Once a slut, always a slut?

[Sanman]

Social conditioning that is no longer necessary. You are sighting a value that began when women could not support themselves. Keep going back through our history you will find that women use to not disclose who the father was to their offspring because they would then only receive aid for their kid from one man rather than all in the tribe. Things changed didn't they. Things can change now too. But men don't want to give up the advantage afforded them by the double standard because it isn't logical or factual but is to their benefit for it being an easier and more physically gratifying way to roll.

 

 

Actually, I stated that it was the historical antecedent to such thinking. You cut my statement. This is the other side of the 'Why should men pay for dates' issue. Many women still want to know that a man can provide for them in the same way that men want to know that know that they are not seeing a 'promiscuous' or 'slutty' woman.

[sally4sara]

You didn't say it but you seem to think it was a good thing that nobody knew who the father was. Do we really want life to be like one big Maury Povich episode?

 

Speaking about the holocaust does not indicate someone idealizes Hitler.

 

Talking about our long ago tribal habits does not indicate someone idealizes tribal habits. You think I want to live in a cave too?

[sally4sara]

Why should men pay for dates?

 

They shouldn't whether the woman is a virgin or a prostitute unless they want to without return. You pay for the expenses of a child because they cannot. Do you date children?

[Woggle]

If I knew a woman would be faithful I wouldn't care if she slept with 100 men as long as she was disease free and used birth control but since sexual empowerment and infidelity tend to go together I advise men to be careful. Committing to the wrong woman can ruin a man's life and men should protect themselves anyway they can no matter how sexist un pc it might be.

[Sanman]

They shouldn't whether the woman is a virgin or a prostitute unless they want to without return. You pay for the expenses of a child because they cannot. Do you date children?

 

So, now you are equating any woman who chooses a traditional method of dating/courting to a child? I actually agree with you on the issue, but you have dug your own grave with those women.

[sally4sara]

If I knew a woman would be faithful I wouldn't care if she slept with 100 men as long as she was disease free and used birth control but since sexual empowerment and infidelity tend to go together I advise men to be careful. Committing to the wrong woman can ruin a man's life and men should protect themselves anyway they can no matter how sexist un pc it might be.

 

Committing to the wrong man can ruin a woman's life and women should protect themselves anyway they can no matter how much men float the belief that its okay for men to be promiscuous.

 

What is your point?

[Woggle]

Committing to the wrong man can ruin a woman's life and women should protect themselves anyway they can no matter how much men float the belief that its okay for men to be promiscuous.

 

What is your point?

 

I fully agree. I have no problem with women protecting themselves but don't judge men for doing so.

 

I still want to ask you if you think it is okay to ask a woman to be faithful.

[sally4sara]

So, now you are equating any woman who chooses a traditional method of dating/courting to a child? I actually agree with you on the issue, but you have dug your own grave with those women.

 

Who cares? They hold themselves back and make it that much harder for me and other women who do not wish for the life of a kept child to be credited as a fully capable person like any other fully capable person with no regard to gender.

[sally4sara]

I still want to ask you if you think it is okay to ask a woman to be faithful.

 

Why wouldn't it be? If you're being faithful and idealize a monogamous relationship, it isn't going to work if your partner isn't being monogamous and faithful as well. Which partner is male or female in that equation is a non factor.

[oldguy]

You're not having much luck with quote function, oldguy! Just highlight the part you want to quote and click the cream coloured speech bubble. That'll wrap the quote code around it.

Thank you, I'll try that.

 

 

I hope not! It was declassified more than 30 years ago. (checking) 1972. A friend of mine is gay, and was talking recently about his father's reaction when he came out. "We'll get you help, son. Private counselling. It's just a phase....we'll go the private route and get you sorted."

 

I think his dad had this idea that even though homosexuality is no longer regarded as a disorder, a therapist could be paid privately to treat it as one.

Yes, I've had people come to me who wanted me to, "cure" their son or daughter. I had very limited success opening the parents minds in family counselling. I was often frustrated because I was less successful helping children come to terms with their feelings because they where minors.

 

Yes. I can see that if somebody is promiscuous because they're lonely and looking for affection, it's probably going to exacerbate all the bad feelings underlying their problem. Like somebody who has been abused deciding "I'm inherently unlovable anyway, so I might as well just grab bits and pieces of affection where I can".

