What Is Wrong With Being A Slut

What Is Wrong With Being A Slut [+ favourites]

Honestly. I really dont se anything that wrong with it.

"Wht cry for those that often cry? Instead, help them smile, and smile for those that smile."

True if you want to be doing that alot well no one is about to stop you.

"Fear nothing for fear is the mind killer."

I think it is mainly a problem when your girlfriend wants to be one.

I think the reasoning behind the choice is of more importance.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Why is it that when a male sleeps around - he is known as a "stud", conversly when a female sleeps around - she is known as a "slut" ?! Can anyone say Double-standard?

And, why is it when a guy ALWAYS seeks the virgin-slut? THey want the ultimate girl who will be honourable, virgin-like, and reject any male offers and be a total slut when it comes to a 3some with another girl?

"Don't tell me there is only black and white."

Digital_Kitten, to comment on your first question, maybe it's because males can actually cause more offspring a day than a female. Maybe the stud is doing what all males are supposed to do, purely seen from an evolutionary perspective. Plus, when a male has that much access to multiply, perhaps his peers will see having him as a friend or the like, as a advantage when it comes to meeting more females that swarm towards his studness. The more seeds sewn, the bigger the harvest, right?

And why a guy always seeks a virgin slut? Well, I'd have to guess this one too. I'd say that a virgin is usually young, thus considered fertile. Also, being considered a 'slut' could be meaning that male have 'easy access' to this female. Not to mention the possible mating advantages and consequences of a threesome!

"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives you the test first, and the lesson afterwards."

Atlantis5 - thank you for your bio-evolutionary inspired response. Although, it's a predominant explanation for why men are held in higher esteem than women when it comes to socially accepted behavior in regards to sex - I really hate to believe that THAT is a reason to accept it.

"Maybe the stud is doing what all males are supposed to do, purely seen from an evolutionary perspective."

See, I find that to be an interesting statement. Is that because males are "suppose" to, because they can't help it (i.e. biological) ... or is it a socially prescribed phenomenon from society itself (i.e. it's an idea that is taught from society from our parents, to our peers, to media)?

Just like marriage... people are conditioned to think that they are suppose to get married at a certain age, or else they are stigmatized as losers because they haven't found a partner yet?

Or, another stigmatized idea of old age. Those socially prescribed ideas are not biological, but cultural and social. For example, in the WEstern society, old age is seen as something that is negative and when that happens... no one wants to have anything to do with you. Worse yet, you're suppose to only associate with your own kind and be locked up in a old house. And, you can argue that biologically the older people get, the worse off they are because things are being taken away from them (e.g. their health), ect. Conversely, in other cultures like India, Japan, and other Asian countries and Europe - old age is celebrated. People who are older are reverred and highly esteemed for their knowledge and experience and celebrated. They are given tons of respect because of their achievements in life.

I guess my point is that, given something that happens, it's not always cool to just say... "It's okay, because biology dictates it". Sometimes, when things aren't fair... and people are being judged negatively because of their gender, age, sex, what have you - it's important to think twice about whether it's trully okay because it's nature, or is it because it's a cultural thing. Know what I mean? Sometimes, culture isn't nice or fair. It just is, becuase it's "cool". It's cool to spend money, it's cool to be popular, it's cool to be mean... etc. But, really... is that survival of the fittest, or is it survival of the followers?

"Don't tell me there is only black and white."

Amen, DIgital Kitten. You bring up reasonable points. It does seem like Atlantis' explanation is just an evolved form of Victorian Social Darwinism (refer to 19th century history about this people.)

Hm, maybe because I'm the minority as a female, but the evolutionary explanation of spreading the seed seems to be an excuse to justify male behavior. Maybe if you explained the concept a bit more. When you explain it, it seems like a guy wants bundles of babies and/or increase his standing among males by marking as many women as he can with his seed. I can understand the second part, but not the first part. If we lived during a more agricultural era, it would make sense, but the desire to procreate doesn't seem that high anymore.

"How can we be just in a world without mercy and merciful in a world without justice?"

Attolia - thanx. I agree with you as well. Not because you're a girl, but you use the utilitarian view in regards to the biological perspective.

