"Promiscuous women are labeled as sluts but promiscuous men are called studs" debunked. The myth of the sexual double standard.

There's this common misconception that many people: they believe that promiscuous women are called sluts and promiscuous men are called studs. This isn't really that true. It's mostly a myth. It's just something society says is true but society isn't right about everything. The best evidence people have for this is anecdotal evidence (and anecdotal evidence is NOT evidence because anecdotes can vary and aren't generalizable).

Empirical evidence research has been conducted for whether this double standard exists or not. Although some empirical evidence shows there's indeed a double standard, a lot of empirical evidence, more often than not, shows there isn't any double standard at all. Both are stigmatized.

According to "Sexual History and Present Attractiveness: People Want a Mate With a Bit of a Past, But Not Too Much":

Other research has addressed the issue of whether there is a weaker form of the sexual double standard in the west, such that some past sexual activity is acceptable for both sexes but promiscuity acceptable for men only. Again, the evidence is mixed, with some studies finding evidence for this asymmetry but others finding none. O’Sullivan (1995), for instance, pre- dicted that women with high numbers of casual sexual partners would be evaluated more negatively than men but did not find any such difference. Similarly, Allison and Risman (2013) found that around 48% of college students lost respect for both sexes equally if they hooked up “a lot,” 27% lost respect for neither sex, 12% held a traditional double standard, and 13% held a reverse double standard (i.e., lost more respect for men than for women; see also Kreager & Staff, 2009; Mark & Miller, 1986; Marks & Fraley, 2005).

In a 2005 study of 144 undergraduate college students and 8,080 online users, participants looked at experimental targets described as either male or female and as having a variable number of sexual partners. Targets were more likely to be viewed negatively as the amount of sexual partners increased, and this was the case for both male and female targets. In the abstract of The Sexual Double Standard (1998) by Margaret Gentry, Gentry wrote:

The sexual double standard posits that men have greater sexual freedom than women, and that society accepts and tolerates from men certain sexual behaviors, such as premarital or extramarital sex, that it does not from women. After predicting the demise of the sexual double standard following liberalization of sexual attitudes and behaviors in the 1960s and 1970s, researchers are still debating the status of the sexual double standard. Has the sexual double standard disappeared in the United States? If it continues to operate, does it do so in its traditional form or in a more subtle form? Empirical support can be found for a variety of answers to these questions; however, most of the studies have failed to provide strong evidence for the operation of a traditional sexual double standard.

Gentry's research of 111 undergraduate college men and 143 undergraduate women revealed no proof of a sexual double standard where promiscuous men are viewed positively but promiscuous women are viewed negatively.

According to a 1996 Spokesman-Review article:

Lucia F. O’Sullivan surveyed 256 young men and women on their attitudes toward men and women with varying levels of sexual experience. Both men and women described as having more sex partners were judged as being significantly less well-adjusted, less moral, more aggressive, “less desirable as a dating partner and less desirable as a spouse” than people with less sexual experience, O’Sullivan wrote in the journal Sex Roles.

Her research is just the latest in a series of studies that cast a skeptical eye on notions of a sexual double standard. It echoes, for example, the results of another study. In this one, of 750 students at three universities, it was found that men and women rated sexually experienced men as being less desirable as friends or potential husbands than those who had fewer lovers. Likewise, both sexes rated more promiscuous women as poorer bets as pals or wives.

According to "The Sexual Double Standard: Cultural Myth or Influential Script in Relation to the Sexual Assertiveness of Men and Women in Two Generational Cohorts?" by Carol Anne Austin:

According to the sexual double standard (SDS), men and women are scripted to express differing levels of sexual assertiveness (SA). However, the effects of this script may be changing with fewer individuals directly implementing the SDS when making judgments about the sexual behaviour of others; yet most still believe in a societal SDS. Analysis was conducted on 339 heterosexual men and women of two age cohorts (18-25 and 35- 42). Consistent with past findings, rates of belief in the SDS were higher than rates of implementation. Belief in the SDS predicted higher levels of SA in women of the older cohort only and implementation of the SDS did not predict levels of SA in any of the groups. The continued impact of the SDS on sexual behaviour is of interest to sex therapists and educators, as it has been known to influence sexual coercion, safer sex practices, and sexual satisfaction.

Individuals' belief in a societal sexual double standard is thought to be independent of the way people actually evaluate one another, thus implement the sexual double standard (Marks & Fraley, 2005). Rates of belief in a societal sexual double standard are high, yet observed implementation of the sexual double standard is lower now than in the past (Marks & Fraley, 2005). That is to say, individuals themselves still believe in a societal sexual double standard (i.e. perceptions of others in society endorsing the sexual double standard), however they no longer seem to implemented the sexual double standard when making judgments on others (Milhausen & Herold, 1999, 2001).