I try to explain promiscuity a "sometimes" symptom or red flag of a deeper issue but hesitate because people often extract what they like and believe I'm saying that behavior is itself a problem. And that is the furthest from what I believe. Mental health is a tough enough medium without the stereo-types & condemnation by some people that that prevents others from seeking help.

That was my initial reason for being here, to suggest to many here that they should consider seeking professional help. People will go to their doctor for an annual check up, to their dentist to get their teeth cleaned but few will ever see a counselor & when they do they would never admit it. It's sad.

 

Before I made my career switch, I worked with young people who had been abused and/or were outside of their parents' control. In some cases they didn't have parents. I think doing that kind of work makes you far more touchy about terms like "slut" and "damaged" being thrown around. You see the impact it has when you're trying to motivate young people to improve their lives and increase their self respect (and their personal happiness), when society's bombarding them with these "you're worthless....slut....damaged goods...." messages. It's a real uphill struggle.

I started out as substance abuse counselling which followed a natural progression to family counselling which turned into relationship counselling.

 

I understand that adolescents will always fling those terms at eachother, but it's discouraging when adults insist on doing it. One time, another member of staff boasted to me that she'd given one of the sexually active girls a real pep talk. "I told her...those boys just see you as a piece of meat. They've got no self respect for you at all. They're laughing at you."

 

As if that kind of humiliating "tough love" directed at a vulnerable young teenager going to achieve any more than to make her hate boys and men for a couple of days before descending into another bout of self destructive, drink-and-drug-fuelled behaviour.

That wasn't a wise course to take. I've seen many people who where molested as young children who ironically felt there sexuality was a means of control now. There was a very good biography called, "Loose Girl: A Memoir of Promiscuity" that chronicled the path of a young woman.

 

I don't blame you for making a career switch. It's a tough way to make a living sometimes. I assist in statistical research now

[sally4sara]

You cut my statement.

 

I cut your statement because I found it offensive to the wonderful gay men I've known. It seems you're hell bent on promoting that anyone female or gay male that is promiscuous needs to book an appointment with you ASAP.

[stepka]

I fully agree. I have no problem with women protecting themselves but don't judge men for doing so.

 

I still want to ask you if you think it is okay to ask a woman to be faithful.

 

Why wouldn't it be ok? The original purpose of this thread was to point to women who've had a run of fun and then stopped and realized that it was holding them back from having a real relationship where one presumes that they'll be faithful. I don't think that anyone here has defended the actions of an unfaithful partner, male or female, unless of course it's one of the rare situations where the couple both decided to have an open relationship and neither one is lying to the other and that would be a case of one of the partners changing the rules midstream.

[rafallus]

I fully agree. I have no problem with women protecting themselves but don't judge men for doing so.

 

I still want to ask you if you think it is okay to ask a woman to be faithful.

 

Nothing wrong with that. Just evaluate how good chance is that promise will be held. Even if there's none, doesn't mean woman is some sort of mentally ill trash (like some folks here quite willingly imply) - just don't commit to her.

[MrNate]

I don't understand.

 

So basically, it's ok for men to sleep around, but not women. And this is the main reason:

 

Because average men have a harder time getting action than the average woman. So a man needs to take advantage while a woman needs to show restraint.

----------

 

So, a few points to make here.

 

1. I think a good 99% of the resentment stems from jealousy. Yes, men have to work harder, and women have to work less, so what? It's not like men are helpless one bit. I'm curious as to how to the average number of men who actually try comes into play. (Let's be honest, this weighs quite a bit in the whole discussion no?) I think we would find the answer is quite heavy. Maybe, just maybe, the top 5% of men who get action are simply those who try while the other 95% (those associated with scraps) do get scraps because they don't.

 

Maybe the men who get angry are those who just sit there and idle by, not doing anything, while building anger and resentment at women who are getting action? (What did they do to you anyway?) Where does self accountability fit in? It is however, always easier to point the finger, than take the blame.

 

And the whole reformed slut idea.. What?? So what she played around then decided to settle down. I'm confident just as many men do it. Maybe if we dropped a lot of these labels, look as women as humans and not some type of power abusers, things would come along a lot easier.

