Defining sluthood

Susan Walsh tried her hand at defining sluthood back in June with her widely read and thought provoking post What a Slut Is.  She had drawn the ire of feminists on the topic ever since she proudly earned a denunciation from NOW.  Her definition begins with:

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.

She follows up with bullet points b through d, and attempts to create a gender neutral definition of sluthood, which she addresses in bullet point d:

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.

I’m sympathetic to Susan’s ambitious goal here.  I can see why she wants to create a sort of unified theory of sluthood.  But I think this makes the definition overly complex, and misses the essence of slut. In doing this she has also inadvertently fallen into playing into the female preferred version of promiscuity.  Note the focus on whether one associates sex with love, not commitment in the beginning of the definition.

I had a roommate in college who was a natural PUA.  We often laughed at him because he would come home on a regular basis and profess that he had fallen in love.  The thing is, he wasn’t lying.  At that moment, he really was in love with whomever the flavor of the week was.  Before too long of course he would fall madly in love with yet another woman, and the old one would generally find her way into the hierarchy of his soft harem.  I’m not even sure he didn’t continue to love all of the women in his soft harem.  If he were a woman we would say he loved too much, which of course is often a euphemism for a slut…

The concept of slut is specifically female for a reason.  Making it gender neutral denies the very nature of what slut means.  Sluts are defined by and reviled for the threat their actions pose to the social order, and to a lesser degree to themselves.  Much like an arsonist, sluts are defined not by an objective metric (the hard fast partner count feminists screech for) but by the destructive threat they pose to themselves and society:

  1. Sluts threaten to disrupt in tact relationships and (especially) families.
  2. Sluts destroy their own ability to be trusted as a wife and mother.
  3. Sluts devalue the sexual currency of women in general, making commitment more difficult to obtain for those who want it.

Before I continue, I want to assist with the acute hyperventilation some of my readers are no doubt experiencing right now.  In addition to breathing into a paper bag, note that while the first item is in fact an example of the ever dreaded double standard it is still accurate from the perspective of other women.  Yes, apartment buildings should be built with sprinkler systems and otherwise up to fire code.  Likewise, women should avoid relationships and especially marriage with men who are predisposed to cheat.  And yes, the man who cheats is morally responsible for his actions.  But this doesn’t change the fact that the residents of the local firetrap get extremely nervous when someone starts playing with matches.

Having hopefully addressed a potentially serious medical emergency for some of my readers, I’ll continue.  Susan quotes fellow blogger Elusive Wapiti in making a very similar point as I did above about sluts:

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.

Elusive Wapiti is undoubtedly correct, except upright women are generally loath to shame sluts out of their displeasure at the double standard.  Furthermore, men could have a huge impact here by merely being willing to judge sluts.  However, most of the men who are aware of this have a vested interest in keeping a plentiful supply of sluts available, and those who have a vested interest in the traditional family are generally unaware of this power.

Revisiting the dreaded double standard, Susan points out in her follow on post Manwhores: For Casual Sex Only that women aren’t the only ones who are damaged by promiscuity.  She referenced a study which found that men with high partner counts were less likely to be satisfied in marriage.  While I’m skeptical of parts of the study’s findings (it claimed the effect of partner count on women was less important), the basic premise makes sense.  I have previously advised men not to marry sluts and women not to marry alphas, and I think this is sound advice all around.  Interestingly this advice is taken differently by men and women.  Men enthusiastically agreed with my advice, while women were often very troubled by it.  Perhaps there is something to this double standard after all…

This entry was posted in Choice Addiction, Feminists, Finding a Spouse, Marriage, Motherhood, Slut. Bookmark the permalink.

209 Responses to Defining sluthood

  1. alcestiseshtemoa says:

    I have previously advised men not to marry sluts and women not to marry alphas, and I think this is sound advice all around.

    Indeed.

  2. ExNewYorker says:

    Great post, Dalrock. It’s especially important to note that “commitment” isn’t in the definition, but the rather more ephemeral “love”. It’s yet another indication of the “it feels good” mentality that seems to have become the cultural norm. So, I agree that Susan fell into that trap, but at least, she’s trying…
    ,
    What’s interesting is how much blowback Susan has gotten on the whole “slut” issue. I mean, of all the issues on the feminists docket, that’s the one that really hurts them, and they respond like rabid rats. I think Susan said she’d be taking a timeout on the “slut” posts…🙂

  3. WestCoastCollegeDude says:

    It’s funny how women denounce the double-standard while providing the basis for it by not penalizing men with lots of partners. If they want to eliminate the double-standard then they can simply refuse to mate with promiscuous males as much as men refuse to marry “sluts”. Interestingly, whenever women apply the notion of a double-standard they would prefer to have men accept sluts rather than for females to denounce promiscuous males even though both actions will eliminate the double-standard.

    I believe that females do understand that the most attractive men are the only ones capable (this is very important) of being promiscuous (lots of blogs have talked about the Apex Fallacy). Therefore, most promiscuous males would be very attractive (although I’m not suggesting that all attractive males are promiscuous). Hence, if women reject promiscuous males then they are rejecting high-quality (in terms of attractiveness, not necessarily marriage material) men. Furthermore, given their overconfidence in their ability to “change” their partners, they pay little attention to his history.

    The difference for men is that promiscuous females are just those with loose legs (ie. “easy”). Only the very few promiscuous females are actually attractive. Megan Fox may be promiscuous but her attractiveness and allure (if fame, and money are important) can compensate for the negative impacts of being promiscuous. But, you can hardly the average “slut” to have enough desirability to compensate for future marriage issues.

    Ultimately, the double-standard exist because men and women are different. Double-standards will disappear the day a guy with a 20 BMI can walk into a bar, get free drinks, get laid, and not have to call the next morning.

  4. susanawalsh says:

    @Dalrock
    A very fair and balanced post! Thanks for the links. I’m glad you’re addressing sluthood here because I’ve promised my readers that I’d take a breather from the constant debate over it🙂

    I agree that promiscuity is markedly different for men and women, and that sluts are primarily identified by other females as intrasexual competitors who threaten their own prospects or relationships. However, I would say that threat #1 can be applied to both sexes in one way. A woman is more likely to cheat with an alpha manwhore than a beta guy, partly because the manwhore won’t hesitate to be sexually assertive regardless of the threat of disrupting her relationships. So the male is a threat, though not policed by other males or women.

    WRT #2 I agree that promiscuity probably has a more detrimental effect on women than men in terms of long-term erosion of nurturing ability and faithfulness. Personally, I advise women not to marry a man who has enjoyed many promiscuous women, i.e. a reformed manwhore. While he may not have done anything wrong per se – he just enjoyed the bounty that came his way – I suspect that men with that much sexual variety in their youth are unlikely to be capable of lifelong fidelity. Keep in mind, today the most desired men on college campuses can easily rack up a number of 40 or more by the time they’re 22.

    #3 is the big one and it only applies to women, for obvious reasons. I believe this one destructive effect alone is delaying or depressing marriage rates and reducing the childbirth rate. Female promiscuity is also widening the gulf between alpha and beta males in the SMP due to hypergamy – the sluttiest women tend to aim very high (see Karen Owen).

    It would be pretty great if men could participate in slut shaming. I see a lot of that at HUS, but not so much among the young males who reap the short-term benefits, as you’ve pointed out. I think it happens primarily when men refuse to marry sluts, and that is what has spawned the spinster lit genre. Unfortunately, young women need to get that information sooner rather than later. Many believe men genuinely don’t mind, and they may be right in some cases. I saw one article online where a guy with many past partners said that a woman who’s been with 20 guys is rounding error is far as he was concerned.

    It’s interesting that women were troubled by your advice to avoid alphas for marriage. I’m suspect the culture – rom coms, fairy tales, and SATC – has helped create that tenacious female fantasy that they can flip an alpha into being head over heels and monogamous.

  5. Reformgirl says:

    New reader/lurker here. Slut shaming needs a come back. I speak as a reformed slut. I look back and I realize a bit of harsh light and shame may have spared me some rough times. For a very long time I thought I was a decent person, when really I wasnt. If I had had to confront that earlier I would have had a different outcome. I have tried to talk to younger woman about the lessons I have learned and dead-ends to avoid and WHY to avoid them but when I speak it is like I am talking in swahili and they only speak text-english. Either that or they spew defensive anger at me.
    I have been enjoying reading the archives. It helps clarify my thoughts and helps me pinpoint the flaws in the reasoning that is leftover from older times. The PUA blogs have helped in that respect too because it zooms in and exposes the foolish excuses I lived by and still harbor unknowingly. (or knowingly.Sometimes I don’t really know) Introspection, repentence and change are difficult but doable, and wonderfully worth it.
    I will definitely be referring people to this blog if the topics come up in conversation since reading quietly may be easier to absorb the message than with me in their face talking about it.

    [D: Wow. Powerful insight. Welcome to the blog!]

  6. Chels says:

    Note the focus on whether one associates sex with love, not commitment in the beginning of the definition.

    Is there love without commitment or commitment without love in romantic relationships? I really don’t think so, they’re tied together in my mind; the bridge between commitment to love is very short. Perhaps you mean long term commitment or commitment for life?

    Likewise, women should avoid relationships and especially marriage with men who are predisposed to cheat.

    I’m hesitant to agree with this, in part because people make mistakes that they regret and they can be reformed. I don’t think people should be held accountable for a mistake they made years ago. However, it definitely is a red flag, but there’s more to the person than their partner count.

    Furthermore, men could have a huge impact here by merely being willing to judge sluts

    Most men are turned off by sluts, except for when it comes to one night stands, and women know this, but refuse to acknowledge it or they just don’t care about it. Therefore, the key wouldn’t be for men to judge them, the key would be for men to stop sleeping with them. Unfortunately, I don’t see this happening.

    Men enthusiastically agreed with my advice, while women were often very troubled by it.

    Well, we disagree because women don’t really care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s something reasonable and it’s not in the double digits. On the other hand, some men want virgins because they’re possessive about this sort of thing.

  7. Matt says:

    “Therefore, the key wouldn’t be for men to judge them, the key would be for men to stop sleeping with them.”

    Yeah. But that only works if it’s done collectively…and we all know the odds on that. Judgment can be done by individuals.

    Sluts and the men who use them (much as the rest of us use our nondominant hands — it’s something one does to scratch an itch, and isn’t especially proud of afterward, even if moral concerns don’t enter into it) have always existed, and likely will always exist. What’s new (and thus, potentially, reversible) is that nowadays they’re normative.

  8. Chels says:

    Since men tend to listen to men, how about men just try to convince men not to sleep with sluts and judge them harshly if they do? If there’s a “bro code”, it’ll work and it seems easier than judging sluts.

  9. Dan in Philly says:

    I have found that everyone in today’s world is very troubled by any standard, double or otherwise. For this reason, Christians are often reluctant to condemn others for what are clearly sinful actions.

    Note the modern world is accepting of everything but condemnation, which it condemns regardless of who is doing the condemning or why. Even if a person is personall repulsed by the actions of another, they will leap to their defense if they suspect shaming is going on. Shame is a very powerful force and those who wish to live without rules are constantly on guard against it lest it be effectively used against them on day, for everyone has one little dark secret they fear will someday be shamed in the light of day.

    I’m not really making my main point here: Modernists have learned that in order to live as they wish, they must effectively outlaw shame. Therefore they will always attack anyone who judges and shames people, even if they behavior is quite deserving of it. They do this so that they, themselves, will not fear shame for their own dirty little secrets they have now, or ones they may have in the future. It’s hard for me to express without a lot of effort just how damaging this is to the people who engage in such foolish behavior, but damage them it does, and the society which these people make up. Overall, it makes me sad…

  10. jack says:

    No rings for sluts!!!
    We cannot expect women to lead on this. Judging and shaming women for their bad behavior is absolutely necessary.

    As much as shaming language is inappropriately directed toward men, perhaps it is valid toward women.

  11. Basil Ransom says:

    Walsh’s definition is a cop-out. While there are women like that, there are far far more who bang tons of guys with gusto. For them, it is not an act bereft of emotion.

    You didn’t offer a definition of slut either. Here is mine:

    Slut: a woman who sleeps with a man who has invested little time and commitment to her.

    Of course, this begs the question of what is ‘little.’ A more rigorous definition:

    Slut: A woman who sleeps with a man before securing an exclusive relationship with him.

    By this definition, the vast majority of American women are likely sluts. Certainly every woman I’ve slept with. Therein lies the problem – by the standards of half a century ago, today’s women are certainly sluts, but standards have changed. Yet sex without commitment remains the sine qua non of a slut.

    If women limited sex to men who had agreed to exclusivity, the alpha-or-bust mentality would be subdued. Pop culture promoting alphas uber alles and the ubiquitous outlets for attention whoring are still problematic though

  12. greyghost says:

    The best deterent to sluts is the pump and dump. The old sagging tattooed spinter. There has to be consequences for the slut. Sites like Roosey’s and this one advising men not to marry sluts. Show stats of women with high partner counts as less reliable as wives. It would also help if some of the femminised preachers of christianity would do some sermons on sluts. ( Throw in some alpha cads to make the women feel better)
    MGTOW once again will have a role in influencing the issue. The PUA gives a slut something to ride while she is on the cock carousel. and as he learns enough of female behavior or as his “good” beta brothers are abused by feminism and misandry assume the MGTOW lifestyle the slut will be left alone to settle for a chump. And true to form the chump 2 kids and 6 to 10 years later is now a non custodial parent paying out to the slut. Also the slut is just another part of femminism (the removal of any and all responsibility from women.) Which may explain the reluctance of women to speak ill of sluts. (https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/why-are-so-many-tradional-conservative-women-obsessed-with-making-sure-hookups-are-fair/) MGTOW causing a commitment shortage for all women will lesson the desire for women to defend femminism against their own interest. Already we have soem female politicians not declaring themselves as femminist.

  13. Anonymous Reader says:

    ExNewYorker
    What’s interesting is how much blowback Susan has gotten on the whole “slut” issue. I mean, of all the issues on the feminists docket, that’s the one that really hurts them, and they respond like rabid rats.

    They do not dare give in even one millimeter on this, for several reasons:

    * “Choice” for feminists is one of their sacred touchstones, and anything — anything – that reduces the choices any woman can make, anywhere, any time, is therefore an evil to be attacked. Thus the sex-positive feminists must have the right to choose to do anything they want, with anyone or anything, anywhere, any time — and men have no right to decline to go along.

    * The sex-positive feminists adhere, as all feminists do, to the blank-slate theory of human behavior. Blank-slatism is one of the bedrocks of leftism, Marxism, and feminism. To admit that women as a group respond differently to a life of promiscuity than men do just happens to demolish the blank slate concept, and that massively undermines feminism. Therefore, it is more important to continue to pretend that women deal with lots of sexual partners exactly the same as men do, despite the clear and growing body of evidence to the contrary, because the alternative is to admit that women are different from men in ways more subtle than “innie” versus “outie” reproductive equipment.

    * So many women have invested themselves in promiscuity, in carousel riding, that it would be a disaster for feminists to admit it was a bad idea – they would be slut shaming women, and not only would that cross a loyalty line betweeen women, it would likely undercut support for feminism within the ranks of women as well.

    So it’s basically a position that the feminists – 2nd wave, 3rd wave, sex-pozzie, new wave, permanent wave, etc. – must take, even though it hurts women, and increasingly is being shown to be out of touch with reality. But disagreeing with reality is nothing new for feminists.

  14. Kai says:

    What’s wrong with sleeping with sluts? That’s exactly the point – sluts can get sex but not commitment (or respect, typically).
    There’s no reason for men to stop sleeping with sluts when they’re lining up. They simply need to not marry sluts. Telling men to stop sleeping with sluts is asking men to fix the problem for women since women are too afraid to deal with each other themselves.
    Then it is sufficiently clear for any woman who has enough brain to look around – you can sleep with tons of men, and get lots of sexual power and be able to keep sleeping with people, or you can temper that side and find someone willing to commit to you. Choice is up to the individual.
    It’s a really dumb woman* who confuses ‘men are willing to sleep with me!’ with ‘men respect me!’ or ‘people approve of my choices!’

    *yes, I am aware this is fairly common. Yes my comment stands.

    I find the “let’s reclaim the word ‘slut’!” crowd amusing. To me, a ‘slut’ is simply a woman who sleeps with a lot of men with little commitment. A descriptive term with no judgement.
    Value judgements can be applied to the concept – if you think that’s an admirable person, then you feel free to proudly call yourself a slut. Personally, that’s not how I want to be known.

  15. susanawalsh says:

    @Basil

    Slut: A woman who sleeps with a man before securing an exclusive relationship with him.

    The problem is that at college age, most of the relationships on campus begin with a no-strings hookup. So when you see the relatively small number of couples walking around, you can assume that nearly all of those women slept with their boyfriends before securing a relationship. Of course, there are women who don’t do that, but they aren’t in relationships, for the most part.
    The rub is that only 12% of hookups lead to a relationship. That explains why so many women are abjectly miserable in the hookup culture. They place their bets and lose. And their numbers keep climbing. This could be rectified if guys stood up and demanded inexperienced women, but they don’t, because they’re not looking for any real commitment at that age anyway.

    @Anonymous Reader

    So it’s basically a position that the feminists – 2nd wave, 3rd wave, sex-pozzie, new wave, permanent wave, etc. – must take, even though it hurts women, and increasingly is being shown to be out of touch with reality.

    Yes, the sex-pos feminists find themselves between a rock and a hard place. Some have broken ranks to acknowledge that women are being hurt by their philosophy:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/08/23/politics-and-feminism/the-cracking-foundation-of-sex-positive-feminism/

    But most of them won’t budge, and are resorting to increasingly snarky and hysterical attacks on “hand-wringers” like myself.

  16. Kai says:

    “Anonymous Reader says:
    * “Choice” for feminists is one of their sacred touchstones, and anything — anything – that reduces the choices any woman can make, anywhere, any time, is therefore an evil to be attacked. Thus the sex-positive feminists must have the right to choose to do anything they want, with anyone or anything, anywhere, any time — and men have no right to decline to go along.”

    I would argue that this is really a subset of the bigger sacred cow of ‘no consequences’ (which is what is really sought when feminists claim to be fighting for ‘choice’.
    I’m all in favour of choices. I think not everyone fits on quite the exact same mainstream, and people (of both genders, in many arenas) should have the choice of multiple options where possible. But the important thing that goes with this is the responsibility to live with one’s choices, and that’s what feminists can’t handle.

    Women have always had the choice to sleep around – but that used to come with the consequence of no marriage, no provider, and a poor reputation.
    Women have the choice to prioritize a career – but fail to understand that that comes with the consequence of less time for family and children.
    Women have the choice to have pretty much exactly as many children as they desire – but complain that their choice to have 3 children and take off a year’s leave means they don’t get the big promotions at work.
    Women have the choice to seek flexible hours and ‘feel-good’ work but expect to be paid as much as someone spending longer, more stressful hours at the office.

    People have choices. What feminists won’t accept is the consequences and responsibilities that come with them.

  17. Jennifer says:

    You seriously don’t see anything wrong with sleeping with sluts, Kai? Good grief.

    Great advice and article, Dalrock. The sin of promiscuity is the same for either sex, but there are myriad consequences unique to each sex. And if a woman marries an alpha, she’d better make sure he’s a solid Christian; anything else is a disaster (that might be why some women were distressed at your words: they don’t want to believe that. Relax ladies, a guy doesn’t need to be an alpha to turn you on; he just needs several alpha QUALITIES).

  18. Kai says:

    “susanawalsh says:
    August 30, 2011 at 4:36 pm
    @Basil
    Slut: A woman who sleeps with a man before securing an exclusive relationship with him.
    The problem is that at college age, most of the relationships on campus begin with a no-strings hookup. So when you see the relatively small number of couples walking around, you can assume that nearly all of those women slept with their boyfriends before securing a relationship. Of course, there are women who don’t do that, but they aren’t in relationships, for the most part.
    The rub is that only 12% of hookups lead to a relationship. That explains why so many women are abjectly miserable in the hookup culture. They place their bets and lose. And their numbers keep climbing. This could be rectified if guys stood up and demanded inexperienced women, but they don’t, because they’re not looking for any real commitment at that age anyway.”

    This could also be rectified if women stood up and demanded commitment before sex. And given that it’s women who are being hurt (while men reap awesome benefits), I think the responsibility falls to the women to take the steps needed to fix things for them, instead of waiting for the men to come to the rescue.
    I would like to see your stats on ‘most’ relationships beginning with no-strings sex. While there’s plenty of that going around, I think it’s more of a strongly visible minority, while most relationships started as relationships that included sex from fairly early on. I think you’re looking in a few particularly bad places to find that the hookup culture is the only one around.
    And I don’t really see the problem you reference – the problem is not the men who are logically taking what is offered. The problem is the women who are unwilling to hold standards.
    If a woman wants commitment, she can quit placing losing bets and demand it – and she can wait until she finds a man who is interested in something more than a short-term hookup and willing to put off the sex to get it.

