nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why "sluts" and "studs" are not the same thing, and never will be

[Deleted User]

Are people still confused by this? If so, read this and all will be answered. It's basic biology and basic economics.

<<Snip>>

I'm just looking for opinions, not to stir up flame wars or anything like that. We've come to a bizarre zeitgeist where any talk of innate differences between men and women is "sexist". I can assure you, I haven't a sexist bone in my body.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

Winsock - yeah, it depends. I wrote about the numbers thing initially but took it out because it was too vague. But a blunt rule of thumb: If a girl in her mid-20s has slept with more than 20 guys, she's a slut. That includes blowjobs, etc.

Dudess wrote: »

Like what?

Certain ad homs that made me chuckle.

Right, to the leaba!

Later folks

Dudess

... but you won't say what they are. Everyone bar one seems to be pretty reasonable towards you (unless you consider mere disagreement unreasonable) - I can't see what projecting you're talking about.

eternal

OutlawPete wrote: »

That's a great opening line to a poem, seriously - I want more

Laugh all you want but I have poems published .(No lie.)

eternal

Killed thread .

Gordon

eternal wrote: »

Killed thread .

But did you care whether it lived or died?

Sisko

Its a very good article with a lot of truth in it , a bit too general but good all the same.

It does its job and answers the question.

I would like to see it debated from the female side however on the same level as that article was written. So far unfortunately its just been nit picking at posts or sentences.

Btw a slut I guess, being the female version of a 'man whore' is a chick who's goal is to sleep with as many different men as humanly possible.

All the girls getting their back up for merely having a healthy sex life need to relax a bit.

Unfortunately the slut label results in women not wanting to be seen chatting up men, where as most guys would love it if women were more active in this regard.

eternal

Gordon wrote: »

But did you care whether it lived or died?

Very witty ,unlike the dire jokes in the jobs thread .

liah

When the hell will people grow the hell up and stop using crap like this to justify their hypocritical, judgmental, and frankly, hateful attitudes?

Stop bringing up this "master key" and "men chase, women choose" bull. It doesn't do anything for your argument. In fact, it just makes you look like an asshole. Why?

Because we're freaking human beings. We're not a goddamn lock and we're not a goddamn key. This isn't some game, this isn't some competition - we're people, not your freaking pawns. Sex isn't a "prize." You're not better than someone just because they have sex with you. What the hell even makes you think that? What is so wrong with your ego that you have to come to that conclusion about someone? Who the hell are you to judge why someone has sex simply based on their gender?

You (collective "you" for anyone who thinks of people as sluts yet sleeps with them) spend all this time manipulating us into the sack and then start calling us lesser human beings and "sluts" because of it. Because we enjoy the physical act of sex with you. Do you not understand how hypocritical and ridiculous that is? We have sex for THE EXACT SAME REASONS YOU DO. And YOU slept with US, too! And you call us lesser ("slut," "insecure," "messed up") for it without even a hint of irony, or a thought that if you can apply it to her, she could apply it to you! What the hell does that say about you?

Just freaking THINK about what you're saying. Think about how it makes you feel as a human being, not as a man, not as a woman, but as a person with actual thoughts and emotions. Engage your empathy a little. How it would feel to be objectified, manipulated, seduced and then shamed and branded a slut, all because you had sex? Why would you even want to do that to another human being? Seriously? Why do you enjoy the fact that you have so little consideration for another person? Why do you laud that, why are you proud of that?

Chrissake. I don't care how this comes across. This one's been pent up for a good long time, I don't give a crap how it's received, I won't be coming back to the thread, so don't bother replying to it. Just really, really needed to get that out of my system.

Cop the hell on and drop the judgment. I guarantee you that unless you're not human, you're no bloody angel, so drop the namecalling and take a second or two to actually understand what it is you're saying, and the impact it may have on another person who has thoughts and an ego and feelings just the same as you do. If you still want to say crap like that, and have it in your head that women who have sex just as much as you are somehow "beneath" you (skip the jokes).. well, just stay the hell away from me.

