Sluts/slappers/whores/homewreckers

Wibbs

A goodly part of the double standard comes from biology and how society views that biology. It's basically down to paternity. A woman knows the child she gives birth to is hers, a man doesn't. He may be fairly sure, but not completly sure. At least for 99% of our history. There are paternity tests now, but that hasn't reset the mechanism yet. This wasn't so much an issue in small tribal groups, but became one when we settled down in one place and property, social position and power got handed down to children. In those case paternity was very important. It was all about the "true" heir, hence many if not most societies in the past put a very high value on women's virginity and fidelity. Women became much more sexually restricted on the back of this and "bastard" was a highly insulting term.

Now as windsock points out it is much easier for a woman to get sex, so it's a sellers market in many ways. It's the woman who chooses the man she sleeps with. Not so much the other way around(though guys would love to think they had some say in the matter).

While it is a sellers market there does exist a smaller amount of men that more women want to sleep with. In our society a monetarily wealthy man will have far more options of sexual partners than a poor man. Around those high value males women are more competitive with each other. At a basic level a married or attached man is already ahead of his peers in value as at least one woman finds him of value. That tends to attract other women more at which point in extremis some women will ignore any thoughts of female solidarity.

Now beauty in women is valued by men and a beautiful woman will also have men competing for her, but if she's thought of as "easy" those same men will not be as interested. A man with a girlfriend will get more attention than a woman with a boyfriend. In general a woman finding out the guy she likes the look of has had a few conquests in the past is much less of a barrier than a man finding out a woman he likes has had the same amount of conquests.

Also in my experience at least, far more women will make a play for a friends man than men will with a male friend's woman. I can think of at least three times in my own past where this has happened with a "best friend" of a girlfriend of mine, or the "friend" will try to sabotage the relationship for reasons beyond concern for her friend. Among my male mates it would be a similar enough number. I can think of only 2 situations where it happened the other way around with men and in both cases they were completely ostracised. I would say in general women are more instantly suspicious of another woman around their boyfriend/husband(especially if she thinks she's prettier).

With this as a background I'm not that surprised that women may call another woman a slut or homewrecker. Throw in the fact that the wronged woman has more to lose. Also throw in that women know that too many men are dumb enough to fall for something shiny and new and I can see why. Men can be equally daft.

My 2 cents anyway.

Dragan

panda100 wrote: »

So you think that women who sleep around deserve to be called names then?

When single i'll sleep with whoever i want. Doesn't bother me if they are married or engaged or what have you.

I should be called names.

So yes, they should.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

in extremis some women will ignore any thoughts of female solidarity

I'm sorry Wibbs but female solidarity is a myth. Men tend towards social cohesion and women tend towards social differentiation, it is a simple sociological fact. Labov, studying language shifts in New York, observed this trend and numerous other sociologists and anthropologists have observed similar trends.

There is no such thing as female solidarity.

gcgirl

Nobody
Style Icon
Movie Star
Serial Love Interest
Marraige
Divorce
Hello/VIP
Marraige
Divorce
VIP with new breasts
Sex video
Marraige to Rod Stewart
Divorce
Nobody

Sums Sienna up !

Wibbs

Dragan wrote: »

When single i'll sleep with whoever i want. Doesn't bother me if they are married or engaged or what have you.

I will say that most of the one night stands I've had it turned out they had a boyfriend. In two cases they were actually engaged. In my defence in most cases I found this out afterward. In the cases where I knew beforehand, they had told me they weren't single, but acted quite differently. Have women never wondered why telling a bloke that you have a boyfriend doesn't stop him trying it on? Mostly it's because they're muppets, but sometimes it's because they have experience that tells them it doesn't always matter(that goes for men too of course).

Deleted User wrote:

I'm sorry Wibbs but female solidarity is a myth. Men tend towards social cohesion and women tend towards social differentiation, it is a simple sociological fact. Labov, studying language shifts in New York, observed this trend and numerous other sociologists and anthropologists have observed similar trends.

There is no such thing as female solidarity.

Oh no I agree in general, or at least female loyalty to friends is ofetn different to how men's loyalty works(bros before hoes kinda thing). Especially when it comes to a man two of them want. Chris rock has something along those lines as part of his routine, a man shows up to meet his mates with a new girfriend who is gorgeous and lovely and generally wonderful. As he leaves his mates go, he's a lucky bastard, how did he pull her? I'm gonna get a woman like that. A woman shows up to meet her mates with Mr handsome and rich and wonderful and as she leaves her mates go; she's a lucky bitch, how did she pull him? I'm gonna get that man.:D

I do think it is in general though. I've women mates who have never or would never try it on with a friends bloke eve if they fancied the arse of him. I've see that payed out too. Women are very supportive of each other in other ways too. It's just when the contents of the pants are involved some are utterly ruthless.

Zaph

Dudess wrote: »

But then surely a man has to degrade himself more in order to get sex?

Look, some of us are just into that sort of thing, ok?

Jules

Ok, can i just clarify that this thread is not about sienna herself, she was used as an .. all together now... EXAMPLE!

