What a Slut Is

June 23, 2011

“Nor was she a Woman of any Beauty, but was a nasty Slut.”

Hearne, 1715

“Our little girl Susan is a most admirable slut, and pleases us mightily.”

Pepys diary, 1664

 

Until recently, there wasn’t much confusion about the word slut, though it’s a word with an interesting etymology. The word first appeared around 1450, describing “a woman of loose morals.” Later it was also used to describe a maid or drudge, as in the reference to my namesake above. From there the connotation of a dirty, slovenly woman was added. That pretty much takes us to the present day, with feminists attempting to reclaim the word, redefining it as a badge of sexual freedom.

After some thought, I would like to offer the following definition of a slut:

a. A slut is a person of either sex who regards sex strictly as a physically pleasurable activity. Sex in and of itself does not include an emotional, spiritual or practical component. Love, emotional intimacy and reproduction are sometimes associated with sex, but are in no way necessary or even desirable as a precondition for sexual activity.

b. Sluts generally disavow any biological difference between the sexes. In fact, there is some truth to this among sluts. Female sluts experience less bonding behavior as a result of sex, perhaps owing to having become inured to the experience, or perhaps as a result of a hormonal profile that is more male, i.e. higher than average testosterone levels.

c. Sluts maximize opportunities for sex as they arise in the pursuit of immediate gratification.

d. Male sluts are generally found highly desirable by many women, and prefer promiscuity to a committed, monogamous relationship. Female sluts are generally found temporarily desirable by highly desirable men, and have few opportunities for committed, monogamous relationships. Some female sluts feel fine about this, others feel regret.

Looking around on the interwebz, other interpretations vary widely:

What a Slut Is

1. A much needed sex-positive term for women (and men)

Organizers of the Seattle Slutwalk:

One of the most effective ways to fight hate is to disarm the derogatory terms employed by haters, embracing them and giving them positive connotations. This also serves to provide a sex-positive term for women (and men), few or none of which currently exist, and allows sluts (individuals of any gender who have and enjoy frequent consensual sex, especially with multiple partners) to identify as part of a cohesive group for political representation.

2. A way of disconnecting sex from emotion

Feminism 101:

If all negative connotations are removed from the word, a “slut” is simply a person, most often a woman, who has had sex with multiple partners…The shift in sexual mores [in the U.S.] has simply shifted the goal posts for “proper” female sexuality from marriage to “the attitude of the girl, her emotional feeling for the boy she’s with and her feelings about sex as an expression of love.”

3. A jumble of nonsense from Jaclyn Friedman

Jaclyn Friedman at Boston Slutwalk:

Slut is a word with little meaning. If you ask ten people, you get ten different definitions.

 

 

…Sluts are loud. We’re messy. We don’t behave.

…The word “slut” is an act of violence. Not just metaphorically. It gives permission for people to rape us, and the person who wields it doesn’t have to lift a finger. It sends a signal: this one is fair game. Have at her. No one will blame you.

…And make no mistake about it: we can be called sluts for nearly any reason at all. If we’re dancing. If we’re drinking. If we have ever in our lives enjoyed sex. If our clothes aren’t made of burlap. If we’re women of color, we’re assumed to be sluts before we do a single thing because we’re “exotic.” If we’re fat or disabled or otherwise considered undesirable, we’re assumed to be sluts who’ll fuck anyone who’ll deign to want us. If we’re queer boys or trans women, we’re called sluts in order to punish us for not fearing the feminine. If we’re queer women, especially femme ones, we’re called sluts because we’re obviously “up for anything,” as opposed to actually attracted to actual women. If we’re poor, we’re gold diggers who’ll use sex to get ahead.

…You know what I expect will happen when I’m dressed like a slut? People will want to get with me…all we want is to enjoy the incredible pleasure that our bodies are capable of.

…Because the secret truth nobody wants you to know is that, using nearly any definition, there’s nothing wrong with being a slut. Not a thing.

 

 

4. A powerful political statement.

Tracy Clark-Flory in Salon, agreeing with Jaclyn Friedman while contradicting her::

As feminist activist Jaclyn Friedman explained in her SlutWalk Boston speech, “That’s how the word ‘slut’ usually works. If you ask 10 people, you get 10 different definitions” — and, of course, therein lies its power.

5. An enemy to motherhood, a symptom of the spiritual disconnect between men and women

Camille Paglia on Slutwalks:

The swift global spread of Slutwalk strikingly demonstrates the energy and aspirations of young feminists.  But its confused message is a symptom of the Ksexual chaos and anomie of the Western bourgeoisie.

…The sexual revolution won by my 1960s generation was a two-edged sword.  Our liberation has burdened our successors with too many sexual choices too early.  Their flesh-baring daily dress is a sex mime to whose arousing signals they seem blind.  Only in a police state, and not even there, will women be totally safe on the streets.  Honorable men do not rape.  But protests and parades cannot create honor.
Slutwalk’s overflowing emotion is a cry of distress, less about sexual violence than the spiritual disconnection of men and women in this garish, tech-driven, careerist age.  When it devalued motherhood, Western feminism undermined women’s most ancient claim to dignity.  Sluttishness as fact or metaphor cannot restore that lost mythic power.

6. A way of participating in respectable society

Jessica Valenti in an editorial in The Washington Post:

The SlutWalkers, in outfits that could be grumpily labeled “ridiculous and indecent,” are not inducing exclusion from respectable society.

7. A joke

Amanda Marcotte:

“I think it’s important to have a sense of humor about this. Obviously, the whole point of Slutwalk is it’s funny. I mean, it’s funny. It’s taking the issue, turning it into a joke and trying to, you know, because we’ve had this conversation so many times, over and over in the most serious terms and I think that’s just  hit a wall in terms of what it can be.”

8. Satire

Lindsay Beyerstein at Jezebel:

In fact, Slut Walk is satirizing the whole slut construct…Who’s a slut? We all are. Or none of us are. And who cares? It’s a stupid, meaningless concept anyway.

…If you try to argue that you’re not a slut, you’re implicitly buying into the idea that there are sluts out there. If there’s some criterion that will set you free, that standard will indict someone else—someone with a higher “number,” or shorter skirt, or a later curfew. So we get bogged down in slut/non-slut border skirmishes over a line nobody should have tried to draw in the first place, and we all lose.

9. Activism from the pro-porn faction of feminism

Kirsten Powers in The Daily Beast:

Samantha Wright, the organizer of the D.C. Slut Walk, which held its fundraiser in a strip club, told me: “I do see how it’s hard coming from an anti-porn standpoint to see how Slut Walks could be beneficial. I consider myself a feminist [who is] pro-pornography. There has to be freedom of choice for women to work in [the sex] industry.”

10. A dude

Urban Dictionary:

A woman with the morals of a man.

11. A hypergamous creature

Collegeslacker/whiteboykrispy:

[A slut is a girl] who has spent [her college] years fucking every athlete, cool dude and somewhat cool dude across campus.

12. A verb

Doug1:

“slutting the first date”

13. A Playah

Commenter Sarah:

He sleeps with anything that breathes. He lies his way into your pants.

14. A sexually aggressive female

Detinennui32:

[A woman] who hits on every guy at the bar.

15. A menace to society

Elusive Wapiti in his post Logically Challenged Slutwalkers:

It is chaste/modest women whose opprobrium is the sort of condemnation that the slutwalkers would be more or less unable to counter with accusations of “rape apologist” and “misogynist”. For it is the relationships of upright women to their men that are most harmed by the rude and reckless behavior of the Slutwalkers. And no less a feminist than Naomi Wolf herself recognizes that a man need only walk down a street to be bombarded with pornographic and near-pornographic sexual imagery…women in relationships with men should be very indignant about the continued commodification (and as a consequence, cheapening) of female sexuality by other women. Sluts don’t threaten men–they may offend us, or tempt us, amuse us, or irritate us–but sluts very much threaten non-slutty women, the security of all women’s relationships with the men around them, and the very fabric of our communities.

…by slutwalking, these women continue to pick at the very social fabric upon which they depend for their own safety. Slutshaming does indeed boost women’s security, and is most effectively employed by more upright women whose objections keep their wayward sisters from polluting the air which we all breathe.

 

Which brings me to this gem:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4Q7tEgumPs

Bwahahahahahaha, that’s me she’s paying homage to!

Sluts are indeed detrimental to a civilized society, and yes, to the economy. Be sure to come back for my next post: What a Slut Costs and I’ll tell you how.

4 Pingbacks/Trackbacks

  • Abbot

    A slut, as viewed generally in Western society, is a female member of a minority group who, not too long ago, would have been categorized as a prostitute. As for a world view, especially south of Mexico and in other vast regions where the absolute majority of global women live, sluts are so few that any discussions about their existence would be considered foolish and without merit.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Abbot

      A slut, as viewed generally in Western society, is a female member of a minority group

      ???? Minority group? Is this a comment about race, or are you saying that promiscuous women, plentiful though they may be, are still the minority of women?

  • whiteboykrispy

    Woah, glad I could contribute in some way :)

  • Abbot

    slut   [sluht]
    –noun
    1. a member of a sexual minority group
    2. an poorly parented woman who deludes herself as desirable by seeking validation through the sexual satisfaction of always ready and willing men.
    3. an aid for men who wish to delay commitment

  • Will S.

    Fail. You can’t change the fact that the word ‘slut’ has always thus far been applied to a certain subset of the female population, not the male, and propose a new definition that encompasses certain members of both sexes. In fact, you don’t get to propose a new definition, period, because doing so takes you into Alice in Wonderland territory, where Humpty Dumpty said ‘When I use a word, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’, to which Alice of course reasonably objected.

    Old words in the English language mean whatever Oxford and Webster say they mean; new words and terms get voted on urbandictionary. But ‘slut’ is an old word, with an established meaning. It means a sexually promiscuous woman. That is all.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Will S.

      Old words in the English language mean whatever Oxford and Webster say they mean; new words and terms get voted on urbandictionary.

      Oh, OK. Here then:
      Manslut:
      A predatory, perpetually single male who spends every minute of every day chasing skirt. This behavior may verge from the passive and cute to the idiotic and destructive.
      “Dude, give it a rest, you’re such a Manslut…”

      And for good measure:

      Manwhore
      The male equivalent of a slut.
      “Wow, Jacob is such a manwhore.”

  • Abbot

    Right now its just lumbering along. You women who are reading this, you will know shortly how fast this will take off, once the “damage controllers” get on board to continue their hell bent mission to “protect” you from the reality of how men think when it comes time to select one woman for commitment.

  • Abbot

    Well, since the barrage has not started, now is a good time to get some very well known facts restated.
    .
    Men LOVE sluts! Men do not shame them. There are exceptions but so minor that to bring them up is stupid. Yes…men LOVE sluts. Men NEED sluts. Always have, always will. Fact is, these days they dont charge for the service. Invent and distribute BC pills and you are all set. As long as sluts are confined to urban pockets in the West and to the small minority of women who go to college in the West and as long as they are not generating new sluts beyond what is needed, the system works perfectly. As planned. All is well.

  • Mike C

    Over/under on this one? I’ll take 350.
    .
    And in this corner we have Abbott…and in the opposing corner Tom and Jess. :)

  • Bob

    A slut is…

    … what alphas call a girl after they put out.

    … the driving force behind beta-enlightenment, leading either to the red pill (positive) or bitterness and pleading (negative).

    … a girl that less openly-promiscuous girls get to look down on.

    … an investment secretly manipulated by cats in order to ensure their continued survival.

    … easier to spot than she thinks she is.

  • Thin-Skinned Mista-Beta

    Separate appearance from behaviour. Those “ladies” showing off on the Slut Walks sure looked the part. Sloppy, slovenly, disordered and undisciplined showing off ill-fitting and badly styled outfits (not to mention generous portions of muffin tops). Nothing tempting there. Can anybody explain why the women pictured from the Slut Walks looked so awful? If you’re going to be slutty why can’t you at least look good? It’s sad but hardly surprising that the ladies pictured from the various slut walks hardly measured up to the perfectly fabulously styled professionals one can see strutting proudly evenings here in the Oranienburgerstrasse. Perhaps it’s an unfair comparison. After all for those ladies it’s their job, for the sluts it’s just a hobby they do for fun for free so we shouldn’t expect too much professionalism from them. But dear sluts of the western world, learn from the pros in the Oranienburgerstrasse. I’m certain they have some boundaries, but they carry themselves with such confidence project such strength, I have a hard time imagining them taking any BS from their clients. There is no excuse for fellows to cross boundaries that the sluts may have. Hate me for blaming the victim, but inebriation makes it really hard to articulate and enforce boundries. Why do so many allegedly “sex-positive” sluts need intoxication to lower their inhibitions? A handful of women I’ve known (here in Europe) have told me how they’ve avoided becoming victims when men they knew as well as strangers have tried to have their way with them. One was a tiny little young Greek lady. I have no idea how she did it, but I imagine it was like one of those little dogs in a fight who stands its ground with nothing but attitude and confidence. Ladies stay safe, be strong and keep your wits about you.

    As for what’s going through a the head of rapist or a slut, I can only surmise. I do know that I have a harder time resisting sweet treats that look particularly delicious. Do rapists prefer to target women they find more tempting? As for sluts, I suspect that a lot of the motivation for the escalation of the exposure of their bodies is to try to get a more attention than the ladies against whom they are competing. But how can they be so stupid to think that this “advertising” only provokes the “right” attention from the “right” guys?

    As for the sex positive aspects of promoting casual promiscuity, I don’t see how dressing slovenly helps promote our acceptance of loose or fallen women. Perhaps it’s unlikely, but are there any wolves in sheep’s clothing out there? Women who like to sleep around, but just don’t look the part? Sluts that look more like a chaste Sunday school teacher than the whore of Babylon?

  • Grindl

    A slut is any woman who has had sex before marriage, even if only with her fiancee. That’s the traditional definition and going by the manosphere general consensus, it hasn’t changed.

    I am a slut; you probably are too — unless you’re one of the very rare women who was a real virgin (no anal, no oral, no handjobs) on her wedding night.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Grindl
      Well, by that definition at least 96% of women aged 26 are sluts. And the remaining 4% haven’t had sexual intercourse, no telling what other shenanigans they’ve been up to. So, yeah, the manosphere needs a reality check on this one. Of course, every man is entitled to select whatever qualities he wants in a partner – he just may have difficulty finding her.

  • http://elusivewapiti.blogspot.com Elusive Wapiti

    Good post.

    Proof positive that the term “slut” has been extruded to mean many different things to many different people. Tho Will is correct: at its simplest, a “slut” is a sexually promiscuous woman. The word is a put-down, employed to shame wayward females back toward more socially constructive behavior.

    And thanks for the linkage, Susan!

  • Matt

    When having sex for men becomes as easy as saying “Yes”, then male sluts can exist. It is not that easy.

    Ex: http://www.rooshv.com/you-still-need-game-to-bang-whores

  • OhioStater

    My favorite…

    A whore has sex with anyone; a slut has sex with anyone but you.

    There’s no worse feeling than rejection by an easy woman. Generally, the sluts I know use sex as a means to attract attention, resources, or commitment from high status men. A woman rated a 6 or 7 is forward with alpha males, but bitchy to normal men. It wouldn’t surprise me if intern Monica Lewinsky, even before she met Clinton, turned down most dates.

    Roissy suggests sluts (women with high partner counts) almost exclusively focus on alpha males, or at least men appearing to behave like alpha males.
    http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/sluts-are-not-less-discriminating/

    As such, they learn quickly how alpha males behave and quickly reject any man lacking these traits.

    I proposed to Roosh a man can judge how many men a woman has slept with based on how quickly and severely she rejects men.
    http://www.rooshv.com/you-still-need-game-to-bang-whores

    A woman needs a lot of experience to make a quick judgment. A cleaner low-count woman needs more time evaluate a man.

    I’ll let a scientist prove that observation.

  • Matt T

    Men are fine with sluts, but they have nothing but contempt for sluts pretending to be good girls or arguing that they’ve changed.

    There are probably evolutionary reasons for this, specifically that a morally loose woman was likely to be bearing another man’s child. I guess another reason would be that a slut would be likely to cheat on you and try to trick you into raising another man’s child if she got the chance. Hey, it’s happened millions of times before…

  • VD

    There are no straight male sluts. It is not a coherent concept and is rather like attempting to describe easy women as players. To do so is to miss the point. Attempting to generate false equivalences isn’t going to help anyone understand intersexual relations, besides, there is already a perfectly good and sexual neutral word that can be applied to both sexes, which is “promiscuous”. If you wish to imply a more negative sense, “STD lab” would also apply equally well to both sexes.

    The problem is that to attempt to generate opprobrium by redefining words in this way is likely to backfire, because it is the “sluttish” behavior of the alpha player that provides the social proof that women find attractive.

    Men do like sluts, in most cases. They simply don’t want to commit to them. Women, on the other hand, like players and do want to commit to them. Go figure.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Interesting pushback here from the men re the use of the word slut to apply to males. It’s a term that has taken hold among young people – it’s part of the zeitgeist. Manwhore and manslut are commonly used terms to describe men who lack any discernment whatsoever re sex partners. They never say no, and they rack up very high partner counts.

      In other words, slut as applied to a male is simply slang for “a promiscuous male,” a cumbersome phrase unlikely to be used by younguns. STDs are definitely part of the package though, and IMO explain why men who have sex with multiple partners are now considered “dirty.”

      Roosh has been named a few times already on this thread. What percentage of American women would have casual sex with Roosh? A very, very, very small percentage. There are men, though, who sit back and wait for the girls to come to them. Sluts are aggressors with high status athletes and cool dudes like whiteboykrispy said, e.g. Karen Owen.

      I’ve written about the declining value of preselection as the numbers get large many times in the past, so won’t belabor the point. Suffice it to say that there is most definitely a boomerang effect with social proof. At some point, the promiscuous male appeals only to promiscuous women. Which may suit him just fine.

      For the record, I did note the difference between the sexes in terms of the social status that sluthood brings.

  • Lavazza

    Dalrock had a fun thing with Sisters Lusting for Ultimate Titillation and Women Holding Out for Relationship Equity.

    I would agree that sluts are as discriminating as other women. At least I do not know any men who have had it easy “getting” casual sex (for free, no strings attached) from women with the same SMV or higher.

  • Abbot

    I am a slut; you probably are too — unless you’re one of the very rare women who was a real virgin
    .
    Ah, we have our first red herring and an attempt to frame it all as virgin or non virgin. An attempt to convince women reading this to dismiss what is being said as nonsense. An attempt to paint men who dare to question female sexual behavior as old throwbacks and outcasts when in fact nearly all men do evaluate women in this manner when selecting for commitment. An attempt to make it appear impossible for a woman to be a non slut. Non sluts never have a reason to make such attempts as they are secure women who were raised properly and wisely understand and respect how men think. Fortunately, that’s most women.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t really see any cloying need to redefine the word “slut” so that it encapsulates an attitude rather than simply a promiscuous girl: in fact, I think such an approach is dangerous for men (“innocent” girls can hide the darkest of skeletons, and their skills in keeping up appearances are often astonishing). No doubt the type of people who believe a slut is a “mindset” rather than a girl who’s had a lot of sex are the sorts who believe you can also “hook up smart”.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    I’m a slut! And it’s not as easy to be a slut as people say.

    Anyone can get sex with someone, if their standards are low enough. However, with the way the sexual marketplace currently works, men are more likely to make the first move than women. Therefore, we see the woman rejecting men she doesn’t want to sleep with, but we do not see the man rejecting the women he doesn’t want to sleep with (i.e. by not hitting on them). I’m not talking “must be Division I athlete” standards here: I’m talking “basic respect for boundaries, sex is likely to be at least okay, not hideously ugly” and a few quirks (for me, I won’t fuck people who are stupid, non-nerdy or currently drunk).

    FWIW, I’ve always been very open about my sexual history and I haven’t noticed any reluctance to commit– rather the converse, in fact (three of the four men I’ve had casual sex with have explicitly stated they wanted to date me).

    However, sluthood is not for everyone. You must be able to disconnect love and sex; you must be able to treat your partner with respect, even though it’s casual sex; you must be able to be responsible for your own orgasm (women with finicky bodies need not apply); you must be good at communicating your sexual desires; you must know how to select men who are probably going to be good in bed from a very few pieces of data (bros are probably not).

  • VI

    Susan, check your email for a story about the costs of being a slut.

    My definitions

    Slut: A woman who has willingly* had sex with many men. I put the number somewhere in the low teens.

    Lothario: A man who has been able to seduce many attractive women. I put the number somewhere in the twenties.

    Player: A man who has been able to seduce many women.

    Manslut: A man who has had sex with many unattractive women.

    *Rape doesn’t make a girl a slut.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @VI
      Thanks, I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts on the cost of sluthood.

      I like your definitions, they make sense to me. It’s that lack of selectivity in the manslut that makes him repellent to attractive women.

  • Anonymous

    Susan, a “manslut” doesn’t become a manslut unless he’s received immense sexual approval from a wide sample of women. “Loose” women are basically a myth, a unicorn: as Roissy says, the sluttiest of women tend to have, if anything, the highest of standards.

    This is once again a case of women saying one thing and doing another. There is no reason for modern man not to slut around as much as possible and get as much social proof as he can: the only consternation he’ll face is from women looking for genuine faithfulness or to raise families, and neither is common whatsoever (you yourself took some relish in explaining to the “manosphere” that women are only interested in casual sex). I find it suspicious to borderline comic that you’re painting this image of women who have no scruples about sleeping around (“a little”, of course, as you’d like say) but who exercise perfect discretion in warding off “douchebags” and “mansluts”. It beggars belief.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anonymous

      Susan, a “manslut” doesn’t become a manslut unless he’s received immense sexual approval from a wide sample of women. “Loose” women are basically a myth, a unicorn: as Roissy says, the sluttiest of women tend to have, if anything, the highest of standards.

      If you’re saying a manslut is always an alpha I’ll agree. I said in the post that mansluts are the most desirable men having sex with women without being selective themselves. Women who are seeking committed relationships know these men are out of the question. It’s untrue that women like this are uncommon, I can’t imagine why you say that. Some men are players who get with girls and seduce them via deceit – they make her believe at least for a time that they are interested in a relationship. Mansluts don’t bother with this. They are strictly ONS material, or may be open about having a harem.

      I know for a fact that every college campus has a few manwhores, usually athletes or frat guys, who can only get with sluts. HIgh status, attractive women wouldn’t touch them with a 10 foot pole. After college it gets harder to ID them, but in college they’re “dirty.” Undoubtedly every one of them has genital herpes, HPV, and probably chlamydia.

      you yourself took some relish in explaining to the “manosphere” that women are only interested in casual sex)

      Whaaaaa? Please provide the quote, you’re mixed up there.

      I find it suspicious to borderline comic that you’re painting this image of women who have no scruples about sleeping around (“a little”, of course, as you’d like say) but who exercise perfect discretion in warding off “douchebags” and “mansluts”. It beggars belief.

      You misunderstand. It’s the women who have no scruples about sleeping around who are having sex with mansluts. The women with scruples reject mansluts.

  • anonymous

    I live in a growing arsty leftist college town here in the south where all I can say is the women suck. Slut might be the least of their problems. Couple it with what I term artsy feminism along with the rampant drug and alcohol lifestyle, they not only act as if tomorrow isn’t coming, they don’t care about what’s happening to them in the moment as long as “they aren’t bothering” anyone else. Yet down the road when many are in poverty and with kids, they will be a burden. Many expect government to subsidize their lives considering their views on just where money should be spent. And it isn’t on infrastructure but parks, museums, and other pork that benefits their views of what society should be.

    Take this for what it’s worth. The woman that graduated at the top of her class here was able to land her “dream” job. It being a part time gig at the local public radio station. I guess using up resources and acting like who knows what is more important than becoming something meaningful in life.

    Maybe it’s the town that’s the reason that the young women who come here in droves get sucked into the lifestyle that uses them up and spits them out. But their own herd mentality and competition within has a lot to do with it as well. And believe me when I say, the males for whom they lust after, the musicians, the artist, the drug dealers, the trust fund babies and the like are using it to their full advantage. I see it for myself.

  • Abbot

    Anyone can get sex with someone, if their standards are low enough.
    .
    read: men
    .
    However, with the way the sexual marketplace currently works, men are more likely to make the first move than women
    .
    Then the current SMP emerged in 325 BC and not with the appearance of male-invented BC pills.
    .
    I haven’t noticed any reluctance to commit
    .
    Not all men will reject sluts. In fact, there may just enough to go around given that men overall vastly outnumber the global slut-minority population
    .
    sluthood is not for everyone
    .
    Because nature intended it that way to best serve male short term needs prior to selecting a wife. Nature is a guardian angel.
    .

  • Abbot

    promiscuous women, plentiful though they may be, are still the minority of women?
    .
    Yes. If they were more than a small minority, then their behavior would be the accepted “norm” and a sex pozzy and slut walker dream fulfilled. If their numbers really increased, then a man worth marrying would become numb to all her empowerment fodder snickering at him for being such a fool.

  • 108spirits

    Sluts are cool.

    Every man wants a slut. He just wants her to be HIS slut. (As said by a certain elder of the Game scene).

    Reformed sluts are not cool and aren’t fooling any guy with half a clue and not desperate.

    You definitely need good game to nail the average looking to the attractive sluts, for they’re so used to putting out to the top dogs that they expect similar behaviours / level of Game. Your average gameless beta will get blown out quickly and rejected harshly by such sluts, or get used by them for non-sexual activities while they put out to alphas at night.

    The fat/ugly sluts of SlutWalks? I know there are guys who stick their dicks in any hole with moisture, but I just can’t comprehend why.

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    @Anonymous
    You sound as if you believe that all women have multiple sex partners in college. This is simply not true. The vast majority of women – I’d put it at 80% – have 2 or less. These women are not riding the carousel, and would never in a million years consider dating a manslut. Mansluts bang the other 20% – most of whom are highly promiscuous.

    I personally know quite a few women in their 20s who are in the 7-9 range. The sluts pick up guys in bars, have sex, then get bummed when they find out how many women they’ve been with, or that they’ve just bedded another player. Most of them would secretly love to land a boyfriend, though their strategy sucks. The women who have a low number, have had sex only in committed relationships (which does not make them a slut) reject manwhores.

    I’ve written in the past about one couple I know. They have known each other all their lives, and they are both extraordinarily good looking, at least 9s. They’ve been good friends, but she’s been with only 2 men in relationships, and he’s been with at least 100 women. He recently confessed that he has been in love with her for 8 years and suggested that now that they’re out of college, he’d like to try it for real. She rejected him because of his number. She just can’t get over the idea that he’s had his dick in that many women. It grosses her out, and she believes that he will be unable to be monogamous in any case. She’s right about that.

    Honestly, I’m finding it just fascinating that the men don’t want me to put down manwhores. As if that’s a noble life purpose.

  • Blues

    @Grindl: atta girl, use the definition that makes girls comfortable with the term instead of seeing reality.

  • Anonymous

    You’re not “put[ting] down manwhores” at all though, Susan, you’re trying to make a case for why it’s not rationally optimal to be a manwhore. If you simply said “it’s wrong to rack through girls without offering commitment” no one would bat an eyelid, because it’s a moral argument. But your tack is that men receive diminishing returns by slutting around, and it’s just totally ridiculous, it’s an awful and barely-defensible position (do you really think a “manwhore” would complain that he isn’t getting as much attention as he’d like from women?)

