Exactly. Great points. Times have changed, that's for sure! I remember a half century ago when pretty much all girls by high school were getting laid frequently and loving it. (or did a convincing job of acting). There were a handful prudish 'save themselves for marriage' types but most girls were down for it. And essentially all the girls who came out to parties. And why not? It was pre-aids, other stds were fairly rare but handleable, birth control pills were the norm, thus, bareback sex was abundant. Some "promiscuous" girls would have boyfriends who they'd do all the time and when they wanted someone else they'd break up and start doing the next boyfriend. Others made it perfectly clear they didn't want to settle on one boyfriend but wanted any friends they could have whenever. That was a common thing then. You just fucked whoever you hit it off with at the time then said let's do it again sometime. More often than not they were still wet from the guy before and nobody thought the less of it. Further, most girls didn't shower so often then and they smelled the part, which was sexually exciting and produced uncontrollable hardons. Smelling a girl's pussy through her clothes was a delightful sign of getting lucky. Which also in those days, we'd wear jeans for months without laundering which helped. Lots of girls were not embarrassed in the least to have cum buildup in their jeans crotch. It was kind of a sign of accomplishment. Imagine that. And underwear wasn't that popular then. A couple would go at it pretty much anywhere, in a car, in a wooded area, bathrooms, wherever was handy. People in general were not uptight about it. Cops might send people on their way but certainly not arrest anyone for it who wasn't being belligerent. Once everybody came, it was pull the jeans back on, nobody asked for tissues to wipe up or anything, it was nice then to be wet. Some of these girls would do half a dozen guys at one party like that. And not be showered the next day and of course wearing the same jeans she'd done that in many times before! Nobody complained. It was actually very nice and the girls smelled very sexy which of course got them lots of action. Wish I knew where some of those girls were today... but I digress. Point is, promiscuity had a much better rep back in those days. And nobody was shooting up schools or anything! They were too busy enjoying life with bareback sex, smoking a bit of pot, and whatever. Even rape seemed like a rare thing, people were more chill, and more open to have more sex with more people. And all of society benefited.
I'm not particularly interested in sluts. They're nothing special to me. I guess they're not really anything special to anyone, except on a sexual level. But on an intellectual level, it's not like anybody strictly wants to be with them. Or if they do their hearts will be crushed. So I guess it kind of devalues people's worth in my opinion. But some people just don't have like, dreams and stuff...at least not big dreams. A slut might want to own a fancy car or something, but that's nothing. Sluts are going to be sluts, because sex is everything for them. It all kind of makes me sick, really. Thinking about the people who someone might love very much who just don't give a damn about anything but their own pleasure. Screw 'em, I guess. Literally. People want to be important to other people. Who you get intimate with is supposed to be very important. If who you have sex with isn't important to you, don't expect someone to feel like they ARE important to you. Some people, with sex, simultaneously don't seem to think it's very important but it's also all they ever seem to be concerned about. You can't have it both ways.
^ This post makes perfectly clear how worthless an opinion on sluts in general usually is. Great job! They're not interesting by definition because they must lack intelligence or dreams lol Ah well, your loss
No, that's not why they're not interesting. It's the gratuitous sex that makes them not interesting. I can be interested in people who are unintelligent and have no dreams. I'm interested in those sorts of people all the time. It's totally their emphasis on physical pleasure that makes sluts boring, in my opinion. Do I think that emphasis is unintelligent? Yes. Do I think they place so much emphasis on it that they can't have any real concrete idea of what is good for society? Yes. You can have it.
There is a double standard in society. If a man gets sex he is praised but if a women has sex she is too easy. I think that is because men have to work for sex. You need to be handsome or smart to acomplish it. With women as long as you have a pulse and are not horribly ugly you can always have sex. Even if the man does not think you are pretty you are pretty enough for meaningless sex if he drinks enough. It sounds harsh but it is true. With that said I do not judge women who have sex. Much of that comes from a religious background that says women need to be virgins for their husband. It's a way of owning her and her experiences. Historically it's been fine for a man to have a few practice girls or hookers before marriage. He can have what she can not. She will never know any better than his bedrooms skills. It means he does not have to be insecure I guess. But I do think some women use sex as a boost to their self esteem and that is an issue that should be addressed.
I like promiscuity as much as the next person, but I think there is something to be said for self-esteem. There are some obvious problems with promiscuous behaviors that can negatively impact women and men alike. Right now there is a problem with sexually transmitted diseases; I can't remember if it's just in my area or all of California. It's not necessarily the same everywhere you go, but there are always risks. Unwanted pregnancy is another potential issue. So, I guess I'm not a big fan of promiscuity, and really don't like it as much as the next person. I'd still like to get laid, but it's been awhile and I hope that I can get to that point by virtue of knowing someone well enough rather than by virtue of promiscuity alone.
^^^ hence the difference between careless promiscuity and selective promiscuity. I would like a gal who has several other sexual partners besides myself, but carefully vetted ones where bareback sex can be mutually enjoyed by all of us without fear of contracting anything.
Bigger may enter the picture, but ya gotta admit there's nothing like variety, for so many reasons. Plus, some of us find it particularly enticing and arousing that we're eating and pumping a lady who freely admits someone else has unloaded in her recently. Especially if it's obvious with evidence.
These girls were clean enough. But not obsessive. We didn't consider the aftermath of sexual relations dirty. It's a natural thing. Anal wasn't exactly a thing then. And I don't remember any HS girls being into deodorants or make up, at least not the girls who smoked, drank, and partied then. I didn't hang out with any prissy ones. Early seventies, DC area. Where'd you come from and when?
My ex was afraid of my size. (Even though it's not THAT big. I don't think.) I just really, despite being a normal, perfectly well-endowed man, don't like emphasis placed on physical pleasure. I find it to be a form of escapism and disingenuous. It also gets really gross, as evidenced by above posters. I mean, Jesus, how lewd are you people. "Oh golly gee, I just love to see dozens of men lined up to fuck some girl. Oh and I really love her too. She's my Sally Sue, and together we're gonna open a drive-thru McDonald's someday."
clearly you're not from a small town. women here are on marriage number two before they're legally allowed to buy their own alcohol.
Is it quantifiable? How many women does a girl have to sleep with for her to be a slut? And how many does a guy? I mean, Wilt Chamberlin's 20,000 partners probably counts.