for typing this anyway anon

you said
>Women like to fuck, but they're generally less willing to have uncommitted sex with lots different partners than men are
So how do you explain the fact that once women had all of the power in dating, they choose to have uncommitted sex with lots of different partners? Whereas when dating was more balanced, there was less casual sex. The more that dating becomes about what women want, the more it becomes about uncommitted sex with lots of different partners. How do you explain that?

They generally don't, and the data doesn't support that either. Most women have low bodycounts.

No, a clickbait article is not data or proof of general trends. It's bait and you fell for it.

he's right. look for studies into who has more sexual partners, rather than one article about a slut

In English? That could be saying anything.

>Median number of opposite-sex partners in lifetime among sexually experienced women and men aged 25-49 years of age
>Women 4.3 (0.10)
>Men 6.3 (0.39)
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/n-keystat.htm

>plenty of evidence for it
kek no there isn't. There are surveys that rely on women's self-reported claims about what they want, and we all know that women are full of shit when it comes to what they claim they want.

see

wrong.

>The Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI; Simpson & Gangestad 1991) is a self-report measure of individual differences
in human mating strategies. Low SOI scores signify that a person is sociosexually restricted, or follows a more monogamous mating strat-
egy. High SOI scores indicate that an individual is unrestricted, or has a more promiscuous mating strategy. As part of the International
Sexuality Description Project (ISDP), the SOI was translated from English into 25 additional languages and administered to a total sam-
ple of 14,059 people across 48 nations. Responses to the SOI were used to address four main issues. First, the psychometric properties
of the SOI were examined in cross-cultural perspective. The SOI possessed adequate reliability and validity both within and across a di-
verse range of modern cultures. Second, theories concerning the systematic distribution of sociosexuality across cultures were evaluated.
Both operational sex ratios and reproductively demanding environments related in evolutionary-predicted ways to national levels of so-
ciosexuality. Third, sex differences in sociosexuality were generally large and demonstrated cross-cultural universality across the 48 na-
tions of the ISDP, confirming several evolutionary theories of human mating. Fourth, sex differences in sociosexuality were significantly
larger when reproductive environments were demanding but were reduced to more moderate levels in cultures with more political and
economic gender equality. Implications for evolutionary and social role theories of human sexuality are discussed

https://www.psy.uq.edu.au/~uqbziets/Schmitt2005%20crosscultural%20sociosexuality.pdf

You're vastly underestimating the amount of uncommitted sex (with different partners) men would be having if women were equally as willing as them to do it. Women are the gatekeepers of heterosexual sex, and they are generally more selective than men are.

This shouldn't be news to anybody.

kek, is this low-key bait?
The studies show women lose their virginity earlier. The studies show a few men at the top are having sex with lots of women. The studies show that causal sex has increased significantly over the last few decades, which is when dating started to shift to being exclusively about what women want. And that last point from [...] is one that nobody can argue with.
If women don't want uncommitted sex with lots of different partners, then why did uncommitted sex only become the norm after our dating norms became exclusively about what women want?

>The studies show that causal sex has increased significantly over the last few decades
no, they show it's been declining since the early 2000s
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2023/04/19/casual-sex-one-night-stands-decline-women-heres-why/11686614002/

you said
>Women like to fuck, but they're generally less willing to have uncommitted sex with lots different partners than men are
So how do you explain the fact that once women had all of the power in dating, they choose to have uncommitted sex with lots of different partners? Whereas when dating was more balanced, there was less casual sex. The more that dating becomes about what women want, the more it becomes about uncommitted sex with lots of different partners. How do you explain that?

continued...
>The more that dating becomes about what women want, the more it becomes about uncommitted sex with lots of different partners. How do you explain that?
Your premise is that current dating norms are what most women ideally want, but I'm not seeing evidence of that. I'm seeing lots of women unhappy they can't find a quality male willing to commit, and I'm seeing lots of young males unhappy they can't find a willing sexual partner at all. There also seems to be a growing number of young women not having sex at all, not only young men.

This could be evidence that women are pursuing a small pool of higher value men with the aim of gaining commitment from them, but those higher value men are using their opportunity to have lots of causal sex rather than commit. It also could be evidence that dating apps are causing young men to "psych themselves out" of pursuing women at all, believing they don't stand a chance.

>Women's numbers aren't dropping
They are and you replied to a post containing an article showing that they are.

>Women's numbers aren't dropping
yes they are. casual sex rates are down across the board. There would be a number of reasons for that - decline in alcohol consumption among the young is one:

>Youth drinking is in decline in many high-income countries. This global trend manifests in terms of delayed age of initiation of drinking, and reductions in the volume and frequency of alcohol consumption
bmcpublichealth .biomedcentral. com

then there's the fact that young people don't go out as much anymore, as more of their interaction is online.

>2021
The sexcession is over.

