Slut Walks

[Empty Hands]

What is really sad about this is people being proud of being scum. The lack of shame in today's society is a big problem.

As I can't see the images/video Flea linked to I can't comment in context but in general terms I do agree with Don about one of the consequences of generations of "Me First Last and Always" is that people do not properly consider how what they do and how they behave reflects upon themselves.

How does having sex with multiple people (but only if you are a woman) make you "scum" or reflect on you poorly?

 

[Big Don]

How does having sex with multiple people (but only if you are a woman) make you "scum" or reflect on you poorly?

That doesn't, being proud to be a slut, does.

 

[Empty Hands]

That doesn't, being proud to be a slut, does.

Being proud of being a slut only makes you scum if being a slut is in fact at or near the scum-worthy level itself. If being a slut was not a negative thing, then how could being proud of it be a negative thing? Like saying that there is nothing wrong with eating hamburgers, but being proud of being a hamburger-eater makes you scum.

So again, why does having sex with multiple people (but only if you are a woman) make you a bad person?

Like there can even be a neutral understanding of the word slut that isn't drenched in misogyny. I've seen women called sluts who were dressed in sweats, walking to class. It's a word used to attack women full stop. Otherwise what is the "slut number"? 5? 10? 1000? I've even heard of women being called sluts who were still virgins.

That's the whole reason for these walks and "reclaiming the word".

 

[granfire]

It's like being proud of being a redneck...

We have slowly moved to embrace the lowest possible denominator.

Not too long ago calling man 'dog' would have earned you 5 across the lips, same as the female equivalent. 'Slut' isn't that far of a leap anymore.

I mean, I am all for expressing oneself, but some stuff does not need to be shown in public....
But it takes somebody with some cloud to proclaim that underwear should only be seen dressing/undressing...(I guess there goes the market for decorated 'whale tails')

 

[Sukerkin]

How does having sex with multiple people (but only if you are a woman) make you "scum" or reflect on you poorly?

I said in general terms, carefully stating that I was speaking out of context, that I thought that selfish and inconsiderate behaviour was a bad thing, EH.

In specific contextural parameters, then, aye, I'm a bit old-fashioned in that I think 'sleeping around' is disreputable whichever gender is doing it. There might be some convincing biological arguments for men behaving that way when we were likely to end up dead before too long and so our genes were eager to get passed on. Nowadays we need, as in so many other things, to rise above our 'caveman' programming.

:blush: I'm still capable of "Outraged of Hemel Hempstead" moralising when the mood takes me it seems .

 

[Touch Of Death]

Being proud of being a slut only makes you scum if being a slut is in fact at or near the scum-worthy level itself. If being a slut was not a negative thing, then how could being proud of it be a negative thing? Like saying that there is nothing wrong with eating hamburgers, but being proud of being a hamburger-eater makes you scum.

So again, why does having sex with multiple people (but only if you are a woman) make you a bad person?

Like there can even be a neutral understanding of the word slut that isn't drenched in misogyny. I've seen women called sluts who were dressed in sweats, walking to class. It's a word used to attack women full stop. Otherwise what is the "slut number"? 5? 10? 1000? I've even heard of women being called sluts who were still virgins.

That's the whole reason for these walks and "reclaiming the word".

By starting with the assumption that society celebrates men that sleep with multiple women, you are creating a false argument. It is unsafe for both sexes. Secondly, you don't reclaim a word that never was in your favor. It has always been a slam, and always will be.
Sean

 

[Flea]

From an evolutionary perspective, sexual promiscuity is ideal because genetic diversity promotes survival of both the individual and the species.

From the extremely newfangled and novel public health perspective, not so much because of the "social diseases" that have been with us as long as sex itself.

But this thread is not about putting women on trial as sexual beings. Waxing poetic about chastity or finger-shaking about short skirts puts us right down to the level of the officer who made the original comment that prompted the marches to begin with. People - including people with vaginas - have the right to make their own decisions about what to wear and how they associate.

