Country Living Series

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

The Death of Pretty

Recently my friend Enola Gay posted a wonderful essay on training her sons to be men. (Knowing her older son as I do, I can testify she and her husband are doing a wonderful job.)

We have no sons, but we have daughters… and the counterpart to training sons to be men is training daughters to be women.

I am the most fortunate woman in the world for having the husband that I do. Don is the ultimate head of our household, and as such he takes seriously his duty to train our girls to value their purity and treasure their virtue.

It’s funny. When our oldest daughter was a baby and I was facing the Great Unknown of raising children in a decadent society, I remember commenting to a friend, “If I can just get her through high school without her getting pregnant, I’ll consider that a success.” Oh the naïveté of that comment! Little did I realize just how much influence we could have on our daughters. As parents, we can do so much more than “merely” get our daughters through high school without getting pregnant. Instead, we can raise them to be virtuous and decent young women, someone any man would be proud to call “wife” some day.

There are many ways to guard the virtue of our daughters – not only guard it, but instill the values in our girls so they learn to guard their own virtue.

Dads. The presence of a father is the Number One way to raise girls with virtue. Girls raised with an involved father are far more likely to develop the (cough) self-esteem (I hate that phrase) necessary to see themselves as more than the sum of their body parts. Girls raised without a father are forever seeking male attention… and sadly, the easiest way to garner attention is by acting and dressing seductively.

Homeschooling. Deprived (ahem) of the example of skankily-dressed peers, girls (and boys) who are homeschooled are far more likely to retain the values of their parents. I find it amusing that this fact – homeschooled children are more like to retain the values of their parents – is somehow construed among some progressives as evil (go figure).

Feminism. I don’t know how it happened, but feminism has been changed from its original lofty intent (equality for women) into something dark and sinister. The old argument feminists used was that women should be valued for their brains, not their bodies. Okay, fine, that’s not such a bad goal. Our culture has embraced feminism with an almost rabid devotion – and what has happened as a result? Young women are dressing more abysmally than ever before, advertising their bodies and (presumably) hiding their brains.

I find it interesting how hostile feminists are to femininity. Last year I spoke to one of the founders of the Ladies Against Feminism site, and let me tell you, she had some stories to tell about the nasty-grams they get from feminists! The women who run this site had to go “undercover” to escape the threats – yes, threats – against their safety from rabid feminists who apparently want to eradicate the voice of anyone expressing a non-feminist viewpoint.

Pop culture. I don’t know about you, but I don’t see a lot of value in pop culture. It seems very few women can develop their talent for singing, acting, or other performance arts without descending into skankiness. What good is a pretty face and beautiful voice and attractive body if you act like a slut? I greatly admired Audrey Hepburn because she managed to combine gracious femininity and talent without the need to strip naked to prove her point. She was a true Lady.

One of the major “unintended consequences” of feminism in our society is its effect on men. Men no longer feel the biological need to defend and protect women. When women routinely dress like sluts, men want to bed them, not protect them. But when women dress modestly, even the most hardened male tends to show a little more respect.

Maybe that’s why I’m such a Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte fan. These women railed against the suppression of women in their day – but their characters did not lose their femininity despite that.

Anyway, all this was sparked by an interesting essay sent by a reader entitled The Death of Pretty by Pat Archbold. It distinguishes between the traditional views of “pretty” women vs. “hot” women. The original source, National Catholic Register, kindly gave me permission to reprint the essay here.

The Death of Pretty by Pat Archbold

This post is intended as a lament of sorts, a lament for something in the culture that is dying and may never been seen again.

Pretty, pretty is dying.

People will define pretty differently. For the purposes of this piece, I define pretty as a mutually enriching balanced combination of beauty and projected innocence.

Once upon a time, women wanted to project an innocence. I am not idealizing another age and I have no illusions about the virtues of our grandparents, concupiscence being what it is. But some things were different in the back then. First and foremost, many beautiful women, whatever the state of their souls, still wished to project a public innocence and virtue. And that combination of beauty and innocence is what I define as pretty.

By nature, generally when men see this combination in women it brings out their better qualities, their best in fact. That special combination of beauty and innocence, the pretty inspires men to protect and defend it.

Young women today do not seem to aspire to pretty, they prefer to be regarded as hot. Hotness is something altogether different. When women want to be hot instead of pretty, they must view themselves in a certain way and consequently men view them differently as well.