The purpose of this investigation was to explore how belief in a societal sexual double standard, and direct implementation of the sexual double standard when making judgments on the sexual behaviours of others, uniquely influence the sexual assertiveness of men and women of differing generational age cohorts. Belief and implementation of the sexual double standard were determined to be distinct constructs that vary independently. This means that an individual can believe a sexual double standard to exist in current culture, yet not use such double standards themselves. Consistent with past findings, rates of belief in the sexual double standard were found to be higher than rates of implementation.

Overall, little evidence of implementation of the sexual double standard was observed in the study. Mean responses to the BI scale supported minimal implementation as the average response on the BI-implementation subscale was 'disagree' to statements regarding the participants' perception of their own implementation of the sexual double standard. This is consistent with past research that found low rates of implementation of the sexual double standard (Marks & Fraley, 2005; Milhausen & Herold, 1999). This finding is in line with newer experimental research on the sexual double standard which consistently finds little evidence of continued implementation of this script.

According to "The Effects of Sexual Permissiveness, Target Gender, Subject Gender, and Attitude Toward Women on Social Perception: In Search of the Double Standard":

The primary purpose of this research was to probe the existence of a sexual double standard, by which perceivers give more negative evaluations to female than to male targets at equal levels of sexual permissiveness. In general, little evidence was found for a double standard of this sort. While sexual permissiveness affected ratings, it generally affected the ratings of male and female targets similarly. The only possible evidence for a double stan- dard in social perception came on the sexual and agreeable scales, and here the evidence was somewhat equivocal.

Many people might argue that because participants might hear that there's a double standard, many might not admit to having a double standard favoring promiscuous men due to social desirability response bias. Some of the empirical research used methods that deter this limitation:

Another possible explanation for the low rates of implementation of the sexual double standard found in this study may be that the participants answered the surveys in a biased manner due to social desirability effects. That is, the participants may have attempted to answer in a fashion they considered to be socially desirable (i.e., not using double standards in the evaluation of the sexual behaviour of men and women). Social desirability is a common limitation to survey research (Philips & Clancy, 1972); however measures were taken to attempt to reduce the social desirability effects in this research. It was thought that the use of online survey for data collection in sexuality research reduces social desirability effects due to the increased anonymity of the participants (Bowen et. al., 2008). Additionally, the Implementation of the SDS scale (Donald, 1985) was a covert measure of the sexual double standard to conceal the purpose of the questionnaire and reduce response bias. Even as such, it is possible that some of the participants answered the items with bias, potentially swaying the results. Even with these possible limitations considered the results of this study, in combination with the results of past research (e.g., Milhausen & Herold, 1999; Marks & Fraley, 2006), suggest little evidence of continued implementation of the sexual double standard.

Austin found some evidence for a reverse double standard:

Consistent with the analysis of the Bl-implementation subscale, as well as past findings (e.g., Milhausen & Herold, 1999; Marks & Fraley, 2006), minimal evidence of implementation of the traditional sexual double standard was supported in the analysis of the Implementation of the SDS scores. The older males and the younger females made the most differential judgments between the sexual behaviors of men and women. However, unexpectedly, they rated the sexual behaviour of men more harshly to women, opposite to the traditional sexual double standard. This is of interest because it is the exact reverse to what would be expected given the literature on traditional sexual scripting and the sexual double standard.

Similar results to these were reported by Milhausen and Herold (2001), who observed evidence of a reverse double standard. When both male and female participants were asked if they would encourage a female friend to date a highly sexually experienced male target, they said they would warn a female friend about the sexual history of the male target, yet would not offer the same warnings if the genders were reversed (Milhausen & Herold, 2001). The researchers attributed these results to recent social trends that view highly sexually experienced men as 'exploiters' of female sexuality. They suggested that this negative view of permissive male sexuality may be due to extensive media coverage and publicity of sexual assault and harassment where men are perceived as sexual predators (Milhausen & Herold, 2001). It may be that the groups of older men and younger women are most aware of these scripts of men as predators thus judge the sexual behaviors of men more harshly to women.