    I can’t address your claims about what type of girl would or wouldn’t touch a “manwhore”: it’s all far too vague for me to make sense of your claims. But I’m tendentious because you have this habit of seeing things as you’d like them to be: so these “long term relationships” common to women are all founts of commitment and deep love (and so nothing questionable at all), “good” women totally reject manwhores and so on. As I have to stress so you won’t misinterpret what I’m saying again, none of this would be risible if not for the fact that you’re trying to call this reality, rather than the reality you’d like to come into being (i.e. a moral instruction).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anonymous

      (do you really think a “manwhore” would complain that he isn’t getting as much attention as he’d like from women?)

      No, but I’d question which women he’s getting attention from. Super hot women do not sell themselves cheaply to manwhores. We know that manwhores are generally having sex with 5s and 6s – that’s their stock and trade. What I have seen happen is that some SHBs will agree to be the gf of a very high status male, even though he gets around. For example, all of the lax players that Karen Owen had sex with were in relationships. The gf’s didn’t get monogamy, but they got high status, which they were willing to take in exchange for being #1.

      As far as seeing things the way I want to, I don’t see any of this first-hand. My knowledge of manwhores comes via readers, stories from my focus groups, and the media. It sounds like it’s been quite a while since you were in college. And as long-time readers here know, I don’t care about the morality of promiscuity, just the strategic impact on the SMP. Morality is not my niche.

      Getting with a manwhore is terrible strategy for a young woman. Why is it so hard to believe that some percentage would figure that out?

      BTW, the spam filter is catching you because it doesn’t like “Anonymous” types, and you’ve linked.

  • 108spirits

    You misunderstand. It’s the women who have no scruples about sleeping around who are having sex with mansluts. The women with scruples reject mansluts.

    The women talk a big talk but I don’t see them follow it up with actions. Two of the biggest mansluts in my social circle just had two good girls moving across country to try to be with them as they’re so smitten. Try, because those guys aren’t committing at all and are dating other girls, one’s still living with and banging his ex. Other guys trying to date those girls have all been LJBFed. The two mansluts make no secret of their plays with other women, and everyone else knows exactly what kind of men they are. I’ve seen supposedly good Christian girls, who’ve blown off friends of mine for trying to be sexual too soon (only friggin’ second base) yet are drawn to those “mansluts” like moths to flame.

    I’m not at their level but I’ve dated quite a few. Some of the girls I’ve banged knew my history, and even expressed some kind of false indignation at how many girls in the same social circle I’ve gone through, but they’d sleep with me on that very same night, after saying some kind of cliche like “I don’t want to be like just another girl you’ve been with in {our social circle}” or “I’m not a bad girl like the ones you dated”.

    Meanwhile, I’m still failing to get my friend, a good beta boy who has everything going for him, to get pass second base with any of those girls. His problem? He’s still a virgin, and obviously Gameless.

    Susan, I think any guy who’s swallowed the Red Pill will have troubles believing what you just said.

  • Blues

    FWIW, I’ve always been very open about my sexual history and I haven’t noticed any reluctance to commit– rather the converse, in fact (three of the four men I’ve had casual sex with have explicitly stated they wanted to date me).

    And i’m sure most girls would say the same about the cads that burned them, remember the very basics of human interactions, objectively evaluate their actions, not their words.

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    @108spirits
    I think the answer is in the degree of sluttiness. When guys here talk about sluts, some will use that term to mean every woman who isn’t a virgin. Others will say 10 partners. I’ve been called a slut by both men and women in the blogosphere. Some guys don’t get nervous until a woman goes over 25 or so. Alphas who get a lot of women are generally more tolerant of sluttiness, at least in the short-term, than betas who don’t get a ton of sex.

    A guy can be a player, possibly even a cad without being a manslut. There is a point, however, at which a guy has had sex with so many women, that his social proof is seen as a marker of a poor relationship prospect. Obviously, not all women make good decisions – I wouldn’t be writing this blog if that were the case, and I don’t write for sluts. Any of us can probably name quite a few examples of nice girls falling prey to mansluts.

    But you’re mistaken if you think a “nice girl” moving across the country to be with a guy who is living with and banging his ex is typical. BTW, I don’t know much about evangelical Christian women, but between your comment and Solomon II’s stories, there doesn’t seem to be any shortage of “slut on the inside” women in that population.

  • 108spirits

    Honestly, I’m finding it just fascinating that the men don’t want me to put down manwhores. As if that’s a noble life purpose.

    I think we (especially beta guys like my friend) would all love for you AND other women to put down manwhores, as they’re our biggest competitors, but the reality just doesn’t match what we read here.

    In your example of the extraordinary hot couple, I’d say it’s the fact that they’ve known each other their whole lives that, to the woman, it feels icky to think of his penis in her. It’d be like banging her brother to her, maybe. Very rarely what women say as the reason why they don’t date some guy is actually the truth. Precious few women could articulate their desire for a man or lack of it.

  • Blues

    I’ve written about the declining value of preselection as the numbers get large many times in the past, so won’t belabor the point. Suffice it to say that there is most definitely a boomerang effect with social proof. At some point, the promiscuous male appeals only to promiscuous women. Which may suit him just fine.

    Preselection value doesn’t decline at all, it’s all about the quality of the preselection, for example a guy with high partner counts of 7’s will get preferential access to 7’s but not to 9s or 10s, but a guy with consistent success to 9’s and 10s will have it way easier with other high level women, see Leo DiCaprio’s dating history for an example.

  • 108spirits

    Nah I don’t believe for a second that those manslut-chasing girls are nice, but they are definitely not sluts. I was arguing against your point that mansluts only nail sluts. That’s so not true in my experience.

    Christian girls of all types are the same as non-Christian if you push the right buttons, just that evangelicals are easier. :P For some reason, I usually end up dating (& banging) Christian girls despite me being somewhere between atheist and agnostic, while my virgin friend would date the same girls and get told no sex till X years into relationship or till marriage, with the extra condition that he must convert.

    I’d like to think I’m more tolerant of numbers than the typical manosphere guy. In fact, I rarely use the word “slut” unless I’m in one of these discussions. It holds no particularly strong shaming connotation in my mind. The only time a girl’s number truly reviles me was when this American chick proudly told me she lost count and couldn’t be fucked keeping track of it after #60. It’s not quite the number, it’s the attitude behind it.

  • Johnny Milfquest

    Ozy wrote:

    Anyone can get sex with someone, if their standards are low enough.

    That’s only true for women. Guys often unwittingly cockblock themselves with the wrong attitude.

  • http://blacksub6.blogspot.com escarondito

    Aunt Susan,

    You know men are not sluts, they are only conquerors. But do I have a story for you.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @esca
      I’m all ears.

  • 108spirits

    Btw just to add, I’m in my late 20s but I date girls of university / college age (18 till late 20s, i.e ugrad to pgrad) and my social circle is full of them due to various things I’m involved with.

    Getting with a manwhore is terrible strategy for a young woman. Why is it so hard to believe that some percentage would figure that out?

    Ah. You see, it is true that very few young women are in relationship with manwhores. The reason is not what you think though. It’s rather simple: manwhores, being their namesake, don’t really do relationships. However, ask any young woman, nice or not (only if you ask the right questions) and pretty much every one of them has had an experience with (as in, getting “fooled” once or twice or thrice or more) by a manwhore. That’s how they “learned”. That’s how manwhores rack up their numbers. I believe that’s what the guys here are disagreeing with you about. There’s no shortage of nice young girls coming of age who make a mistake or two with manwhores that a few who have “learned” their lesson the hard way swearing against manwhores don’t really matter.

    Besides, a girl who says no manwhore is like a girl who puts “no jerk / no player” in her online dating profile. It’s just screaming out to others what her true preferences are.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      However, ask any young woman, nice or not (only if you ask the right questions) and pretty much every one of them has had an experience with (as in, getting “fooled” once or twice or thrice or more) by a manwhore. That’s how they “learned”. That’s how manwhores rack up their numbers.

      I agree completely, that’s exactly what’s happening. Note that use of the word “fooled” implies deceit. So manwhores are man of bad character. I will say that some men are such notorious manwhores that other women witness their deception, pumping and dumping of other girls, especially freshmen. These guys are viewed as wolves, and many more than the women they’ve used stay away. For example, the frat at Duke that has all the lax players is routinely ignored by the “core four” sororities. No high status woman wants the public humiliation of falling for their BS. Women don’t really care to be cautionary tales for other women. That frat gets its supply of girls from outside the Greek scene – athlete groupies. It’s a relatively small number of women who have sex with as many team members as possible. Karen Owen was one of those girls, and the sorority girls had no idea who she was when the story broke.

  • Anonymous

    Super hot women do not sell themselves cheaply to manwhores. We know that manwhores are generally having sex with 5s and 6s – that’s their stock and trade.

    How

    do we know this? How would you even begin to form the basis for such a claim?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anonymous

      How do we know this? How would you even begin to form the basis for such a claim?

      Because the men here tell me that contemporary hypergamy means that 5s and 6s will no longer date 5s and 6s. They act like sluts in order to have sex with 8s and 9s.

  • Blues

    Here’s an idea to prove my point, compare Brad Pitt’s history to DiCaprio’s (and Leo’s hasn’t been updated to include Bar Rafaeli), Pitt’s began on 7’s and worked his way up, DiCaprio on the other hand got a huge start with Liv Tyler and kept it consistent, also note this are just the women on their own level of income and fame i’m sure both have plenty of numbers on the fangirl level.

  • OffTheCuff

    A slut is any woman who has had sex before marriage, even if only with her fiancee. That’s the traditional definition and going by the manosphere general consensus, it hasn’t changed.

    I will take a stab at rational conversation here, even though I can tell this is a “butthurt” emotional reaction and likely to fail.

    No man actually believes this, save for a few religious kooks. If this a “traditional defintion” then I’m sure you’ll be able to point me to untold articles that promote this view. I’d love to see it.

    What is true, is sometimes men will use slut pejoratively (“Jane, you ignorant slut!”) which really has nothing to do with sex, but getting a rise out of you. Just like it’s possible to say “fuck you” to anyone, it’s possible to call anyone a slut. I have never done so, neither any of my male friends, not behind a woman’s back, and not to her face. I know countless women who say it to themselves and to other women, though. Funny how that goes.

  • VI

    In my experience, low promiscuity girls with 1-2 partners do avoid players of all types, if they know he’s a player. Of course, a man who is a big enough player will either have a reputation or give off a strong player vibe.

    Girly girls, very attractive and feminine, will be cautious but still date a player. The few low promiscuity girls who are also girly girls will be married before their mid 20s.

    Among girly girls, their propensity to date players will be directly related to their looks. Mildly cute girls will often fuck players, but not date them. Red hot girls will date players.

  • http://Photoncourier.blogspot.com David foster

    The Pepys quote could be posted in certain stores at the typical mall…some moms would surely feel it was vindicating their wardrobe choices for their daughters…

  • whiteboykrispy

    @SW

    From my experience, the only time preselection starts declining in value for players is when chicks find out about some marginal girl you were with.

    The only times I have ever been accused of being a player or a manwhore are when a good looking girl, fully aware of who I am beforehand and totally ok with it, finds out about one or two of the mistakes I’ve made taking back marginal girls.

    Girls are willing to forgive, nay secretly like, that I have banged girls of their equal or hotter.

    If you play the hotties, you’re a lothario like VI says, and therefore girls are willing to look past the many notches, not to be confused with player and manwhore, which, as you’ve sort of noted, are terms for men of no discretion.

    But yet, the lothario is still a player. Preselection still has tremendous value if you keep it high class.

  • whiteboykrispy

    @Unfortunate Rake

    Typing the same things at the same times, great minds think alike.

  • Mule Chewing Briars

    Strange how out of all the quotes in your article, Camille Paglia’s is the only one that makes any sense at all. Lesbians know women better than anyone else.

    Feminism is such a comforting ideology for elite women, where the Corporate State fulfills the role of the Alpha Protector.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mule
      Agreed. I actually found it painful to type out Marcotte’s quote, and the excerpts from Friedman’s speech. These women can’t string a coherent sentence together, much less a speech.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Christian girls of all types are the same as non-Christian if you push the right buttons, just that evangelicals are easier. :P For some reason, I usually end up dating (& banging) Christian girls despite me being somewhere between atheist and agnostic, while my virgin friend would date the same girls and get told no sex till X years into relationship or till marriage, with the extra condition that he must convert.

    Isn’t this possible be a matter of target audience? If he is only interested on women looking for a relationship chances are they are not going to put out unless what you mean is that this women your friend is interested in are having sex on the side? Possibly with you?

  • http://blacksub6.blogspot.com escarondito

    @Aunt Sue

    This will be comign in e-mail

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    Especially in Social Circle Game, a man can handicap himself with attractive women by sleeping with too many ugly women. While an isolated drunken lapse will be forgiven, if it is known that he mates with ugly women routinely, he lowers his value to their level. And an attractive woman will feel that her value is being lowered to that level if she sleeps with him.

    On the other hand, it doesn’t matter how many women a man is known to have slept with if they are all 8s, 9s and 10s in looks or have high status (such as a celebrity). Virtually all women who meet this man will be incredibly curious about him, and biased toward the belief that there must be something about him if all these exceptional women wanted a piece of him. His real number could be 10 or 80 or 800. It doesn’t matter if the women connected to his reputation are of high quality.

    For a man, social proof can work in either direction: You can prove yourself to be a man who can only get low-value women, or prove yourself to be a man who can get high-quality women and limits himself to those women.

    For a woman, social proof doesn’t work this way. The quality of her lovers is mostly irrelevant. If a guy knows that a woman has slept with 50 guys, it doesn’t matter if they are all heads of state or homeless men. She’s still a slut.

    One woman says to another, “She fucks a new guy every week, and they’re all losers.”

    To a man overhearing this, only the first part registers. If the woman being talked about is attractive, he’ll still want to sleep with her (and only that).

    “She sleeps with a new guy every week, but they’re all pretty hot.”

    Still the second part won’t register with a man. He’ll feel exactly the same way about her: If she’s attractive, he’ll want to sleep with her (and only that). He won’t feel that his own value is somehow raised because she tends to sleep with high-value guys.

    With regard to partner count, the only way a woman can increase her value is by being perceived to have a low number. In contrast, a man benefits by having a higher number, so long as the women are of high quality.

  • Orthodox

    If there’s any male corollary to slut, it’s something like the term trash dick. A guy who often goes well below his SMV.

  • http://blacksub6.blogspot.com escarondito

    @ white boy and the rake

    You both are right on the money. BTW krispy, I love the name.

  • Tom

    Because the secret truth nobody wants you to know is that, using nearly any definition, there’s nothing wrong with being a slut. Not a thing.
    ___________________________
    She is, of course, right………
    However, some men will not give a woman of experience a chance at a relationship. (as some women will not give a male slut a chance)
    Personal preference or narrow thinking…you decide

  • Tom

    @ Abott
    slut   [sluht]
    –noun
    1. a member of a sexual minority group
    2. an poorly parented woman who deludes herself as desirable by seeking validation through the sexual satisfaction of always ready and willing men.
    3. an aid for men who wish to delay commitment

    ______________________
    Abbott what is this womans definition?

    A woman who has occational sex with men of her choosing, always includes condoms in her sexcapades,does not have sex for self validation purposes, loves sex, and is not ready for a committed relationship at this time.

  • Clarence

    Susan:

    That video you say is about you has been marked private. What can you tell us about what it said?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Clarence

      That video you say is about you has been marked private. What can you tell us about what it said?

      That’s weird, it’s OK on my computer. I put up a clip where JF says that last summer, after she wrote a manifesto against slut-shaming, a “pearl-clutching blogger” living in Boston told her that if there were enough sluts, they would destroy the economy. That’s not actually what I said, but female promiscuity does have negative long-term effects on the economy and civilization.

  • Clarence

    Susan Walsh:
    Would you say the status of the Duke Lacrosse team has changed for the worse since the false allegations in 2006? I ask, because many newspaper and magazine articles at the time painted the team as very high status and having their pick of groupies..BMOC that sort of thing? Or was it something else?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Clarence

      Would you say the status of the Duke Lacrosse team has changed for the worse since the false allegations in 2006? I ask, because many newspaper and magazine articles at the time painted the team as very high status and having their pick of groupies..BMOC that sort of thing? Or was it something else?

      The students strongly supported the players during the crisis, unlike the administration. However, being falsely accused doesn’t mean they’re a great group of guys. As I understand it, they have a very active groupie scene of their own, do their own thing. They reportedly regularly run trains, pass women from guy to guy, etc. They invite women to their parties in outrageous fashion – I ran a flyer in a post last Halloween where they invited all the sorority women on campus to their party, provided they were not overweight and were prepared to dress like whores for the occasion. So, total douchebags, total debauchery at SAE. That makes them BMOC in a way, but also so far beyond civil behavior, many women avoid them and their frat. They are really an example of what I’m talking about – too much shady behavior, too much hooking up with sluts. I guess you could say they “are not received in polite society.”

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    Yes, there is something wrong with being a slut. The sluttier you are perceived to be, the further you get away from the ideal that a high-value man will be looking for in a relationship partner.

    If you truly don’t want a romantic relationship with a high-value man, then I suppose there’s nothing “wrong” with being a slut. But how many single women does that describe?

    But I hasten to add: There’s nothing wrong with being a slut with me.

  • Tom

    Isnt the observation of who actually is a slut, a matter of perception?
    To someone with similar tastes as Abott, a woman with 3 or maybe 5 past sexual partners would be a slut.
    To other men it might be 7 or 10/15 is perfectly fine. To some men it doesnt matter at all….
    A west coast friend of mine said in Califorina, 30 sexual partners is pretty common for women these days.
    Personal prefrence comes into play. So does insecurity. So does character.
    In my opinion, I still say,” All sluts are promiscuous, but not all promiscuous women are sluts.”..To me if a women is constantly trying to seek men out sexually to verify to herself her own desirability, she has problems, and could be a slut….However, a woman who has confidence and self esteem and seeks out men on occation to satisfy her sexual needs, to me is only displaying promiscuous behavior..I personally can live with that.She probably has the rest of her life in order too.
    I know to many men, it doesnt matter how or why a woman has had multiple partners,it is all the same and it turns him off. Fine… but is the mental opinion he has of her due to her activities, or due to his tolerance level? And what determinds his tolrance level? Moral influence from a religious background? Insecurity?

  • detinennui32

    Ehh, Susan, I think you’re off on this one. Will is on target.

    A slut is a sexually promiscuous woman.

    The description you offer for a “manslut” or a “manwhore” is actually a player or PUA.

    Anything else is, I think, an attempt at moral equivalence which serves only to dilute the term, eviscerate its meaning, and detract from the moral and social issues the term “slut” raises.

    Do “players” and PUAs and their lifestyles raise social and moral issues? Maybe. But those issues aren’t in play in this discussion.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @detinennui32

      Anything else is, I think, an attempt at moral equivalence which serves only to dilute the term, eviscerate its meaning, and detract from the moral and social issues the term “slut” raises.

      Thanks for pointing this out – I’ve been at a loss to figure out just what is rankling the men here. I don’t mean to make a moral equivalence – as I’ve said, I don’t take a moral view at all. I do think that female promiscuity is far more problematic than male promiscuity. But I’d be lying if I said it’s a good thing, or even a neutral thing, when men just get laid all the time with a variety of women :P The last thing society needs is more Rooshes. He is what I call a UMOS – unproductive member of society. This is the problem with promiscuity in general, for either sex.

  • Aldonza

    This:
    a girl that less openly-promiscuous girls get to look down on.
    Plus this:
    A whore has sex with anyone; a slut has sex with anyone but you.

    Seems kind of silly to debate a word and what it means as a label. There are people who would call me a slut…and sometimes I even like it. Most of the time though? I don’t really care. If you’re looking at me through such a narrow lens that you need to rely on inflammatory words to describe what you see, then we probably won’t have much to talk about.

  • Tom

    @ Whiteboykrisby
    The only times I have ever been accused of being a player or a manwhore are when a good looking girl, fully aware of who I am beforehand and totally ok with it, finds out about one or two of the mistakes I’ve made taking back marginal girls.

    Girls are willing to forgive, nay secretly like, that I have banged girls of their equal or hotter.
    _________________________
    Dude you think having sex with any women who is not a complete hottie is a mistake? Good god you how shallow that sounds? So what some hot slut thinks you are a manwhore if you did a 6. You ARE a manwhore even if you did 20 tens…Being a manwhore has nothing to do with the caliber of woman you slut around with…

  • Tom

    @ Rake
    If you truly don’t want a romantic relationship with a high-value man, then I suppose there’s nothing “wrong” with being a slut. But how many single women does that describe?

    But I hasten to add: There’s nothing wrong with being a slut with me.

    ____________________
    Most women are realistic.. Most women are not “hot” therefore they know they will never marry the good looking top exectutive…. There are plenty of good looking betas that will look the other way to get a “decent looking” woman who tears his ass up in bed.

  • Maura

    Cowardis the only term for a man that is as degrading as slut is for a woman. Men are not valued for their chastity nor looked down on for their lack thereof. Men are valued for their bravery & willingness to stand for whatever is perceived as right in their culture/time. For women the exact opposite is true. No one looks down on a woman who lacks courage, she isn’t required to have it.

    Alpha males are the ones who are the least afraid, or a least show no fear.

  • Tom

    @ Aldonza,

    Seems kind of silly to debate a word and what it means as a label. There are people who would call me a slut…and sometimes I even like it. Most of the time though? I don’t really care. If you’re looking at me through such a narrow lens that you need to rely on inflammatory words to describe what you see, then we probably won’t have much to talk about.

    _____________________

    But aldonza darling, you must know by now ALL women of experience are viewed as women who are not worthy, could NEVER be good girlfriends, good wives, good mothers, good teachers, good Doctors, good executives, and will always cheat on their significant other.
    Well, you are right, it is a very narrow minded view by mostly uninformed, insecure men. Many on the hypocritical side to boot.
    A woman of character is no more likely to cheat on her man, reguardless of her sexual expriences than any other woman.

  • Tom

    @ Maura
    Cowardis the only term for a man that is as degrading as slut is for a woman. Men are not valued for their chastity nor looked down on for their lack thereof.
    _____________________
    Sluts are geneally looked down on because it is said they lack self control(complete BS by the way)
    However, men sluts may display the EXACT supposed lack of self control (and they are praised by it?) The Sheeple here just kill me.

  • Aldonza

    But aldonza darling, you must know by now ALL women of experience are viewed as women who are not worthy, could NEVER be good girlfriends, good wives, good mothers, good teachers, good Doctors, good executives, and will always cheat on their significant other.

    There are plenty of people who believe that. And that’s their right. But what does that have to do with me or my life?

  • VI

    However, men sluts may display the EXACT supposed lack of self control (and they are praised by it?) The Sheeple here just kill me.

    Bullshit. Unless a man is only fucking fuglies, his promiscuity is not due to a lack of self-control. It’s due to his SKILL at seducing women.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @VI

      Bullshit. Unless a man is only fucking fuglies, his promiscuity is not due to a lack of self-control. It’s due to his SKILL at seducing women.

      This is obviously true. However, there is no question that a man who seduces many women loses the ability to bond with one woman. From a societal standpoint, that is a bad thing. The real question is: what is the man’s mission? What is his purpose in life? If it is seducing women, well that’s a very shallow and meaningless life. He leaves no legacy, no shadow, no footprint. You could make an argument that such a life shows an inability to delay gratification, and perhaps even an inability to attach emotionally.

  • OffTheCuff

    Coward is the only term for a man that is as degrading as slut is for a woman. Men are not valued for their chastity nor looked down on for their lack thereof. Men are valued for their bravery & willingness to stand for whatever is perceived as right in their culture/time.

    This is a very good point, although, I think “creep” is far more damaging. A coward can live alone in peace. A creep gets arrested for flirting, and placed on sex offender registries, and is reviled.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    @Tom & others

    I don’t think anyone is championing or encouraging promiscuous guys, we’re just pointing out that a good majority of the time young girls will look the other way. Society would be in better shape if they didn’t, but that just doesn’t happen often.

    If I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard a girl call a guy gross because of his reputation, only to eventually have sex with him… well then I’d have a shitload of nickels.

  • Maura

    @offTheCuff
    Yes, I agree that creep is proabably as inslting to a man as slut is to a woman

  • Blues

    But aldonza darling, you must know by now ALL women of experience are viewed as women who are not worthy, could NEVER be good girlfriends, good wives, good mothers, good teachers, good Doctors, good executives, and will always cheat on their significant other.

    Ok i had my doubts about Tom but i’m joning the Stephanie Rowling camp on that topic, no man would just talk like that, sweetie, sweetheart maybe, but darling no, i don’t even think a really conservative brit would use that.

  • jess

    cuff,
    .
    can a guy get arrested for flirting?
    .
    “im sorry sir, come with us, that pick up line was just too lame….”
    .
    I wonder how many guys who have been done with sexual harrassment came up with
    “but I was only flirting your honour!”
    “but her ass backed into my hand”
    “I thought she wanted me to follow her into the ladies”
    .
    mmm

  • ExNewYorker

    Tom sounds like Edwina from “Ab Fab”… :-)

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    I liked the Urban dictionary definition the best, but I would rephrase it:

    A slut is a woman with the morals of a man with low morals.

    So a slut is like what a common joe, the “I would fuck any woman that would fuck me” kind, if he was in position to cash on that.

    So a female slut is a woman who doesnt screen properly or doesnt screen at all, and is taken by the swing of the moment too frequently and with too many people. And that is usually linked to similar behaviors with drinking, drugs, lack of self esteem, etc. Addictive personality.

    And all of that because for a slut to happen, she only has to open her legs and let it happen = like a leaf to the wind. As opposed to the regular men slut, which involves a lot of work, and therefore a different personality traits.

    The female slut is comparable to the male virgin omega in a lot of checkpoints, with the female slut being more sociable.

    I know a bunch of girls who suck one dick at the bathroom, make out with the bartender, rub against some other dude, and go home with another one, and thats a regular “friday”. Some other girls who have had mini short relationships with every guy I know. Female sluts are like butterflies.

    There are quite fewer men-sluts or manwhores, and the social scene happens around them. The social scene rarely happens around the female sluts, so the female sluts go in groups and crash the scenes and try to grab some fish.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Yohami

      So a female slut is a woman who doesnt screen properly or doesnt screen at all, and is taken by the swing of the moment too frequently and with too many people. And that is usually linked to similar behaviors with drinking, drugs, lack of self esteem, etc. Addictive personality.

      Brilliant summary, I like it.

      The social scene rarely happens around the female sluts, so the female sluts go in groups and crash the scenes and try to grab some fish.

      Yes, this is my understanding at the college level. There are obviously some slutty acting women who have social status, but the truly shameless sluts who mindlessly bang every high status guy they can find usually gain access via crashing and initiating sex with a player immediately.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    jess, sexual harassment is ridiculous, until the law starts prosecuting women who flirt and tease and play sexual games to get favors everywhere

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Rake and Crispy are right

  • Blues

    can a guy get arrested for flirting?

    Well jess, if you can get arrested for “placing a hand inside a girl’s clothing in a way that suggests a sex act” even if it was consensual or by “eating doughnuts in a playground while unaccompanied by a minor” then i’d say yeah, that’s not as far fetched as it sounds.

  • Blues

    Female sluts are like butterflies.

