As much as the mainstream pushes the claim that we have evolved beyond being mere animals, in reality we will never rise above our biology. I can no longer count on two hands how often I have heard variations of the claim that “X may have served us in the past, but it is no longer useful in our modern age” in corporate trainings. If you ever get to sit through an “unconscious bias training” it’ll be all about that, i.e. why stereotypes are harmful, completely ignoring the fact that stereotypes coalesced because they are generally true. It’s crystalized experience.
Biology also rears its ugly head when we tell young girls to whore it up in their teens and twenties. Mainstream culture encourages girls to be promiscuous. The anti-baby pill is, in fact, pushed really hard on young girls in school already whereas you would think that it might make more sense to teach girls to abstain from sex at that age. Sex is supposed to be fun and inconsequential and once Jane is too old to get a quick pump-and-dump by Chad, she hopes to settle down with guy who is buff, accomplished, and popular.
Sex is not just fun and games, however. We have sex for the sole purpose of procreation. Here is what I think is really happening: boy and girl see each other. They get horny because there is mutal attraction. They fuck a lot. Before contraception, the outcome would be pregnancy, and the guy staring down the barrel of a shotgun held by the girl’s father. They marry, have some more kids, and are productive members of society.
Related to the issue of mutual attraction is that there is an amplification effect that can be triggered by a member of the opposite sex. For instance, if you, a guy, run into a reasonably attractive girl who is really into you, chances are that her strong expression of sexual interest in you will make her appear more attractive to you. The opposite is true for men as well, i.e. women get turned on more by you if you make strong, bold moves, provided that they are already attracted to you. Again, this is nature doing its thing: nature wants us to procreate and if there is the chance to do so, it makes sense that we have such a biological trigger that makes us more attracted to someone else as this increases the likelihood of sex and conception. If this did not work, the phenomenon would not exist.
In a time in which sex is supposed to be fun and in which Jane can’t have enough dicks in her before setting down for some beta-buxxer in the best-case scenario, we attempt to thwart biology but can’t. It is still the case that you will have a lot of sex at the beginning of a relationship because that’s nature telling you to fuck so that you procreate. You keep fucking and then one of two things happen:
1) She gets pregnant because she doesn’t take birth control, the two of you want a kid anyway, or the condom bursts because you shot out a torrential stream of cum. Congratulations, you’re a father now! The intended outcome is that you’ll raise the kid with your woman. Consequently, how both the man and the woman view sex will change completely. It’s suddenly no longer such a big deal because having a baby or a toddler around will take a huge chunk of energy out of you. You have become a family man and it will take a while until your sex drive returns to normal.
2) She does not get pregnant because she’s on birth control. You still fuck a lot but subconsciously something does not feel right. Let’s discuss the case of the woman first:
2a) Due to the woman’s biology, her perception of you changes. She views you as infertile or as a useless man because you can’t seem to manage to knock her up. Consequently, she’ll look for a new guy behind your back. Women end most relationships, and most women don’t do so without having secured the next guy already. Of course, they will only repeat the same tragicomedy: infatuation leads to routine leads to disappointment leads to hopping on a fresh dick.
Now let’s move on to the perspective of the man:
2b) You keep fucking the chick and you get bored of fucking her. This is supposed to be normal. There is even the term “Coolidge Effect” for it. However, the guy goes through a similar transformation as the girl. He gets bored of her because she did not get pregnant. Had he fallen in love and had she gotten pregnant, he’d be a willing father and even the unwilling ones would have so much to now take care of that sex would not be really on their mind. Yet, because she is not getting pregnant, he subconsciously perceives that he’s banging the same chick over and over and nothing happens. He feels that she’s barren, loses interest, and moves on.
The advanced of birth control lead to men viewing their women as barren, and women viewing their men as infertile. Thus, you get the flare-up of lust at the start of a relationship, and the slow death because such a couple does not manage to reach the next step in the plan nature has laid out for them. They are supposed to have kids as that is why they have been having sex.
Prolonged sexual activity in a relationship that does not lead to having children within a few years is almost guaranteed to lead to a failed relationship. Consequently, you are wasting your time if you do dry-runs by having relationships with women you do not want to have children with. You are not going to trick nature here. Instead, you will get bored of her, she will get bored of you, then you may even try relationship counselling but the “woke” therapist either does not understand that biology is the underlying reason or doesn’t want to understand it. At that point, the relationship is already over because both missed the window of opportunity where they could have converted strong sexual attraction into conception. They thought they could trick nature but in the end, nature bitch-slapped both of them. They did not want to take the next step of having children, so nature tells them to try again with someone else. They can of course rebel against this, but this will only lead to misery. This is mostly the misery of the childless woman, but the man will likewise ask himself eventually what he is doing with a woman who cannot bear his children.