As I said, pretty inspires men’s nobler instincts to protect and defend. Pretty is cherished. Hotness, on the other hand, is a commodity. Its value is temporary and must be used. It is a consumable.

Nowhere is this pretty deficit more obvious than in our “stars,” the people we elevate as the “ideal.” The stars of the fifties surely suffered from the same sin as do stars of today. Stars of the fifties weren’t ideal but they pursued a public ideal different from today.

The merits of hotness over pretty is easy enough to understand, they made an entire musical about it. Who can forget how pretty Olivia Newton John was at the beginning of Grease. Beautiful and innocent. But her desire to be desired leads her to throw away all that is valuable in herself in the vain hopes of getting the attention of a boy. In the process, she destroys her innocence and thus destroys the pretty. What we are left with is hotness.

Hotness is a consumable. A consumable that consumes as it is consumed but brings no warmth.

Most girls don’t want to be pretty anymore even if they understand what it is. It is ironic that 40 years of women’s liberation has succeeded only in turning women into a commodity. Something to be used up and thrown out.

Of course men play a role in this as well, but women should know better and they once did. Once upon a time you would hear girls talk about kind of women men date and the kind they marry. You don’t hear things like that anymore.

But here is the real truth. Most men prefer pretty over hot. Even back in 6th grade I hated the “hot” Olivia Newton John and felt sorry for her that she had to debase herself in such a way. Still do.

Our problem is that society doesn’t value innocence anymore, real or imagined. Nobody aspires to innocence anymore. Nobody wants to be thought of as innocent, the good girl. They want to be hot, not pretty.

I still hope that pretty comes back, although I think it not likely any time soon. For every Taylor Swift, there are a hundred Megan Foxs, or Lindsay Lohans, or Miley Cyruses etc.

Girls, please, bring back the pretty.


  1. I have a three-year-old son. And a one-year-old daughter. They are not stepping foot into the public school system until they need taught something I can't teach: algebra. Maybe by then I will be able to teach it, but I'm not holding out a lot of hope.

    I do plan to block out as much of the slut culture as I can--for both of their sakes.

  2. When it comes down to it, I believe most men would rather marry pretty than hot. Excellent blog.

  3. Homeschooling vs. Public Schooling. I'm a liberal in most ways, and if I had young children I would homeschool. Our society (people from across the political spectrum) has screwed up public education so much that in most areas, it has become hopelessly inefficient at everything except teaching children poor behavior. The schools here are dismal, and a responsible parent would not consider allowing her child to attend.

    However, there are as many terrible homeschools as good ones. I know two homeschooling families here that do no schooling at all. The teenage daughter of one (high school age) when asked to subtract four from eighteen, needs to draw eighteen marks on a paper, cross out four, and count the answer. Counting change? Forget it. The sixth grade son can't write his last name. There are seven or eight kids all together, and they all fit the pattern. There don't seem to be disabilities, just a lack of exposure to the three Rs. The other family is better, but the children are still several years "below" what we assume is grade level in writing and mathematics. Then again, how many times do we hear that the National Spelling Bee Champion is homeschooled? Often. And look at the good job Patrice is doing with her girls. I would have loved to have such well-behaved, motivated, smart girls in my class! ("When in the course of human events...")

    Back when I was teaching, when I was told a homeschooled kid would be entering my (overcrowded) classroom, I was always on edge. Would I be getting a student who was on grade level? Above? Or a second grader who still did not know the alphabet letters and sounds, and wasn't able to recognize the numerals above three?

    And while I do not wish to start a long discussion, it IS my belief that the public schools have the responsibility to teach evolution, along with the "theory" of gravity, the "theory" that germs cause disease, the "theories" of matter and sub-atomic particles, and so on. Creationism and intelligent design should be taught in church and/or at home by parents who wish their children to learn it. It has no place in the public education system. Nobody is insisting (nor should they) that churches give evolution equal time. But a public education should deliver the best science has to offer.

    Of course nowadays, we have overcrowded classrooms teeming with students who are rude and disruptive. We have so many parents who don't insist their children do homework or show up at school on time, or refrain from cussing in the classroom. Sometimes we have teachers who are unprepared (and they should be fired). So probably not much Evolution is getting taught anyway.

