VETTING

 

With divorce and cheating rates going through the roof marriage is a risky business. A popular idea among the more traditional / right wing / conservative sections of the manosphere is that you can reduce the odds of a marriage failing if you vet her carefully before hand.

At first glance this seems to make perfect sense. A woman who spent her 20s having loads of one night stands is more likely to cheat on you than a women who had a couple of long term relationships. A career woman who out earns you is far more likely to divorce you than a stay at home wife. A women with a bad childhood is far more likely to have "issues" than one from a good family background.

Unfortunately there are a number of problems with this that are overlooked.......

Women fall on a spectrum. Many men put women into 2 categories, "pump and dump" or "wife and mother". Whereas in reality there is a big grey area between good woman and bad woman. Some women give off massive red flags. Finding out she takes hard drugs, previously made a false rape allegation or stabbed her ex by the second date then yes, get the hell out of there. Most women don't and their true nature only comes through after many years.

It assumes that you have the option to vet women in the first place. If you tick all the boxes, tall, confident, good-looking, successful and have dozens of potential suitors who would be happy to marry you and have your babies. Then you can afford to be picky. Unfortunately, only the top few percent of men fall into this category.

You're vetting her under pre-leverage conditions. Which tells you nothing about how she would behave when she finally has leverage. It's like trying to predict how someone would act if they had lots of money based on when they're broke. 

You become the male version of the woman hunting for Mr. 6 Feet tall, 6-pack abs, 6-figure income. What are the odds of meeting a woman in the modern era, in a Western country, who has a low body count, isn't hooked on her smartphone, isn't tainted by feminism, wants a traditional marriage and meets your minimum requirement for attractiveness?

"Good women" will be in high demand. Just as men instinctively know that high body count women are bad bets for paternity. The reverse is also true, good luck with competing against dozens of men for the few "good girls."

If you met this mythical 23 year old virgin in the modern western world it begs an obvious question....why ? It could well be that she's a virgin because she's never felt much compulsion to have sex. Marrying a former slut is a terrible idea but the other side of the coin is marrying a loyal but sexually repressed, low libido woman. Hardly marital bliss !!!

If you "locked down" a young woman in marriage she is going to be exposed to the idea she is wasting her younger years.  Slutty friends and the media will often convince her to "catch up". 

You can't estimate a woman's body count so don't even try. Living in a small town in the pre internet era, a woman's "count" would have been common knowledge. Today she can play the "good girl" in the pub at weekends while discretely having sex with countless random men via dating apps midweek. There are some obvious signs, but not all women display them.

Going to church means nothing. A lot of former sluts turn to religion in middle age. It's the perfect combination of an environment that forgives their past behaviour and is full of clueless blue pill beta males. 

Some men promote, bang loads of women until you are 35, then marry a virgin. Go figure !!!!

Realistically you are never going to reduce the odds of divorce or cheating to acceptable levels. If you could theoretically half the odds you have done well. But that still a 25% chance, do you honestly want to gamble your freedom, sanity and finances on those odds. You simply cannot undo the effects of modern life such as social media. Unless you do something drastic like live in a third world village miles away from western influence.  

It assumes that divorce and cheating are the only ways a marriage can fail. She can cut off the sex, get fat, turn into horrible insufferable cow and generally make your life hell without cheating on you.

If it worked there would be a lot of men on the internet, who have been happily married for decades telling other men to do the same. Spoiler there isn't 

"Vetting" is a deeply flawed idea

The answer is not to the liking of the traditional / right wing / conservative crowd. Traditional marriage in the 21st century doesn't work anymore. At best you are shaving a few percentage points off the odds of having your life destroyed. Trying to marry a low body count woman isn't a good idea, it's a slightly less bad one. Here are some alternatives

Women You Should NOT Have Sex With - Alpha Male 2.0 (alphamale20.com)
Don't "Screen" Women. Instead, Categorize - Alpha Male 2.0 (alphamale20.com)

SLUTS vs STUDS

 

"Ladies, the digital footprint of your sexual history will follow you indefinitely. No amount of shaming men for being concerned with it will erase 100K years of men’s evolved revulsion of women who are bad bets for their own paternity" : Rollo Tomassi A common complaint from women (and a lot of white knights) is that men who have sex with lots of women are studs (a positive expression). But women who have sex with a lot of men are sluts (a negative expression) and this is a double standard. Unfortunately they are wrong...........