This blog depends on your contributions. So, share your view and comment on this article (comment policy). Then, to ensure the survival of this blog, donate. If you haven’t bought Aaron’s books yet, buy them, all of them. Lastly, if you want tailored and honest advice, book some one-on-one consultation sessions.
16 thoughts on “Contraception Leads to Lackluster Sex and Failing Relationships”
1. You present two different scenarios with the woman with conception. What about the following scenario? In this scenario, a woman already has kids. She’s a slut. She’s either divorced and/or is a single mother and is jumping from cock to cock, and in some cases, she has fuck buddies. She doesn’t want any more kids. Does the woman get tired of having sex with the same guy because something doesn’t feel right, or has her attraction to the guy faded away? Or is she looking for a new thrill or merely more validation?
2. “Sex is supposed to be fun”
In early juvenile years and early adulthood, men will often fuck anything that moves. Over time, some men realise that sex takes on a different path. Sex is still fun, but something funny happens. They realise that sex is a very intimate act something that young men can’t understand. As young men with raging hormones, they’ll literally make-out with every girl they encounter. However, once they’ve gained life experienced, they realised that kissing a random woman isn’t so easy any more since it’s a very intimate act. This wasn’t the case in their early adulthood years. What causes this change in men?
3. In the beginning of a relationship, sexual activity is very high, and couples engage in lusty porn sex. Over time, the frequency of sex lessens due to a number of factors. Men often complain about the lack of sex. Once the sex has diminished, is there anything men can do to restore their sex life to its original state form of lusty porn? I understand that women don’t like having sex with their beta providers since they are not attracted to them, thus, sex is a chore, but what about Chads?
I’ve often met my share of women who claim they were attracted to their partners, but have gotten tired of having sex with them and thus commit infidelity. Perhaps infidelity deserves its own blog.
4. On a related note, what about women who already have kids and are either divorced and/or single but keep on fucking a lot none stop? These are either your porn stars, escorts or strippers. What’s the underlying issue with these women?
5. “The relationship is already over because both missed the window of opportunity where they could have converted strong sexual attraction into conception”.
What about situations where a couple have a difficult time conceiving and resort to professional help – In vitro fertilization?
Obviously they do it because it makes money (much more than minimum wage, In Austria minimum wage is like 8€ per hour, a good escort can make 250€ per hour, no skills required, porn stars can make even more, the best ones like Madison Ivy make like 5k per video),
and people like money.
Now of course when interviewed they are going to say “I do it because I just love sex! I also like to have cum on my face, it’s so sexy!”.
Which is just marketing. 99% of whores/porn stars don’t enjoy the sex with men they have on camera/customers.
I even have “empirical” evidence for this. Most whores in a Austria last for 2-3 years. Then they leave. And it’s not because they got ugly, a lot leave when they were still quite attractive. But so that makes it obvious they don’t enjoy it, otherwise they would keep doing it.
Also just from pure logic you would understand that a 20 year hottie doesn’t like it to get fucked by the average 50 year old overweight man.
It’s a survival strategy basically.
Same reason women stay with men they don’t find attractive.
1) The women you mention no longer have the ability to pair-bond. Thus, they go from one guy to the next, wondering why no relationship ever lasts. On that note, I think a big reason promiscuity has been promoted so heavily to women since the 1960s is because it destroys their ability to pair-bond. Thus, you will get unstable families, which then necessitate a strong state. We can observe the consequences all around us.
2) I’m not sure you can generalize here. However, I would say that most men who have had some experience will at some point start to care a lot less about women (and sex) as they have realized that it’s not quite the greatest thing on earth, unlike the heavily sexualized marketing they have been exposed to all their life suggested.
3) The problem is that you have sex to have children. You can’t expect to trick nature for years and years by using contraception. Once Chad is surrounded by a bunch of kids at home, sex won’t be all that important to him either.
4) This was answered very well by someone else already.
