OP: Thoughts on 'slutty' women?

Man, I don't mean to sound harsh in the title thread, but there are many of them out there. Women who don't believe in having sexual relations with just one person. There are lots of women out there who would have sex with as many and any guy they lay their eyes upon. But it seems to me that most nymphos are beautiful perfect looking women who enjoy showing off their body to the whole world. There are women out there who is very addicted to sex. Why? Maybe it's because they get bored of doing the same body everyday and they want different tastes in men. There are many reasons why women become slutty and nymphotic.

I've ran into women like this before and I tell ya, it's no fun. I don't mind being close friends with these type of women, but I would not go as far as having sex with them even if they asked it.

I'm the type of guy that would have a serious relationship with one person only. Sex maybe fun, but one night stands with a random person is not my thing.

I'm just simply wondering what are the guys opinion are on these type of women? The women in this forum can answer the question too if you want.


Posted: 02 Oct 19:47


How about that they are just different from you!

Most people here are saying that it is personal choice and I agree, if sex carries great emotional attachments for you that’s fine, that is normal for you. If it doesn’t, then that that is fine too and is normal for somebody else. As long as people are honest and upfront with each other (oberon giving the best example).

If I found out that somebody had only one sexual partner their whole life, I would not call them frigid or a prude or sexually repressed or some other derogatory expression that they probably wouldn’t take to kindly to, I would respect their choice.
So why call women who choose to sleep with different people sluts? And as tease keeps asking, why just women. What do you call men that sleep around? Do you have your own derogatory name for that category of people too?
These people are just men and women who make different choices from some of us. They are not bad people, unless they are misleading those they sleep with.


Posted: 02 Oct 19:53

Well, there are many names to call men who sleep around different women, I've heard men who sleep around get called names like "Sly dogs", "Man whore", etc. Things like that.

But as you people say, I guess there is nothing wrong with people having sex with random people. As long as you are single and doing it responsibly then there is nothing wrong with it.

But if you happen to be a married person that sleeps around with different people, then yep, that is definitely wrong.

As long as I'm a single and still a virgin, I could get into this if I wanted.


Posted: 02 Oct 19:53

yeah but sly dog isn't really a derogatory name and man whore/slut is just an adaptation of the female version of the name. Why isn't is called female whore/slut and male whore/slut?
I personally don't sleep around, but for those people who do, as long as they are safe, more power to them.


Posted: 02 Oct 19:53

Man whore and sly dogs are not derogatory terms like a slut and a whore for a female.
You call a guy a man whore or a sly dog in front of his buddies and you're liable to get a smile or some laughs and even some high fives.


Posted: 02 Oct 19:54

depending on the crowd you're in, slut and whore aren't derogatory terms either. A group of my friends uses those terms as simple nicknames, sort of as a joke almost like man whore is used (but not quite).

oh, and i call the man whores out there (because most of them are very misleading in their seduction) pigs. sometimes i think that women that sleep around are more morally grounded than the guys that do. Most women i know who sleep around don't use lying and cheating to get with more guys. The guys i know however use promises of commitment and generally have one girl on the side that may consider herself their "girlfriend" while the guy is doing several other girls. enjoy sex, just be honest


Posted: 02 Oct 19:54

Just to stir the pot a bit, consider this:

"You often hear women, especially feminists and sluts, complaining about how it’s such an unfair double standard that men are called studs when they sleep around, yet women are called sluts. It’s really not a double standard though, because both scenarios are pretty different in terms of circumstances and consequences. I can think of at least three crucial differences.

First, sleeping around is easier for women. Regardless of how you feel about promiscuity, we can all agree that a guy who manages to rack up a lot of sexual partners has to have some skills. It’s challenging for men to rack up partners, even for men with low standards. It requires a certain amount of social intelligence, interpersonal skills, persistence, thick skin, and plain old dumb luck. For women to rack up a lot of partners, however, it pretty much only requires a vagina and a pulse. So a man whoring it up and a woman whoring it up are hardly the same thing because for a woman to get a lot of partners is absolutely no challenge, hence no one respects it. It’s just viewed as a lack of self-discipline when women indulge in lots of sex partners because they can get new ones whenever they want. When men get lots of sex partners, it’s respected more because getting lots of sex partners, for men, is a challenge. This is just human nature: people gain respect for those who accomplish challenging feats while they consider those who overindulge in easily obtained vices as weak or flawed.