Dudess

Sisko wrote: »

Its a very good article with a lot of truth in it , a bit too general but good all the same.

It does its job and answers the question.

I would like to see it debated from the female side however on the same level as that article was written. So far unfortunately its just been nit picking at posts or sentences.

Not true. Read the responses again - females have given a pretty broad reaction. Methinks you're doing as the OP and just not liking that they're in disagreement.

And whatever about there being truth in the article (which I acknowledged) it's not nice to read some of the stuff the OP says like "Empty my balls into" (and not in a joking sense) - but of course, no, women shouldn't object to that. That would be just irrational of them.

OutlawPete

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Sometimes I truly think men are insane. They contradict themselves at every turn.

If a guy said similar regarding women, he would most likely be told he was using 'misogyny'. So on that basis you are using 'misandry' - equally as contemptible, or at least it should be. Any particular reason why you think "Men are insane"? Or was your opinion that "they" appear to contradict themselves "at every turn" the reasoning for such misandric ****e.

sock puppet

OutlawPete wrote: »

If a guy said similar regarding women

Ha what are you talking about? We say similar stuff practically every day!

eternal

Men are from Mars -Women from Venus.
kill thread x 2

Dudess

liah wrote: »

When the hell will people grow the hell up and stop using crap like this to justify their hypocritical, judgmental, and frankly, hateful attitudes?

Stop bringing up this "master key" and "men chase, women choose" bull. It doesn't do anything for your argument. In fact, it just makes you look like an asshole. Why?

Because we're freaking human beings. We're not a goddamn lock and we're not a goddamn key. This isn't some game, this isn't some competition - we're people, not your freaking pawns. Sex isn't a "prize." You're not better than someone just because they have sex with you. What the hell even makes you think that? What is so wrong with your ego that you have to come to that conclusion about someone? Who the hell are you to judge why someone has sex simply based on their gender?

You (collective "you" for anyone who thinks of people as sluts yet sleeps with them) spend all this time manipulating us into the sack and then start calling us lesser human beings and "sluts" because of it. Because we enjoy the physical act of sex with you. Do you not understand how hypocritical and ridiculous that is? We have sex for THE EXACT SAME REASONS YOU DO. And YOU slept with US, too! And you call us lesser ("slut," "insecure," "messed up") for it without even a hint of irony, or a thought that if you can apply it to her, she could apply it to you! What the hell does that say about you?

Just freaking THINK about what you're saying. Think about how it makes you feel as a human being, not as a man, not as a woman, but as a person with actual thoughts and emotions. Engage your empathy a little. How it would feel to be objectified, manipulated, seduced and then shamed and branded a slut, all because you had sex? Why would you even want to do that to another human being? Seriously? Why do you enjoy the fact that you have so little consideration for another person? Why do you laud that, why are you proud of that?

Chrissake. I don't care how this comes across. This one's been pent up for a good long time, I don't give a crap how it's received, I won't be coming back to the thread, so don't bother replying to it. Just really, really needed to get that out of my system.

Cop the hell on and drop the judgment. I guarantee you that unless you're not human, you're no bloody angel, so drop the namecalling and take a second or two to actually understand what it is you're saying, and the impact it may have on another person who has thoughts and an ego and feelings just the same as you do. If you still want to say crap like that, and have it in your head that women who have sex just as much as you are somehow "beneath" you (skip the jokes).. well, just stay the hell away from me.

The bit in bold I disagree with, but otherwise, well said.

Sisko wrote: »

All the girls getting their back up for merely having a healthy sex life need to relax a bit.

Where? You appear to be seeing stuff that's not as prevalent as you say it is. Considering all the awful stuff the OP was saying, the girls on this thread were mostly very calm actually - walking on eggshells. Possible for him to say what he wanted to say without using such horrible language.

