Sluts, Studs and Losers

November 9th, 2011 by Pelle Billing

I just saw the following tweet:

I don’t think it’s fair that when women have sex with lots of men they’re “sluts,” but when I have sex with lots of women I’m “dreaming.”

It’s obviously funny. That’s what I thought at first.

But there’s also a deeper meaning. Modern societies care greatly about women being called “sluts”, while men have the luxury to be referred to as “studs”. It’s not fair, according to feminists and just about everyone else.

But who cares about men who cannot laid at all, even if their life depended on it?

Women may have to worry about being called sluts, but there are far more men than women who are not even part of the sexual marketplace.

This discrepancy in sexual value is due to women being the sellers and men the buyers, and the sellers determine the price and if there will be a transaction at all.

Why are women the sellers? Well, to be crude, they have a uterus – and men don’t. This means that women have always owned something precious, something which is absolutely crucial for humanity to survive.

Sperm, however, are cheap. Millions are produced every hour in a fertile man, and they are readily replaced after each ejaculation.

At the end of the day, women simply bring something more important to the sexual transaction, at least evolutionary speaking. Today we may have contraceptives, and not care about the reproductive part of sex. But we are still deeply affected by the evolutionary programs that are part of our brain and our consciousness.

Translated into sexual economics, this means that the average women finds it fairly easy to get laid, whereas the average man finds it fairly difficult. Long term relationships are another story – we’re talking about plain old sex here.

Rereading the tweet above, it’s evident that it’s both funny and (for many men) deeply realistic at the same time:

I don’t think it’s fair that when women have sex with lots of men they’re “sluts,” but when I have sex with lots of women I’m “dreaming.”

Next time someone tells you that the slut label is unfair, you may consider informing them about the other side of the equation.

22 Responses to “Sluts, Studs and Losers”

  1. Ulf Döner Says:

    “If a lock can be opened by any key it’s not a very good lock, but if a key can open many locks it’s a master key”

  2. Pelle Billing Says:

    Very well put Ulf.

  3. Karl Says:

    One of the more often-cited papers on the sexual marketplace theory, which shows some of its explanatory power, is by Baumeister and Vohs (2004). One interesting point of evidence is a study reporting that women generally do not rate sex as a benefit of romantic relationships at all, while men consistently do.

    The same conclusions can also be derived from Gaddam and Ogas’ (2011) theory of sexual cues: in men, one cue is sufficient (“power of AND”) for sexual arousal, while in women, no single cue is necessary or sufficient (“power of OR”). The fact that physical and mental arousal have no correlation in women generally also serves to make it harder for ‘studs’.

    Comedian Jim Jeffries has given an explanation for the layman.

  4. T. Rose Says:

    But it really isn’t fair that women are called sluts,nor is it fair that virgin men are so hated either.

    This expectancy that women are prudes and men are just drawn to sex at all times is just such a double standard. It just pulls back to the whole “Men are success objects,women are sex objects” crap that society still actively follows,even after feminists hit it big in most issues.

  5. Steffen Says:

    @Ulf Döner:
    “If a lock can be opened by any key it’s not a very good lock, but if a key can open many locks it’s a master key”

    What is lost if the “lock” is opened? What does this lock protect?

    @Pelle Billing:
    “Sperm, however, are cheap. Millions are produced every hour in a fertile man, and they are readily replaced after each ejaculation.

    At the end of the day, women simply bring something more important to the sexual transaction, at least evolutionary speaking. Today we may have contraceptives, and not care about the reproductive part of sex. But we are still deeply affected by the evolutionary programs that are part of our brain and our consciousness.”

    It certainly sounds reasonable at the first sight, but I’ve grown very skeptical of evolutionary psychology and it’s ability to explain human behavior.

    For example, all of your reasoning (sperm = cheap, uterus = precious) could be applied to bonobos as well, yet bonobo females are very promiscuous.

    Add to that, that contrary to most other species the ovulation in women is hidden and a single sexual encounter will most likely (95%) not result in a pregnancy, so “access” to an uterus can’t be THAT precious.

    “Next time someone tells you that the slut label is unfair, please let that person know that there are worse things than being called a slut.”

    Labeling promiscuous women sluts and shaming them is actively done by society, while if men can’t get the sex they want, they are “just” unfortunate (of course, it may subjectively feel much worse for them!), so those two things really can’t be compared.