  4. Great post, so wish more Mom's and Dads would understand that they still have the obligation to their Daughters to teach them what pretty really is. Too many parents are in fear their children won't like them, they won't be cool or hip. Children who are not taught at home will learn what pretty is by the garbage society tells them

  5. I am glad to find I am not the only person who dislikes Grease. I know a number of Christians who say its a great movie and then get embarrassed when I point out what the movie is really about - a girl giving up her values for a guy.
    J A H

  6. Heroditus Huxley,
    Do not sacrifice your poor children on the altar of public schools just because you are not good at algebra. There are tons of math programs and helps that will get you through it and even on to calculus (yuk!). There are even homeschool co-ops where they have classes for subjects such as science and math or English. But you have plenty of time to research this all. In the meantime, enjoy your little ones and they will be "homeschooled" every day just by being with you and watching and learning from you.

  7. Thank you! I have 2 daughters also and want the same for them. I never hear the phrase " Be a lady" anymore. I heard it plenty growing up. This reminded me how I need to teach my girls to be ladies not the other derogatory titles that are presented to them in our society.

  8. I was struck recently reading the scriptures where it says that women left their estate before men did, ie sexual behaviors are addressed in this passage...
    And I realized that I wanted to represent femininity to my generation. I know a lot of women who will only wear dresses or skirts as part of their Christian beliefs, but they will wear them with camouflage sweatshirts! To me that defeats the purpose of dressing differently from men. And so many who only wear skirts, do not look pretty at all.
    I decided to try wearing only skirts (they are all maxi length) for a bit and see how long I could go; I have not worn pants since! I love wearing dresses and skirts. But I will add a scarf or something pretty also as my goal to be feminine.
    I have also noticed that I am treated differently, especially by men. They will go out of their way to open doors for me, etc, and I sense a feeling of appreciation from them, as though seeing someone they are inspired to protect and help is appreciated.

    1. Just out of interest, how do you exercise wearing skirts? seems impractical in some instances.

  9. Beautifully stated! The world's imitation of God's beautiful creation is to reduce it down to it's lowest common denominator: lust. Sink down below intellect and spirit and appeal to the basest desires. Why not, since they are convinced they aren't worth anything anyway. WTG, pop culture!

    @Anonymous - that was probably as close as I've ever heard anyone come to admitting that public school is a religious institution. Well said.

  10. Dear Anonymous, please don't home school. Gravity is not a theory but evolution is a theory. Hence, the search for the missing link. And please don't confuse adaptation with evolution. The Darwin finches adapted to their environment, they did not evolve.

  11. I'm in my 60's and have been searching for 'pretty' a few years. Mention the words 'provide for and protect' and most gals run! It's a great way to save valuable time in my search for 'pretty'. Montana Guy

  12. Anonymous at 11:51 says: "...there are as many terrible homeschools as good ones." Is that so? I'm curious where you got that information. No doubt from some anti-homeschooling liberal group. They love to quote "facts and figures" which are anything BUT "factual." It's like going to the James Brady anti-gun group for honest facts and figures about gun ownership. They are a liberal-progressive organization, and if there's one thing you can be certain of, it's that you'll never get the truth from them!

    Fact is, sure, there are some terrible folks who homeschool and shouldn't. But those situations are few and far between. I have a close friend who worked for the CA Child Protective Services. From what he told me and what I've seen first hand, the vast majority of homeschoolers are doing an excellent job. Their children do far better in their age groups than children taught in public schools. I have no doubt that Patrice and Don have researched this. Why not ask them what the REAL facts and figures show concerning home-schooling? That is, if honesty is what you are truly seeking. --Fred in AZ

  13. This is simple. If you want to be treated like a nice girl then act like a nice girl, if you act otherwise you will probably be treated otherwise.

    In my opinion this whole problem comes back to the feminist movement wanting to have it's cake and eat it too. It is fine and dandy to say girls (used intentionally since we are mostly talking teens and early 20 somethings who lets be honest are girls) can do they want and dress provocatively, do whatever with whoever, etc all.They should be able to as it is their bodies and their lives. However everything in life has consequences.

    The issue is that for some reason girls (often) expect guys to still treat them respectfully which is just not going to happen. A girl who dresses slutty and parties too much, maybe fooling around with semi random guys or whatever but thinks that guys are going to value her and consider her for a serious long term relationship is kidding herself.

