Q4All: Which gender double standards are ok and which ones aren't & Why?

yolo_tomassi · 2017-09-21T15:01:52+00:00

Between how people treat the sexes? If there's a situation where you treat the opposite sex (or think should be) differently or the same, why is it sexist...

[–]LewisCross 43 points44 points45 points 8 years ago* (209 children) | Copy Link

The slut - stud double standard is OK. It's hard to be a stud. It's easy to be a slut. Being a stud requires skill, hard work, and more than a little undeserved victory at the genetic lottery. Being a slut is as easy as having a functioning vagina and a pulse.

Most men cannot be studs, even if they want to. Any woman can be a slut if she wants to.

Being a stud doesn't seem to fuck guys up. The worst it does to them is bore them and cause them to move on to other things. Slutting it up seems to either fuck women up, or more often, exacerbate things that are already fucked up in those women.

Studs still seem to be able to attract women they're attracted to for relationships after they're done being a horse on the cock carousel.

At least around here [EDIT: my geographic location, NOT this subreddit], sluts seem to have a hard time attracting and keeping men they're attracted to after riding all the horses on the carousel. She gets disappointed and pissed because she can't take one of the pretty horsies home and keep him for her very own.

[–]NOTSM 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The slut - stud double standard is OK. It's hard to be a stud. It's easy to be a slut. Being a stud requires skill, hard work, and more than a little undeserved victory at the genetic lottery. Being a slut is as easy as having a functioning vagina and a pulse.

100% agree

Being a stud doesn't seem to fuck guys up. The worst it does to them is bore them and cause them to move on to other things. Slutting it up seems to either fuck women up, or more often, exacerbate things that are already fucked up in those women.

It definitely fucks with a mans head. It's probably worse for woman but men don't get away Scott free either

At least around here, sluts seem to have a hard time attracting and keeping men they're attracted to after riding all the horses on the carousel. She gets disappointed and pissed because she can't take one of the pretty horsies home and keep him for her very own.

This is some weird revenge fantasy bull shit that the redpill really needs to let go off. Sluts have zero problem getting a husband.

[–]LewisCross 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]NOTSM 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]NOTSM 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]newName543456went volcel0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nemma8830/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]newName543456went volcel0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SmurfESmurferson6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]sunkindonut149Blue Pill Mouse2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SmurfESmurferson0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (172 children) | Copy Link

I don't get why something being easy for someone makes the behavior reprehensible. It's also easier for men to do certain things, it doesn't make those behaviors reprehensible. It's fine and good to not celebrate a slut's N count meanwhile see why a man's N count is worth some recognition, but if you want to believe having a higher N count makes you less loyal or less able to hold a steady Relationship or indicates you're not satisfied with a single partner or indicates that you don't value sex as an emotional connection only to be had in Relationship, those things I believe apply equally to men and woman , because those things have nothing to do with how "easy" it is to achieve in the first place.

"Doesn't seem to fuck guys up" is so beyond laughable as we have had many accounts of men with particularly high N counts admitting to be unable to be satisfied in a relationship with a single woman. I find similar amount of number of cases where men/women claim to be fucked up/not fucked up by their sexual past.

Sluts also have no problem attracting men they want, not a single woman on this subreddit ever had an issue and find the concept that they would have a hard time finding a relationship due to their N count to also be laughable.

At least around here, sluts seem to have a hard time attracting and keeping men they're attracted to after riding all the horses on the carousel. She gets disappointed and pissed because she can't take one of the pretty horsies home and keep him for her very own.

What the hell are you even talking about? Literally never seen anyone express this viewpoint but rather the opposite one. Jeezus, what a load of misinformation.

[–]LewisCross 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago* (24 children) | Copy Link

Oh yeah...

A key that opens many locks is a master key and is valuable.

A lock that opens with many different keys is a shitty lock, and is worthless.

Inb4 "a good pencil sharpener sharpens many pencils, a pencil that's been in a lot of sharpeners gets short and dull..."

Pencils and sharpeners aren't good analogies to sex. You can always get new pencils and new sharpeners. Neither are worth anything. Both are a dime a dozen.

But locks and keys are important and have value. Or at least they should. Keys open things that need to be opened, and locks keep things out that should be kept out. Or at least they should. And women are always telling us they don't want to fuck just any guys - only the BEST ones. They want only the GOOD keys.

