I’m opening this up with a disclaimer. I respect what you have to say on these boards and think you’re a nice guy. I’m offering my opposing view, so this post is not intended to be confrontational or trolling.
Insecure or having reasonable trepidation having nothing to do with religion and nothing but reality? Promiscuity tells something about someone, and if a thrill-seeking woman who treats sex and relationships cheaply, including marriage cheaply, continues her ways into a relationship she can commit adultery, and a man might wind up raising children that are not even his and/or be divorced for no fault of his own and a subsequently be fleeced for up to 50 to 75 percent of his income, have custody of kids taken away, be completely unable to defend himself, and have his kids be wards of the state.
So not being with a promiscuous woman isn’t a matter of being “close minded” or insecure. And interestingly, I’ve never heard of a woman being “insecure” for not wanting to go on a date with a poor man. After all, chasing well-heeled men has much to with seeking security.
And it doesn’t take turning to the Quran, the Talmud, the Torah, or the Bible to be on guard against this. But it seems talk of sexual propriety these days inevitably turns into a religious conversation, not one of pragmatism or innate repugnance to certain types of behavior as a survival mechanism.
And this goes for the “old fashioned” expectation of women to have sexual propriety and hold up that nasty “double standard”, as if there are no “double standards” imposed on men. The reason being is simple and has to do with reality and biology. If most men are chaste, the remaining men can still sire, if the women are willing, the same number of feral bastards as the whole lot of men can, and they can become a burden on the whole population, and they actually do. If most women are chaste, the situation is for the most part controlled. That is exactly why older men and women policed young women’s sexual behavior, including how they dressed.
And as said elsewhere, the way to control a market, in this case the sexual market, is to control it on the supply side.
Religious conviction is unneeded for this.
My granddad once scared the daylights out of my aunt for going with the wrong guy. I don’t think he could recite one line from the Torah or Talmud, nor did he attend a synagogue unless for a wedding or Bat Mitzvah. He simply had the innate tendency to guard or chaperone the women in his family for the same reason “old fashioned” men of the past did: to prevent shitbags becoming part of families or having grandchildren with no fathers to care for them, with these men having to clean up the mess from such negligence, and to prevent young women from getting into stupid and dangerous situations.