OutlawPete wrote: »

If a guy said similar regarding women, he would most likely be told he was using 'misogyny'. So on that basis you are using 'misandry' - equally as contemptible, or at least it should be. Any particular reason why you think "Men are insane"? Or was your opinion that "they" appear to contradict themselves "at every turn" the reasoning for such misandric ****e.

I agree there isn't any need for "Men are xyz" comments to be fair.

Jesus Wept

Wibbs wrote: »

One of the biggest "sluts" (and cheaters too)I've ever known is and always has been incredibly well balanced emotionally. Really has her stuff together. Though like I said she was/is a very discreet person. I'd say me and only one other mate knows the score. In her circles no one would think of her that way. Goes for a fair few of the very promiscuous women I know and have known. So I'd say public sluts are low self esteem, private ones quite the opposite.

It's like the idea that women go through the "bad boy" phase because they're low in self esteem. Yep again some are, but mostly not so much. They go for the bad boys or so called bad boys because I think it's that they're simply more fun. They're more emotionally engaging, even if they're not so nice emotions, a real rollercoaster ride and that's fun. Yep they grow out of that, but it's a gas while it lasts.

tbh, if she is one of the biggest cheaters you have ever known, I have to question how well balanced emotionally she is.

Is it possible that she just has a massive lack of empathy with regard to some people/men that she is a relationship with?
I say this because, if she were so well balanced, then she wouldn't feel the need to have relationships and cheat, she could just be single and have lots of sexual partners or she could seek an open relationship.
Instead she has relationships but cheats within those relationships constantly.

OutlawPete

sock puppet wrote: »

Ha what are you talking about? We say similar stuff practically every day!

Yes and users that say stuff like that get called on it everyday, which is my point.

Wibbs

MonkeyBalls wrote: »

Hi Wibbs. First, check out the study if you're interested; I entirely agree with what you said about them. As for "eh no", I disgree - but that's a tedious semantic blurry-line discussion that I've no interest in.

Man this is textbook deflection stuff MB.

Next, saying I'm thankful for the existence of loose women doesn't mean I'm a "pua guru". It means I enjoy emptying the contents of my balls inside a vagina without having to invest too heavily in its outer accouterments.

Ah man it's too easy, too easy

Some people in this forum have difficultly differentiating the concepts "generally", "most", "some", and "all". Not necessarily you, Wibbs.

Oh damned by faint insult.

Better than the usual Ted, defo better than the usual.

The-Rigger wrote:

tbh, if she is one of the biggest cheaters you have ever known, I have to question how well balanced emotionally she is.

Is it possible that she just has a massive lack of empathy with regard to some people/men that she is a relationship with?
I say this because, if she were so well balanced, then she wouldn't feel the need to have relationships and cheat, she could just be single and have lots of sexual partners or she could seek an open relationship.
Instead she has relationships but cheats within those relationships constantly.

I suppose TR it depends on ones personal value judgements. Also it does depend on that 11th commandment "don't get caught". So many relationships out there that are doing pretty well have dodgy enough foundations if one digs deep enough. I'll give you the lack of empathy part though. Very much so. Well.. it's focused empathy, like us all. Focused on whom she wants to focus it on, she(and others like her, male and female) are just more narrow.

4zn76tysfajdxp

OutlawPete wrote: »

If a guy said similar regarding women, he would most likely be told he was using 'misogyny'. So on that basis you are using 'misandry' - equally as contemptible, or at least it should be. Any particular reason why you think "Men are insane"? Or was your opinion that "they" appear to contradict themselves "at every turn" the reasoning for such misandric ****e.

Here we go again...

Johro

MonkeyBalls wrote: »

Are people still confused by this? If so, read this and all will be answered. It's basic biology and basic economics.

http://apesinelysium.blogspot.com/2011/02/sluts-versus-studs-definitive-guide.html

I'm just looking for opinions

Couldn't stick that for too long, it's an awful read. Apart from being badly written, it's bollocks.

sock puppet

OutlawPete wrote: »

Yes and users that say stuff like that get called on it everyday, which is my point.