    But aside from that, why do we even need to make these comparisons, anyway?

    It’s true that most feminists are hypocrites, they pretend they are for equality but in reality don’t care when men are treated unfair (many are even actively anti-men).
    We know that!

    But if someone *just* complains about the slut label and doesn’t say it in this “Women have it worse in every aspect”-way, we should imho just agree with him and not counter with “But men on the other hand…”.

  6. Vladimir Says:

    This comes down to values. Courtship and sex are rituals for all intents and purposes.

    “Rituals reveal values at their deepest level… men express in ritual what moves them most, and since the form of expression is conventionalized and obligatory, it is the values of the group that are revealed.” (Wilson, M., 1954)

    Now, Karl mentioned one very interesting video clip. For those who have not viewed it, or understood it, I will break it down:

    Women generate attraction by just being what they are. Men might go for a better woman because of additional qualities, but the point is that women will attract men by their mere existence in that space and time.

    For a man to be a stud, he really has to be all that and a bag of potato chips. He needs to be something well above average to be with so many women on a consistent basis to be classified as a stud.

    A woman can have all the guys she want by just spreading her legs.

    There is a difference of the invested time and effort either has to make. For a man to be a stud, he needs to be persistent, hard working, be willing to take risks both social and physical…

    A woman will always know if she’ll have someone in her bed that evening. A man will not.

    Also, take a look at a video featuring Christopher Hitchens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7izJggqCoA

    Men, on the other hand are the ones who *HAVE TO* go and conquer.

    Yes, yes I hear you already cursing at me… I’ve lived in Sweden, and I know women there will also approach guys. To be honest though, these women are not the type any man would like to keep in a serious relationship. And this is just further proof.

    The thought process of men in these kinds of situation goes something like this:
    “If she’s so easy to conquer, why gives me the assurances that she will not cheat? What gives me assurances that that child will really me my child? What gives me assurances that she will not break the family? What assurances do I have that she is not carrying some kind of disease?”(think about the new gonorrhea strain that is completely resistant to all known drugs for example)

    Ever wondered why so many Swedes hook up and marry Asian or eastern European women?

    Radical feminist do actively work on undermining the family as the pillar of society. That is their value. Most people, even though you would not necessarily have the right to call them “patriarchal” prefer the family to loose, self-centered vision provided by the radical feminism. Also, there is an appreciation of some sort of restraint for the benefit of others. Now more so then ever, as the world is getting so self-centered and selfish.

    This is then a clash of the values. This is why it is very difficult for women to find a man willing to get married in the western world, especially in US due to the unholy mess that is the divorce courts.

    To sum it up:
    Being called a slut is a cultural insult meant to cause shame to those who would change the culture by misbehaving, judged by the cultural values one is in. Not always insulting… Thing of the “slut walk”…

    Being outside of the sex loop, is not an insult. It is something that is traumatic, painful and looked down upon especially by those that would very likely wear the slut moniker.

  7. Pelle Billing Says:

    Karl,

    Great links, thanks!

  8. Klas Says:

    Brilliantly funny!

  9. Pelle Billing Says:

    Steffen,

    You make some good points. I’ll think about them.

  10. Pelle Billing Says:

    Vladimir,

    You too make good points. It’s not all cultural, which makes it so tricky. Culture and biology and evolutionary psychology interact, to form a constantly evolving reality.

  11. Jim Says:

    “At the end of the day, women simply bring something more important to the sexual transaction, at least evolutionary speaking. Today we may have contraceptives, and not care about the reproductive part of sex. But we are still deeply affected by the evolutionary programs that are part of our brain and our consciousness.”

    No. At the end of the day, it matters not how many infants you drop, or that you are the one dropping them, but how many of those infants grow to maturity to drop more who grow to maturity who…. And the evolutionary choice the species made all those millions of years ago reflects the reality that a single female parent cannot keep her young alive to an age that amounts to real reproductive success. And even today a woman truly on her own is likely to see most of her sons die in the streets and her daughters die in under-age childbirths, if left unaided by Patriarchal medicine.

  12. Danny Says:

    Ulf:
    “If a lock can be opened by any key it’s not a very good lock, but if a key can open many locks it’s a master key”

    I’ve seen this used a lot when talking about double standards between men and women when it comes to sex and just out of nowhere something hit me.

    “Master keys are considered threats which is why they kept under firm control.”

    Sound familiar?