And another thing - if sex isn't important, and it's not worth anything, and it's just something people do together, why aren't women having sex with incels and uglo guys and unattractive guys? Shouldn't the women who think it's just something people do together be helping these guys out? I mean, you might see a movie with these guys, or play Scrabble with them, or talk to them now and again. Why won't you have sex with them? I mean, it's just something you do with another person, like a movie or a board game. What's the big deal? Why won't you have sex with them, if it's unimportant and just an activity?

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo2 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_calibre_cat1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DarkLady789-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gopher_glitz14 points15 points16 points 8 years ago (59 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (58 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

Sure.

I'll just leave this here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/askwomen/comments/3h4bv8

Manwhores don't have trouble getting laid or in Relationships with women who also view casual sex the same way. If the manwhore tries to get with a virginal woman, it probably won't go so well (evidenced above). If he tries to date a slut or reformed slut, that won't be an issue. She won't judge him on his past as she also has a past. Not a difficult concept to grasp.

It's definitely not "the same". Im saying if I was a person who thought having casual sex was reprehensible, like some people are, I wouldn't be applying different standards to women and men. Because it's easier for one group to get doesn't make it any less viscerally unappealing, IF and only if I was one of those people who found it viscerally unappealing in the first place.

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth2 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]notworthmuch20xx1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]JustStatedTheObviousYou Probably Won't Believe It.0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Women just don't care about men's N (except that he better not be a virgin).

This is the point you made from which I am responding to. The point that "women just dont care about a man's N"

& from the ask women thread:

I would not want to date someone that prioritized being with a lot of women. Or prioritized dating more than other things.

.

A low number of sexual partners is actually a plus in my book. I am very selective with my sexual partners so it's nice if my partner is on the same page.

.

I would not want to date a player. I prefer someone with fewer partners so he and I are on the same playing field.

.

Not at all. I have respect for people who are selective.

.

I prefer someone with fewer partners. Players are unattractive to me.

.

I'm a christian who wants to wait until marriage for sex, so obviously that influences my answer. I want to be with someone who shares my views, but wouldn't reject someone because they had a history of sexual behaviour at all! However for me less is better.

.

Not at all, I don't really care either way but it's nice if he wasn't especially promiscuous.

.

A lot of previous sexual partners can be a red flag for me, but it depends on the person. Personally I feel more comfortable if he has had fewer partners.

.

No. I prefer low partner counts. A "player" is a no-go for me.

.

No, and I wouldn't expect him to. I'd feel a lot more comfortable if he hadn't slept with a lot of people. I wouldn't want to date a "player," so a handful of partners is fine. So is zero partners. I wouldn't care if he was a virgin, either.

.

Nope, quite the opposite actually. I don't find promiscuity appealing in the least

.

No. As someone who has barely been with anyone and only wants to be with people I really like/ am serious about, I want the guy to be similar to me.

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

many of those responses DO indicate higher N count would be unappealing,

Holy shit. NO THEY DID NOT. A FEW of them SUGGESTED a high N man would be unappealing. MOST said they didn't care or that a low N man would be ok, at least "not unappealing".

I don't see how finding a Lower N count Appealing is not the same as finding a higher N count Unappealing, either.

First of all, women did NOT say "a low N man is appealing". They said, in so many words "A low N man is not unappealing. There's a huge difference between those two statements, too, by the way. But let's deal with what you actually asserted.

Because we aren't dealing with linguistic wordplay or philosophical concepts. We're dealing with what women actually say about men and how women actually feel about different kinds of men. And in that vein, there is a world of difference between

A high N man is unappealing

and

A low N man is not unappealing.

The first: High N is bad, do not want, will not accept.

The second: Low N would be OK, I guess I'd take it, I would maybe accept it. But the second statement DOES NOT say that high N is NOT acceptable. It says NOTHING about high N.

That's where you're missing it.

[–]EliteSpartanRanger1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If a man has a Low N count, I find him Appealing -> If a Man does not have a Low N count, I do not find him Appealing

No it's not. I agree with the rest of your post that many low n-count women themselves prefer low n-count guys, but as a stemnerd i felt the need to point out that this isn't the contrapositive.

A contrapositive is this

"If a man has a low N count, I find him appealing" -> "if I don't find him appealing, then he doesn't have a low n-count".

However, this is only true if the original statement is true, that she is attracted to every man with low n-count. Likely, she does not mean that literally. She probably means "If I'm attracted to a guy, and he has a low n-count, I would prefer it."

