Veux que dating camilla history belle men
It’s common knowledge that most guys would rather not… consider their girlfriends’ sexual histories in any great detail. It’s a little much, that’s all. There was the cheesy nightclub owner — that much you know. There was one who looked like The Situation. She was younger. Whatever. It’s gross. Don’t think about it.
Given that the very idea that a girl should even have a “sexual history” is pretty recent, historically speaking (we have to imagine that the “experiences that made me who I am” line went over far less well in medieval Saxony), we can conclude that this sort of retroactive jealousy is a strong force. It’s behind a lot of taboos, a lot of rituals (the broken wine glass of Jewish wedding fame being among the more disliked by hotel janitors, for instance). It’s pretty widespread.
What we don’t see as much of, however, is the opposite. Though women, in our experience, are pretty fond (three margaritas in) of the whole “how come if a girl sleeps around she’s a slut but if a guy does it he’s a player*” thing, the question of past promiscuity on their man’s part doesn’t usually seem to bother them to any great degree. It’s not as visceral. It’s a side-eye, a shake of the head, a peccadillo. It doesn’t keep them up at night.
This is why we have to wonder about this whole Camilla Belle/Tim Tebow thing. AskMen’s No. 65 woman of 2012 seems to currently be dating the famously virginal (is “virgin” not a strange word to use for guys? Why don’t we just talk about Tim Tebow’s "maidenhead"?) Jets QB. Her previous squeeze, of course, was the inexplicably nicknamed DJ Danger, aka Joe Jonas, another committed Christian and another outspoken member of the Never-Done-Its.
Now, we have our own reservations about extreme public religiosity among celebrities. Camels and needles, bread and circuses — it’s not hard to be suspicious. We’ll let that lie, however, for the purposes of this discussion, save to note that — outside of her dating choices — Ms. Belle has never made any great show of orthodox belief.
This is what has us wondering. Is there something we are missing here? Is there any other context outside of extreme religiosity in which male virginity is highly valued? Because we’ve never seen it. Despite the modern desire for all sexual behaviors to neatly traverse the gender line, women just don’t seem as bothered by their guys’ pasts as we do theirs. In our experience, the phrase “male virginity” makes them think of other phrases, phrases like “it happens to every guy,” “no…no... not quite” and “why aren’t you moving?” It doesn’t seem like a plus.
So what are we missing? Is this going to become a thing? Is Camilla Belle at the vanguard of some new, virginity-requiring movement?
If so just let us know. We still have an old copy of World of Warcraft in the basement, and a pile of old conspiracy magazines from the ‘90s. As far as virginity goes, well, we think we can get it back.
* There is an explanation to this. It’s not some sort of impossible ‘70s koan. Here goes: Generally speaking, it is somewhat hard for men to have sex with women, and easy for women to have sex with men. That’s why the former is associated with achievement, and the latter with none. Excepting rock stars or whatever, most men face at least some resistance, you know, en route, and must handle their game and present attractive qualities. Excepting very severe cases of… aesthetic failure, women encounter little to no resistance, and must simply remain in the room. That’s why we use the words that we do for these scenarios.