  13. Mario Says:

    When I see the complaints of double standards in this essay and the following comments, my first thought is “Duh.”

    Of course there are double standards. I realize there are countless sociological arguments to attribute to the notion of attraction and socially acceptable conduct, but for me it seems to boil down to a simple concept; women are capable of becoming pregnant, men are not.

    I learned this the hard way 19 years ago when my son was born. I’d heard rumors of the idea that you could make babies that way, but sex was too much fun to bother heeding the warnings. Please don’t misinterpret my remarks to mean I regret his birth. My point is had I not wanted to be a part of his life, the potential for me to fall of the grid and saddle his mother with the burden would have been much easier than the other way around.

    When we consider the proportion of single parent families with a mother as the head of household, it’s tough for me to complain about the difficulty I might have trying to get laid if I were still on the market. Additionally, my understanding of where to meet casually, sexually active women is mostly at “the club.” I suppose my question then is ‘are the men who want to “unlock” women trying to meet them for meaningful relationships or are they trying to screw them?’ If they’re simply trying to nut off, how would they equal the double standards of performing the potential acts of pregnancy, abortion, carrying to term, birthing, or nursing?

    I by no means wish to give a pass to the obnoxious people who want to diminish the significance of masculinity through the perversion of feminism. There have been enormously important ideas presented on this forum; several have changed my view of the world and my life. However, I think this argument isn’t one of them.

  14. Pelle Billing Says:

    Mario,

    I’m not saying that it’s unfair, I’m simply saying that we would do well to honestly acknowledge both sexes advantages and disadvantages in the sexual marketplace.

  15. criolle johnny Says:

    Steffen
    What is LOST if the lock is opened?
    Google “Paternity fraud”.

  16. namae nanka Says:

    ” Although the general public’s belief in the sexual double standard is pervasive, (Marks, 2002; Milhausen & Herold, 1999), the research literature paints a different picture. ”
    “Although the sexual double standard seems selfevident, person perception studies generally fail to show that people actually evaluate sexually active men and women differently.”

    “In contemporary Western societies it is widely believed that there is a sexual double standard such that men are rewarded for sexual activity, whereas women are derogated for sexual activity. This pervasive belief may result in a confirmation bias such that people tend to notice information that confirms the double standard and fail to notice information that refutes it. ”

    http://www.reddit.com/r/fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu/comments/gfiww/locks_n_lolers/c1n7lwx

  17. egrb Says:

    Wow, did ya really think you have the right to get laid, spewing bile over women like that?

  18. criolle johnny Says:

    OK, shaming language, what else to you have? Your middle school debate-team tactics have served you well, young Jedi.

  19. Mario Says:

    Pelle,

    I appreciate your observation in the “sexual marketplace,” but my interpretation of that environment leads me to envision a setting where casual, sexual encounters are the goal. If casual sex is the goal, then a measure of discrimination seems responsible and called for. I suppose the reason I took exception in this essay was there seemed to be a whiny tone that guys have a harder time geting laid than chics, so it’s unfair for guys.

    I realize my experience is anecdotal, but in committed, respectful relationships the playing field is fairly even over sex and intimacy.

  20. Vladimir Says:

    @egrb
    Why do you believe you have a right not to be insulted?

    Why do you believe that women with a lot of sexual partners should be respected by men who clearly do not respect their lifestyle, moral and attitude choices in life?

    Why do you believe that men should simply throw themselves on a sword just because the trending feminist theory says so?

    Why do you believe that women deserve “a real man” instead of an ordinary man?
    -Well, regarding this, there have been a bunch of articles in reputable media houses(Like the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704409004576146321725889448.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read#articleTabs%3Darticle ) on how western men are reluctant to marry or commit in modern times, and how a lot of Americans look for brides overseas. And specifically, these articles have been written by women out of frustration caused by their inability to marry after hitting 30′s and a turbulent past before that(exploring sexuality). Hmmmmm, I wonder why is that?

    And in case a specific country law protects you from being insulted, I am writing this in a country where it is absolutely legal to insult someone to your heart’s content as long as you don’t slender.

  21. Vladimir Says:

    @Steffen

    I recently saw this post on 9GAG, but it was so good, I have to repeat it.

    As sex got easier to get,
    Love got harder to find.

    I think this explains the situation better than anything else.

  22. אדמות למכירה Says:

    אדמות למכירה…

    [...]Sluts, Studs and Losers[...]…


Google