Wednesday, September 05, 2012

How to Screen the Good Girls from the Bad.

It's not foolproof but a pretty good rule of thumb. Roughly 3% of women with 0-1 sexual partners have a tattoo. From this study.

It called a tramp stamp for good reason.

(Hat tip, Roosh V)

Glad to see my Australian colleagues doing their share of the heavy lifting.


Ingemar said...

I prefer tattoo-free myself. But in Southern California, that pretty much eliminates 95% of women.

Ras Al Ghul said...

Absolutely correct.

You should see how argumentative women get when you point out:

Tattoo = slut.

And Ingemar, I think that tells you the state of women in California.

Anonymous said...

tattoo or not, the best way to screen a woman (and men) to see if they're a good person, is to see how they treat people they don't need.

Anonymous said...

The term slag-tag is also appropriate.

Black Death said...

'There are no good girls gone bad, only bad girls found out."

- Mae West

Sojourner said...

Yes, California is now seemingly COVERED with tattoos. I'm pretty certain it will be nearly impossible to find a decent lady out here in the 25 year old range (am divorced and there's no way in hell I'm going after women in the same age range as I am (early thirties)).

The Social Pathologist said...

Southern California appears to be grim. But its the same over here. Way too many girls with tats.

I've never liked them. They seem to proclaim poor judgement and impulse control with hardly any long term thinking. Not good qualities in a potential mate.

I think there is a bit of bad in all girls. The thing is, though, is that the good girl controls the bad one, not the other way around.

Anon 1.38, the problem with most of the tattoo crowd is that the bad girl controls the good. Even sluts have their non sexual good qualities. I'd rather a slut than a puritan.

Anonymous said...

My husband says a better word for "tramp stamp" is "splatter mat". Crude, but funny.

David Collard said...

I used to work with a really clever young woman, half-African. Nice manners, a good worker. But a tramp stamp. Pity.

Yes, there is a bit of bad in all girls. They are all minxes. But there is no need to advertise one's sex life. I assume they make sense in rear entry. Something for the chap to look at.

Thanks, SP, for finding me non-boring in your blogroll.

David Collard said...

I once saw a fellow public servant, a woman, waiting for a bus. Neat little thing, nice legs, well-dressed professional look. Except for a freaking huge tattoo of a dagger on one calf. It was sexy, but must have embarrassed the poor woman.

Cane Caldo said...

Another tell: "If she smokes, she pokes."

The Social Pathologist said...


Another tell: "If she smokes, she pokes."

I can't say I disagree with that.


Except for a freaking huge tattoo of a dagger on one calf.

I find the dichotomy interesting. Prior to the social acceptance of tattoos, a girl like that would never get one. A man in prior times would of seen a woman like her and thought "looks like a good catch" only to find out later that his catch was not so good. While I deplore them, I think the social acceptance of tattoos is a boon to the astute. A girl with one is pretty much advertising her poor impulse control and poor long term judgement. It makes it far easier to separate the wheat from the chaff.

The problem with a woman's beauty is that it is so intoxicating that we tend to conflate the beautiful with the good; two things which are quite separate. A tattoo is not just a mark on the body but a revelation of the soul.

David Collard said...

She was what would once have been called a young matron. Presumably it was something she did when she was young and silly, but she was now very much in female bureaucrat mode. It was just incongrous, like a belch from the Queen.

If I were not a Catholic (I think tattoos are regarded as mutilation) and my wife had been up for it, I would not have minded marking her with a personal tattoo, maybe somewhere private.

But that is the problem. Dagger-woman may well have done that to please an early lover. Which is not a happy thought for other men.

David Collard said...

Yes, very good point about interior and exterior beauty. Men have so much trouble understanding this.

I had a crush on a pretty girl of a type I find very attractive at university. She looked the picture of innocence; like something out of an Irish village; like an ancestral memory. I got to know her female friend well, who told me that she was actually a major slut. And she probably was. Another life lesson.

mdavid said...

DC, Presumably it was something she did when she was young and silly

Ahh, and there is the rub. A woman's sexuality is too important to have even one mistake when they are "young and silly". She could get knocked up or worse. Women are indeed on a different standard from a biological perspective.

Anonymous said...