    I remember a conversation I was a bystandard for way back in college. A girl told a buddy of mine that she could probably set him up to go on a date with another female acquaintance. My buddy replied with something to the effect of "A date with her, are you kidding. I am interested in 'hooking up with her' but not dating." My acquaintance treated her like she asked, as a girl who lived a bit wildly and sometimes fooled around with semi random guys.

    I don't have a daughter. However we are planning to have another child there is about a 50% chance it will be a girl. If that is the case I hope we can teach her to value herself. I know how I hope she behaves but at a minimum I would like her to ask (through her behavior) for what she is looking for from guys. Also I would like her to not be a stripper. Keeping boys out of jail and girls off the pole (stripping) is our minimum goal for parenting.

  14. I am a seventy three old gentleman who some years back, happened to open the door for a woman in her early thirties. She proceeded to dress me down royally for supposing that she needed the assistance of any man. When her tirade was finished, I told her that I had noticed that she was wearing a dress and in my upbringing, ladies wore dresses. I told her that I had been trained by my mother years ago to regard all females who had the appearance of being ladies as such until they proved otherwise. I said I am sorry I had made such a mistake and my mother was one hundred percent right. Harold

    1. Ha ha, Harold!! Good for you. I don't care what feminism has taught; to rail against a gentleman for an act of courtesy is rude bordering on cruel.

      My compliments to you. At least you were the bigger person.

      - Patrice

    2. While I have no problem with common courtesy and will myself hold doors open for people, it's absurd when people decry feminism for getting rid of chivalry- feminism has done infinitely more for the world than chivalry ever could.

    3. There's authentic feminism and then there's radical feminism.

      Authentic feminism seeks to explore the beautiful gifts that women have and how they compliment masculinity, especially in family environments. Radical feminism seeks to force a woman's will (whatever that may be) over others, be it the baby in her womb, her boyfriend/husband, etc.

      Authentic feminism is constructive, Radical feminism is destructive.

      Authentic feminism realizes that having a masculine partner brings out the best of her femininity. Radical feminism thinks that anything masculine is wrong, that men should be more feminine, and women should be more masculine.

      Which of these do you espouse?

    4. Your definition of radical feminism is not feminism at all but misandry.
      I believe people of either gender should act as masculine or feminine as they want as this does not affect me.

  15. Miraculously, my parents have managed to raise me to be "decent" (whatever that's supposed to mean) without drastically limiting my life experience. I retained my virginity through high school not out of fear of damnation but because I felt I wasn't ready, if I was it's important that I was fully informed on contraception so I could make the decision safely. There is absolutely nothing wrong with extra-marital sex and it's a dangerous lie to try and tell children.

    1. You say that there's "absolutely nothing wrong with extra-marital sex and it's a dangerous lie to try and tell children."

      First and foremost, the use of "absolutely" is strong and suggests that there truly are zero undesired consequences that come out of extra-marital sex. Tell me, is abortion wrong? How about all of the women that seek to have over 1,000,000 (that's over a MILLION) abortions PER YEAR because "their contraception failed". They felt they could have sex with a man, but they didn't want to raise a child with that man, even though they completely understand where babies come from and how they are conceived.

      Tell me, is abortion safe? We see time and time again that it's not. On top of the obvious murder of an innocent baby, which is horrific enough, the mother that has an abortion comes out physically and emotionally damaged... and that's if she's fortunate enough to come out alive!

      Let's say a woman has extra-marital sex, gets pregnant, and keeps the baby. Where's dad in this? Is he married to her with vows that he will stay with her, in good times and bad, 'till death do them part? Chances are he skips town and doesn't want anything to do the with child because he "didn't ask for this". He, like the woman, wants the selfish pleasures of sex but none of the responsibility.

      Best case scenario, let's say he sticks around. Maybe the couple even gets married. That's a noble thing to do for the sake of the child, but how many people enter in to such marriages. Is it not better to enter into marriage with somebody you love, whom you want to have children with, who shares your values and goals... having all of that in place BEFORE you have children rather than being "forced" into marriage?

      I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. These undesireable outcomes all take place as a result of extra-marital sex. Where we can safely say with an absolute is this... there is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with waiting until you get married before entering into sexual relations... and the beauty that will be there as the couple bonds to each other INSIDE MARRIAGE... and being open to new life. That's a beautiful, even heroic, ideal outcome that needs to find itself more commonly in today's society.

