jester Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Slutty behavior has value. It is a form of EROTIC expression, of amorous advertising. We all should not sexually advertise in lockstep. Slutty behavior suggests sexual availability, energy, id expression. If it's in bad taste, that's fine. Bad taste is kitschy ; good taste is too Donna Reed. It's a fun type of expressive riffing. Slutty behavior is play. Playing is good.
UCFKevin Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Sluts to guys is like bad boys to girls. They're nice to look at, maybe mess around with, but that's about it.
jester Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Let me see, would I prefer spending a long evening with a moralistic prig, or a slut? A slut! Why? A slut lives, she doesn't judge. Tut, tut , is not in her lexicon, thankfully.
moimeme Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 a moralistic prig Looks remarkably like judgement to me. Sluts to guys is like bad boys to girls. They're nice to look at, maybe mess around with, but that's about it. Not to mention their adoration of their own 'rebelliousness' and 'bohemian' ways is so cliché as to be a crashing bore.
jester Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Why this war on sluts? Why always the need to denigrate for virtue's sake? Why?
moimeme Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Why always the need to denigrate? Yes, why indeed? Log, mote?
dyermaker Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Jester, the thing about your self-proclaimed war between the virtuecrats and pragmatists are that one one side you're making yourself a victim, but on the other side you're actually fighting in it.
jenny Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 o, for the love of pete. who the hell cares anymore? all jester did was post a celebration of sluts. i don't get, honestly, why that occasions winkery and such. this is not my business, it's totally irrelevant to the thread, but of course i'm going to stand for my friends.
moimeme Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 why that occasions winkery and such. Kindly don't assume you know the joke. who the hell cares anymore apparently, jester, since it was he who brought up the fabled dichotomy yet again.
jester Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Jenny, the fate of Western Civ hangs in the balance ! Our Virtuous must protect us from from "The Attack of the Sluts!" Without our self-appointed Moral Guardians, who knows how many naked breasts might be forced upon us. I, for one, am very grateful that good old LS has a couple of these fine, upstanding folk to protect us from this slut menace.
Skittles Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 I'll take an honest slut any day to the mature guy in the dark raincoat, and his dark desires. ...An honest slut is the libido's Abe Lincoln.
meanon Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 LOL! Kindly don't assume you know the joke. Whatever it was the context implied it was at Jester's expense. You must have know this. Chill guys - indulge in some slutty behaviour. Life must be dull if this is sport
Skittles Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Chill guys - indulge in some slutty behaviour. Life must be dull if this is sport ............Word!.......meanon........
moimeme Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Whatever it was the context implied it was at Jester's expense. You must have know this. No. It was not. a moralistic prig Without our self-appointed Moral Guardians, who knows how many naked breasts might be forced upon us. I, for one, am very grateful that good old LS has a couple of these fine, upstanding folk to protect us from this slut menace And these, I suppose, aren't meant to be lobbed at anyone's expense? But because the speaker is a 'bad boy', I guess, it's cute and adorable. Everyone else on this board can debate an issue without name-calling. Pity this one can't.
InmannRoshi Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Originally posted by dyermaker Or we could stop being so condescending, and give people credit for the responsibility they take in their own life to follow whatever path they choose. Of course, you’re right. Corporations foolishly squander billions of dollars every year in this marketing and advertising “hocus pocus” when really it doesn’t have any consequence. People make choices and decisions that organically stem from their own free will and self expression. So many people buy Brittany Spears’ albums because her music is just a cut above the rest. Young girls wear thongs because they’re so much more comfortable than cotton briefs. McDonalds sells more hamburgers than anyone else because their food is so scrumptious. I'm being condescending and insulting for suggesting otherwise. Originally posted by dyermaker You're creating your own rhetorical palace to live in. I'll say.
moimeme Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 I think those of us who are impervious to advertising find it difficult to believe that people are susceptible. I tune out during ads often. Then again, I'm a stubborn SOB who doesn't do things just because someone tells me to. I was astonished to learn that the sales of chinos went up something like 60% because of one GAP ad. It's true that marketing companies would not hurl millions at research on the psychology of influence if it didn't reap them bundles o' bucks, though.
dyermaker Posted March 5, 2004 Posted March 5, 2004 Originally posted by InmannRoshi People make choices and decisions that organically stem from their own free will Funny, what you see as sarcasm, I see as truth. So many people buy Brittany Spears’ albums because her music is just a cut above the rest. Young girls wear thongs because they’re so much more comfortable than cotton briefs. McDonalds sells more hamburgers than anyone else because their food is so scrumptious. Are their preferences any of your business? I'm being condescending and insulting for suggesting otherwise. The condescendingness comes when you make huge generalizations about a group that you don't belong to, clearly attaching a stigma to their preferences, by impliying that they're bought anything they're sold.
quickmorph Posted March 8, 2004 Posted March 8, 2004 Could someone please tell me what a slut is? I'd like to hear a clear definition of this word that I've never used.
quickmorph Posted March 8, 2004 Posted March 8, 2004 I'm not even sure what promiscuous means. If someone (male or female) has slept with 40 people, does that make him/her promiscuous? What about if that is over a 10 year period...4 people a year. Is that promiscuous? Should a woman think twice about marrying a man who has slept with 40 people, most of which have been 1-night stands...4 one-night stands a year? Should a man think twice about a woman who has done the same?
Recommended Posts