5) I don’t think there are any happy couples out there who have undergone IVF. The message is pretty clear: you can’t procreate naturally for whatever deficiencies but, here, we can use high-tech to increase your chances of conception. Also, I’d speculate that the children created this way are inferior for two reasons. One, the child was not the result of sperm competition in the womb. Instead it was luck of the draw in the petri dish. Two, the genetic material of the parents is arguably second-rate and if it’s not that, the fact that they can’t have children naturally implies that nature does not want them to procreate. Maybe Chad would be able to know her up and maybe some young Vixen would make some doughy beta-buxxer hard and horny enough to impregnate her right away. All of this is just theoretical, of course.
Thats an interesting angle I had not considered…. that LTRs without children will cause peoples perception of each other to change because they deem each other subconsciously infertile? Sounds plausible on its face. Have you read any psych papers in support of this, or can you point to some specific author to check out? I would like to delve deeper into this matter.
I know that contraception has been shown to alter the attractiveness perception of women. Apparently, we are wired to be more attracted to people who have a major histocompatibility complex (MHC) that differs from ours, in order to promote genetic variability and prevent inbreeding, and we normally know this through smell (expressed as some gut feeling, something does or does not “feel right”). Supposedly this also prevents us from being attracted to close relatives (think Marty McFly in Back to the Future being kissed by his unknowing younger mother on prom night: “I felt like kissing my brother”).
The thing is, hormonal contraceptives wreac havoc a womens olfactory perceptions and allow them to be attracted to men they would normally reject instinctively. Now, a lot of couples meet while she is on birth control, by the time they are married and want kids she goes off the pill and suddenly finds out she doesnt like her husband anymore.
I cannot look up specific studies right now, cuz I am on a tight deadline, but i remember reading about it in the book “Sex at Dawn”, by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha.
It would be interesting to see a study of women’s mental health before and after the mass production of birth control. Like any study regarding IQ among races, a study reviewing women’s mental health after medicating their bodies into temporary sterility (often times for years!) would probably never see the light of day.
Look up a paper called The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness
Women today are unhappier than their mother and grandmas.
Plenty of room for intervening variables, though, so cannot blame it on birth control alone. But its certainly part of a larger trend.
This article was the result of me enjoying a good cup of tea in relative tranquility, similar to how philosophers of yore achieved their insights. Of course, I wrote a speculative article, but it is based on observations, sound premises, and a good grasp of reality. I’d argue that much of academia in the current year is opposed to all three of those aspects. They also denounce the role of logic in constructing sound arguments with their post-structuralist nonsense, so I’d say we’ll have to wait for a collapse of academia before we can rebuild it and have a new generation of people doing proper research again. (This would go too far, but I’d say if or when contemporary academia collapses, we won’t see a reemergence of traditional universities, which itself were modeled after monasteries.)
Besides the pill and other hormone-based birth control methods preventing pregnancy, I wonder to what extent condoms interfere with the normal biological process. Particularly, I wonder if there’s some sort of primal circuitry that comes into play when you cum inside a girl, that doesn’t happen if you’re using a condom. I’ve wondered to what extent this explains how easily women are able to hop from one cock to the next… at least the ones that bother to use condoms.
I’ve certainly noticed that cum seems to have some almost magical properties for some girls. You may pull out, pull the condom off, and she may rub your jizz over her breasts or spread it around her belly button. Also recall that a lot of girls ask you, when you bone them with a condom, if you came. A large subset of them also want to see the cum in the condom. At the very least, getting a man they find sexually attractive provides an enormous source of validation for them. On top, there are all those deeply rooted biological aspects that won’t ever be scientifically researched in “democratic” societies.
Procreation is essential for humans (obviously). This relates back to the discussion about the midlife crises. The question arises if these men would trade up. Everyone is unhappy to one degree or another, and that is perfectly normal. So I think the answer to a midlife crises is to encourage your offspring to have their own. Then you will have taken the next step and become a grandparent! That is yet another reason why people were encouraged to have children young back in the day. I think that the toxic way we have been doing things for decades is making great grandparents obsolete. And by the time you become a grandparent you might not even enjoy it the way they used to.
1. “The women you mention no longer have the ability to pair-bond.”
Does this mean these women are a lost cause, and counseling/therapy won’t be able to fix this issue? Would seeking a purpose be the alternative for these women since they cannot pair-bond?
2. “They go from one guy to the next, wondering why no relationship ever lasts.”
