Yeah, Brit’s 10-12 year career that’s still going has been remarkable in it’s brevity.:rolleyes:
And since when is entertaining people with songs they love a meaningless thing? Again, you never hear people characterize male pop stars this way.
Britney’s career is dead. She puts on stuff, but she doesn’t have the hoards of fans she once had. How many male pop stars do you know with decade long careers? :dubious:
I’ve often heard/read people ask this question. And really, it has a simple answer.
The answer is this: People are impressed by men who are able to sleep with hundreds of women because it takes WORK for a guy to pull that off. He has to be a rock star. He has to have the whole stud act down. He can’t do it just by being handsome.
Women, on the other hand, can basically sleep with as many guys as they want if they are hot. The sex is something they give away, i.e. it’s all up to them. They hold the power. They dispense their sexual favors as they see fit. They get to make that choice.
Even a great-looking guy can’t live that way. It’s impossible. A guy has to work to get laid. He has to act a certain way. And so when a guy is able to pull this off, he’ll be lauded because the sexual favors from women are being given to him because of some skill that he is demonstrating. Whether that skill is being a rock star, being a great athlete, being extremely rich…the sex comes only because he’s able to do something that is perceived as having value.
Because of this, women’s sexuality is seen as something that they are supposed to be responsible with. Those who just “give it away” are looked down on, right or wrong. Notice how you never hear about men “giving it away” or “giving it up.” That’s because guys don’t have the ability to “give it away.” They have to TAKE IT.
Whether this situation is good or bad is something I can’t say. Should it be changed? I don’t know. Maybe it can’t be changed because of some fundamental biological differences in sexual psychology. Maybe it can be changed - maybe it has more to do with social conditioning. Again, I don’t know, but I think that’s just the way it is right now and is the clear answer to that question so many ask: “Why are men who fuck lots of women ‘studs’ and women who fuck lots of men ‘sluts’?”
It all comes down to the “giving it away” versus “having to work at winning it” dichotomy.
If by “simple” you mean sophomorically simplistic.
She did have a #1 single just a few months ago, for the record.
Why don’t you give a better explanation, genius?
You want to tell me that:
Men don’t have to work hard to get laid by hundreds of women?
Hot women can’t basically have their pick of male sexual partners?
Society doesn’t have has less respect for people who give something away versus people who work at obtaining something?
The concept of “giving it away” is applied to men as well as to women?
Which of my points do you object to?
A “simple” explanation is what this discussion calls for, not a treatise on male vs. female sex roles in our society. But as a general rule I maintain that all the points I made above hold true and are the answer for the question of why promiscuous women are condemned while promiscuous men are admired.
She’s not selling as much as she used to. I thought this new album flopped, but it was number one. :eek:
I think it’s the end for her. I might be wrong, but I think she’s SLOWLY entering the end of her career.
If she does hang on, she’s not going to be what she once was. Bringing this back on topic, I doubt in 2020, anyone will know who Katy Perry is/was.
You gotta love it…
“What a cock obsessed slut! What decent woman would say she wants to see someone’s sexual anatomy? It is trashy and idiotic and gross”
“Yeah, the whore! And she has great tits”
“TTTIIIITTTTAAYYSS!!!”
“I want to see her tits!!!”
“OMG Haha bouncing GIFs of Perry tits!”
“Boobboobboobbooby!”
Indeed.
How does it feel, guys, to have women making a buck off singing about crudely sizing up your anatomy? To have women claiming (or choosing not to claim, as they see fit) interesting sex with attractive partners as a perk of fame and fortune? To know that women are comparing and commenting on your intimate parts? And they might not want to be in it with you for the conversation?
Get used to it. Women are done looking at cocks with mock horror and feigned distaste. We are becoming fans of the thing. Crass objectification works both ways now. I’ve been noticing a lot more luscious, fit, sexy men in music videos. Mmmmm. If I were a guy, I’d hit the gym now because women are realizing it’s okay- even awesome- to want to fuck attractive partners.
Women have always realized this; it’s just now that they’re publicly admitting it. But, for reasons I explained before, there is a backlash against it from both men and other women because it’s not how things are “supposed” to be.
Hey her aerial silks routine was/is pretty cool. (I dunno if she does that anymore, didn’t she get hurt or something?)
I’m not going to bother looking it up either, but I heard the official/cover story (whichever you choose to believe) is that Vedder’s(?) grandmother/aunt Pearl made good **Jam.
**
I don’t know, maybe the scorn/praise criticism/fame ratios between male and female artists is disproportionate (or maybe not?) and maybe it’s of a different character, but male performers who have sexually explicit lyrics/images/lifestyles/reputations also get some of all of it. (scorn/praise criticism/fame)
(If my post is worded awkwardly, I blame a late and hazy Sunday night.)