Second, women do more harm by sleeping around than men do. Say a man sleeps around with a bunch of different women. He is definitely doing harm to these women if he pretends to be monogamous while sleeping around with these multiple partners. He may cause them emotional pain by his promiscuity. He may cause unwanted pregnancy. He may spread venereal diseases. When women sleep around, however, they can cause not only these same ill effects but one additional crucial ill effect: the risk of unknown parentage. If one guy sleeps around with five women, each of whom is monogamous to him, and they all get pregnant, it’s a safe bet as to who the father is. If one woman sleeps around with five men and gets pregnant, it could be anybody’s baby. And if a man is tricked into raising a baby that isn’t his, he is basically investing his time, money, estate and property to provide for a child that is not carrying on his DNA into the next generations, which is a costly mistake from an evolutionary standpoint. Our two basic primal drives are to survive and to reproduce, and promiscuous women traditionally make it hard for a man to know for sure whether he is truly reproducing or simply raising another man’s child. Men stand a lot more to lose from promiscuous women than the other way around. And it’s no picnic for the child to not know who his real father is either. And it’s a mess for the women carrying on the deception as well. Or just look at any random episode of the Maury show if you don’t believe me. Considering that the DNA test and the birth control pill had not existed for most of human history, meaning that there were no reliable ways to prevent pregnancy or prove parentage, society for many centuries had a vested interest in preventing promiscuity among women and society accomplished this by creating the slut stigma. And even though the creation of birth control and DNA tests have made this less of a risk than the past, longstanding traditions and customs are not easy for society to break.

Third, men have evolutionary reasons to be programmed to sleep around. A lot of women roll their eyes when they hear that men are “hard-wired” to sleep around. But from an evolutionary standpoint, it makes total sense. If the two primal drives of humans are to survive and to reproduce, nothing leads to maximum reproduction like one man sleeping with multiple women. If one women slept with many men, in a nine month period, she would still only get pregnant just once. Nine months of rampant promiscuity would give the same result as nine months of highly sexed monogamy: one pregnancy. Now if one man sleeps with many women, you can get many pregnancies. The more women he sleeps with, the more pregnancies. So from an evolutionary standpoint, there are concrete advantages to men sleeping around with multiple partners rather than women.

These three reasons are probably why the longstanding tradition came about of men being rewarded for multiple partners while women get socially punished for similar promiscuity. Of course all this is gradually changing, but we’re up against centuries of tradition here, so don’t expect any dramatic reversals or anything.

Now a lot of people are going to read all this and dismissively think Oh this guy is just being a typical man and trying to justify every man’s dream: cheating and polygamy. But believe it or not, I don’t really think male polygamy is all it’s cracked up to be. Despite what most people assume, polygamy actually may benefit women more than men. Most dudes think a society of widespread polygamy (specifically polygyny, where one man can have several women) would just be a utopia of every guy sleeping with every woman under the sun. Some economists think otherwise though. The basic argument is that in a world where polygamy was acceptable, most of the women would be hoarded by the most successful men."

Does it at least make sense?

Personally, I see no reason to call women sluts. Then again, after reading this, I see there are at least *some* arguments that could be made. If nothing else, the whole question of skill. A woman just needs to say yes or alternatively just ask, a man has to do a whole lot more.

Your thoughts?


Posted: 03 Oct 22:37

Intresting perspective... I don't think anyone is a "slut" as long as they have responsible sex, and that sex is not for attention or somthing trvial like that, regaurdless of gender. The difficulty in which to attain that sex shouldn't matter in IMO.


Posted: 03 Oct 22:38

Hey Brandye!

Which part am I wrong about? I didn't really say I had any position at all on the matter except to say:

"Personally, I see no reason to call women sluts. Then again, after reading this, I see there are at least *some* arguments that could be made. If nothing else, the whole question of skill. A woman just needs to say yes or alternatively just ask, a man has to do a whole lot more. "

If you're saying that a man does not have to do a whole lot more to get laid than a woman, well, I'll just laugh that one off. If you mean to say that I agree with what was said, well, I don't agree with women being called "sluts." I do however see some of the rational behind it (as presented in the arguments above).