Now we have gotten past that i agree Panda. I have had xx amount of sexual partners but my OH has been with xxx amount. He thinks it is shocking amount even thought i am older then him and he has been with more. Girls are branded sluts and slappers where guys are slapped on the back and told they are great.

Why?

Zaph

I suppose it's because historically the male imperative was to spread our seed as far and wide as possible, and so by sleeping with as many women as possible we'd doing our best to propogate the species, which was considered a manly thing to do. On the other hand, historically women were expected to look after the offspring of all this manliness, their role was as mere sperm recepticles and baby factories. A woman who actually enjoyed sex and sought it out would have been seen to be rebelling against what society expected of her, and therefore got labelled accordingly. Of course all of this is from the Dark Ages, you'd have thought we'd have grown up a bit by now, wouldn't you?

Dudess

Zaph wrote: »

Look, some of us are just into that sort of thing, ok?

Slut... :pac:

spinandscribble

The male slut term is CAD, but tbh i know a few guys that call themselves that.
I think she deserves those names, she knew what she was doing.

Yes, he should be called names too but i guess people have always thought this type of behaviour is typical of men and women know better. its not right so how about we come up with a word for a male slut?

Madame Razz

Meh, some people are just prejudiced, and some are on the eternal quest for perfection.

I find older men, ironically, less concerned by the number of sexual partners that a woman has had, compared to their younger counterparts. Younger men seems more hung up on it, but then they haven't been around long enough to realise that perfection doesn't exist, but that that special someone does.

I have been branded a slapper before(an unfair jibe I hasten to add), by somebody who quite literally would sleep with anything that moved(as long as it had a big wallet!) I thought this was priceless!! The parameters can widen/narrow as people see fit!!!

I have now reached the conclusion that some girls just wanna have fun, some girls have low self-esteem, and some girls are mercenary whores.

I dont dont dont do married men though....thats a whole different ball game, and one i certainly don't want to play;)

Zaph

spinandscribble wrote: »

The male slut term is CAD, but tbh i know a few guys that call themselves that.

Cad is a very outdated word, as is philanderer, which is the same thing. However, because their use is mired in the 20s and 30s, a lot of people seem to think that describing someone in those terms affords them a certain roguish charm. Slut, on the other hand, has lasted since the 15th century through to modern day, and consequently no-one is in any doubt what is meant when a woman is called a slut. It's also a much harsher sounding word, which adds to the venom when it's directed at someone. Unfortunate that it's turned out that way, as I agree that that sort of behaviour is not gender specific and it takes two to tango.

Reku

Kinetic^ wrote: »

The reason she's been branded as such is because of the target marked for retarded celeb mags/programs are 99% female. With women being exceptionally hateful towards one another, it sells more when it's the woman that's being a <insert slut alternative>.

Wibbs wrote: »

I have to say I think Kinetic^ has a point. I have found women are generally much worse than men at branding other women sluts, whores etc. You'll hear more women brand women, too fat, bad dress sense, bad mothers, too skinny, too pushy etc. Do not get me wrong men can be as bad sometimes, but not nearly to the same extent. Especially about complete strangers.

Most men would have ms miller on the radar as some tottie they've seen half naked in loaded, that as far as they recall was shagging that bloke jude law. That's about the extent of their knowledge. I would put money that most of those calling her a slapper are other women reading those mags and editors male and female serving it up to an audience that wants to read that guff.

Exactly, which gender is far more prone to using the term "slut" in a rather hateful manner, and actually has more of an actual issue with women behaving like this?
It'd probably simply down to gender, men try to relate to the man and so simply end up thinking about getting to have sex with the second woman as well as the first, whereas women try to relate to the females, but rather than choose to feel a sense of guilt prefer to empathise more with the man's original partner and so adopt a hostility to the second woman.


But then with all the geneology studies on the matter coming back with 30-40% of kids not being the children of the person who they thought was their father perhaps it's just that having a woman caught being the other woman or cheating on her partner is perhaps a bit too close to home for 30-40% (well technically less since in some instances more than one of these kids may be offspring of the same mother) of women with children, and so the best way to appear innocent is to jump to extreme condemnation of the woman who was caught.:rolleyes:

Hope the man's wife has enough sense to have left him.

WindSock

Thaedydal wrote: »

I find the idea that a man can not pass up sex on a plate even when he is in a committed relationship to be insulting.

Why are you insulted? Of course not all men have affairs when offered to them. I also didn't say they were at fault either if they do. I don't agree they should get off scot free when found out but I also think the Woman who chooses to go for the married man is disgusting. Not all men are as strong willed to be able to fight off temptation and there are women out there that know this. It's as if it gives them an ego boost to have a man that is married rather than a man that is single.

John Mason

Kinetic^ wrote: »

The reason she's been branded as such is because of the target marked for retarded celeb mags/programs are 99% female. With women being exceptionally hateful towards one another, it sells more when it's the woman that's being a <insert slut alternative>.