[rafallus]

Hey, guess what? Didn't read past this.

Why? Can't handle the truth?

 

You are so blinded by your little anti slut crusade, it's really hard not to laugh at you. I'm failing that miserably.

1. I think a good 99% of the resentment stems from jealousy. Yes, men have to work harder, and women have to work less, so what? It's not like men are helpless one bit. I'm curious as to how to the average number of men who actually try comes into play. (Let's be honest, this weighs quite a bit in the whole discussion no?) I think we would find the answer is quite heavy. Maybe, just maybe, the top 5% of men who get action are simply those who try while the other 95% (those associated with scraps) do get scraps because they don't.

 

Maybe the men who get angry are those who just sit there and idle by, not doing anything, while building anger and resentment at women who are getting action? (What did they do to you anyway?) Where does self accountability fit in? It is however, always easier to point the finger, than take the blame.

Basically, this.

 

Many of the slut-haters actually secretly want those "sluts" to notice them and invite them into action. Except when it doesn't happen, they get all bitter and offended, calling those girls names. If anything, I side with "sluts" in that case.

 

I had a buddy like this - after he slept with a girl, he started calling her a slut. Unsurprisingly, he complains that he can't find "a good woman". But when he's about to get laid by so called "slut" - boy, he doesn't complain. Not at all.

Edited June 4, 2011 by rafallus

[sally4sara]

It is a summary of my own argument debunking the double-standard myth. The imaginary/inapposite "double standard" is brought up constantly in these forums when issues such as the thread topic are discussed. Double standards exist only when the two compared groups are similarly situated. For example, man and woman both making 100k go on a first date. Man is expected to pay for woman... all other things equal... double standard. Where judging men and women for their promiscuity is concerned, the genders are not similarly situated.

 

So again, a guy much less attractive than yourself shames you about having a ONS, he would be justified in calling you a slut, suggest you have a mental disorder, and warn others to not attempt a serious relationship with you? This, by your reasoning, would be proper because you have more opportunities than a much less attractive than yourself male. You would tell this guy that he was right for labeling you a slut, suspecting you of being BPD, and warning others off of you? You would ponder the way you've been living based on his assessment of you because you were being gluttonous by HIS standards even in not your own?

 

 

Will modify this one to state, "as Sanman alludes, promiscuity is significantly less correlated with disorder in men than women due to men acting out more via violence and women acting out more via sexual behavior."

 

This is largely due to society not finding male promiscuity to be unnatural. Why would you site something commonly heralded as normal to be a symptom of a mental disorder. Who says its common? Men. Who says its not common for women? Men. How convenient. Has anyone noticed since Freud Jr. started providing this excuse how many threads are up where some guy is pondering if their female partner has a mental disorder for:

 

not hanging on their BF's every word while they are on vacation for a weekend with family.

their GF taking/making texts while in their company.

questionable behavior that has nothing to do with promiscuity of any kind.

Oh but Sanman said! It so must be true! Is there a disorder for men who blame everything a woman does that isn't all about them in the way they would like on a mental disorder? Cuz we seem to have an epidemic on our hands. Thanks Sanman. Can you tell us next how womens' menstruation cycles make them incapable of thinking clearly?

Fine. And if that is the case, do men also hold in their bad treatment at the hands of promiscuous women more?creating an environment where the social costs of female promiscuity are underreported and underestimated?

 

What? Are you building your argument on stats even you suggest are not accurate?

That one came directly from -several- other threads on this board, recently and in the past, where many women admit to judging men as likely undesirable relationship partners for lack of sexual and relationship experience.

 

If women ARE less likely to be a good partner because of their sexual history is so promiscuous, then so are men who do the same. I've never taken issue with a chaste man wanting only chaste women to partner up with. I take issue with the double standard of expecting others to live up to a standard you can't, don't and even won't live up to yourself and then thinking you are deserving and compatible with a chaste female partner.

Or rather take two 30 y.o. online virgin daters, both dating others seeking long-term relationships, one male, one female, both volunteer on the first date that they are virgins. A small handful of men will not seek a second date with the woman, most won't care. Many women will not seek a second date with the man.