You've probably had as many partners as I have (let me check the list, ah yes...) 26 or 27 (I have a double entry and I can't recall if it's the same woman). No harm to my psyche yet! :D

Of course, I just started having sex about 3 years ago now (and I'm mid 30's). So I guess I'm a bit more mature. TO prove my point about how hard it is for a man to have sex, only 2 of my partners weren't pay for play.

Pretty sure a woman of average attractiveness could have 30 different sex partners in 30 days if she put her mind to it. If she's very attractive, she could do 30 in 1 week (if her body was up for the challenge) and maybe even 1 day (in the right setting).

As for the harm to female's psyche's, I wonder if it's a chicken and egg thing. If there was no such concept of "slut" would women be harmed by having so many sex partners?

I'm still trying to figure out what I was "wrong" about.... A bit stumped to be honest. I just brought up the quote for discussion purposes. It's kinda interesting as a discussion piece dontcha think? I've certainly never heard it discussed and for that reason alone it's interesting (at least to me anyways)....

Btw, regarding the number of partners I've had (and / or the fact that I paid for most of them) mostly means nothing to me. I suppose I wouldn't want it broadcast to the world that I've paid, but my mom knows, my sister should know and my best friend knows. They still love me and I'm ok.

I don't even begin to understand why you said: "I daresay that I have had as many male partners (and female partners) as you have had female. I am not particularly proud of that but..."

What is there to be proud or ashamed of? Note, I can't say that I've had any male partners (and don't want any, I don't swing that way), but I digress...

BTW, do I have more or less partners than I? I'm curious :D ...

For the record, the last girlfriend had more sex partners than I. She wasn't a slut nor did she think of herself as one (not that I noticed anyways....). Beautiful woman. Could have had 30 guys in 15 days no sweat. Wouldn't of course, because she had plenty of self respect, but could if wanted to... She said more than 25 to my 21 at that time... Probably still has had more partners than I...

Anyways... Enough about my exploits... Let us discuss the origin of the word "slut" and rationales (if any valid one exist) for the term as it is commonly understood.

Also, how would you say it harmed you? That I do find interesting.

Disease? Reputation? Self image? Physical harm? If self image, is it because of the concept of slut and virginal woman = good and pure, or is it because you bought into the b.s. that society fed you? If you ceased to believe societal b.s. would whatever harm you suffered abate or disappear?

Personally, I stopped believing societal b.s. about "johns" and I have enjoyed my sexuality for the first time in my life. It's been a godsend. Thank god I cast off the idiotic crap about all johns being abusers and wanting to hurt women. I have no intention of harming any woman, have not harmed any woman (no more than usual of course, to some women, my mere existence is harmful to them... but I digress) that I've paid for the pleasure of enjoying their company.

That said, I am certain that not all of them were comfortable with what they were doing, but most of them were. Considering the number of times I've been turned down cold (i.e. even with money in hand I couldn't get laid), I know it's not because they didn't have a choice with me.

But again I digress...

How were you hurt? I want to try and understand the harm that you've suffered...


Posted: 03 Oct 22:39

Lots of the use of 'whore' on here

Well to me, whore means prostitute. She/he sells sex to strangers. To me thats a perfectly honourable thing to do, if she/he is happy to do it and isnt coerced.
prostitution should be quite legal (it is in the UK) as I dont think the state has any right to say who we can and cant have sex with EXCEPT to protect children and the vulnerable.

In all relationships we should take care to not hurt each other. But outside a relationship, we should be free to sleep with who we like and it is no business of anyone else.

Posted: 25 Nov 17:23

We need to recognise that women has just as much right to enjoy sex as men. That does not mean that they are sluts. Personally, I dislike the term "slut" and all the other degrading terms for women who enjoy sex. The problem for women is they have to suffer the consequences of their enjoyment of sex.
I have been seeing an escort for the past five years. She is a lovely mature person and I enjoy her company greatly. I also enjoy sex with her, and this is reciprocated. In fact, she often climaxes multiple times when we are together. I look forward to our times together.
She has admitted to me that one of the reasons that she is an escort is because she enjoys sex so much, and the pay is good. By being an escort, she gets her sexual satisfaction without the need for hanging around bars to meet men, etc. She also can screen those she sees and can decline to get personal with any of them. It is much like a "friends with benefits" situation because she does not get emotionally involved with her customers.
As a registered working woman, she can get good medical support, and even pays tax.
This is one way of her getting a win-win situation.

Posted: 27 Oct 02:27

Add a Reply!