  19. Kai says:

    “Jennifer says:
    You seriously don’t see anything wrong with sleeping with sluts, Kai? Good grief.”

    In a social sense, no. I’m not bringing morality into it here. There has always been and will always be a fringe in which slutty men sleep with slutty women. ‘Slutty’ men and slutty women sleeping together don’t threaten my marriage at all.
    I could have better phrased it though as “why shouldn’t men sleep with sluts?” or “what have men to gain from refusing to sleep with sluts?”
    Where I am aiming is the point of a reason that men, for the sake of men, should not sleep with sluts. And I don’t see one. Sluthood is great for men – it gives them sex without requiring commitment – how easy! Men sleeping with sluts are simply giving them exactly what they’re seeking.
    Did you read the rest of my comment?
    My point is the silliness of Chels suggesting that a solution to female sluthood is for men to force it to go away by not sleeping with them (so that women don’t have to do the work of shaming other women for taking down their likelihood of securing commitment). It’s the epitome of women expecting men to do the work for them, and I don’t respect that.

  20. Dalrock says:

    @ Susan Walsh

    The problem is that at college age, most of the relationships on campus begin with a no-strings hookup. So when you see the relatively small number of couples walking around, you can assume that nearly all of those women slept with their boyfriends before securing a relationship. Of course, there are women who don’t do that, but they aren’t in relationships, for the most part.
    The rub is that only 12% of hookups lead to a relationship. That explains why so many women are abjectly miserable in the hookup culture. They place their bets and lose. And their numbers keep climbing.

    This reflects roughly equal parts of:

    1) The devaluation of women’s sexual power due to letting sluts run rampant.
    2) An active rationalization hamster. They throw themselves at the alpha they are attracted to, and later rationalize it away that they were really just looking for love.

    The second part is the more insidious and therefore destructive.

    This could be rectified if guys stood up and demanded inexperienced women, but they don’t, because they’re not looking for any real commitment at that age anyway.

    But as you have pointed out in douchebag math 101, we aren’t talking about the majority of men here. We are talking about a small percentage of alphas riding the slut gravy train. Ordinary men aren’t going to be able to stop the alphas short of physical force.

  21. Johnycomelately says:

    I think the genuine slut is actually quite rare, these type of women are actually quite healthy psychologically and often ‘good’ people, My 55 year old neighbour is one (I’ve known her for 30 years) and god bless her soul she’s still chugging along in her leopard skin outfits.

    The other type of slut is the jilted woman who can’t ‘hold down’ a man and continually jumps back on the love train. Consciously she doesn’t know why this keeps on happening to her but unconsciously she knows she’s not ‘good enough’ to keep one, or at least a decent one. So rather than face the stark reality of her deficiencies (which is what a lot of lifelong virgins do as well) she lies to herself and becomes an easy lay hoping to snare what she knows she never will attain.

    To this type the word slut eviscerates her soul because it denies her pain and condemns her worthlessness. In the unsavoury world of female mate sorting the slut is the optimist, ever striving for ‘happiness’, to condemn her is to condemn every women unsatisfied with her life and with a glimmer of hope for a better future.

    Of course the satisfied woman just wants to punch her in the face. Going by responses there must be a heck of a lot of unsatisfied women..,..

  22. greyghost says:

    Plus one Kai. You have a common sense streak a mile wide.

  23. Chels says:

    My point is the silliness of Chels suggesting that a solution to female sluthood is for men to force it to go away by not sleeping with them (so that women don’t have to do the work of shaming other women for taking down their likelihood of securing commitment). It’s the epitome of women expecting men to do the work for them, and I don’t respect that.

    Seriously Kai? What power do I have over the rest of women? The only women I *might* be able to influence are my cousins, and not even them, because they think that they can do whatever they want and I have no business interfering in their lives.

    Problem is that most women have that mentality, “you can’t tell me what to do!” or “if he can’t love me for who I am, then I’m better off without him!”

    I have a friend who’s promiscuous, she makes out with random guys at parties, she sleeps with them, she has a friend with benefits, and she doesn’t see anything wrong with it. I’ve asked her why she’s doing this, and she told me that she has needs that need to be satisfied now. And when I asked her why she doesn’t enter a committed relationship, she said that she’s not ready to settle down. And when I told her that she’s really decreasing her value by sleeping around with so many men, she asked me what year I’m living in, and called me old-fashioned (she’s also the same one to deride me for being in a stable relationship, for refusing to sleep around and told me that I should be having fun until I can).

    Short of forcing them to wear a chastity belt, there’s *nothing* I can do; rationalization hamsters run pretty fast and I doubt anyone would be able to catch them.

  24. Chels says:

    So your rationalization hamster makes you do things that better judgement would advise against.

    Well no, because I’m not a slut nor am I a “reformed slut”. I know that I wouldn’t be able to handle sleeping around with random dudes, nor do I want to.

    At least Chels is honest that most women are ultimately, not ‘adults’, who can make well-considered decisions.

    *Most* women are not sluts. And it’s about instant gratification, not wanting to “settle”, thinking they’re enjoying life, refusing to admit the consequences, etc…

  25. Kai says:

    “TFH says:
    This also goes into the theme that we see from Dalrock’s last 5 posts, and the rest of the anti-feminist sphere. Women surely act like they are not ready to be ‘adults’ and do not want to be ‘adults’. This is in direct contradiction to the Western legal paradigm that women are in fact adults (which is itself a relatively new concept, that had only been tested for a few decades in a few countries). … But market forces don’t care about political correctness.”

    We don’t need to bow to political correctness, and we don’t need to make women legal chattel. We simply need to hold women to the same consequences of their choices as we hold men. This allows the competent the freedom to do well, while the incompetent can find a man and let him make choices for her so she doesn’t have to be an adult.

    “TFH says:
    August 30, 2011 at 5:23 pm
    And yes, a sane and responsible woman like Kai or crella suffers when the other 85% of women do things that establish a pattern of female behavior that is very far from what a responsible adult should do. Unfortunate. It must be frustrating to be an elite minority within a large mediocre group, constantly having to prove themselves as the rare exception.”

    I’m not going to be egotistical and claim ‘elite minority’, but there is a reason I push for people to recognise the existence of statistical anomalies and not completely judge an individual by its group. I understand that an individual will be first logically assumed to be similar to the rest of a class to which it belongs, but I think it’s important for people to be sufficiently open to accept when that turns out not to be true. And this goes for whether we are speaking about women, blacks, the poor, or Tahitians.
    We get statistical anomalies in men as well. I’ve met a few men that are ‘women’, and I suspect most people have. And it’s just sad.

  26. greyghost says:

    Well Chels welcome to femminism girl power. Not one person in her life other than you said a damn thing to her other thanyou, she is entitled to be happy. Nothing different than all of the post of articles Dalrock has of the prodivorce and dump him messages all over pop culture. To an article about a story of a woman slutting out on her husband and having a child of adultery being seen and spoken about by women here as literature.
    This is a long haul cultural change.

  27. Anonymous Reader says:

    Chels
    Problem is that most women have that mentality, “you can’t tell me what to do!”

    You know, I could be wrong about this, but I believe that every man who posts or reads here has some experience with this. Maybe more than some experience. I know what you meant. It’s just hugely ironic to read this from a woman, as a man who has experienced that for … a long time.

    I have a friend who’s promiscuous, she makes out with random guys at parties, she sleeps with them, she has a friend with benefits, and she doesn’t see anything wrong with it. I’ve asked her why she’s doing this, and she told me that she has needs that need to be satisfied now. And when I asked her why she doesn’t enter a committed relationship, she said that she’s not ready to settle down. And when I told her that she’s really decreasing her value by sleeping around with so many men, she asked me what year I’m living in, and called me old-fashioned (she’s also the same one to deride me for being in a stable relationship, for refusing to sleep around and told me that I should be having fun until I can).

    First of all, some people have to learn the hard way. She may be one of them. Maybe she’ll get to be in a series on MTV, with that attitude, but I doubt it. No matter, you should, IMO, keep on telling her the facts whenever you can. Even better if some other women are within earshot, because they might learn from her bad example.

  28. Chels says:

    We simply need to hold women to the same consequences of their choices as we hold men.

    But we don’t hold men to the same standard. A woman who sleeps around is a slut, whereas a man who does it is forgiven and sometimes he’s even encouraged. There’s not even a word for the male equivalent of “slut”.

    And you seem to forget that a woman can’t sleep with herself, she needs a man so men are to be blamed equally.

  29. Kai says:

    “Chels says:
    Seriously Kai? What power do I have over the rest of women?”

    We have a slight misunderstanding here. I did not mean to suggest that it was your personal responsibility to convince all other women of their mistakes. That is certainly not my belief – personally, I don’t care all that much if other women want to make dumb choices – they’ll suffer the consequences. My female friends know that they can come to me when they want a logical realistic assessment of a situation, and to stay away from me when they just want a ‘you go, girl!’. But I can’t be bothered to go out of my way to tell random women what to do with themselves.

    I was responding to you in the hypothetical, based the the hypothetical that you suggested.
    We are having a conceptual discussion here. The concept in question is the problem that slutty women sleep with men and decrease both their value in marriage, and the likelihood of non-slutty women to find a guy willing to wait for them with sluts available all around.
    We’re talking theories for solutions as well – not an expectation to go out today and fix the problem.
    Your theoretical solution is that men stop sleeping with sluts.
    Why? Why would a man *not* take commitment-free sex that is offered on a platter? What benefit does this give him? He has no problem with the existence of sluts. The only reason a guy should do that is for the benefit of women. And frankly, I think women should solve their own woman-created woman-problems.
    My solution is that women stop validating the sluttiness of other women.
    It’s women who stand to lose from slutty women, and thus women who should solve the problem. *You* may not personally have a lot of influence over the others in your life, but women as a whole have a lot of influence over each other. If women in positions of authority over other women (mothers, older sisters, aged singletons/childless, leaders of groups, etc.) stopped giving respect to all types of behaviour, and started talking about the reality of what sleeping around does to women, it could have an effect. If women in general stopped validating their friends slutty behaviour, then you wouldn’t be such a lone voice in the ears of your acquaintances.
    It’s not *your* personal responsibility to fix a woman problem caused by women, but it sure isn’t up to men to do it at their own expense.

    “TFH says:
    Chels,
    So your rationalization hamster makes you do things that better judgement would advise against. That is why Game works so well…”

    Actually it sounds to me as though Chels has a good idea as to the consequences of sluthood and hasn’t partaken, but simply doesn’t know any way to get through to other women in her life making those bad choices. That’s understandable.
    Unless you meant a general ‘you’.

  30. Prof. Woland says:

    I would modify her definition of a slut, “A slut is a person of either sex who regards sex strictly as a physically pleasurable activity”. Many women / sluts find sex less than pleasurable but will do it for gain. Gain could be anything from she can’t break up yet because she has not found someone to support her to he is fun to hang out with because he has benefits but he wants sex in return. By saying she is doing it for love or pleasure makes it sound a little better than it might be. Some women simply use men.

  31. Kai says:

    “Chels says:
    August 30, 2011 at 5:53 pm
    We simply need to hold women to the same consequences of their choices as we hold men.
    But we don’t hold men to the same standard. A woman who sleeps around is a slut, whereas a man who does it is forgiven and sometimes he’s even encouraged. There’s not even a word for the male equivalent of “slut”.
    And you seem to forget that a woman can’t sleep with herself, she needs a man so men are to be blamed equally.”

    But the consequences *aren’t* the same for promiscuous men and women.
    I mean, in a moral sense, they are, and churches theoretically are and practically should be equally disapproving of male and female sexual immorality.
    But socially, it’s totally different. A man who has slept with a woman can still easily get other women, can get the respect of women, and can marry a pretty good woman.
    A woman who has slept with a lot of men will find it more difficult to get men, will lose the respect of men (and some women) and will have a hard time finding a good man to marry.
    I did not mean that the consequences should be the same – i simply meant that people should understand the consequences of an action and accept them, and not place fault elsewhere.

  32. Anonymous Reader says:

    Chels
    But we don’t hold men to the same standard.

    I agree with this statement, but I do not think you will like that.

    <i.A woman who sleeps around is a slut, whereas a man who does it is forgiven and sometimes he’s even encouraged. There’s not even a word for the male equivalent of “slut”.

    Have you ever heard of the idea of evolutionary biology? It is a model that explains some significant parts of human behavior, in particular those associated with mating/reproduction. You might find it interesting, although some parts are likely to be unpleasant to you.

  33. Kai says:

    Addendum to comment above:
    One can argue about what consequences should exist, but aside from that, one should be realistic about the actual consequences, and make choices accordingly.
    There *is* some reason for the traditional sexual double standard though – what women get out of men is a provider – experience is good here. what men get out of women is assurance of paternity, and fertility – experience is bad here.
    Also, with men generally more interested in sex on a broad scale, there’s a difference again.
    A man who has slept with a ton of women generally had to do something – he might have been genetically gifted, but he still had to convince all those women to sleep with him. That’s why a manwhore is traditionally a ‘stud’.
    A woman who has slept with a ton of men didn’t have to do anything (unless she was *extremely* genetically ungifted). All she had to do was say yes. A woman who has slept with a lot of men is commonly a woman without much self-control. On the other hand, a woman has to work to get a man to commit to her – hence the traditional value of marriage to a woman.

  34. Dalrock says:

    @Chels

    But we don’t hold men to the same standard. A woman who sleeps around is a slut, whereas a man who does it is forgiven and sometimes he’s even encouraged. There’s not even a word for the male equivalent of “slut”.

    And you seem to forget that a woman can’t sleep with herself, she needs a man so men are to be blamed equally.

    This is exactly the thought process which lead us to the disaster we have today. Women decided not to shame sluts because the alpha she chased wasn’t equally shamed. This is how Pandora opened the box.

    The previous explanation should be sufficient, but there is a bit more. Women always frame it as you have, 1 alpha and 1 slut. But the reality is 100 sluts aren’t going after 100 alphas, they are going after something under 20. The other 80 men are the betas the sluts will one day turn to as a husband/provider. Even if there are 100 would be sluts and only 1 alpha, you still end up with 100 sluts. Add to this the fact that alphas are the last group of people to be inhibited by social shame, and the rest should be clear. We can’t solve the problem by draining the swamp of alphas.

  35. Kai says:

    “TFH says:
    The problem is, there is a massive legal apparatus to shield women from exactly this. It is in fact the dominant ideology of the US, UK, and Canada. 70-80% of all government spending in the US is a transfer from men to women, effectively to shield women from hardships and bad choices, even at the expense of men.
    And I claim that this is an unavoidable outcome of giving women too much power. Men are not obsesses with some burning need to subjugate women, but women *are* obsessed with a burning need to transfer resources from men to women, and to shield themselves from the consequences of their action.”

    Women can hold equal power without ending up with more power as has happened. I agree that there is a massive apparatus to shield women from consequences, and it would be extremely difficult to dismantle. It would be equally difficult to dismantle it to remove women’s legal rights though. My point is that that extreme is not necessary – if we simply gave women the responsibilities along with the rights they have gained, they’d have to wise up.
    Then again, this isn’t just a woman problem anymore. This is a society-wide problem. Not too many males are interested in being men anymore either. There’s a whole mass of citizens who want to know only what their country can do for them. It’s past time *everyone* was held to the consequences of their choices (see: expecting a warning of hot coffee/not to jump over bridge handrail/that sex causes children………)
    But I don’t think the real apparatus is legal – I think it’s political. As long as we have a system that requires leaders to pander to the most vocal citizens to be elected into power, we’re doomed to be ruled by the vocal interest groups.

    “TFH says:
    Oh, manginas are an extremely large part of the whole problem. I don’t even consider them to be men, but rather a ‘third gender’, as existed in medieval China and elsewhere.”

    I should have said ‘males’ to reference the biology as I use ‘female’ to reference the biology without necessarily indicating ‘woman’ in the classic (negative) sense.
    ‘Men’ means something. but males can be women.

  36. susanawalsh says:

    @Kai

    This could also be rectified if women stood up and demanded commitment before sex. And given that it’s women who are being hurt (while men reap awesome benefits), I think the responsibility falls to the women to take the steps needed to fix things for them, instead of waiting for the men to come to the rescue.

    Gee, I wonder if anyone has thought of starting a blog to encourage that?😉

    I would like to see your stats on ‘most’ relationships beginning with no-strings sex. While there’s plenty of that going around, I think it’s more of a strongly visible minority, while most relationships started as relationships that included sex from fairly early on. I think you’re looking in a few particularly bad places to find that the hookup culture is the only one around.

    From: HOOKING UP: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus
    Kathleen A. Bogle
    2008, New York University Press

    “Hooking up is a vague term to describe what has happened sexually between two people.
    But there are some things understood by both college men and women:

    • It is the pathway to a potential romantic relationship, yet it doesn’t guarantee any commitment beyond when the encounter takes place.
    • Someone can opt to ask for the other’s phone number, or try to make a plan to meet up, but the most likely outcome of a particular hookup encounter is “nothing”. You may not hear from the person again (In 49% of hookups with intercourse, the parties never see each other again), but may coincidentally see him or her at another social event and decide to hook up again.
    • “Many students, particularly women, often hoped that a hookup would evolve into some version of a relationship.”

    “For women physical appearance plays a more central role in attracting the opposite sex than it does for men. That’s where her status is derived. For men, status is derived from many different sources, including fraternity membership, athletic status, academic major, and intellectual ability.” (Dorothy Holland and Margaret Eisenhart)

    Bogle: “If a girl wants to go all the way and it’s mutual then the boy won’t perceive her as “dirty”, but if there’s potential interest in a relationship, and the girl does too much too soon, the boy will perceive her as “dirty”.

    Freshman girls are more likely to think that a hook up might turn into something relationship-wise, but sophomores, juniors and older would not expect it. Freshmen are less likely to understand that their sexual availability decreases the chance of having the man pursue the relationship.

    The least likely outcome is becoming an exclusive couple. This is “going out” or being “together” or “with” the other person. But the possibility of a relationship may explain why girls hook up. Girls learn “the hard way” over time to have low expectations.

    Most freshmen say they want to “see what’s out there” and “keep their options open”.

    Girls sometimes have “fake boyfriends”. The girl looks for a repeat hookup with the same boy so she can pretend she’s dating him. The boys want a tally of the greatest number of girls. Girls encourage each other into believing a boy likes them. It ends when he hooks up with another girl.

    Girls learn to have very low expectations of boys, but they continue to hook up in hopes that “this time it might be different.”

    “College students recognize what the dating script is, but they don’t follow it in the traditional sense because a date is no longer the mechanism by which college students find potential partners. The pathway to becoming a couple, when a date might occur, begins with hooking up.”

    @Dalrock

    Agreed, we’re talking about 20% of men, which is my estimate of the percentage of promiscuous men in college (I estimate 20% for women too). That’s why I said that casual sex has exacerbated the divide between alphas and betas. When I went to college in the late 70s, I happily dated beta guys, as did my sorority sisters. No longer. However, the cultural impact of the alphas creeps into the beta groups too – I’ve heard numerous stories of beta guys preferring hookups to dating. It’s not surprising – if that’s the measure of a man in college, all guys will aim for that, sometimes even when it means they forego a sexual relationship to remain “free.”

    @TFH

    Is this The Fifth Horseman? It’s been ages!

  37. Omnipitron says:

    “I mean, in a moral sense, they are, and churches theoretically are and practically should be equally disapproving of male and female sexual immorality.”

    Agreed, however wasn’t it also up to men in the past to show their young charges the benefits of chastity? I can’t see men in the past being kosher with many PUA being on the loose to possibly have a go at either their daughters or someone else’s. So in essence the destruction of the family and the increasing amount of fatherless homes has wrought yet another casualty amongst the genders.

  38. Jack Amok says:

    The problem is that at college age, most of the relationships on campus begin with a no-strings hookup. So when you see the relatively small number of couples walking around, you can assume that nearly all of those women slept with their boyfriends before securing a relationship. Of course, there are women who don’t do that, but they aren’t in relationships, for the most part.
    The rub is that only 12% of hookups lead to a relationship. That explains why so many women are abjectly miserable in the hookup culture. They place their bets and lose. And their numbers keep climbing. This could be rectified if guys stood up and demanded inexperienced women, but they don’t, because they’re not looking for any real commitment at that age anyway.