The inverse is what you're talking about, and the inverse is not necessarily true.

Ex. she finds both low and high n-counts appealing.

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRanger1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Alright, so let's forget about the semantics of these individual arguments and REFOCUS on the big picture.

The big picture is - IS there an acceptable double standard between men and Women when it comes to their sexual Partner count?

Your belief -> YES there is an acceptable double standard

Mine -> No there isnt

Your Proof -> Women "dont care" as much as men do about sexual history

My Proof -> To refute/disprove your "proof"

So, in order to do that, we'll have to find some numbers. Anecdotes are great, but what do numbers have to say

A few google searches and articles tend to support what I'm saying, which is unsurprising to me, because I know I'm not wrong.

For example: http://www.psypost.org/2016/12/study-finds-number-past-sexual-partners-large-effect-attractiveness-46594

In addition, the researchers found no difference between men and women’s willingness to get involved in a long-term relationship with a hypothetical individual who had more than two past sexual partners.

So where did YOU get the idea that there are FAR more men that care about a woman's history than there are women who care about a mans?

EDIT: and by sexual history, I'm referring to High N verses Low N. I'm not talking about virgins verses not virgins - we're talking about slut/stud here. So when i say a woman cares about a mans histroy -> I mean she cares whether or not he has a high N. Not that she cares he doesnt have a Low N. & I'm trying to show that ther are women who definitely, do care about the High n. "I wouldnt date a player" == "I dont want to date a High N man"

Also some gold from the above article:

The traditional double standard was more common among men; the reverse double standard was more common among women. In other words, underlying the different double standards there was actually just a single double standard: It’s OK for me but not for you! To be clear, though, most people didn’t have a double standard at all: They judged men and women in the same way. (You can read this study here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X13000665)

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MagicGainbowKeepin' it real, havin' a feel0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Sure. I've pivoted now anyway since ancedotes from one source aren't a good foundation for an argument.

This one basically supports my View though:

http://www.psypost.org/2016/12/study-finds-number-past-sexual-partners-large-effect-attractiveness-46594

Certainly, there are still some people out there who hold to the old double standard. But they seem to be a dwindling minority. One recent study found that only about 12% of students held the traditional double standard, but also that around 13% held a reverse double standard – in other words, they thought it was worse for men to sleep around a lot. The traditional double standard was more common among men; the reverse double standard was more common among women. In other words, underlying the different double standards there was actually just a single double standard: It’s OK for me but not for you! To be clear, though, most people didn’t have a double standard at all: They judged men and women in the same way. (You can read this study here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X13000665)

[–]MagicGainbow1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MagicGainbow1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]imjussayin430 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gopher_glitz0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago* (38 children) | Copy Link

Insert "as a general rule" in front of all my statements. Because they're generally true. everyone can point to outliers and exceptions to every rule. But we aren't going to throw out the rule just because you know one or two people to whom it didn't apply.

I don't get why something being easy for someone makes the behavior reprehensible.

Well, I guess it all depends on how you view sex. If someone thinks sex is something that two people just do together, like going to a movie or playing Scrabble, then, I guess if it's easy, maybe it's not reprehensible. If someone thinks sex is and should be something special, then having sex with a lot of people because it's easy for you to do is kind of reprehensible. Because if I'm with a woman who doesn't view sex as special, then it'll be easy for her to do that with other people. And my relationship with her, and her having sex with me, doesn't mean anything to her. It's just something that people do together.

And, if it's just a nothing activity that doesn't really mean anything, then it's something people can NOT do together. Which to me, in a relationship, isn't acceptable. Maybe to you it is. To me, it isn't.

Sluts also have no problem attracting men they want, not a single woman on this subreddit ever had an issue

That's why I said "at least around here". I know the outliers in the Boswash corridor who post on PPD say they never had a problem attracting attractive men for relationships. That's just not my experience.

EDIT: It never ceases to amaze me how indignant and pissed off women get whenever the slut-stud double standard is brought up. It's like "Dooonnnt juuuuudge meeeee" and "ittttssss noooooot faaaaaiiiiirrrr".

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Women who value sex DO recoil from men with a high N count. Women who value sex will want a man who values sex the same as her. She will worry about that man's loyalty. She will question that man's ability to commit to her. It happens.

What you're NOT understanding is that those women are NOT the same as the women who will sleep with those men on the drop of the hat. But the women who sleep with those men DONT view sex as a special thing that should only be had in Relationships.