I find this entire thing to be one sided personally.. I have 6 tattoos myself (no tramp stamp) and each one symbolizes something of great value to me.. The fact that anyone would be so ignorant as to even assume women with tattoos should automatically be looked down on or that we're less likely to make a good partner.. Well you should feel pretty stupid. People are people.. Yes maybe I have poor impulse control and I'm not concerning myself with how my ink will turn out when I'm in my elderly years, but to say for even a second that I should be ashamed or to catogorize me with women who have no respect for their bodies is demeaning and bullsh*t. Tattoos can be bautiful. It's art of the body. No one has the right to judge us or tell us we're wrong. I have the upmost respect for myself and believe my body is a temple. And while I'm not religious in any way I still am spiritual. "True till Death" is written across my chest as a symbol for my sobriety because I grew up surrounded by alcoholics and drug users, but I made a change from that, I broke the chain, and one day when I have children I'll do my absolute best to teach them that they're worth more then what they put in or on their bodies even.. Pochahontas is tattooed on my inner left thigh. I got her because as a child I thought she was incredible. Powerful young beautiful and completely natural. Her story made an inpact on me at such a young age. To this day I don't cover my face with make up. I don't try hiding who I am. My love for her stays with me. It's inspiring. Getting tattoos is like being a painter except you carry your art around with you. I'm proud of my tattoos and plan on getting more. And if and when I die and "Judgement" calls my name... The last thing "God" is going to see are my tattoos.. Don't be so closed minded..

Stacy said...

I feel like the post above was written by a SWPL white liberal woman.

Anonymous said...

I feel like the post above was written by a troll (it was funny though).

Anonymous said...

It's been a little while since I've had the opportunity to enjoy your posts.

Please know that many are looking forward to reading more of your insights. Your blog is unique from any that I can think of because it is able to present Christianity in a rational sense, grounded in conservatism.

Please don't consider the lack of comments as a lack of interest. Sometimes it may be a case of feeling like there is not much more to add to the discussion.

Anonymous said...

mdavid said
"A woman's sexuality is too important to have even one mistake"

And herein lies the idiocy of this blog in one short sentence. A woman's sexuality is no more important than a man's. In as much as she can get pregnant, he can get a woman pregnant (several at a time actually, and then be forever financially and emotionally drained). But the prevailing assumption with this blog is that women have more responsibility to uphold decency in sex and even further, morality in general, and this is wholly and completely UNTRUE. It is in fact, idiocy, because by definition society needs both genders to buy into its standards or else it fails. Is a tattoo a symbol of a slutty man? Does one sexual partner make a man completely unworthy of any decent wife? The blog owner answers these questions in completely biased and lopsided ways depending on the gender of the subject, and that's why his logic fails and women would never subscribe to it. You aren't even attempting to show male leadership, just deflecting to women at every moment's opportunity like you get paid to do it.

This line of thinking is the exact downfall of society as a matter of fact, particularly male and female relations as we know it. Back in the day, men saw just as much reason to protect their virginity, their bodies, etc. as women. They saw just as much value in building themselves up to be a good, marriageable husband as women to wives. Now you have a bunch of men running around, JASM (Jaded Awkward Single Men) I presume, finding ways to demonize women for everything they do under the sun, simply for the fact that they can't find a woman that interests them (and is interested back) or they remember all the previous lonely years they had when younger.

Anonymous said...

Anon, you seem very convinced of the blank slatist perception of society, which explains your ignorance on the subject.

The fact is, there are differences in gender. Because women control sexual access, men compete over women and adjust their behavior in order to maximize their sexual opportunities. If women select for provider characteristics, men will become more faithful. If women select for sexual attraction, such as that in modern society, men will become less faithful.

The exception to this is societies which have a large surplus of available women, due to wars or other factors which would decrease the share of men in society. But for the modern Anglo world, there is a huge overabundance of available men compared to women due to hypergamy, giving more women sexual options and decreasing the pressure on being chaste. This blog allows men an educated view into the ramifications of this. Sorry to shit all over your fantasy worldview. I've got a time machine to sell you.

*** ******** said...

hit the nail on the proverbial head.

Anonymous said...

westunderground said
"Because women control sexual access"

I read your whole post, but really shouldn't have bothered beyond this statement because its what you base your whole line of thinking on and it, like the rest of this blog, is bullshit.

No women do not control sexual access. A woman cannot have sex with a man against his will any more than a man can have sex with a woman against hers. Both people must decide to have sex before any sex happens.

