How many partners constitutes a girl to be considered a %@%$!?

[lanzer23]

Originally Posted by RobinVanDamn

The conversation we were having wasn't "A girl is dirty only if she has slept with ... people". I am aware a lot of other facts go into a girl be considered that. It seems like people are opening it up and turning it into some broad philosophical "What does it mean to be a *++!# in today's society?" type thing. Maybe the edit in the OP caused the confusion, topic itself is vague but for me personally if the only information i had on a broad was she was 18 and been with 12 dudes my perception of her is going to be clouded. It's closed minded and immature, i know and maybe all those partners can be justified but based SOLELY off that information about her "body count" that's how i would view her.

They are variables and other BS that was involved in our discussion like If she's been with 15 guys but used protection for everyone (condoms and dental dams during oral and allat) then body count isn't that big of a deal BUT a girl who has been with 6 dudes and let all of them hit raw is nasty.

Immature conversation but

The bolded part is what i agree with the most. 

 

[shinkuhadouken91]

Originally Posted by ksteezy

The number of partners doesn't equate her being a !*++, it's more about the way she carries herself....

Lol @ any dude being as naive to think that women don't lust over sex just as much or maybe even more than us men...they just hide it better.

I have a friend who I slept in the past ad her count is approaching 20 and she's far from a !*++.

/

 

[mangudai954]

Originally Posted by ksteezy

The number of partners doesn't equate her being a !*++, it's more about the way she carries herself....

Lol @ any dude being as naive to think that women don't lust over sex just as much or maybe even more than us men...they just hide it better.

I have a friend who I slept in the past ad her count is approaching 20 and she's far from a !*++.

 

[keithsweatsjordans]

They're born %@%$. Except my mom, grandmas, sister, aunts, cousins, etc.

/thread

 

[elpablo21]

Numbers don't matter...her attitude and how she carries herself should be the focus

 

[sdsolecollector23]

1 But mostly how she carries herself

 

[robinvandamn]

to everyone who says number aren't important then would you wife a former prostitute or porn star? church going upstanding citizen now but has taken 70 different poles... just wondering

 

[big j 33]

OP, what's your number then?

If a girl was "perfect" in every way and you had no complaints and were 100% satisfied, would the discovery of her being one more than your required number be a dealbreaker?

 

[elpablo21]

Originally Posted by RobinVanDamn

to everyone who says number aren't important then would you wife a former prostitute or porn star? church going upstanding citizen now but has taken 70 different poles... just wondering

If the chick is a "church going upstanding citizen" so to speak...she will still reveal herself as +##$ cause that's her personality. Her attitude and actions will reveal it regardless

Those type of chicks have a thin facade you can see through quick anyways

 

[je ne sais quoi]

Remember that thread where some chick in her 20s had atleast 80 dudes on her record, I'd say a majority of comments leaned towards her being equated as a garden tool.

 

[diew its james]

by age 21 i think 2-3 partners is reasonable, any more and well...you already know...

 

[credo]

Originally Posted by soltheman

Their age / 2.

That means at age 6 having 3 is okay.

 

[troymcclure]

when her number exceeds yours. so for most of y'all, one. zing!

 

[n ll k 3]

Originally Posted by ksteezy

The number of partners doesn't equate her being a !*++, it's more about the way she carries herself....

Beat me to it...

Lol @ any dude being as naive to think that women don't lust over sex just as much or maybe even more than us men...they just hide it better.

Precisely, and it baffles me how many dudes on NT either don't know this or don't understand this.

A girl's # will never be the deciding factor, but I'd be lying by omission if I didn't say I hope my future wife is * < 5.

EDIT:

Good luck to the dudes hoping to marry virgins.  I gave up on that thought process a long time ago.

In this day and age, if she's 25-30 w/ her cherry still intact, she is either fugly or the bore of the century in bed.  Good luck w/ that.

I'd rather marry a faithful, moderately experienced chick who wants it 24/7 than some virgin who has never had an appetite for sex in her life.

 

[robinvandamn]

.

 

[snaggykicks]

Originally Posted by Ruxxx

1.


