jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (17 posts)

Double Standards: Men and Women Sexuality, Who has it worst? Better?

  1. deecoleworld profile image84
    deecoleworldposted 3 years ago

    Define a woman who sleeps with a lot men. Now define a man who does the same? What are some words and adjectives used to describe such a woman? What are some words and adjectives used to describe such a man? What do you think of these labels? What about your personal experiences?

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Not too bright, considering the spread of STD's, with or without protection.

      Not too bright, considering the spread of STD's, with or without protection.

      I think both are reasonable.  My experience bears both out; those that are consumed by sex are either not too bright or have a mental problem of some kind.  I did see a film about a woman (British, I think) that required sex from strangers several times a week.  Her problem was eventually traced to a chemical brain imbalance and cured - she even kept her husband through it all.

      1. deecoleworld profile image84
        deecoleworldposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        that is an interesting perspective  .... its seems stds are everywhere and no is safe

    2. HowardBThiname profile image87
      HowardBThinameposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      "Define a woman who sleeps with a lot men."

      Slut.

      " Now define a man who does the same?"

      Stud.

      " What are some words and adjectives used to describe such a woman?"

      Skanky ho. Whoring around. Desperate.

      What are some words and adjectives used to describe such a man?"

      Playboy. Ladies' man.

      "What do you think of these labels? What about your personal experiences?"

      They are obviously unfair but there's more to the equation than just looking down on promiscuous females and putting promiscuous males on a pedestal.

      Both are sexual creatures but both experience very different responses from open sexuality.

      Wilderness is right - the risk of STDs should put an end to casual sex, but because the sex drive is so strong - hormone-pumped people will probably continue to behave irresponsibly.

      Sexual acceptance and equality for females is a double-edged sword. Do you remember those slut-walks of a few years ago? Young women claiming they had the "right" to dress trashy and parade themselves half-clothed?

      While their hearts were in the right place, they were playing right into the hands of every straight man alive. After a century of feminists burned bras and demanded that they not be objectified by their bodies, the slut-walkers did just the opposite. They became the public persona of the stripper every man wants to watch but is afraid to go to the club and do so.

      Females have a tougher road when it comes to sexuality. Not fair - but there it is.

      1. deecoleworld profile image84
        deecoleworldposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Very good points and responses ... do you agree/support with these labels and definitions of promiscuous men and women? why or why not?

      2. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Don't know about "fair" - women have advantages in the area, too.

        "Give me what I want or I'll shut you off".  Just let a man try that and see how far it goes.  Sex can be and very often is a weapon to women.

        Sex is also very definitely a hook, or bait.  Consider the normal dress of the sexes; women consistently approach dressing very sexually, men do not.  Women, for example, expose a great deal more skin, including right to the current social limit - that would be quite abnormal for a male. 

        So even the normal day-to-day dress code is a little along the lines of the slut-walk (never heard of it).  Personally, I see it as built-in evolutionary wise as the strong sex drive of men.

    3. dashingscorpio profile image87
      dashingscorpioposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Define a woman who sleeps around - "A slut is a woman who behaves like a man."  I heard a female comedian say that once. :-)
      Generally speaking most men and women frown upon women who sleep around. Conservative women hate it because they feel like the "loose women" are a threat to their relationships by "tempting" their men. They blame these women for changing traditional courtship values.

      When a man sleeps around with beautiful women he is thought to have some kind of "magic spell" that "seduces" them. Getting a "hot looking" woman is seen as a (challenge). Other men want to know his "secret". 

      On the other hand if a woman sleeps around no one considers that to be a challenge after all most men are ready to have sex! She is expected to have a much (easier) time to get men.

      It's like comparing a guy who goes out (prospecting) to sell products on commission facing rejection over and over again; versus a woman who works the order desk where people are (contacting her) to get the product!
      Naturally the person who has the most "challenging job" and is successful will be admired more than the person who simply answers the phone and takes orders.

      With the advent of the sexual revolution,  the birth control pill, better career opportunities and higher pay some women want to be seen as equal to men in all areas of life including sexually.

      Men generally only care about (men) respecting them. If the men admire them women follow their lead. Men for the most part do not knock each other for their sexual behavior. They also don't care what women think!

