Why is female virginity viewed as virtuous by so many different cultures and religions?

>it is the most unsafe meat if cold chain is broken
Another issue is that pigs are not useful for anything but giving meat. They don't give milk, they don't provide wool, they don't lay eggs, etc. and the food fed to the pigs could also be used to feed people or more useful animals.
In particular in regions where resources are scarce it may appear an immoral luxury to keep pigs.

And only a minority of people should have cars, but those that do should at least have a few.

If men should have lots of sex, and women should only have sex with one man each, that naturally leaves lots of 'extra' men that can be used for intense labor or war with no ill consequence.

>no contraception
you know that, though not nearly as effective as modern ones, contraceptive methods existed since ancient Egypt?

One man one wife is a progressive control on the sexual free market.

>this
Virginity is only meaningful/useful in patrilineal societies

Natural selection

Guys who didn't care about being cucks didn't breed

And literally non of them worked. Basically homeopathy.

>Why is it bad for a female to have sex before getting married (according to many religions)?
Pregnancy. You either have a baby out of wedlock, in which case there is no one to support it except the woman's father (women could not support themselves), you force the babby daddy into marriage, which nobody likes, or you quickly marry someone else and tell him it's his kid, giving him a continuation of his line which is viewed as illegitimate.

>What is the evolutionary/psychological significance of it?
From a pre-civilized perspective, there may not be one. It's not like a woman having had sex/kids before makes her less able to bear yours and even if you do fuck a virgin, she'll only be a virgin that one time, so it's plausible that the preference for virginity is entirely a social construct and not something ingrained genetically. Even raising someone else's kid wouldn't be as much of a disadvantage in a tribal society where the burden of providing for them is spread through the entire tribe, not just on you.

t. pedo

This
Added to the fact whatever there was would have been un-affordable for common people, assuming they actually heard about it.

>Pig or hog skin leather is a dense leather similar to cowhide with a soft and supple feel and very good durability. Pigskin is very pliable,
comfortable and water resistant.

and pigs grow much faster with less food than cows, so pigs can be pretty useful outside of food.

>he food fed to the pigs could also be used to feed people
true, but they also eat stuff no other animal would eat, so they play a role in keeping streets (relatively) clean and limit disease hazards

this being said, I totally agree with you. If perceived utility is none, it makes no sense to keep the damn beast.

Because men don't want to raise another man's children, so virginity is one way to ensure that her offspring is yours. Thus, control women and make sure they're virgins.

Why do anime posters make such awful posts

Ancient equivalent of a DNA test on the kid

>What is the evolutionary/psychological significance of it?
You've never had a girlfriend have you?

If you're mentally healthy it's a big turnoff.

femicucks and probably trannies

Obvious answer: if you want a wife, a pure, chaste girl is better than a huge slut who have slept with dozens of guys.

But also: in virtue ethics, chastity was recommended to men too. Not because of other people, but because it is good for you. Being a manslut, a hedonist (in the popular sense of the world) leads to to unhappiness.

The psychology of it is that no healthy, proud and competitive boy wants to feel like he gets the next-best. The woman should exist for and be an extension of him. He wants the finest goods.

Yup

Take this famous quote by Sheryl Sandberg:

>When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home.

Which healthy male would want to be the good guy here?

She's mistaking the way she's being treated with the best way to raise a family and the end-result of it.

This is why women are oppressed.

Smart, ambitious and opinionated women are the cream of the crop when their priorities of familyhood remain straight. Sadly, most of the time it's just another word for being self-absorbed careerist and consumer.

>Sheryl Sandberg
>(((Sandberg)))

Too bad women are dumb enough to fall for this retarded advice - don't worry gals be as careless as you want, some cuck will foot the bill at the end of the day!

So in short alpha fucks beta bucks.
Wait is this not what /pol/ and mgtow claim?
How they are wrong(in this case) somebody remind me?

/pol/ is always right.

Well when contraceptives don't exist it means she doesn have children, i know you're tiny brain cant think logically, so this could mean in most religions she is already married or a widow.

A key that opens many locks is a master key.
A lock that opens for many keys is a bad lock.

Lets not get too crazy here.

Virginity is good, but not necessary, but if it is a woman who wants to spread around the disease by taking every man she can, it´s disgusting and they shall be left alone as punishment, then they may repent and can come back into society.

So basically, like said, it's only useful in patrilineal societies. It's not like he was wrong. The context you described is only in paternalism. Just saying.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't this quote a different view of the same coin?Is this kind of not the same idea that you were just saying only in terms of women? People shouldn't marry sluts or bad boys just because they are good in bed/hot. In the end, they probably won't be there for/loyal to you or really love you for you.

Promiscuity is bad for the people who engage in it themselves. Chastity was recommended to men too.

The problem is not the "marry the good guys" part. It is the "before marrying the good guys, date the bad guys" part.

...

cheating, associated mental health problems and pic related before penicillin

berg isn't a jewish name.

Well it could be also German - I do not know what is worse.

Recommended but not enforced. Yet the society still sustained as long as the other was enforced. Again, because not having female chastity in a paternalistic society is unsustainable. Mostly when the technology of proper contraception was inadequate to non existent.

No shit. My point was, this "bad behavior" is not and was never just exclusive to women. There is a habit of guys fucking/dating the hot 9-10/10 sluts. As many as men's skills partnered with their raging hormones will allow. Many guys will do this(and it was still encouraged) with the overall goal/ desire to MARRY a virgin in the end(when I feel like settling down) or if luck has it(a lady in the streets who is somehow a freak in the sheets). "Fuck sluts but not marry them" mentality. Same things can be said of women and "bad boys." How is that similarity flying over your head?