>Your premise is that current dating norms are what most women ideally want, but I'm not seeing evidence of that.
the evidence is that women have thousands of options, and presumably choose the ones that conform to the norms and gender roles shewants
> I'm seeing lots of women unhappy they can't find a quality male willing to commit
because they define "quality male" as the top 0.00001%, and on top of that she has unrealistic and often contradictory requirements. IE, she won't date a man unless he takes all of the initiative, but she also wants a man who treats her like an equal. What you're seeing is women with impossible standards, but when those women finally do settle, they settle for the men who just want casual sex and reject the men who want commitment.

didn't realize your isolated anectdote disproves the fact that women are increasingly avoiding commitment and rejecting any man who wants commitment.
>inb4 maybe it's the men choosing to be single
men ask women out every day with the intention of seeking a long-term relationship. Women reject those men every day.

>the evidence is that women have thousands of options
....because there are more males willing to have sex with them than there are women willing to have sex with as many different males, or similar rates. This strengthens my argument about male sociosexuality and female seductiveness. It's a supply and demand issue, and for there is more demand for women than there is for men. Generally men have to do the chasing for sex, while women generally just need to agree to it.

>because they define "quality male" as the top 0.00001%, and on top of that she has unrealistic and often contradictory requirements. IE, she won't date a man unless he takes all of the initiative, but she also wants a man who treats her like an equal. What you're seeing is women with impossible standards, but when those women finally do settle, they settle for the men who just want casual sex and reject the men who want commitment.
all that may be true, but it isn't what you argued - which was that (alleged) increases in casual sex are evidence that rates of sociosexuality aren't higher for men than for women - and it doesn't disprove it.

>sex
there are more males willing to have commited relationships with them than there are women willing to have committed relationships. Which do women choose: The sex or the committment?
>increases in casual sex are evidence that rates of sociosexuality aren't higher for men than for women - and it doesn't disprove it.
lol
>Hey women, here are thousands of men to choose from. Some want commitment and some want casual sex. You can have whichever one you want. Which do you choose?
>An increasing number of women: SEX! I WANT SEX! NO COMMITMENT JUST SEX!
>this dumbass anon: Ummm that doesn't prove that those women just want sex
every woman who is having casual sex has rejected attractive and compatible men who wanted commitment.

>do you have any proof of this?
yes: There are, right now, a lot of men who want committed relationships yet are single. There are virtually no women who want committed relationships yet are single (since any woman who wants a committed relationship doesn't have any difficulty at all in finding one)
>women are more selective in choosing mates, not that that women generally want casual sex more than men do
if a woman is rejecting men for committed relationships, while she is having casual sex with men who are of roughly equal physical attractiveness, then it's safe to say she just wants casual sex.

2 is correct 1 isn't even remotely correct. Women's average sexual partners is over 20 now it was probably 5 to 10 for a long time on average

>An increasing number of women: SEX! I WANT SEX! NO COMMITMENT JUST SEX!
This is false. I have never slept with a girl that didn't strongly attempt a relationship or a level of exclusivity that may as well be a relationship. This has been the experience of most my friends as well except for the one with a small penis (he claims it's easily under 5 inches). He's the only one of us that can sleep with a girl and then she just never bothers him again.

post even a single study that contradicts mine.

>So any woman who chooses casual sex is doing it because she doesn't want a committed relationship
you seem to be not grasping what this argument is about. Nowhere have I said there aren't lots of women that seek out casual sex. Are you familiar with bell curves? There are lots of black people who are smarter than most white people, but the average IQ of blacks is still lower than that of whites.

>Before feminism started destroying dating in the 60s, casual sex was rare.
it was rarer for men and women back then too. that isn't an argument against my claim about differing rates of sociosexuality between men and women.

kek, is this low-key bait?
The studies show women lose their virginity earlier. The studies show a few men at the top are having sex with lots of women. The studies show that causal sex has increased significantly over the last few decades, which is when dating started to shift to being exclusively about what women want. And that last point from

you said
>Women like to fuck, but they're generally less willing to have uncommitted sex with lots different partners than men are
So how do you explain the fact that once women had all of the power in dating, they choose to have uncommitted sex with lots of different partners? Whereas when dating was more balanced, there was less casual sex. The more that dating becomes about what women want, the more it becomes about uncommitted sex with lots of different partners. How do you explain that?

is one that nobody can argue with.
If women don't want uncommitted sex with lots of different partners, then why did uncommitted sex only become the norm after our dating norms became exclusively about what women want?

Can't you show any evidence of your claim? That's why you pit the burden of proof on me?

>both men and women in the 25-34 bracket have the exact same number.
Because they're the middle of the shift. Zoomer boys, meanwhile, have half the partners of girls.
And this data is from 2015 so you know it's gotten worse

>And this data is from 2015 so you know it's gotten worse
It hasn't and there are studies which still show men outperforming women.