As i suggested, if you think that sums up the reason for the gender double-standard, the only way to describe your argument is sophomorically simplistic.
And as I predicted, you can’t come up with anything better.
If there’s a point that you don’t agree with, say it. If there’s something I left out that you think I should have included, say it. But just obtusely calling it “sophomoric” without explaining further is really prickish behavior.
OK, actually, now I’m genuinely curious to hear someone else’s take on this. Could you please elaborate? What do you think is a more detailed reason for this double standard that exists in our society? I want to know. Sorry if I sounded hostile before.
Do you disagree with the “giving it up” versus “having to take it” dichotomy I suggested before, or do you just think it’s part of the issue but that there’s more to it?
It’s one of those arguments that can appear reasonable to someone who either has no idea about the history of gender relations, or who prefers to think that sexism is somehow a thing of the past, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Your argument is, somewhat paradoxically, a strange combination of overthinking and not thinking nearly enough.
Reducing the whole gender double-standard to a question of who has to work harder to get laid is so ridiculous that i have trouble believing you even need its stupidity explained to you.
Sex isn’t cash. “Give it away,” “Work for it,” these statements show a really bizarre and bitter attitude about sex.
Sex is something you have, not give away like a gift, or work for like cash. This weird idea about guys having to work so hard to get sex, and women just being able to go out and hand pick anyone to screw is overly simplistic, and frankly, sounds like it’s coming from someone who doesn’t actually have much real life experience with it. And from many of your posts, Argent, I get the idea that you are quite young, so that might be true of you at this point. I don’t know.
There are a lot of men who can have sex with most women they desire. There are a lot of women who don’t find it easy to get sex. That is reality. And I don’t think your theories are the reason men are glorified for having sex and women are labelled and trashed for it. But strange notions about the relative availability of sex partners definitely plays into it. If you are interested, I’d recommend looking up the term "slut-shaming,"and also reading about the virgin/whore dichotomy in western culture. If you want to go even further, take a look at the concept of rape culture. This stuff goes quite deep, and very widespread in our society, and it isn’t actually overstated at all, quite the opposite, in fact.
Bottom line, we should all be entitled to have sex with whoever we want, how many people we want, and as long as it is consensual there shouldn’t be any value judgments on it. It isn’t anyone’s business if a woman “gives it away” to 5000 men, or one, or none. It is hers to “give,” and I’ll never understand why people can’t look at it that way. Having sex with any number of people doesn’t make you any less clean, or moral, or mean that you don’t respect yourself. It doesn’t have to mean anything other than feeling horny and getting your groove on. It’s not a finite “resource,” it’s human sexuality, and women are just as entitled to go out and “get theirs” as men are. Believe it or not, we actually like it.
If I had any reason to think she were singing TO me or ABOUT me???
It’d feel pretty damned good.
I’m 25, which can be “quite young” or not depending on how old you are.
I have enough experience with this to know that nothing is ever 100 percent true in every situation. I was trying to use generalities to explain why our society generally sees things in a certain way. You’re right that sex isn’t inherently something that you give as a gift or work for like cash, but surely you don’t suggest that there aren’t many, many people among us who do, in fact, use sex in this way.
Didn’t you yourself work in the sex industry? (Or have I confused you with someone else?)
You say:
And what makes those men like this? What do they do - how do they have to act in order to attain this?
Why did the hundreds of women who Gene Simmons and Steven Tyler fucked, fuck them? What did these men offer to the women that an average guy can’t offer them? Are you telling me it’s not work for guys to reach this level? Are you telling me that the average, non-rock-star guys who also manage to sleep with hundreds of women don’t have to work at it in their own way?
I don’t doubt that, which is why I said, a woman who is “hot” can basically have her pick of male sexual partners.
Are you really going to sit here and tell me that any of the women shown here (safe for work) wouldn’t have an easy time sleeping with as many willing male partners as they wanted, if they decided that’s what they wanted to do? And this wouldn’t have shit to do with any skilled act they accomplished, like music, sports or money, but just based on how they looked - the looks they were born with?
Did I ever say anything to contradict that? Didn’t my post end with:
There is no value judgment there.
I also want to point out that Katy Perry’s association with Russell Brand probably contributes to her image as a “slut.”
I gotta say, for being 25, you sure have a surprising attitude about sexuality and modern gender roles.
ETA: I didn’t really mean for that to sound quite as judgmental as it came off - “surprising” doesn’t necessarily mean bad.
Honestly, I’m loving it.
I’ve always hated not only the double standard, but also the Victorian era sensibilities when it comes to sex in this country.
AND she had the good taste to be playing a Gibson “Dave Grohl Reissue” of a 1965 Trini Lopez 335.
Anyone who has the good taste to play THAT particular guitar is “right on” as far as I’m concerned.
Anyone who knows anything about electric guitars will know she didn’t choose that guitar by accident.