    Exactly, like treacherous butterflies…

    Mariposa traicionera ♫

  • Clarence

    Ozymandias has a cute post about when she lost her virginity:

    http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com/

  • Clarence

    Yohami, et. all:

    It’s not even so much that “one can get arrested” for such stupid acts. More often it’s one can lose one’s job -with a black mark against employment in the same industry- due to a sexual harassment lawsuit. Those lawsuits operate on expansive, undefined concepts of SH , such as “hostile environment”. They are conducted via civil, not criminal standards of evidence, thus it’s easier to get a conviction. And the fines for a company can be immense.

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    Most women are realistic.. Most women are not “hot” therefore they know they will never marry the good looking top exectutive…. There are plenty of good looking betas that will look the other way to get a “decent looking” woman who tears his ass up in bed.

    And, sadly, if she’s a slut, she’s probably experienced so much alpha that her new beta boyfriend just won’t get the fireworks going, as much as she may wish he did. Then again, a beta male is pretty much the only choice she has for a long-term mate, because no man with lots of options will willingly choose to enter a committed long-term relationship with a slut.

    And bedroom skills are not a plus. Ever. An alpha male has no problem getting his woman to satisfy him in bed. She doesn’t need to have given 1,000 blowjobs before. Or any, for that matter. There are few men on this planet who love to be reminded how many other cocks his girlfriend has ridden before. And an extensive repertoire of bedroom tricks will be just such a reminder.

    Any slut who thinks that all that cock experience she’s getting is somehow adding any significant value is fooling herself.

  • jess

    rake- expereince
    .
    on the contrary i have heard men say how women sex skills vary a lot and can be a deal breaker.
    .
    some guys dont like inexperienced girls because they lack passion, just lie there, are not imaginative, can have trouble having orgasms.
    .
    there may be other men like you, but you are making a sweeping generalisation that simply isn’t true.
    .
    also alpha guys are not always great in bed- another falsehood being pushed around here.

  • Clarence

    jess:
    For maybe the first time EVAH I’m going to agree with you.
    Rake overstated his case or else has an extremely limited view of what women should be like in bed. The fact is, JUST FOR THE SEX (ignoring long term considerations) experienced enthusiastic girls are the best. And if she’s not experienced, she better at least be enthusiastic. Who wants to hump a dead fish?

  • detinennui32

    @ Tom:

    Dude you think having sex with any women who is not a complete hottie is a mistake? Good god you how shallow that sounds? So what some hot slut thinks you are a manwhore if you did a 6. You ARE a manwhore even if you did 20 tens…Being a manwhore has nothing to do with the caliber of woman you slut around with…

    In today’s SMP, neither men nor women call a guy who has done twenty 10s a manwhore.

    Men call him a hero. Men call him alpha.
    Women call him. And get with him. And screw him.

    You might not like it. But them’s the facts.

  • jess

    what on earth are you all on about???
    .
    being in a playground without a minor… um…. guys should not be in playgrounds by themselves… that should need no further explanation. as to why 2 women were ticketed is because the law cannot be seen to be hostile to men so treats everyone equally.
    So why not just warn them? becuase by ticketing a lone guy in a playground his details get on a data base for child protection. See? not so barmy after all is it? Only today british news is full of Millie who was kidnapped and murdered.
    .
    putting your hand inside a 15 yo’ blouse- in a photo.
    it does seem harsh to charge the guy but this is a tricky area- he was 17 so statutory rape issues loom. what if it was 18 yo guy and a 14 yo girl? – is that ok? the rule is- dont put your hand inside the blouse of a child in a photograph- its not that difficult to avoid surely?
    .
    ‘hostile environment’- you make it sound like guys can say hello to a girl and get charged with SH. This is scare mongering.
    .
    A girl likes to be asked out or flirted with. But if she gives you the cold shoulder you back off. its that easy.
    .
    i have had a few guys come on too strong when i was at work a few years ago- its a common thing for women to experience.
    .
    I was polite but firm in my rejection but a couple of guys kept inviting me out, leaving messages and even bringing flowers. when i eventually got a male friend to intercede in consecutive situations they were really pissed off. A hostile environment was very tangible. My car was vandalised in the car park for example when no one elses was. I probably could have pressed sexual harassment charges but i just braved it out- it wasn’t nice though and without my colleagues support it would have been awful. Again, not such an unfair protection in the law is it?

  • Blues

    For maybe the first time EVAH I’m going to agree with you.
    Rake overstated his case or else has an extremely limited view of what women should be like in bed. The fact is, JUST FOR THE SEX (ignoring long term considerations) experienced enthusiastic girls are the best. And if she’s not experienced, she better at least be enthusiastic. Who wants to hump a dead fish?

    And since when experienced and enthusiastic are mutually inclusive? she can have near zero experience and still enjoy it and personally because she enjoys it i enjoy it, would it be better if she knew “tricks”?, sure but id’ prefer she learned those WITH me. And before someone twists my words, would i reject a girl with more some history? no, but between 2 girls equal on all aspects but partner count the lowest count one is preferable.

  • Blues

    a)being in a playground without a minor… um…. guys should not be in playgrounds by themselves… that should need no further explanation.

    b) as to why 2 women were ticketed is because the law cannot be seen to be hostile to men so treats everyone equally.

    Does anyone else detect the clear radfem hypocritical double standard here or is it just me?

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    I did

  • Blues

    Ozymandias has a cute post about when she lost her virginity:

    Dunno about the post itself but the tags are cracking me up

    Labels: dammit I’m all grown up and shit now, I am a dumbass, morgan, my playa skillz are flawless yo, nostalgia yeah right, oh god she’s going on about her vaj again, seriously wtf

  • Clarence

    jess:

    I suggest you do NOT MESS WITH ME on this.
    I know quite a bit about SH law in the USA and you do not.
    Do you want me to make you look stupid? And yes, the laws here are so vague that SH policies in corporate can literally be read as making one guilty until proven innocent.

    So c’mon little girl. Dare me. Otherwise keep your “scare mongering” accusations to yourself.

  • jess

    blues
    .
    well of course, no 2 humans are identical. i suppose if there were 3 versions of my partner and one had 1 ex, another had 10 ex’s and another had 30 exes I guess I would plump for the middle guy but its not something I would consider important and would barely register in my head.
    .
    It bemuses me that a guy could fall for a girl, adore her mind, soul and body and then say “you slept with 10 guys!- get lost”.
    .
    just sounds too far fetched to be a common thing. Im prepared to accept it goes on but thankfully as far as I am aware, its not a super common.
    .
    and i dont think anything is mutually exclusive- I was pointing out that your blanket statement was only true for some men.
    .
    look, i used to have, (and perhaps still do – modesty forbids) a bit of young innocent look. I had big eyes, long hair, and was and still am very skinny. I did attract guys who thought i was an innocent little angel. One guy even called me that. Of course when I opened my gob (and i was a pretty political feminist back then) they were soon disabused of the misconception. Some guys were intimidated I’m sure. But the guys I did hook up with or have relationships with didn’t seem the slightest bit put off. In fact some guys said it made them feel good they could please me when my experience meant I was in a position to be a judge of such things. A male ego thing Im sure and girls don’t see sex as sport in quite the way guys do but nonetheless, me not being a virgin was not a turn off.
    .
    The only guy who perhaps prized my innocence was my 1st partner who i was with for 12 years who took my virginity. But I don’t think he had any frame of reference either.
    .
    I have known guys say they dumped pretty girls for being sexually boring or that they had no chemistry connection. I have also known guys stay with girls but complained to others that things werent great in the sack. Of course I have known girls do that to. I guess people are different and its a complex pattern here.

  • Clarence

    Oh c’mon!
    That paragraph about the BJ and how it was the greatest thing in the history of ever and then the next paragraph how she didn’t know she was supposed to move her mouth…cute. Funny. Very human.

  • Passer_By

    “Slut”

    To a woman: another woman who has sex without a level corresponding male commitment that is required (by the woman making the judgment) for sex, thereby potentially lowering the commitment required from other men.

    To a man seeking a LTR: a woman who has had sex with a sufficient number of partners that he will feel free floating and unexplainable anxiety over her sexual past. This number will depend upon several factors, including his number of partners and how much she convinces him during sex that he makes her cum like no other man.

    To a man not seeking a LTR: A cool chick with a great attitude – if her standards are low enough to include him. Otherwise, a stuck up bitch.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Passer By
      Another great definition of slut, and its various applications.

  • Blues

    @Clarence: Granted, the post was hella fun, i just felt a little cheated to find out it was oral virginity, not virginity virginity, i don’t like to be played with like that, i have expectations and standards for my erotica too, ya know what i mean?
    [/drama lama]

  • Clarence

    Gives Blues an old Smokey Robinson record, and a hanky ;)

  • jess

    clarence- dont mess with me
    .
    why, wot u gonna do?
    kick my sorry cyber ass?
    you sound so cool- honestly I feel myself drawn to your masculine and masterful prowess…..
    .
    on a serious note- I have had to liasise with Human Relations Depts regularly in all of my past jobs.
    .
    True, I only know the UK laws well but I doubt very much these terrible injustices are occurring at the hands of the american courts. Hey- I watch Judge Judy- she seems perfectly sensible to me.
    .
    US law is developed with case law just like the UK. So if you have a case with a terrible injustice then I would happily read it. Give a link or an idea where to look and I’ll spend some time reading up on it.
    .
    I know some companies have a no relationship rule for workers but there are reasons for that.
    .
    In the scenario of a guy asking a girl for her number or to go for a drink no one is going to convict on sexual harassment.
    .
    If however, there is physical stuff, suggestive jokes, brushing up, groping, malicious texts, inappropriate emails, then all staff, male or female shouldn’t have to endure that. Is that not fair, proportional and reasonable?
    .
    what some people consider as a joke or harmless fun can be very upsetting for others. its a simple respect thing.

  • Mike C

    @Susan
    .
    Honestly, I’m finding it just fascinating that the men don’t want me to put down manwhores. As if that’s a noble life purpose.
    .
    “Manwhores”, and for sake of argument I’ll say that is 50-100+ to me are like competitive eaters….you know… the guys that can eat like 70 hot dogs in 5 minutes or 10 pizzas. Yes, absolutely, there is ***nothing*** noble about it, nothing to be held up as a role model, but in a sense, there is something impressive about it. It is an accomplishment in a twisted kind of way.
    .
    Fact of the matter, is it takes serious chops to bed that many women especially if you aren’t scraping the bottom of the barrel. Because ultimately as the guy you have to approach, attract, comfort, and seduce. Alot of skill involved in getting from A to P in V. Again, for a woman, just a matter of being willing and going with the flow. See Yohami at 3:32 PM. I can’t say it any better.
    .
    To me though, trying to get that many women indicates something missing in the guy as to a greater life purpose. I’ll go back to my player alpha co-worker. Every story, every day is about going out, trying to meet chicks, game them, text them back and forth, work them, etc. Jeez, it is all-consuming. If I were single, I’d be too busy poring over stock charts trying to be successful and make money to waste that much time always trying to score new pussy. At some point, in my opinion it becomes pathological. I think men have a normal, natural drive for variety, and I think it is OK to indulge that to some extent while younger if you have the option to do it. But there is a point where it becomes a “sickness” IMO. I see it in this guy (who is up to 208). It is almost like greed. No matter how much you have it is never enough. That is warped. I think sluts (except for maybe a minority who are high T-male brain wired) are NOT acting out of a normal drive, but acting out of neediness for endless validation from high status males, so it is a warped lifestyle as well.
    .
    I’ve written in the past about one couple I know. They have known each other all their lives, and they are both extraordinarily good looking, at least 9s. They’ve been good friends, but she’s been with only 2 men in relationships, and he’s been with at least 100 women. He recently confessed that he has been in love with her for 8 years and suggested that now that they’re out of college, he’d like to try it for real. She rejected him because of his number. She just can’t get over the idea that he’s had his dick in that many women. It grosses her out, and she believes that he will be unable to be monogamous in any case. She’s right about that.
    .
    I can’t say for sure, but my guess is she would be the exception, not the rule, and as others have pointed out it is more about quality than quantity. I think 8-9 women are bothered if they find out you’ve been banging a bunch of 5-6s because it is insulting to them. WhiteKrispy has a kick-ass post about avoiding 6s…the reasons why…and the consequences if you don’t. I remember when I was bouncing (and thus had to stay next to the entrance door) I’d get these 4-5 overweight chicks who started congregating around me. It just wasn’t in me to be a dick, but I later learned that some of hot waitresses and bartenders were like WTF is he doing talking to them. The alpha bouncer who sort of took me under his wing explained it all, and basically said you’ve got to send them packing. You can’ t be seen talking to them and letting them flirt with you.
    .
    So, I think a guy can be with 20-30 8-9s and that isn’t going to hit his value with other 8-9s at all, but if he starts racking up to 100 and a good chunk of those are what those high status girls would call “skanks” his value is going to take a huge hit.

  • Mike C

    Especially in Social Circle Game, a man can handicap himself with attractive women by sleeping with too many ugly women. While an isolated drunken lapse will be forgiven, if it is known that he mates with ugly women routinely, he lowers his value to their level. And an attractive woman will feel that her value is being lowered to that level if she sleeps with him.
    On the other hand, it doesn’t matter how many women a man is known to have slept with if they are all 8s, 9s and 10s in looks or have high status (such as a celebrity).

    .
    Yes

  • Mike C

    I think the answer is in the degree of sluttiness. When guys here talk about sluts, some will use that term to mean every woman who isn’t a virgin.
    .
    I think only a very, very, very, small minority guys use the term in that way.
    .
    Others will say 10 partners. I’ve been called a slut by both men and women in the blogosphere. Some guys don’t get nervous until a woman goes over 25 or so. Alphas who get a lot of women are generally more tolerant of sluttiness, at least in the short-term, than betas who don’t get a ton of sex.
    .
    IMO, the key factor is lots of casual, *non-relationship* sex, because to me it reveals a woman who is simply indulging because she can. In my book, a woman gets a few freebie mistakes with alphas she thought might be interested in something more then a pump and dump. But if she has made a routine habit/lifestyle out of quickly and easily giving it up to every higher SMV guy that spits game her way, then she is a slut.

  • Blues

    I’ve written in the past about one couple I know. They have known each other all their lives, and they are both extraordinarily good looking, at least 9s. They’ve been good friends, but she’s been with only 2 men in relationships, and he’s been with at least 100 women. He recently confessed that he has been in love with her for 8 years and suggested that now that they’re out of college, he’d like to try it for real. She rejected him because of his number. She just can’t get over the idea that he’s had his dick in that many women. It grosses her out, and she believes that he will be unable to be monogamous in any case. She’s right about that.

    And i think the bolded part is the real problem, it’s the same reason as to why it’s very rare for childhood friends to hook up despite what Hollywood wants us to believe, i wish i could link but i don’t have it and google didn’t help much either but i do remember The Red Queen did mention something about this near the end of the book.

  • Mike C

    Some men are players who get with girls and seduce them via deceit – they make her believe at least for a time that they are interested in a relationship.
    .
    This is true…my co-worker pulls this move often. That said, often the women invent/assume the relationship in their head simply because sex took place…and he just omits talking about other women.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      often the women invent/assume the relationship in their head simply because sex took place…and he just omits talking about other women.

      Yes, women are very frequently guilty of going along with, or even perpetrating, this “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Which is fine, if they’re willing to accept the risk. “Ask me no questions, I’ll tell you no lies.” If they get a nasty surprise, though, they don’t get to call the guy a jerk. This is why I have no problem with players – and am even quite fond of some of the players who comment here. Unless a guy is practicing outright deceit, he’s not guilty of misleading. Lying by omission doesn’t count – it’s the woman’s responsibility to ask the hard questions if she needs to know what’s going on.

  • whiteboykrispy

    @Tom

    “Dude you think having sex with any women who is not a complete hottie is a mistake?…”

    Reframe your strawman to “any girl 7+”- Yes.

    “… Good god you how shallow that sounds? So what some hot slut thinks you are a manwhore if you did a 6….”

    Shallow? Perhaps if it didn’t have real consequences. And I’ve written about these consequences before, it wasn’t pretty.

    “…You ARE a manwhore even if you did 20 tens…Being a manwhore has nothing to do with the caliber of woman you slut around with…”

    I disagree. Calling one a manwhore brings taste into the equation, and someone banging 10s has the utmost taste, and skill, with women. The entire difference between a manwhore and a lothario is the hotness of the women they get.

    But you don’t actually have problems with promiscuous men per se, just the idea that they are celebrated while your reason d’etre- proclaiming the unchaste women of the world excellent for commitment- is laughed at.

    Manwhore is a dirty word, so it’s obvious your intention is to bring down the dude who sleeps around, even if it is exclusively with hot chicks. But you defend to the death any promiscuous woman.The manwhore label is just one more shaming label pot shot in your war for equality of promiscuity.

    You constantly beef with men who don’t like sluts, and rage at the screen when nobody agrees with you that there is nothing different about promiscuous women.

    You try endlessly, like a broken record, to equivocate male and female promiscuity, despite all evidence- socially, psychologically, biologically- that a vast majority of men prefer chaste (or relatively chaste) women for commitment, and a vast majority of women are absolutely fascinated with men who have gotten around with high quality women.

    Your agenda is clear, and I enjoy reading your comments as well as knowing that as soon as promiscuity become the topic, your batlight is shining in the night sky.

    If you’ll permit me to ask- Are you a girl, possibly one of a promiscuous background? It would clear up so much.

  • SayWhaat

    A guy can be a player, possibly even a cad without being a manslut.

    Again, sorry to keep bringing up the reality TV examples…Bentley from the Bachelorette is a Mormon, and he attended BYU which means for sure he wasn’t banging tons of girls (if having sex at all). This dude was the definition of cad, one huge enough to break a girl’s heart, and all on television to boot.

  • Anonymous

    In light of the rampant spread of sluttiness in America, here is the new single male agenda:

    1) Assume all women are slut until proven otherwise. A slut is a women who has had sex outside committed relationships, this includes one-night stands, casual fuck buddies, sex while traveling, fucking and dating multiple men at the same time, etc. These women are riskier for long term committed marriages based on pair bonding, and a guy is at a higher risk of being cuckolded. If you are a guy who is the committed and faithful type, you would be amazed at the sluttiness of girls once you scratch the surface, I have dumped my share of chicks who demonstrated any signs of above behavior. If you are the player type, then you probably love sluts and you know what to do.

    2) Do not marry period. If you want to have kids wait until you are in the mid-40s and find a girl in the late twenties, and have a child. But don’t sign the marriage certificate, you will only owe child support. Women have a finite shelf-life, men don’t, don’t let the feminists tell you otherwise. Don’t ever apologize for being attracted to younger women. The Western marriage laws, child custody, alimony, etc. are all stacked against men. Why bother with sexless marriages?

    3) Don’t date women who are older than 35, the large majority of them are bitter and just not fun to hang around, their negativity in life will pull you down. The younger girls are generally more optimistic and have a more cheerful outlook.

    4) Take care of your health, exercise(heavy cardio and compound weight exercises), eat well, cut back on alcohol or no alcohol, all this will raise your testosterone level naturally and will make your erections rock hard as well. The girls will thank you.

    5) Learn how to please a women in bed, become a passionate lover, take care of your women and give her mind blowing orgasms.

    6) Do well professionally at work and become financially independent. Have interests outside work, travel the world, and enjoy all the good things that life has to offer.

    Aren’t you glad that you are a man?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anonymous

      Do not marry period…don’t sign the marriage certificate, you will only owe child support…The Western marriage laws, child custody, alimony, etc. are all stacked against men. Why bother with sexless marriages?

      Newsflash: 83% of marriages between college educated people do not end in divorce. And most marriages are not sexless. If they are, it’s usually due to lack of male dominance – get on over to Athol’s blog. Successful marriages confer numerous benefits on a man’s physical and emotional health.

      You can obviously choose never to marry, but I don’t allow that advice to be given here. I’m very pro-marriage. You just need to choose very, very carefully.

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    “The fact is, JUST FOR THE SEX (ignoring long term considerations) experienced enthusiastic girls are the best.”

    True, I should have emphasized that I was talking about the best strategy for attracting a man of quality to a committed relationship — in other words, making him fall in love with you. A high notch count and polished whore-skills will hinder that endeavor. But of course for casual sport-fucking a good sex athlete is desirable, not least because there’s not much time for training the girl during a one-night stand. If a girl desires to be a one-night-stand or drunk-dialed fuck buddy to an alpha, slutty behavior will not get in the way of that goal.

    But I suspected that Tomgirl was trying to convince herself that a slutty history would not get in the way of capturing a man’s heart. It will. Sluts have to settle for the cock only.

    However, just like “alpha,” “slut” is a perception. When beta men transform themselves into alphas using Game, they simply decide to change who they are — how they act, how they think of themselves, how they regard others. And they usually end up with a new social circle as a result, because their old friends still see them as betas.

    A “slut” can do the same thing. She can decide to stop acting like a slut, change her appearance and behaviors, change the way she thinks about herself and others. She can become a new person and enter a new social circle, where she isn’t considered a slut because she never acts like one.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Ok i had my doubts about Tom but i’m joning the Stephanie Rowling camp on that topic, no man would just talk like that, sweetie, sweetheart maybe, but darling no, i don’t even think a really conservative brit would use that.

    Actually this sentence is telling but not because of that, IMO. But the fact that she (and I’m calling you a she from now on Tammi) bulked together doctor and teachers as part of the slut shaming, something that no one here ever advocated. Hamstering that “Guys that don’t marry sluts, don’t hire sluts either” is such a stupid feminist reasoning that I really have no doubts at this point.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    yeah what is unusual in Tom is the “stupid feminist reasoning”. Feminists guys at least make sense. Tom reasons like a woman: everything depicted logic or not based on his very own personal preferences.

    like in: shaming a promiscuous girl is bad but shaming a promiscuous man is fine. I only see that kind of stuff happening in women. Add the womanish language and Tom sounds like a TomBoy.

    But there are people who are born with the wrong gender and there are manginas and… who knows what else. Maybe Tom has the XY, but is using only half of his chromosomes

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Maybe Tom has the XY, but is using only half of his chromosomes

      This cracked me up. I like the idea of using some chromosomes and ignoring others.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    But there are people who are born with the wrong gender and there are manginas and… who knows what else. Maybe Tom has the XY, but is using only half of his chromosomes

    I also entertain the possibility of Tammi being a trans, born a woman turned into a man, born a man that is turning into a woman. But I lean for woman faking to be a man, because…? Well I can’t see why really. But I can’t deny the evidence of a bitter woman bitching because she cannot get her cake and eat it too that calls herself Tom for mysterious reasons.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I think someone suggested once that “Tom” is actually real Tom’s promiscuous girlfriend. She has access to his Facebook account, and enough info about his past to give some data “proving” she is male. If this is the case, it’s very unfortunate. This woman is on here all the time arguing with determination and she’s not going to hear what she wants to hear. She must have regrets or even doubts about her ability to be faithful in the relationship, and seeks confirmation here that it will all be OK.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    I have met a few of man to woman transgendered people and their reasoning and logic was still 100% male, so if Tom is a trans, he/she the other way around.

    Aint it funny that we can smell gender in the screen

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I have met a few of man to woman transgendered people and their reasoning and logic was still 100% male, so if Tom is a trans, he/she the other way around.

    Mmm interesting data.

    Aint it funny that we can smell gender in the screen

    Had I mentioned that Shakespeare used to drove me nuts? The women acted and talked like men with boobs, it was a relief when I found out that this plays were written for men in drag, That explains it!
    I usually have issues with males writing females characters they are usually so freaking wrong (the latest biggest offender for me are Priscilla Hutchinson novels), Of course there are exceptions Saramago for example had amazing women of all types… Anyway I’m used to this, just not with a clear intend though.

  • Brendan

    I have met a few of man to woman transgendered people and their reasoning and logic was still 100% male, so if Tom is a trans, he/she the other way around.

    Agree. The MTFs I have met when I was younger were all (although I never would have told them this to their faces) quite male, still, in their thinking and expression .. and sexuality, sexual aggression and so on. I disappointed a couple of them, I think, because I’m not into men sexually, even quite feminine/attractive men (and some trannies are quite attractive visually if they have the proper body size and type and so on), but I enjoyed the talks because marginal cases are always interesting. Troubled folks, really, but an interesting conversation partner.

  • Brendan

    I usually have issues with males writing females characters they are usually so freaking wrong (the latest biggest offender for me are Priscilla Hutchinson novels), Of course there are exceptions Saramago for example had amazing women of all types… Anyway I’m used to this, just not with a clear intend though.

    Franzen does a pretty good job with his female characters.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Franzen does a pretty good job with his female characters.

    Reads his bio in Wikipedia, finds his rules for writing:

    It’s doubtful that anyone with an internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction (the TIME magazine cover story detailed how Franzen physically disables the Net portal on his writing laptop).

    THAT is why I never get anything done nowadays. Taking this advice from now on. I also feel better about not liking to write 400 pages when I can tell my story in 150, maybe less. Of course no one will ever publish me like that but that is life.

  • Brendan

    He has some interesting writing habits — reminds me of a lighter version of Proust’s odd habits, although significantly less eccentric. His most recent book, “Freedom”, is well worth a read, and I think he gets the main female character quite well.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I just have to say I am so happy to see Brendan here. Such a treat.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “Freedom”, is well worth a read, and I think he gets the main female character quite well.

    Adding it to my list. Thanks! And for weird writing habits Stephen King is worst IMO. Is like 12 hours reading and 12 hours writing, eating and sleeping optional! :)

  • Blues

    Actually this sentence is telling but not because of that, IMO. But the fact that she (and I’m calling you a she from now on Tammi) bulked together doctor and teachers as part of the slut shaming, something that no one here ever advocated.

    Well shit, i had not noticed that one, good call. Guess i still have stuff to learn.

  • Abbot

    some men will not give a woman of experience a chance at a relationship
    .
    Does this somehow anger or create a disadvantage for WOEs? How so? If not, then no harm done and lets move on.
    .
    And what determinds his tolrance level? Moral influence from a religious background? Insecurity?
    .
    None of the above. Men avoid sluts for commitment simply because they can. Take away that option and just about every man including those being recast as “insecure” [a common propaganda campaign on this site] will embrace sluts. Of course that would stifle the slut pozzies and disorient sluts who walk.

  • Mike C

    For shits and giggles:

    http://bookblog.net/gender/genie.php

    I don’t think it is accurate though. I just ran a bunch of Aldonza and Susan’s comments as a check, and it keeps saying they are male.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I just ran a bunch of Aldonza and Susan’s comments as a check, and it keeps saying they are male.

      Haha, Aldonza and I are both on the analytical side for women – so I’m not surprised. I hope that doesn’t mean I’m high testosterone. :-/

  • chris b

    Hello Susan long time reader first time commentator i love your blog very informative must say. However, on the subject matter i must say that the word slut is very subjective considering that everyone has a different connotation of the word. Most people would consider the sluts to be women who sleep around alot. However my question is there a certain types of sluts. I mean if a woman genuinely likes sex and not doing it for the wrong reasons ( attention and validation) does that still make her a slut.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @chris b

      I mean if a woman genuinely likes sex and not doing it for the wrong reasons ( attention and validation) does that still make her a slut.