There is no justification for an unprovoked violent crime, and showing a little more skin than is expected under a particular social standard is not provocation. It's an excuse, and a completely unacceptable one at that.

 

[WC_lun]

I don't care if a woman walks bare assed naked down the street, men have to be responsible for thier actions. Is it the smartest thing a woman could do? Of course not. However, it in no way makes her responsible if she gets raped. That is 100% on the man who would do such a thing. For me saying that a scantily clas woman contributed to her own rape by virtue of adding temptation is just adding an excuse for the man's behaviour. There is no excuse for rape. None.

 

[Empty Hands]

I said in general terms, carefully stating that I was speaking out of context, that I thought that selfish and inconsiderate behaviour was a bad thing, EH.

Then I don't understand, since I've seen no selfish and inconsiderate behavior discussed in relation to the OP - except for the cop, of course.

In specific contextural parameters, then, aye, I'm a bit old-fashioned in that I think 'sleeping around' is disreputable whichever gender is doing it.

Why?

 

[Empty Hands]

By starting with the assumption that society celebrates men that sleep with multiple women, you are creating a false argument. It is unsafe for both sexes.

Social celebration and safety are separate arguments and points. Why did you conflate them?

It isn't really disputable that women are held to a higher sexual standard then men, individual exceptions aside. However, that has nothing to do with the question I asked - why is sexual promiscuity immoral?

Secondly, you don't reclaim a word that never was in your favor. It has always been a slam, and always will be.

The point is that it is a sexist slam, inconsistently applied almost solely to women. It's only true meaning is "woman I want to put in her place." If it actually meant something, then it wouldn't be applied to virgins and college students dressed in sweats and t-shirts.

Also, slurs obviously are so re-claimed, like "******" and "******", so you are wrong on the facts.

 

[Sukerkin]

Finally seen the video clip, Flea - nice and effective without being preachy or going out of it's way to demonise all men.

 

[Sukerkin]

It isn't really disputable that women are held to a higher sexual standard then men, individual exceptions aside. However, that has nothing to do with the question I asked - why is sexual promiscuity immoral?

In modern times it is more a public health issue than anything else, if you are seeking only practical reasons.

There is still the hangover too of the inate need for men in particular to know that they are expending resources to raise offspring that actually contain their genes and not those of some other man.

I don't think tho' that we are cleaving too well to the topic with this digression.

Those that don't want to hear that a certain mode of behaviour carries a risk will never hear it and those that will always believe that women dressed a certain way will also behave a certain way will likely never be convinced either.

The good points have largely been made already on both those platforms, as far as I am concerned, at least.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Social celebration and safety are separate arguments and points. Why did you conflate them?

It isn't really disputable that women are held to a higher sexual standard then men, individual exceptions aside. However, that has nothing to do with the question I asked - why is sexual promiscuity immoral?



The point is that it is a sexist slam, inconsistently applied almost solely to women. It's only true meaning is "woman I want to put in her place." If it actually meant something, then it wouldn't be applied to virgins and college students dressed in sweats and t-shirts.

Also, slurs obviously are so re-claimed, like "******" and "******", so you are wrong on the facts.

The word means slat, and if you want to lay claim, thats fine by me, but your proof has been hidden from my view; so, I still have no clue what you are talking about.
Sean

 

[Touch Of Death]

Social celebration and safety are separate arguments and points. Why did you conflate them?

It isn't really disputable that women are held to a higher sexual standard then men, individual exceptions aside. However, that has nothing to do with the question I asked - why is sexual promiscuity immoral?



The point is that it is a sexist slam, inconsistently applied almost solely to women. It's only true meaning is "woman I want to put in her place." If it actually meant something, then it wouldn't be applied to virgins and college students dressed in sweats and t-shirts.

Also, slurs obviously are so re-claimed, like "******" and "******", so you are wrong on the facts.

