>>82565959
>how do you know what your future husband would think if you haven't even met him yet?
Well, let's look at the logical set of options here.
>man wants virgin, isn't one: bad
>man doesn't care: good
>man wants virgin, is one: good
Why risk it?
There's the slim possibility of >man doesn't want virgin
But if you're set on marrying that guy you can just ask him "so do you want me to sleep with someone else first or what".
But you can't unfuck someone.
>why are your morals based on an external factor? That's weird
Western morals are based off Christian morals, full stop. It's not inherent to humanity, see the preponderance of scams, lying, theft, and etc. in China, India, and add rape and murder for Africa.
>but anon, all people commit crimes!
In China and India it's culturally accepted and encouraged. If you fall for a scam it's your fault and you deserve to be made fun of.
If you want to go further, much data has gone into pair bonding research, and the simple fact is that those the lower the number of partners, the more successful the marriage.
Since her entire post was about "my future husband", obviously she would care about such a thing.
Since you don't realize those very basic points, you should really dive into academic literature, basic philosophy, ANYTHING to expand your knowledge base.
