Okay, I'll keep this brief. In many of the discussions that we have (seemingly over-and-over again) about slut-shaming, usually we have two theories:

  1. Slut-shaming is a sexual double standard and it is an outgrowth of misogyny.

  2. Slut-shaming is actually an equal standard that is based on misandry; male sexuality is seen as vile, corrupting, polluting and predatory and therefore anyone who "takes dick" is seen as pathetic and lacking in self-respect.

I honestly think tons of people slut-shame inconsistently and opportunistically, so in the real-world its hard to say it comes down to one consistent cause. But I think the second theory explains more than the first.

Bottom-shaming in gay male culture for example. No sexual duality there, so no sex-based double standard. HOWEVER it COULD be argued that bottom-shaming is misogyny because bottoming is seen as feminine and that's the cause of contempt for bottoms... I would answer that argument by pointing out its mostly bottoms who bottom-shame other bottoms due to a lack of tops to go around.

But here's another phenomenon that, I think, sits with the penis-as-defiler theory: gold star lesbians. A gold star lesbian is a lesbian whom has never had sex with a man. Why would this be even remotely desirable, almost like a kind of virginity (!), unless male sexuality were the primary object of revulsion?

It is also compatible with the "pussy cartel" theory of slut-shaming. If exposure to male sexuality is a benefit then there's no reason for women to slut-shame. But women do slut-shame (at least as much as men IME), which is consistent with the idea that exposure to male sexuality is seen as a cost and thus a woman should get herself a good deal before she takes cock (otherwise she clearly has no sense of her own value and is debasing herself).

So, any thoughts? Which theory do you believe in, and why? Would you offer other theories? Do you think, perhaps, different people in different situations use different implicit understandings of "slut-shaming"?