 

Or rather, could you claim with a straight face that the movie "40 Year Old Virgin" could have ever been made about a woman?

 

You realize this was a comedy movie and not real life? Never was intended to be taken seriously? Even if you did take it seriously, after seeing it, you believe that guy was a virgin at 40 because no women wanted a virgin? NO. He was awkward, uncomfortable to be around, lacked social ease. His being a virgin at 40 was a byproduct of that not because he was a virgin. What? You're a virgin because you're a virgin? Did you lose your virginity or didn't you?

 

Absolutely agree. I added that particular point not so much as a "deconstructor" but as a response to the doctrinaire feminist position that men have been sexually oppressing and repressing women.

 

Also, as pertains to the reasons why men avoid promiscuous women? The women in their lives -told- them to. Finally, I have never heard men sit around and "run down" tramps to the extent that I have heard women do it. Half the "girls" conversations I've been privy to or sat in on in life have consisted of listening to women -slam- other women for their sexual habits (always behind their backs of course)

 

 

 

Well, I made this point with two types of experience in mind.

 

1. Most men would have no problem voting for Hillary Clinton (assuming they agreed with her politics) merely due to Bill's history of promiscuity. I contend that many women would vote against a candidate, though, if say Paris Hilton was the prospective first lady, merely due to perceptions of Paris.

Men would vote for Hilary because Bill cheated? You are making me question the intelligence of men with that one.

 

2. Woman walks into a party with a known promiscuous man as a date. This will neither raise nor lower her social value in men's minds. OTOH, man walks into a party with a known promiscuous woman as a date? This will definitely lower his social value in many women's minds.

 

Earlier you said it would make him look better in their eyes because he isn't virginal. Make up your mind. And the only reason why a woman's partner being promiscuous doesn't change how men view her is because you tend to believe this is natural. And then you want to say you can be faithful in a relationship?

[Movingthrough]

It's plainly obvious that someone who admits to some combo of TEN different FWBs at any given time over a two year period pretty much has a mattress strapped to her back, and is sleeping around lots. Your quote above makes it seem somewhat that she only had sex ten times , and that's not at all what CG's post conveyed.

 

Anyway enough about that.

 

The answer is simple, and the scenario you premise on is not how things actually play out for men who arrive at a sceptical stance on this topic. The way it plays out is that men, as we gain experience with women, are eventually fooled by at least one woman (and if you are old like me, many women over decades) who represents herself as one way with us, while she is -simultaneously- another way with other men. You find out that the girl you just took out on a second date and got a demure kiss from slept with three guys you know last week, maybe even one the night before your date. While that same girl has portrayed herself to you as sexually conservative and seeking monogamy.

 

It's not some "life stage" that she did last year or ten years ago, as it is so often conveniently rationalized, we learn this harsh lesson while she is doing it. And if she -was- capable of that behavior then, she -is- still. There are women who are governed by rational thought... some... and there are others who are governed strictly by emotions and stay that way their entire lives. Those latter ones don't change... ever, and they are the ones who tend towards promiscuity due to whatever reasons. The best predictor of future individual behavior is past behavior.

 

She purposefully deceives the relationship -prospect- as to her character and attitudes while doing as she likes with the -non-prospects- whom she rightly figures aren't going to take her out, be nice to her, do things for her, and maybe most importantly don't represent emotional threat to her, but are still fun and supplies of attention, if only sexual. This -duplicity- is what pisses guys off, "Why am I, the good one, being penalized for my good behavior while others are -simultaneously- being rewarded for their nonchalant or even bad behavior? and moreover, what a conniving, self-serving bitch this one is!" Why should I court -this- "precious flower" when she's giving away the store for free... right now this minute?

 

And as you get even more experience, you end up in the other role (and if you are old like me, with many women), the guy getting a quick NSA BJ from a girl who mentions she has a date as she casually walks out the door WITH YOUR SEMEN IN HER MOUTH. Or it could play out that the -prospect- takes her out, feeds her a nice sexy meal, gets her buzzed, and because she wants to preserve some illusion with him, she calls ME over to sex her after and may even give details about her date!!:sick:

 

After a few cycles of this, or many, over decades, can you blame us for becoming somewhat immune to the "mystery of romance?" Somewhat judgmental about a woman's slatternly past, inured to women's pleas that their past shouldn't matter and that they have the right to change their character back and forth like a chameleon as their emotions dictate? Of course you have the right to do that, and we have the right to get you the F OUT!