    So, maybe making it the norm that colledged aged women hang out with colleged aged men unchaparoned for 4 or 5 years was a bad idea?

  39. imnobody says:

    Great comments here. I have only read a few and I have so many comments

    Dan in Philly makes one of the most insightful comments of the year. How can slut shaming can be possible if there’s no SHAMING whatsoever? I don’t like to repeat comments, but this is worth repeating.

    I’m not really making my main point here: Modernists have learned that in order to live as they wish, they must effectively outlaw shame. Therefore they will always attack anyone who judges and shames people, even if they behavior is quite deserving of it. They do this so that they, themselves, will not fear shame for their own dirty little secrets they have now, or ones they may have in the future. It’s hard for me to express without a lot of effort just how damaging this is to the people who engage in such foolish behavior, but damage them it does, and the society which these people make up.

    (You can see a more detailed explanation of Dan’s argument in Bring Back Stigma
    http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_4_bring_back_stigma.html )

    No behavior is shamed: Why should sluthood be different? (After all, a slut is not worse than a wife that has sex outside the wedlock, divorces his husband, takes all his assets, takes his kids and plans to go abroad, so the father cannot see their kids. Unbelievable? It’s happening to Welmer, the founder of The Spearhead: tomorroy is his trial).

    If such a despicable person is not shamed, why should a slut be?

  40. Kai says:

    “Omnipitron says:
    …wasn’t it also up to men in the past to show their young charges the benefits of chastity? I can’t see men in the past being kosher with many PUA being on the loose to possibly have a go at either their daughters or someone else’s. So in essence the destruction of the family and the increasing amount of fatherless homes has wrought yet another casualty amongst the genders.”

    I’m not sure who you mean by ‘young charges’.
    In the past it was a father’s responsibility to actually enforce his daughter’s chastity, but not really through logic and convincing.
    I do think that men might have some motivation to convince other men not to have uncommitted sex with women given that some women are their daughters or such. But that would be men policing men, while women can police women.

  41. susanawalsh says:

    @Jack Amok

    Indeed, hook up culture really took hold when universities rejected their traditional role as in loco parentis. I wrote about that here:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/06/17/hookinguprealities/the-coed-dorm-debate/

  42. Dalrock says:

    @imnobody

    No behavior is shamed: Why should sluthood be different?

    While his larger point is true that shaming is generally frowned upon in our liberal culture, shaming men is one area where they are willing to make an exception. Pornography may be widely viewed on the Internet, but men aren’t generally comfortable discussing their latest bout of one armed browsing. Probably a better example is how the church has responded to a widespread phenomenon of Christian women failing to keep their marriage vows and kicking the father out of their children’s lives. What did Christian leaders do in response? Why they created Promise Keepers, with the goal of convincing men to keep their promises. Thanks Christian leaders!

    Shame and social guidance is alive and well, but it is almost exclusively aimed at men. Christians know how to use shame, they simply refuse to use it against women.

  43. Kai says:

    “susanawalsh says:
    HOOKING UP: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus
    Kathleen A. Bogle
    2008, New York University Press”

    I do not see a free version of this on the internet, and I’m not up for paying for it myself.
    I agree with your characterisation of the hookup culture and what goes on within it, and all that is mentioned in your excerpt. But I’m looking for numbers – not of what goes on within, but of who’s taking part in the first place.
    Perhaps ‘what percentage of college-aged women have had a no-strings ‘hookup’ sexual encounter within the last month’. Or a graph of ‘on which date did your relationship start to include sex?’
    I fully believe the culture is out there. I am not convinced that that culture is essentially the only culture among college-aged people today.

  44. imnobody says:

    About the double standard (1):

    Well, firstly, as I have said once and again, there are lots of double standards that harm men but we are always talking about the double standard that harms women.

    Double standards regarding men are everywhere: in divorce courts, for example. In TV, where men are treated like chumps and women like superior beings. In public opinion, a man who dumps her wife is a bastard, a woman who dumps her husband is discovering herself (“Eat Pray Love”, “The Bridges of Madison County”). A man who has not a job is a loser. A women has no such shame. A stay-at-home mom is somebody who is contributing to the welfare of the family (a homemaker). A stay-at-home dad is a slacker. And so on and so forth.

    Let me tell you another double standard that I am thinking about these days. In the traditional society, the good sexual conduct was monogamy. But, as you know, monogamy is easier for women than for men. So, how the standard of “good sexual behavior” end up being the behavior that is easier for women? Double standard.

    Well, now, we have rejected most of the sexual morality. But there is only a thing that is remaining. The fact that cheating is wrong. So “serial monogamy” is good while “polygamy” is wrong. You see this even in language: “serial monogamy” should be called “serial polygamy” because monogamy is one sexual partner for life. But calling it “serial monogamy” it seems more respectable.

    As you see, “serial monogamy” is the thing that comes natural to women and “polygamy” is the thing that comes natural to “men”. So how the standard of “good sexual behavior” end up being AGAIN the behavior that is easier to women? Double standard.

    Or as Dilbert’s creator said:

    The part that interests me is that society is organized in such a way that the natural instincts of men are shameful and criminal while the natural instincts of women are mostly legal and acceptable. In other words, men are born as round pegs in a society full of square holes. Whose fault is that? Do you blame the baby who didn’t ask to be born male? Or do you blame the society that brought him into the world, all round-pegged and turgid, and said, “Here’s your square hole”?

    http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/pegs_and_holes/

  45. Chels says:

    Dalrock, I understand what you’re saying. However, a woman can only try to influence other women and a woman who’s not a slut is still going to find a husband. Not only can’t women do anything, they also get shit for not being able to do something.

    It sounds really selfish what I’m going to say next, but it seems to me that the most affected are the sluts and the men who are not able to find a partner, so let them do the work.

    Totally selfish on my part, I know.

  46. imnobody says:

    @dalrock

    Indeed. My last post and your last post are talking about the same phenomenon. As a person, men are shamed because of their natural instincts while women are given a free pass (like Dilbert’s creator said). As a Christian, women’s sins are excused but men’s sins are condemned, at least in many churches. This is opposed to Christianity’s teachings that are against men’s sins and women’s sins (read the Bible).

  47. Jennifer says:

    “Where I am aiming is the point of a reason that men, for the sake of men, should not sleep with sluts. And I don’t see one. Sluthood is great for men – it gives them sex without requiring commitment – how easy!”

    Morally and emotionally, it’s a freaking disaster and it does hurt when men encourage that.

    “My point is the silliness of Chels suggesting that a solution to female sluthood is for men to force it to go away by not sleeping with them (so that women don’t have to do the work of shaming other women for taking down their likelihood of securing commitment). It’s the epitome of women expecting men to do the work for them, and I don’t respect that”

    No, women should be responsible for their actions. But it makes perfect sense for men to shame sluts and women to shame jerks; sluts and cads wouldn’t have a place if the members of the opposite sex they aim for didn’t respond. This too is common sense.

    Dan in Philly has it absolutely right.

  48. Kai says:

    “Chels says:
    Dalrock, I understand what you’re saying. However, a woman can only try to influence other women and a woman who’s not a slut is still going to find a husband. Not only can’t women do anything, they also get shit for not being able to do something.
    It sounds really selfish what I’m going to say next, but it seems to me that the most affected are the sluts and the men who are not able to find a partner, so let them do the work.
    Totally selfish on my part, I know.”

    That’s not wrong at all. That’s a logical position. I certainly don’t hold anything against you for not doing anything, and I don’t think anyone here is giving you shit for not being able to do anything about it. I only gave you shit for suggesting a theoretical solution that asked men to do the work to fix a problem created by and affecting women.

    I think that if non-slut women have enough trouble within the culture, then it will be up to them to do something about it.
    Like you, I didn’t really find it to cause me personally any hardship, and have no vested interest.

  49. jack says:

    Of all the cultural forces at play in the world right now, the only one strong enough to tackle the slut issue is probably Islam.

    Islam is immune to shaming language, it cares not for being called a “religious nut”, or any other critique.

    It also has no detectable propensity for white-knighting or pedastalizing. I will never be a muslim, but I know which side would win in a cultural war between muslim men and women vs. white American sluts and their mangina enablers.

  50. jack says:

    By the way, sluttiness is not cured by refusing to sleep with women, it is cured by refusing to marry them.

  51. Kai says:

    “Jennifer says:
    Morally and emotionally, [sluttiness is] a freaking disaster and it does hurt when men encourage that.”

    It hurts whom? Men or women?
    Morally, I don’t need to tell others what to do. Those with a moral compass already have it set where they want it or where their church/other moral entity has told them to. So I’m speaking to the section of society outside of that clear constraint.

    It makes sense for men who morally disagree with promiscuity to shame sluts.
    But it does not make any sense for the rest of men, who mostly want sex, to attempt to stop themselves from getting it.
    I think we’re working from extremely different definitions of ‘make sense’ here. I’m speaking of pure self-interest. It is not in the best self-interest of a man who wants uncommitted sex to shame those giving it to him. (At least not explicitly. It’s certainly logical for him to leave a woman to afterwards try to figure out what the problem is.)
    I think you’re speaking to it ‘making sense’ for a broad societal morality. And that’s not really the point at hand, even if it is desirable.

  52. imnobody says:

    About the double standard (2)

    As someone said, this standard is caused by women who don’t refuse to sleep, date, have a relationship and/or marry male sluts, a.k.a, studs or alphas. This is rooted in biology and won’t change.

    I remember being 20 years younger and being a virgin. I foolishly assumed that this was something worthy that my girlfriend would appreciate. WHAT A LOSER!. Anyway, I was friend of a family: the husband was 35, the wife was 30, they had three lovely kids and his mother. They were my best friends (we were from a foreign country and lived in a foreign country) and they are still a family.

    Anyway, I digress. I remember the husband used to enjoy while telling all the relationships, affairs and one-night stands that he had while he was in his twenties. I was horrified that he was telling that BEFORE HER WIFE and me. The wife (a Catholic girl, very traditional, whose first boyfriend has been her husband) was laughing and told me:

    As long as he did that before meeting me, I don’t care.

    After that, I thought: “So you have a free pass to have sex, as long as you do it BEFORE MEETING YOUR WIFE”. All these years that I have been virgin won’t be valued by my wife. So they have been wasted.

    After that and after becoming a man slut, every girl I have had a relationship with me has had the same attitude: “As long as you did that before me, I don’t care”.

  53. Kai says:

    “TFH says:
    MRAs do have to take blame for their failures, though”

    So an interesting question is ‘Why are women so much better at self-organising?’
    They’re plenty bitchy to each other, but they still do very well at working together against the common enemy of men. Why do men do so poorly at the same thing when it’s not even working against but just trying to hold some ground?
    I don’t have the answer – any takers?

  54. Jennifer says:

    “By the way, sluttiness is not cured by refusing to sleep with women”

    Yes it is; that cuts it in the bud.

    “It hurts whom? Men or women?”

    It hurts both, Kai. Don’t think you can use your body, or another’s, lightly. And these things do affect society on a larger level.

    You didn’t waste anything, nobody. That wife was a fool. And biology dictates that a woman wants a strong man, but not that she can’t help marrying a caddish jerk.

  55. imnobody says:

    About the double standard (3)

    So, if slut don’t stop being sluts, who are going to stop sluthood? The alphas that benefit from it? Chels has an idea:

    it seems to me that the most affected are the sluts and the men who are not able to find a partner, so let them do the work.

    Nonsense. Sluts won’t do the work. If they did it, they wouldn’t be sluts. Slut do this because they reap emotional/attention/sexual benefits. They have decided that these benefits are higher than the benefits of closing their legs. So giving sluts the job to stop sluthood is like giving the rich the job to raise taxes for the rich.

    About the men who are not able to find a partner. What can they do? Shame man-sluts because of having a lot of babes while they have to spend their time playing World of Warcraft in their parent’s basement?

    I have been in both positions (man-slut and not able to find a partner) and, believe me, the shaming goes the other way. The man-sluts shame you because you are a pathetic loser who can’t get laid.

    In reality, the problem has no solution because it is embedded in human nature. So how is it that we had no such problem sixty years ago? Has nature change? I will answer next.

  56. Chels says:

    Are men really not affected at all emotionally by sleeping around? I just find that hard to believe, and he’s going to bring a lot of extra emotional baggage when he does get married.

    What I wish is that more sluts would admit that they’re not happy sleeping around, and they do it because they have low self-esteem and don’t think they deserve any better. They can rationalize any way they want, but it’s still not healthy for them.

  57. Jennifer says:

    Bingo, Chels. Nobody, all we can do individually is avoid sexually loose people.

  58. imnobody says:

    This is because a large part of female attraction towards men is based on whether she thinks other women also want him.

    Indeed. This is preselection. Many animal species do it. For the female, choosing a male to have his babies is a cost-consuming process, which is also prone to error. Females have only one womb and it is valuable. If you choose a male who has been preselected by another female, you reduce the costs and the risk.

    I remember a girl who I tried to be a friend with some years ago. She didn’t seem interested so she let the thing die. She didn’t answer my emails. Then, several months afterwards, we run into each other in the movies theater. I was with my girlfriend who was much taller and prettier than this girl. After this, she has been going after me for all these years. Preselection is king.

  59. Kai says:

    “Chels says:
    Are men really not affected at all emotionally by sleeping around? I just find that hard to believe, and he’s going to bring a lot of extra emotional baggage when he does get married.”

    Men are affected, but less.
    The most serious manwhores aren’t interested in marriage at all, and aren’t worrying about any of that baggage.
    The average guy isn’t affected by having a few girls in his past.
    There are stats which demonstrate that men with higher partner counts don’t do quite as well in marriage, but it’s hard to claim a causal relationship. It may well be that some men are simply not wired for monogamy – these are the ones likely to rack up the biggest numbers, and also the ones least likely to do well in marriage.
    It would be hard to determine whether an average guy who gets a little luckier than another average guy has more trouble in marriage.
    It’s not usually emotional baggage though. That’s the biggest difference – men do not invest the same kind of emotion in sex that women do. For men, sex is much more physical and much less emotional. So for most men, there is no emotional baggage. The ones who have a problem with marriage do so because they know what they are missing.

  60. Kathy says:

    “The wife (a Catholic girl, very traditional, whose first boyfriend has been her husband) was laughing and told me:
    As long as he did that before meeting me, I don’t care”

    Traditional Catholic Girl? In a pigs eye.

    Hypocrite more like it.

    FWIW, I was brought up in a traditional Catholic household.
    I was taught by my parents that sex was a sin outside of marriage for either sex.

    The thought of marrying a man who had slept with lots of women turned my stomach..
    I most certainly never married such a man.

    Men who sleep with many women also find it hard to bond in the marriage as do women who have slept with many men.

    My husband and I are bringing up our daughter to value chastity, to save herself for a good man. Not a feckless one who will sleep with a slew of women and expect to settle down with a good girl..

    Not with my daughter they won’t!😉

    She has a good example to follow in her parents.
    More parents (especially mothers) need to lead by example, too many mothers are abrogating their responsibilities in this area.

  61. Dalrock says:

    @Jennifer

    “By the way, sluttiness is not cured by refusing to sleep with women”

    Yes it is; that cuts it in the bud.

    You aren’t acknowledging the numbers involved here. As I said before, if there are 100 would be sluts, and only 1 alpha, you will still have 100 sluts. Add to that the fact that Alphas are by their very makeup not concerned with social stigma. This is the heart of the traditional double standard, and it worked until we abandoned it. It simply doesn’t work the other way around.

    Great advice and article, Dalrock. The sin of promiscuity is the same for either sex, but there are myriad consequences unique to each sex. And if a woman marries an alpha, she’d better make sure he’s a solid Christian; anything else is a disaster (that might be why some women were distressed at your words: they don’t want to believe that. Relax ladies, a guy doesn’t need to be an alpha to turn you on; he just needs several alpha QUALITIES).

    Thanks! But I would no more advise a woman to marry a solid Christian alpha than I would a man to marry a solid Christian slut.

  62. RL says:

    “I don’t have the answer – any takers?” I think it is because men arrange themselves in a hierarchy, and women in a social network.

  63. Kai says:

    “Jennifer says:
    “By the way, sluttiness is not cured by refusing to sleep with women”
    Yes it is; that cuts it in the bud.

    “It hurts whom? Men or women?”
    It hurts both, Kai. Don’t think you can use your body, or another’s, lightly. And these things do affect society on a larger level.”

    Is a man who desperately wants to cheat on his wife but can’t find a willing partner a virtuous man?
    Men refusing to sleep with women would prevent the problem from being visible, but it wouldn’t solve the underlying issues.
    And again, it’s expecting men to do something against their interest in order to solve women’s problems for them. Needing that is hardly strong womanhood.

    So again, you’re talking morally. Do you completely not understand the self-interest frame in which I’m speaking, or do you just to refuse to acknowledge it as relevant?
    And if you want to suggest as a Christian that men are wired for monogamy and having sex with multiple women hurts them, I’d like you to explain why Abraham, Jacob, and the rest are exceptions to your rule.

  64. Chels says:

    Well Kai, a woman who sleeps with a few man won’t be affected emotionally that much either. I think there must be a threshold for this, and maybe it’s higher for men.

  65. Ducky says:

    After that and after becoming a man slut, every girl I have had a relationship with me has had the same attitude: “As long as you did that before me, I don’t care”.

    @ Imnobody

    I’m sure they’d feel different if you told them that you proposed to your last girlfriend. I’m sure they’d be angry that you haven’t proposed to them.

    They might not care about sexual history, but they are more emotional over material and commitment overtures. Imagine if you told her that you bought your ex-girlfriend a 10K diamond ring but now you don’t feel like spending money anymore.

  66. Anonymous Reader says:

    Kai
    I would argue that this is really a subset of the bigger sacred cow of ‘no consequences’ (which is what is really sought when feminists claim to be fighting for ‘choice’.

    Agreed. IMO one of the real reasons for the slutwalks was the usual “my choice, someone else picks up the pieces” definition of “choice”. Another, of course, being the attempt to normalize sluts – as Marcotte and other sex-pozzies basically don’t want men to have any ability to not “choose” a slut. Of course the latter cannot work. Rather than risk being cuckolded, many men will just not have children…

  67. uncleFred says:

    Only mothers, fathers, and the girls peers can end sluthood. Sorry folks, but men can’t do this, even were they so inclined. Lets be clear about this. Men, because they have to pay for the mistake, have no desire to marry (or if they are smart impregnate) a slut. But as long as they don’t make those mistakes have little downside in bedding them.

    Feminism has taught women that there is no downside to screwing everything that moves for their own enjoyment. It has taught men that women are, in the main, not worth protecting. Why on earth would men today forgo sexual pleasure with something (yes a thing) that they have learned to hold in disregard? While I disagree with all of this, that does not make my analysis incorrect.

    As far as sluthood goes, the whirlwind is here. As sad as it is, and as much of a problem as it presents, the majority of young women today are raised to be sluts. Or more fairly the are not raised not to be sluts. Without strong familial and societal pressure wanton promiscuity is the norm for humanity. If our young women are not raised to to be sexually restrained, they end up sluts.

    My lady has two teenage daughters. Both raised with a strong sense of self, self respect, and personal value. In other words, raised not to be sluts. The older daughter’s best friend openly uses sex to get gifts and favors from various boy friends and brags about it. She “doesn’t get along with her parents” and spends as much time away from them as possible while they pay her expenses. I’m certain that none of the young men who bed her have any desire for a long term relationship let alone marriage. They are content to enjoy her while they look for someone worth while. And why not? They grew up being told they were inferior and brutes and worse.

    Even were we to convince 90% of men not to screw sluts, the remaining 10% would be more than enough to keep the carousel in full operation. If you want to end sluthood, the only place to apply pressure is parents, and eventually their peers.

  68. imnobody says:

    And biology dictates that a woman wants a strong man, but not that she can’t help marrying a caddish jerk.

    Of course, not. I haven’t said that. What I said is that promiscuous men have no problem to get married to good women. The guys who are not promiscuous have a lot more trouble.

    You didn’t waste anything, nobody. That wife was a fool.

    Well, they are still married and he is faithful to her. They love each other very much. They have an amazing marriage and three good kids. I don’t think she is that bad. I wish I had their family.

    Are men really not affected at all emotionally by sleeping around?

    When I was young, it was tough to realize that being chaste and being good to women was condemning me to a life of celibacy and endless dismissal on behalf of the same women who praised my attitude. I remember the sentence: “He is so good and the girl who gets it will be a very lucky one” (but nobody wanted to be this girl).

