Slut shaming is at its core anti-male.

ExpendableOne · 2015-01-05T14:21:14+00:00

It is both anti-female and anti-male but, I agree, it is mostly anti-male. It is like women are initially this sacred temple, who only become more tainted once they allow those dirty cocks to enter and ruin the place. This view that women are so inherently superior and pristine compared to men, or that other men having their way with that woman essentially shames her by both his contact and her approval of him, is very misandric. Society will slut shame women, because it's already "understood" that men are already gross pigs who can't help themselves no matter what, and that's what the rest of society will focus on because it's still an assault on that pristine and valued sex that they can do something about by focusing on women, but it is still rooted in a very anti-male sentiment. This is also why male homosexuality is view with far more disdain than female homosexuality. There is also sexism against women in that expectation though, or in general possessiveness from men to that "temple"(though, a lot of slut shaming tends to just stem from women too, where at that point you also have an element of cutting down the "competition"). Both aspects are largely reinforced by religion too.

[deleted] · 2015-01-05T18:49:57+00:00

[permanently deleted]

ThorLives · 2015-01-05T05:36:24+00:00

Slut shaming comes from the costs of paternity uncertainty. Men who were not jealous and did not guard their mates for 'contamination' from other men did not pass on their genes. In other words, jealousy and prizing womens 'purity' was positively selected for in our ancestral past. It makes perfect sense, since women have hidden ovulation.

Also, women who are less inhibited sexually are more likely to cheat. This seems intuitive, but somehow it gets lost in all the ideological ranting that goes on. Research has shown that one of the most powerful predictors of a womans unfaithfulness is her number of previous sexual partners. Men grasp this instinctively. Women also grasp this, as research has also shown that if women are rivals for a mans interest, they will bad-mouth their rivals sexual history as a way to make their man-target lose interest. In other words, slut-shame.

Finally, there is the economics of sex. Women can demand more for supplying sexual access to their bodies if sex is scarce than if the market is flooded with it. This drives women to try to keep the price of sex 'high'.

So while there may be some anti-male component to slut-shaming, this is a mirage. Its about both men and womens self-interest.

SpaceWhiskey · 2015-01-05T05:50:44+00:00

That explains why TRP views penises as some sort of WMD/death sentence.

throwinout · 2015-01-05T05:03:50+00:00

People don't seem to care about how slutty gay guys are either, so I'm not buying your story. Sure, bigots care about whether the guy is gay in the first place - but they don't care how many men they sleep with. Its that old adage

If a man builds a thousand bridges and sucks one dick, they don't call him a bridge-builder... they call him a cocksucker.

It doesn't matter if you sucked 1 dick or 100, you're a cocksucker for life.

And this has been repeated so many times its getting tiring: the basic assumption behind slut shaming is that it is so much easier to sleep with men.

cxj · 2015-01-05T06:31:38+00:00

No shit its anti male. Most slut shaming is done by women to maximize the value of their major bargaining chip, sex. The less women give out, the higher its valued. It's a ploy to leverage power over men. And somehow this is mens fault.

ThorLives · 2015-01-05T09:07:53+00:00

This post reminded me of a story posted a few months ago involving two female teachers who had a threesome with a male student. Here's one of the highly-upvoted comments. I should say that I completely disagree with his analysis. I was shocked that it was highly upvoted and that so few people actually disputed the narrative, but many people don't see it the way that you (and I) do:

http://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/2jcfyx/teen_feels_bad_his_bragging_over_teacherthreesome/clajnvj

Here's one comment that actually disputed the claim, and while I generally agree with it, I think he could've expanded on the explanation a great deal.

http://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/2jcfyx/teen_feels_bad_his_bragging_over_teacherthreesome/clam229

I would've written a rebuttal to the first comment, as well, but I was on vacation and reading it on my phone (where I was not logged in). It's interesting how many different ways people seem to interpret the male-female double-standard when it comes to sex. There's plenty of interesting comments about the double-standard in the larger thread - like this one: http://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/2jcfyx/teen_feels_bad_his_bragging_over_teacherthreesome/clanjrz

Antiteetotaler · 2015-01-05T05:38:32+00:00

Male sexuality is considered damaging at a base level.

bunker_man · 2015-01-05T12:46:04+00:00

From what I hear they did a story that revealed that ultimately its just anti poor. People considered in good social standing aren't judged for having any kind of sex. Poor people are considered a generalized form of trashy even if its very little. And this is what the shaming directs itself at.

LeGrandDiableBlanc · 2015-01-05T18:59:19+00:00

The thing is that there is no instinctual basis for men to need to compete with women over women.

Minorly, the number of homosexuals is relatively small (the highest figure I have ever heard was 10%, and that was from a politically charged gay rights group in college), and even fewer of 'queer' folk are specifically bisexual women. Queer folk also tend to date within queer circles, so there is even less overlap.

