What's your Point of View on this possible double standard?

Why does it seem that when a guy gets alot, we are viewed as "players" "pimps" or even sometimes "studs" but when a woman does the same thing she is viewed as a "whore" or "slut"?

Just curious on different folks points of views.

 

Because we allow our standards of morality to be dictated by a group of zealots who really really hate it when other people having more fun than they are.

 

Good point.

 

Women have control of who gets in, men have to hunt.

 

It's a double standard that I cannot see changing.

 

This is arguably THE best, most succinct answer to this question I have ever seen.

:cheers2:

 

while i think it extremely unfair, its not exactly a double standard. its true, generally speaking a guy has to really work at it, whereas a woman just has to give in and consent. therefore it is seen more as an "achievement" for a guy. i dont think either men or women should be judged for it. neither as stud or whore.

 

It is definitely a double standard. When the same action generates completely opposite responses and characterizations based on the sex of the one taking the action, it's the very definition of a double standard.

I should also make it clear that I don't agree with it, I just thought that gent47's way of expressing the attitude behind it was well put.

 

The double standard is bullshit.

 

This has always been true. It's true of most of the creatures on earth. Males seek out sex with as many females as possible, females control access to sex. It's just how Ma Nature designed it. There's no need to make value judgements on it.

If someone thinks that a woman is a "whore" because she controls access to sex, that's their problem, not hers.

 

It's not becuase she controls it, it's when she lets "too many" guys in. The problem, the societal characterization of a woman as a "slut" (I use slut rather than whore, as "whore" indicates prostitution to me) stems only from a woman being free with her sexuality and allowing what society (driven by religion) calls "too many" partners in.

 

The double standard will never go away, that's just how things are in this time we live in...

 

I've known many men (I know, fnarr, fnarr) who have controlled who gets a ride, just as I've know many women who control who gets in, and then the rest of the guys and gals I've known have fit into the other category.

Sometimes I've hunted, sometimes I've been the hunted. I like free love as long as it's for the right reasons and both/all parties understand what's happening, and everyone's clean and consensual.

And I feel like a whore/slut sometimes when I think of some of the things I've done but for the most part I've enjoyed it, I've been safe and clean and I've wanted to. The rest of the times can be put down to bad experience, alcohol and the after effects of things I won't speak about.

Each to their own but I think that good clean fun is fine and well if you're into it. Sex is still best in a loving relationship, but the thrill of something naughty is also amazing.

 

How bout this, may be it's a double standard because it's hard to be a Stud and effortless to be a slut. A stud has to be witty, charming, well-dressed, attractive, make decent money a slut just has to be there.

 

Wow Bonkai, good answer. It is worlds easier to have sex as a female then as a male. I know sometimes women have difficulty finding a partner... But it is still hardly comparable to how difficult it is for the average male to find one.

 

You guys have no idea what you're talking about. Women who want to look their best put a huge amount of time and effort into it. And dealing with the medical consequences of sex is a much bigger deal for us too.

 

I think that the point they're trying to make is that a woman doesn't HAVE to put all that time and effort into "beautifying" in order to find a partner (unless they're really shallow)(in fact, I despise the whole "made up" thing because it radiates lack of self confidence to me), whereas the desirable females won't go for the straight white-trash, dumpy looking guy.

I think the double standard needs to take into consideration the quality of the "kill", as it were. Probably putting too much thought into it, but if the whole purpose of courtship is to procure a physically superior mate to mingle genes with, then there are a whole lot of encounters that shouldn't count toward the judgment of "studly" or "slutty". Especially so the "studly" label.

*putsonflamesuit*

I so agree with the medical consequences thing. The fiance and I were just discussing this regarding our kids (1 boy, 1 girl), and I had to explain out the double standard about teenage sexuality, and why it's a bigger deal with the girl. The long and short is that our girl has the possibility of coming home pregnant, whereas our son doesn't. I don't approve necessarily of either one becoming sexually active in their teenage years, but the boy has less chance of harmful side effects in our home. I would definitely beat his ass into getting a job and taking care of whatever incident might arise from his promiscuity. The movie "Juno" comes to mind, wherein the girl has to deal with the entire ordeal by herself, while the boy that knocked her up is clueless throughout. That's not how it would happen in my household. If you're old enough to do "it", then you're old enough to live with and care for the consequences.

 

But even applying a minimal amount of makeup and drying longer hair takes a lot more time than most guys invest in their appearance. That seems to be the minimum expected effort level to satisfy most guys. If you want to maintain your weight and look like a cheerleader or stripper, then the time investment increases drastically. Some of the girls that do all that are the trashiest ones around, and usually have a competitive advantage in getting hot guys.

And even with the smaller problems, there is no equality. Most guys seem to have no concept of how miserable a bacterial or yeast infection can be for us. They don't have anything comparable. There are also several STDs that cause much greater problems for girls than guys. The guys just don't know how lucky they are.

 

Agreed Mistress, I think it is amazing that women can do what they can do. There are serious risks involved... It is truly spectacular. As far as I'm concerned the male needs to put forth as much as possible effort and responsibility in attempts to meet the female in participation. Obviously the male cannot do as much as the female, unfortunately for us we weren't given that gift. Though we have to do what we can at the very least...

Yes Karen, I think you did misunderstand what I meant. No worries though, I can see how you could take it that way. I was referring to how a girl could walk up to just about any guy for the most part and he would be ready to go... Where as the male has to try significantly harder...

No saying it is right or wrong... I'm just bringing the point to light.

 

Yes, because the girl has put in her time and effort beforehand. Some guys know how much trouble we go to, and some don't.

There can be a serious downside to a woman looking too good. Guys tend to be interested for only one reason, and other women instantly go into catfight mode. It isn't the wonderful, carefree life that people think it is.