      Thanks so much for commenting! I think the answer to your question rests on the question of how selective the woman is. For example, a woman who loves and sex has it just for pleasure, frequently changing partners, having sex with strangers, for example, would most definitely fit the definition of slut because she has detached sex from her emotions. On the other hand, guys here say they love the idea of a woman being “their slut.” Meaning that they want a woman to love sex, love trying new things, mixing it up, etc. but only with them. That woman, being highly sexual in a monogamous relationship, would definitely not be a slut in the pejorative sense.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    On the other hand, it doesn’t matter how many women a man is known to have slept with if they are all 8s, 9s and 10s in looks or have high status (such as a celebrity).

    Personal anecdote.
    I already mentioned that when I was single in my country I had a lot of married men chasing me around, never hooked up with them (I’m not an idiot), but there was one that tried a lot, lets call him D.
    D was obviously an experienced gamer and he tried pretty much every trick in the book, neg me, flatter me, ask me out, bitched about his wife “not understanding him”, he was my type (white and skinny) but I knew he was married (married/taken men = women to me), I felt a bit of pity for him because he tried so hard but still not pity enough to accept his advances.
    Well we all were part of the same political association and I noticed that after a while, he started to insist in us visiting his house, like he mentioned it several times till we all agreed to go together. He specifically assigned me a role to make sure I was going to attend.
    Well his wife was one of the most beautiful women I ever seen, long dark hair, big eyes, clear pale skin and if you look at her body you could hardly ever know she already had two kids (I consider myself a 6 I will rate her an 9 everyone remarked on how pretty his wife was so I’m probably right). He also lived in an apartment three times the size of the house I shared with my parents.
    Well after the party I though that D was done with me given that no man will introduce me to his pretty wife and kids and then think I will want anything to do with him…Yeah I know I’m an idiot.
    He totally tried even harder as soon as he could, my guess is that he was trying preselection with his wife and obvious higher social status, in case I had any doubts which I didn’t he had a nice car from the same year so I knew he was high status I didn’t knew how his wife looked though.
    I went for mildly pity him to downright disgusted by him I totally ignored him from that day on, to this day is the only one of that circle of friends that I don’t speak to. I know that is probably the minority but really if normal girls are supposed to be more interested in a guy because they can pride themselves that you somehow got his attention away from someone hotter. I’m glad not to be normal, very very glad.

  • chris b

    @susan i understand but what if that is the woman’ choice sometimes people just want good sex and not the baggage that comes along with it by most people’s defition i could be called a manslut lol.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    just want good sex and not the baggage that comes along with it

    Err do you realize that the baggage that comes with sex it is called a human being?

  • Blues

    This is obviously true. However, there is no question that a man who seduces many women loses the ability to bond with one woman.

    Or maybe it just takes him a much greater woman for him to bond.

  • chris b

    Or maybe it just takes him a much greater woman for him to bond.

    Thats true blue.

    @steph
    Err do you realize that the baggage that comes with sex it is called a human being

    If you not in a relationship with them you dont have to deal with their bull shit. You just get your nut and go i do this all the time with the girls i would never have a ltr with.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Man, I am doing this slut thing all wrong. Good thing, too, some of the women described herein sound obnoxious. I’ve never been so happy to be going to a liberal arts college without sports…

    To be completely honest, perhaps I’m deriving men from a different sample than the commenters here, but most of the guys I’ve spoken with have either not cared about their girlfriend’s promiscuity (again, barring STDs) or actively desired a woman who’s slutty (because of high sex drive, knowledge of what gets him off, knowledge of what gets her off, etc.). (Also, this guy is very enthusiastic about his love for sluts.) I think it’s probably a bell curve here: a large group of guys in the center who don’t really care, or who mildly prefer a more chaste or more slutty woman, with a few at the extremes who actively prefer a slut or a virgin.

    I’m also trying to work out whether my friend, who’s in a polyamorous relationship with her boyfriend and their girlfriend, her first two partners, counts as a slut or not. Very annoying.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ozy
      That’s a very interesting question about polyamory. I don’t think it necessarily means a person is a slut. It depends on the motives of the individuals involved. FWIW, in every account I’ve read from poly types, there is not an equal degree of enthusiasm among the partners. One partner proposes opening the relationship for sexual variety, which serves as an ultimatum of sorts for the other partner. The accounts I’m referring to are by people twice your age, mixing children into the lifestyle as well.

      I don’t understand polyamory – the physiological aspects of it, including the role of jealousy. I cannot even fathom such a lifestyle. So whether a poly person is a slut would, I think, depend on how they view sex – whether it’s strictly a physical pleasure to be enjoyed, without emotional complications or a means of communicating and sharing emotional intimacy. That’s the real line for me.

  • Mike C

    To be completely honest, perhaps I’m deriving men from a different sample than the commenters here, but most of the guys I’ve spoken with have either not cared about their girlfriend’s promiscuity (again, barring STDs) or actively desired a woman who’s slutty (because of high sex drive, knowledge of what gets him off, knowledge of what gets her off, etc.).
    .
    Well….I think there are 2 factors at play here:

    1. I think we’ve already established your tastes in men, and the men you hang with probably aren’t representative of the average guy. No offense, but I think you’ve pretty much said you exclusively target super-beta nerd boys.

    2. Age – I think you are 19? At your age, with the guys you are hanging out with and talking too, marriage and being a potential marriage partner are off the table. They aren’t going to care about promiscuity in girlfriends who are temporary playmates, especially if they are guys just thanking their lucky stars to finally be getting laid consistently.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I agree with Mike chances are that your personal social cluster is not going to be affected with slutshaming Ozy.
    I mean a lot of the issues men have is the fact that sluts are not honest about their attractions, they spent their youth banging guys for free that were not anywhere near their social market and then want to charge for the same service (or less) and they know by heart that this women are more likely to continue banging Alphas behind their backs or sponsored by alimony support after the divorce.
    If you only date nerd types as long as you don’t show signs of wanting to keep pursuing other nerds after committing, chances are that they are just going to be sorry they didn’t meet you before than counting a large pool of other nerds. Or I am wrong guys?

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Mike C: Oh, I target nerdy betaboys sexually, but I talk about sex with all sorts of people. :) It interests me. And most men of my acquaintance seem to not regard it as that much of an issue or, as I said, actively favor promiscuity. It is true that my friend cluster tends to be more intelligent and interested in “geek culture” than the average, but they have a wide spread of personality traits, family backgrounds, etc.

    The sense I had gathered from this thread was that the people here found promiscuous women less attractive for dating in college, not just later in life; was that mistaken?

    Steph: So it’s okay to be a slut as long as I’m a honest slut? :) That’s a relief.

    I’ve never understood this notion of “charging” for sex. If I’m dating someone, I want the relationship to be fulfilling for both of us, not something he has to suffer through to obtain pussy.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Or maybe it just takes him a much greater woman for him to bond.

    I cosign this. In a way, a man with options and experience behaves a lot like a woman. Lots of screening. Low tolerance.

  • Matt

    The sense I had gathered from this thread was that the people here found promiscuous women less attractive for dating in college, not just later in life; was that mistaken?

    Sluts are more attractive for dating in college. Most men in college encourage sluttiness because it increases their chance of shooting up their number with hot women who like to “have fun” on the weekends.

    Men don’t like sluts as much AFTER college when they are looking for more long term prospects because acquiring sex from attractive sexually desirable women gets significantly harder (no mo fraternity parties :( ).

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I’ve never understood this notion of “charging” for sex. If I’m dating someone, I want the relationship to be fulfilling for both of us, not something he has to suffer through to obtain pussy.

    I meant that this women were offering free easy sex to the frat boys for no commitment at all, going to their houses and doing all the work to ensure they got laid and then turn around and say to betas that they will have to do a lot of effort (dates, cohabitation, marriage) to get the same thing just because they feel they deserve better after years of not deserving better.
    Is an interesting female double standard that barely no one acknowledge the “settling” they don’t call it finding the best man you ever met and marry him to spent the rest of your life with him, give him children and grow old, but finding a guy willing to commit so you fulfill your dreams (wedding, white picket fence, dogs) regardless of who the guys is or how much do you really love him or if you spent your nights longing for your young years of banging guys that you cannot get to bang again and settling for him is preferable to the alternatives.

  • Abbot

    most of the guys I’ve spoken with have…not cared about their girlfriend’s promiscuity
    .
    Efforts at damage control were successfully neutralized at the very beginning of this thread; however, a reminder at this point is obviously warranted:
    .

    men LOVE sluts. Men NEED sluts. Always have, always will. Fact is, these days they dont charge for the service. Invent and distribute BC pills and you are all set. As long as sluts are confined to urban pockets in the West and to the small minority of women who go to college in the West and as long as they are not generating new sluts beyond what is needed, the system works perfectly. As planned. All is well.

    .
    Okay…that should suffice to effectively keep propaganda out of at least the next 45 comments

  • 108spirits

    Few men will tell a woman that they disapprove of sluts face to face in public, because that’s a dumb move socially. The femtards in their social circle will forever hold that against those men.

    Sorry ozy, a lot of those men you talk to would never consider you to be long term materials, but they wouldn’t tell you that to your face, for it accomplishes nothing and potentially can bring them many enemies. Besides, you’re 19, your male peers are likely in college / uni, they aren’t at a stage where they start to think long terms. They just want to get laid.

    I’ve been in many of those conversations and I never said anything bad about sluts. I don’t have anything personal against them, but I don’t want one to be the mother of my children that’s for sure, nor even one to invest emotionally in (LTR). It’s a great strategy for men to shut the fuck up and play the non-judgmental fella, as you’ll get to hear every nasty thing you want to know about her, before you decide to commit or not.

  • jess

    such charming threads all of you…
    .
    i never made a secret out of my past and was offered LTRs from guys.
    .
    my SO couldnt give a toss about my past- nor I, his.
    .
    as I have said before the vast majority of my experienced freidns up are luvved up with great, attractive, successful guys. And they were pretty much were drawn from the same social group so they knew each others histories.
    .
    You are again, under the faltering assumption that ALL guys think like you. They really dont. People have a variety of views on the matter.
    .
    If ALL men thought like you then my friends would be single, childless and unmarried. Not so.

  • Brendan

    I don’t understand polyamory – the physiological aspects of it, including the role of jealousy. I cannot even fathom such a lifestyle. So whether a poly person is a slut would, I think, depend on how they view sex – whether it’s strictly a physical pleasure to be enjoyed, without emotional complications or a means of communicating and sharing emotional intimacy. That’s the real line for me.

    There is an interesting book about this, Susan, that a poly person handed to me several years ago in a proselytization effort (which failed) called “The Ethical Slut”. It’s about how to make polyamory ethical — basically by having agreed rules. It doesn’t really address the jealousy aspect (most poly people are, in my personal experience with them, very derisive of people who admit to being sexually jealous of their mates, and consider themselves to be “more evolved” or “superior” to these (i.e., most) people) or the changed feelings issue beyond recognizing that this is a risk and that it’s one everyone must accept (i.e., someone may eventually drop out of your poly thing and go exclusive with a subsequent lover). The way one person described it to me is that they had a number one, a number two, and then everyone else. 1 was serious and had priority, but had to welcome a bit of balancing with 2 as well. Beyond that, it was casual sex adventures that were to be conducted without threatening 1 or 2. Sometimes disclosed, sometimes not, but always disclosed that it could be happening type of thing.

    My own sense, Susan, is that poly people tend to embrace the concept of being sluts, proudly. These are, by definition, people who are generally more promiscuous than average and they like it that way — that’s why they do what they do. There aren’t many people who can operate that way — male or female — in the context of a long term relationship with someone they care about, but there are a handful of them and they are the poly people.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Brendan
      The problem with some poly relationships is that not all people are in it for the same reasons. I don’t know if you’re familiar with Steve Pavlina – he writes a very successful personal development blog and gives seminars in Las Vegas. He’s a guru at this point. He basically decided he wanted to have sex with other people, and told his wife this is how it was going to be. It was pretty clear she was less than enthused but said OK – they have two kids. (I know this story because he shared it on his blog as it was unfolding.) Immediately, he began dating other women, and got very annoyed with her for not bringing other men into the marriage. After several months of this, he decided to divorce her and marry one of his poly partners. He decided to keep the mansion, citing the need for more space with a variety of poly relationships, and booted her into a small rental property nearby. He also felt it was best for the kids if his ex had sole custody. As a final insult, he removed his ex-wife’s blog from his blogroll.

      That’s probably one of the best known poly stories, and I don’t think any of those people were cut out for it. He was just looking for a way to change partners. Sometimes not even poly people are poly people.

  • Abbot

    “as I have said before the vast majority of my experienced freidns up are luvved up “
    .
    Efforts at damage control were successfully neutralized at the beginning of this thread; however, a reminder at this point is obviously warranted:
    .

    Not all men will reject sluts. In fact, there may be just enough to go around given that men overall vastly outnumber the global slut-minority population

    .
    Okay…that should suffice to effectively keep propaganda out of at least the next 42 comments. Although the temptation to self-placate or influence lurking female readers must be painfully overwhelming

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Not all people use a primary/secondary model of poly: there’s also polyfidelity (a classic triad), the people who only have vanilla sex within the relationship but allow both partners to do BDSM outside it, the 100 Mile Rule (i.e. “fuck around if you’re 100 miles away only”), Don’t Ask Don’t Tell relationships, people with multiple casual relationships, people who think primary/secondary is bullshit, etc. With the primary/secondary model there’s prescriptive and descriptive primary/secondary: “prescriptive” is like “I already am dating Alice who’s my primary, so Bob has to be my secondary”; “descriptive” is like “I’m living with Alice and our relationship is serious, so she’s my primary, but Bob is a lot more of a see-each-other-twice-a-week thing, so he’s my secondary– but this might change.” And sometimes people can have multiple primaries or multiple secondaries.

    It’s true that many people who are good at poly are very much “what is this emotion you humans call jealousy” people, but actually there’s a lot of advice in the community about avoiding jealousy. Mostly, the idea is that jealousy is either (a) triggered by something, often something stupid, which the other partner has a right to avoid, or (b) a symptom of some flaw in the relationship itself (maybe you’re neglecting one partner because of Shiny New Lover Syndrome?).

    The two biggest flaws with poly are two most people don’t think of: processing and time management. There is a lot of relationship discussion and analysis going on all the time, and if you are bad at being completely, 100%, no-white-lies honest with your partner or completely 100% entirely non-judgemental of your partner, you will not do well. The other problem is that “love is infinite, time is not.” A lot of poly people end up putting the entire “network” on Google Calendar since it’s the only way to coordinate everyone’s schedules. The joke is that the mating cry of the polyamorist is “let me get out my dayplanner.” :)

    Also, there are likely to be more breakups for simple math reasons. A two-person relationship has one relationship in it. A three person relationship has three (Alice Bob, Bob Eve, Eve Alice) and even if Eve and Alice aren’t fucking if your two girlfriends hate each other’s guts at some point you will have to pick one of them. A four-person relationship has six. A five-person relationship has ten. You get the idea. :) And some poly networks (i.e. Alice is dating Bob, who’s also dating Eve; Eve is dating Clare, who is play partners with Tim and Ryan, who are a long-term couple who also date…) may include twenty or thirty people in them. :)

    Any poly person who thinks they’re more “evolved” is a dick.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ozy
      Poly arrangements get incredibly complicated with children, and I can’t believe they’re not damaging. One family told their story to the Boston Globe – again, the wife was reluctant, the husband enthusiastic. He is sharing a bed most frequently with a woman not his legal wife. His son asked him why he didn’t love the boy’s mom anymore.

      Also, I noticed you used two women and one man to illustrate a triad. It frequently seems to be this way – rarely two men and a woman. Which tells me that jealousy is very much a factor. As you know, evo psychologists believe that jealousy evolved as an emotion to reduce the risk of cuckoldry, which makes sense. Also, when I’ve read of quads, there is usually not a male-male component. I may be just doing the math wrong, but I’m pretty sure if you looked at all the poly arrangements and tallied up all the sex, the males would be having the majority of the sex.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Sorry for the giant poly ramble; everyone can skip it and go argue about sluts if they like. :)

  • Clarence

    jess:

    I suggest you read to get an idea of the difference between US SH law and UK law.
    http://www.connellfoley.com/seminar/employharass.html

  • Clarence

    Honestly Ozy:

    I don’t consider it cheating OR poly if:
    1.The acts outside the primary relationship do not involve sexual gratification
    2.The acts outside the primary relationship do not lead to feelings for someone outside the primary partner.

    I have found many men and women who were in committed marriages or ltr’s but whom either were too embarrassed to discuss BDSM with their partner or had been shot down when they broached the subject. If such a man or woman was to go to a “pro” Domme or Dom or even a public “play party” and the activities were of a non-sexual nature, I don’t consider this cheating or poly. It’s not cheating b/c it’s not sexual and no affection was exchanged. It’s not “poly” because poly is something that you have to discuss with your partner and get them to agree with (else you are cheating) and there is no sex nor the forming of a new “secondary” or “primary” relationship.

  • Clarence

    Susan:

    Thanks for answering my questions.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Clarence: I dunno, I’d be really upset if a partner kept his going to a play party secret. Of course, I have a Thing about dishonesty, so.

  • Brendan

    If such a man or woman was to go to a “pro” Domme or Dom or even a public “play party” and the activities were of a non-sexual nature

    They’re inherently sexual. Even if no sex takes place it’s still very, very sexual. That’s the draw.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I define cheating as doing anything that you don’t want your partner to know about. If there is any doubt, if your conscience tweaks, you should not do it. Granted, some of this is emotional cheating, not physical affairs. But it’s very, very important to be honest and open. I would never want my husband going to play parties without my knowing, no matter how non-sexual they were. It would feel like a betrayal because I’d been lied to. If one partner can allow the other that kind of freedom, then the relationship should be fine. But if you have to keep secrets, someone is getting an unfair deal. Fess up or end the relationship.

  • Clarence

    Ozy:

    But that’s because you are an open person who wants to pursue polyamourous relationships and form relationships with people who do likewise. Monogamy, raising kids – right now, this stuff isn’t for you nor how you see your life in the near future at least.

    Do you really have any idea of what the average married (or in a ltr) person thinks of polyamoury? Heck, maybe a significant proportion of “vanillas” might go for a one time 3some fantasy at some point during their marriages or relationships, but actively opening them up to other sex partners is something the majority of men and women just seem to be too jealous to even fathom.

    I mean it’s easy to be judgmental about lying and things of that nature (actually, I never advocated lying and my advice to most people would be if your partner has sexual or other desires that you cannot fulfill it’s probably best to allow them some outlet) when neither you nor your partner comes from any kind of less than explicit sexual culture and regards things such as peeing on one’s partner to be “just another day in the bedroom”. And then there’s the fact you are childless so have no kids that would possibly be very hurt if mommy or daddy walked away because the other partner made a choice to step outside the relationship for any reason.

    Of course explicit sexual communication before and during marriage is very important and is one of the things I can get behind sex positive feminism 100 percent abut. But not everyone has had that luxury.

  • Clarence

    Brendan:
    With all due respect, I think you are talking of something you do not know about here. I’d recommend you research it a bit more more on the web. Look up the concepts of “domestic discipline”, subspace and Domspace. And it might help if you remember I’m not coming from a Christian perspective. With regards to BDSM : to some people it’s all about sex, some people totally separate it from sex, and some people mix it to an extent.

  • Brendan

    Clarence —

    I actually have some personal experiences with BDSM in my younger years when I was away from Christianity and so on. It’s mostly sexual in nature — that doesn’t mean it involves “sexual gratification” (that’s a very, very narrow definition of “sexual” you have there), but it’s still sexual. Straight guys generally don’t wish to be dommed by gay male doms, for example. Just because you aren’t sexually gratified does not mean it isn’t sexual in nature to a substantial degree. BDSM is essentially about playing with sexual power in more overt terms. Even someone who is in subspace or Domspace is still engaging in something that is quite connected to their sexuality, even if they are not sexually gratified by it and there is no sexual touching.

    The most honest opinion I got from someone in the BDSM community, although it is an unwelcome one for many involved in BDSM, is that people who have BDSM type interests are best off partnering with someone who also has them, because it is a significant part of their *sexuality*, even in situations quite removed from actual sexual gratification or sexual touching.

    A good example of this, I think, is what has been portrayed in the film “Secretary”. There’s a pretty telling scene at the end where Maggie Gyllenhaal’s character is having her strike to convince the James Spader character that she wants him rather than her vanilla fiance. He asks, perplexed, “Is this some kind of sexual thing?” She is sitting at the table with her palms placed flatly there, as she has for many hours. She responds “Does this look like a sexual thing?”. Of course it *was* a sexual thing. When Spader arrives, he carries her up and bathes her and they make love. The sacrifice of self, the submission to him, was intensely sexual and emotional, even though it didn’t actually involve immediate sexual gratification or touching.

    If someone who is married or in a committed LTR sneaks around to engage in BDSM, that’s cheating, regardless of whether he/she is sexually gratified or sexually touched. It’s an activity that is very sexual for most of the participants in it, and I’m saying that not to blow smoke, but based on my own experiences in the BDSM subculture in my younger years, 20 years or so ago.

  • Clarence

    Brendan:

    Of course it’s best if people into spanking, bdsm, whatever get a partner also into that. I agree with that 100 percent, but remember both me and you are arguing from a position that (even if we have different reasons for it) your marital relationship should be your one and only primary and sexual relationship, and in addition we both probably agree that spouses should keep nothing essential to their happiness from each other.

    When I first got into all this stuff in my early teens I thought I was a submissive. I was also so shy that when I went to my first pro-domme (I’ve only been with 5 in my life and none in about 12 years but at the time it beat “nothing” )I literally couldn’t tell her explicitly what I wanted. It was just too embarrassing. Now this was a pro. Someone I’d never see again. Someone used to this particular type of thing -not a prostitute , a pro-Domme- someone who wouldn’t judge me.

    Now translate shy old me trying to talk about this with a normal girl, esp. when, if any “normal girl” gave me any attention whatsoever it was a Great Thing That I Wouldn’t Want to Mess Up.

    So yeah, I can totally see how people can get into LTR and marriages where vast amounts of wants and desires -esp of a sexual variety – have not been discussed. Unlike you, I can be a bit morally pragmatic because I don’t believe in the Bible, whereas you have one unerring standard you have to meet. So yes, provided it doesn’t lead to the formation of new relationships and no actual sex is involved (i.e. no orgasms or stimulation of organs that can lead to such) I give my blessing to people who feel (after they have at least brought it up with their partner) they have to step out a little. I view divorce -esp. with children present- as the greater evil.

  • Clarence

    By the way Brendan:

    Thanks for opening up about your background in such a way. I’ve followed you on the net for about two or two and a half years now and while it’s obvious you knew something about this subject, I’d never see you explicitly state that you ever were interested in it at all. I always assumed you had a friend (or maybe your former wife) into it, and had probably done some reading. I could imagine you swatting your wife a few times or something like that. Certainly nothing more. Still, this is YOUR past. I’m still the only resident male perv here ;)

  • Brendan

    Hehe.

  • Anonymous

    clarence- SH
    .
    Hi, i checked through your link. It all seemed quite straightforward to me. Very similar to the uk i think. Was there a particular paragraph you thought unreasonable?

  • jess

    last post was from me- jess

  • http://lafemmeroar.wordpress.com/ lafemmeroar

    If sluts are members of a minority group as Abbott defines them, then that explains why there are so many “hos” and “man-whores” running around.

  • Clarence

    Jess:

    Well, the choice of using a “reasonable woman” rather than a “reasonable person” (let alone the “reasonable male” ) standard might be a clue, though to be fair, I don’t know crap all about SH law in the UK and never claimed to have so I don’t know if you have those constructs there.

    Remember, SH supposedly can work both ways, but its p.o.v. is that of a woman.

    I’ll put up a longer post later deconstructing that link and linking it some problematic real cases. Straightforward, my butt. I can assure you there is nothing “straight forward” about it, which is partly why so many large US companies have such Orwellian policies. I also am not a fan of Catherine Mckinnon’s feminist legal jurisprudence which helped establish many of these policies and laws in the US, but, being English, I don’t expect you to know what I’m talking about.

  • Clarence

    Then there’s this about “swinging” from Gucci Little Piggy:

    “Six years later, after talking the issue over for a year, the husband caved and started accepting sensory-dulling sexual electroshock therapy in the form of other women in exchange for foreign dong intrusions into his wife’s private parts. If she’s not into swinging solely to have intercourse with another man, she’s made clear that she’s interested in the other woman – basically marginalizing the men. For both husbands, they have to live with the fact that not only does their wife have sex with another man – causing lifelong flashbacks and PTSD (Post Traumatic Swinging Disorder) – they aren’t even wanted by the other wife they’re banging. Swinging is a ploy for women to get their rocks off; the cost is male emasculation.

    As I’ve mentioned before, the act of lesbianism should be unappealing and lackluster to men. As a man, my penis is as welcome in that setup as a turkey at a vegan Thanksgiving. The appeal of lesbos is their attractiveness as two seperate naked entities, not as an intertwined erotic act.”

    http://glpiggy.net/2009/12/01/backdoor-cuckoldry-girls-just-wanna-swing/

    I think Ozzy, esp. should consider this , as it takes a certain type of man to be willing (rather than semi-coerced) into swinging and he better be successfully getting other woman (and happy at boinking them) or it’s going to be hell on the relationship or marriage.

  • VD

    She rejected him because of his number. She just can’t get over the idea that he’s had his dick in that many women. It grosses her out, and she believes that he will be unable to be monogamous in any case. She’s right about that.

    Do let us know when she changes her mind and decides to give him a shot. You have to know the odds run that way….

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @VD

      Do let us know when she changes her mind and decides to give him a shot. You have to know the odds run that way….

      HA, for what it’s worth I’m working on her. I’ve known this kid since he was in short pants, and he is a really, really good kid. Handsome, smart, good values. I probably exaggerated his number – I had heard it was 50 or so when he left for college, mostly as a result of women throwing themselves at him. He probably slept with some uglies in there, or at least some women a lot less attractive than him. In college, though, he’s been in a couple of LTRs. He was a wild man during his single period, but faithful as far as I know otherwise. So his number may not be much higher than it was 4 years ago.

      This love confession occurred only last week, and she’s definitely mulling it over. I think she suspected all along – she’s not stupid. But she just always saw him as a player, and was never tempted to be one of the girls. Having an offer of monogamy on the table may indeed change her mind.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Clarence: Well, then, I feel that Gucci Little Piggy should probably not have group sex then. :) The vast sexual diversity of the human race…

  • Jason

    As I’ve mentioned before, the act of lesbianism should be unappealing and lackluster to men. As a man, my penis is as welcome in that setup as a turkey at a vegan Thanksgiving. The appeal of lesbos is their attractiveness as two seperate naked entities, not as an intertwined erotic act.”

    http://glpiggy.net/2009/12/01/backdoor-cuckoldry-girls-just-wanna-swing/

    As a man who has been there, many times – this article is complete bullshit.

    If you’re going to swing and you (as a man) are going into it feeling jealous, then you really shouldn’t be doing it.

    Since when is a man jealous? That’s woman territory.

  • jess

    clarence,
    well i cant fault your logic- the text should indeed read ‘person’ and not ‘woman’.
    and i have seen women behave sexually inappropriately in the work place and not just at the xmas party.
    .
    BUT…. i would guess 99% of sex harassment is towards a women so the legislation would have been conceived with that in mind. So its sloppy wording as opposed to anything else don’t you think?