Meanwhile, a man who views sex as special, probably won't rack up a high N count as he values sex in this way.

I can agree that a woman who doesn't have those attributes might have a hard time finding a man. Would she have a FAR EASIER time if she was a virgin as well with no experience? Doubtful. Being ugly/poor will always be a detriment regardless of your N count.

Maybe there will be some slack with men supporting a woman who is virginal if she's poor/ugly, this seems to be more on the exceptional side than the rule side.

Most people have sex, and then later on settle down. Women and men alike. The ones who don't, they usually don't end up with people with drastic different N counts.

[–]LewisCross 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]puntifex0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IckyStickyPoo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IamTheWalkingMenu 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

No, I think it's a male-female thing.

For most men, sex is difficult to get. And it's worth something.

That's why men tend to get repulsed at women who treat sex as if it's not worth anything. Because if it's not worth anything to you, then it won't be important for you to do with me during our relationship. Why should you see it as important? It's not really worth anything. It's just something two people do together, right?

And if you don't have the self respect to limit with whom you have sex, then why should you limit yourself when you're with me? Why should I believe you when you say you won't have sex with other men? You had sex with A LOT of other men before you were with me. Why stop now? It's just something people do together, right? It doesn't mean anything, right?

And if you don't have self respect, why should I respect you?

And if you give up your most valuable asset to every Tom, Dick and Harry you fancy when drunk, why should I assign any value to it when you give the leftovers and table scraps to me?

And if you give up your most valuable asset to Tom, Dick and Harry who you claim you didn't really care about, why should I believe you when you have sex with me and claim you DO care about me?

[–]SmurfESmurferson2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BPremiumMeh0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]storffish-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

OK.

Is sex "important"?

No one gets repulsed by a slut when sex is on the table and it's time to fuck.

Where guys get repulsed and start pulling away is when the slut starts pulling a Beyoncé and saying "If you like it then you shoulda put a ring on it".

Guys have no problem fucking sluts. Sluts are fun for sex. Where sluts are a problem and are NOT fun is when you try to relationship/ or wife one up. Because for one reason or another, sluts aren't good bets for marriage or relationships. Because most dudes aren't hawt enough to keep her satisfied. Because most sluts aren't geared to be half of a relationship with a man. They're accustomed to using men, avoiding being used by men, and discarding men once they're done with those men. They haven't learned how to have relationships; they learn how to break up and move on. They don't know how to stay in and hang tough when the going gets tough. When the going gets tough, sluts break up and disappear. To sluts, men are like buses --- just wait a few minutes, another one will be along shortly.

And one man is as good as the next. To sluts, men are fungible goods. Men are just a means to an end, a tool to be used, an item to manipulate and get to do her bidding. To sluts, sex is a weapon to be wielded, a shield for protection, and a scoresheet for validation and affirmation.

Sluts are valuable for fucking. They're not so valuable for relationships.

[–]DarkLady7892 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]storffish0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scurvemuch 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sunkindonut149Blue Pill Mouse0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]sunkindonut149Blue Pill Mouse0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DarkLady7890 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]acrylicpainter778 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]acrylicpainter778 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]acrylicpainter778 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

sex addictions rehab, means that it's not entirely a myth that SOME men have issues when they have too much sex / addicted to sex

An addiction only becomes an addiction when it causes a dysfunctional life style. In reality all men who have normal levels of testosterone are addicted to sex, they can't life without some form of sexual release. Given enough time women will also not be able to life without release.

But I believe that there's still a definite possibility a man who sleeps with 50-100 different women might not be able to see them as people they can have meaningful relationships with. "Onto the next" at any little bump in the road.

Well sure, but that doesn't mean the man in question is "fucked up". He may simply not want to even try to make a meaningful connection, and just enjoys the high life.

See this argument is very similar to what some feminists say about objectification "How could you just look at her ass in those short-shorts and not her personality, you filthy piece of dirt!!!!!", yet they are entirely opposed and will absolutely reject any instance of a woman wanting to be objectified. Hilarious.

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When other people say fucked up, USUALLY they mean fucked up for LTR. Not just fucked up all around. So yeah, if a person can't find LTRs worth it despite maybe wanting to have done that in the past, they are "fucked up" for a relationship. Even some wish they could undo that shit, but cant.