    Every man in the manosphere remembers the day when he realized that it had been fed with lies and that women pay lip service to good guys but don’t want these guys. After all the hurt of being rejected, you discover that everything is a lie and your being unhappy, sad and miserable is not because something is wrong with you (as you thought) but due to everybody lying to you. This is what gives you emotional baggage, this is what leaves a scar in your soul. Sleeping around? That feels great if you are a men. Remember that men aren’t a women and feel different.

  69. Anonymous Reader says:

    TFH
    The PUA phenomenon is a very urban one for obvious reasons.

    Same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks.

  70. Dalrock says:

    @Chels

    Are men really not affected at all emotionally by sleeping around? I just find that hard to believe, and he’s going to bring a lot of extra emotional baggage when he does get married.

    I think for men there are two very important factors. First the experience undoubtedly does change them. Even if they don’t struggle to pair bond the way women seem to after this the problem is they will always be thinking about the other options. They will remember the thrill of the chase, and they are masters at it. But I also think as with women there is some powerful sorting involved. We mock Betas because of their intense, at times wholly irrational loyalty. Even PUA sites often talk about the difficulty of overcoming the beta instincts. This is something I think women fundamentally don’t understand. The apex fallacy has blinded them to the true nature of the Beta condition, including the noble side of it. Some alphas are made (through studying game), but many are born alphas. Many are somewhere in between. The more natural being alpha is to the man, the less likely he is to fully attach to any one woman.

    What I wish is that more sluts would admit that they’re not happy sleeping around, and they do it because they have low self-esteem and don’t think they deserve any better. They can rationalize any way they want, but it’s still not healthy for them.

    This simply won’t happen, at least in large numbers. Reformgirl’s powerful comment above is an extremely rare exception. More importantly though is for all of us to admit that sluts aren’t victims of insecurity or anything else. They are doing exactly what they want to do. They are doing what their animal programming says they should do. They in many ways have gone feral. When we paste over this with patronizing talk of self-esteem issues we rob them of the opportunity to truly acknowledge what they have done. And if they can’t be honest with themselves, they can never come to terms with it; in Christian terms, they can’t really repent. Self esteem may be involved, but it is mostly used in our society as a cop out for bad choices.

  71. Chels says:

    Dalrock, I learned something new today🙂

  72. pechorin2 says:

    With regard to the effect of sluts on relationships and hence society: Dalrock, have you read “Sex and Culture” by J.D. Unwin? He studies various examples from anthropology and history and concludes that strict lifelong monogamy and premarital abstinence are strongly correlated with, probably in a causal manner, advanced civilization. He also claims that throughout history, sex has always be regulated by the control of female sexuality, and the loss of this control is generally associated with civilizational decline.

    He’s a Freudian, so he proposes that the mechanism of this connection is sublimation – repressing sex leads to greater mental energy leads to civilization – but you could also explain his data by appealing to the civilizing effect of the family as an institution, for example.

  73. susanawalsh says:

    @Kai
    I do not see a free version of this on the internet, and I’m not up for paying for it myself.
    No, it’s not free, it’s a popular book.

    But I’m looking for numbers – not of what goes on within, but of who’s taking part in the first place.

    Eh, it’s very Googleable if you’re curious. I’ve researched that stuff many times for posts. In the past few years there have been quite a few studies on college sexual mores. If you’re interested, I provide some key stats here:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/about-hooking-up-smart/

  74. Jennifer says:

    “Of course, not. I haven’t said that”

    Oh I know; I was responding to more than one comment; sorry.

    “What I said is that promiscuous men have no problem to get married to good women”

    Depends on the woman. As Dalrock implied, many loose men don’t lose their urge. Such women are foolishly careless, putting sexual thrills above other deeper concerns. Please recall that being good to women and being supplicatory to them is different; a smart woman will not dismiss a good man. It sounds like, sadly, you were taught that being a good man meant being always calm, supplicatory, and a perpetual white knight and “nice guy”; being good is a lot more than that. Being chaste is not wrong either, though it’s not something one should advertise, as that presents an “Aren’t I a good little person” attitude that’s grating.

    “And again, it’s expecting men to do something against their interest in order to solve women’s problems for them”

    And again, this isn’t about men solving women’s problems.

    “Men refusing to sleep with women would prevent the problem from being visible, but it wouldn’t solve the underlying issues”

    But it would rob them of their sexual market.

    “And if you want to suggest as a Christian that men are wired for monogamy and having sex with multiple women hurts them, I’d like you to explain why Abraham, Jacob, and the rest are exceptions to your rule”

    They’re not; Abraham loved Sarah and didn’t want another wife, and neither did Jacob; he loved Rachel. BOTH their marriages and sets of wives resulted in unhappiness on both sides.

    “Do you completely not understand the self-interest frame in which I’m speaking, or do you just to refuse to acknowledge it as relevant?”

    It’s not true that mass sexual partners truly benefit men, and I really don’t consider such shallow self-interest as relevant; apparently we are in general operating from different sides.

  75. Dalrock says:

    @Kai

    In a social sense, no. I’m not bringing morality into it here. There has always been and will always be a fringe in which slutty men sleep with slutty women. ‘Slutty’ men and slutty women sleeping together don’t threaten my marriage at all.

    Interestingly this was my wife’s response to the part of the post where I said sluts pose a threat to the social order. Like her mother she isn’t afraid to call out sluts, but her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife).

  76. Chels says:

    Jenn, I think that he was trying to say that even smart women want the good guys after they slept around for bit (or for a lot).

  77. Jennifer says:

    To be clear, Kai, I know that women won’t stop being sluts and men won’t stop bedding them, not this side of paradise. I’m just speaking in terms of what WOULD be best.

  78. Jennifer says:

    You and he are correct in that, Chels. Women, like men, often focus on sexual thrills before they realize the importance of LTRs.

  79. Jennifer says:

    “He’s a Freudian, so he proposes that the mechanism of this connection is sublimation – repressing sex leads to greater mental energy leads to civilization – but you could also explain his data by appealing to the civilizing effect of the family as an institution, for example”

    Bingo on both points. Civilization fell because promiscuity became massive and the family collapsed.

    “her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife)”

    They might not succeed in seducing them, but tempting can be harder and can open new windows. That’s one of the reasons why emo and physical porn are dangerous.

  80. Chels says:

    I don’t agree that sluts don’t affect one’s marriage, I mean yes, it’s not like she’d be able to steal my husband. But she can definitely do damage by tempting him and helping him cheat–he won’t leave, but the damage is done, most mistresses are sluts.

  81. Random Angeleno says:

    “Are men really not affected at all emotionally by sleeping around? I just find that hard to believe, and he’s going to bring a lot of extra emotional baggage when he does get married.”

    Yes that is correct about men, Chels: most men are truly not affected that much by sleeping around. I would say that only the extreme man sluts may be affected. For the rest, sleeping around is usually what they can (or want to) do in their younger days. Once they mature and want to marry, most men have got that out of their systems and are able to commit to monogamy. Yet another way men are very definitely different from women, they are usually more capable of setting aside that emotional baggage around promiscuity than women.

    Don’t get me wrong there will always be men who are affected, men who should never marry because they can’t keep their pants zipped, but that is never to be confused with all men, heck that shouldn’t be confused with most men.

    Go check out the Talk About Marriage forum someday, it might open your eyes.

  82. Butterfly Flower says:

    All these years that I have been virgin won’t be valued by my wife. So they have been wasted.

    That depends. I know many young [mostly Christian] women who refuse to date non-virgins.

    …I value my boyfriend’s virginity.

    I wouldn’t be comfortable dating a non-virgin. I feel like it would lessen the value of my own virginity. I would feel like just another girl, disposable.

    Before I met my [super-awesome-wonderful] boyfriend, I realized most men I would encounter wouldn’t be virgins. It wasn’t a thought I enjoyed, but I tried my best to cope with said fact. I’m realistic, I didn’t want to have impossible expectations.

    – I think a lot of women feel that way. Women may act like they’re cool with their significant other’s high partner count; but that’s probably just their hamsters spinning. Women might desire the man most wanted by their peers, but they certainly don’t want the baggage that goes along with it [STDs, illegitimate children, crazy exes, etc.]

    Let’s compare:

    “He could have slept with any girl, but he saved it for me!”
    “He slept with everyone, but he settled for me!”

    The first option sounds the most romantic.

  83. Jennifer says:

    “No, a large number of partners does not hurt men”

    I don’t agree. It doesn’t hurt them in the self-esteem, sad-slouching way that it hurts women, but I think it hampers their decision-making abilities; it may ultimately be more harmful since the effects are less visible. A man who gets used to sleeping around may never settle down or wish to, until it’s too late. And it’s true that sometimes we should ignore natural urges for others’ sakes instead of ours; for ex, a man’s biological urge may be to be polygamous, and this might make him desirable by careless women, but it would hurt the women he was with. Likewise, let’s look at a men who’s literally polygamous; would this benefit his wives? No; not in a biological or emotional way. And ultimately, having even three wives, all with their needs and wants and childrens’ needs and wants, would put unbelievable stress on a man. Likewise, is a woman’s hypergamous urge beneficial to the men or even one man she’s involved with? HELL, no; talk about crushing a man, by trading him up. And it places all kinds of delusions on her, about both herself and men, and robs her of the need for loyalty and real love in a relationship.

  84. Jennifer says:

    Whoa, good one BF. This again relates to women who stupidly choose sexual thrills (“ooh, he’s had many women so he’s GOOD in the sack!”) above quality.

  85. Jennifer says:

    Polygamy actually hurts men too, the “beta” men.

  86. Chels says:

    BF

    I really don’t care whether or not he’s a virgin, all I care is that his partner count is not in the double digits. I’m really ambivalent to virginity and if he’d say to me that he saved himself for me, I’d be like “thanks?” Really doesn’t matter.

    Most women think like that, not in the extremes you talk about, hey don’t want the virgin but they don’t want the player either, they want something in the middle.

  87. imnobody says:

    The problem has no solution but it is complex to say why.

    – As long as there is casual sex, there will be sluts. With casual sex, monogamy ends and there is a rough competition for the alpha man. There will always be women willing to give sex to an alpha if this gets them attention, excitement or increases the chances of landing an alpha. This is a slippery slope so chaste girls are pressured to join the game if they don’t want to be alone.

    – The problem would only be solved by stopping casual sex completely. Stopping casual sex for the 80% of people won’t solve it. There will always be sluts and alphas and the temptation for women to get an alpha by giving him sex. This is a slippery slop, an arms race and eventually, “everybody is doing it”

    – Stopping casual sex completely is not achieved by shaming women or punishing people for having casual sex. If you did that, the only thing you would get would be to get sluts and alphas to be more secretive when having casual sex (instead of bragging about it). You don’t know WHO is having casual sex and you can’t put a policeman in every bedroom.

    – The traditional society managed to solve that because they knew WHO was having casual sex. Who was having casual sex? The girl who got pregnant and his boyfriend. Before contraception, this was a tried-and-true method to know who was damaging the society.

    And then you could punish these people: the man was forced to marry the pregnant girl (“shotgun marriage” they said), the girl was regarded with contempt by other women for all her life. And if the man was a stranger or managed to escape the shotgun marriage, the girl was single forever and, since women didn’t work then, she was poor forever. Other girls who knew her story were very careful not to follow her example so they rejected casual sex. I know these things very well because it was this way in my country when I was a kid.

    This is impossible now because a) You can’t know what people is having casual sex b) You can’t punish these people the way it was done before.The pill changed everything. So our society will disappear and other societies will replace it (in my country, this is happening right now with Muslim people)

  88. Stephenie Rowling says:

    “But most of them won’t budge, and are resorting to increasingly snarky and hysterical attacks on “hand-wringers” like myself.”

    I though we were the “pearl clutchers”? I even ordered the T-shirts!!!! :(…:)

    “But as you have pointed out in douchebag math 101, we aren’t talking about the majority of men here. We are talking about a small percentage of alphas riding the slut gravy train. Ordinary men aren’t going to be able to stop the alphas short of physical force.”

    Could be, but still sex is hamsters food. If the sluts were failing on getting atractive men to put up with them for the absolutely minimum for sex how could they think they could marry them too? I don’t think the solution is men, but they are accomplices. I already mentioned at HUS that the sluts are the ones that rob the bank, but the alphas are driving the get away car. No judge will declare them non-guilty. Do they get a reduced sentence? Of course and that is fair, but sluthood is not sluts sleeping with women, but men, YMMV.

    They needed to meet him not even half-way, but even just 10% of the way, but as usual, they did almost nothing…..

    I often mentioned this, manosphere needs to be active and support the things that are good for men, while stopping supporting the ones that hurt them. But again they often claim that no man can resist the power of punani. Funny conclusion for a group that is so dead set in women being destroying them. At the very least MRA’s guys should not sleep with married women, everytime a married woman gets a guy to bang her, she is mentally sticking nails in her husband back, if you can’t do it for the women, do it for the husband and for his children. Once the slut divorces thinking that she can get any man she wants that poor family is in for a ride to hell that will never stop, again YMMV as usual.

    Yet another way men are very definitely different from women, they are usually more capable of setting aside that emotional baggage around promiscuity than women.
    Actually this is a cultural difference not a physiological one, in my country were all men cheat all this men also had time to “experiment” and yet once they settle they still wanted more, even if that meant destroying their families. Jerkinesh is not sexist.

  89. Cat Patrol says:

    I see a lot of posters offering up “solutions” to the “problem” of woman sluthood.

    Its’ most likely that women in their natural state are sluts. They sleep around, and with the more Alpha the dude, the better. Women have choices now, and they don’t want reliable average Joe. They would rather have a small slice of a few Alphas and then reminesce in their old age with their fellow sluts about the dudes they used to fuck.

  90. Stephenie Rowling says:

    Most women think like that, not in the extremes you talk about, hey don’t want the virgin but they don’t want the player either, they want something in the middle.
    I would had preferred a virgin man as well, but I was realistic about the possibility of that being true, specially as I grew older. My husband is not into double digits, never had a sex with a woman she was not in a relationship with, no ONS, not FWB, but he doesn’t brag about it like he deserves a medal for having sex. I wouldn’t had married a guy that rubs in my face his “fun” years. I mean what he is trying to accomplish with that? To show that he was attractive? I might be weird but I never needed anyone to validate what I found attractive if I found him attractive that is more than enough for me. But again I might be weird.

  91. imnobody says:

    That depends. I know many young [mostly Christian] women who refuse to date non-virgins.

    A minority in my society or American society. And even them, they want to date attractive virgins. Nobody (men or women) wants to date a person who is not attractive.

    It’s difficult to be attractive to women unless you have a confidence that is difficult to have when you are virgin and lots of women have rejected you. Failure breeds failure. Success breeds success.

    Of course, there are exceptions like you. But one flower doesn’t make a summer.

    Now that I know women, no problem with that.

    It sounds like, sadly, you were taught that being a good man meant being always calm, supplicatory, and a perpetual white knight and “nice guy”; being good is a lot more than that.

    I was a very decent Catholic guy, with values, with respect to family, women and the neighbor. I loved to help people: (NOT WOMEN, PEOPLE). I believed in God and in good. It’s not my fault that many women misled being good with being weak.

    When I say that I was a good boy, there is always a woman who tries to avoid the conclusion that women don’t like good boys. So they come to a rationalization why I was rejected. It usually boils down to “you were a good boy, but you were not the RIGHT kind of good boy”. This is the same advice I received from my female friends while I was growing. But women don’t know themselves. They think they want something and want another thing. They think they want good boys but they want alphas who are good boys. So you have to be an alpha before. And that’s what I did.

    The solution was very simple: To judge women by their actions, not by their words: it is the only way.

  92. imnobody says:

    @Chels

    Well, we disagree because women don’t really care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s something reasonable and it’s not in the double digits.

    THE SLIPPERY SLOPE! THE SLIPPERY SLOPE!

    Chels’ grandmother. I don’t care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s reasonable. He may have dated women as long as he has not had indecent behavior with them (in current English: hookup or sex).

    Chels’ mother. I don’t care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s reasonable: one or two. I don’t want a cad.

    Chels: I don’t really care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s something reasonable and it’s not in the double digits.

    Chels’ daughter. I don’t really care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s something reasonable and it’s not in the triple digits.

    Chels’ granddaughter. I don’t really care about a man’s partner count as long as it’s something reasonable and it’s not like Julio Iglesias’ count (estimated in 30,000 women).

  93. imnobody says:

    I wouldn’t had married a guy that rubs in my face his “fun” years. I mean what he is trying to accomplish with that? To show that he was attractive?

    Well, in my case, we were talking things about the past and he told a lot of stories, some involving women, some involving the good old times of college. I know him and I know he didn’t mean to brag. His wife didn’t seem to care. We all were laughing. Having said that, if I were a woman, I don’t think I would have allowed that.

  94. Anonymous Reader says:

    TFH
    So….is gender still a social construct?

    I’m sure that Amanda Marcott believes that to be so…

  95. Stephenie Rowling says:

    Well, in my case, we were talking things about the past and he told a lot of stories, some involving women, some involving the good old times of college. I know him and I know he didn’t mean to brag. His wife didn’t seem to care. We all were laughing. Having said that, if I were a woman, I don’t think I would have allowed that.

    Okay it was more of a rhetorical question a man bragging about his sexcapades with other bros, makes sense , they are sharing a common experience and interchanging “war stories” a man bragging about his sexcapades in front of his virgin bride? Kind of tasteless, IMO.

  96. Jennifer says:

    “I actually know an old Muslim man with many wives. He was wealthy but not extremely wealthy. The women managed their kids, divided the chores between them, and managed the husband’s resources”

    I’m talking about emotional stress. Polygamy is not emotionally good for anyone, and it leaves beta men without a partner. Not just emotionally beta men, either.

    “They think they want good boys but they want alphas who are good boys”

    That’s more or less what I meant: if you’re good but with no alpha traits whatsoever, you won’t be attractive. Many phrase this in a way I don’t like, but there it is. Nevertheless, the women who rebuffed you were probably not acting wisely.

    “It’s difficult to be attractive to women unless you have a confidence that is difficult to have when you are virgin and lots of women have rejected you. Failure breeds failure. Success breeds success.
    Of course, there are exceptions like you. But one flower doesn’t make a summer.

    Now that I know women, no problem with that”

    It can be hard for a man with not a lot of money to be confident too, but they can learn to be nonetheless, especially with game tactics. And if women change their tune in a positive way once a man does begin sleeping around, it just shows what damn idiots so many women are.

    “Having said that, if I were a woman, I don’t think I would have allowed that”

    Good for you🙂

  97. Kathy says:

    “Actually this is a cultural difference not a physiological one, in my country were all men cheat all this men also had time to “experiment” and yet once they settle they still wanted more, even if that meant destroying their families. Jerkinesh is not sexist.”

    Well said Stephenie. I have seen this sort of thing happen on numerous occasions. Men who regularly slept around could not stop once they had married. There’s a saying.. what you have never had you don’t miss. Nothing wrong with a good high Beta(for want of a better term) I wish people would stop disparaging these guys. They make terrific husbands and fathers (I married one)and are extremely loyal. My husband would never cheat on me, I stake my life on it.🙂 And I would not cheat on him, of course, either! We’re tight. We’re a team.

    As Dalrock(and his wife) wisely observed:
    “Interestingly this was my wife’s response to the part of the post where I said sluts pose a threat to the social order. Like her mother she isn’t afraid to call out sluts, but her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife).

  98. Kathy says:

    “I would had preferred a virgin man as well, but I was realistic about the possibility of that being true, specially as I grew older. My husband is not into double digits, never had a sex with a woman she was not in a relationship with, no ONS, not FWB, but he doesn’t brag about it like he deserves a medal for having sex. I wouldn’t had married a guy that rubs in my face his “fun” years. I mean what he is trying to accomplish with that? To show that he was attractive? I might be weird but I never needed anyone to validate what I found attractive if I found him attractive that is more than enough for me. But again I might be weird”

    Well said!
    I don’t think that you are weird Stephenie. Not at all.
    My situation was very much similar to yours. My sentiments are the same as yours also.

  99. Jennifer says:

    Kathy’s right. A “beta” doesn’t have to be a weakling, he just has to have strength and some strong (“alpha”) traits to balance things out. Dalrock and Athol demonstrate this well, as do Christian leaders/husbands Michael Pearl, John Piper, Billy Graham, Randy Alcorn etc (you see both kinds of traits in their teachings/personalities in general as well as their words on marriage).

    To be clear, I never meant to imply that I won’t date a non-virgin. Just not a guy who’s still sexually active.

  100. Stephenie Rowling says:

    @Kathy
    Heh women that are not wetting their pants for the Roissy’s of the world. We are not a myth.🙂

  101. Butterfly Flower says:

    I was a very decent Catholic guy, with values, with respect to family, women and the neighbor. I loved to help people: (NOT WOMEN, PEOPLE). I believed in God and in good. It’s not my fault that many women misled being good with being weak.