What we find attractive or repulsive is not an accident, it evolved for millions of years and for good reason. From an evolutionary perspective the worst thing a man can do is devote his time, effort and resources into raising a child that is not his. Women who have sex with lots of men are more likely to cheat and obviously raise the odds of that happening. Men have evolved a repulsion for these women as a result. Yes we have DNA testing now but you are not going to switch off 100K years of evolution overnight. Women obviously have not evolved this trait because they are the ones giving birth.

Women have evolved their own mate selection choices that are usually ignored in this argument. They are often ruthless at rejecting men who lack height, income or confidence. These are traits that men usually don't care about in women. Yet there is no outcry of double standards for rejecting men on the basis of height. Something which they obviously have no control over.

It's easy for women to sleep around, very hard for men. Most women age 18 - 45 (with the obvious exception of the grossly obese and ugly) could go on Tinder at breakfast and be having sex with a new person by sunset if they really wanted to. Where only a tiny percentage of men could achieve that same feat. Women are usually completely clueless about what the dating market is like for men. Many women who complain about being judged on their sexual history use the word Incel to insult men. Go figure !!! Most men actually resent players. Contrary to the feminist myth. Only a small percentage of men are actually having sex with lots of women and bragging about it. A third of young men today are sexless and often view studs as "taking all the women for themselves". A lot of men view players as "ruining" women for future long term relationships. Most men don't want players going anywhere near their wives, girlfriends, sisters, or daughters.

Women slut shame each other. It's nothing unusual for a woman to tell a potential suitor "she is a slut" in an attempt to downgrade the competition. Women in happy relationships don't want slutty women tempting their man. More traditional women who expect multiple romantic dinner dates before sex are going to be threatened by the woman who puts out on the first date after coffee. OnlyFans star Bonnie Blue says she gets '300 death threats a day' from women - after inviting 'barely legal 18-year-olds' to have sex with her on camera | Daily Mail Online

Women SHOULD judge men for long term relationships based on their sexual history. Although it applies to a much smaller percentage of men. It can easily be argued that a player who had experienced a huge amount of sexual variety is far more likely to cheat on his future wife. But if women actually used logic like this the manosphere wouldn't exist. Women will often date and marry men full in the knowledge that they have used and cheated on dozens of other women in the past. Men can't be "players" if women just said NO to them.

Woman evolved for quality not quantity. Men and women have different mating strategies that conflict with each other. Human pregnancy hinders women for months so women have to be more selective than men. The ability of a woman to have sex with loads of men without the biological cost of reproduction is only possible due to the modern day invention of birth control.

Women who have had sex with lots of men are not the same. High value men will have sex with average women but will not commit. Average women delude themselves into thinking that because they can have sex with a high value man they "deserve" that type of man. This is why we constantly see average women demanding "elite men" on dating sites. Many women will eventually but reluctantly settle for "average men" out of necessity. She will constantly compare him to the "studs" she dated in her younger days, her preference for the top 10%-20% of men isn't going to vanish. Put another way, if you are the 25th man she has had there is only a 4% chance you will be her best. The odds of being cheated on, divorced or ending up in a lackluster relationship skyrocket.

Many women spend their prime years dating players and bad boys. Women have the fantasy of changing, taming, and fixing them, which often fails. What usually happens is that they end up getting used and mistreated. Women often carry a massive amount of physiological baggage from being in dozens of failed relationships. This baggage will usually be unloaded on the one good man who actually wants to stay with her. This is the woman who will be insecure, jealous, and demanding to know where he is in overcompensation for relationship failures with more prolific men before.

Men take most of the risks when it comes to long term relationships and marriage. The law is almost always on the womans side when the relationship fails and there is a house, a marriage contract and children. Men have every right to judge women before committing to life changing relationships. Men are constantly chastised for their “fear of commitment”, yet most divorces are instigated by women.

IF YOU ARE NOT PLANNING TO GET MARRIED, LIVE WITH A WOMAN OR HAVE CHILDREN THEN ALL OF THE ABOVE BECOMES IRRLEVANT

For a MGTOW who is only interested in casual relationships . It's actually preferable that a woman puts out with the minimum of time, effort and money spent.

For this reason I don't actually hate sluts, I hate "reformed sluts". The woman who previously went home with dozens of random men within hours of meeting them in a club. After the age of around 27-33 she reinvents herself as a "good girl" and suddenly demands multiple expensive dates before you get anywhere near her bedroom door.

"A slut is a woman who has sex with men who would never commit to her and marries a man she'd never have a one night stand with."