 

We AREN'T STUPID. We do learn eventually. We know that if you are doing it -with- us, you are equally capable of doing it -to- us. It may take us 15-20 years to figure this out, but most of us other than the most abject chumps, DO figure it out eventually.

 

We know the score, and get used to it. It gets us laid more. Women in today's culture do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it, governed nearly entirely by emotions, with no accountability or moral compass whatsoever, and then backwards rationalize into "being a good person" despite that their character is entirely inconsistent, their treatment of the male "pawns" in their lives despicable and duplicitous, and their self-image merely a "puff-piece" of empty rationalizations.

 

We know the score, and if those to whom the above rant applies would just OWN UP, own it instead of the constant lies and deceit, we would come much closer to accepting you, mattress back and all.

 

While i know this post can hit a nerve with the ladies, this is something you see a lot on the boards, and something i hear a lot from friends. I think what he is trying to say is that men sometimes look at women as "saying" they are this and that but doing the opposite, there always seems to be some sort of justification. I have more then one story where a girl will be this great beautiful person in front of me, but is doing things behind my back and lieing straight to my face. I think the "anger" men have is that women will play it off as nothing, or that they justify it in some way. Literally three days ago i talked to a girl who cheated on her husband and on the hospital bed of their new baby, saw a baby come out of another race. Then she admitted she cheated with no remorse and said that the kid was the best that thing that happened to me, so basically putting it off as "well i got my kid out of it so who cares".

 

 

BUT BUT BUT.....guys are not innocent here. I think with most guys and the problem that girls have with them is that over abundance of this sexual energy. Look on the news and see all these high powered guys banging anything they can find while married, some while there wife is on their deathbed. So men do these things too, i think they do it usually a little more with just sex on their mind and trying to quench that sexual thirst. I can say that men have a huge sex drive and sometimes its hard to control, to me thats just genetics, we were put here to reproduce, but it doesnt make it right. The notion that men are pigs can be true, but think about it, its an OPEN thing that usually we cant even cover up if we try, men are bad cheaters and i that is one of the biggest complaints i have heard from women, guys know they want more in the bedroom but also want thier emotional needs filled, so they go and find someone to fill that. Its not right but most of the time they know that is run by sexual desires. Like i said, it doesnt make any of it right though.

 

My point is, the argument seems to be that men are "openly pigs" and only want sex, while men think women portray themselves as "doing nothing wrong" even though they are. Its like one has an open stereo type about being crappy, while the other can do the same thing and somehow justify it.

 

This is just what i seem to hear and read on a daily basis. Personally, i think we all need to take a step back and fix ourselves before a relationship of any sort.

[Stockalone]

Oh how I wish we had a rep button on here.

 

OK, got another question for the men. Two women available to you, and you must choose. Both of them adore you equally and both want a relationship with you and both are equally attractive. The first one loves and adores sex with you and has a bit of a colorful past, but has left that all behind, well before she met you. She's taken time off to work on herself and she's not in Sanskrit's "army." Warmhearted as they come and she loves sex--she'd be fine with every night--no less than every other night--with you.

 

The other one is practically virginal--maybe has had one partner in her life and he was long term. Trouble is, she just doesn't much care for sex. After a couple of years with her, your love life is whittled down to 1x/week and only so she can say you did. She loves you but treats sex as a chore.

 

So, which is it guys?

 

Like carhill, I'd take option three and remain single and celibate.

 

If I absolutely had to choose, I'd choose the second woman. Less sex is a price I'd be willing to pay for peace of mind.

 

 

Note: I'm mainly directing this towards the men who've said that they wouldn't consider having a relationship with a slut--not even a reformed one, and no matter what you guys believe, there are plenty of them--they're just not likely to share their history, and for good reason it seems to me.

 

I am curious now how far you are willing to take this. What else do you think women should be allowed to lie about?

 

What about having an affair, having another man's baby, would that be okay to lie about, too?

[stepka]

Like carhill, I'd take option three and remain single and celibate.

