What is wrong with "slut shaming"?

Society is both the People and Government -- should provide assistance to those who can not produce.

 

Sadly both sides have inhumane practices.

 

Modern USA has resources to provide reasonable material standards to all people. In many places this is not an option due to lack of resources.

 

Referring to women as "sluts" and the usage of potty language in general is childish behviour that too should be shamed. "Slut shaming", however, is not about throwing around the word "slut" on random, but rather is it about shaming a certain behaviour (promiscuity) that affects both the indiviudal and society negatively.

A society without shaming does not impose a cost on bad behaviour and when bad behaviour is cheap or - worse - when it is free, society deteriorates into hedonism, savagery and insanity.

It is also important to note that - contrary to Feminist doctrine - "slut shaming" is not a gendered term. It is one that attacks a non-gendered behaviour. Being a "male slut" is just as bad as being a "female slut". Only difference is that the latter comes with the extra cost of pregnancy, but that cost has been deleted thanks to (or rather because of) birth control and easy access to contraceptives.

Say yes to slut shaming!

 

You were giving excuses for avoiding sex. For a lot of men, there is that mess thing that seems to prevent them.

 

It is one of those things, almost mystical in a way. In a town, or just in the midst of a group of conservatives, especially conservative Christians, there is a suffocating quality about the atmosphere. The talk, and ideas espoused so restricted, so rehearsed. All the things that can’t be said, and all the myths that have to be accepted as fact.

It has a lot to do with why the children of conservatives, who go to college, tend to lose their religion. There is a whole wide world out there that isn’t nearly so stifling.

 

That is a position that is central to the Democratic ideology but opposed to by Republican ideology.

 

I agree 100%. In this case, Democrats are right 100%. I am neither Liberal nor Conservative. Both sides have anti-Humanitarian aspects of doctrine.

 

No, I was listing social problems having to do with Complex-consumerist-celebrity-promiscuity culture, especially among the young. As I've posted twice in the thread now, I have no problem with sexual choices and healthy sex lives that don't amount to promiscuity.

Take me for instance since you like anecdotes so much, I've had lots of sex in my middle-aged life, but 0 one night stands, 0 hook up culture, 0 tinder or other net hookups, despite never being married, not being religious in a typical sense, and despite being very good at online dating and attracting women with many chances for hookups turned down or avoided since school days years ago. 100% of the sex I've had has been in relationships or at least extended dating of a month or more, with moderately carefully screened women. Also, since unwise habits in youth, I only sleep with one woman at a time while dating them, and only date women who behave similarly.

I'm not some paragon of sexual virtue, just not promiscuous and exercising a common sense baseline of sexual choices. I believe this is the natural baseline of behavior that young people -would- gravitate towards if Complex consumerist-celebrity-promiscuity culture didn't blare out sexuality at every turn. Sex is a moderately important part of adult life, but nowhere near as important as rotten Complex promiscuity culture preaches in efforts to CREATE social problems, MISERY, ADDICTION and DEPENDENCY that ENRICH the Complex.

Promiscuous women stick out like a sore thumb, and are easy to avoid. I would imagine the same is true of women avoiding promiscuous men. Applying just a few common sense rules like "no sex until I'm willing to date the woman and see where things go," etc. almost completely shut down the social costs of promiscuity. They also coincidentally avoid many of the mental and emotional costs and drama of promiscuity.

 

Were the unwise choices in youth, sluttishness?

 

Not surprised you would focus on only that in my post. Not unless you consider dating and sleeping with two women at the same time as "sluttiness." Neither of those women had a reasonable expectation of exclusivity, we were casually dating over a couple of months, and hadn't discussed exclusivity at all. I had been in dry spell and then suddenly had two high quality women interested in me at the same time. Both of them ended up visibly hurt and I was too. One dropped an unhealthy amount of weight and the other broke out in hives, which caused me emotional pain as they were both better than average women. Seeing that straightened me out on the affects that casual sexual relationships can have on good women whether they are visibly apparent or not. Haven't had more than one sexual relationship at a time going since by design. Sex simply isn't as important as the possibility of hurting someone to the point of affecting their physical health.

Do people still get hurt in monogamous, partnered sexual relationships? Of course, but hookup-promiscuity culture and multiple partners exacerbate the chances drastically.

 

Not being judgmental, it was the folly of youth perhaps?
You caused weight loss and hives?