  • Clarence

    Jason:

    Wow, you don’t know very much about human nature do you? Heck, until relatively recently one would get a sentencing discount from murdering your wife or hubby if he or she was caught in the act of cheating when you did it.

    Jealousy is a female emotion? My ass. It’s obvious you’ve never loved someone.

  • Renee

    VI,

    Bullshit. Unless a man is only fucking fuglies, his promiscuity is not due to a lack of self-control. It’s due to his SKILL at seducing women.

    But if he’s having sex with hot or decent looking women on the regular, then yeah, it raises the question about his self control. It’s believed that sluts tend to have sex (or prefer to have sex) with high-status, alpha, alpha-acting males. So they are selective as well (or can be). But they’re still described as being ones with low self-control. And I’m talking about self-control in and of itself.

    And let me ask this. Do you all think it’s THAT easy for women who aren’t hot to nail alphas? I hear all this talk about how easy it is for a female to get laid, even with alphas, and personally, I really don’t think that’s the case….unles the guy is REALLY on the social “totem pole” so to speak.

  • Plesko

    Any poly person who thinks they’re more “evolved” is a dick.

    Glad to see you acknowledge that, because it’s one of the most consistent traits that I’ve observed among poly’s and people who are into ‘alternative’ lifestyles generally. They have a bad habit of asserting, or implying, that people who are different from them are somehow weak or damaged (e.g. the term Vanilla). Which strikes me as rather hypocritical being that they typically resent people judging them. I suspect that there’s some projection involved.

  • Renee

    Abbot, I’m still wondering about what you meant in one of your first comments when you spoke of “minorty women”. I looked through the thread and didn’t see an answer to Susan’s question about the same thing.

  • rick

    A slut however, is not wife material, and even less mother material.

    More on sluts from the onion:

    H1 Reality Show Bus Crashes In California Causing Major Slut Spill

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @rick
      That Onion piece is hilarious. Wow, you’ve been with me here for ages – I think you’re one of my original readers. So glad you still stop by!

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    I know a lot of sluts, they dont have sex with the alphas exclusively, they have sex with the flavor of the moment, which can be just anybody, and usually it just means the new guy in the scene, as long as he is not too retarded, and as long he has ANYTHING good about him (from a tshirt to a haircut to a job to nice glasses)

    There are just a handful of alphas. If sluts only had sex with alphas, the SMP would be called harem, and they wouldnt be called sluts

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Also theres a lot of competition between women about who´s gonna get THAT guy, and within sluts, its about who´s gonna get him FIRST

  • Brendan

    Since when is a man jealous? That’s woman territory.

    This is a troll comment, surely. You can’t be serious. Cuckolded husbands not jealous but accepting of other male sired offspring? What?

  • jess

    rick et al
    .
    i have feeling that some of the guys here would get quite a shock if they knew the full and undiluted sexual histories of their own mothers.
    .
    (and sisters and daughters and friends etc)
    .
    if they just treated sex as a natural healthy way of enjoying half and hour or so of ones life they wouldn’t get quite so bent out of shape about it…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      if they just treated sex as a natural healthy way of enjoying half and hour or so of ones life

      There you have it. The view of a woman who views sex as a pleasure point, nothing more. Jess is a slut.

  • Brendan

    as I have said before the vast majority of my experienced freidns up are luvved up with great, attractive, successful guys. And they were pretty much were drawn from the same social group so they knew each others histories.

    But this must have been a group of men with huge cocks and women who love men with huge cocks only. That makes sense, as it is more of a jungle type morale.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Brendan

      But this must have been a group of men with huge cocks and women who love men with huge cocks only. That makes sense, as it is more of a jungle type morale.

      I suspect you really hit the nail on the head here. Jess first found HUS via the penis size post, where she argued her size queen views for months.

  • Mike C

    This is a troll comment, surely. You can’t be serious. Cuckolded husbands not jealous but accepting of other male sired offspring? What?
    .
    Absolutely. I think one could argue persuasively the male sexual jealousy is perhaps one of the most powerful of all emotions. What other emotions are only 1-2 steps away from murder, war and have been chronicled in literature for hundreds if not thousands of years?
    .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Othello
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_of_troy
    .
    Personally, I believe the male aversion to “sluts” for commitment and marriage is a self-defense mechanism to not having to experience that emotion. I think most men know instinctively it has the potential to send them over the edge.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      Personally, I believe the male aversion to “sluts” for commitment and marriage is a self-defense mechanism to not having to experience that emotion. I think most men know instinctively it has the potential to send them over the edge.

      I’ve read that women should never try to instill jealousy in their men, because men hate the feeling so much they’d sooner end a relationships than feel it. Of course, women hate the feeling too, but I get the sense it’s a whole other order of magnitude for men.

  • Mike C

    and in addition we both probably agree that spouses should keep nothing essential to their happiness from each other.
    .
    Where do you draw the line though? What about people who sexualize human waste and get into pissing and shitting type stuff. Should someone go along with that because it is “essential to the other person’s happiness”. Anyways, all this is a good argument that one should know if they are sexually compatible before marriage instead of springing a surprise about what is “essential” after the fact.
    .

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Anyways, all this is a good argument that one should know if they are sexually compatible before marriage instead of springing a surprise about what is “essential” after the fact.

    Totally agree. I think there should be a full disclosure of sexual likings before tying the knot, if is essential for your happiness say it out loud before the I do, if is not essential enough before marriage to mention it then go without it as well if your partner really is miserable doing that. The thing is Mike that people lie to themselves and other more often than not and for the social status of getting married are willing to omit a lot of things. Honesty should be one of the big ones for people to try and cultivate instead of money and self steem. I will think things would be better if we learned to be more honest about ourselves.

  • Clarence

    Susan:

    Steve Pavlino sounds like an uber asshole to the NTH degree. Many men who would kill to see their kids and he basically all but gives his up.

    As for who initiates these arrangements more, men or women, I don’t know. Ozzy seems to want to initiate said kind of relationship and that link from Gucci Little Piggy I provided basically has the wives initiating.

    I don’t feel it much matters if BOTH partners get something out of it. But I feel extreme caution is called for.

  • Brendan

    Sometimes not even poly people are poly people.

    Very true. It’s easy enough to slip into this in your late teens and early 20s, when there are no real commitments or children. It’s quite something else when you are in your 30s or 40s with kids.

  • Clarence

    Mike C:

    All “kinks” should be discussed and preferably experimented with before any kind of engagement or marriage. Sexual incompatibility probably does more to kill marriages than any other factor short of the build up of contempt for the other spouse for whatever reason.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    In my experience women like jealousy. Plus I havent heard of a woman dumping a man because she is jealous.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Of course, women hate the feeling too, but I get the sense it’s a whole other order of magnitude for men.

    Unless you are the jealous type, one of the few things I agree with Bender “there cannot be a great love without a great jealousy”. No offense intended to the polys but is a really personal view of “true love” I have,YMMV.

  • Abbot

    there are so many “hos” and “man-whores” running around.
    .
    No hos then no man whores. Its not a chicken-egg thing.
    .
    I’m still wondering about what you meant in one of your first comments when you spoke of “minorty women”
    .
    If they represented more than a small minority [more like a cult], then their behavior would be the accepted “norm” and a sex pozzy and slut walker dream fulfilled. If their numbers really increased, then a man worth marrying may go for it since his options would be less and her empowerment fodder would be less likely to be snickering at him for being such a fool.

  • jess

    dear oh dear
    .
    brendan- huge units
    .
    seriously weird comment…and out of no-where
    .
    susan- cheating
    .
    i would agree with your concept of cheating.
    .
    susan- 30min of pleasure
    .
    you are of the belief that one can only have sex as part of a commited relationship. Millions, sorry, billions of people, beg to differ. its doesnt make them sluts or any worse than you. For many, relationship sex may be BETTER, but that doesnt mean a fling cannot be incredibly enjoyable.
    .
    Let me ask the guys… guys can you only enjoy a blowjob if you are married to the woman??
    .
    what utter piffle.
    .
    next you will be telling us that women cannot enjoy masturbation unless she is in a commited relationship with her vibrator.
    .
    susan- size
    .
    you seem to have selective comprehension skills- but once again with gusto- those are not my views. and in case i wasnt clear- again- those are not my views. clear?
    .
    My understanding of the definition of a SQ is a woman with a strong preference for bigger units. Whilst i have met some women who like that, I would say 2/3 prefer average. And I belong in the latter camp. But in case of any lack of clarity: I prefer average, and for plenty of reasons.
    .
    jealousy-
    .
    Male jealousy can be very powerful and was a significant factor in many of the domestic violence cases I worked on.

  • Abbot

    i have feeling that some of the guys here would get quite a shock if they knew the full and undiluted sexual histories of their own mothers.
    .
    Poor dad. Got suckered. Did not see it coming. Did not have the benefit of knowing slut tells, watching them walk, etc. But son learned from it and will proactively ferret out sluts for sex only. He will break the cycle and ensure his children start with not being born through a bombed out birth canal. Then, as they grow and flower, they will never be put through that “shock” and his daughter will have a clear unhypocritical direction for her own sexual behavior. All parents want their children to do better then they did. Be more successful, more healthy, more ethical, be better behaved. What better way to start off then not marrying a slut.

  • Abbot

    Male jealousy can be very powerful and was a significant factor in many of the domestic violence cases I worked on.
    .
    Such jealousy may not go down if women were less slutty, but its surely likely.
    .
    if they just treated sex as a natural healthy way of enjoying half and hour or so of ones life they wouldn’t get quite so bent out of shape about it…
    .
    Oye. Ok, again, from the beginning of this thread:
    .

    Men LOVE sluts! Men do not shame them. There are exceptions but so minor that to bring them up is stupid. Yes…men LOVE sluts. Men NEED sluts. Always have, always will. Fact is, these days they dont charge for the service. Invent and distribute BC pills and you are all set. As long as sluts are confined to urban pockets in the West and to the small minority of women who go to college in the West and as long as they are not generating new sluts beyond what is needed, the system works perfectly. As planned. All is well.

    .
    If there is any getting “bent out shape about it” its not coming from men. Makes no sense at all. In the future, there is No reason to get bent out of shape about her string of half-hours any more than getting bent out of shape over her prior booze addiction if any. If you dont approve you just move on. No harm to anybody. Half hour stringers are in the minority.

  • chris b

    Me and my girlfriend are both bi and are in an open relationship so we understand the that a open relationship can work if both parties on board and their are boundaries set in place. Personally i think a polymourous relationship wouldn’t work if the partners all have a emotional connection with one another. In our situation it is only about the sexual acts not the emotional intimacy with the other people.

  • Bob

    Re disliking the word manwhore and similar terms.

    There’s already a perfectly good name for men with a high partner count and little discrimination.

    It’s horndog.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    Plesko: I’m pretty sure “vanilla” is just the word for “non-kinky sex,” no shame intended. In fact, many kinky people have and enjoy vanilla sex often. Although, don’t get me wrong, there are “omgsoevolved” douchebags in the kink community too.

    Mike C: In my opinion, people should sit down and have a discussion at some point before the relationship gets too serious about hard limits, soft limits, turn-ons and essentials. If piss is a hard limit for you and an essential for your partner, then you should either break up or arrange for your partner to get their needs fulfilled elsewhere. (Or anything, really– I have a hard limit around public sex, and if someone else can’t be satisfied without having sex in public sometimes, s/he wouldn’t be a good partner for me.)

    Susan: Pavlina’s clearly a douchebag. Poly can get more complicated with children, although a friend of a blog-friend is a stay-at-home mom in a poly family who likes that they can have dual incomes and a stay-at-home parent.

    The only reason I picked an FMF triad was because I was using the Alice/Bob/Eve cryptography convention. :) I know, both in meatspace and online, roughly equal numbers of FMF and MFM triads, and more common than either is the “network” style– where Bob might have a relationship with Alice and Eve, but Eve also has relationships with Charles and Bob, and so on and so forth.

    Actually, I’m pretty sure that women are having most of the poly sex. Polyamorous women are disproportionately likely to be bisexual, and if two women fuck double the number of women get laid. :)

    Swinging has different dynamics than poly, and I’m really not qualified to comment.

    Jess: I agree to a degree. Sex can be an enjoyable way to spend an hour or two. It can also be an expression of love, a means of self-harm, a way to connect with reality, an expression of hatred, a Zipless Fuck moment of pure if brief connection and even a way to cure a headache. :)

  • DelFresco

    I once had a girl tell me about what a ‘slut’ she had been and how she had had sex with three of the guys in her building. We were both around 20 or so and I was already in the friend zone, I assume anyways.

    Not sure why she felt the need to tell me that. It might have been to brag about how she could get sex partners easily. IE, she was that hot. (She was pretty cute but not exactly outstanding at CU (Colorado) at the time, btw.)

    At the time, and even now, slut isn’t a term I use, especially around women. That said, when women brag about the dudes in their past, I write them off for being manipulative.

    Recently had a girl I was IM chatting with tell me about how her old boyfriend was some champion poker player. I’m not sure what I responded but my actual opinion was:
    1. I don’t care
    2. Most gamblers are losers
    3. You’re telling me this for some ultior (sp?) reason, that you can’t speak directly.

    I liked what Paglia had to say on this from the links. Sexuality isn’t just a social construction. Young women of priveledge are playing with it. If you want to be a slut, fine, don’t get upset when someone calls you that then. Don’t get upset when/if guys don’t take you seriously as LTR material then. (To be fair, I don’t know how much that happens.)

    Interesting post Susan! I look forward to what you’ve got coming up.

  • http://propiedadesdelalpiste.com Andy C.

    I know slut is a vulgar term. And I think it is inappropriate for a woman or a girl to be called as sluts regardless of her sexual activities or experiences. Thanks for the insights on the meaning of sluts.

  • Anonymous

    if they just treated sex as a natural healthy way of enjoying half and hour or so of ones life they wouldn’t get quite so bent out of shape about it…

    That isn’t what sex is or means to any human being with functioning brain chemistry, sorry (for one thing, generalized sex participants do not exist: this is a way of saying that all sex is personalized with different motives, hopes and fears).

    I’m always astounded at how utterly childish women of your general age tend to be when it comes to things like sex. If it feels good, just do it! Great advice if you’re looking to turn cynical (take it from me). Oh, and before you retort with your worldly experiences, I’ve probably had more sex in my 20 years than you have in your entire lifetime. I would never recommend my lifestyle to another man of curious means.

  • Renee

    Tom,

    A woman who has occational sex with men of her choosing, always includes condoms in her sexcapades,does not have sex for self validation purposes, loves sex, and is not ready for a committed relationship at this time.

    This is how I often view “sluts”, or simply females who have casual sex. Not always in the frame of there being something psychologically, emotional, physiologically wrong with them. I really don’t find many discussions that acknowledge that women do have an “itch to scratch” of their own and nothing more.

    I also believe that sluts should be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material. I remember an earlier post about measuring a woman’s worth as wife/mother material by something other than her sexual history. I believe that sluts can change their ways just like any other person. She doesn’t have to be defined by that for the rest of her life. But then again, I’m a Christian so…..

    And about something Abbot said, something like men reject sluts as marriage material because they can and nothing more. I don’t believe that. Yes people have preferences, but in this case, there’s too many evolutionary, psychological, social, etc., etc…..stuff beneath it all.

  • Anonymous

    Thanks for pointing this out – I’ve been at a loss to figure out just what is rankling the men here. I don’t mean to make a moral equivalence – as I’ve said, I don’t take a moral view at all. I do think that female promiscuity is far more problematic than male promiscuity. But I’d be lying if I said it’s a good thing, or even a neutral thing, when men just get laid all the time with a variety of women The last thing society needs is more Rooshes. He is what I call a UMOS – unproductive member of society. This is the problem with promiscuity in general, for either sex.

    Okay… I think you’re reaching the limits of your purely economic approach to matters of love and relationships, and it’s showing in the way that you can’t help but make a moral condemnation of “Rooshes” (despite avidly claiming you don’t mean to make a moral equivalence). Why are you so eager to avoid giving moral lessons? Do you honestly think it’s possible to guide young women, assuming that’s your mission, simply by telling them the latest statistics from the ground? It reminds me of how bristled you became over “the number”, saying how there should be no specific number and that it’s just a matter of attitude. Well, why shouldn’t there be a number? We’re all looking for empirical answers here, right?

    If the “problem with promiscuity” is that its practitioners are “unproductive”, do they simply need to get jobs to fall out of range of your firing line? Without invoking morals, how do you counter Roissy’s claim that “manwhores” are simply more attractive sex partners for women, and so they’re bringing pleasure and happiness into those women’s lives that otherwise wouldn’t exist?

    I’m a little perturbed that you’re acting as though men here are “defending” male promiscuity, because it’s completely misreading the problem. I reiterate: if you said male promiscuity was wrong because men ought to restrain themselves to one woman, no one would bat an eyelid. But the way you’re obstinately refusing to give an opinion is going to lead to a post where you hash out a perfectly tailored “life plan” for young women, where they engage in serial monogamy with an optimal number of 7.2 partners per lifetime or whatever.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anonymous
      My condemnation of Roosh is not a moral one. I don’t care who he has sex with, or how often. What I said is that he is a hedonist – his sole purpose in life in getting laid. He has written himself about the downsides of this lifestyle. Hedonists do not contribute to the community, they are a detrimental force on the social fabric, and they probably wind up costing the taxpayers money. That’s my objection – it is social and economic.

      Why are you so eager to avoid giving moral lessons? Do you honestly think it’s possible to guide young women, assuming that’s your mission, simply by telling them the latest statistics from the ground?

      Moral lessons are readily available in society and in the media. They have had zero effect on hookup culture. My tack is different – I’m appealing to women to think about whether they’re getting what they want, and if not, how they might pursue a strategy in keeping with their long-term goals. I know it’s possible to guide young women in this way – at the very least, women who read here are thinking about their choices. I also receive many testimonials. You can see in the recent comment thread for the post Losing Out By Putting Out that Danielle is taking seriously not only my advice, but the input of the many men and women here.

      As for the number, I can’t give you one because I’m not in a position to judge it. That is something that men will judge, and every man has the right to set his own boundary. For some men here, 1 partner is too many, others have said 10 is the upper limit. Still others are probably going to be OK with twice that. It’s always a personal choice for the male.

      If the “problem with promiscuity” is that its practitioners are “unproductive”, do they simply need to get jobs to fall out of range of your firing line?

      Not all promiscuous males are unproductive. I was simply stating that a man whose only mission in life is to get laid is not producing or contributing anything to society. Even porn actors make a product, as objectionable as it might be. Making just enough money to fund your next trip to get laid by a new group of women is pure hedonism.

      Without invoking morals, how do you counter Roissy’s claim that “manwhores” are simply more attractive sex partners for women, and so they’re bringing pleasure and happiness into those women’s lives that otherwise wouldn’t exist?

      Attractive sex partners /= pleasure or happiness. That doesn’t mean women don’t want them, but let’s not claim these men are rendering a valuable service to women.

      • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

        I’ve been thinking a lot about women’s feelings about manwhores. I know for a fact there is some revulsion among women for guys who have a very high number. I also know for a fact that preselection is powerful. So what is it that causes women to recoil at some point? What is the wire that gets tripped?

        I believe that an emotionally healthy woman, i.e. self-respecting, will reject any man who is likely to humiliate her. When guys, even hot guys, are known for being extremely indiscriminate, they do not convey status on a woman they have sex with. The opposite is true. As VI, Rake and others have said, when a guy has been with a lot of women other women judge “gross, slutty, dirty” etc., women are reluctant to join that company. It’s humiliating to sell oneself so cheaply, to a man that everyone knows only does ONSs. It’s not so different than women rejecting men with little or no social status – they do so because of the fear of humiliation, i.e. low status for themselves.

        However, if a man is known for getting lots of women, all very attractive, all with high SMV, a woman will want to be part of that “elite group.” Getting such a guy to commit is the highest status move of all. That is why women will happily sign on for a relationship with a high status lax player, even though everyone knows he’s getting a lot on the side. She will still be “Concubine #1″ a high status role she deems worth the tradeoff.

        If a guy has a history of being a player but wants to settle down with a very high SMV woman, he will have to convince her that it’s the real deal. I’m talking here about male 9-10s trying to mate long-term with female 9-10s. (Some female SHBs become sluts, others hold out for a higher payout down the road.)

  • jess

    7.2 partners?
    is that like 7 whole guys and half a leg?
    .
    seriously though- good post

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    I can’t figure out if men like Roosh represent the dark side of Game or just the dark side of men or just an isolated example of mental illness. Even more than Roissy (who is at least still in love with being in love), Roosh represents what no rational man would aspire to be. Roosh is deeply unhappy and yet keeps doing exactly what seems to make him so unhappy. Weirdly, he apparently makes his living advising men how to become just like him.

    Superficially, Roosh seems to be living a dream life — traveling the world having lots of sex. But his blog reveals how deeply unhappy he is inside. He spends his days in pursuit of people for whom he has disgust and contempt. He must hate himself for constantly seeking the approval of these hateful creatures. What kind of achievement is it to dump a load of sperm into a subhuman? Yet he has put himself on a treadmill running after this end goal, over and over and over, apparently unable to stop himself. What a nightmare of a life.

    I’ve known the female equivalent of Roosh — sluts who have spent enough years just going through the motions that they are unable to make themselves vulnerable to love anymore. And yet they still want men, the more masculine the better. While a male slut is not as exposed to the social hazards that threaten a female slut, I think Roosh shows that a man’s self-image and ability to love are just as fragile as a woman’s. Turning your life into a “Groundhog Day” of meaningless pickups is a sure way to learn to hate your world, whether you are a man or a woman.

  • Platero

    I would consider a slut to be a person–male, female, transgendered, or any other gender identity–who actively seeks out sex with many partners. I would also consider someone a slut if they had a very high number of partners and if those partners came about in recent times; if they happened a long time ago and someone had since become monogamous or celibate, I would consider that person an “ex-slut”. In addition, I would say that a slut would be one of those “sex positive” types and would feel little or no shame about his or her actions: a slut would not think of himself or herself as a slut but would instead rationalize it by framing it as being “liberated” (which amuses me, as being a slut is being a slave to one’s body and is anything but liberating) or as being “open-minded”, or something of that nature. On top of that, a slut would not really care about the feelings of the people with whom he or she has sex and would simply seek gratification; there wouldn’t be love or even just basic human warmth involved.

    I would also point out (as I recall someone else already doing) that not all sluts look like sluts or act like them (e.g., dressing provactively and being flirtatious), so it’s important to really get to know someone before deciding whether he or she is a slut. It’s also possible for a person to truly change and to decide to take control of his/her life and to reform from being a slut–that change must come from within and no one else can force it, but it is still possible.

    **

    To be honest, I really don’t know why women (and even men) in the 21st century even go for player/slut types when they have resources such as blogs like this (i.e., access to the human experiences of other people) as well as licensed professionals, books, etc. I feel exasperated with people when they complain about how sluts and players treat them but they still continue to pine for those people and condone and accept their behavior; it irritates me. I can understand making one or two mistakes early in one’s dating life when one is unknowledgable and inexperienced, but come on, to repeat the same mistake over and over again makes it go from being a mistake to becoming a habit/pattern.

    I’ve learned in my lifetime that the body and the heart can’t really be fully trusted to always make the best choices, and so I feel that the mind is the logical choice for being the decision-maker, not the other two. It disappoints me that for all of humanity’s intellectual potential, creative gifts, and other mental abilities, so many still choose to enslave themselves to their bodies, to promiscuity, to lust, instead of aiming higher and choosing to be wise, use good judgment, and employ sound reason and common sense. To be really honest, my frustration with people is a large part of why I don’t know that I’d ever be a good nun (a path that I’ve strongly considered and continue to consider–not in the Catholic tradition, but in another religious tradition): I just don’t have the compassion or patience that I would need to have to really take on that role and succeed at this point in life (though I hope that perhaps I could, in the space of several years, work for and obtain such gifts). I don’t mean to be self-righteous or arrogant–I certainly am far from perfect and I certainly have my own shortcomings–but I just feel like people should know better by now and should have the strength and willpower to turn away from such things. I really don’t understand, very likely because I simply don’t have and have never had neither the powerful physical drive nor the emotional drive that most other people seem to have, why people choose (and yes, it is most definitely a choice) to obey physical impulses and fickle emotions rather than to listen to and use as a guide the gifts of wisdom and reason.

    As time goes on, I honestly continue to feel more and more relieved that I have chosen to be permanently single. I’ve reached the point of total disenchantment with dating and relationships and can honestly say that I not only feel a lack of desire to pursue them, but such a path actually repulses me. More and more, I feel relieved to be free of the whole mess and am relieved to be simply an interested and curious observer rather than someone who actually has to participate in that crazy game. That’s all that relationships really seem like to me anymore–games that people play with each other rather than profound, intense, beautiful, and dare I say even holy and sacred connections between two people reaching out to each other, reaching through to each other, truly becoming one in and with each other. It saddens me and disappoints me, but I accept it as it is, and that’s that. Again, I know that I’m not perfect, and I’m sure that many would consider me a failure or defective, but I honestly do feel a certain enduring peace and sense of freedom in not getting mixed up in such things.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Platero

      I feel exasperated with people when they complain about how sluts and players treat them but they still continue to pine for those people and condone and accept their behavior

      Agreed. Sometimes I’ll have someone email me for advice – I give it, they do the opposite. Then they write again, with an even bigger problem. I’ll usually answer once more, briefly, instructing them to return to my original reply. Some people just keep writing and doing the opposite. I don’t get it. Their behavior is making them miserable, they know it, and they keep doing exactly the same thing.

      Platero, interestingly, you are the female version in some ways of filrabat, a guy here who has made the same choice to avoid dating and relationships.

  • jess

    rake,
    you make an excellent point. I think I have known men and women who fit your description to a tee. Endless, loveless ONS’s for years and years must effect the psyche after a while. And the longer it goes on the more intractable the issue.

  • Anonymous

    Not all promiscuous males are unproductive. I was simply stating that a man whose only mission in life is to get laid is not producing or contributing anything to society. Even porn actors make a product, as objectionable as it might be. Making just enough money to fund your next trip to get laid by a new group of women is pure hedonism.

    Susan, I can’t tell if you’re not aware of the difference between a “practical” and a “moral” argument or if you’re simply not paying attention to what I’m saying (I am trying to be diplomatic here, so don’t take me as though I’m being mean. I simply want to be firm). There is nothing in your logic which would condemn “hedonism”: from a practical standpoint, both the “manwhore” and his female conquest want the pleasure, and it’s impossible to deny the “manwhore” his hedonism unless you’re making a moral argument that it’s wrong to indulge in it.

    Hedonists do not contribute to the community, they are a detrimental force on the social fabric, and they probably wind up costing the taxpayers money. That’s my objection – it is social and economic.

    Who’s to say? Where’s your evidence? And I’m asking you again — if “hedonists” somehow contributed to the social fabric, would you still ward against the lifestyle?

    Attractive sex partners /= pleasure or happiness. That doesn’t mean women don’t want them, but let’s not claim these men are rendering a valuable service to women

    Why? What in the world is better than giving women superior feelings of frission and attraction to the lustless offerings they’d otherwise endure? (Note that I’m clearly leading you somewhere with this).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anonymous
      You and I are a bad combo in debate. We seem to be talking past one another. You feel like I answer questions you’re not asking, and I feel like you’re not reading my replies. Perhaps we just misunderstand one another.