      I'd like to know what you think is so "dangerous" about this ideal relationship? For those of us that hold to these values and these ideals, exactly what is the "lie" that we're perpetuating?

    2. On the contrary, extra-marital sex has caused countless problems, many of them in my own family, and no, I have not retained my virginity this long out of fear of damnation. I did it to honor God and the body that he has given me to take care of while on earth. The so-called 'health' benefits of sex can only go so far, as in PUTTING IT IN PROPER CONTEXT!

      You need to read up on the drug-like affects that sex has and how multiple partners can screw up a girl's ability (and to a lesser extent a boy's) to form life-long bonds. I have a cousin who's a class A example of it, and she's just one of countless girls my age who are living proof. That 'dangerous lie' I was told by my own mother saved me a great deal of heartache at a time when my hormones were trying to do the talking for me. It doesn't stop when you get out of high school or college either. I'm STILL dealing with it, but I'm not in the best position to deal with the consequences, not to mention the pill is out of the question for me because of a condition that I've inherited (gee, in this day and age, that would put me at a REAL disadvantage because, you know, the guys can't get the milk for free from me). My cousin used the pill as an excuse and tried to coerce me into agreeing to taking it. It's almost as if she wants to bring me down with her because she was ashamed, yes, ASHAMED of herself (and we are in our late twenties!). Its the same stupid thing I've seen played out over and over and over again! Liberalized girls never seem to learn, yet if you tell them about your own inspiration for saving yourself, you end up being the closed-minded sheltered one (Ha! If only they knew me!)

      Life experience doesn't have to include sexual experimentation, in fact, its best to RUN FROM IT! I've seen far more than I care to see and wish that it could still remain a mystery. Sadly, there's only one thing left of me that I can consider 'virgin' now. I don't wish to turn into my cousin who has blinders on to the reasons why her love life is a mess and can't find a proper husband. She's a very fickle 'in the moment' sort of person who can't look ahead. That's how she ended up playing 'wife' for a boyfriend who could not care less for anything she did for him (she read this book about love languages and claimed that they just didn't understand each other's language. He was verbal and physical, while she was the type that would do things for you. UM, HELLO? HE KNEW HER LANGUAGE, HE JUST DIDN'T CARE BECAUSE HE WAS GETTING FREE SEX!). She ignored the fact that his family had a terrible dynamic too, all because of the, and I quote, wonderful 'BANGING' they did, even AFTER they officially broke up and weren't living together. Yet, when she tried to visit friends in the area after moving away, he promised to pick her up at the airport AND THEN NEVER SHOWED UP. He never even acknowledged her phone calls or provided any explanation. Well, I've got an explanation for you: he wasn't getting the milk for free anymore!

      (to be continued...)


    3. (continued...)

      My cousin has also recently acquired a stalker who, while I was visiting and sleeping in her bed, came to her apartment without notice and tried to wake me up because he thought I was her. Scared the living daylights out of me! He later sat in the bathroom for an hour WATCHING my cousin get ready for work! From what I understand, they had a very short, non-serious relationship, at least on my cousin's end. The guy didn't get the message, and I bet you more than anything that sex was involved. These are just TWO incidents I've experienced with her. She was also going to try to set me up on a bunch of dates (online) back when I was still considering moving to the area for a job. I guess she thinks that becoming a dating fiend like her was going to up my chances of finding someone, as if it worked out for her.

      I just don't understand people like you. I regular sites that have masses of liberal brainwashed teenagers spewing the same drivel, because, you know, as long as they're happy, what's the HARM? Apparently, life has yet to beat you or those snot-nosed brats down enough yet, so its easy to think that sex has no consequence going beyond that mythical 'daddy in the sky' striking you dead story. In truth, sex is subtle in its destruction. I have no idea where the old sweet version of my cousin has gone (my mom used to say she didn't have a mean bone in her body), and I would do anything to have her back, even if it meant going back in time and putting a friggin' chastity belt on her.

      I realize that you're just a troll, but this is a VERY sensitive subject for me. I can provide other reasons why I think your attitude is totally wrong, but it would involve some extremely personal information that I've yet to even share with my own family. I'm still coming to grips with what was done. I'll just say, it had a devastating effect on my view on sexuality, and amazingly enough, I didn't have to sleep with anybody to feel the affects.