Mostly, however, is that fact that a woman cannot get pregnant from having sex with a women. Male mate guarding exists because of instinctual adaptations to the lack of paternal certainty. If my partner is fucking other guys and she has a kid, how do I know it's mine (circa 120,000 BCE)?

Is this really anything other than obvious?

redpilltom · 2015-01-06T06:52:06+00:00

In general, I guess overall it's anti-male purely numbers wise. But if there was no slut-shaming, it doesn't mean your average beta gets laid more, it just means the alpha guys get laid twice as much. Women don't hook up with beta guys because of slut shaming, it's because they aren't attracted to them. No amount of anti-slut shaming will change that.

phasetwenty · 2015-01-05T05:22:00+00:00

The base assumption is that male sexuality is damaging to women.

This is not true. A more useful model would be that the stakes for heterosexual intercourse are a category higher than homosexual intercourse due to the possibility of offspring. Slut-shaming enters the picture as a control on the female side of heterosexual sex due to the possibility of offspring. Since there's no chance of it with homosexual sex, the social structures around it are far less evolved.

Petticoat_Rule · 2015-01-05T13:11:46+00:00

Men who use the word 'slut' are disgusted by penises. Penises are kind of like this weird, ugly tail of an elephant attached to their crotches. These men can't bear that women see too many penises, lest the women have lasting nightmares and refuse to allow a man to take his pants off in their company ever again.

Sesa_Refum · 2015-01-05T17:24:45+00:00

Women are biologically motivated to "defend" their ovaries

[deleted] · 2015-01-05T05:50:01+00:00

[permanently deleted]

[deleted] · 2015-01-05T07:11:48+00:00

Who are these guys running around slut shaming women? Guys will often talk about it with other guys and be open about it with the anonymity of the internet, but I don't know anyone who's ever gone out and picked on a girl for being slutty. In contrast, I can hear young girls calling each other sluts down at the local bus stop. Hell, my sister has outright warned me to stay away from certain friends of hers (a sure sign that I need to give those girls a call).
There's a pretty clear statistical correlation between number of partners and divorce risk. Given the sampling size and strength of the correlation, I'm inclined to believe there's something there (you don't get correlations that strong when there isn't). Does this mean that I think easy girls are bad people or unworthy of relationships? Not at all. But if there were a choice between two hypothetical women that were exactly the same in all regards, except one had fucked fewer guys, I'd most likely go for the one with a lower notch count. If you asked most guys, I'm guessing they'd probably tell you something similar. It's something that needs to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but as a general rule of thumb, it's probably a good idea not to LTR promiscuous women.
There are plenty of negative personality traits such as impulsiveness and BPD that are correlated with promiscuous behavior, which -- along with the added STD risks and increased chances of divorce -- make promiscuous partners less desirable for a lot of men.

I don't think any of these are anti-male. In fact, I think it's pretty pragmatic and important when it comes to good partner selection. Who you end up with can have some pretty far reaching effects, and I'd rather have someone who is relationship and commitment minded than someone who sucked two dicks at the same time in a club bathroom. As an inherently relationship-oriented guy, one of those is indicative of a similar mindset to mine, and one isn't.

I don't care about lesbians, so it doesn't particularly affect me. I haven't met enough bisexual girls for it to be a factor in my life.

And in anticipation of someone trumpeting the usual experienced girl knowing what she's doing thing, I couldn't care less how good a girl is in bed, it's honestly not a factor for me. I know what I like, and I have no compunctions with teaching someone who's inexperienced.

Deaddpooll · 2015-01-05T12:36:50+00:00

At the core of it all,(most)women love domination. Not every single moment, but if they are not fucked senselessly once in a while they'll remain dissatisfied.

An avg 5'5 girl would want a 6'3 guy over a 5'8 one,even when the latter is closer to her height.She would suck on an 8 inch dick with much more vigour than she would a 5 inch one even if she can't fit that thing in her vagina.

Its so fucked up to want to be physically imposed by a much larger dude, to want to be penetrated by a huge dick. Its filthy and degrading and thats what women love.

The more they are dominated, the more they are satisfied and the more they are ashamed of it.In short, female sexuality is messed up

I would look at the dude who wants to be assfucked by someone twice his size with the same disdain.

give_me_shinies · 2015-01-05T13:06:58+00:00

Part of it is male sexuality (which is assumed to be base and vile) being damaging to women (who are assumed to be pure and innocent). And part of it is a woman giving out her product for free, i.e., being a sucker of sorts for undervaluing her product. Look at how we describe sluts; they lack self-respect, don't value themselves, are "cheap", etc.

[deleted] · 2015-01-05T05:00:25+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Title	Slut shaming is at its core anti-male.
Author	wazzup987
Upvotes	19
Comments	96
Date	January 5, 2015 4:44 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2rdcvs/slut_shaming_is_at_its_core_antimale/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/slut-shaming-is-at-its-core-anti-male.283894 https://theredarchive.com/post/283894

Comments