Claim promiscuity is frequently observed in women with AS?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm very curious as to what are some of your personal definitions of promiscuity?

Had sex outside of marriage?

Had sex with more than X number of men?

Had sex with someone they weren't in love with?

I would say regular casual sex or more hookups than serious attempts at dating. It's hard to draw a clear line, though.

I am 31 and can count my ex-lovers on one hand, not including the thumb.

This! I love sex, but I haven't had it in over a year because I am selective, coupled with having a hard time meeting people.

What he said.

So, you've had four? Without giving out any names, there's been a few female members here who have admitted to having more than that.

"He" is a "she".

Oops, the avatar choice appeared to me kinda masculine as well as her joke. Better to just say the username next time.

Uh-oh, Boo accidentally agreed with a woman! The world as we know it may be ending!

I kind of like KindOf's "definition." It can be applied equally to both men and women.

I do wonder why it is still considered more socially acceptable for men to be promiscuous (by any defintion) than it is for women....at least in the over-30 demographic.

Maybe that is not the case anymore for the younger generation? I honestly don't know what "the kids" are doing these days, except the ones I know personally (and that's maybe half a dozen or so). The ones I know personally, if anything are less promiscuous than kids were during the '60s and '70s, and are much harder on women who sleep around than they are on men (both men and women are much harder on the women). Is this really a thing, or is this limited to the handful of under-30s that I know reasonably well? Is there still an overarching attitude in society that women stand to "lose" the most by having premarital sex, and thus get judged more harshly?

^ I agree with a lot of women before, users like hale_bopp, Ladywoof and hurtloam for example (because hale says things bluntly and doesn't sugar-coat, hurtloam is usually very logical, sometimes not lol, clashed with Ladywoof at first but later found myself agreeing with her).

It's you in particular that I don't often agree with:lol, I find your ideas regarding relationships too idealistic, unreal and sometimes contradicting.


As for your question, the term "Womanizer" is often used as degartory, maybe you women should slut-shame men more often to balance things .

4-5 doesn't seem like such a high number of partners to me, if that's the meaning of the numbers. But just how many female aspies do you know? And how did you determine that women are more sex-driven than men? That's interesting, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, as they say, and I think this claim qualifies!

Oh, and let me be the first to say what most males in this thread have been thinking: where can we find all these promiscuous, hypersexual aspie females?

Last edited by FMX on 17 Jun 2014, 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

LOL! I'm actually totally okay with my allegedly idealistic, unreal, and contradicting ideas, since they seemed to have worked reasonably well in practice.

I don't believe in slut-shaming, I'm just curious as to whether (and to what extent) the old double-standard still exists.

My ex Aspie girl freind was promiscuous. Until I didn't want to put money in a joint bank account.

My point, not all aspie girls are promiscuous because of Asperger's syndrome.

Im on the hypersexual end of the spectrum! I sometimes wear my partners out because I have sex with them many many times and have to masturbate during times they are too tired for sex! I have watched a lot of porn too but cutting down on that because too much for a long time desensitizes me and it takes longer to climax and such. I still look at it once in a while but relying on my imagination more and I get better results!

LOL! I'm actually totally okay with my allegedly idealistic, unreal, and contradicting ideas, since they seemed to have worked reasonably well in practice.

I don't believe in slut-shaming, I'm just curious as to whether (and to what extent) the old double-standard still exists.

Oh boy, I would have to go so politically incorrect about that. Oh well, I except some would tell me this is a sexist post.

You should understand and accept that cultural evolution is not totally a separate entity from our biological evolution as humans, this latter comes first, biological evolution is one of the elements that have shaped our cultures, everything about humans has a biological root, even religions.

Also, there's an opposite double-standard exist for virgin guys or for guys who have lack of past relationship experience and partners or even lack of attractive female companionship. This is relevant in the copycat mating phenomena in women for example:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt261393.html

The reason why this double standard of "slut and stud" existed across the cultures and times, is due to a biological root in this double standard:
A man in order to be successfully promiscuous, has to be very attractive and impressive to a larger pool of women, otherwise the wannabe-player would just masturbate alone over pics of different women.
Him being attractive and impressive means his genes are valuable, the more he spreads it the better, his genetic contribution is an asset for humanity's pool of genes.

A side note: Speed dating studies indicate that the majority of women would only see again a minority of men (while most men wanted a second date with most women) - on okcupid it shows that 80% of women rate only 20% of men as more attractive than average. That doesn't mean that most women would marry only a minority of men, our monogamous culture makes this impossible (and there's a biological root for the success of monogamy, but that's a different story). But when it comes to casual sex, first impressions are very important and the man should be in this minority group in order to have it a lot, this one of the reasons why the stud-praising still exists.

On the other hand, basically any woman can have a lot of casual sex as long she's being willing and not being very selective, she doesn't have to be the crème de la crème in any way, there are many studies and surveys that prove a large portion of men are willing to have sex with a random woman.

Women can't spread their genes in the same degree of men, so a promiscuous female is more likely to be impregnated by a lowly male, contributing into spreading more bad genes in the human genetic pool.

And oh Eureka, as you probably already know, it's not only men who do slut-shaming and stud-praising, a lot of women exhibit this same double standard too.

Tarantella and starvingartist will pop up in 3...2....