Not really. Men and women always say crap like that to their friends or to each other. It's a bit of a slagging ffs no need for the persecution complex.

Novella

MonkeyBalls wrote: »

But a blunt rule of thumb: If a girl in her mid-20s has slept with more than 20 guys, she's a slut. That includes blowjobs, etc.

Okay. Mid-twenties, so we'll say a 25 year old female. You're saying that a 25 year old woman who has engaged in any sexual activity at all with over 20 guys is therefore a slut? Do you realise that that's actually ridiculous?

If she had her first sexual experience at 15, that's 10 years. That is 2 partners a year and by your rule, she needn't have even slept with all of them. I don't see how that is excessive by any means.

OutlawPete

sock puppet wrote: »

Men and women always say crap like that to their friends or to each other.

I am talking about on Boards - not what men and women are saying to their friends.

AskMyChocolate

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Yeah theres more to it than that. Alot of texting me and wearing me down first. And having about 4 other girls on the go, and making you feel wrong when you questioned him, that he didnt know what he wanted at the minute. How dare you question him kinda thing. What do men think alpha male behaviour is out of curiosity?

Alpha-males are far more concerned about what they think of themselves than what other people think of them. They have no interest in being perceived as an Alpha-male by either their mates or women. This is possibly an innate arrogance stemming from their belief that their opinion of themselves is more important than anyone else's opinion of them. If you want a bloke's opinion of an Alpha-male think Paul Newman or Chuck Feeney rather than Charlie Sheen or Gerry Ryan.

sandmanporto

i'm not a big sporty jock, but im a cute looking dirty boyo! I've impressed big time!

sandmanporto

**** if u got an 8'' boyo down there ur made!

sandmanporto

alpha males are all image and talk plus fight! Means zero really!

Da Shins Kelly

I think it was mentioned here already, but the term "slut" is bandied about a bit too much, in my opinion. To the point where some girls feel judged for even just talking to certain men who might have a rep or even just getting the shift with some randomer. Everyone is a "slut" by a lot of people's standards these days.

PrincessLola

So we should be allowed to have to slut/stud double standard because biology backs it up?
In that case fathers-rights groups will have to shut the f*ck up because biology backs the fact that women are the primary care-givers.

Just sayin' that just because there is scientific data behind it doesn't make it okay.

OutlawPete

I think people are posting without reading the article or indeed, even the thread. It's not about the 'word' slut, it's about the very concept that society has that women who sleep around are somehow of lesser worth than a man.

I realise that the word 'slut' is being used in the thread title and is also in the title of the article in fact, but to focus on the word and word alone, misses some of the points made and whether you (collective you) agree with them or not, some of them are quite valid.

Perhaps it would be best to use less emotive words when discussing the subject as I think the word 'slut' carries with it such negative connotations and weight, that it suffocates any possibility of a rational debate on just why society thinks less of a women that is as promiscuous as her male peers.

dominiquecruz

I think the concept should be eradicated; its disadvantageous for both sexes. Women calling women sluts only makes it OK for them too to be classed as such. Men calling women sluts discourages promiscuous sexual behaviour.

I say, hurrah for sluts. Both men and women. Lets all have more sex

Agonist

The article was interesting enough not to need jibing insults towards women, particularly in the addendum. That kind of thing is not going to lead to productive debate but will probably lead to louder, lower quality debate.

Insofar as what the OP said about biology and evolutionary imperatives it's all well and good, ut isn't there a case to be made that humans are able to live independently from their instincts a good deal of the time?

In general, and according to "stereotype", the points hold true but in normal life not necessarily. If you hang out with science PhDs you won't find the women being labelled as sluts. The women will be in the minority and highly prized. If you hand around with accountants the women just won't be attracted to the guys who are having the most sex.

However, I think that the unemployed guys who father eight children by five different women will always be able to find a mate. It's always going to be harder to find examples that break the rule.

I think that as people marry later now, there's a good chunk of your twenties where it's fine for both sexes to enjoy plenty of sex and it's not going to impact on your future long term mate.