IronMaiden Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 You know, this thread is like a train wreck. You don't WANT to look, but sometimes you just can't help yourself. Jersey, those quotes you answered were the most ridiculous things I've ever read. A guy screwing 20 women by age 20 is to be admired, but a gal doing the same is a slut? What are we, 12 years old? Haha! Sooo true! So, the original question was where and with whom do the 'sluts' hang out? Well, if you are going to be perjorative to one sex, lets be equal opportunity...." they hang out with MAN HO's"...OK? Do you qualify?
dispatch3d Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) Actually, liking sex and being a "slut" is the same thing for many men as shown in this thread. You men want it both ways. You want sexual wild cats in bed that cater to your every whim but how dare she indulge herself with other men before *you*. It's all ego talking. And that is why men try to tear women down and call them names for their sexual practices. Now, it's one think to not want a partner with a certain number of sexual partners. That's fine. But you cross a line from mere personal preference to outfight controlling women's sexuality when you put the any negatively sexual name towards women just because *you* don't like their choices. Get over your own ego. Men call women "sluts" to control their behavior. That's the ONLY reason it's done. You don't want a woman with a certain number or sexual partners? Fine. But when you cross that line and make the choice to refer to women in negative sexual names for how they live their life that has nothing to do with you, your showing your own insecurities. And as for your assertion that it's not right for men or women, well men don't get called names for sexually indulging themselves. Women do all the time. So lets not pretend that men are nearly as judged or called names for indulging themselves sexually. You want stand up girls that practice what you preach? Then you must practice it too. Ugg, whenever someone pulls this "men aren't programmed for monogomy" bullcrap I know that they've done absolutely no reading on human sexuality. Because if they did, they would know that human beings are programmed for both monogomy AND ploygogmy. That is why in the end, it is a *choice* you utimately make. We have reactions and hormones and emotions that indulge and feed needs for both one special partner and many partners. Men and women. So it will never be and never was a question of humans being *programed* for one thing over the other. When people make false claims that men or women are programed for one or the other, they are really jsut trying to support their own selfish desire. The scientific reality is we are programmed for both. Which means that either way you go, it is a choice. All in all, as a man, you give more sway to poor male behavior and the using of women and being sexually active then you give women. Justify it anyway you want, in the end it's a control mechnism applied by men to attempt to control female sexual behavior so you can limit your own competition which you think will give you a better option of scoring a woman. This is your own personal male insecurity speaking because you are ready to give men accolades by proclaiming a man accomplished becasue he slept with 20 women instead of giving men accolades for treating women with respect. Hi, So we are fighting on the same side. I agree that the word slut shouldn't even be in the dictionary and condemning women for sleeping with many men is counter-productive. That said, I still hold the view that the 20/20 question is COMPLETELY different when comparing men to women. 20/20 for a man is a pretty big feat and shows a lot of selection/abilities when a man does it (ie. he's very good with women). On the womens side it shows she has poor selection standards for who she sleeps with. This has everything to do with how men and women work and nothing to do with a lot of the stuff you are writing. I'm just saying my hormones are not feeding my need to have one partner for life. I don't believe you that men are programmed instinctually to want both one partner and many partners. Does not make sense. I know I want to bang all hot girls when I look at them. This doesn't mean I do it (I have a brain that can reason), but I know what my urges tell me to do and if I listened to them I'd screw everything. I'm not a women, but women tend to base a lot of things on guys staying power/ie. they will stick around in the event of a child/good provider/power/etc. etc. I tend to agree with everything/90% of what the other guy says as well. Odd but fun! I wouldn't say it's very easy for a women to get laid. It depends a lot on how hot you are. I have hot friends who get hit on by 10 guys/night (cause she takes photos of them and labels them "random #1"...bitch). If she chose to she could have sex with 10 guys/night 4 days a week 52 days a year. Obviously she has to perform some sort of selection where there are ALMOST NO GUYS who have a similar problem (ie. they don't have 10 girls who want to sleep with them EVERY NIGHT they go out). Another friend of mine gets hit on with similar frequency, double digits anytime she goes to the bar. Obviously she has to have a lot of selection or she would be sleeping with 5+ guys per week. Other girls don't have it as easy. That's the way the world is kind of and it likely sucks but there you go. Edited July 8, 2010 by dispatch3d
TheBigQuestion Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 A woman who doesn't allow herself to be controlled by the double standards attempting to be imposed by a so-called man who is bitter because he can't get laid? Considering that the usage of the word is not exclusively the domain of sexually frustrated guys by any means, this is clearly another pointless assumption fabricated by imagination rather than observance of reality.
donnamaybe Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 Considering that the usage of the word is not exclusively the domain of sexually frustrated guys by any means, this is clearly another pointless assumption fabricated by imagination rather than observance of reality. But wait - wasn't it you who said women can get laid alllll the time - any ol' time they want, while men have a hard time with it?
donnamaybe Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 That said, I still hold the view that the 20/20 question is COMPLETELY different when comparing men to women. 20/20 for a man is a pretty big feat and shows a lot of selection/abilities when a man does it (ie. he's very good with women). On the womens side it shows she has poor selection standards for who she sleeps with. And who's to say the man's sexual partners were of better standard than the woman's? Or are you just making that up? Since, from other posts in this thread, the men are of the mind that women can get laid any time they want, wouldn't it then follow that a man will stick is dick in any old hole that's offered? Seems to me, then, that it logically follows that the MEN in this case are the losers and not selective. NOT the women.