 

Whatever it was it wasn't "sluttiness" or promiscuous behavior, just behavior I no longer do and haven't for 30+ years. See all my unresponded to posts in the thread about the apples and oranges differences between how women and men seek and obtain sex. Only a tiny percentage of men can ever be "sluts" in the ways average women can, rock stars, extremely rich men, models/actors, celebrities, and I'm not one of those.

I was partly responsible for emotional distress in both of them, and the emotional distress led to the physical symptoms. I have also suffered physical symptoms of hard break ups and other relationship issues several times over the years, they don't call it the "break up diet" for nothing.

Back to the topic and somewhat related, another consequence of promiscuity culture is in deleterious effects on brain chemistry, the same dopamine and serotonin system damage caused by drug and other addictions can be caused by promiscuity. Once brain chemistry is altered, it is extremely difficult to heal it, takes -much- time to return to a healthy state. Females release many times more oxytocin during orgasm than males, and also are more prone to unhealthy levels of limerence. Promiscuity is a big cause of the "women are crazy" generalization/exaggeration that can result from messed up neurotransmitter systems in the brain.

Limerence:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...s/201109/limerence-when-is-it-more-heartbreak

https://livingwithlimerence.com/2017/04/26/limerence-libido-and-the-challenge-of-long-term-romance/

Oxytocin (an extremely powerful sexually secreted drug)

https://www.livescience.com/42198-what-is-oxytocin.html

https://www.quora.com/Who-releases-more-oxytocin-Are-the-levels-both-the-same-in-males-and-females

Study on promiscuity and the dopamine system:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2994774/

 

cant you become un-slutty?
If you can’t, then slut shaming is pointles.
Is more than one sexual partner at a time promiscuous?

 

You can always stop sleeping around and settle down. But, the sooner the better because it has been proven that the more you do it, the harder it is to settle down and commit to a monogamous relationship.

The ultimate goal of slut shaming is - of course - for no one to become a slut in the first place.

 

How can slut shaming prevent a slut from becoming a slut?

Its often stated that women are monogamous by nature, but what if that’s a trick by the more polygamous by nature men, to control women’s sexuality?

 

By imposing a social cost on the behaviour which is the very point behind any shaming strategy. If it gets "too expensive" to be a slut, people will be less likely to seek out such behaviour.

The culture of today encourages sluttiness with all the nonsense about "find yourself", "experiment" and "free love". Media glorifies promiscuity and marriage is often the target of ridicule. So, our current culture does not impose any cost whatsoever on the behaviour.

I do not know about that and not sure if I ever heard it. What is true is that a woman's sexuality - historically speaking - has been limited due the biological reality of pregnancy which made it easier for men to sleep around than it was for women.

 

For about a year, shortly after college I lived with two women. I also had a go or two with a few of their friends. I don’t remember anyone unduly suffering.

I do remember once, I was at a party and someone said something about my girlfriend at the time, something goofy she had done. I joked that if it wasn’t for crazy women, I wouldn’t have any girlfriends. With that, a woman remarked, “if it wasn’t for a** holes, women wouldn’t have boyfriends”. Everyone had a good laugh.

 

You are literally saying that you're so rich, you shouldn't have to care for people. That you prefer (like so many of the ultra wealthy) to pay someone else to do your dirty work.

 

1) Yeah, I know what you mean. When you sit down to a meal with a bunch of Progressives. Suffocating atmosphere, produced by a stifing adherence to sanctioned topics and opinions. The talk, and ideas espoused so restricted, so rehearsed. All the things that can't be said, and all the myths that have to be accepted as fact. Stultifying conservatism, it is.

2) You have clearly not spent much time around multicultural campuses. I guarantee that most children of migrants are not losing their religion at university. Further, some previously atheist kids FIND religion at university. And some enter university as brainwashed and indoctrinated children of the aforementioned Progressives, and are able, for the first time, to mix with a much broader range of people and ideas.

 

The Govt does provide assistance, to maximum capacity. Free education, free healthcare (in my country), roads, police, hospitals, housing assistance, etc. The rest is on the people. We must be free to choose if/when/how we'll use the aforementioned Govt supplied 'help'. If we can't choose that, then we are no longer democracies.

 

Free education and free healthcare is a huge benefit for people of any country.
Of course people can always make better choices, but you can't really judge situations you don't live with.

 

In USA, many people who need help get prison. There are about 400,000 severely mentally disabled people in US prisons.

 

Unfortunately I belong to lower middle class.

 

Some sexually transmitted diseases are spread without a person knowing they have it. Makes sense to help stop any spread doesn't it?