      There is nothing in your logic which would condemn “hedonism”: from a practical standpoint, both the “manwhore” and his female conquest want the pleasure, and it’s impossible to deny the “manwhore” his hedonism unless you’re making a moral argument that it’s wrong to indulge in it.

      You can’t see the obvious forest for the logic trees. My argument against hedonism as a lifestyle is twofold:
      1. It is a poor strategy for obtaining personal fulfillment and happiness.
      2. The hedonist is a burden and destructive force in society.

      The latter reason has an ethical component, but I’ve never heard of a hedonist considering it, or indeed feeling any sense of obligation to society at all. The individual’s pleasure is the only objective.

      I have no wish to deny the manwhore his hedonism, nor even to deny the slut her manwhore. I’ve often said here, “Let the sluts go at it with one another, and leave the rest of us to form lasting relationships, produce the next generation, and fulfill our creative and intellectual potential.

      I don’t ward against the lifestyle of hedonists – this is not an anti-hedonism blog. For people whose objective is met with a hedonistic lifestyle, I respect their right to make that choice. My goal is to convey to women (and to a lesser degree men) that pursuing short-term gratification in the form of sexual pleasure with strangers has been shown to lengthen the odds on securing a life partner, reproducing and generally experiencing contentment in one’s life.

      I can tell that you’re trying to catch me out in some way here, but I’m not clear on what your agenda is. Are you a Christian who believes that all premarital sex is wrong? Are you a guy who aspires to Roosh’s lifestyle? Whatever your agenda, I don’t think I can say much more on the issue. You may speculate on the posts I may eventually be forced to write if I continue in this muddled vein, and you may be right. Time will tell.

  • Anonymous

    Your explanation that it should be a man’s choice also doesn’t wash with me. When a girl is soundly rejected by a man she’s besotted with because of her turbulent past, how do you think she’ll feel that you gave her no hard direction when it could’ve made a difference?

  • Blues

    @The Unfortunate Rake: Maybe Roosh and sluts are getting validation through sex taken to the extreme, dunno, just an idea.

  • Blues

    *are the idea of getting validation

  • OffTheCuff

    I’ve learned in my lifetime that the body and the heart can’t really be fully trusted to always make the best choices, and so I feel that the mind is the logical choice for being the decision-maker, not the other two. It disappoints me that for all of humanity’s intellectual potential, creative gifts, and other mental abilities, so many still choose to enslave themselves to their bodies, to promiscuity, to lust, instead of aiming higher and choosing to be wise, use good judgment, and employ sound reason and common sense.

    Speaking as someone who’s spent a lifetime of being rational and constantly repressing nearly all emotions, it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. This comes very to easily to an INTJ like myself. Do you really think we’d all be better off being robots? We have to strike a balance somewhere.

    As time goes on, I honestly continue to feel more and more relieved that I have chosen to be permanently single. I’ve reached the point of total disenchantment with dating and relationships and can honestly say that I not only feel a lack of desire to pursue them, but such a path actually repulses me. More and more, I feel relieved to be free of the whole mess and am relieved to be simply an interested and curious observer rather than someone who actually has to participate in that crazy game. That’s all that relationships really seem like to me anymore–games that people play with each other rather than profound, intense, beautiful, and dare I say even holy and sacred connections between two people reaching out to each other, reaching through to each other, truly becoming one in and with each other. It saddens me and disappoints me, but I accept it as it is, and that’s that. Again, I know that I’m not perfect, and I’m sure that many would consider me a failure or defective, but I honestly do feel a certain enduring peace and sense of freedom in not getting mixed up in such things.

    Is this from experience, or second-hand knowledge from others? Don’t you know a real-life old somewhere that’s been married for 60 years and seem happy? Of course, their marriage wasn’t perfect, but if it went that long, it’s was probably more good than bad.

    To feel joy, you must also risk feeling pain. To completely avoid one is to completely avoid the other. It is your choice to choose a joyless existence. I’m not religious, but if I was, I would be firmly convinced that God wants us to experience joy at the expense of some pain, and attempt to do more good than harm.

    I’ve played the zero-risk game before, for untold decades. You will regret it. All the graet joys in my life come from exposing that vulnerability enough to find that someone who wants to see the real you, instead of take advantage of you. It exists.

  • Matt T

    I can’t figure out if men like Roosh represent the dark side of Game or just the dark side of men or just an isolated example of mental illness. Even more than Roissy (who is at least still in love with being in love), Roosh represents what no rational man would aspire to be. Roosh is deeply unhappy and yet keeps doing exactly what seems to make him so unhappy. Weirdly, he apparently makes his living advising men how to become just like him.

    Superficially, Roosh seems to be living a dream life — traveling the world having lots of sex. But his blog reveals how deeply unhappy he is inside. He spends his days in pursuit of people for whom he has disgust and contempt. He must hate himself for constantly seeking the approval of these hateful creatures. What kind of achievement is it to dump a load of sperm into a subhuman? Yet he has put himself on a treadmill running after this end goal, over and over and over, apparently unable to stop himself. What a nightmare of a life.

    I’ve known the female equivalent of Roosh — sluts who have spent enough years just going through the motions that they are unable to make themselves vulnerable to love anymore. And yet they still want men, the more masculine the better. While a male slut is not as exposed to the social hazards that threaten a female slut, I think Roosh shows that a man’s self-image and ability to love are just as fragile as a woman’s. Turning your life into a “Groundhog Day” of meaningless pickups is a sure way to learn to hate your world, whether you are a man or a woman.

    Well, part of the purpose of Game is to teach people healthy attitudes about women: instead of worshiping them as angels, you see them for what they are. Many men, upon seeing the truth, can’t figure out how to deal with it. I’m not saying Roosh is “Many men”, he probably just writes vitriolic tirades on purpose to attract viewers. I really don’t see how someone that hated women could be successful as a PUA, it would cause all sorts of incongruities that women pick up on.

    As for me, the attitude I take is “don’t hate the player, hate the game”. Yes, women frequently trick, deceive, and exploit men. And men do the same. That’s just the way it is, and it’s never going to change.

  • jess

    blimey, what a series of depressing posts.
    Cheer up, its wimbledon week…

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    All I’m saying is that if I read the sex-pozzies’ blogs, and then I read the PUAs’ blogs, the sex-pozzies seem to be having way more fun. :)

    Also, Susan, there are a lot of very productive sluts, both male and female. Off the top of my head: nearly any musician, Lord Byron, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Catherine the Great, Pablo Picasso…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Also, Susan, there are a lot of very productive sluts, both male and female. Off the top of my head: nearly any musician, Lord Byron, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Catherine the Great, Pablo Picasso…

      I agree Ozy. This is just what I was trying to say. What would be a real shame is if a person with creative genius pissed it away living a life of pure hedonism. There are plenty of those examples too.

  • jess

    ozy
    …..quite… and I produced a clay teapot in pottery class the other day…

  • jess

    also isnt there a legend that catherine the great died whilst attempting congress with a member of the equine species?
    .
    if thats accurate, even I gotta admit that is kinda slutty

  • Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: In Absentia Edition()

  • GudEnuf

    I’ve often said here, “Let the sluts go at it with one another, and leave the rest of us to form lasting relationships, produce the next generation, and fulfill our creative and intellectual potential.

    You don’t think Roosh isn’t fulfilling his creative and intellectual potential?

    Think about the average American: How many end up writing that novel they’ve been daydreaming about? How many countries do they visit? How many books do they read not written by Larsson, Rowling, or Meyer? And you’re calling Roosh shallow?

    The politically incorrect truth is that is possible to live a fulfilling, unethical life. In a perfect world, Roosh’s misogyny would be punished. Too bad.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @GudEnuf

      The politically incorrect truth is that is possible to live a fulfilling, unethical life. In a perfect world, Roosh’s misogyny would be punished. Too bad.

      Yes, I’m sure there are serial murderers who feel that their lives have fulfilled their wildest dreams. And drug lords, and gang leaders. Yet we are not required to validate their choices. We can, and should, understand that people who lack ethics rob society. Their lives are purely selfish, and destroy community.

  • Renee

    I also believe that sluts should be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material.

    That “should” should be SHOULDN’T.

  • GudEnuf

    Yes, I’m sure there are serial murderers who feel that their lives have fulfilled their wildest dreams. And drug lords, and gang leaders. Yet we are not required to validate their choices. We can, and should, understand that people who lack ethics rob society. Their lives are purely selfish, and destroy community.

    I don’t approve of Ahmadinejad’s politics, but I can’t say that he wears tacky suits. And even if he did, it’d be besides the point.

    How can you honestly say that Roosh is uncreative? Don’t just tell me he’s a slut–that’s a circular argument.

  • http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com ozymandias

    I mean, say what you will about Roosh, but he’s clearly producing “work of the mind,” if you will.

    And way more creatives have been frittered away with TV than sex. At least sex leaves you with something to write about…

  • Clarence

    Susan:

    What Roosh is doing is in no way comparable to a drug lord or serial murderer. I’ll agree his life isn’t the best for society but:
    A. Society has screwed him before. I don’t blame him for his reaction to that
    B. As you say, he’s hardly “marriage” material so what should he ethically be doing?

    Indeed, while I appreciate you giving out the information you do on this blog, you don’t really answer that question. You let people make up their own minds. I don’t particularly like Roosh, but he’s not being utterly useless. Bang is a very good book except for the last chapter about “LMR” of which 3/4 I would either throw out or rewrite.

  • http://torrentbitch.com Bit(ch) Torrent

    We need to bury the “S” word right next side to the “N” word.

  • Matt

    Susan, I just wonder, why is being promiscuous for a male negative?

    Men have to work so much harder to get laid than a women ever will. For a man to lead a sexual life that is even comparable to that of a female slut, he has to climb mountains. While all a female slut has to do is have a vagina, a decent body and a decent face.

    Even after the man climbs MOUNTAINS to have a sexual life that is anywhere near that of a slut, most of the women he has sex with will be less attractive than him. While most of the men a slut has sex with will be SIGNIFICANTLY more attractive than her.

    I CALL BULLSHIT ON THE MALE SLUT! Also, I am a dude and I think it is BS that I have to go to the gym six days a week, buy nicer clothes, eat healthier and learn “game” (become more masculine) all in order to fuck women I am more attractive than. Then, at the end of the day, I am going to be judged for the hundreds if not thousands of rejections I will have had to have faced in order to have the life I want. All while the slut had to do was literally sit there and reject man after man until they found one they liked. THAT SUCKS!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Matt
      Look, if you aspire to be promiscuous, and you can succeed, good for you. I’m not trying to tell you how to live your life. I’m just saying – when and if you decide you want a relationship, then marriage, women most suitable for the role may balk at your promiscuity. There is a reverse double-standard that has come out of hookup culture, and you might as well be aware of it. If that’s not your experience with the women you find most attractive, then good for you.

      Anyone here can feel free to disagree on whether male sluts exist. I didn’t make this concept up, though it clearly threatens some of what Mystery said. I’m reflecting what young women say, and yes, DO. The terms manwhore and manslut are part of the culture and commonly used. They must describe something, no? And I can assure you neither term is used as a compliment.

      All while the slut had to do was literally sit there and reject man after man until they found one they liked.

      But that doesn’t give her the life she wants, presumably. Even hard-core sex-pos sluts want more than f*cking in life. It really doesn’t make much sense to feel envious of female sluts, who are viewed as disposable by most men.

  • VI

    Damn, all this Roosh hate. How is the man making the world a worse?

    He’s helping thousands of men get laid. I say give Roosh a medal.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Meh, Roosh was the most readily available example of a pure hedonist. Whether you respect Roosh and his efforts depends on your individual values. The larger argument is really about whether hedonism is a “good” way to live one’s life. In my view, it’s not – that’s a value judgment.

  • Höllenhund

    When guys, even hot guys, are known for being extremely indiscriminate, they do not convey status on a woman they have sex with. The opposite is true. As VI, Rake and others have said, when a guy has been with a lot of women other women judge “gross, slutty, dirty” etc., women are reluctant to join that company.

    There are many, many reasonably attractive (6 and above), gross, slutty, dirty women in this world. (I suppose by “gross” and “dirty” you don’t mean physical dirt.) These are the women manwhores normally have sex with; it doesn’t mean they’re indiscriminate. Having sex with 5s and below, fatties, obese women, old women, unwashed prole girls with missing teeth – THAT’s being indiscriminate.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hollenhund

      These are the women manwhores normally have sex with; it doesn’t mean they’re indiscriminate.

      First, obese women, old women, unwashed girls with missing teeth? These are 5s? I would have thought they were 1s.

      If any woman with more sex appeal than that is a 6, my theory will need adjustment. In your scale, women will reject men who regularly have sex with women lower than 9.

      It’s in the best interest of men to be rewarded for promiscuity. It is in the best interest of women to reject promiscuous men.

      The men arguing in defense of male promiscuity assume that women will never figure this out – that preselection will always highjack the hindbrain. But that’s not the way the world works. Women observe the SMP in microcosm. The truth is that only promiscuous women will knowingly hook up with manwhores. It is possible that some “good girls” will get burned by a cad, but that is deceit, she hasn’t got full information (this happens frequently to new freshmen). Why is it so hard to understand that when a man has a reputation for being someone who will want sex the first night, probably be inattentive to your needs if he can get past whiskey dick, and never make eye contact with you again, he is not a prize to most women?

      Every campus has its manwhores and the women who orbit around them. These are the most promiscuous students.

  • Blues
    I also believe that sluts should be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material.

    That “should” should be SHOULDN’T.

    Maybe on your end, but on mine they do get automatic disqualification for a really high number or certain rep, if they don’t reach that criteria they get HEAVY AS FUCK screening at the very least, to me that’s fair play.

  • Blues

    Why is it so hard to understand that when a man has a reputation for being someone who will want sex the first night, probably be inattentive to your needs if he can get past whiskey dick, and never make eye contact with you again, he is not a prize to most women?

    If you ever get the asnwer to this one please make a post about it, hell, email it to me, i could use the info somehow.

    Meh, Roosh was the most readily available example of a pure hedonist. Whether you respect Roosh and his efforts depends on your individual values. The larger argument is really about whether hedonism is a “good” way to live one’s life. In my view, it’s not – that’s a value judgment.

    Here’s the thing, i can’t speak for everyone but from my POV ¿do i want to follow Roosh’s path? no, ¿do i respect and value his efforts and take every piece of his advice? Hell yes, the thing is i don’t just take it at face value, i adapt it to my own style (if viable) and that’s the real thing most miss when they enter game, not just take info and advice from Roissy and Roosh and apply it as to make yourself V2.0 of them, get the underlying nugget of truth and use it your own way.

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    Also, Roosh’s method of selling his wares is just embarrassing. His blog reeks of desperation. He dashes off some quick advice, then begs his readers to buy an e-book.

    And I’ve read Bang — it’s an incoherent mess. It contains nothing that isn’t written better in the works that it tries to copy.

    Roosh’s approach to his career is as short-term in focus as his approach to pleasure. He goes from sucker to sucker selling derivative works that he obviously dashes off quickly and almost thoughtlessly. He’s building no status for himself as an author but instead just relies on cheesy internet marketing to get enough PayPal money to buy his next plane ticket to a third-world country with poor, exploitable women to use.

    I’ve got nothing personally against the guy, but he’s a shining example of what not to do with Game.

  • anonymous

    @ Matt

    Apparently from your post, you don’t actually know any sluts/players IRL, no?
    I do/have! and *plenty* of them up close and personal (some are elderly folks now).
    The sluts I know vary from quite attractive-unattractive, likewise with the players. These guys don’t necessarily go to the gym or wear nice clothes or anything of that sort, they’re just charming risk-taking sweet talkers who bed a spectrum of women. It’s not a clear case of all sluts are plain/fugly and all players are Adonises

    I’ll back Susan up, based on my observation- promiscuity can be negative for males too when they want to settle for marriage with a high quality, low-count woman.
    It’s happened to a guy I know, despite his good looks and financial good-standing. He couldn’t marry the quality he wanted to, those girls rejected him.
    Why?
    A-If a woman sees sex as meaningful, she’s not going to want to pair up with some guy who obviously doesn’t have the same values.
    B-She’ll know that his lack of self-control disqualifies him as a faithful husband.
    C-Also, if she knows her worth, how does being someone’s #112th make her feel -oh so special to him (only a foolish girl would think this)?
    There’s a difference in being with a man who others agree is a good-catch and being with a man who everyone has had sex with or is unavailable. Is the latter the ONLY factor for preselection? If it is, I completely missed out on that class when they gave it.
    D-On top of that, the player often doesn’t value women since his lifestyle has tainted his look on them. And if you think that’s not what happens, you’re naive. This whole “he’ll value her compared to all of the other slutty women” is very short-lived. The reality is he’s damaged because he’ll never trust ANY woman, not even his chaste wife and it will show in how he treats her.

    Sluts will gladly take a player because he’ll likely be less judgmental of her than a non-player.
    Gold-diggers will gladly take him if he’s wealthy or famous. Other damaged women will take him because they’re messed up in other ways.
    In cultures where players are commonly bred, the women will take them because they have no other choice if they want kids or need a provider. But, whenever there are other options available, less promiscuous people of both sexes will generally seek the like-minded.

    So, if your goal is to be a childless life-time bachelor, go ahead and be a player. I certainly don’t object.
    If eventually you want to settle down, abandon cyberspace for a while and go seek out older players IRL to interview and see if that’s how you want to live. Make sure you’re making an informed decision.

  • Tom

    VI
    Bullshit. Unless a man is only fucking fuglies, his promiscuity is not due to a lack of self-control. It’s due to his SKILL at seducing women.

    ______________________
    LOL Total BS.. A man who does 200 women is more of a manwhore than a woman who did 30 men is a slut.
    It doesnt matter what the women look like, 200 women is 200 women.. The self control or lack of it is in NOT trying to pick up that many women. Have a little self control. (as I have said before self control has little to do with “some” women or men who have high numbers. Some definately do, however.
    that being said I could care less how many people someone sleeps with. I have my own personal limits in that arena and I dont like the negative connotations of the words whore, slut, manwhore etc.

  • Tom

    @ Aldonza
    But aldonza darling, you must know by now ALL women of experience are viewed as women who are not worthy, could NEVER be good girlfriends, good wives, good mothers, good teachers, good Doctors, good executives, and will always cheat on their significant other.

    There are plenty of people who believe that. And that’s their right. But what does that have to do with me or my life?

    ____________________________
    Nothing I was on your side. I know there are people who believe there is no difference between women who are sexually actively.. To some ALL women are obsessed with hypergamy, want to do as many great looking Alphas as they can. That, as you understand, just is not true.

  • Tom

    passerbys definition of a slut to some men who are looking for a LTR.
    To a man seeking a LTR: a woman who has had sex with a sufficient number of partners that he will feel free floating and unexplainable anxiety over her sexual past. This number will depend upon several factors, including his number of partners and how much she convinces him during sex that he makes her cum like no other man.

    ___________________________
    I agree.. Hence insecurity about her past=” he will feel free floating and unexplainable anxiety over her sexual past.”

  • Tom

    Yohamy
    So a female slut is a woman who doesnt screen properly or doesnt screen at all, and is taken by the swing of the moment too frequently and with too many people. And that is usually linked to similar behaviors with drinking, drugs, lack of self esteem, etc. Addictive personality.

    _______________________
    so what is the lable of the woman who DOES screen properly, is not very impulsive, has over time amassed a fair amount of men, has high self esteem, and isnt wanting a relationship at the present?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      so what is the lable of the woman who DOES screen properly, is not very impulsive, has over time amassed a fair amount of men, has high self esteem, and isnt wanting a relationship at the present?

      This notion that women “gotta have it” while not in a relationship is nonsense. As I’ve said many times, the outliers who have high T and are more like men are usually the ones who actually prefer NSA sex, and they’re also the same women who avoid commitment.

      Most women welcome a relationship, indeed prefer it when having sex.

  • Matt T

    Also, I am a dude and I think it is BS that I have to go to the gym six days a week, buy nicer clothes, eat healthier and learn “game” (become more masculine) all in order to fuck women I am more attractive than. Then, at the end of the day, I am going to be judged for the hundreds if not thousands of rejections I will have had to have faced in order to have the life I want. All while the slut had to do was literally sit there and reject man after man until they found one they liked. THAT SUCKS!

    Well, it’s not just about the sex. I mean, if women as a whole were satisfied with their personal lives, entire corporations and industries would come crumbling down.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    Why is it so hard to understand that when a man has a reputation for being someone who will want sex the first night, probably be inattentive to your needs if he can get past whiskey dick, and never make eye contact with you again, he is not a prize to most women?

    It’s not hard to understand at all… what’s hard to understand is that despite understanding all of the traits you listed above, most young girls still find the average “manwhore” more attractive than the average respectful guy.

    Do I wish “manwhores” were avoided like you claim they are? Sure. But my experience in life tells a very different story. I guess we just have to agree to disagree on how this actually plays out in real life. Do I like how it really happens in real life? Hell no. But it is what it is. Between complaining and adapting, I’ll choose the latter.

  • Tom

    @ Susan
    This is obviously true. However, there is no question that a man who seduces many women loses the ability to bond with one woman.
    ______________
    OMG… you mean men cant fall in love and change their catting ways?..Are you serious?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      OMG… you mean men cant fall in love and change their catting ways?..Are you serious?

      There is some evidence that high numbers leads to more cheating in marriage. It’s not as dramatic as it is for women, but it’s real. Personally, I would consider a guy with a player past as high risk. After all that sexual variety, all those conquests, I would suspect he’d be unable to embrace monogamy for a lifetime. And by definition, most of the sex he’s had has been strictly physical. He’d be bringing that experience into the bedroom, but no experience with emotional intimacy during sex.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    so what is the lable of the woman who DOES screen properly, is not very impulsive, has over time amassed a fair amount of men, has high self esteem, and isnt wanting a relationship at the present?

    We dont have that many labels. We dont even have that many words. Thats one of the problems with dealings with stuff like this. There are layers of gray and we have 2-3 words to assign the whole thing.

    So lets say we have a woman who DOES screen, aint impulsive, has high self esteem, and isnt wanting a relationship at the present, however she has ranked a fair (70?) amount of sexual partners.

    Promiscuous? yes. Label?

    – How would you call her?
    – How would you call her, if she was a man?
    – How would you rank her for a long term relationship? would you filter or make her work harder for your long term relationship approval?
    – What if she was a man?

    etc.

    I would call that one slut btw. And she probably calls herself slut too and her friends do the same. And maybe she likes going to these walks.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      And maybe she likes going to these walks.

      Yohami is funny.

  • Tom

    Maybe Tom has the XY, but is using only half of his chromosomes

    _______________________
    Ha I laughed at this one too…….Could be Tom is not as judgemental and insecure as the average sheeple man.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Susan,

    This is obviously true. However, there is no question that a man who seduces many women loses the ability to bond with one woman.

    “No question”? eh, really. Disagree.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Yohami
      Fair enough – I don’t have the evidence or knowledge to state that as fact. Let’s just say the odds of his falling Head Over Heels appear to go down, for a whole bunch of reasons. I can only think of one example to the contrary – Warren Beatty. But he was already old when he settled down.

  • Tom

    I think someone suggested once that “Tom” is actually real Tom’s promiscuous girlfriend. She has access to his Facebook account, and enough info about his past to give some data “proving” she is male. If this is the case, it’s very unfortunate. This woman is on here all the time arguing with determination and she’s not going to hear what she wants to hear. She must have regrets or even doubts about her ability to be faithful in the relationship, and seeks confirmation here that it will all be OK.

    ________________________
    Lmmfao are you serious?

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    Could be Tom is not as judgemental and insecure as the average sheeple man.

    Its your language. You speak about men like they were from another planet, and use shaming language and female language. You just didt that again.

    “insecure as the average sheeple man” lol. I can almost see the color of bra you are wearing when I read that.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I can almost see the color of bra you are wearing when I read that.

      Really funny.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Susan,

    Most women welcome a relationship, indeed prefer it when having sex.

    Yep. Even the sluttier do. Relationship hungry. A lot of them dont know what to do with the relationship once they got one tough. Because this is based of instincts and not rational conscious decisions. The relationship craving is responsible for many relationships that would have been healtier if there were less strings attached (or none)

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Susan,

    Someone else pointed it out before, and I think its more like this: if a person has abundant superficial X, its probably because the person has already a problem with having intimate X. Be it sex, friendship, etc.

    A guy who is a womanizer probably had troubles getting into proper relationships BEFORE becoming a womanizer. Same for the woman.

    Some of the more promiscuous women I met, are so troubled I cant imagine what would be like to be in a relationship with them. I dont think they can handle love or care for a person other than themselves

    Then, there is a segment of the promiscuous women that are really ugly physically. They cant catch a good man any other way. The random cock is whats left, and they put it easy, then they try to sweeten it up and catch it and fail. Snooky comes to mind.

    Roosh, I dont think the guy was “pair bond” material before going pussy rampage.

    A lot of guys getting into game already hate women= not bond material.

    Etc.

    And then, the risk that with experience one might get jaded.

    But I cant warp my mind about this “having to many superficial X prevents you from having one deep X”. If that was a true consequence, it should show up everywhere, not just in sex / relationships.

    I think its more like, people take what they can while they can.

    A lot of people into hookups are really after love and get none. But keep trying.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      But I cant warp my mind about this “having to many superficial X prevents you from having one deep X”. If that was a true consequence, it should show up everywhere, not just in sex / relationships.

      Interesting – I will have to give this more thought. I think you’re right that people seek experiences that are congruent with their real selves in the first place. Other than sex/relationships, where would one see superficial vs. deep? I’m not sure that emotional intimacy would look like other applications of that concept.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    In cultures where players are commonly bred, the women will take them because they have no other choice if they want kids or need a provider. But, whenever there are other options available, less promiscuous people of both sexes will generally seek the like-minded

    A-fucking-men!
    This is like 85% of Dominican women. I went to an activity in our embassy some months ago and then I noticed that all women there were married to men from other countries, I was wondering for a second and then it hit me “don’t be silly none dominican woman with two ounces of brain,will marry a dominican man if she had any other choice”, I will say some of them are shameless carousel riders (15% more or less), but the huge majority will take a foreigner if circumstances were right,regardless of social status or income.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    A guy who is a womanizer probably had troubles getting into proper relationships BEFORE becoming a womanizer. Same for the woman.

    This argument ignores the fact that not using certain muscles can render them useless and that using them too much can do the same.
    You are assuming that people that are naturally able to bond can’t change that with bad habits. That is not truth, as you might know no matter how naturally healthy you might be if you smoke and drink in excess, eat bad and sleep worst, you are going to get sick and have a shorter lifespam.
    Is the same with sex and bonding, if you exercise meaningless sex for a long time, your body will adapt itself to this lifestyle and connecting will be harder with time. Is truth that numbers vary and one lover might be enough for some while for others one thousand would be the limit. But given that we don’t have any way to know what number is the magic one to avoid. Is wiser to be moderate, not indulge in it and always being alert for a good long time partner and commit to him/her as soon as is practical.
    I know the motto is that life is too short no to enjoy sex, I say life is too short to not enjoy great sex and love with a person you can connect, physically, mentally and spiritually for as long as you live, YMMV, as usual.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Stephie,

    You are assuming that people that are naturally able to bond can’t change that with bad habits.

    Im not assuming that.

    if you exercise meaningless sex for a long time, your body will adapt itself to this lifestyle and connecting will be harder with time.