Just because men today have no morals and will have sex with anything that moves and generally make the decision before the woman, does not mean they are not deciding to have sex just like the women they pretend 'allow' them to.

If the man didn't proposition sex beforehand, what decision would the woman even have to allow access? Precisely. And wouldn't virginity be more prevalent in women AND men if the proposition didn't even occur? Precisely. Generally it starts with men, but if men today had morals it wouldn't even start. This blog doesn't encourage morality/virginity among men but only women, and then its owner and posters feign shock/disgust that things are the way they are. You are even comfortable and accept the fact that men today are doing everything in order to gain access to sex. That is to say, your line of thinking is entirely devoid of practical logic, almost as if you do not see the link between men having sex and women having sex. As if they are not having sex WITH EACH OTHER.

Stop it. You do not want chaste women if you are aware of and seemingly fine with the idea that men are trying to "maximize their sexual opportunities". Be happy with the lot of women you have created if the accepted value system for a man is to have as much sex as possible.

The Social Pathologist said...


It was just incongrous, like a belch from the Queen.

It's precisely my feelings about tattoos. Tattoo's are so prolish and beauty is so not. I think most normal men are wired to conflate beauty with moral goodness, and it's this fact of our wiring that gives the femme fatale all of her powers. Men simply assume she is good. Female beauty at its apogee is simply breathtaking and no work of man can add to it. "Adding" to female beauty by tattooing would be akin to painting the perfect mustache on the Mona Lisa. Yeah, the artistic execution of the moustache may be immaculate but the net result would be vandalism. Minimalism's strengh is in recognising the sometimes less is more.


The fact that anyone would be so ignorant as to even assume women with tattoos should automatically be looked down on or that we're less likely to make a good partner.

Not I, but the statistics speak for themselves.

The last thing "God" is going to see are my tattoos

You're sure about that, aren't you? I mean, you've got a direct line to him? I imagine he will most definitely "see" your tattoos but given your unfortunate circumstances overlook them. "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do." is your get out of jail card. In terms of your spiritual salvation, I'd be more worried about your pride than your tattoo's.

By the way, where in my blog have I stated that its quite O.K. for men to screw around? Quotes please.


Thanks. I do try to provide a unique service.

I'd like to post more but recently I was suffering from writers block and now, unexpectedly, we've had a bit of an upheaval in the family which means that I'll be rather busy. I'll try to post some more but the post probably be infrequent for a time to come. Do keep dropping by though.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said
A woman cannot have sex with a man against his will...

Thanks for understanding. You should listen to yourself more often, by the way. I've stopped arguing with people like you, because it is pointless trying to teach logic to the willfully blind. I appreciate the entertainment, though. At least know you're serving a greater purpose.

@The Social Pathologist
Take all the time you need. I understand the patience required to consistently blog after my initial venture into this world. I just wanted to remind you that despite the volume of comments, you do have active readers.

Flying in the face of "anonymous", I remember reading your insight into "Post Natal Depression", and the subsequent breakdown of careerist vs domestic leanings in women. This changed my understanding of womens' perspective in a fundamental way. While most of the alternative right seek to demonize women, I think this blog along with a minority of others (especially Athol Kay) try to explain the reality behind womens' situations in a way that men, even frustrated ones, can appreciate.

I mentioned earlier that you are able to present Christianity in a rational sense, and that wasn't just lip service. This is the main reason I continue to read your posts, because I think it's a unique insight. For the past 5 years or so, I have tiptoed the line between atheism and abrahamic religions. After reading your posts quoting C.S. Lewis, namely the ones discussing the tao of life, it all began to make sense to me.

I now believe that Christianity recognizes the fundamental aspects of human behavior, and produces a guide for people to live optimally healthy and productive lifestyles. I think modern society lacks these beliefs to their detriment. Also, one of the sole reasons Western Europe flourished during recent centuries is due to the enforcement of Christian principles. Most people I talk to fail to understand this, and I think this is a message that deserves to be heard.

Anonymous said...


I take it that based on that ramble of a response you formed towards me and your obvious refusal to address any points in my post you now realize the illogical thought process you possess? Glad I could help.

Happy Sunday.

Anonymous said...

I like that I'm branded like a histrionic cow. So there! (sticking pierced but tagless tongue out)

Will S. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Will S. said...

Worst tramp-stamp ever.