Is their inability to pair-bond the primary reason why relationships fail with these women, or is there multiple underlying issue perhaps BDP, bipolar isues, etc. that is the cause of their failed relationships?
1) I think they are a lost cause. I’m not sure they can find a purpose. An underlying issue seems to be that they have a short attention span and low inhibition. Besides, how many women do you know who can focus deeply on anything with great effort for a long time? This is rare among men, and even rarer among women.
2) There are two categories here, in my opinion. Some women never had a chance, e.g. if they are bipolar. Even if you marry them when they are virgins (I don’t know how this would happen, but let’s assume it for the sake of the argument), you’d find it impossible to live with her. The other category are women who have had the ability to pair bond but got jaded and saddled with emotional baggage due to a string of relationships.
“The women you mention no longer have the ability to pair-bond. Thus, they go from one guy to the next, wondering why no relationship ever lasts.”
1. Since women no longer have the ability to pair-bond, does this mean they also “lose interest” in men faster and move on to the next cock since they have low attention spans, low inhibitions, are sexually promiscuous, and have a lot of emotional baggage? I’ve often heard women claim that they are quick to lose interest in men and drop them like nothing ever happened between them.
2. Are bonafide sluts more likely to lose interest faster than the average woman who many not be as sexually promiscuous?
3. Are these women aware of their inability to pair-bond on a conscious or subconscious level, or do they remain puzzled for years trying to figure out why they keep on having failed relationships?
4. On a related note, plenty of research has highlighted that women who come from dysfunctional/broken families turn out to be very promiscuous. However, I have often seen the same case(s) with women who come from stable families where both parents are present. These women often turned out to be promiscuous later in life compare to their counter-parts. What’s going on here?
1) Upon reflecting over this a bit, I think reality is a lot worse: those women remember falling in love when they were in their teens and they are chasing after this elusive high over and over, unable to ever reach it again. You sometimes may even encounter women in their 30s or 40s who write in their online profile that they want to “feel like a teenager in love” again and other such drivel. This implies that there was only ever superficial interest at first. They meet guy after guy, hoping they will cause them to feel butterflies in their stomach again.
2) The former commonly view men as completely replaceable. She may only ever view you as an object, e.g. a big dick or a walking wallet, and move on once she’s gotten her fix.
3) This ties back to 1). I do not think that they are typically aware of this at all. In fact, I have found that self-awareness is surprisingly uncommon in women. They basically repeat the one relationship blueprint they know over and over and wonder why things never work out. Commonly, they reenact the unproductive patterns of their single mothers as that is all they know.
4) With regards to the latter, I think this is part of media brainwashing. They are bombarded with messages such as “30 is the new 20” and the like and they think they have missed out on something, such as whoring it up during their college years. Then they get hubby to pay for a boob job, a new nose, and liposuction. Afterwards, they are off to the divorce lawyer and then it’s time to hit the club and Tinder and play catch-up. The sad thing is that it is hard to tell if a very sexually aggressive woman in her 30s is a battle-hardened slut with decades of dicks under her belt or a more recent convert. If they have fewer tattoos and are economically better established, they are likely to be those who are late to the party. (Not to go into this in too much detail, but you can meet sluts in their 30s who live really sad lives, i.e. they have no good job prospects, live in a shoebox apartment, nobody wants to marry them, and they spend their evenings with takeout food, red wine, and their cats. In contrast, the late starters may have a great apartment or house which they got due to their divorce.)
– “…it’s time to hit the club and Tinder and play catch-up.”
– “…they think they have missed out on something, such as whoring it up during their college years.”
1. Should these women be considered and treated as damaged goods and poor relationship prospects since they choose to whore it up late in the party scene despite coming from a stable background?
2. Since these women started whoring it up late in the party scene, does this still affect their ability to pair-bond?
1) I’d say so. What good is their background if they decide to act in such a reprehensible way?
2) Those women are probably better able to pair-bond than women who hop on the cock carousel at 13. On the other hand, the former want to actively destroy their pair-bonding ability by being promiscuous, so the only way to salvage this would be if you were the first or second guy she met during that phase. However, what guarantee do you have that she doesn’t just act out the same way a few years down the line? She may think that she got a Chad like you in her mid-30s so now that she’s “more mature” and “more desirable” in her late 30s, why couldn’t she get an even better guy then? That kind of reasoning only sounds bizarre to us, but to them it makes perfect sense.