I don't agree with the all men are addicted to sex argument. I'm specifically talking about men who have issue after promiscuity connecting to other people deeply. It might manifest itself in many ways, addiction, cheating, perpetual bad boy player lifestyle. If he's internally miserable, that's all the same fuckedupness.

I don't know how this relates to what you said about feminism at all. A guy whose perfectly fine with his player lifestyle isn't the same as a guy who can't stop being a player but wishes he could

[–]Unabummer80 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Unabummer80 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

I partially agree with you, in that I think sociosexuality is demonstrated by both genders by the extent to which they pursue casual sex - i.e. if one thinks a woman wth a high partner count is less likely to be suited to monogamy, they should likely think the same for a man with a similar history.

But I don't understand where much of your argument is coming from. Do guys actually think promiscuous weekend are reprehensible? I mean incels maybe, but I don't think the average guy thinks that. Unattractive, maybe, but not "reprehensible".

I think the "have a hard time attracting and keeping many men they're attracted to" is in reference to the posts where women complain about partner backlash upon discovering their sexual history.

I also think that it's generally true that women generally use sex to get relationships, whereas men generally use relationships to get sex. Not always, but generally. And i think some women do rack up high partner counts because they try to get guys they are interested in to commit too them, while the guys are only interested in purely physical relationships.

Edited for swypos :/

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Doom_and-Gloom-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy881 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolon1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Doom_and-Gloom 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Doom_and-Gloom 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Doom_and-Gloom 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuittlerಠ_ಠ[M] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleknownfactsVaguely Uncivil Comment2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBookOfSeilCuckleberry Finn1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]VermiciousKnidzz 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]imjussayin430 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Thetasigma880 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Unabummer80 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tyler_Gatsby5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]sunkindonut149Blue Pill Mouse2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tyler_Gatsby3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]notworthmuch20xx 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DarkLord0chinChin0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Tyler_Gatsby0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kick6Red Pill Man5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]kick6Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]single_use_accTaupe Enema0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

I think men and women should be able to work with children. I don't agree with the double standard to assume men are pedos when they play with kids, and assume women are virtuous. Everyone should be careful when letting strangers around their children, but a man who plays with a child doesnt mean he's a Pedo and I don't think its OK to judge him more harshly at all.

I also think unemployed women are Losers. There are plenty of work that doesn't require tons of physical strain. I think its pretty much not OK to let women be users/abusers of a system. Sure, if some man is willing to support her, that would be "OK" but i only think this way because I think its "OK" if a man decides not to work and have a woman support him. As long as both non-workers are contributing to the household/relationship in other ways, then its OK.

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheThingsIThink 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Thetasigma880 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]whichbladeNA Paler Shade of Purple0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]whichbladeNA Paler Shade of Purple0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheThingsIThink 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]puntifex0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]puntifex0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]puntifex0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]puntifex0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalism1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheThingsIThink 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]single_use_accTaupe Enema0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]single_use_accTaupe Enema0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]single_use_accTaupe Enema0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scurvemuch 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Scurvemuch 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]single_use_accTaupe Enema0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, I think that if men are asking for help they should be treated the same as a woman asking for help. For example, I am a small woman, not even 5'. A man a foot taller than me comes up to me while I'm walking to catch my bus in crowded NYC port authority and tells me he is hungry and doesn't have money and could use something to eat. Now me personally , the fact he's a man doesn't cross my mind. I don't think to myself "well if I was in his shoes , I wouldn't be asking bc I'm a man!" I think to myself "if I was in his shoes, I'd want someone to have mercy on me and help me". Sure I suspect I would get more help from the average person because I look like a small vulnerable women. But I don't think that's fair. What about being smaller and weaker, physically, gives people more reason to help me than helping a taller, bigger man? I also suspect that since I'm white and he's ethnic, people would scoff at him but help me. That's just not cool.

Maybe I'm just Oblivious to the inherent dangers of male nature, but we were in a public place with a lot of people and five feet away from a convienience store. I didn't have cash so I told him to pick out some snack and a drink and I paid. I couldn't go too out of my way since even tho I was earlier for my bus than usual , I still had to catch it

I've always treated men and women asking me for help the same. I think if I was in their shoes how I'd want to be treated and do that. I don't see why men shouldn't get help and support from others. As a woman I am strong and can beat my own path. I am not weak and vulnerable like many want to impose on me. Likewise men, it doesn't have to be that you're always EXPECTED to be strong and independent. It's okay for a man to need help too. I'll treat a woman and man on the same standard. I don't think being a woman means I'm more deserving of empathy and help than a man, I just don't.