If they think that there is a reason to being a male-slut because in the past, it made a lot of functional sense... it certainly doesn't apply to the society of today and it's usefulness has run out! Being a male slut should arguably be a distatesful thing because no woman can stand a disloyal man who can't provide and stay around to "functionally" provide for his off-spring by being responsible and getting a job. How is a child possibly going to survive without any support?! His so-called lineage should then be weeded off by himself.

Again, I think I'm trying to point out that now that everyone is equal in the economic sense, social sense, and in every other way - people should not be judged and seen more negatively because of their gender. So, if that's the case - that's out right prejudice based on gender and nothing else.

"Don't tell me there is only black and white."

Thank you for your reactions. I'd like to add some new material.

Power. Control. Libido. Three basic and primary drives of many, many men and perhaps the most primitive urges in the center of the core of a male mind. Do not get me wrong; I am not trying to justify selfish and perhaps even anti-social behavior of the men you label as 'male-sluts'. It would not be ethical to justify each act of man as biological, thus unexorable. It is one of the rules of evolution. I agree with you on this.

The world we live in today is not the one we (as a species) once roamed with sticks and stones. It appears we have come to a point where we think we have the option to discard our nature and form another as we see fit or appropriate. Society this day does not work the way it once did, as far as society goes, and having many offspring with different partners can create multiple problems in -for example- financial, emotional and social areas. The functional part of having many offspring has indeed lost its value to many of 'us'. But sleeping with a girl, in many cases, does not incline mating to the point where conception sets in.

Perhaps the reasons are indeed social and an indirect form of classical social conditioning or reinforcement. Being seen as a stud might indicate a good chance of succeeding in the goal of life - hence the male social reward of success in that area and making it perhaps an even more pleasurable experience - both during and afterwards.

With this said, and my previous post, I am merely trying to think with and offer you an explanation without regard to personal reasons for their behaviour these males might have. You may both (Digital_Kitten and Attolia) be biased in some way, since you obviously have placed a negative value to this matter and this may alter your ability to look at your own species from a more unbiased, neutral and scientific point of view. Wasn't good and bad merely a way of human catagorization?

So as far as I am concerned, there is a cooperation of both genetic and social factors at work here. Let me know what you think.

"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives you the test first, and the lesson afterwards."

Let me clear the fog a little.

Just like the 'world' the 'woman' is like a 'womb'. All these words mean the same thing; like mother earth. A lady is like the comfort zone; like nature. And to be a man is not about proving something to anyone; its about having having dreams and fun and having the confidence to project your dreams into the future and make them reality.

Ladies are like reatreats, like a base of love, which free birds go to. They give and rejuvinate the man and the man repays by giving her a new dream to live in. This is the way of the world, like mother nature bears its children to help it self sustain, so we pay her back by creating the new. A man is not a person without a backbone or someone who gets angry. He is contempt and purposive. Problems only come about, in truth, because of the lack of such men.

""No words""

Atlantis 5 - I applaud your efforts toward a more succinct explanation of your views. I am pleasantly surprized that you are open-minded in that you acknowledge other ways of explanation as well as your original stance. I also agree with you that the reason things are they way the are (i.e. the social status quo) is a result of a culmination of social, biological, and classically conditioned ideas from the past.

Personally, I don't disagree with the bio-evolutionary perspective in its interpretation of the past roles males have played... what I do disagree with is taking an extreme point of view on human behavior and attributing EVERYTHING to that. Because I think our behavior is complex enough to be explained by more than one factor.

"Don't tell me there is only black and white."

So it's down to the nature-nurture conflict. Where do we draw the line? If a boy grows up in a household where the father has several affairs compatred to a boy who lives with gay parents, would they both have the same libido? So is it nature...or nurture? Who's to say which one is better?

HeyJme, you chose to define men and women by their reproductive organs, man as the giver, woman as the acceptor. Some feminists are against this concept because this goes behind domestic abuse and rape. You talk about an ideal man and ideal women in a society of ideals and non-ideals. If a woman chose not to be the "base of love," would you label her as abnormal?

"How can we be just in a world without mercy and merciful in a world without justice?"

"Why is it that when a male sleeps around - he is known as a "stud", conversly when a female sleeps around - she is known as a "slut" ?! Can anyone say Double-standard?"