What? People still get syphilis. Most of it is asymptomatic once you first contract it. The pic you posted is the first sign that leads people to getting help these days. If you wanted an accurate depiction of syphilis before penicillin, you should have looked up a pictures of "late stage/ tertiary syphilis."

>Recommended but not enforced. Yet the society still sustained as long as the other was enforced. Again, because not having female chastity in a paternalistic society is unsustainable. Mostly when the technology of proper contraception was inadequate to non existent.

You said "chastity is only useful in patrilineal societies" here It is not the case. Chastity is useful for the people who are chaste.

>No shit. My point was, this "bad behavior" is not and was never just exclusive to women. There is a habit of guys fucking/dating the hot 9-10/10 sluts. As many as men's skills partnered with their raging hormones will allow. Many guys will do this(and it was still encouraged) with the overall goal/ desire to MARRY a virgin in the end(when I feel like settling down) or if luck has it(a lady in the streets who is somehow a freak in the sheets). "Fuck sluts but not marry them" mentality. Same things can be said of women and "bad boys." How is that similarity flying over your head?

You said "Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't this quote a different view of the same coin?Is this kind of not the same idea that you were just saying only in terms of women? People shouldn't marry sluts or bad boys just because they are good in bed/hot. In the end, they probably won't be there for/loyal to you or really love you for you." here Yes. We agree that "People shouldn't marry sluts or bad boys just because they are good in bed/hot. In the end, they probably won't be there for/loyal to you or really love you for you." What is being criticized here is her promotion of the idea of "fuck bad boys, marry nice guys".
Yes, there are many guys who do think "Fuck sluts, marry virgins". They are assholes. They are not the kind of person you would want to marry your sister.

...

Who is this loser?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bagot_Glubb
people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf
Interesting read even if little short.

I was using that argument in context. Merely to point out hypocrisy of that post getting mad a woman specifically saying that. The context was of course, going to be under the assumption that people wouldn't marry sluts/bad boys. My personal views on morality/ use of chastity weren't necessarily being showcased. I kept in context with the logic at hand. I was simply making a point to expose the hypocrisy of a post that basically came down to "it's only bad/unfair/destructive when women do it" with no proof. I'm saying with that same logic, the same could be said of men.

ah so correlation= causation now?
Why does this always happen in the context of things you happen to not like?
Let's just forget the fact that government and invaders kind of just came along after a while. THAT just had because caused by women getting some influence in the workforce. Even when the document itself said that push to get women appointed into public positions was not able to be accomplished, thus men were still in control when the ensuing chaos happened.

Document itself registered voiced opposition to women going into specific jobs. If they were not successful in obtaining it there would be no people complaining that they did.

Because raising another man's child is the ultimate form of failure, and the female word is worthless. The only somewhat trustworthy proof that the child is yours is the trn hymen.

Why is this question still being asked? The answer is obvious.

I'm talking about the jobs specifically as public officials and judges. The text simply said the attempt was unsuccessful. Whether some women actually did or did not become judges was not stated clearly. Obviously, they were in other professions hence why there was complaining that women shouldn't be in professions. You post makes no sense.
Regardless of all this, even if a few of these women did somehow get involved(again, it doesn't seem like it happened) in being public officials, I'm sure they had very little influence considering they were a minority and men would still mostly be the ones filling the profession.

Hymen are not a good indicator of virginity. Females can break their hymen from just riding a horse.

High maternal mortality was probably also a contributing factor. Getting impregnated by some random guy in some fling could lead premature death very easily.

Women get pregnant, men don’t.

Because women who have sex with lots of different men tend to have STDs. Fucking whores has consequences, hence why most societies looked down upon those who either whored themselves out or bought services of whores. As it pertains to families themselves, parents (free or not) have a bonafide reason to keep their girls STD-free to ensure maximum value to husbands (either as a literal sale in the case of slaves/servants or as an arraigned marriage).

In the modern era (1920-present), STD control took on a whole new dimension with the Spanish Flu causing so much death. The government itself decided to incentive the whole abstinence-only sex ed as a means of disease control. Despite a brief lull in the late 60s/early 70s, it came back with the HIV/AIDS epidemic and wasn't rolled back until after Obama took office.

tl;dr STDs

Men don't get STDs?? Wait nevermind, you're trolling.

The feminist eye is that of the psychoanalyist's backed with a hint of the evolutionary biologist's armchair musings. Very superficial observations about society coupled with preconceived notions of prejudice not borne by fact but by "cultural observation" disguising Victorian notions of how people -should- act. The feminist is very little different to the traditional conservative in this regard. They both make insane cultural observations based on naught but their own pitiable world experience and both use it as a cultural mandate to stamp the bootheel down on everyone else's back. They fling books and 'noble writers' at you spewing their conjecture farther and farther away from anything you could call evidence-based pretending like I should give a damn about your religion. Freud is dead.

Diseases and ensuring you aren't being cucked.

women were and are commodities to some extent, the value of a daughter plummets when she loses her virginity.

its a relic of an idea and derived only from the objectification/monetization of daughters.

Nice edgy post there, user. Too bad you still haven't disproved the point I made in context. Sorry that I used facts to back up my post. Tell me how difficult it was for patrilineal society to function when the male gender did not have the same chaste behavior ENFORCED(they did not, only recommended overall and I want proof to otherwise)? As long as legitimate heirs that were his and his wife's, who he fucked was of little importance. I'm waiting. Or perhaps you're talking about my second reply to another user?
Freud has nothing to do with any of this. I spoke only of a cultural aspect of society(paternalism) so evolutionary psych is null and void here. You are confused.

God that manga was hot trash

Literally because no man wants his girl to be fucked by another nigga. If you struggle to understand this then you are either a woman or a child.

Religions are written by men, men like their women "pure".