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm not going to enumerate all the ones that are valid.

It's easier to give you the "why ?" to apply as a general rule...

If there is an inherent difference between the sexes, physical or mental, there is a justification for different standards between the sexes.

These inherent differences are almost exclusively at root genetic.

However, if there is no inherently set difference then a double-standard probably isn't appropriate.

Thats more or less it, is it justified ?

With the corollary that many differences our current mainstream believe are "cultural" and "set by society" are, in reality, genetic. (e.g. non 50:50 rations in some jobs.... I'd expect veternarians to be mainly female, for example, due to inherent genetic preferences and don't think the 75:25 f/m ratio in vets is an example of sexism for example.... then again, I also don't necessarily think the 25:75 f/m ratio in programmers is an example of sexism either.)

So, thats more or less it. If you want to fire a few examples at me to see where I am on each of them, I'm game to give me views on those examples ...

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Well,

To be honest you can start with the old physicians adage "First, do no harm".

If people, in a relatively free society likes ours are doing a thing you're initial assumption should be thats because they want to do that thing and not that a dark and shadowy patriarchy is forcing them to do that thing against their will by nefarious and underhanded means.

And, if after reflection, you believe that they are not doing that thing because they want, that there really is some dark and nefarious thing going on you should be forced to take steps to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt before you are allowed to go monkeying with all societies laws, rules and customs in order to remove the bad thing that is occurring.

Right NOW.... It's almost exactly the reverse.... Feminists point to a field, or a behaviour that is NOT strictly 50:50 distributed between men and women (child rearing, say).... Then immediately jump to the assumption that women are forced into that... Then immediately start trying to change the laws, rules, customs to undo that phantom they'e just jumped at... and no-one puases and asks them to stop and prove that there is something wrong before trying to fix it.

Forget for a second what we should positively do to sort this out. Step 1, that would resolve 80% of the damage by itself is to require evidence that something is going badly wrong before we start fucking things up worse by assuming (on usually nothing more than the ratio is not strictly 50:50 m:f) that something must be done and society/culture must be fucked about with to put it right.

Make them prove in some serious and well understood scientific manner something is wrong, before taking action to put it right.

In a society where men and women are genetically different physically and psychologically you are going to find ratio's other than strict 50:50 everywhere. Half the time they are going to be ratio's "against" women from a naive perspective of strict enforced equality (based on men and women being fundamentally identical).

And, it's worth noting, this is very MUCH a one-way deal.

This doesn't happen the other way, indicating it's the feminists and their approach that is the root cause.

Who here has ever even been AWARE before my comment above that 75% of vet's are women ? Who here has heard of a campaign to change that ratio ? Seen a social movement trying to do so ? Let alone seen a social movement succeeding and getting university admissions policies, laws, and industry regulations and ethics committees subverted to return it to it's "natural" 50:50 M:F ratio ?

No-one. It doesn't happen. Because the rest of the world isn't that fucking stupid. (Well, to be fair it is... but we seem to rub by without tearing society apart trying to put it right).

There is a problem with naive feminists, and naive fellow travellers on the left pushing this. And it's largely a one way problem.

And, I say this as someone who very much counts himself as a lefty, and a left-wing voter (largely because these nutballs aren't all of the left, and a lot of the rest of the lefts policies... on education, healthcare, economics, liberal laws, and restrained militaries are largely correct).

If the left could stop being fuckwits on this one issue... We'd be right on EVERYTHING :)

So.... We don't need to worry about how to identify this and "put it right", or at least not yet.

Step 1 is Stop making it worse.... First, do no harm.

Thats 80% of the battle right there. And if we can stop that, and stop the constant pushing of society away from the norms it naturally adopts then cleaning up the last 20% or so is relatively easy.

Finally, it is worth making a point that feminism wasn't always like this. There was a real struggle to be had, a real victory to be won, a real need to adjust some of society to be more equal.... Getting women the vote, setting up the norm that they could work if they wanted to, that they should have the same freedom to act on their own choices any man was extended.

But that fight was won by the 1980's, and that victory fully secured by the 1990's. At this point feminists should have largely packed up, and (whilst retaining a "Nights Watch" to guard the equality "Wall") largely gone home under their "Mission Accomplished" banners and had their ticker tape parade.