D-K- It seems that when I read this you are more interested in gettign your point across, in venting your feelings, then getting to the point. Because although you did pose a qeustion that spawned better qeustions, I dont think you did this on purpous. I feel, and I could be very very wrong about this, that it was an accident what you did. The only reason why I am saying something is because it annoys me when I am tlaking to someone in real life and they do this, and what I would want more than anything is for them to notice that they are doing, understand why its retarded, and then stop it.

Stop it. please.

"And, why is it when a guy ALWAYS seeks the virgin-slut? THey want the ultimate girl who will be honourable, virgin-like, and reject any male offers and be a total slut when it comes to a 3some with another girl?"

This is something else that annloys me. You just said the word always in reference to character and personality in a general populous, the male gender. There could be no more of a prejudice remark to make. You assume that just because you have experienced something once or twice that is similar in deffierent elements, then if those two elements come in to the eqaution again, that the experience will be the same. This is so far fromt he truth that it is so obvious that it requires no more explanation, and if you cant see where I am going with this, if I guided you through it step by step (something I dont have the energy for right now) you still wouldnt get it.

Again, please stop it.

Atlantis5- "Well, I'd have to guess this one too. I'd say that a virgin is usually young, thus considered fertile."

You are just looking too far into this one. Its really simple. A guy wants a virgin because he doesnt feel comfortable being sized up both figurativly and litterally. Its taht simple.

D-K- "Although, it's a predominant explanation for why men are held in higher esteem than women when it comes to socially accepted behavior in regards to sex -"

Unfurtunately you are under the impression that "men" are held in high esttem as far as their extreme activity goes in sexual relations. The only people that like active men, are active females. And it sthe same the other way around. Its just so happens to be that you see more of the sexually active side of the two parties, because sex sells and sweaters dont.

"Is that because males are "suppose" to, because they can't help it"

Im sorry but you're just wrong here. It is in a mans head that he needs to release himself, and it is genetically programmed for that release to be in a women. Funny that you balme society for the bad, when it is societies fault for the good. It is far more natural to have sex with as many mates as possible then just one, but the idea of love has grown so popular over the ages of civilizations growth (and I'm tlaking all the way back) that it is programmed in our heads by society to have one mate.

Attolia- "Hm, maybe because I'm the minority as a female, but the evolutionary explanation of spreading the seed seems to be an excuse to justify male behavior. Maybe if you explained the concept a bit more. When you explain it, it seems like a guy wants bundles of babies and/or increase his standing among males by marking as many women as he can with his seed. I can understand the second part, but not the first part. If we lived during a more agricultural era, it would make sense, but the desire to procreate doesn't seem that high anymore."

Thanks guys. We couldnt be farther off subject... We are talking about females here, not males.

HeyJme1- "Just like the 'world' the 'woman' is like a 'womb'. All these words mean the same thing"

....... Please quit it. please. Just please. Stop... Thank you.

And now that we have gone so far off track that we have forgot what we are talking about, even though it is clearly stated in the title, lets get back to why it is a problem for girls to be sluty, and not why it is ok for men to be.

Thanks.

"Wht cry for those that often cry? Instead, help them smile, and smile for those that smile."

What's wrong with being a slut? Everything. What we percieve to be slutty is a negative in every sense of the word. Being a slut implies that you are having sex with partners which you have little to no actual feelings for, yes? Humans are unique because of our capacity to have deep, influential feelings. Being a slut is a self inflicted wound upon our own feelings, this is why slutty people are "bad." Men are idolized for sluttyness because it promotes a warrior like status, women are scorned because they are not percieved as conquerers.

The main problem is that people automatically associate having multiple sexual partners with being a slut. This is not generally the case.

Humans seek meaning within every aspect of their life. When they choose to find no significant meaning in their sexual relations, they become a slut.

"I am Akba-Atatdia"

Thank you for an intelligent answer Wyote. But I dissagree a little. It isnt 'wrong" () Whats wrong with having sex just because it feels good? I mean, why do we eat expensive food that taste good? Do we need it? Arent we being selfish and gluttonis witht his? Those are very bad traits, yes? Its the same shoe with having sex. I know that we have the capability to feel great emotion, but we also have the capability to hate. Is it a shame we dont?

Do you see where Im going with this?

"Wht cry for those that often cry? Instead, help them smile, and smile for those that smile."