Sexual promiscuity directly effects the family. If you choose to believe family is unimportant in modern times then, for you, sexual promiscuity is not immoral; however, family oriented people know otherwise. Its all in the eye of the beholder. You get to believe what ever you want, but expecting us to follow along with your thought process is going to get you no where.
Sean

 

[Empty Hands]

In modern times it is more a public health issue than anything else, if you are seeking only practical reasons.

Is smoking immoral? Is overeating immoral? Are extreme sports or riding motorcycles immoral? All public health issues, yet it is rare that any of those issues are treated the same way as promiscuity.

I am curious if you have any reasons other than the practical yourself, since I know that you like me don't hold with a God laying down religious rules for behavior.

At the end of the day, I know perfectly well why everyone treats promiscuity the way they do. It is essentially an irrational prejudice, and I would like people to start thinking about their irrational prejudices. Especially when those prejudices hurt women.

 

[Empty Hands]

Sexual promiscuity directly effects the family. If you choose to believe family is unimportant in modern times then, for you, sexual promiscuity is not immoral; however, family oriented people know otherwise.

If that were the real reason, then young women without families of their own yet would not be called sluts. "Promiscuity" is very, very different from "cheating", which is indeed immoral because it is lying that hurts those close to the cheater. Promiscuity is not lying.

You get to believe what ever you want, but expecting us to follow along with your thought process is going to get you no where.
Sean

That's kind of funny, because what I've been doing over and over again is asking people to justify their conclusions - to explain their thought process. The few reasons that have been put forward, like yours above, just don't hold up logically.

 

[Touch Of Death]

If that were the real reason, then young women without families of their own yet would not be called sluts. "Promiscuity" is very, very different from "cheating", which is indeed immoral because it is lying that hurts those close to the cheater. Promiscuity is not lying.



That's kind of funny, because what I've been doing over and over again is asking people to justify their conclusions - to explain their thought process. The few reasons that have been put forward, like yours above, just don't hold up logically.

Its not about having or not having a family. If you value the family, then you don't engage in promiscuity. It's that simple. I said nothing of lying and cheating. You brought that in and shot it down all by your self. This is also why the logic doesn't match; you missed it.
sean

 

[Empty Hands]

Its not about having or not having a family. If you value the family, then you don't engage in promiscuity. It's that simple. I said nothing of lying and cheating. You brought that in and shot it down all by your self. This is also why the logic doesn't match; you missed it.
sean

Then you're going to have to explain it, because it doesn't make any sense.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Then you're going to have to explain it, because it doesn't make any sense.

You will notice that all ten of The Ten commandments also, directly effect the family as well, but for some reason or another, a value is placed on being chaste until married. If we can't get that we like the idea that our mates showed some loyalty to the boyfriend or girlfriend they had before us. Its just the way we as a people think. The last choice for a marriage partner is the person sleeping with multiple people. It is simply a character flaw no matter how you slice it, when you think in terms of the family. The whole Hippy free love thing collapsed in on itself because it lacked substance or any real alternative plan to what existed before... the family.
Sean

 

[Empty Hands]

If we can't get that we like the idea that our mates showed some loyalty to the boyfriend or girlfriend they had before us.

Again, you conflate promiscuity with cheating. Hint: not everyone dates the people they have sex with. Not all promiscuous people date or have sex with multiple people at the same time. Another Hint: there exist a certain number of couples with open marriages, at least one of which that I know of that has children. They do more or less the same as other couples. Not everyone conceives of sex and family in the narrow way you do, and thus your views cannot be universalized.

It is simply a character flaw no matter how you slice it, when you think in terms of the family.

You have put no arguments forward as to how it is a character flaw, so no it isn't obvious to me. I know of promiscuous people who have families (polyamory and the like) that have loving family lives, and monogamous families which are miserable. You have put nothing forward to make promiscuity a character flaw in respect to the family or anything else.