TheBigQuestion Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 But wait - wasn't it you who said women can get laid alllll the time - any ol' time they want, while men have a hard time with it? You must be confusing my post with someone else's. I don't think I said women can get it ANY time they want, or that it is advantageous for them to indulge in it or not. I said that they generally have far more opportunities than men do. Let this be my correction if I in fact did say the former at some point. Oddly enough, the guys I've known who are themselves promiscuous have been far more likely throw around sexually disparaging remarks about women they perceive as promiscuous. Hypocritical and dumb? Absolutely.
donnamaybe Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 You must be confusing my post with someone else's. I don't think I said women can get it ANY time they want, or that it is advantageous for them to indulge in it or not. I said that they generally have far more opportunities than men do. Let this be my correction if I in fact did say the former at some point. Okay, maybe you didn't use the exact words "any time they want," but you basically said what equates to that. In addition, you said a guy having had 20 women by age 20 was "an impressive feat" and that a woman doing the same was "not so impressive" and even went so far as to say it was "certainly not be respectable." Double standard. And I also maintain that if women are SO hard to get in the sack for men, then the men must not be very choosey who have had lots of women, and these "hard to get women" MUST be choosey. Only makes sense.
abouttoloseit Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 Just want to add my $0.2 My "number" is somewhat low compared to most. But fortunatley, Im a sexual freak and love exploring all kinds of messed up **** in the bed. Anyway, I have had 3 long term relationships. 1 was with a girl who had a very low number, she had no emmtional problems. No baggage, no history of abuse, no tantrums, mood swings etc...but she was just not for me. A bit...boring. My other two relationships were somewhat different. My second reltionship was with a girl who had been abandoned by her parents, at some point in her life. They were divorced. She had abusive step parents. She had a history of drug taking, weed, pills, ketamine and coke. She was diagnosed depressed and bi-polar. She was on medication. She had a number well into double figures. It didn't last very long. Third girl had an ever higher number. Don't ask how I found all this out, read my posts if you want info. This girl had been raped whilst young. Had been in hospital over her mental health. She had plenty of sex with lots of men and kept in touch with most of them, being best friends with one of her ex's. She was also on medication. This didn't last long either. The number doesn't really bother me TOO much as opposed to what a girlfriend does whilst with me. In my experience, I see a small pattern. But I will keep you updated on the next, should there be one.
Mary3 Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 Like I said in post # 122 of this nonsense thread where the title and the body of the original letter make no sense : An open attack on women. Nothing more. To incite # 188 responses to demean women. Sluts such a hatred of women to give them that title. OP shame on you. ------ # 122 : The title : " Do Sluts hang out with Sluts " ? Its nonsense gibberish. An open attack on women . To decode their sex lives and pass judgement on them. Its not like " Do birdlovers hangout with other birdlovers " Do you think that would get as many responses ? __________________ __________________
kdark Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Oh, your envy is showing. I had many conversations with my feminist ex girlfriend about the slut double standard, and this what we always came back to. The average man wishes he had the same power over women sexually as the average woman does over men. It has already been said, but the average girl can walk into any bar and get laid almost immediately if she wanted to. And don't lie to yourselves guys, the average guy cannot do the same. And so guys get jealous. And call the ones that do do that names. And even take it so far as to get much of the female gender to call those girls names as well. The over sexed men are idolized, while the over sexed women are vilified. It's a double standard, and it needs to end.
dispatch3d Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Okay, maybe you didn't use the exact words "any time they want," but you basically said what equates to that. In addition, you said a guy having had 20 women by age 20 was "an impressive feat" and that a woman doing the same was "not so impressive" and even went so far as to say it was "certainly not be respectable." Double standard. And I also maintain that if women are SO hard to get in the sack for men, then the men must not be very choosey who have had lots of women, and these "hard to get women" MUST be choosey. Only makes sense. These women have to be choosey. They can't sleep with 10 guys in a night. They probably cant' sleep with two guys. So if 10 guys hit on them because case scenario one guy lays her. 10% is the upper limit within even the realm of possibility. I don't think you can come to any logical conclusion about the men for this. The women decide when sex happens since they have so much selection. Guys are being choosey with who they hit on in the first place. I don't think you can come up with a choosey conclusion on guys but I'll have to think on it... it's late... guys chances range from like 0%->95% and this doesn't always affect how many girls they hit on/how frequently they try.
Recommended Posts