/thread

 

[mytmouse76]

Originally Posted by diew its james

by age 21 i think 2-3 partners is reasonable, any more and well...you already know...

so in 5 years (lets assume she started at 16 and throw in a faithful 2 year relationship) you expect shorty to only have 2-3 partners? 

i'm gonna need you to have a seat next to this guy http://niketalk.com/topic/317350

 

[pip777]

Originally Posted by Elpablo21

Numbers don't matter...her attitude and how she carries herself should be the focus

+ her STD/AIDS/HIV test results.

 

[essential1]

Im more concerned of how far apart between guys..

For example if she's 21 and the number is 20 (WHICH IS A REALLY HIGH NUMBER), and lost her virginity at 16. By law of average it would be 4 guys a year or 1 every 3 months..That could be much worse if say 15 of the 20 were within a 6 month span then that's ++%#% -like behavior


As for my number limit of what changes it I don't really know.. It's less than 20 I know that... But I think the more relevant question is the dates of the encounters.

 

[dajondondo]

I know alot of females in HS who %%+!%@ only 1 or 2 dudes.... But once they got to College....

 

[Humbled]

Originally Posted by ksteezy

The number of partners doesn't equate her being a !*++, it's more about the way she carries herself....

This.

 

[nktran001]

More than a handful... especially if it all went down within under a year.

 

[robinvandamn]

numbers aside if a girl has sex without any emotional attachment or bounces from man to man and justifies either with "when men do it it's fine but when woman do it it's a problem" she's a little icky to me. Something about that mindset isn't cool with me.

 

[big j 33]

Originally Posted by RobinVanDamn

Originally Posted by Big J 33

OP, what's your number then?

If a girl was "perfect" in every way and you had no complaints and were 100% satisfied, would the discovery of her being one more than your required number be a dealbreaker?

Said my number in a thread on here already... I'm 18, been with my girl for about 2 1/2 years and she is the only girl i've been with. For me personally if the relationship was fine on all other aspects her "number" would be meaningless unless it was something outrageous or was involved in a train. The edit i made in the OP sidetracked this discussion but if i was JUST beginning to talk to a chick (like one or two months into it) and i found out like 4 of my homies smashed or she has been with a sizable amount of people that i actually know then i wouldn't really pursue that. 

So if you were dealing with a girl and things were going okay (nothing goes perfect) and you find out she has been passed around the city in her past that wouldn't effect your overall view of her?

Then say the number again? I don't know you so I can't recall

And you say yourself, the number doesn't matter unless it's something outrageous, then what's outrageous? And if she was just one guy over that number, it wouldn't be OK? If it was 5 guys, and she was with 6, that's a no go? If it was 20 and she was with 22? then it's too many?

The number is arbitrary if you would make an exception for your girlfriend. Not to mention, you speak about if your friends or people you know had sex with her prior, to it seems that you're more insecure about how others perceive you rather than the actual number. Would there be a difference if she had been with 20 strangers or 20 people you knew?

Even your language implies your immaturity with the subject. "Passed around the city in her past" not only implies that she's an object, but that she only exists for male pleasure. She can be a willing participant in a mutual activity, just as a man would. If I was dating a woman, I would treat her with the same expectations I hold to myself. Even then, if I've been with less women than her, that isn't a reflection of her lower standards or morals compared to mine.

Originally Posted by RobinVanDamn

numbers aside if a girl has sex without any emotional attachment or bounces from man to man and justifies either with "when men do it it's fine but when woman do it it's a problem" she's a little icky to me. Something about that mindset isn't cool with me.

Something about that mindset? You mean fairness? Clearly you're speaking from a naive experience, you say you've been with only one girl and you're 18, if and when you break up and have experiences, that will most likely change.

 

[keithsweatsjordans]

Honestly the number is irrelevant for the most part, but all you dudes talking about "its how she carries herself" and whatnot are lost. I've shared stories on here before but my father was a church pastor growing up and some of the freakiest/nastiest girls I've met were through church functions. Vacation bible schools, hotel conventions, church basements, you name it we were gettin it in! On the other hand I've dated cheerleaders, dancers, bartenders and some of them have been some of the most down to earth and goodhearted girls ever. The point is theres really no way to tell how much of a **$ a female is until you get to know her and her situation. All this speculating from the outside, body counts, how she dresses, how she talks, who she hangs out with is just that, speculation.