QFT

The only women and tabloids that are aimed at women that called each other names such hateful names. I would think men and myself couldnt give a flying f.cuk what she does, thats her business

WindSock

Wibbs wrote: »

A man with a girlfriend will get more attention than a woman with a boyfriend.

It's funny how this is, yet Men seem to get a lot more jealous if they see anothera Man chatting up his bird, rather than the other way around.

WindSock

Zaph wrote: »

and consequently no-one is in any doubt what is meant when a woman is called a slut. It's also a much harsher sounding word, which adds to the venom when it's directed at someone.

Men can be called Sleaze. Words with an 'uh' in them like cunt and slut seem to have a harsher sound though, so maybe the equivalent for a man is Scum? :pac:

Madame Razz

Surely the term male slapper or man whore suffices?? Thats what I would call any man who was a bit 'loose';)

Burial

manukahoney wrote: »

Surely the term male slapper or man whore suffices?? Thats what I would call any man who was a bit 'loose';)

This is what I've said, but no-one listened to me! No-one ever does

As from what I can gather, people are still annoyed as to why mainly girls are called "homewreckers". What they don't get is that, statistically speaking, it's mostly married men who sleep with single women. Therefore the woman is the homewrecker. If the roles were reversed the man is the "homewrecker". I ask people to find a celebrity couple in which a married woman slept with a single man. That man would be the homewrecker.

A homewrecker is someone who came into a marreid persons life and stole/took the OH away from them. So Sienna was the homewrecker....

*EDIT*

Dudess wrote:

Surely the married party (and in this case, parent) is also the homewrecker?

I would've thought so, but homewrecker is the person who had the affair with the married person...

Star Lord

panda100 wrote: »

Has anyone else been really pissed off by the unfair coverage of Sienna Miller in the media recently?

It's not exactly unfair...

I ask, why oh why is it always the (innocent) women that always gets the blame for marriage breakdowns/splits etc.

In fairness, she's far from innocent.

panda100 wrote: »

So you think that women who sleep around deserve to be called names then?

No, women who sleep with married men do, and the men deserve to be called all the names under the sun too for being complete bastards.

kizzyr

If a single woman sleeps with a man she knows is married or in a relationship with someone else she is wrong.
If a man who is married or in a relationship sleeps with a single woman he is wrong.
If a single man sleeps with a woman he knows is married or in a relationship with someone else he is wrong.
If a woman who is married or in a relationship sleeps with a single man she is wrong.
If two people who are in a committed relationship/ marriage sleep with someone else then they are wrong.


Its all wrong, as the single person you should respect that fact that they are off limits. As a married person/ person in committed relationship if you want to sleep around end the relationship, othewise its cheating and that makes you a scumbag whether you are male or female.

Dudess

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

No, women who sleep with married men do, and the men deserve to be called all the names under the sun too for being complete bastards.

But they don't get called all the names under the sun in these instances, whereas the woman does - I think that's what Panda's trying to say...

Red Hand

Dudess wrote: »

But they don't get called all the names under the sun in these instances, whereas the woman does - I think that's what Panda's trying to say...

Yes...but what do you want done about it?

Dudess

I don't know whether a whole lot can be done about it - there seems to be complacency about it and it's no help when a lot of that namecalling biased against the woman is by... women.

Dudess

Dudess wrote: »

But they don't get called all the names under the sun in these instances, whereas the woman does - I think that's what Panda's trying to say...

They do around my parts.

kizzyr

Dudess wrote: »

But they don't get called all the names under the sun in these instances, whereas the woman does - I think that's what Panda's trying to say...

It is an age old double standard and I agree that it is wrong and it is unfair. The double standard applies in many ways though. Take Madonna for example, I personally think she is great in a business sense. She makes the very most of what she has, never accepts anything less than the best from herself and those around her. As a result she is uber succesful. Yet many women I know say that they don't like her because she is too pushy and they don't like pushy women. Yet, they admire the drive and ambition of some one like Mick Jagger. :rolleyes:

kizzyr

kizzyr wrote: »

It is an age old double standard and I agree that it is wrong and it is unfair.

I don't think we have historically had that double standard in Ireland.
I think we have imported it via pop-culture.

Star Lord

Dudess wrote: »

But they don't get called all the names under the sun in these instances, whereas the woman does - I think that's what Panda's trying to say...

Moonbaby wrote: »

They do around my parts.

Around mine too.

Kinetic^

Thaedydal wrote: »

I find the idea that a man can not pass up sex on a plate even when he is in a committed relationship to be insulting.

I agree. This idea that "ah sure he's only a man" is a joke. In fact it irritates the bejesus out of me that people assume I can't control myself when in a relationship.

Star Lord

Thaedydal wrote: »

I find the idea that a man can not pass up sex on a plate even when he is in a committed relationship to be insulting.

Kinetic^ wrote: »

I agree. This idea that "ah sure he's only a man" is a joke. In fact it irritates the bejesus out of me that people assume I can't control myself when in a relationship.

Couldn't agree more with these posts. I would never, ever cheat on someone that I'd made any form of commitment to, be that from simply dating, engaged to or married.

Men CAN pass up "sex on a plate". Bastards can't.