      I guess you would just tell this poor ignorant girl to stuff it and open her legs. As for being ready, NO ONE IS EVER READY. And those precious pills of yours won't make the decision any safer. Honestly, I hope there's still some mystery left to it when I finally marry, otherwise its just going to be a monumental waste of time having sex AT ALL.

      Okay, I'll shut up now. Apologies to Mrs. Lewis for the feeding.


    4. By extra-marital sex I don't mean sleeping with random strangers, though I wouldn't judge anybody who does do. Also, people will probably hate me for saying this but I believe that if you were coerced into sex/didn't enjoy it/feel it was a mistake you are fully within your rights to consider yourself a virgin as it is a personal notion.

    5. Heidi said: "By extra-marital sex I don't mean sleeping with random strangers, though I wouldn't judge anybody who does do."

      Oh my! Is there anything that you feel so strongly about that isn't followed with a statement of non-judgemental appeasement? You're spouting the classic "I'm personally opposed, but... " line in so many terms. Do you always walk the fence on matters? Is anything sacred in your book (other than contraception)?

      Surely you can see the relativistic approach you're taking on so many serious matters. I'm paraphrasing you with these statements: "I wouldn't have an abortion, but I don't think woman should be denied an abortion if they want it" and "I don't sleep with random strangers, but it's OK if somebody else does."

      What if we were talking about slavery in this country? Would that also be OK if somebody wanted to have slaves? You may not personally want to own any, but is it OK if others do?

      How about obeying laws? What if somebody wants what another has... are they allowed to steal? What if they have to kill to get what they want?

      Again from the 'sexual freedom' front, should people be allowed to have sex with anybody they want? At what point is a line drawn and how do you determine where that line should be?

      At what point do you realize the relativistic talking points you share are 1) void of any strength and 2) dangerous when everybody holds their own relativisit views. To clarify, a relativist has a "do whatever you want" mentality with "right vs. wrong" system being completely decided by themself... typically with a litmus test of "If it feels good, it must be right".

    6. Heidi M Maybe you were a virgin in high school cause your ugly and no body wanted to have sex with you and your not very nice!!!! Wow people drive me crazy sometimes. I need Spring now.
      Dawn (PA)

    7. "true failthful catholic" - your points are completely different issues as they involve harming someone else.
      anonymous - very intelligent comment, believe me, I could have gotten plenty of sex but in any case I do not base my self esteem on whether guys want to have sex with me. "Your ugly" is not a very good insult and adds nothing of any worth to the discussion - I can't control how I look and it says nothing about my personality. Such a comment says more about the shallowness of whoever said it. Also, I'm usually not pedantic about grammar but the utter spite in your comment has brought out the worst in me so I must point out *you're.

    8. Heidi, you claim that my points are "completely different issues" because "they involve harming someone else." How sad it is that you don't see that abortion DOES hurt somebody else... specifically the little boy or girl in the mother's womb.

      Before the abortion... he/she is alive. After the abortion, he/she is dead. I'm pretty certain that somebody that has gone from living to death has had something very harmful happen to them. I'm pretty sure that when the baby's limbs are ripped off and the skull crushed... it was painful.

      Can you imagine/comprehend just exactly what is taking place during an abortion?

    9. That really depends, it has been scientifically proven that first trimester abortions do not cause pain to the foetus, though I wouldn't advocate late term abortions unless in extreme circumstances.

    10. Also, if proper contraceptive precautions are taken, abortion won't even be an issue.

  16. The type of man attracted to you will depend upon the kind of person you are. Be a loose woman who freely gives away her virtue and the man who's attracted to you will want your freebies and nothing more. Be a woman who knows her value and waits for a good man who will be kind to her, will protect her, and want a life-long relationship with her, and you will attract THAT kind of man. Your choice.

    My stepdaughter (20) was taught by her mother that sex was something she could do with whomever with impunity. She's had three abortions by her own admission. She joined the Navy and is surrounded by men, most of whom know what kind of woman she is and will have nothing to do with her. She is miserable and angry. She does not - since about the 8th grade that I've seen - value herself. There are consequences to every action and I hope that she changes her ways because I fear that her future will be as miserable as her present is.

    1. Her mother clearly didn't adequately advise her on contraception. It's a mark of disrespect on the part of these men that they ignore her due to her previous sexual choices as this has no bearing on her value as a friend. It's a little sad that only women seem to be condemned for promiscuity. Men who are overly concerned about a partners past experiences are generally very insecure, and have often a similar sexual history.