They didn't. The momentum was too much. They had a cause rolling. The money was still coming in. Too many had too much invested. So they just kept pushing..... Way paast the equality line.... Way past "A woman should have the same choices a man has" and out into the damaging realm of "assuming everything must be strictly 50:50 by distribution" and by doing so fucking up female lives as much as males lives.

Or... thats how I see it.

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, it's something very unbalanced. I use 25:75 to contrast with the vet example... it might be 90:10... But in that role I'd expect tit to be very unbalanced even if there was no sexism at all.

Men are inherently, genetically, drawn to some things... they have higher interest than women in things that are solitary and non-social... they have a higher interest in mechanical things... and they have a higher interest in logic/math type problems. All of these are very well serviced by programming. It (like being a car mechanic) hits all these male sweet spots.

Girls, in contrast, generally have an inherent interest in social roles (working with "people" not "thing") based roles, they have a higher interest in caring roles where they get to help people or animals, they have a far less intense interest perhaps even aptitude for logic/math. None of these needs are serviced by programming as an occupation.

Now this ain't "every woman" or "every man"... you are going to find plenty of women who, against the grain of their sex, have these interests. And of course, if they so choose, they should be able to choose to enter programming as a profession if they wish.

But... Given the different distributions of interest ... I'd expect to see heavy female ratios in areas like nursing, veterinarians, psychologists, doctors (people, caring, social roles, low in mechanical/logical things) and heavy male ratios in things like programming, car mechanics and the military (thing based, non-caring, mechanical/logical, solitary roles).

A world with no sexism... and just people following their natural preferences into their careers... are going to see these unequal distributions.

You can see this in almost any company... IT is male dominated because of its thing based nature.... HR/Marketing is female dominated due its people based nature.

No woman should be prevented from entering programming.... no male should be stopped from being a nurse or going into HR.... But mostwho do will not be entirely typical of their sexes normal interests... and this is going to mean unequal distributions by sex in those fields.

You even see this a lot within IT (where I work).... Business Analysts (wherever I've worked) tend to be female dominated because they deal with people (they drive requirements out of the business people).... the programmers that work head down in a logical/mathematical/mechanical "thing" tend to be male, and usually greatly dislike having to deal with "people" and are often very glad to have the BAs acting as a buffer between them and the business people.

I don't know what the ratio would settle too in an utterly non-sexist world. But I am very sure that this would not be a strict 50:50 in programming, the military, and car mechanics.... not in nursing, psychologists and veterinarians.

The two sexes innate distributions of interest are so different that in those roles that very heavily cater to one distribution or the other then they are going to be highly skewed even in a strictly fair world.

And I'm NOT hearing the "strict equality" feminists complaining of the female domination of psychology or veterinarians (say) despite the fact you'd think they'd be as upset against "the sexism shownby the unequal sex ratios there" as in programming.

[–]aznphenix0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Electra_CuteChristian, Flat Earther, Anti-Vaxxer, Astrologer6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SlimLovinHigh Value to Own the Libs8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SlimLovinHigh Value to Own the Libs2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]whichbladeNA Paler Shade of Purple2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]whichbladeNA Paler Shade of Purple2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]blerkel0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah that's why I tacked that on there - I am left wondering though whether it would successfully operate at the same level as common commercial friendliness (think servers, phone staff etc) does. No one's really under the illusion that person in front of you is really that excited to take your order but yet at the same time it does seem to assuage & smooth over some of our basic social subroutines.

It doesn't get you all the way there in the same way a universal basic income isn't going to give you the satisfaction of a successful career, but It still seems an improvement nonetheless and provides some sort of a floor.

Not sold on its feasibility ofc, It would take some truly ungodly amount of tax money so sufficiently subsidise etc etc.

edit: This assumes that the incel/prostitue barrier is substantially a legality/taboo one.

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not sold on its feasibility ofc, It would take some truly ungodly amount of tax money so sufficiently subsidise etc etc.

Yeah, that's the thing.

It's just that with all the inequalities in the world, including many that are more important - healthcare which is literally life or death for many people, people who can't even pay their rent, prostitution isn't that high on the list of priorities when it comes to spending tax money.

If it happened, as long as it's completely voluntary for the prostitutes involved, I'd be fine with it as long as more important issues are being dealt with. But the amount of incels who see government prostitution as the most important issue over everything else, or feel like the government owes them sex is what I disagree with.

Having access to prostitutes isn't a necessary need to survive.

