https://usa-girls.jouwvindplaats.nl/ https://usa-girls.sieraad4you.nl/ https://usa-girls.linkminer.nl/ https://usa-girls.18plusbegin.com/ https://usa-girls.seniorencentrum.nl/ https://usa-girls.linkstartup.nl/ https://usa-girls.hoeverandertmijnzorg.nl/ https://usa-girls.denieuwezorgverzekering.nl/ Thanks and welcome. I think some other objections raised and my responses in the comments can help illuminate things further, where I show my discussion from another site. I think that showing some evidence to back this up would be a good post and I will do one. There is one paper that correlates attractiveness in men and women with number of sex partners and whether they’ve had quick sex or in sex-only relationships. There’s a correlation that supports what I’m saying here. See tables 2 and 3: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19485565.2011.615172#.Uc5sZ_mkpd4 Other studies that show some men with really high N doesn’t talk about how attractive they are but it shows that some men are “cleaning up.” The super athlete players like Wilt Chamberlain and rockstars that have slept with thousands show that society has changed. I think casanova only slept with slightly over 100. I think if we could show the difference in number of sex partners between now and the past we’d see a big rise. We’d be left to infer that the men chosen more for casual had some attributes that would have signified better genes or value in the prehistoric environment (not that they necessarily are better or are fit for today’s environment). Just the fact that women are having more casual proves that in safe/rich environments they want it somewhat more. They could have collectively held firm and not started putting out and men would have continued to marry them like before. But women, through a combination of wanting it and giving into men’s pressures, started having more casual sex.