    …Catholic? So when you were younger, you were only pursuing Catholic girls?

    Did you by any chance go to a Catholic school? ’cause I’m a [lapsed] Catholic that went to a Catholic school &, well… all those porn stereotypes about Catholic schoolgirls… they’re kinda based on the truth. So no wonder you had so many difficulties [I doubt many of my former classmates are still virgins].

    The solution was very simple: To judge women by their actions, not by their words: it is the only way.

    Everyone should do this; man or women. People generally suck. I’m naive & I tend to trust people more than I should. I think “why would they lie to me? I’m a good person!” However, this often just leads to getting hurt.

    I think genuine, good individuals have it much harder than others. I’ve noticed awful people [usually women] are drawn to me like moths to a flame. I’m young, but I’m already afraid I might become prematurely bitter.

    Since so many women are cruel to me [a decent young girl] I can’t bear to imagine what they’ve been doing to my male counterparts [i.e. decent young men].

  102. greyghost says:

    If a woman is not a virgin on her wedding night or a widow she is slut period. There is no such thing as a male slut. The biggest threat to society from sluts is that men that would normally tend to be a loyal beta type will learn to devalue women as they lose the pedestalizing respect for women. (femenism cannot survive a day without it) Men that feel that way about the woman he chooses will stand up for and care for a woman with a strength far stronger than emotional “love” (honor,commitment loyalty etc).
    A beta man (the back bone of civilization) will not have a harem because those men tend to love the special girl so to speak. As Dalrock stated earlier men have to actively suppress that tendency to game women including their own wife in marriage. An alpha just plan doesn’t have those emotions dragging him down and will have a harem. No stress for him to worry about all his wives. Where as a beta man will be overwelmed with stress.
    All women are sluts with few rare exceptions. Civilized women that have a sense of responsibility work to keep that in check. So the actual number of women that behave as sluts is lower than all. With feminism infecting social values as it has we have many ways to justify many things. The female commenters seem to think there are male and female sluts that is just PC femminism. Men and women are not the same nor equal they are different. A “male slut” is just an alpha women line up to fuck. To even be an alpha you have to lack the emotional capacity to give a damn about women other than stretching their pussies out. And for you real liberated and independant ladies we’ll throw in assholes and tonsils. Female hypergamy was so natural that every effort was made to keep it in check. From not having the vote,separating children by sex, to the tradition of the white wedding gown to sybolize the chaste of the bride. The term slut is used as a social shaming tool. Feminism was just a removal of those checks. Anything that interfered with hypergamy is oppression. Women in the work force was ment to remove a finacia;l reson to stay with one man,abortion, child support laws, paternity fraud, family law, pussy pass in criminal law and on and on. We now have beta men that need to learn game so their wife will stay with them. Not enopugh to be hard working reliable and loyal. No way a loving christian wife needs for her man to be a man other women want.

  103. Svar says:

    Good post, Dalrock.

  104. Jennifer says:

    Heh, yep and you’re cool too Stephanie.

  105. Jennifer says:

    *Stephenie* Forgot the e.

  106. Jennifer says:

    Good Lord, greyghost, your standards. Many religious folk count promiscuity from either sex as shame; we don’t line up for used men. But some things you mentioned are true. Some alphas are just creeps; some betas lack qualities women need and not just want. There’s a balance every man needs to be successful. And your words about the most independent women giving the most of themselves to men sexually strikes a chord of the tragic joke of feminism; women thought stomping on men would make them and their sisters powerful, and fulfilled. Then as men decreased more and more, women became so hungry for strong men that they found themselves overcompensating by going for cold men, who used them for sex. A terrible irony, not unlike the irony that the type of women PUA alphas attract are not usually the type they marry.

  107. Jennifer says:

    Svar, DAMN! Solomon II is wrong; 100% of women will NOT rationalize away that dynamite article.

  108. Kathy says:

    Svar, stop stirring Jen.
    What! Is the line to your door finally dwindling?.. now that they’ve discovered what a heartless cad that you are? 😉

  109. Jennifer says:

    No seriously, it is a good article Kathy🙂 That’s why I said Solomon’s wrong, because he claimed no woman would agree with his article.

  110. Kai says:

    “Dalrock says:
    @Kai In a social sense, no. I’m not bringing morality into it here. There has always been and will always be a fringe in which slutty men sleep with slutty women. ‘Slutty’ men and slutty women sleeping together don’t threaten my marriage at all.
    Interestingly this was my wife’s response to the part of the post where I said sluts pose a threat to the social order. Like her mother she isn’t afraid to call out sluts, but her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife).”

    I knew that any guy who had slept with women all over the place wasn’t the sort of guy I’d be interested in. So if slutty women are throwing themselves at the men interested, I don’t really care. I feel that if my husband valued his ability to sleep with other women over a commitment to me, he wouldn’t have married me. So I’m not all that worried about slutty women being a problem. I *would* have words if a girl was actually throwing herself at my husband, or if my husband was putting himself in places where girls were regularly throwing themselves at him.
    I do recognise that as a non-slutty single woman, one’s chances of getting men are lower, so maybe I would have a different opinion had I spent more time in that scene. But I feel like it’s still not a threat to any man I’d want to marry.
    For my part, if I wanted sex with dominant men more than a stable relationship, I’d have gone for that when I was single. I didn’t want it then, and I’m not interested in it now.

  111. Kathy says:

    Yeah, Jen, I know, just an excuse for me to tease Svar.. Lol.

  112. Kai says:

    Regarding Jacob and Abraham, I did not mean the marriages, but the sex. Neither seemed to have any problem with their preferred wives despite sleeping with others.
    Polygamy is a pretty normal thing in societies which marry for procreation and providing rather than love, and is really to the benefit of women. A woman gains more from 1/3 of the provisions of a rich man than everything a poor man has to give her. In such societies it is really the lesser males who don’t get women who lose out.
    But the men with multiple wives don’t do a lot of complaining.

  113. J says:

    I fully believe the culture is out there. I am not convinced that that culture is essentially the only culture among college-aged people today.

    I fully agree with you. Dismayed by what I’ve read on Susan’s blog and worried about what might face my sons on campus, I’ve shown HUS to a number of college students of my acquaintance as well as to some adults I know who work on college campuses. The consensus is that the hook-up culture certainly exists but that there are alternatives to it as well. One recent grad reminded me of the sex and drugs culture that was so publicized during my college years and asked me how many of my peers, now middle-aged, were drug-addled sex fiends. It was a valid point and decreased my worries markedly..

  114. Jack Amok says:

    This is impossible now because a) You can’t know what people is having casual sex b) You can’t punish these people the way it was done before.The pill changed everything. So our society will disappear and other societies will replace it (in my country, this is happening right now with Muslim people)

    Imnobody, perhaps you’re overlooking something. The Pill hasn’t changed everything. It’s only changed conception. It doesn’t prevent STDs.

    Anyway, the rest of your analysis is accurate. Controlling female sexuality is the cornerstone of civilization, and it can only be done via social institutions that shame promiscuous women. It’s not enough to simply let them suffer the consequences of their actions (no husband, no family, mounting vet bills in their spinsterhood as they stop collecting partners and start collecting cats). I think it’s pretty obvious that young, attractive women are too easily beguiled by their relative SMV, thinking the world is and always will be their oyster. They can’t relate to the 50 year old spinster with thinning hair, damaged skin, and a facelift that isn’t that bad but still you can tell she’s had work done and it makes her look kinda like a witch or something… they don’t believe they’ll ever look like that.

    So most will slut it up if nobody stops them. The people who have to stop them are the, well, hell, the patriarchy. That’s it’s job, fer crying out loud. Of course, one of the ways the Patriarchy keeps sluthood under control is by killing the indiscriminate lotharios. Men who went around deflowering the daughters of respectable families did so at considerable risk to their lives. That right there is probably what most women don’t like about the Patriarchy – it tells them they can’t have fun, where “fun” is defined as screwing the brooding drummer.

  115. J says:

    The wife (a Catholic girl, very traditional, whose first boyfriend has been her husband) was laughing and told me:As long as he did that before meeting me, I don’t care

    That is the highly traditional attitude I was brought up to hold about men’s prior experience. Of course, that was before HIV and herpes. These days, it seems pretty stupid and maladaptive not to care where a man has been before.

  116. Jennifer says:

    “I knew that any guy who had slept with women all over the place wasn’t the sort of guy I’d be interested in. So if slutty women are throwing themselves at the men interested, I don’t really care. I feel that if my husband valued his ability to sleep with other women over a commitment to me, he wouldn’t have married me. So I’m not all that worried about slutty women being a problem. I *would* have words if a girl was actually throwing herself at my husband, or if my husband was putting himself in places where girls were regularly throwing themselves at him.
    I do recognise that as a non-slutty single woman, one’s chances of getting men are lower, so maybe I would have a different opinion had I spent more time in that scene. But I feel like it’s still not a threat to any man I’d want to marry.
    For my part, if I wanted sex with dominant men more than a stable relationship, I’d have gone for that when I was single. I didn’t want it then, and I’m not interested in it now”

    Sounds pretty reasonable.

    “polygamy is really to the benefit of women”

    No, it really isn’t, but that’s the lie they’ve been fed. And perfectly good men who are entitled to a wife get nothing.

    I don’t agree entirely with your solution, Jack. Society should shame both sexes for being loose, though the key to withholding sex is indeed women’s. Both women and men, generally the older ones, are needed to stem the promiscious flow.

  117. J says:

    Kai: There has always been and will always be a fringe in which slutty men sleep with slutty women. ‘Slutty’ men and slutty women sleeping together don’t threaten my marriage at all.

    D: Interestingly this was my wife’s response to the part of the post where I said sluts pose a threat to the social order…her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife).

    J: I have never felt worried or threatened by the slutty behavior of any other woman. If they posed a huge temptation to my husband, that would reveal more about his character than about the woman involved.

  118. J says:

    I would had preferred a virgin man as well, but I was realistic about the possibility of that being true, specially as I grew older. My husband is not into double digits, never had a sex with a woman she was not in a relationship with, no ONS, not FWB, but he doesn’t brag about it like he deserves a medal for having sex.

    I can say the same about my husband. Male virginity wasn’t important to me, but who wants to marry a pig or a user? And surely those behaviors DO influence what sort of a husband a man will be just as much as a high number influences what sort of wife a woman will be.

    I might be weird but I never needed anyone to validate what I found attractive if I found him attractive that is more than enough for me. But again I might be weird.

    Not at all. I don’t feel much influenced by “”preselection” either. I think the whole idea is overrated.

  119. Kathy says:

    Kai “polygamy is really to the benefit of women”

    Jen; “No, it really isn’t, but that’s the lie they’ve been fed. And perfectly good men who are entitled to a wife get nothing.”
    Totally agree Jen.

    I find it quite curious, the cold and clinical way polygamy is viewed and discussed by some.
    How else could polygamy be viewed, I suppose. Nothing deep meaningful and loving about it.

    I suppose it would benefit a woman who never really liked sex, saw it as a duty and so, in keeping her part of the bargain was well looked after and provided for by the male.(who was only interested in a root and never cared about the love factor)

    Well, I’m afraid I’d rather live in a hovel without a brass razoo with the man I love having mind blowing sex exclusively(and frequently)..
    Ain’t no way I would share my man with another woman.

    I’m sure Stephenie would agree😉

  120. ExNewYorker says:

    @Kathy,
    “Ain’t no way I would share my man with another woman.”
    That’s a good sentiment. The problem is that, I’m sure you’re aware, the sentiment in a lot of women tends to be that, all things being equal: “five minutes of alpha is better than five years of beta”. That being the case, a lot of women prefer sharing their “cad” than having sole possession of their “beta”. And by sharing, it also includes the “serial monogamy” (better phrased as serial polygamy), where women share the same men over and over time and again…
    .
    It’s an important thing for men to find women who have the first sentiment, and not the second…and it’s not an easy thing…

  121. Jennifer says:

    Yes, men need to find women who don’t go for bad boys. Sometimes betas are more lucky in the women they find; both Vox Day and Dalrock showed well that the good “beta” type guys are often not unfortunate altogether. Though of course, there needs to be a balance of both traits for the guy to have the healthiest life.

    I’m bowing out of the discussion now, guys. Kathy, J and Dalrock, see ya around🙂

  122. Jennifer says:

    Oh and Ex, you might actually be surprised at how jealous women can be, often especially women who have alphas.

  123. J says:

    Polygamy exists comfortably where there is a shortage of men. For many women in polygamy, unshared man>shared man>no man. It’s never a first choice for women, even in societies that allow it–no matter how alpha the man may be. And in most polygamous societies, a girl is property to be dealt with by her father. She is more likely to end up with a man who her father wants to ally himself with, than a man she is attracted to. It has nothing to do with preferring to share an alpha or being stuck with a beta, since no one asks the girl want she wants.

  124. Stephenie Rowling says:

    I’m sure Stephenie would agree

    Preach it sister.🙂
    I totally will eat eggs with my ONLY husband than eat caviar with a man I have to have on schedule and share with other women.
    Also I’m hard working, smart and stubborn enough to also provide for the family if I feel I want more material goods (not that I’m materialistic I’m actually very frugal). I do consider important for the man to be responsible and work for the house, but all women in my family found ways to contribute to the household (my mother sold bakery goods in front of the house for example and saved enough money to afford the furniture she liked or when we needed to move to a bigger house, while my father payed the bills) so yeah sharing a man to have more money…not something that works for me.

  125. Buck says:

    Chels,
    Men and Women are equally at fault in the slutting up of society???? HUH???

    If she isn’t putting out, he’s not getting any tang…PERIOD!

    it’s a 99% vs 1% situation…women are the 99%…I leave the 1% male for the rare cases of rape.

    I find this stream ironic in that me and Mrs were chatting about this subject this morning. Seems Mrs has a friend who’s hubby knocked up one or more neighborhood wives. He’s a love sponge who stays home with the kids, and spreads seed all over the hood, while the husbands are at work. My wife can’t stand this guy for his exploitation of her childhood friend…I mentioned the obvious…he couldn’t be the neighborhood stud if the housewives weren’t willing participants. Mrs got animated about the 50-50 thing and again I spoke the obvious…”she ” MUST say yes for him to do his nasty…it’s 100% the whore/slut/cum dumpster wife who is at fault…PERIOD!
    He’s a cad, sure, but only because the average American woman is such a punchboard.
    Women are simply loath to accept their majority responsibility for chastity…of course my question, if women are so unable to ward off the advances of desirable men, if they simply cannot keep their knees together…why should they be trusted with the levers of Government??? or the vote, or any responsibility for that matter…

  126. Stephenie Rowling says:

    See my comment further up. The last 5 articles Dalrock has written (as well as the rest of this ‘sphere) continues to prove that women don’t really act as though they are ready to be ‘adults’, and the experiment to give them adult-level powers has only been tried for a few decades and a few countries. The jury is still out on whether this was a good idea or not, and whether this should continue or not

    I would say that maybe we should start treating adulthood as driving, only people that had proven by a series of tests to actually be able to handle adulthood and its responsibilities to get the privileged of an adult. You pass the test? You can drive, vote,legally have sex ,get married, work…you don’t? Yyou get treated like a child till you can prove you are not one anymore. Of course I doubt anyone will support this the 18/21 mark of “adulthood” is waay to convenient, YMMV.

  127. Opus says:

    It is time to return to reality, and to do so I have consulted the OED which has devoted no less than two of its columns to the word Slut. This at 2 is its definition: A woman of low or loose character; a bold or impudent girl; a hussy; a jade. The earliest use of the term is Hocleve from 1402 ‘the foulest slutte of al a towne’.

    I have also consulted the OED for the word Whore where at 1b the definition given is: An unchaste or lewd woman; a fornicatress or adultress.

    A woman does not like being called a slut (the last and only time I did this the young lady burst in to floods of tears), but there is an inverse rule, which is, that the more slutty (or whore-ish) a woman is the greater the length she will go to for the purpose of hiding her sexual behaviour frequently with an attempt to shift any blame to a sufficiently high-calibre male. My objection to sluts is not their behaviour but their hypocricy.

  128. imnobody says:

    Me: “I was a very decent Catholic guy, yaddah, yaddah, yaddah”

    …Catholic? So when you were younger, you were only pursuing Catholic girls?

    Did you by any chance go to a Catholic school? ’cause I’m a [lapsed] Catholic that went to a Catholic school &, well… all those porn stereotypes about Catholic schoolgirls… they’re kinda based on the truth. So no wonder you had so many difficulties [I doubt many of my former classmates are still virgins].

    Well, it was different for me. I was born in a Catholic country so Catholicism was different than in America. 90% of people were Catholic back then (there were no other Churches and atheism was unknown). When I was a kid, Catholicism was like air: it was everywhere but you barely noticed. You noticed the occasional reference of people to God, all the holidays devoted to saints, with processions, masses. Every wedding and every baptism was done in the Catholic Church (there were no other churches. People were not fanatic and you know that Catholic people do not spend all time reading Bible and praying like Protestant people. It’s a very lightweight faith. (I was especially Catholic: I gave religious instructions to children).

    I was born in the so-called patriarchy era. Divorce was forbidden. Families were stable. You knew some person being miserable in his/her marriage but this was the exception. Theoretically, the father was the head of the family. In practice, women ruled because men were raised to always hear to their women. It was a matriarchy in disguise. It was a sweet time for those who had the privilege of living it. Kids played in the street all day long because there was no danger. The door of every house did not have key because we felt safe. Everybody knew each other in a small town of 10,000 people.

    There were no Catholic schools then, because all the schools had a subject (named “Religion”) who taught religion (what religion? “The Catholic one, of course, the only that is true”). 90% of schools were public schools and my school was a public school (“Public” meaning “belonging to state”). Women were not sluts, as I will explain next.

    And then it came the so-called matriarchy. I was a teenager when the matriarchy came, in a gradual process. But we didn’t notice and we didn’t know what was happening. Everything was different. Everybody was behaving in strange ways.

    Back then, men and women went to different classes in the same school. Women had the normal subjects (“Maths”, “Language”, “Science”, “Social Studies”) and then a subject that was strange to men (“Housekeeping”). It was supposed that this prepared women to be wifes and mothers.

    Suddenly, someone decided that men and women had to study together, in the same class (which was a lot of fun and anguish in our teenage years). We were told that men and women were equal. And women started to be taught to be professionals, instead of being housewives. But this was done without any discontinuity. For example, my mother (which was teacher) was one of the most enthusiastic teachers in this process but, at the same time, one of the most Catholic people I know. People still believed that you had to keep your virginity until marriage. It is only that women were going to work but with all decency and without “bad customs”.

    And in fact, girls in my teenage years were NOT slutty. Catholicism and patriarchy were still lingering. They dressed as good girls and they tended to seek relationships instead of fun. It is only that, since they didn’t need a man to survive anymore, they started to look for men who were attractive for them (alphas). The previous generations were looking for a decent beta with good values so they needed betas to economically support them. And this changed.

    A generation of boys (my generation) got trapped between two worlds. We were raised by parents who lived in the patriarchy so we were not taught to deal with women. Our parents taught to be good citizens, good boys, hard-working, with good values and we respect to women. They assumed that, like previous generations, this is all we had to do to get a good girl to get married.

    But women had changed and we didn’t know why we were claiming “I only want a good boy!” and they only had jerks as a boyfriends. I thought that something was wrong with me because I was unable to get a girlfriend. There was no Internet and no Roissy back them. Evolutionary psychology didn’t exist and PUA was in the future. Nobody knew about the nature of women. Nobody could teach us. In Catholic countries, women were assumed to be like Mary: naturally good, naturally religious, only wanting love from a good man. And, to be truth, most women of previous generations were like this, because they were brainwashed to be like this. But girls of my generation were different and nobody knew what was happening. When I found out, I have wasted the twenty best years of my life (from 17 to 37) trying to follow a script (being a good boy) that didn’t work. The amount of pain and hurt during all these years is difficult to describe. And nobody will give me those years back.

  129. greyghost says:

    imnobody I couldn’t have given a better example.

  130. imnobody says:

    This deserves comment. ExNewYorker hit the nail in the head

    @Kathy,
    “Ain’t no way I would share my man with another woman.”
    That’s a good sentiment. The problem is that, I’m sure you’re aware, the sentiment in a lot of women tends to be that, all things being equal: “five minutes of alpha is better than five years of beta”. That being the case, a lot of women prefer sharing their “cad” than having sole possession of their “beta”. And by sharing, it also includes the “serial monogamy” (better phrased as serial polygamy), where women share the same men over and over time and again…
    .
    It’s an important thing for men to find women who have the first sentiment, and not the second…and it’s not an easy thing…

    Well, there are still women who prefer a beta for their own than a shared alpha

    Stephenie doesn’t count. He has an alpha in house, since, for any Dominican woman, landing a gringo is winning the lottery. So it is easy to say that you aren’t going to share your husband, when your husband is a monogamous alpha in your eyes (although it may be a beta for American women).