Onto evidence of a reverse double standard, while there might be some people out there who support the traditional double standard, there are some people out there who support a reverse double standard. Women are more likely than men to support the reverse double standard. In this 2001 study "Reconceptualizing the sexual double standard":

This study analyzes the prevalence of the sexual double standard using a diversity of measures. It distinguishes between the perception of the double standard at the societal level and one's personal acceptance of it. Young people (N = 413), ranging in age from 18 to 28, from three university classes and two community-based dating bars in Canada were surveyed to determine their attitudes and behaviors regarding the double standard. The majority of the participants perceived the double standard to exist with more women than men perceiving this, especially with regard to the issue of sexual freedom. On a personal level, however, most men and women held a single standard. There was a significant gender difference as men were more likely to endorse a double standard, whereas women were more likely to endorse a reverse double standard, in which men's sexual behavior was evaluated more harshly than that of women's. This study indicates that the double standard is more complex in nature than has previously been thought.

According to the study, of 409 men and women, they typically did NOT hold a double standard for things like casual sex, one night stands, sex at age 16, watching porn, visiting strip clubs, etc. A majority didn't have any double standard. Men who held a double standard, although a minority, usually held the traditional double standard instead of the reverse. Women were less likely to hold any double standard, and when they did, they typically held a reverse double standard and rarely held a traditional double standard.

According to the study, of 365 men and women (with multiple responses allowed), only 25% of men viewed promiscuous men as a stud or "the man" and only 11% viewed him as sexually liberated. 38% viewed him as a womanizer/sexual predator/player and 40% viewed him as promiscuous/slutty/dirty. 10% viewed him as psychologically damaged, desperate or insecure. 37% of women viewed promiscuous men as a womanizer or predator, 30% viewed him as slutty or dirty or promiscuous, 3% viewed him as psychologically damaged, and only a mere 8% viewed him as a stud. Only 5% view him as sexually liberated. Zero men and women viewed promiscuous women as predators. 75% of men and 66% of women viewed her as slutty or dirty. 7% and 9% of men and women respectively viewed her as psychologically damaged, 0 called her a stud, and 8% and 16% of men and women respectively called her sexually liberated. The total percentage for each category exceeds 100% due to being allowed multiple responses.

Here's another noteworthy quote:

Difference scores were calculated to assess the proportion of men and women who endorsed a double standard, a reverse double standard, or a single standard for discouraging one’s friends from dating someone with many sexual partners. The majority of women (75%) and men (68%) endorsed a single sexual standard on these items indicating they were equally likely to discourage a male or female friend from dating a highly experienced other. More respondents (23% women, 26% men) supported a reverse double standard than a double standard (2% women, 6% men) as they evaluated the sexual behavior of potential male dates more negatively than that of potential female dates for both items. Therefore, contrary to our expectations, the genders were not sig- nificantly different from one another (χ2 = 5.65, p = .06). In fact, both genders were more likely to support a single standard with a solid mi- nority supporting a reverse double standard.

Also, although feminists believe only men consider promiscuity a dealbreaker when it comes to looking for a relationship, studies actually show that women also consider promiscuity a dealbreaker. Many women won't date a promiscuous man. Although virginity is a dealbreaker to many women, many women consider a promiscuous man a dealbreaker. In fact, women are less willing than men to date a promiscuous person. Women's cutoff point for a maximum acceptable number of previous partners in a significant other was slightly more strict than a man's cutoff point.

​

Men and women's willingness to engage in a relationship with someone based on their sexual history. Average age of male participants was 22 and the average age of female participants was 20.

Although society puts pressure on men to have more than just a couple sex partners, they don't put pressure on them to have 20 or 30 partners. If he has 10 sex partners or something, he probably would be viewed as adequate. But if he had 15 or 20 or 30, at that point he's just going to be viewed as a womanizer or a fuckboy. Women typically would never view him as a stud. As for men, only a minority of men would view him as a stud (not a tiny minority but a minority). And honestly, the only men who view him as a stud for sleeping with 20 women are usually those macho guys you see in your teens/early-mid 20s. Hypermasculine men would be more likely to view him as a stud. Men in hypermasculine environments such as fraternities, delinquent gangs, or athletics might be more likely to view him that way. Men in general, however, might view him as dirty or view him as a womanizer. Many women would view him as a womanizer who objectifies women and cheats.

Virgin men are definitely stigmatized but so are promiscuous men. There's also this myth that virgin women are viewed as angels. They're not, or at least not anymore. That may have been true a century ago, but nowadays, even virgin women are stigmatized once a woman reaches her mid-20s as a virgin (I think men will be stigmatized for being a virgin at any age). Even if a woman says she's waiting until marriage, people might just view her as a prude or a cocktease. If a man says he's waiting until marriage, people might view him as unmanly or some might even assume he's gay.

Sure there's people out there who think promiscuous men are studs, but many might say he's a womanizer who objectifies women. It depends on who you ask. And there's some people out there who hold a reverse double standard favoring promiscuous women over promiscuous men.