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

If it's completely voluntary, then I don't care who pays them - the john or the state. as long as the state still has money for more important things (health care, education, infrastructure). There are a lot of things more necessary than prostitution, access to prostitutes isn't a basic living need, I don't think the government owes them that. Just like the government doesn't need to help me make friends.

if it happens, it has to be completely voluntary. While I think that in a perfect world, everyone who wants to get laid should be able get laid, in the real world, it takes 2 people to have sex and bodily autonomy is important.

But I think that with so many inequalities in the world to deal with (more important things like health care for example), this issue isn't that high on the list of priorities since many incels don't have problems paying for prostitutes, but that they feel like prostitutes aren't validating because the pros aren't with them due to desire, which is what they want.

[–]BPremiumMeh0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

(Full disclosure - I'm a guy, but promiscuity was never attractive - either for me or for my partner. Neither of us have any interest in casual sex. I'm arguing a general point with you, not one that pertains to myself, personally.)

Also - Note that I'm not saying that women should consider themselves lucky to be with promiscuous men, or anything like that. Many women find promiscuous guys a turn-off, and that's totally fine (and if I were a woman, I probably would, too). I also think promiscuous guys are probably more likely to cheat, for example.

So I'm not saying promiscuity is necessarily good in a male partner. I'm also not saying promiscuous women should be shamed, not do I think that choosing to not date someone should constitute shaming. I'm just saying that male promiscuity tells you different things from female promiscuity

First of all, I don't agree that it's harder for a woman to be a successful MMA fighter than it is for a man. I don't think it's easy, I just think the challenges are different.

Women might feel more social pressure to not be fighters, for example. But they fight women, not men. So this also reduces the talent pool. The female fighters that do go pro are not facing the same cream of the crop as are the men, since many of their would-be competitors are doing other things.

If, on the other hand, a woman beat a man at MMA - that WOULD be much harder (i.e. basically impossible), and if it happened you're damn right I'd respect her for it more than a guy beating about guy!

So in general, doing hard things does confer some type of respect, as it is more of a testament to your ability, or hard work, or something.

But maybe it doesn't matter. And sometimes, it doesn't. Eating a whole mattress is more impressive than eating a tenth of a mattress, but that doesn't mean I necessarily respect that person more.

The problem is, that as applied to sex and romance, being a sexually promiscuous male likely implies that you have positive qualities that women care about. Maybe you're very attractive, or you have sexual prowess, or you are intelligent, clever, talented, etc.

Because it's not easy to have a high count as a male (and I say this as someone who had no interest in this, so I'm relatively neutral here). Now, I know, not EVERY promiscuous male had these traits. Some get lucky, some learn icky psychological tricks that work on certain vulnerable women.

And certainly being a sexually successful male should not be the only thing you know about someone. If a guy isn't handsome, good at sex, charming, intelligent, witty, or talented, you obviously shouldn't think he is, just because he has slept with a lot more women.

But given the very basic premises that 1) men are generally more amenable to casual sex than women, and 2) men tend to use relationships to get sex, whereas women tend to use sex to get relationships, it seems clear that to be promiscuous, a woman doesn't need much - to be willing, and not too unattractive.

But a guy often needs to be willing AND very attractive in some way.

[–]LittleWindowpane 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fufususui just like purple0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]whichbladeNA Paler Shade of Purple0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrel1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Shipcake1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lolymammoth1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Unabummer801 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrel1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Unabummer801 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrel1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Unabummer801 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]buttFumblebee0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]snailypop 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]snailypop 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]snailypop 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]snailypop 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]snailypop 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LewisCross 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FairlyNaiveRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iNeedItLoudno1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IamTheWalkingMenu 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DashneDK2King of LBFM0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AutoModeratorBiased against humans[M] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hrdbldbbsndrkchclt0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]yolo_tomassi 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ClarityofDisasterPerson Going Their Own Way0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]badnews4u0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]frankcastlesteinEgalitarian0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]crackrocksteady7Jason tell me what you're chasing0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thenoorys 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DarkLady7891 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Sniveling_Cur -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jonascf-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Q4All: Which gender double standards are ok and which ones aren't & Why?
Author	yolo_tomassi
Upvotes	12
Comments	376
Date	September 21, 2017 3:01 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/71jp60/q4all_which_gender_double_standards_are_ok_and/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/q4all-which-gender-double-standards-are-ok-and.265980 https://theredarchive.com/post/265980

Comments