    If you dont exercise for a long time its going to get harder when you go back to the gym. If you develop a comfort zone is harder to get out of that comfort zone. This is an universal thing. What Im arguing against is the notion that you would lose the CAPACITY to do something different.

    And Im saying people who dont exercise wont do much at the gym anyway, even if they come back, or even if they never left it. Theres a lot of non sporty people at the gyms who are losing their time. And theres a lot of people non suited for LTR who are also losing their time by being in failed relationships.

    And sure, habits can tame a lot of stuff for better and worse.

    But given that we don’t have any way to know what number is the magic one to avoid.

    I dont think theres such a magic number.

    I think we can sum all of this as fear. The fear that if you go the wrong way you might get lost so you better dont. Which is fine, but preaching it as science / facts… isnt fine.

    life is too short to not enjoy great sex and love with a person you can connect, physically, mentally and spiritually for as long as you live

    I personally agree with that. But

    1) you need a special person to do that

    2) not everyone has that goal. If everyone had that goal, there wouldnt be casual sex, flings, cheating, etc.

    3) “for as long as you live” is punishment when you do that with the wrong person

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    many superficial friends vs few intimate friends
    many conquests vs few relationships
    fame vs family
    many hobbies vs one strong passion

    etc. I see personality traits, going from superficial and cheap to few and valuable, and the value mechanics and focus change. introvert and extrovert will tend to pick different extremes, sensible vs not so sensible and socially talented vs mentally gifted will pick different traits.

    Focusing on fewer / deeper / has a different effect than focusing of many / more superficial. Thats true in every field. And for better and worse: you can focus too much on the wrong stuff.

    What I dont see is one person being introverted, intimate and with a few valuable friends, “losing” his or her ability to connect on that range because of going in the opposite direction. As long as that direction is wanted and not forced, nor traumatic / jading

    So a person with many friends that chooses to focus on a single friendship. Should this person lose their social ability? what about reverse.

    Or a person with one strong passion, would they lose the ability to focus on a passion, if they decide for a while try many smaller hobbies?

    I only see gains. I dont see this “you´re losing your ability”

    But I do see the losing your path when going DARK, when doing stuff because you give up, when losing the screening, goals, whatever. But I see the getting lost as something that happens before, or as a trauma somewhere, not because the change in focus

    I have met a lot of promiscuous people who have NO clue about relationships. But its not like they had any or were interested and the few relationships they had were hell (because they are so inept)

    And a lot of people in relationships who have no clue either, or / and no clue about not being in relationships and cant handle themselves when they are on their own. There are a lot of sickness that can only be developed within a relationship.

    So I would put a sane person in the middle and with the ability to focus and switch at please.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Yohami
      But how commonly do people switch gears like that? I’ve never known any extroverted, gregarious person with lots of friends to switch gears and focus on one intimate friendship. It’s just not the way they’re made. If they did, wouldn’t that one close friend wonder how long it might be before the person missed all their other friends, and the general enjoyment of meeting and interacting with others, which is in keeping with their nature?

      I understand the hypothetical, I just don’t see it happening IRL. Someone who is very family-oriented will probably remain so, even in fame. If a person has many hobbies, they may focus on one strong passion for a while, but will miss their other interests. That’s the case with me – I work very hard on HUS, and I’ve given up other things to make that work. I haven’t painted in two years, my garden suffers, my kids know I don’t have as much free time, I’ve stopped seeing women friends during the day for lunch or a walk. This is a choice I make willingly, for now, but I miss those other things, and eventually I will make time to pursue them. I am especially anxious to return to painting. So while I know that it is possible to do something “out of character” it’s always going to feel sub-optimal. When it comes to marriage, that’s just not a compromise worth making.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I think we can sum all of this as fear. The fear that if you go the wrong way you might get lost so you better dont. Which is fine, but preaching it as science / facts… isnt fine.
    But you are preaching that going any where you want will be fine, when you know is not. Then what gives?

    2) not everyone has that goal. If everyone had that goal, there wouldnt be casual sex, flings, cheating, etc.

    Mmm the thing is that the majority of people have that goal or eventually develop it. Again how many women are having sex with Alphas with the goal of making them commit to them? Is a horrible approach but if everyone that had casual sex, cheats or have flings was just in it for sex only and not looking connection we wouldn’t have issues either.
    The problem is that many people had been conditioned to think that they want casual sex and flings and end up in a bad place to begin with, don’t you think is best to assume you are going to end up wanting a solid relationship from early on? Is easier to go from dad to cad than from cad to dad, a lot easier.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Stephie,

    But you are preaching that going any where you want will be fine

    mmm Im not. There is danger everywhere. What Im preaching is “be yourself”, and then explaining what that is.

    don’t you think is best to assume you are going to end up wanting a solid relationship from early on?

    Not so sure. In my case that resulted in about 25 years of celibacy, and then a couple of relationships where I committed like my life was in play, and a lot of personal problems until I let idealism go.

    In my mind it would have had it better if I had started fucking when I was 15.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    In my mind it would have had it better if I had started fucking when I was 15.

    Could be. I guess only time will tell.
    Like mentioned by others I also know a lot of guys that starting fucking at young ages and have all the women they desired that end up regretting the “fruits of their labors” when they reached old age and old good Testosterone stopped being in control. But yeah at this point if you are damaged is too late already for you. But word of caution is better for people that are starting IMO, just in case, YMMV.

  • Steve Macey

    all in order to fuck women I am more attractive than.

    This is one factor that I think explains the extreme decline in the probability of men marrying past 40. The relative attractiveness of women available for LTR’s falls below the threshold required to motivate the effort. You’re either chasing younger women, who are wary of getting together with a guy 10+ years older, or settling for a middle aged woman that you’re not very attracted to.

  • Bob

    I’ve always thought it was women who enforce the double standard.

    Promiscuous means too many more partners than the making the judgement had.

    Too many fewer and the women won’t touch you with a ten foot pole.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Susan,

    Yes, and thats pretty much my point too. Usually, people dont change. Going out of your path usually means you miss your path and go back to it when given a chance and even regret moving away from it.

    So how would a naturally intimate / close / introverted / fewer friends / one main relationship go out of cause, go casual sex and extroversion and LOSE his / her natural ability to connect? it doesnt ring true.

    I think if people having lots of superficial flings suck at having relationships, other than the lack of experience, its because they suck at it anyway.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Going out of your path usually means you miss your path and go back to it when given a chance and even regret moving away from it.

    I agree and disagree. People core traits don’t change, but don’t underestimate the power of culture, experience and society to express those traits or not.
    A person can be really miserable having casual sex and not connect that is the casual sex per se what makes them miserable. If you look at the feminist reasoning when they talk about post-sex depression affecting more women than men, they swear is out of Patriarchy and the young women continue this path for years (sometimes forever) without realizing they are not wired for this. The same could be say the other way around. Lack of self awareness also creates issues with this. I find hard to believe that the majority of people is naturally ill suited to have stable relationships, if anything for the fact that society had to create an artificial bubble for it to happen (bigger stable cities, birth control, longer lifetime spans, separating sex from commitment, less families, the war against marriage…) so is more likely that this unnatural conditions create an unnatural state for this traits to develop or not, YMMV.

  • Laura

    @Anonymous

    Thank you for your last post. I have tried to make this point to a manwhore who kept begging me for sex. He just isn’t worthy. You said it quite succinctly. I will save your words if I should ever need them again.

  • filrabat

    @OffTheCuff

    Is this from experience, or second-hand knowledge from others? Don’t you know a real-life old somewhere that’s been married for 60 years and seem happy? Of course, their marriage wasn’t perfect, but if it went that long, it’s was probably more good than bad.

    To feel joy, you must also risk feeling pain. To completely avoid one is to completely avoid the other. It is your choice to choose a joyless existence. I’m not religious, but if I was, I would be firmly convinced that God wants us to experience joy at the expense of some pain, and attempt to do more good than harm.

    It depends on what you mean by “joy”, which gets inevitably leads to a whole bunch of philosophical issues I can’t even begin to do justice to here. Suffice to say that I myself am not as much interested in “joy” (as in intense emotional ‘warm fuzzies’ or exhilarating thrills) as in a calm, satisfaction with my own life – one without lots of emotional intensities.

    I’ve played the zero-risk game before, for untold decades. You will regret it. All the graet joys in my life come from exposing that vulnerability enough to find that someone who wants to see the real you, instead of take advantage of you. It exists.

    It depends on the kinds of risks one is willing to take. I don’t think Platero meant avoid all risks one can possibly or even reasonably avoid. Susan herself said she appears to be a female version of me in many ways, and I largely agree. While I still cannot come even close to legitimately claiming I know her well, I do suspect she has other passions in life that she is willing to take a risk with – simply due to different priorities from most of society. She’ll ultimately have to speak for herself in this matter.

    However, speaking for myself, I’m the type of person who control over my own life – necessarily involving stability and predictability. That doesn’t mean I find my life boring – indeed learning and speculating about the nature of things keeps a little “zip” in my life. It’s just that I recognize that the more things you have and/or aspire to be, the more stress and craziness you create for yourself.

    From my point of view, I find the best approach is to lead a “minimalist” life – worry only about the things I absolutely need to maintain at least a minimally humane quality of life, and be careful about what you aspire for (if it’s necessary for maintainence of physical and mental health, maintain the roof over my head, etc., it’s good; if it’s just for my own glory and “bragging rights”, then that’s suspect). But hey, that’s just my own personal view. If you want more, I’m all for you going after more. All I’m saying is that people have strikingly different needs and “not needs”.

    If that makes me an omega in the eyes of the world, so be it. I stopped caring about what others think long ago, and (not to be judgmental, but..) I find an amazing number of adults who still play the “go for it all” game, making me wonder just how far behind their college or even high school years really are to them.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Stephie,

    A person can be really miserable having casual sex and not connect that is the casual sex per se what makes them miserable.

    A person can be doing X and be unhappy and not realizing its about X. Sure. X can also be celibacy, career, scholarship, religion, etc. Anything you are doing because culture says so.

    If you look at the feminist reasoning when they talk about post-sex depression affecting more women

    I think we should stop calling that “reasoning” :-P

    I think more men are suited for casual sex than women. I think women are more suited for relationships. Our culture however is pushing both genders reversed: slutty braggart women and castrated nice men.

    I find hard to believe that the majority of people is naturally ill suited to have stable relationships

    I think a lot of people is ill

  • filrabat

    Personally, I say “slut” is dependent on the details of the totality of her circumstances.

    Age – the older she is when you meet her, the more likely she is to have a high number (a 30 yr old with a number of 10 but only in committed relationships plus slept with only as many men – probably not a slut, or at least not to her detriment. A 19 year old, or even 21 year old with this – probably IS a slut, or at least have slut-like tendencies).

    Relationships – There’s a relationship number too, a 30 yr old woman with 4 bf’s in her life, likely not a bad catch. A 19 year old, she’s on the borderline and needs to step back and ask herself some hard questions

    Which types she slept with – If she met all or most of her men in places, clubs, or organizations associated with societally redeeming activities, then I think she deserves at least some benefit of the doubt – especially if she has a high LTR/Marriage “score” on the above two. If she met the vast majority of her men in venues commonly associated with player pick-up venues (bars, concerts, spring break in Daytona, malls, or other places you see people coming and going a lot), she’s gonna have to go cold turkey on men for a long time before she has even a fighting chance of being an “ex-slut”.

    Social groups she met him in – Similar to the immediate above. If she met him in a group or venue not easily given to easy sexual encounters (esp. religious organizations, but also socially redeeming or “high IQ” special-interest clubs) — especially thorough frequently encountered friends that lets her watch and observe the guy in question before she opens herself up to him, also a good sign. If the opposite, random encounters at the bar or frat house or Daytona Beach; again, she’ll have to do at least a few years of “good girl” building, and even then the “Good Guy” types will still make her jump through more hoops (by actively examining her behave and her attitudes at a distance) before she has a shot.

    Hence, I find “slut” very contextual, even if there are sexual resumes 95% of the world agrees screams “slut”. No wonder Susan refused to give a firm number in this matter in her months ago posts about “how many is too many”.

  • Blues
    In my mind it would have had it better if I had started fucking when I was 15.

    Could be. I guess only time will tell.
    Like mentioned by others I also know a lot of guys that starting fucking at young ages and have all the women they desired that end up regretting the “fruits of their labors” when they reached old age and old good Testosterone stopped being in control. But yeah at this point if you are damaged is too late already for you. But word of caution is better for people that are starting IMO, just in case, YMMV.

    @Steph, Yohami: i think it has little to do with fucking and a whole lot more with seeing reality and taking whatever way your personality dictates knowing how things really are instead of the illusion and the younger that happens the better.

  • daffyyd

    @yohami….ill?…bingo!….america: 5% of world population consuming 25% of world resources at the cost of the misery of millions; 7 wars ongoing; hypocrisy the order of the day……karma got you by the gonads

  • Abbot

    I agree.. Hence insecurity about her past=” he will feel free floating and unexplainable anxiety over her sexual past.”
    .
    Given the obvious world wide choices in women available to Western men, why would any man who is not a masochist put himself through that? Why would a woman with such “sexual past” who is not a sadist even want to subject a man to this “unexplainable anxiety”?

  • rick

    Tom writes like a woman.

    An angry one at that.

  • rick
  • Abbot

    I also believe that sluts should be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material.
    That “should” should be SHOULDN’T.

    .
    They will not be disqualified as much when men are no longer the ones to solely determine what defines wife and mother material and / or when its no longer easy to detour around sluts when a man decides the time is right to do so. That is, you need to work on taking away a man’s agency.

  • Abbot

    Who wants to fish for a wife from this pond?
    .
    The problem isn’t hooking up, it’s that hooking up is the only way of being sexual that my students see as an option. There were no counter-messages. Students who are deeply religious feel entirely unsupported in their desire to remain virgins till marriage. Students who want relationships, but not casual sex, are seen as fuddy duddies: old fashioned and possibly repressed. Students who are interested in polyamory, love-based sexual relationships with more than one person, are seen as simply weird. A feminist perspective on sex is essentially invisible, especially any real discussion of women’s pleasure…Meanwhile, interest in having sex is essentially compulsory for my students. They had hookup culture and hookup culture only.
    ,
    http://www.theconsensualproject.com/blog/lisa-wade-and-consensual-narratives

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Steph, Yohami: i think it has little to do with fucking and a whole lot more with seeing reality and taking whatever way your personality dictates knowing how things really are instead of the illusion and the younger that happens the better.

    True. Self awareness is an scarce resource nowadays, specially for the young. Sadly is the most necessary for people to be truly happy and not be “happy according to…”. I do wonder if they are happy in a way at least. I mean NLP is a powerful tool. Maybe those feminists had been so brainwashed at this point that they recite to each how happy they are “liberated” that in a way they truly are…need to ponder that a bit.

  • VI

    In my mind it would have had it better if I had started fucking when I was 15.

    I was two weeks shy of my 15th birthday when I gave up my virginity. I was very much in love with that girl, but starting young certainly paid off in the long-run. I gave up idealism at a younger age than most men do.

  • tito

    slut is a term females created and used to keep other women from driving down their aggregate value. end of story.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      slut is a term females created

      Look again at the etymology, this just isn’t true.

      used to keep other women from driving down their aggregate value

      This is true. Intrasexual competition among women has always included slut shaming.

  • tito

    @Stephanie Rowling

    “True. Self awareness is an scarce resource nowadays, specially for the young. Sadly is the most necessary for people to be truly happy and not be “happy according to…”. I do wonder if they are happy in a way at least. I mean NLP is a powerful tool. Maybe those feminists had been so brainwashed at this point that they recite to each how happy they are “liberated” that in a way they truly are…need to ponder that a bit.”

    these people bounce the same ideas off of each other, essentially preaching to the choir, in order to hear back what they already want to believe. this confirms them in sillyness that they don’t actually believe but want to. that’s why the shrillness. they make the case against themselves.

  • OhioStater

    Most of the women with a partner count above 30 will end up marrying a guy below their league. The top guys won’t take them.

    Their sad example will convince the next generation of girls it’s best to keep their legs closed.

  • GudEnuf

    That’s the case with me – I work very hard on HUS, and I’ve given up other things to make that work. I haven’t painted in two years, my garden suffers, my kids know I don’t have as much free time, I’ve stopped seeing women friends during the day for lunch or a walk. This is a choice I make willingly, for now, but I miss those other things, and eventually I will make time to pursue them. I am especially anxious to return to painting.

    Is that a hint? Will HUS be closing up shop soon?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @GudEnuf
      No way, I’m so hooked on this blog. I’m thinking about getting up an hour earlier, though…

  • Sox

    A “slut” is someone whose behavior triggers a visceral reaction in a man along the lines of “Wow, I don’t want that kind of girl.” Simple as that. To find “that” just ask any individual guy or take a poll, and there’s the answer you’re trending towards. This explains why a definition is so hard to come by, why guys’ standards vary so much, and why guys are frequently accused of jealousy and insecurity when talking about female promiscuity.

    For further explanation, I defer to the scarcity principle, oft-cited both on here and throughout the Game community: If something is difficult to get, then getting it demonstrates to ourselves and others that we are in control of our environment. Threatening to take something away is showing the other person that you are in control. The desire of scarcity is thus the competitive urge to maintain control. (linked from http://changingminds.org/principles/scarcity.htm) I’ll also add that many define themselves in part based on what they’re able to get, for better or for worse.

    That’s how most men view sex (from the ~60% they find attractive), and how most women view sex/commitment (from the ~20-30% they find attractive). Most women have throughout history known this. Most men have known that most women have known this, ergo, a woman’s most powerful asset is her sexuality. Is anyone really debating this? Also interesting how most successful PUAs advocate men adopting a principle of abundance.

    By being so critical of how, when, and to whom women give it up, we men make an assessment of how emotionally healthy they are (self image, control, etc.), how they handle their greatest assets, what their priorities are, and as a result their overall value on the sexual market. The other side of this is how this all plays into how the guy views himself, what he wants in a girl, and how being with a particular girl with a certain SMV will affect his own view of himself. A guy who doesn’t really consider all of the above part of his criteria for selection, then he’s either a) so “secure” that he’s willing to risk all of the potential red flags and potential blowback that could occur or b) values himself so little that he’ll take whatever the fuck he can get. You be the judge, I say there’s a pretty fine line there. That’s where other women come in handy- they’re the judges.

    Personally, I don’t care if a girl has fucked around a bit. I look at the big picture. I also can’t say I’ll never date a girl I may consider a slut by my standards right now. I can tell you that most promiscuous women I’ve met have had a shit-ton of baggage. The more self-righteous they were about their promiscuity, the more obvious the depth of their self-delusion.

    In the end, you can say you want a man secure enough to handle you, your past, your attitude, your job, whatever…but if that automatically disqualifies 80% of men, how are you doing yourself any favors?

  • Sox

    I’ll also add that I have friends who actively base their decisions/dating strategy/whatever on paranoia of how they’ll be perceived and fear of raising their number…I don’t advise this for any girl. In the end it makes you come across as repressed and unable to let go of yourself and live in the moment. As always, there’s a happy medium that you’d think would be common sense for most people.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      YAY SOX IS BACK!

  • Tom

    @ Renee
    A woman who has occational sex with men of her choosing, always includes condoms in her sexcapades,does not have sex for self validation purposes, loves sex, and is not ready for a committed relationship at this time.

    This is how I often view “sluts”, or simply females who have casual sex. Not always in the frame of there being something psychologically, emotional, physiologically wrong with them. I really don’t find many discussions that acknowledge that women do have an “itch to scratch” of their own and nothing more.
    ________________________
    There are a lot of women who get the “itch” also known as horny. I agree with you, many women who experience occational casual sex are not the heathens , emotional wreaks some people here make them out to be…some definately are, however.

    “I also believe that sluts should be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material. I remember an earlier post about measuring a woman’s worth as wife/mother material by something other than her sexual history. I believe that sluts can change their ways just like any other person. She doesn’t have to be defined by that for the rest of her life. But then again, I’m a Christian so…..”
    _______________________
    Seriously? If you are a Christian then you know of ,” judge not and ye shall not be judged?” Luke 6:37.. That is a horrible thing to say. Sex is not evil so having sex is not evil, with one person or several over time. Many MILLIONS of sluts have gone on to marry and raise kids…Shame on YOU!

    And about something Abbot said, something like men reject sluts as marriage material because they can and nothing more. I don’t believe that. Yes people have preferences, but in this case, there’s too many evolutionary, psychological, social, etc., etc…..stuff beneath it all.
    ______________________
    I totally agree with you. Men like abbott want the Stepford Wife. His prerogative. He and men like him will never admit their preference is based out of insecurity, or even social conditioning. You know, kind of like insecure sheep. Many men do not want to even think of their woman “knowing” another man or men sexually. It isnt that she has done something wrong, but it is his perception and insecure jealously that is the influence of his thought process.

  • Tom

    @ Steph.
    I know the motto is that life is too short no to enjoy sex, I say life is too short to not enjoy great sex and love with a person you can connect, physically, mentally and spiritually for as long as you live, YMMV, as usual.
    ______________
    I agree, but what if you connect with a wonderful person who has slept with 30 others? How does THAT disqualify them? In my book it doesnt necessarly. If she is of good character she gets a chance with me. If her life is a mess maybe I move on. In My opinion, a wonderful person is a wonderful person. THAT is ultimately what counts. Not something so trivel as how many people they had sex with. Once I get to know them, find out what makes them tick, find they have ALL the qualities that makes for a wondeful person, I am to cast them aside because they happened to enjoy sex? Sorry I am man enough NOT to be so stupid, and so jealous to let her past matter.

  • Tom

    @ Rake

    Turning your life into a “Groundhog Day” of meaningless pickups is a sure way to learn to hate your world, whether you are a man or a woman.
    __________________
    And it can be that hate that ultimately can be the catalyst to springboard them back to a more normal life to find love and a mate. They know as well as anyone that life is not for them. Little chance of someone who has truely learned a lesson, returning to that lifestyle. That is what a lot of men use as their excuse. They fear a woman still needing the variety, but it is the variety that drove them AWAY from that life. At least the smart ones anyways.

  • Tom

    @ Matt
    Well, part of the purpose of Game is to teach people healthy attitudes about women: instead of worshiping them as angels, you see them for what they are
    _____________________
    Please enlighten me, tell me how you see women for what they are. What are they?

  • Tom

    @ Susan
    We can, and should, understand that people who lack ethics rob society. Their lives are purely selfish, and destroy community.
    __________________
    At what number does promiscuous sex become unethical, start robbing society and start destroying a community? 5 partners? 10? 30? 50+?

    Just remember this…….. given enough time, the same personality that had sex with 8 people could have had sex with 28. Susan what if you had not met your wonderful husband for the next 5 years? what might YOUR number have been?

  • http://blacksub6.blogspot.com escarondito

    @tom

    I’ve been gone for a minute but I’m back with the jumpoff tom. Generally, are women who are after their own interest and not yours. And game helps you learn women’s interests, why they have those interests, and how you can work with this new perspective in viewing their actions in a true light. But that’s just what I heard from Duece Linc the president of civil war records. Dude make’s the hot beats. Too bad he was capped in the north states south states rivalry back in the day. L.O.G. L.I.F.E. 4 eva b.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I agree, but what if you connect with a wonderful person who has slept with 30 others?

    I will never connect with such a person in the first place, and if I connected I will automatically disconnect the moment I find out. And this is not a rational process. Before I meet my husband I though I had found the one, but then I found out that he had a couple of orbiters and I tested him to see how much was he really going to invest in me, exclusively. He failed miserably and I could never see him in the same way…ever.
    So maybe you are wired differently but I don’t and I can’t lie to myself for the sake of being “enlightened” and “modern” thus I understand man having the same standards, I can’t ask anyone something I’m incapable of giving.

  • Tom

    @ Yohami,
    So lets say we have a woman who DOES screen, aint impulsive, has high self esteem, and isnt wanting a relationship at the present, however she has ranked a fair (70?) amount of sexual partners.

    Promiscuous? yes. Label?

    – How would you call her?
    – How would you call her, if she was a man?
    – How would you rank her for a long term relationship? would you filter or make her work harder for your long term relationship approval?
    – What if she was a man?
    ______________
    Man or woman, it doesnt matter….I really dont have a label for them. 70? if that was over 5 years, that is @ one new partner a month. Still a little high but certainly not a person who hops in bed with every alpha she meets. If that was in ONE years time, I say that person may not be for me. SHE would take some serious consideration before interring into a LTR. That would be on average more than one guy per week.

  • Tom

    @ Renee
    “I also believe that sluts SHOULDN`T be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material. I remember an earlier post about measuring a woman’s worth as wife/mother material by something other than her sexual history. I believe that sluts can change their ways just like any other person. She doesn’t have to be defined by that for the rest of her life. But then again, I’m a Christian so…..”
    There fixed it for you.. looks like we agree a lot.

  • Tom

    @ Steph
    I agree, but what if you connect with a wonderful person who has slept with 30 others?

    I will never connect with such a person in the first place, and if I connected I will automatically disconnect the moment I find out.
    ___________________
    Fair enough Steph.. May I ask why you would terminate the relationship automatically?
    Many times two people connect, on a deep level without knowing the others past. Sometimes it just doesnt come u early. If our opinion of someone is they are smart, witty, has a good job, relates to us well, we connect on a deep level, why does that have to change (or I should say, how have THEY changed) to the place where we drop them like a hot potato?
    I just do not understand that mentality. Could be they actually benefited from their past and it is what made them who they are today? ” A wonderful person”
    People arrive at different stations in their life time by different means and at different times. some people find themselves easily, some people have to search.

  • anonymous

    @ Tom
    I’m not Steph, but I’ll answer anyway.

    First of all, I’m not the kind of person who *deeply* connects with anyone right off-the-bat that I don’t know very well. Yes, I would drop that person like a hot potato if I knew their sexual history comprised of meaningless sex (as I would if they were a drug addict or any other of my dealbreakers).

    Why?
    Because I know plenty of people who fit that description and I’ve observed how quickly it is that THEY drop the “deep connection” with someone for a quick roll in the hay with another.
    Sexual fidelity is very important to me.
    So, I’d NEVER knowingly take the chance with the odds against me.
    I don’t care if that’s what people call “insecure” or whatever label they call it, I’m protecting myself the best that I can.
    I want to receive exactly what I’m willing to give and no less.

  • tito

    this was a comment made earlier in the thread:

    “Most of the women with a partner count above 30 will end up marrying a guy below their league. The top guys won’t take them.

    Their sad example will convince the next generation of girls it’s best to keep their legs closed.”

    are you out of your mind!!?? counter-intuitive. the ‘sad example’ you mentioned is not going to convince the next generation of anything. if so this would all have ended 30 years ago. if anything, they will see what bad comes of it, say something nobel, and then drive on into the stonewall at 1,000 mph.

    you must have noticed this trend. i am totally dumbstruck by your comment.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @tito

      counter-intuitive. the ‘sad example’ you mentioned is not going to convince the next generation of anything. if so this would all have ended 30 years ago.

      I’m not so sure about this. I think it has taken a couple of generations to really see the effects of the Sexual Revolution. Today we have signs everywhere that women are having difficulty marrying. Black women face long odds for a whole host of reasons, and lots of white women are writing spinster lit confessional memoirs. These 30-something women serve as a clear example of disaster. I think it will take another 20 years or so, and then we’ll see marriage ages trending downward, though the marriage rate will continue to decline. Women will have to compete more than ever before for marriageable men.