 

If I absolutely had to choose, I'd choose the second woman. Less sex is a price I'd be willing to pay for peace of mind.

 

I am curious now how far you are willing to take this. What else do you think women should be allowed to lie about?

 

What about having an affair, having another man's baby, would that be okay to lie about, too?

Fair enough, from both you and carhill as long as you're willing to live up to your own standards. I don't believe that anyone should be lying about anything and as I've told about my lying sack o' shyt sister, I esp hate lies. Still, if a girl has a history and she's left it all behind her and she meets a man and falls in love with him and over time realizes that he can't stand reformed hoes, I can understand why she would. As to whether she should? That's another answer. I don't believe that people should tell lies about things that might ultimately hurt someone like whether this is his baby, though again, that's a gray area b/c what about this scenario: a couple are married and they have a baby and 5 or 10 years later she starts to feel bad and tells him it's not his. . . uh, I think you can see where I'm going with this. Some truths might be better not spoken.

[stepka]

This was a 16 y.o. girl who told you this?

I remember the "back in the day" where even if their name was Rockefeller, they would have been dragged out of their mansion and lynched en masse. Guess we remember different.

 

Will just have to agree to disagree on this.

 

yes, we do remember differently, but perhaps it's the age diff? I'm 52 and no one was accusing any Catholic priests in those days either. I think the only way the family would have been lynched over this is if they had been dirt poor or of an objectionable race--for those days. God this is making me feel old.

[stepka]

"WELL I NEVER! HOW dare you use our friendship like that! We are JUST FRIENDS! Sanskrit, I see that mexican wrestling mask poking out of your pocket! You had this in mind all along!. HEY STOP LOOKING AT MY CHIHUAHUA LIKE THAT RIGHT THIS MINUTE. Is that a bacon strip attached to your zipper? I'm getting the spray bottle!"

 

men and women are plain different and differently situated.

 

Mommee! Sanskrit is petting my chihuahua!

[Stockalone]

I don't believe that people should tell lies about things that might ultimately hurt someone like whether this is his baby, though again, that's a gray area b/c what about this scenario: a couple are married and they have a baby and 5 or 10 years later she starts to feel bad and tells him it's not his. . . uh, I think you can see where I'm going with this. Some truths might be better not spoken.

 

Not at all.

[nordic]

Yes, this is also my understanding of men's thinking (although I will never understand why... although I suspect it has a lot to do with the male ego). It's totally and completely unfair to women. But that doesn't seem to factor in anywhere with you guys.

 

You might want to put a qualifier on the word "love", though - at least the way you're using it here. When you say "men love sluts", you really mean "men love to bang - and use - sluts to take care of their own sexual needs." That ain't love - at least in my book. But it appears to be in yours (and 99% of the male population's).

 

In any case, thank you for your honesty and putting it in writing. This is how most men I know IRL think.

 

yea, i meant what you wrote:)

 

you are welcome

[nordic]

Agreed. And this is precisely why our mothers and grandmothers are constantly telling us ladies: "Never give a man what he wants." Enter, stage right: Game-playing. It's all a game, the dance of love.

 

you have a smart mother.

 

today, though, mothers words weigh far less than an episode with sex and the city. lucky for us:)

[stepka]

Not at all.

 

OK, this came up on a Dr. Laura radio show one day. The poor man called in and said that his wife came to him one day when his daughter was 12 and informed him that she wanted a divorce and BTW, the girl was not his. He wasn't too sorry to see the pathetic wife go, but he hated like anything to lose the daughter and what should he do? The wife had him over a barrel b/c if he chose to not pay child support she would not let him see the girl--a child he loved dearly and had built a relationship with all those years. He had already chosen to continue paying child support and wanted to know if he should tell his dd. But when asked if he would have preferred to not know at that point, he admitted that he wished his ex had not told him and I agree that there are times when a truth is better withheld. Those times are rare though and I think it's a point of particular cruelty that the woman told him. If she had told him from the beginning it would have been much better b/c the man could have made an informed decision about whether to be a father to his "daughter."

 

You will not see me argue that some women are not just awful and that the things they do are often unjustifiable. Men and women hurt each other and it will always be that way, but it doesn't make it right but, sometimes they do manage to grow up.