Today we live in a world of absolute hypocrisy. As people- we strive for companionship and love and to find that special someone. And yet we don't even know why. To put it succinctly people- the purpose of life is to reproduce. Not to play golf or video games or bake the next delicious Instagram photo. As far as evolution is concerned- if you die childless- then you are a failed gene code.
I know that may sting to a lot of unmarried, still looking, childless women out there. But that is the cold fact of reality. We spend our lives in silly pursuits and just assume that when the time is right, magically Mr. Right will be there to make it happen. Let's be adults people. The purpose of adult bonding between males and females is to ultimately produce children. We have sexual intercourse to facilitate that. And that's the part that we like.
Men have a very instinctual and good reason why they prefer women who don't have many sexual partners. A woman who is able to sleep with many men while still not producing a child is infertile. She is not a good investment of his time and money because ultimately- she probably isn't capable of producing children. If said women WERE capable of producing children, then she likely would have, and she would have sought to secure a good home and resources for those children via a strong committed relationship with the father.
This is why men are instinctually REPULSED by a women with a high 'number'. This new false paradigm of 'female empowerment' is anything BUT empowering. Girls are being told 'your value is not determined by your 'number''. It's not empowering. It's enabling. It's enabling women to stay where they are and feel okay with it- instead of being able to get what they want out of life; which is usually a sense of self actualization according to maslow.

As you can see- most women today hover midway of level 2. Society may permit a single woman to achieve her basic security needs, but her family usually isn't complete without a husband. A woman instinctively feels incomplete when her children's primary male role model is the principal of their school or her gay 'bestie'. When we tell people that this is untrue because we sympathize and want to sooth their ego- we actually do them a disservice. They stay at the lower levels of the hierarchy of needs- and lingering too long near the bottom is not just unhealthy; it can be dangerous. People in general, but especially women have a tendency to suffer from depression which often results in suicidal behavior if they do not ever move up the hierarchy. Just pay attention to the commercials on TV during an hour of your favorite programming if you don't believe me. Chances are- at least one of them will be for antidepressant or other mental health medication.
I'm not giving men a free pass here. I just haven't gotten to them yet. (ladies first) Men also have a consequence to their sexual history. Women are more forgiving than men though, because biologically it's not as important for a woman to have a virgin man. Men aren't the bearers of primary consequence of pregnancy. As long as a man is capable of insemination- evolutionary speaking- his job is done. The only concern at that point that the woman may have is the possible sharing of the man's resources with children of another woman- which is not in the interest of her own children. That is why women are more forgiving of a man's promiscuity. So long as he doesn't have children by another woman, usually women more easily look the other way.
I'm not saying that emotions and common interests and all those relationship things don't play an issue. I'm explaining WHY they are important in the first place. Consequently, this means that no matter what your opinion on the matter is, the reality is that the number of previous sexual partners you have had DOES matter to your current relationship and your current partner has every right to consider whether they want to take the risk of the investment in you- or move on to greener pastures.
With all that said, I'm not willing to entertain geriatric romance or homosexual relationship straw (wo)man arguments. Those are topics for a different mytake. This mytake only covers nominal heterosexual familial development. (notice how I used the word 'nominal' instead of normal because that word has been so conflated. these days everyone gets to be 'normal'. "OMFG I'm homosexual and you said I'm not normal? WTF! you can't tell someone that their minority situation isn't normal because it might trigger them, and that's not PC. People, can we please let others make their points? let's not turn into billy bob clinton and argue about the definition of the word "is".)
Most Helpful Guy