  • tito

    @Susan

    ” ‘slut is a term females created’

    Look again at the etymology, this just isn’t true.”

    oh please. it is and you know it.

  • jess

    to anonymous and tom,
    anonymous makes a fair point and its nice to see someone make a point without resorting to shaming or insults.
    .
    the last phrase is rather poignant and something I kind of subscribe to myself.
    .
    So why would I not agree with the overall point? Because humans are more complex than one characteristic.
    .
    i know many women who had plenty of experience but are completely true to their partner.
    .
    I know some women who did not have much experience but cheated later in life (ever see the british sit com Butterflies?).
    .
    I also know men and women who showed the opposite dynamic.
    .
    Now some people have produced published evidence in other threads that fidelity statistically does go down on average if the prior partners number increases.
    .
    but its only a statistical correlation- it not a certainty. it seems bizarre to me that people would choose their loved one on that basis.
    .
    but at the end of the day, in your heart of hearts, you dont trust someone- then fair enough, move on. Someone else will trust and love them- just hope you don’t look back one day and regret the decision.

  • tito

    sorry guys. i spelled “noble” wrong. fixed.

  • jess

    tito,
    i suspect you are right that young people dont listen to their elders nor learn from others mistakes.
    .
    do you have any links on the origin of the word ‘slut’- you seem very certain of yourself on that one.

  • tito

    @jesse

    for your point to become reality there needs to be a lot of human agency involved. that is not allowed by our current society. one must adhere strictly to the lowest common denominator. source: pop-culture

  • Tom

    Anon
    Why?
    Because I know plenty of people who fit that description and I’ve observed how quickly it is that THEY drop the “deep connection” with someone for a quick roll in the hay with another.
    Sexual fidelity is very important to me.
    _____________________
    Fair enough at least you are kind of honest about the origins of your preference.
    I can tell you I have experiences where I know of people that also fit that discription who went on the have a good marriage and raised kids.
    It is a risk for any relationship.
    Some people say if you have tasted others, you wont get over it and will always want others…
    then there is the school of thought that if you have never tasted others, there will always be that curiosity of what it might be like to be with another.
    See cant win….lol

  • Tom
  • Tom

    another opinion or theory

    In the days before divorce and birth control, probably even back as far as when man was the hunter and woman was the care-giver and “educator”, a woman needed a man to provide for her and her child’s basic needs. A man needed to be sure that the time and effort he was expending on providing those needs were actually benefitting his genes in the child. (And if you believe in the Selfish Gene proposition this is not a thought-process but an intuitive act.)

    What better way to stop your woman begetting another’s child for you to care for, than to make it totally socially unacceptable to do anything other than “stand by your man”? Hence the value-judgement that became attached to the words that didn’t describe anything other than a factual situation.

  • Tom

    I remember reading about when they were said no self respecting woman would EVER wear a two piece bathing… LOL
    times they are a changingggg

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Fair enough Steph.. May I ask why you would terminate the relationship automatically?

    Meaningless sex is a turn off for me. So that person might be wonderful, but I will not desire to have sex with them. Not all wonderful persons are necessarily dating material you know? I adored all my sluts friends but I never wanted to sleep with any of them. And I think we all agree that finding a person sexually desirable is an important part of any romantic relationship, so automatic Friendzone for them.

  • Tom

    But Steph they wouldnt be having meaningless sex with YOU. Why does it matter what they did before they even knew you were alive.. Im serious.. What is the turnoff?

  • tito

    @Tom

    “times they are a changingggg”

    times don’t change. pop-culture changes them and the (m)asses just obey.

  • Tom

    tito
    The more freedom women get, such as the right to own property, the right to work, the right to vote, the right to drink, the right to wear what she wants at a beach, the right to have sex like a man without the fear of pregnancy (the pill) means men lose more and more control. That really just pisses most of us off. Not all of us mind you.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    But Steph they wouldnt be having meaningless sex with YOU.

    And how I can tell that? Is not like I can read minds, they can swear to me I’m different but why would I believe it? I don’t have a golden punani you know? I have a vagina exactly like any other women they have meaningless with, I do believe I have wonderful traits but after a while sluts only see genitalia and not the person (I think my slutty friends called them tissue paper, you used them and discard them). And again I’m not talking out of personal experience only, there is hard data in this phenomenon… meaningless sex is like nicotine, alcohol or any other drug people get so used to it that they cannot appreciated meaningful sex, YMMV.

    Why does it matter what they did before they even knew you were alive.

    Before I was alive? Serious I don’t date old guys either. I have a father I don’t need another one.

    Im serious.. What is the turnoff?

    Read the list Susan did of manwhores risks, and tell me if that turns you on in any way. Because it doesn’t to me.

  • anonymous

    @ Tom
    “then there is the school of thought that if you have never tasted others, there will always be that curiosity of what it might be like with another”

    Yes, but, IMO, that’s more likely the case if the person was involuntarily chaste/low numbers, less likely if they had opportunities but chose not to take them.
    We’re talking about meaningless casual sex here though. Most women won’t refuse a man who has had some meaningful experiences.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “then there is the school of thought that if you have never tasted others, there will always be that curiosity of what it might be like with another”

    Heh I was raised with this idea about men, but facts probe it wrong. All males had access to prostitution and/or the neighborhood few sluts so they tasted a lot of women before trying to commit, emphasis in trying they all cheated, regardless if they wanted to be faithful or not. Faithfulness, specially for men, is something they need to learned and mastered and sticking it up in any willing punani is not going to help them to stop at any given point. In fact many of my friends cheated on when they rationalized that the woman in question didn’t deserved their loyalty, from any reason, their cooking was bad, they gained to much weight and so on, it was just because there was a new punani they needed to pump and no man wants to think of himself as the bad guy. So again being faithful is an art and IME, you cannot miss what you never had.
    My father did dated regularly, no too much and no too little, but he have had bad experiences with the typical Dominican male and he had a natural disgust with sluts (like my little brother, maybe is a family thing for us no to like sluts) so once he committed he never strayed, god bless him. I was really privileged in that aspect.

    In the case of the women, most of the time the women that choose to be celibate already had a different idea of sex so they are not missing anything, now the ones that are celibate for the wrong reasons (societal pressures or as something that entitled them with special treatment from their partners…), are the ones that are going to get disappointed and assume they made a mistake that can only be fixed with more experience, YMMV as usual.

  • tito

    @Tom

    very well guy, but wether guys are pissed or not it is what it is. and it is socially engineered by pop-culture. women could do most of those things you listed before. there were no laws against those. they were social taboo. they are, unlike many men, afraid to violate the norms of their environment. once they have the status quo to back them up, suddenly they “fought” for their rights and can “slutwalk” to throngs of cheering goofballs and with a fawning media. isn’t that how all rebellions went?

  • tito

    @Susan

    Some good points you made here. where to start. OK:

    “I’m not so sure about this. I think it has taken a couple of generations to really see the effects of the Sexual Revolution. Today we have signs everywhere that women are having difficulty marrying.”

    ……they’ve seen the effects Susan. so did you back in the day. so did everybody. they see them, and then they proceed to do the same things that cause those effects. they don’t care, they want to do what the other girls are doing.

    “Black women face long odds for a whole host of reasons, and lots of white women are writing spinster lit confessional memoirs.”

    …..aaah, black women. the first real victims of the blessed revolution. and as far as the white women spinsters, they are the main supporters of this and other faux-rebellions and not only bring ruin to themselves but to the black women, the kids and the greater society at large upon which they foist the very nonsense they themselves don’t actually believe. like this hen:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1237311/LIZ-JONES-Wish-lonely-Christmas-spare-thought-millions-women-like-me.html

    “These 30-something women serve as a clear example of disaster.”

    …..do they? for who? yeah we see their pathetic state, but, the ones who need to most don’t seem to be.

    “I think it will take another 20 years or so, and then we’ll see marriage ages trending downward, though the marriage rate will continue to decline. Women will have to compete more than ever before for marriageable men.”

    …..another 20 years?! we don’t have that long. do you realize that our civilization will be unrecognizable by then? Susan dear, all those genderless illegitimate kids who are toddlers now are not going to take care of this problem. women don’t care about marriageable men now, do you think any will exist in 20 years. marriageable men are not popculturally correct.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @tito
      I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. Basically, we’re all f*cked. Still, chaos always breeds opportunities. There will be winners, even in this incredibly screwed up SMP. Why not be one of them?

  • tito

    @Stephanie Rowling

    you said:

    “This is like 85% of Dominican women. I went to an activity in our embassy some months ago and then I noticed that all women there were married to men from other countries, I was wondering for a second and then it hit me “don’t be silly none dominican woman with two ounces of brain,will marry a dominican man if she had any other choice”, I will say some of them are shameless carousel riders (15% more or less), but the huge majority will take a foreigner if circumstances were right,regardless of social status or income.”

    wow really? is it that bad? just curious, what is the level of civilization there? according to your own opinion i mean. i don’t know much about Dominicans or the DR, but i’ve seen, heard, read about and learned from knowing about the whole ‘Colombian woman’ thing. for some reason these women seem ready and eager to take a non-colombian husband or boyfriend. even if they have to leave Colombia. i know you don’t live there, but what do you think the deal is with that?

  • tito

    @Susan

    haha! well put again. yes i intend to be one of them. however, it is hard to swim in a murky sea of douchebags. there should not be sooooo much effort in order for one to win. the thing is, these ladies, and men, always talk about simplicity and how everything is complicated but they will never change direction until they are ordered to do so by some sort of authority. that authority is mass-media/pop-culture. it’s that simple. ‘liberation’ means taking direct orders from faceless, unknown freaks in the pop-culture industry. but hey, it’s better than taking an hour to cook a measly meal for a man. meh, that’s not liberation.

    chaos breeds opportunities but these folks are not sharp enough to take advantage (except for narrow short-term indulgent gain). they are replicating the genes of the pop-culturally correct who are useless for turning chaos into something other than parasitic narcissism. civilization has to come first. before our sacred holy genitals, and certainly before the ‘revolution.’

    oh well. you’re correct Susan.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    wow really? is it that bad?

    Did I mentioned my friend that was in love with his future wife for nine years, married her and then cheated on her with her best friend when she was 7 months pregnant? And he at least was sorry now he had a kid with his slut cousin just because they decided that the fact that they grew up together was not a problem. I could write a book about how awful Dominican men are, they have a whole tradition of screwing as many women possible, by any means necessary.

    just curious, what is the level of civilization there? according to your own opinion i mean.

    Define civilization? We have a lot of technology if that is what you mean ( I think we are caribbean nation with most cell phones and Mercedes Benz), but we also have a lot of blackouts and corruption.

    i don’t know much about Dominicans or the DR, but i’ve seen, heard, read about and learned from knowing about the whole ‘Colombian woman’ thing. for some reason these women seem ready and eager to take a non-colombian husband or boyfriend. even if they have to leave Colombia. i know you don’t live there, but what do you think the deal is with that?

    Is simple, Latin men are like American women.
    Entitled, consider women their inferior and use them till they don’t want them anymore. Then beat them, cheat on them abandon them and their children with no child support enforced on them.
    The thing that any gender where that doesn’t have any bad consequences for their actions will end up corrupted.
    That is why you see a lot of educated young and decent,chaste Latin/Thai women trying to pair up with first world men and that is what they do. Interesting enough Latin men hate First world women and 9.5 out of 10 times they will pair with them for money or the visa only, abandoning them as soon as they arrive in the country. Also Latin men love to tell Latin women that First world men are “frios” (bad lovers, cold) as a way to discourage this unions. Is very interesting to see the gender wars when men are the ones on top, not much difference,IMO.

  • Abbot

    preference is based out of insecurity, or even social conditioning.
    .
    It is not important or necessary to identify the reason men prefer to avoid WOEs, sluts, promiscuous etc. If it was important, then WOMAN would demand to know why. Obviously then, nobody cares that men do this. Move on.
    .
    I am man enough NOT to be so stupid, and so jealous to let her past matter.
    .
    The damage-control recasters are out in full force.
    .
    “I also believe that sluts SHOULDN`T be automatically disqualified as marriage/mother material.
    .
    Prove that sluts care about this. If not, then move on.
    .
    Could be they actually benefited from their past and it is what made them who they are today?
    .
    Ah, the ol made em who they are today line. Yep, thats right up there with embrace and explore their sexuality. We are just reeking with propaganda now.
    .
    I don’t care if that’s what people call “insecure” or whatever label they call it
    .
    The ol insecure line. Its so worn out. Recasters sure dont have much imagination. But its a certainty that you will see it again and again and again, and probably just a few comments away
    .
    Someone else will trust and love them
    .
    Your target audience, the women reading this thread, just felt a sigh of relief. For a second.
    .
    That really just pisses most of us off
    .
    Makes no sense at all. Mighty hard to be pissed off when this so-called free woman is blowing you
    .
    Women will have to compete more than ever before for marriageable men
    .
    That means meeting the pervasive and common definition of wife material, as solely defined by men

  • Ivan Dmitriev

    For one time I returned to see whether your audience became any more intelligent or indeed you, Susan have become any more selective in whom you ally yourself with.
    I’m sorely disappointed.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ivan Dmitriev
      Would you care to expand on that? How is the audience unintelligent? How am I not selective? As if a blogger could hand pick her readers, haha.
      Sorely disappointed? Why were you so invested in the first place. Are you a male feminist or something?

  • tito

    @StephanieRowling

    thanks for the explanation Stephanie. by civilization i meant levels of violence, education, infrastructure, standard of living, etc.

    you said:

    “Is simple, Latin men are like American women.”

    oh noooooo!

    “Then beat them, cheat on them abandon them and their children with no child support enforced on them.”

    does this make the women even more attracted to them like it does with american women?

    “The thing that any gender where that doesn’t have any bad consequences for their actions will end up corrupted.”

    yes indeed, it is not institutions that make people bad, they already are bad and need to be chastened in advanced in order to have civilization.

    “Also Latin men love to tell Latin women that First world men are “frios” (bad lovers, cold) as a way to discourage this unions.”

    ha! suppose that is true. so what? do you want to have ‘calientes’ and the attendant 3rd world situation that comes with it? or would you rather live 1st world. i see many latins breaking their necks to get here so the ‘frios’ must be doing a few things right. ladies, if you value momentary, fleeting pleasure over long-term civilizational goals then you need to ask yourselves; do you deserve ‘liberation’ and ‘rights?’ of course those of you that are more into civilization don’t need to answer such things. bravo.

  • Tom

    Yohami,
    Please dont take this the wrong way, but look here you little artsy womanizer fag, suck my dick.

    There is THAT man enough for you.
    I put up with a ton of immature, insecure morons the first half of my life in athletic locker rooms.
    You know the type. They act like children putting BS labals on women, acting as if women are good for nothing but fucking, calling them cunts cocksuckers, etc.
    Part of the problem is MOST men do not respecrt women. Most of these morons THINK they are SUPPOSED to act like that.
    Sorry if my respect for women is a little different than the typical asshole out there. I was raised by a great mother, maybe that is where I learned respect. I also grew up tough. Football was my way out of a bad situation, and I never looked back. Knowing both sexes as well as I do, most men I have no respect for.
    Sad you morons think you have to create game to get women, or maybe it is sad, not all men can relate effectively with women, I have never had that problem.
    I do, however, have a problem with men who disrespect women. I raised my daughter to be athletic. It payed for her college at the same unversity I went to. I`ll be damned if I want to hear the BS I hear from the morons who frequent this blog.
    Lessons……women are people too, they are more than a pussy, they can and do contribute to society, no matter their sexuality.They get lied to by morons and sometimes they lie too.
    For those of you who think Im a woman, fuck you. I am an older and obviously wiser man then you.
    Oh and for all you guys here who are so fucking insecure that you wouldnt even consider an experienced woman for a relationship, too fucking bad for you dudes, you have no clue into human nature, and how people change and grow. But dont worry, life experience is a great teacher.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    thanks for the explanation Stephanie. by civilization i meant levels of violence, education, infrastructure, standard of living, etc.

    Is one of the things were my country is rare, you can see a very poor house filled with the highest electronic devices and a car from the year in front of a kid with no clothes and dirty. Violence is high in certain zones and unheard of in others, and education is free and it was very good when the catholic church had control of it, now we are adopting the american model and well, my mother is a teacher and she considers the new model pure crap, so there is that. I will say is a good place to live if you are a foreign man and have a couple of dollars, a terrible place to live if you are poor, heaven in earth if you are poor and unambitios is the kind of life were you don’t have to care a lot to get a certain standard of living and hell in earth if you are a smart woman with two ounces of brain and self respect…so I will say it varies.
    “Is simple, Latin men are like American women.”

    oh noooooo!

    I know I know

    does this make the women even more attracted to them like it does with american women?

    Well carousel riders are the same in every culture we just have less than them and most of them concentrated in the poorest parts of the country. Is very funny that feminists here say that educated women are more sexually liberated is the other way around smart women in my country are the more likely to wait till marriage for sex, because they have goals an ambitions that pairing up with an idiot will screw and we know very well that sex is powerful so we don’t take it lightly.

  • Smh

    Female offender registry:

    http://register-her.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

    This is true female behavior

  • tito

    @StephanieRowling

    i guess maybe the church should take over education again. everywhere our model was adopted goes to pot.

  • jess

    smh
    i read your link.
    .
    are you sure its reliable as they quoted no sources. i cannot beleive they would take a female sex offender off a register, thats disgusting. and closing womens prisons??? sounds like BS to me…

  • http://blacksub6.blogspot.com escarondito

    @tom

    Damn homie. In high school you never were the man homie. Now look what happened to you!

    My dude. Like even getting past any insecurity I might have, it’s still just not attractive. Like that’s alot of penii that went down that whole. And some of those niggas were probably unscrupulous mother truckers. With strap-ons. So, if her vaginal number doesn’t turn me on you can’t hate on me for making her gone.

    *CLAP* *CLAP*
    [from the crowd]: I feel you!/STAY BLACK BRUH!/ *singing* Let your soul go!

    Esca steps back from the mic.

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    Please dont take this the wrong way, but look here you little artsy womanizer fag, suck my dick.

    Eh, thats like a grandmother trying to sound manly. And failing.

    I put up with a ton of immature, insecure morons the first half of my life in athletic locker rooms.

    I cant imagine what you were putting up with in the locker rooms. Oh wait. I can.

    Sad you morons think you have to create game to get women, or maybe it is sad, not all men can relate effectively with women, I have never had that problem.

    I dont have doubts you relate to women EXTREMELY well. Your problem seems to be relating to men.

    I do, however, have a problem with men who disrespect women.

    We are on the same boat.

    women are people too, they are more than a pussy, they can and do contribute to society

    Couldnt agree more.

    For those of you who think Im a woman, fuck you. I am an older and obviously wiser man then you.

    If you happen to be a man, feminists must be really, really proud of what they did to you.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    i guess maybe the church should take over education again. everywhere our model was adopted goes to pot.

    Tell me about it. My mother totally loathes it, but then is the model of the first nation of the world so it must be better right? right?

    The catholic still teach but in private schools, part of the reason we adopted the USA model is because other churches felt left behind so they want to separate state and church to have a better chance at getting tax cuts because the agreement with the church was official religion for education and taxes cuts. So there is pressure from many people to get them out of the educational system. So only rich people will have access to good education and poor will get “standard” one. Yeah that will improve things..a lot.

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    @Mike C
    This thread is winding down now, and I just want to point out that you nailed it when you predicted 350 comments!

  • Mike C

    @Mike C
    This thread is winding down now, and I just want to point out that you nailed it when you predicted 350 comments!

    .
    Not bad, eh? :)
    .
    I must admit the part I most enjoyed is that Tom got called out by just about every guy. Not easy faking being a guy. :)

  • Tom

    @ yohami,
    For those of you who think Im a woman, fuck you. I am an older and obviously wiser man then you.

    If you happen to be a man, feminists must be really, really proud of what they did to you.
    __________________
    I am a man, and my respect for wome has nothing to do with feminism.. Yohami, you are living proof that wisdom is not waisted on youth.
    Speaking of proud, your mother must be so proud of your 200+ number of “conquests.” Oh wait, you are the one who said he couldnt find a good woman…dude the one constant between you and the 200 women is you.. Maybe YOU are the problem… You remind me of my womanizing friend. He cant find a good women either. He goes out with women, they realize he is a moron and never see him again.. The stupid ones figure him out after a couple weeks or so.

  • Tom

    @ Mike,
    I must admit the part I most enjoyed is that Tom got called out by just about every guy. Not easy faking being a guy.
    _____________________
    Well mike if I AM a woman, then you must be too, because we believe the exact same thing.
    I wouldnt automatically dismiss a woman for her number if she was a really good person with a great personality. You have stated EXACTLY the same thing.
    Seems we do think alike afterall. Whats your real name?..Michelle?

  • Tom

    Proving you people wrong doesnt matter to me, but it would be as easy as meeting Ohio Stater for lunch, I believe we both live in the same city.
    Funny, I bet you all are conpiracy nuts too. LOL@ She has access to Toms facebook.. LOL “she” works all day at a major banks head quarters. I, on the other hand, own my own business, and can do as I please. I have the time to post, “she” does not. LOL you all fail as detectives….

  • http://www.yohami.com YOHAMI

    Tom,

    Yohami, you are living proof that wisdom is not waisted on youth

    Waised like, around the belly?

    Speaking of proud, your mother must be so proud of your 200+ number of “conquests.”

    You spend so much time defending female promiscuity, so what kind of dumb argument is this.

    Oh wait, you are the one who said he couldnt find a good woman…

    There´s plenty of “good” women and I have no trouble finding them. “Character” is a rare trait.

    dude the one constant between you and the 200 women is you..

    And my dick.

    Maybe YOU are the problem…

    I´ve been called worse.

    You remind me of my womanizing friend. He cant find a good women either. He goes out with women, they realize he is a moron and never see him again.. The stupid ones figure him out after a couple weeks or so.

    Meh. Your friend also sounds like a woman.

  • Thrasymachus

    “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

    William Shakespeare, Hamlet

  • tito

    the sheer number of comments that Susan’s post receive are astounding. who’d a thought. anyway, i wanted to be the one to leave the very last comment. so there.

  • Pingback: Mozart’s Answer to the Manwhore Question | John C. Wright's Journal()

  • Il Capo

    Related comic on why it sucks to marry a slut.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I just have to say, I came here searching for strategies for how to hook up casually, something I’ve never actually done. Originally I was just looking for it to be just something I could say I’ve done, but now, after reading much of what’s on this site, and seeing just how common it is for girls to bed down with so-called “alphas” casually, I think I’m done with relationships altogether. Who wants to be with a girl who spent college fucking around with man whores and is now ready to settle down for something serious? Better off joining the man whores, learn some guitar, buy a motorcycle, and just score with as many as possible.

    That doesn’t sound like paradise to me, tbh, but it beats the heck out of opening your heart to a reformed slut.

  • Pingback: Defining sluthood | Dalrock()

  • David

    Nice attempt, but it suffers a little from being addled by the gender equality drivel; slut is just a female thing, ‘male slut’ just doesn’t work unless wer’e talking about a gay man who takes the passive role.

  • Jeremy

    Girls everywhere and all you emasculated “men” who are trying so hard to be politically correct at the expense of your masculinity, listen up.

    Men and women are equals. This does not mean that they are equal in every single thing they do. For example, men are, on average, physically stronger than women. It is much easier for a semi attractive (even a 6/10) woman to go out and get laid. The same cannot be said about men. Men have to work at it, have some skill (game) and thereby get a woman to sleep with them. It is a LOT harder for an equally attractive man to get women than it is the other way around. This is one of reasons behind why we, as a society, naturally celebrate men who are successful in bedding multiple women; while at the same time shame women who bed multiple men.

    Let us briefly visit the topic of virginity from both perspectives. Virginity in a man is not a desirable state or label when it comes to an attribute that the opposite sex wants. This is because he has obviously not been preselected by other women. However, female virginity is not looked at negatively in the least by men. If she looks decent, no man cares if the girl is a virgin or not. In fact, a female virgin is often wanted more.

    Now don’t get me wrong, men LOVE sluts. We will never turn down an opportunity to sleep with a good looking slut. Partly because she’s good in bed, partly because it’s sex. But any decently intelligent, self-respecting man will know that it is a terrible idea to emotionally involve himself (i.e. date) a slutty girl. That would be a very dumb move. Why would any man want to get emotionally involved with a girl who’s had 15+ sexual partners? We would just be setting ourselves up for failure. There are many nice worthy girls out there who don’t have daddy issues and haven’t slept with an entire fraternity house. But, by all means, fvck the brains out of sluts in the meanwhile.

    Most guys can detect when a girl is a slut by the first few dates and by what he hears about the girl from other people and from the girl herlself. We put this information together and figure out if she is dating material or not. If not, I like most guys, will still go in for the prize but have no intention of following through with dating the dirty little tart.

    To put it simply, a lock that can be opened by many keys is a useless lock and of little worth. But a key that can open many locks is a master key and is valuable.

  • Liz

    How do “sluts” harm other women? I haven’t seen this answered satisfactorily. The quoted text above (under #15) keeps making this claim, and in not very polite terms, but doesn’t seem to justify it or back it up in any way with any substance.

    Also, please note that feminists are not responsible for the fact that some people blame rape victims for “dressing like sluts”. We’re just responding to it.

  • Liz

    Jeremy and co.: what exactly is wrong with a woman who’s had 15+ sexual partners? How important is that number, really? Consider for starters that having unprotected casual sex once is more risky (in terms of both pregnancy and STIs/STDs) than having safe sex with 15 partners. How about if the woman’s willing to agree to a paternity test, in the event that you’re wanting children — would that make any difference?

    For another thing, if you’re saying you’d sleep with a woman who you’re fundamentally against getting emotional involved with, then that’s doing the same thing (worse in fact) than you’re criticizing “slutty” women for.

  • jessdixonjess@yahoo.com

    “US President Barack Obama publicly faulted talk-show host Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday for calling a law student a “slut” in an on-air rant about contraception and health insurance.
    Speaking at a White House press conference, Obama declined to comment on Limbaugh’s apology to Georgetown University student Sandra Fluke or the flight of sponsors from the right-wing broadcaster’s syndicated radio program.
    “What I can comment on is the fact that all decent folks can agree that the remarks that were made (by Limbaugh) don’t have any place in the public discourse,” said the president, who is facing re-election in November.
    Limbaugh branded Fluke “a slut” and “a prostitute” after she told Democratic lawmakers in Washington about Catholic-affiliated Georgetown’s refusal to include contraceptive in its health insurance plan.”

    “….and that we want to send a message to all our young people that being part of a democracy involves argument and disagreements and debate… and there’s a way to do it that doesn’t involve you being demeaned and insulted”

    Quite…

  • jessdixonjess@yahoo.com

    Liz,

    Both very good points- to be fair some have attempted to answer the questions but when they failed to do so got rather upset-

    but if you have seen the other threads you may have already gleaned that.

    But if its any consolation at all, most guys are not like Jeremy and are kinda embarrassed for him- so you know, its all good in the end.

    (just ask Barak)

  • Brody

    Ladies, don’t get your panties in a twist. The 15+ number was just arbitrary. There is no hard and fast number that makes you a slut. It depends on the age of the girl, her slutty attitude and a host of other factors. Most adults, guys and girls, can innately identify a slut.

  • Pingback: Slut! | Dalrock()