    But there are very few monogamous alpha in society. So the problem is with women whose only options are a polygamous alpha and a monogamous beta. Who are they going to choose?

    Some old-fashioned women will keep the monogamous beta but many women will choose the polygamous alpha. How many women will prefer to be the only wife of an elementary teacher than the third wife of a Kennedy? Very few and their number is dwindling more and more.

    Women are hypergamous in nature. They were taught to be monogamous but the effect of this past indoctrination is wearing off. In the future, expect to see more and more soft harems, more and more serial polygamy. Let me quote the woman of the French president’s father: Pal Sarkozy.

    “My mother told me: you can share an attractive man or have an ugly and boring man for your own”

    She has had no kids and has devoted her life to a man who cheated on her constantly. Ah, the power of alpha.

  131. imnobody says:

    Thank you, greyhost

  132. Svar says:

    “Svar, stop stirring Jen.
    What! Is the line to your door finally dwindling?.. now that they’ve discovered what a heartless cad that you are? ;)”

    Hahaha, nahh. It’s actually extended to two blocks now instead of one thanks to my heartless cadding around. Women, huh?😛

  133. Höllenhund says:

    ” That explains why so many women are abjectly miserable in the hookup culture. They place their bets and lose. And their numbers keep climbing. This could be rectified if guys stood up and demanded inexperienced women, but they don’t, because they’re not looking for any real commitment at that age anyway.”

    This could also be rectified if these women weren’t focused exclusively on alphas, thereby subconsciously albeit deliberately shutting out the vast majority of men from consideration.

  134. imnobody says:

    I am translating an interview that a newspaper did to Pal Sarkozy and his fourth wife, Inés (which has been his wife for the last 42 years):

    Newspaper: “Inés has managed to keep a complete womanizer like you”

    Pal: “She has had patience, courage and I hope that a bit of love”.

    Inés: Because we hadn’t had children. At the age of 27, when I met you, I could have been mother three or four times but I choose to devote myself to you. One day, my mother told me: “It is better to share a handsmome, attracive mane than to have an ugly and boring man for your own”

    The power of alpha. Inés has given up motherhood for a cheating man. The future comes with more Inés and Pals and less families.

  135. Butterfly Flower says:

    In Catholic countries, women were assumed to be like Mary: naturally good, naturally religious, only wanting love from a good man. And, to be truth, most women of previous generations were like this, because they were brainwashed to be like this.

    Women were brainwashed to be monogamous Beta seekers, because human beings aren’t a naturally monogamous. Monogomy is purely a social construct. Like any primate, pre-civilization Homo sapiens were promiscuous.

    Biologically, it will be difficult for humans to be as monogamous as, say, swans [they mate for life]. Monogamy goes against our DNA. [not that this is an excuse for promiscuity – we’re civilized , women shouldn’t be regressing to pre-historic behavior]

  136. Opus says:

    In the seventeen or so hours since this was posted there have been no less than 155 comments – mainly from women: that speaks volumes and merely supports my inverse rule (see 3.55am above)!

  137. Dan in Philly says:

    Dal, etc, check out this latest attempt to show how awesome your life will be once you end your mopey marriage: Divorce Rings!!

    http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/sex/would-you-wear-a-divorce-ring-2535497/;_ylt=AiMKMfLN5mOVLI61xqn462WBbqU5

    [D: Good find! I love the “true to myself” comment from one of the women, too.]

  138. dragnet says:

    @ Cat Patrol

    “Its’ most likely that women in their natural state are sluts. They sleep around, and with the more Alpha the dude, the better. Women have choices now, and they don’t want reliable average Joe. They would rather have a small slice of a few Alphas and then reminesce in their old age with their fellow sluts about the dudes they used to fuck.”

    Yes, exactly. What is glossed over a lot of times is that promiscuity is really the natural state of women (and men) because humans have dual reproductive strategies, both short- and long-term. The triumph of human civilization was, in part, enabled by the sharp curtailment of actions providing only short-term payoffs (ie, slutting it up) in favor of incentivizing long-term reproductive benefit and male investment.

    The reason why societies imposed comparatively stricter proscriptions on female sexuality is because it was easier to do so for several reasons:

    1) The potential cost for each individual sexual encounter was (and still is, though diminshed) greater for women owing to pregnancy & ease of acquiring STIs.

    2) The disparity in the desire for sex. Women are, in fact, the gatekeepers of sex…but they are not only gatekeepers when it comes to sex. Yes, women enjoy it too…but men tend to want it more. Testosterone matters.

    3) Men are simply willing to go to greater lengths to acquire sex—a fact which every successful civilization has exploited. Jacob worked seven years hard labor to get Rachel, and when Laban decieved him with Leah…he worked another seven years to get his true love. Fourteen years hard labor for a woman!

    When viewed through this lens, it isn’t difficult to see why traditional genders norms came about and why they were successful.

  139. Kai says:

    “Opus says:
    In the seventeen or so hours since this was posted there have been no less than 155 comments – mainly from women: that speaks volumes and merely supports my inverse rule (see 3.55am above)!”

    I would suggest that a majority of female commenters here aren’t sluts – or might be slightly slutty taking the strictest of the definitions given. It’s not exactly a friendly place for women of that mindset to hang around.
    If you mean defending the behaviour of sluts or blaming men for it / expecting men to fix it, I agree.

  140. Kai says:

    “Jennifer says:
    “polygamy is really to the benefit of women”
    No, it really isn’t, but that’s the lie they’ve been fed. And perfectly good men who are entitled to a wife get nothing.”

    Did you miss the rest of my comment about it? There’s never been a feed to women – it’s always been assumed that polygamy was all to the benefit of men, which is not the case. It is strongly to the benefit of women *in the sort of society in which people marry for procreation and provision instead of love*.
    Since when are *any* men ‘entitled’ to a wife? Marriage is not an entitlement. Men have always had to compete for women.
    And in the societies it has been practiced, no-one is marrying for love. It’s not about part of the love of a rich man, it’s about part of the resources.
    Polygamy doesn’t work so well in societies that believe marriage about love, because we do have the idea that love is between two people.

  141. Kai says:

    “Kathy says:
    I find it quite curious, the cold and clinical way polygamy is viewed and discussed by some. How else could polygamy be viewed, I suppose. Nothing deep meaningful and loving about it.
    I suppose it would benefit a woman who never really liked sex, saw it as a duty and so, in keeping her part of the bargain was well looked after and provided for by the male.(who was only interested in a root and never cared about the love factor)
    Well, I’m afraid I’d rather live in a hovel without a brass razoo with the man I love having mind blowing sex exclusively(and frequently)..
    Ain’t no way I would share my man with another woman.”

    *marriage* was cold and clinical for much of civilization’s history. A girl was not taught to seek mind-blowing sex, and generally married with only a vague concept of sex at all.
    There wasn’t any deep meaning and love in the vast majority of marriages.
    Again, it works (/worked) within the context of the society in which marriage is a transaction between families.

  142. Kai says:

    “Buck says:
    My wife can’t stand this guy for his exploitation of her childhood friend…I mentioned the obvious…he couldn’t be the neighborhood stud if the housewives weren’t willing participants. Mrs got animated about the 50-50 thing and again I spoke the obvious…”she ” MUST say yes for him to do his nasty…it’s 100% the whore/slut/cum dumpster wife who is at fault…PERIOD!”

    This is a different situation, and I disagree. I blame individual sluts for their own sluttiness. Men are to blame for their own sluttiness (which isn’t really blame), but not that of women.
    But that does for singletons.
    People in committed relationships have made commitments to each other, and not to the rest of the world.
    If a married man is sleeping around, it is not the fault of the other women, who made no promises to the wife. Yes, they certainly facilitate it, but it is 100% the fault of the man for breaking his vows. He is the one who committed himself and is not living up to his promises.
    The same goes in reverse – a wife who married and made a commitment is fully at fault if she breaks her vows and sleeps with others. Yes, she has to find a willing man to do it with (admittedly much less difficult), but she has to go out looking to break her vows in the first place.
    In the exact instance you mentioned, the neighbourhood women are to blame for being sluts, and they are at fault for breaking their vows to their own husbands, but they owe nothing to the childhood friend in question. It is not the responsibility of other women to prevent her husband from cheating on her – it’s his own responsibility to not go looking to cheat.

    People in committed relationships are the ones to blame for breaking their commitment, regardless of what sluttiness is going on outside of the relationship.

  143. Anonymous Reader says:

    I *would* have words if a girl was actually throwing herself at my husband, or if my husband was putting himself in places where girls were regularly throwing themselves at him.

    With whom would you have words if, say, one or three young women were making overtures to your husband at work? If he did not tell you of it, you would not know, so long as he kept away from them. There are women who “throw themselves” to some degree – some subtle, some blatant – in all sorts of places. For your husband to avoid putting himself in such a place might require he not work, not go to coffee shops, not attend any university, and (ahem) not go to some churches. (Yes, that’s right, there are women who both attend church, and who will let some men know they are available – both single and married women, by the way).

    In a previous posting I mentioned self control, on the part of both men and women. It matters, a lot, in any long term relationship. Another thing that matters, frankly, is what’s at home. Think about, oh, cooking. A man who has a tasty dinner waiting at home every night is not very likely to be tempted to stop off for a quick snack on the way home. A man who gets to make his own cold, bologna sandwich every night, will be tempted. It helps a man’s self control in the wider world if he is not frustrated at home. I hope this is not too subtle.

  144. Anonymous says:

    “Women were brainwashed to be monogamous Beta seekers, because human beings aren’t a naturally monogamous. Monogomy is purely a social construct. Like any primate, pre-civilization Homo sapiens were promiscuous.”

    Actually, women are not naturally promiscuous, since that implies sleeping with multiple men. In fact, there’s a lot of evidence that promiscuity can psychologically harm women.

    Rather, women are *hypergamous*. In the evolutionary environment, women would attach to an alpha once hitting puberty, and stay with him for the rest of their lives. Of course, in modern society, alphas have no obligation to support women, so women end up becoming promiscuous. But they don’t want to…

  145. tenthring says:

    1) The PUA community is probably the best thing to happen to dating for women.

    Strange statement you say? Think about it. Natural alphas are not reading PUA material. Betas are. And when the chips are down, betas will treat their women right. But they will never get them unless they are sexually attractive, so they need to learn to act like alphas. Wouldn’t you rather have a man that acts like a jerk once in awhile to keep the tingles flowing but will be there when you need him versus a natural player?

    Just as women put on makeup and do things to be appealing to men, men have to learn to do things that are appealing to women. The good news is that lifting weights, ordering bitches around, and generally just being in charge are a lot more fun then waxing your legs.

    I think most hate for PUAs, beside the obligatory feminist shrews, comes from omega panic. Women would prefer omegas were invisible, but when one reads PUA material now he is opening her in the street. Well, deal with it. Its your job to get approached, if you want to switch jobs and get rejected all the time be our guests.

    2) Listen to your mother (unless she is a divorced femnazi shrew).

    Honestly girls, you are young and stupid. There is a reason you weren’t allowed to make your own romantic decisions for 99% of human history, most of you are bad at it. Your mothers understand things you don’t and if they say don’t date this boy don’t date him.

    3) You can have a good boyfriend if you want one.

    Susan laments that most relationships start as hookups, but her own statistics show 80% of men would prefer otherwise. 80%, you can’t find a boyfriend in that group! If they act too beta, teach them! The best thing that helped me on the path out of betatude was A) getting laid B) hearing from a woman that she wanted to be completely dominated and follow me in a relationship. Yes, you can “roll your own alpha” if you pick a guy with good fundamentals.

  146. Kathy says:

    “*marriage* was cold and clinical for much of civilization’s history. A girl was not taught to seek mind-blowing sex, and generally married with only a vague concept of sex at all.”

    I disagree that marriage was cold and clinical through much of civilization’s history…..In any event..
    That was then, this is now. Women have come to understand their sexuality, and what pleasure and joy that they can have with a husband that they deeply love.

    I was not taught to seek mind blowing sex.. (How is a woman taught to have multiple orgasms?) It happened as a natural progression. Know why? Because I loved my husband very deeply. He wanted to please me and I wanted to please him… The more we had sex the better it got.

    More women should try it! It deepens the marriage bond. Really it does. The trouble with many women today is once they get the ring on the finger and a couple of kids, sex goes out the window, to the detriment of the relationship.

    You underestimate the power of sex in a loving marriage Kai.
    It is for this reason that the arguments that we do have, last a very short time..

    I usually crack first and snuggle up to my husband in bed.. Sex breaks the ice.. All arguments are forgotten, as we lay together entwined in the afterglow, and drift off to sleep.

    It’s the best feeling on Earth and I would not trade it for a million bucks…😀

    My husband told me before he left for work this morning, that he could get away from work for a couple of hours.. We spent the time in bed…No kids, no interruptions, just the two of us.. Bliss.

    “There wasn’t any deep meaning and love in the vast majority of marriages”.

    That’s your unsubstantiated opinion, Kai.

  147. imnobody says:

    If a married man is sleeping around, it is not the fault of the other women, who made no promises to the wife. Yes, they certainly facilitate it, but it is 100% the fault of the man for breaking his vows. He is the one who committed himself and is not living up to his promises. The same goes in reverse

    This is absurd. Of course, the one who is making a commitment is more “guilty” than the other one, because he has broken a commitment.

    But saying that 100% is the man’s fault and 0% the woman’s fault (or the reverse with the gender reversed). Come on! Give me a break! Don’t you think the woman has some responsibility in sleeping with a married man?

    What if I go to your car and start destroying it with an axe? When you protest, I can say: I have no commitment to this car. You bought this car with your money. It was your decision. I was not consulted. If your husband were the one destroying the car, he would be responsible because he had a commitment to this car. But I have no commitment so it’s not my fault.

    To live in society, you have to respect what others have: their assets, their homes, their children and, yes, their marriages. The same way the others have to respect your things. If you want to be free to destroy everything that is not yours go to the Tibet and live alone.

    The fact that I have had no commitment in buying your home does not entitle me to go to your garden and crapping on it. The fact that I have had no commitment in your marriage does not entitle me to go to your marriage and crapping on it.

  148. Kai says:

    Anonymous:
    I certainly don’t expect my husband to avoid women. But if he spent a lot of time with a woman who made her interests clear, or was not discouraging women at work, I would have some concern.
    And yes, obviously women who want their husbands to be faithful can do a lot of things to give him no need to look anywhere else.

    “Kathy says:
    You underestimate the power of sex in a loving marriage Kai.”

    Not at all. I simply disagree that love had anything to do with marriage in an earlier time. In today’s day and age in which people do marry for love, obviously sex is a big part of deepining that bond.

    “imnobody says:
    Come on! Give me a break! Don’t you think the woman has some responsibility in sleeping with a married man?”

    I think it is immoral for a person to sleep with someone else in a committed relationship. I have no respect at all for a woman who will sleep with a man she knows is married. But even the sluttiest woman doesn’t sleep with a married man who isn’t interested in cheating.
    Given that my house can’t choose whether or not you trash it, it’s not a fair comparison. My house can’t even stop you from trashing it. But if a house could choose to lock it’s own doors, then there wouldn’t be any way for you to walk in the door and trash it in the first place.
    I think that decent people respect the relationships of others. But there will always be indecent people out there, and it’s the responsibility of decent people to avoid them.
    No husband should be out trying to pick up girls, and he’s wrong and a betrayer of marriage to seek it regardless of whether he finds immoral women to let him cheat with them.
    Sex is equally the ‘fault’ of both people who had sex, but only one has betrayed a marriage (or they’ve each betrayed different marriages).

  149. imnobody says:

    I have no respect at all for a woman who will sleep with a man she knows is married. But even the sluttiest woman doesn’t sleep with a married man who isn’t interested in cheating.

    This can go both ways. Even the biggest married womanizer (aka, cheating bastard) don’t sleep if they are not sluts interested in sleeping with him. It takes two to tango.

    Kai. I don’t try to say that your husband it’s not to blame for cheating on you (in an hypothetical scenario). On the contrary, I think it’s the person who is the MOST guilty of this cheating, no doubt about it. I don’t excuse him. If you read my post, you will see that I said that.

    But there is a difference in your husband’s having MOST of the responsibility and your husband’s having ALL the responsibility. This is what you said: your husband has 100% of the responsibility. Sorry, but this is absurd. Now you are backpedaling in your last message (you say: Sex is equally the ‘fault’ of both people who had sex, but only one has betrayed a marriage) but you said very clearly:

    If a married man is sleeping around, it is not the fault of the other women, who made no promises to the wife. Yes, they certainly facilitate it, but it is 100% the fault of the man for breaking his vows.

    Why am I so blunt in this matter? Because, in modern society, even the more absurd ideas are considered normal. I have heard this idea of yours a lot of times and it’s not a good idea. There is nothing personal. I am single and I have no axe to grind (and certainly, no axe to destroy your car).

  150. Chels says:

    Kathy, I loved your comment, very true…Another woman says the same thing:

    http://equalbutdifferent.blogspot.com/2008/03/sex-in-marriage.html

    And Kai, I’d love to see how well you’d function in a marriage that was purely a business deal, and it had no emotions involved.

  151. Buck says:

    RE:
    Sex is equally the ‘fault’ of both people who had sex, but only one has betrayed a marriage (or they’ve each betrayed different marriages).

    PLEASE!!!!!

    The women hold the power, if they are not spreading their legs, the guy is not getting any tang!

    Nancy Reagan suggested… “just say NO!”….Gee, is it really that easy…YES!!!! it is!

    If you women would simply use restraint you gals would rule the world. You would get stable marriages, you would get commitment, you lesser looking gals would have available men…

  152. imnobody says:

    But Buck, it takes two to tango. The woman has not all the responsibility either. Most of the blame goes to the cheating husband. But some of the blame goes to the slut banging him.

    Having said that I wholeheartedly agree with your last paragraph. This is why I don’t want women to have restraint. They would have an incredible power over us. The current situation is the best for men.

  153. Chels says:

    Yes, Buck, but then Dalrock’s blog would cease to exist and you’d have nowhere to comment, plus you couldn’t get your daily dose of slut.

  154. Chels says:

    I agree, nobody, how many girls have heard from their boyfriends say that if they’d care for them, they’d have sex or if they don’t, he’s going to break up with her? How many girls were guilted into it? So you can’t blame it on just women, men have their part in it too.

  155. Svar says:

    Damn, Kathy. You make marriage sound good, haha.

  156. uncleFred says:

    “No, it really isn’t, but that’s the lie they’ve been fed. And perfectly good men who are entitled to a wife get nothing.”

    No one is “entitled” to a spouse. The notion that, regardless of her past choices, when a woman, is ready to settle down, she is entitled to a husband that she finds acceptable, is one of the legs of the feminist platform. Most men, since they generally do the pursuing, know that they are not entitled to a good wife. Also “perfectly good” has never been a very successful benchmark for selecting a spouse for a successful marriage. Picking a person who is obviously bad is right out, but “perfectly good” is far from enough. I’m reminded here of Dalrock’s sound advice only to marry if you are head over heels in love.

    @Dalrock
    ” … her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife).”

    This assumes that, at the point of temptation, the marriage is heathy and loving. It also assumes that both partners are honest and faithful. In a marriage where one partner is unfaithful, dishonest, or physically unavailable, the honest can be tempted. Ideally, the honest partner would terminate the marriage, but with marriage 2.0 in full swing and/or if children are involved, that option is often impractical.

  157. imnobody says:

    I agree, nobody, how many girls have heard from their boyfriends say that if they’d care for them, they’d have sex or if they don’t, he’s going to break up with her? How many girls were guilted into it? So you can’t blame it on just women, men have their part in it too.

    Agreed, Chels. The present situation is responsibility of men and women. It is only that modern culture teaches not to accept responsibilities. Everybody has rights and nobody has duties. This is why in women’s forums, men are blamed, and in men’s forums women are blamed.

    By the way, amazing link. Luckily, in Latin America where I live, we don’t have such a problem. Women are willing to have sex inside a relationship. In fact, in all my relationships, they have wanted it more than me. Sometimes, it’s like “sh*t! Now that the game is beginning she wants to get laid.” But I know that it’s my duty in responsibility giving sex to the woman whenever she wants it.