      Seriously I don't believe (women) admire men who sleep around with a lot of women. They call them "dogs", "liars", "cheaters", "a-holes", and "no good". There are also have always been some women who see these guys a "challenge". They won't to be "the one" to get him to finally commit. This is especially true if the man is good looking, successful, and respected by other men.

      One can only imagine what it would be like if women didn't care what men think! Suppose women also did not put other women down or call  them names for doing exactly what many women do?
      You would have a situation where both genders are supported by their own. Neither women or men would be attacked or put down by (both) genders.

      The reason why this will never happen is because women are very "competitive" with one another. They not only put each other down for their sexual behavior but they will knock each other for their weight, the clothes they wear, hairstyles.. If two women wear similar outfits People Magazine will pose the question: "Who wore it best?" The whole stroll down "The Red Carpet" for awards show is for women to critique other women's gowns/dresses. Whenever a magazine shows a female celebrity without make up or with cellulite it makes a lot of women feel better about themselves! Men don't get caught up with "competing" with one another's clothes and appearance. Women could stop the double standard if they stopped putting each other down and didn't a damn about what men think.

      1. profile image0
        Beth37posted 3 years agoin reply to this

        For the most part I agreed up until the last paragraph. The minute a man sees another man outclassing him in any way, he is quick to call him a ____. Men are ultra competitive and what do they compete for more than women? Whether movies, books or real life, I have seen men belittle other men the first chance they get, if they think the other man is making him look less-than in any way.

      2. dashingscorpio profile image87
        dashingscorpioposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        I meant to say there have always been women who see men who have lots of women as being a "challenge". They want to be "the one" who finally gets him to commit.
        Women could stop the double standard if they stopped putting each other down and didn't (give) a damn about what men think. This is not likely to happen.

        Women respect other women who are able to get men to marry them. The perception is men don't want to get married or commit. This is their "challenge". Not many men are going to reject sex with attractive woman. That's "easy".

        Therefore both genders are respecting what they consider to be the "challenge" among their sex. A man who seduces beautiful women is respected because he is seen as overcoming a (challenge). A woman who has a man considered to be a "catch" that pleads for her hand to marry him is admired by other women because it's viewed a challenge.

        It's the perception of overcoming a (challenge) that garners respect from one's own gender.

        1. profile image0
          Beth37posted 3 years agoin reply to this

          I think some women are highly respected when they turn down "the challenge" (securing a loving, good looking, successful, husband) and choose some other satisfying path entirely. It's like women everywhere look at this phenomenon, hit their own heads v-8 style and collectively say, "That was an option?"

          1. WD Curry lll profile image61
            WD Curry lllposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Yep, I saw that just today. Every woman stopped and simultaneously slapped themselves in the head. It was quite a phenomenon!

  2. profile image0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    It's interesting that we assume a woman like that is really just wounded and a man like that is just going with his natural instincts.

    I think something is broken inside each of them. I think the man is likely less aware of his emotional needs and might not realize that it is that need he is actually trying to fill.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Would that imply that a woman is aware her actions are resulting from emotional failures, but is not strong or smart enough to override her emotions with reason?

      It doesn't sound too complimentary to either sex, which is probably fair enough given their actions.

      1. profile image0
        Beth37posted 3 years agoin reply to this

        No, it's not complimentary... like any weakness or shortcoming, it is chalked up under the negatives column. Smart enough? That would depend on the person. Strong enough? Well if he/she realizes they are compensating, consciously trading sex for love, then I would say... they weren't strong enough. Like any addiction, one simply has to say no, but for what ever reason, the individuals say yes.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          And, just maybe, those individuals do not follow the same moral code most of us do and find nothing intrinsically wrong with sex.  Given that they accept the physical risks, that the value received is more than the probable price to be paid, it becomes quite reasonable to have a hundred partners.  Presumably Soloman slept with lots of different women...

          Can't say I would agree, but can understand such thinking.

          1. profile image0
            Beth37posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            When it comes to sex, moral codes seem to fly out the window faster than the speed of light. There have been many a good man and woman, who in a moment, found resisting certain opportunities nearly impossible. What are we talking about again? lol

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              All too true, unfortunately.  Because I want, I can have and hang the morals for the moment.

 
working