  158. Kai says:

    “Now you are backpedaling in your last message (you say: Sex is equally the ‘fault’ of both people who had sex, but only one has betrayed a marriage) but you said very clearly:”

    I am not backpedalling. I am trying to make a clear distinction.
    When two people have consensual sex, both people are responsible for having the sex.
    But when one of the sexual partners is committed to someone else, it is fully that person’s fault that (s)he chose to betray the commitment.
    Quite simply, when a committed person decides to have sex with someone else, that person has betrayed the commitment – whether or not (s)he successfully finds someone else to facilitate the act.
    So while ‘sex’ is done by two people, they are each individually responsible for the effects of that sex to themselves – and to anyone else they had made promises to.

  159. Kai says:

    “Buck says:
    The women hold the power, if they are not spreading their legs, the guy is not getting any tang!”

    Ah, so as far as you are concerned, it’s simply always the woman’s fault.
    If a married woman has sex with another man, it’s her fault for going out and finding another man.
    And if a married man has sex with another woman, it’s the other woman’s fault for being available to the man.

    Your conclusion rests on the premise that all men are hormonal idiots unable to ever make the decision to not have sex with a woman, who therefore need to be tempered by women working together to allocate out whom they will allow to have sex.
    That may well describe you, but it doesn’t describe all men, and it doesn’t describe our society.
    I happen to expect both men and women to be adults.

  160. Kai says:

    “Chels says:
    And Kai, I’d love to see how well you’d function in a marriage that was purely a business deal, and it had no emotions involved.”

    I wouldn’t function well in that situation at all. And I am thus extremely happy to have been born in a time where I have the power to choose my own husband for love, rather than being married off to whatever man my father would like to gain favour with, or thinks will provide for me well.
    My statement that it was done that way for much of history is in no way advocating it as a practice. I’m simply acknowledging the realities of the past. Similarly, slavery was the norm for a long long time. I could say many things about how slavery functioned – that doesn’t mean I think it’s a good idea.

  161. Kai says:

    “Chels says:
    I agree, nobody, how many girls have heard from their boyfriends say that if they’d care for them, they’d have sex or if they don’t, he’s going to break up with her? How many girls were guilted into it? So you can’t blame it on just women, men have their part in it too.”

    When it’s between available people, sex is 100% the choice of the woman, AND 100% the choice of the man. Sex won’t happen if either chooses not to, and thus a man and a woman are both solely responsible for the consequences of their choice to have sex.
    Women who are ‘guilted’ into sex by the big bad men still had a choice. they could choose to ditch the guy who would make sex a prerequisite for affection. They didn’t choose that. They *chose* to have sex with him. and the consequence of that action are their own damned fault.

  162. imnobody says:

    When two people have consensual sex, both people are responsible for having the sex.

    So far, agreed. This is obvious.

    But when one of the sexual partners is committed to someone else, it is fully that person’s fault that (s)he chose to betray the commitment.

    He has the responsibility of breaking the commitment (and there is no excuse that “she throw herself over me”).

    She has the responsibility of having sex with a man who is taken (and there is no excuse that “I don’t have a commitment so it’s not my problem)

    Of course, his fault is bigger than hers. But she is not without fault, as you said. Marriage between people are made to be respected by third people and there’s no excuse.

    (The same with the genders reversed).

  163. tenthring says:

    “I’m reminded here of Dalrock’s sound advice only to marry if you are head over heels in love. ”

    If people really really followed this very few people would be married. I’m 28, I’ve never met a woman that I was head over heals in love with. For most of human history 28 would be considered very old for marriage. Most people find someone they like, that they are pretty passionate about in the beginning and they can reasonably get along with, and they rightly realize they need to settle instead of trying to marry Brad Pitt/Jennfier Aniston etc. I don’t think my parents were anywhere close to head over heals in love for the vast majority of their marriage, but they managed to stay together, raise a family, and have some good times.

  164. Kai says:

    “uncleFred says:
    @Dalrock
    ” … her point is that they won’t succeed in tempting an honest husband (likewise alphas won’t successfully tempt an honest wife).”
    This assumes that, at the point of temptation, the marriage is heathy and loving. It also assumes that both partners are honest and faithful. In a marriage where one partner is unfaithful, dishonest, or physically unavailable, the honest can be tempted. Ideally, the honest partner would terminate the marriage, but with marriage 2.0 in full swing and/or if children are involved, that option is often impractical.”

    It is, of course, the responsibility of both partners to ensure that a marriage continues to be healthy and loving and thus keep both partners faithful and with little motivation to give in to the temptations that will always be out there.

  165. Kai says:

    “imnobody says:
    He has the responsibility of breaking the commitment (and there is no excuse that “she throw herself over me”).
    She has the responsibility of having sex with a man who is taken (and there is no excuse that “I don’t have a commitment so it’s not my problem)”

    We agree on the concept; we simply have different terms for it.
    I agree with the two responsibilities you mention, but I see them as two completely separate responsibilities that don’t affect each other. Fact is, there will always be the immoral people out there who don’t care about the commitments of others. I have no respect for them, but I see their wrong as a separate one from the wrong of a committed person who chooses to break their commitment.

    Question: how do you compare a cheater with a man who decides he wants to sleep with another woman, and goes out to pick up women, but is unsuccessful in persuading any to sleep with him?

    To me, they are (im)morally equivalent.
    And I have used a man in that example because the chances of such a thing with a woman are basically nil. If it could happen, my point would be the same for her.

  166. Chels says:

    When it’s between available people, sex is 100% the choice of the woman, AND 100% the choice of the man. Sex won’t happen if either chooses not to, and thus a man and a woman are both solely responsible for the consequences of their choice to have sex.
    Women who are ‘guilted’ into sex by the big bad men still had a choice. they could choose to ditch the guy who would make sex a prerequisite for affection. They didn’t choose that. They *chose* to have sex with him. and the consequence of that action are their own damned fault.

    Absolutely, I was just replying to Buck’s comment that if women kept their legs shut, sex wouldn’t happen (which coincidentally makes men appear like some sex crazed animals).

  167. Stephenie Rowling says:

    “Stephenie doesn’t count. He has an alpha in house, since, for any Dominican woman, landing a gringo is winning the lottery.”

    You kind of forget the part where I was willing to offer this to any decent Dominican guy till around 25 then I realized it was not going to happen and decided to outsource.
    You talk like I was looking for a gringo to be faithful, but I was into nerdy/beta hobbies since I can remember many years before I meet him (I used to wake up at 3 am in the morning to watch the reruns of Star Trek:TNG in cable and I used to walk to the public library just to use the Internet to search Stephen Hawkins and Michio Kaku latest articles with money I saved from my lunch money, the first thing I bought when I got my first job was a computer and installed Internet, again to chat and forum over DC and Marvel) My first love at 6 was a kid that knew about computers and books, and was not interested in “punching other kids” like all the other males that surrounded me so I disagree with you. I was wired to like Beta guys, always. I managed to need a gringo one because in my country they are scarce, but being born here I would had liked the same type.
    So I DO count.

  168. Buck says:

    Ah, so as far as you are concerned, it’s simply always the woman’s fault.
    If a married woman has sex with another man, it’s her fault for going out and finding another man.
    And if a married man has sex with another woman, it’s the other woman’s fault for being available to the man.

    BINGO!!!!

    Men are hunters by hard wiring/nature. Men will chat up ( hit on) women all the time, just to reinforce their “hunting” skills. It’s fun…
    I’m quite happily married to a very hot wife for 20 years and have never cheated, but I get ego satisfaction form the interested smiles, phone numbers etc from young hotties and soccor moms…I’ve had some rather graphic offers, which I politely turned down, but I’d be a liar to say it wasn’t flattering. I know the day is coming when all attempts at the chase will be mocked as pathetic by the gals, but until then, the chase is a blast. And yes, I chat up gals even while accompanied by Mrs…why?…competition anxiety, let her hampster wear that wheel out!

  169. imnobody says:

    Question: how do you compare a cheater with a man who decides he wants to sleep with another woman, and goes out to pick up women, but is unsuccessful in persuading any to sleep with him? To me, they are (im)morally equivalent.

    Agreed. But this is not the discussion we are having. This is the same to say:

    Question: how do you compare a woman who sleeps with a married man with a woman who wants to sleep with a married man but he refuses to do it? To me, they are (im)morally equivalent.

    I agree with the two responsibilities you mention, but I see them as two completely separate responsibilities that don’t affect each other. Fact is, there will always be the immoral people out there who don’t care about the commitments of others. I have no respect for them, but I see their wrong as a separate one from the wrong of a committed person who chooses to break their commitment.

    Another fallacy. This goes both ways. I could say:

    There will always be the immoral people out there who don’t care about keeping their own commitments. I have no respect for them, but I see their wrong as a separate one from the wrong of a woman who wants to break a marriage

    The fact that there will always be people who do evil have nothing to do about whether their behavior is evil. You want to have it both ways, Kai.

    For the women breaking a commitment of other people, it’s only that you don’t have respect for them and there will always be people like that.

    For the men breaking his own commitment, it’s that they have 100% of responsibility and their wrong. For them, it’s not only lack of respect and for them, you don’t use the argument that there will always be people like that.

    This way you can understate the woman’s responsibility while highlighting the man’s responsibility. This is something I think it’s completely wrong (the same with the gender reversed).

    I accept that his fault is bigger than hers, but there are not two separate categories, as you say, so you can emphasize men’s fault and throw women’s fault under the carpet. Wrong is wrong.

  170. Kai says:

    “There will always be the immoral people out there who don’t care about keeping their own commitments. I have no respect for them, but I see their wrong as a separate one from the wrong of a woman who wants to break a marriage”

    I agree with this too.
    I simply think that the two wrongs are two separate wrongs.

    Where on earth are you getting that I am blaming men and excusing women? I have very carefully pointed out many times that this goes no matter whether it is a husband or a wife doing the cheating. When a married man sleeps with another woman, I think she’s immoral and he’s an immoral cheater. when a married woman sleeps with another man, I think he’s immoral, and she’s an immoral cheater.

    “For the men breaking his own commitment, it’s that they have 100% of responsibility and their wrong. For them, it’s not only lack of respect and for them, you don’t use the argument that there will always be people like that.”

    For a man *or a woman* breaking his/her own commitment, it’s that they have all the responsibility for the break of the commitment.
    I do believe that there will always be people who will not honour marriage vows. The difference is that I can choose not to marry one of those.
    I can’t do anything about the immoral people I don’t marry, but whether I was a man or a woman, I would choose a partner who I expect will honour the vows we make. And therefore I entrust them with the responsibility to do so, regardless of what other people do.

    “Question: how do you compare a woman who sleeps with a married man with a woman who wants to sleep with a married man but he refuses to do it? To me, they are (im)morally equivalent.”

    I agree with this as well. They are equivalent.

    My point in bring up those moral equivalencies is to explain why I see the moral crime of a wife or husband breaking their vows as a separate (and more grievous, though that part is a personal opinion) moral crime from that of a man or woman who is willing to sleep with a married person.

    “Question: how do you compare a cheater with a man who decides he wants to sleep with another woman, and goes out to pick up women, but is unsuccessful in persuading any to sleep with him? To me, they are (im)morally equivalent.”
    Since you agree with this equivalence, my point is that when a married person (of either sex) decides to cheat, they have already broken their vow to their spouse, and that is wrong – regardless of whether they find anyone with whom they can actually do the cheating. Therefore in making that decision, they are 100% responsible for being a cheater.
    If they successfully find someone else they can sleep with, that other person is guilty of the separate moral crime of not respecting the commitments that others make to each other.

  171. imnobody says:

    You kind of forget the part where I was willing to offer this to any decent Dominican guy till around 25 then I realized it was not going to happen and decided to outsource.

    Steph, I haven’t forgot that. I know Dominican men and Latin American men. And I know that landing a gringo was the only way to you to have a monogamous husband

    It is only that it was not the thing we were discussing.

    You talk like I was looking for a gringo to be faithful

    Where have I said that? I think you are projecting your preconceived ideas over me. I have never said that. It’s more: I have never thought that.

    I managed to need a gringo one because in my country they are scarce, but being born here I would had liked the same type.

    Yes, Steph, but let me tell you, that, as a man who has lived 11 years in Latin America, I am not unaware of Latin American culture. A man from Europe or United States is regarded with admiration in Latin America. A man from these countries has automatically a high status. And you know it’s true.

    (I know it’s true: I have experienced it in my person).

    You know that the woman who lands a gringo is considered lucky, not only because gringos are faithful, but also because a gringo is a man of status. And Dominican women are women and, hence, hypergamous.

    This is why I tell you that your husband is alpha in your eyes. I am positive that you would have married a Dominican if they wouldn’t be so unfaithful. But I am positive that, when you started dating your husband, the fact that he was gringo was an added bonus. And that some of your female acquaintances told you: “You are dating a gringo. Lucky you!”.

    You are a Dominican woman, Steph. From your childhood you have been taught to see gringos with admiration. So your husband is an alpha in your eyes.

    And, last but not least, this was not a discussion about you, but I made the mistake of referring to you.

    So I DO count.

    So no, you DON’T, haha.

  172. Kai says:

    “Buck says:
    BINGO!!!!
    Men are hunters by hard wiring/nature. Men will chat up ( hit on) women all the time, just to reinforce their “hunting” skills. It’s fun”

    So you agree that ‘all men are hormonal idiots unable to ever make the decision to not have sex with a woman, who therefore need to be tempered by women working together to allocate out whom they will allow to have sex.’
    So men are completely unable to control themselves, and need women to control them, since they can’t be adult enough to be responsible for themselves.
    And yet you think these people should control the rest of the world, while completely unable to control themselves? logic fail.
    Luckily, I think most men *are* more adult than you give them credit for.

    I suspect many of the adult men around here and in the rest of the world will disagree with your conclusions.

  173. Stephenie Rowling says:

    You are a Dominican woman, Steph. From your childhood you have been taught to see gringos with admiration. So your husband is an alpha in your eyes.

    Wrong again. My father was part of the revolutionary party when he was young, he hates gringos and that was a constant since my childhood, heck USA invaded us twice (1914 and 1965) there is still a part of the population that hate your guts including my daddy and one of my best friends that is my same age, but at the time I told my father about my beau he knew I was a serious girl so he trusted my judgement. My admiration for gringos was after I realized that my likings were shared by the majority of men here so I started to try and connect in Sciconnect (again too specific if alI I needed was any gringo). Really if all I was looking for was a “high status men” you should know that Italians and Spaniards go to my country to meet women at resorts and marry them in regular basis, why would I pick a guy from USA when the visa for Italy and Spain is easier to obtain? Or why didn’t I dated a guy from Miami (you have any idea how much money I will have to save to visit my family from California to DR? like 3 times what it costs from East Coast) Makes no sense to wait 2 years to be with my hubby if all I wanted was “a first world man”?

    Is truth that some women were jealous of my conquest. But that was after they meet him I didn’t told anyone about my hubby till I was certain were were engaged to be married and he was indeed the good guy I was looking for, not preselection needed at all for him to get me into his bed.

    So really I think you are projecting too much on women and latin women in general. I’m a nerd lover and the only reason my husband is superior to other men in my eyes, is because he is a man of character and we share things I love dear (like our love for science and nerdy stuff) nationality was not relevant in my choice.
    So again, I DO count🙂

  174. imnobody says:

    ,I agree with this too.
    I simply think that the two wrongs are two separate wrongs.

    Well, I think not. I don’t think that this discussion is going anywhere and I have to work.

    Where on earth are you getting that I am blaming men and excusing women?

    I should have said that you are blaming the married person but I was talking all the time about married man and unmarried woman, because:

    1) It’s the more likely scenario
    2) It gets difficult to write in English in a general way,

    I do believe that there will always be people who will not honour marriage vows. The difference is that I can choose not to marry one of those.

    This is not what we were discussing. We were discussing about what is right or wrong, not about what would be your strategy finding and keeping partners.

    This sentence proves what I was thinking but I haven’t said until now, because I had no proof. You are taking this personally. This usually happens to me when discussing with women. When I talk in general, they are always thinking about them. So I say, for example, “American women are feminists”, there is always a woman saying “I am not a feminist and my friends are not feminists”. I feel like saying: “Honey, I am not talking about you or your friends. The world is bigger than your navel”.

    I can’t do anything about the immoral people I don’t marry, but whether I was a man or a woman, I would choose a partner who I expect will honour the vows we make. And therefore I entrust them with the responsibility to do so, regardless of what other people do.

    I, ME, MYSELF. I was not talking about you, Kai. I am talking about a situation in general. Everything that you say is your strategy to find partners. We were not talking about your life. We were not talking about strategies for choosing partners, not even in general. We were talking about the wrongness of the participants in a cheating situation. You are mixing topics.

    So, it was about men and women, after all. But not men and women in general. About the man who is going to commit to Kai and about the women that they are going to try to break this commitment.

    My point in bring up those moral equivalencies is to explain why I see the moral crime of a wife or husband breaking their vows as a separate (and more grievous, though that part is a personal opinion) moral crime from that of a man or woman who is willing to sleep with a married person.

    Since you agree with this equivalence, my point is that when a married person (of either sex) decides to cheat, they have already broken their vow to their spouse, and that is wrong – regardless of whether they find anyone with whom they can actually do the cheating. Therefore in making that decision, they are 100% responsible for being a cheater.y

    If they successfully find someone else they can sleep with, that other person is guilty of the separate moral crime of not respecting the commitments that others make to each other.

    This proves nothing. Again this goes both ways. When a woman decides to sleep with a married man, they have always guilty of not respecting the commitments that others make to each other, regardless if they end up sleeping or not.

    If they sleep with a married man, this married man is guilty of the moral crime of not respecting their own commitments.

    Kai, with all due respect, you have to take a course in logic. You bent the logic to bend your preconceptions and your feelings. This is a female characteristic.

    I quit. I will let you have the last word. I have wasted so much time in a discussion about the topic that I don’t give a damn about (unlike you, I don’t have an axe to grind). Do you think that they are separate moral crimes? Be my guest.

  175. imnobody says:

    Steph, I don’t want to argue with you. Regardless of the political preferences of your family, you are from a culture that admires gringos, even if they hate them. You have born in this culture and has been drowning in this culture. Even left-wingers: I have known that.

    Really if all I was looking for was a “high status men” you should know that Italians and Spaniards go to my country to meet women at resorts and marry them in regular basis, why would I pick a guy from USA when the visa for Italy and Spain is easier to obtain?

    Steph, I never said that. I never thought that too.

    You are projecting too much. I NEVER said that you were looking for a high status man. I said that a gringo is high status in the eyes of the Dominican women (the same way that Spanish and Italians) and that your husband is an alpha in your eyes. I didn’t say that your looked for high status men. I hate when somebody puts words in my mouth.

    Makes no sense to wait 2 years to be with my hubby if all I wanted was “a first world man”?

    I never said that, Stephanie. Please, read my posts. You are making bad inferences. You are putting in my mouth words that I haven’t said and don’t even think.

    Is truth that some women were jealous of my conquest. But that was after they meet him I didn’t told anyone about my hubby till I was certain were were engaged to be married and he was indeed the good guy I was looking for, not preselection needed at all for him to get me into his bed.

    I didn’t said that Stephanie. I didn’t said that you married your husband because of preselection. I only said that your husband is an alpha in your eyes and that gringos are high status in Dominican Republic, as Europeans are. And the fact that some women were jealous of your conquest (I DID say that) proves my point.

    So really I think you are projecting too much on women and latin women in general

    No, Stephanie. Let me be blunt, since you have been so blunt to me.

    YOU ARE the one who are projecting and putting these projections in my mouth and then you say that I am projecting. This is dishonest on your behalf and I can’t have an honest conversation when somebody is putting nasty things in my mouth. And the things you are putting in my mouth are very nasty. If I thought like the way you are saying I think, I would never have had a Latin American girlfriend (and most of my gf were and are Latin American women).

    Your last post says a lot about you and very little about me and my arguments. I think I touched a raw nerve. But I am not responsible about things I never said and I am not responsible about things I never thought.

  176. Stephenie Rowling says:

    You are projecting too much. I NEVER said that you were looking for a high status man. I said that a gringo is high status in the eyes of the Dominican women (the same way that Spanish and Italians) and that your husband is an alpha in your eyes.

    Okay let me clarify My husband is the best man I ever meet, because he has good character, is faithful and he is smart. Not because he is gringo. Which is what you are saying. The same guy had been a Dominican, Russian. African or Asian would had been the same, me born in Spain, in Africa or in China would had been the same factors of attraction for me to consider him sexy.
    Also some Alpha carouselers from my country also said that he looked too “pariguayo” too “nice” so its not all women that see gringos as sexy because of their nationality the 15% or so of sluts in middle class and the 90% of sluts of low class prefer a “moreno” tall dark and brute than a gringo. Is that clear?
    So I stand by my point I’m a beta lover so I do count.

  177. Kai says:

    “imnobody says:
    [Kai thinks] that the two wrongs are two separate wrongs.
    Well, I think not.”

    and that’s fine. I pointed out above that we’re on the same general side, we just happen to be using different terms to define what we both clearly think is wrong.

    “Where on earth are you getting that I am blaming men and excusing women?”
    “I should have said that you are blaming the married person but I was talking all the time about married man and unmarried woman”

    Totally fair. Because used in that way, it sounded as though you thought I was suggesting that men are bad but women get let off in general.
    Similarly, I made a mistake in using ‘I’ as an example.

    “I do believe that there will always be people who will not honour marriage vows. The difference is that I can choose not to marry one of those.”
    “This is not what we were discussing. We were discussing about what is right or wrong, not about what would be your strategy finding and keeping partners.”

    Right here. In using an ‘I’ as an example, I sounded personal in a way not intended.
    I have the same point whether it is me or anyone else. A person who chooses to marry expects their spouse to honour his/her commitments. that’s usually why they married that person.
    They can do something about whom they choose to marry, but not about who else is out there. This is why it is the fault of the married person who cheats – not the cheating partner.

    “This sentence proves what I was thinking but I haven’t said until now, because I had no proof. You are taking this personally. This usually happens to me when discussing with women. When I talk in general, they are always thinking about them. ”

    Nope, just a poorly chosen example. My point on the immorality of a person choosing to cheat and the immorality of a person who will sleep with committed people is general, not personal. No stance, no axe to grind.

    “This proves nothing. Again this goes both ways. When a woman decides to sleep with a married man, they have always guilty of not respecting the commitments that others make to each other, regardless if they end up sleeping or not.

    If they sleep with a married man, this married man is guilty of the moral crime of not respecting their own commitments.”

    Again, we’re in agreement. And you have even phrased it here as two separate moral crimes – one of not respecting commitments made, and one of not respecting commitments that others make. That’s all I was pointing out in the first place.

    Aside from using a theoretical ‘I’ as an example, which I understand gave an unintended impression of speaking solely about myself or my own life/experience, I’m not seeing what you find so illogical.
    As far as I can tell, we both think it’s wrong for married people to cheat, and we both think that it’s wrong to sleep with married people, but I see those as separate moral crimes, while you see them as contributing to each other. I don’t see a difference in framing being a big difference, unless you’re having a completely different discussion that simply lost me a while ago.

  178. Buck says:

    Kia,
    I never agreed with your typically woman conclusion!

    Men will try their skills at attracting women…sure… I am a moral person, not a “hormonal idiot”, I believe in the promise I made (to God) to be faithful to my wife, but lets face facts, women love to be hit on by men and men get ego gratification from receptive females…flirtation is not infidelity.
    The fact that women just await a man to show attention (passive) and a man must make an approach (aggressive ) means men are better suited to lead!

  179. Kai says:

    My original lost point in response to a post blaming the neighbourhood women is that when a person is cheated on, they should be angry with the person who made a commitment to them and broke it – not blame the others who, while immoral, made no such promise.

  180. Kai says:

    “Buck says:
    Kia,
    I never agreed with your typically woman conclusion!
    Men will try their skills at attracting women…sure… I am a moral person, not a “hormonal idiot”, I believe in the promise I made (to God) to be faithful to my wife, but lets face facts, women love to be hit on by men and men get ego gratification from receptive females…flirtation is not infidelity.”

    I do not consider flirtation infidelity.
    But it sounds like you enjoy flirting with women, and they enjoy flirting with you, but you choose not to sleep with them. So men aren’t slaves to their hormones after all – good.
    So as a moral person, you choose not to betray your wife and god and sleep with other women.
    If you changed your mind and *did* sleep with another woman, would it not be your immoral choice? – and thus (at least in good part) your fault?

  181. Kai says:

    My ‘typically woman’ conclusion was simply the logical extension of the argument that all sexual encounters are the ‘fault’ of women – which implies that men are unable to take responsibility for their own sex lives. It now sounds like you do take responsibility for your own commitments, and thus men *are* responsible for their own sexual morality or immorality. Certainly much more logical.

  182. Bellita says:

    Kai, your last comment reminds me of an exchange I once read in a novel.

    A wife was telling her husband that if she ever caught him with another woman, she would kill him. He argued that that would be the wrong response, saying that if he ever caught her with another man, he would kill the other man.

    It was meant to be humorous, but I see why someone might think it would be better to scapegoat the person who didn’t make the commitment or to insist that both parties share equal (if different) blame: if you wanted to save the relationship, you wouldn’t want take it all out on the cheating partner, lest the relationship no longer look worth saving.

  183. Anonymous Reader says:

    Seems to me that it can be agreed wide spread (heh) promiscuity in women at the peak of their physical attractiveness, however much they and some men may enjoy it, the cost to be paid in social and personal terms later on is much too high. Given that women really are better off in a committed pair-bonded relationship, and that too much carousel riding makes that difficult at best, the question that IMO should be kicked around is simple, but difficult.

    Question: how do we convince young women, at the peak of attractiveness, not to go Alpha-chasing but rather to cultivate a decent Beta man who has sufficient Alpha traits to be attractive and tingle-generating?

  184. Kai says:

    “Bellita says:
    It was meant to be humorous, but I see why someone might think it would be better to scapegoat the person who didn’t make the commitment or to insist that both parties share equal (if different) blame: if you wanted to save the relationship, you wouldn’t want take it all out on the cheating partner, lest the relationship no longer look worth saving.”

    It probably also helps to save face if one can convince him/herself that the spouse didn’t really mean to betray – it was that horrible other man/woman who made it happen!
    I’ve usually heard it more the other way though – with women blaming the other women, and men blaming their woman.

  185. Kai says:

    “Anonymous Reader says:
    Question: how do we convince young women, at the peak of attractiveness, not to go Alpha-chasing but rather to cultivate a decent Beta man who has sufficient Alpha traits to be attractive and tingle-generating?”

    Honest, realistic assessments of where the carousel path left women with a ‘don’t do what I did if you don’t want to end up where I am’ from those for whom it is too late?

  186. Stephenie Rowling says:

    “Honest, realistic assessments of where the carousel path left women with a ‘don’t do what I did if you don’t want to end up where I am’ from those for whom it is too late?”

    But for that you need to convince older women of stop listening to their hamster and spinning their lonely jaded life into a fabulous single hood by choice that they try to sell to the younger crowd. Fat chance, no pun intended. Women need for status is so that very few of them will try to get women they don’t care about to outrank them by choosing differently than them, sad but true.

    I will also add that happily married women should be more outspoken about their feelings of happiness and realization. It seems to me that the EPL crowd keeps the smoke and mirrors by both denial and little counter-evidence, some women that are happy to be mothers, that have a good sex lives with their hubbies and that they found themselves in the arms of the man they married and during raising her kids would be a welcome change of “female empowerment” phrases, YMMV.

  187. Stephenie Rowling says:

    “Another benefit of traditional patriarchy is that it prevents women from sabotaging other women! Mothers and grandmothers shield their granddaughters from veering off the path.”

    True, also IME, sluts breed sluts so a slutty mother won’t be telling her girl to be prudent, more often than not she will offer a condom and birth control pills than some talk about sex and relationships.
    True story I had a coworker my age that got her first and only baby at 15, the boy was raised mostly by the father after he became a deeply christian man (they were married for almost 10 years till he started cheating) so his son grow up to be completely sweet beta kid. Mother started to yell at him because at 17 he hasn’t gotten anyone pregnant yet…I think is a combo of she becoming infertile after years of sluthood and wanting another baby in the house, but the part where in her world getting people pregnant during their teenager years as a mark of being…healthy tells you a lot about her reasoning process, YMMV.

  188. Amirantes says:

    Interesting:

    The results for monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal) twins indicate an important genetic component in marital status. The genetic inheritance of marital status is found to be particularly strong for females.

  189. greyghost says:

    Well it has been really great checking out the comments here. But the problem of sluts is still here. The best cure for the slut is to make beta types sexually desirable.Women haven’t been very interested in the question and it doesn’t seem the women here are either. Beta types are actually picking up the tab on that by learning game. As more men learn “game” (which is basicly female sexual and relationship pschology)the social value of women will go down. As it stands now the only real value a lot of men find in women is just sex. All other contact with women for men is becoming a huge burden. These attitudes are what comes from unchecked hypergamy.
    For you happily married women this is one thing to keep in mind. Take care of your man sexually and emotionally. Your husband is human. Kathy has the right idea making herself open and available for her husband to come home for a nooner. And she even allows herself to happily enjoy that with her husband of all people. Enough so to comment on it here. That ladies is how you insulate yourself from a slut.Beta’s the loyal bastards that they are always respond well to that. Alphas don’t care. Now teach your daughters that lesson. So marry a good strong beta, fuck the hell out of him, be happy proudly happy about it and enjoy a life with a loyal stud that will die for you.

  190. uncleFred says:

    @tenthring
    ” I’m 28, I’ve never met a woman that I was head over heals in love with. For most of human history 28 would be considered very old for marriage.”

    The advice applies to the current situation, specifically with regard to marriage 2.0 and divorce 2.0. If you’ve yet to fall head over heels in love and are currently single you may want to count your blessings. If you are married and you and your spouse after the fact ended up head over heels in love, again count your blessings. If you are married and not head over heels in love, I wish you both luck, may you beat the odds and be bless with the happiest of marriages.

    I can’t speak to your parents. I can speak to mine. From my teens into my twenties I too did not think that they were head over heels in love. They had many arguments, misunderstandings, and difficulties. I viewed them as two people who cared for each other and “made it work”. Later in life I learned that I was wrong and that despite all the difficulties they were the great loves of each others lives. The reason that they “made it work” was because of the depth and richness of their love. My point is even in the closest of families, the depth of love between husband and wife may not be apparent.

    It’s not easy to wait until you find a love where you both knock each other head over heels. I realize that at 28 it seems that you’ll never find it. It’s easy to rationalize that a certain mix of attraction and compatibility is what you should settle for and then make it work. Just because that rationalization makes sense, does not make it a good idea. The price of being wrong, especially for a man is abusively high. Your choice of course, but I still back Dalrock’s advice.

  191. Ceer says:

    It always puzzled me why people talk about a sexual “double standard with regards to the old marriage system”. A man who had sex without having married the woman first was guilty of a grave moral offense. A woman who had sex without having married the m an first was guilty of a grave moral offense. Then I realized that they were talking about how life wasn’t fair when they wanted to abuse that system. All their complaints are really just rationalizations about how since they stuck themselves in an unfair situation, the alternative (IE, Marriage 1.0) was even less fair.

  192. Kai says:

    “greyghost says:
    For you happily married women this is one thing to keep in mind. Take care of your man sexually and emotionally. Your husband is human.”

    I think both partners should be doing what they can to keep each other happy and invested so they would have no reason to look outside the marriage. If you’re not caring for each other, and having sex with each other, you’re not really living up to the spirit of your vows.
    As someone who probably wouldn’t be too respected around here said: ‘monogamy’ is supposed to be a commitment to sex with one person – not sex with no people. It is as much a responsibility of the partners to have sex with each other as it is to not have sex with anyone else.
    And let’s not assume that the quality of a sex life and the tendency to talk about it on the internet are correlated.

  193. Kai says:

    “@tenthring
    ” I’m 28, I’ve never met a woman that I was head over heals in love with. For most of human history 28 would be considered very old for marriage.””

    On the upside, a 28-year-old MAN has plenty of time.
    But good luck – I can’t imagine marrying any of the women I know, and I can’t imagine being on your side of things.

  194. George Clooney can have relationships with 10 women, use up their prime years, and make them unable to marry anyone else since they cannot ‘settle for less’.

    One alpha doing this (even though he is not officially collecting short-term relationships) has major ripple effects on women. George Clooney has singlehandedly prevented multiple attractive women from landing husbands.

    That’s not the only way to use up the prime years of a woman. What most men (men who are not alpha) can do is what I am doing. When women are nearing the end of their prime years looking for a beta chump to marry, beta men who are in the know about the real nature of women can use up a woman’s last prime years by being with them then and not getting married. When beta men in the know are done with those women, they have seriously lowered chances of finding a beta chump to marry.

    Unlike simple refusal to have sex (which is ineffective unless alphas do it), this is actually an effective way of dealing with sluts.

  195. Buck says:

    Kia,
    I go back to my original contention…it is the woman’s fault 100% of the time!
    I can hit on women regularly, but it’s all so much wasted energy until a woman says yes. They are the gatekeepers of morality. Yes, I’m moral and don’t cheat, but if I were immoral and wanted to cheat…too bad so sad…unless I find an available woman.
    Let us never forget, Eve caved to desire and caused the first sin…and what was her reflexive response when confronted with her conscious choice…the snake tricked me!
    ” Sorry Matilda, I banged your husband, he tricked me ” or ” Bob, aren’t you married to Matilda? go away you pervert!..and yes, I’m going to rat you out, stay away from me “

  196. Bellita says:

    @TFH

    It’s probably a mistake for me to keep looking into a totally fictional example, but I think it’s to its credit that the husband was telling the wife that she shouldn’t want to kill him for adultery, but the other woman–not because the husband is a man but because the other woman is the interloper.

    Not that the example is meant to be watertight or anything. I brought it into the discussion in not to laugh about men dying but because what Kai was saying about who should shoulder more of the blame in adultery reminded me of it. I think you could reverse the sexes in that scenario so that it’s the women who die and my isolated point would stand.

  197. imnobody says:

    My husband is the best man I ever meet, because he has good character, is faithful and he is smart. Not because he is gringo. Which is what you are saying.

    Stephanie, AGAIN, I NEVER SAID THAT (I didn’t ever think it).

    Everybody can read what I have said (it’s written in this thread), everybody can read what you have said (it’s written in this thread) and everybody can see that, since this conversation has started, what you have claimed I have said IS NOT what I have said.

    In other words, you have put words in my mouth, not one, not two, but more times. When I have protested about that, you have answered putting more words in my mouth.

    God knows why you are so dishonest when speaking about your husband. I must have touched a raw nerve. Well, I don’t know and I don’t care. The only thing I know is that I have said what I said, not what you say that I have said.

    Please, from now on, ignore me and I will ignore you. I don’t want to talk with a person who is so dishonest in conversations.

  198. Kai says:

    “Buck says:
    Kia,
    I go back to my original contention…it is the woman’s fault 100% of the time!
    I can hit on women regularly, but it’s all so much wasted energy until a woman says yes. They are the gatekeepers of morality. Yes, I’m moral and don’t cheat, but if I were immoral and wanted to cheat…too bad so sad…unless I find an available woman.”

    If you wanted to cheat, and changed from flirting with a woman to propositioning her, you’ve already done the wrong thing and betrayed your wife, whether she says yes, or says “hell no, I’m telling your wife”.
    Unless you’re going to complain “sorry I slept with her, Matilda, she tricked me”, you bear at least a good chunk of the blame yourself. The only women can be the sole gatekeepers of morality is if you consider yourself unable to take responsibility for your own.
    And we’re talking about adults today – not mythological creation stories.

  199. Buck says:

    Kia,

    I can stand in front of the bank all day, I am just loitering, it’s not until the bank teller unlocks the door and lets me in do I become a bank customer…regardless of how urgently I wish to make a deposit!

    ..

  200. Kai says:

    But if the teller unlocks the doors and you choose to walk through, you bear no responsibility whatsoever for your presence in the bank?

  201. Its much simpler than all that.

    Its about sexual Power. ie the power of transactional farking. ‘Power’ schtick being the life blood of neo-marxist backlashing proles. Which in essence is what 99.9% of females end up being. Eventually.

    It is age specific.

    More men over say 30-40 and under say 50-60 have more of it than most women of any age.

    All women under say 30 have more of it than any man in the SAME age cohort.

    “Slut’ is a female shaming tactic used against females. its purely IN HOUSE. Its all about protecting, maintaining and RAISING the transactional value of sex WITH WIMMINZ. All femmy protestation to the contrary is pure psycho-babbling denial of their incessant delusions. Consalt Frued. He gave a fark what woeminz want.

    To wit. women loath those in their own ranks who devalue sex. Its no different to any othet market. The free and easy traders are loathed by the inefficient, low skilled operators who seek to veil their weakness in monoploy tactics of high barriers to enry and un-written rules of engagement that seek to keep out or ostracise the non-conforming free marketeers.

    Basically, ‘slut’ is a way for the 99.9% of ineffecient operators (woeminz) to protect their sloppy monopoly against the 1 in a 1000 female who doesn’t buy-in. Some few of that minority protest. eg. slut-walks, who are either too stoopud or too fugly or too lesbo to matter anyway. The femmy monopoly will never support slut-enomics. They’re not dat stoopud.

    ‘Slut’ is by., of and for da wiminz.

    Menz are spectators. Simply relax, be patient, watch the show and watch the tide turn. Until it goes out in ya 50s or 60s. Unless ya got status, like money or power. Femmy psyche is infinitaly susceptible to such nonsnense, so if ya can be farked with all that, it can last till thy death bed. Such is the nature of feminine consciousness. Wantonly led and happily deluded, self perpetuating and eternally basking in deluded denial.

    Then there is Reality.

    But ya’d have to be male to even begin to wounder about that part of life.

  202. Jane Wilder says:

    You know, the whole slut thing is kind of funny. Men always think that sluts are easy, and being used. It never occurs to them that maybe these so called sluts are young women who like sex and variety too. I did.I loved sex when I was young . Why not? It is fun, feels good and I never felt used. I could choose who I wanted to have sex with. It was great. I didn’t have to choose the alpha guys if I didn’t want to, and mostly I didn’t cause they were terrible at sex. The beta guys were better, and you know what? Everyone was going around saying how the guys were using me, but I thought I was pregnant a few times, and it was the guys who were supposedly “using me” who were dying to marry me. I didn’t want to marry anyone, and was happy when the pregnancy scares resolved, but maybe liking sex with variety doesn’t make a young, not ready to be married woman a “slut” who is viewed as garbage as much as you all seem to think. There were plenty of jealous women who were being told sex is bad sex is bad, save yourself, who then , once married never could get over that nagging feeling that sex was dirty, and turned out to be headache prone, frigid women, who only had sex every so often to keep their marriageable man in line–I would hate to be a man married to a woman who is of the really good faker genre. Of course many might not even know their wives really hated sex as they had been trained (like seals) to flap their flippers, but someone who is really good at sex, is usually someone with practice, just like with most things.

  203. Chels says:

    You know, the whole slut thing is kind of funny. Men always think that sluts are easy, and being used.

    Sluts ARE easy, and you are used because you’re really just used as a stress releaser, you’re simply a pump and dump, you mean NOTHING to the man screwing you, you’re a tiny bit better than masturbation.

    It never occurs to them that maybe these so called sluts are young women who like sex and variety too. I did.I loved sex when I was young .

    Yup, sex is great, but do you need to be a slut to enjoy it? Isn’t one man enough?

    Why not? It is fun, feels good and I never felt used. I could choose who I wanted to have sex with. It was great. I didn’t have to choose the alpha guys if I didn’t want to, and mostly I didn’t cause they were terrible at sex. The beta guys were better, and you know what?

    Betas are better, they’re all around amazing, they’re loyal, loving, attentive, all you want. Now did you choose a beta just to have sex with him or was he good for more?

    There were plenty of jealous women who were being told sex is bad sex is bad, save yourself, who then , once married never could get over that nagging feeling that sex was dirty, and turned out to be headache prone, frigid women, who only had sex every so often to keep their marriageable man in line–I would hate to be a man married to a woman who is of the really good faker genre. Of course many might not even know their wives really hated sex as they had been trained (like seals) to flap their flippers, but someone who is really good at sex, is usually someone with practice, just like with most things.

    Seriously? You’re going to make the argument that sluts are better in bed than virgins? Seriously? There’s nothing a virgin can’t learn, and just because she hasn’t slept with loads of men doesn’t mean she’s frigid or hates sex. A better thought would be that she actually respects herself, that to her sex is something meaningful, that it is related to love, or that she takes her faith seriously.

    And it’s laughable to say that other women were jealous of you, they were probably just pitying you or making fun of you; either or, but definitely not jealousy.

    You’re absolutely deluded to think a man would marry a slut over someone who doesn’t have a lot of experience. I’d venture that to most men, a woman’s inexperience is a nonissue, but the opposite is a huge disadvantage.

  204. Pingback: Marriage lite: mistaking “No sex before monogamy” for a moral statement | Dalrock

  205. Pingback: Slut! | Dalrock

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s