Not only that, but if you accept the idea that the gender double-standard is based on some sort of rational calculation about the relative ease with which men and women can get sex, then it would stand to reason that people would also apply this calculation within the two sexes, as well as between them.
So, for example, if Argent Towers’s theory had any validity at all, we would expect to see people making moral distinctions between attractive women who have a lot of sex and unattractive omen who have a lot of sex. we would also expect to see people making such distinctions between, for example, rich attractive men who have a lot of sex, and poor, unattractive men who have a lot of sex.
Furthermore, what Argent Towers fails completely to recognize is that men’s sexual adventures are not only treated more indulgently by society in general, but that women’s sexual adventures are subjected to active and aggressive hostility and ridicule. When someone calls a woman a “slut,” they’re not just saying “Well, it’s easier for you to get sex than it is for a man.” They’re saying “You having sex the way you do is a sign of a moral failing on your part.” This sort of thing reflects a far more complex and historically-determined set of ideas than a simple (and incredibly simplistic) calculation about scarcity and accessibility.
I do not fail to understand that. I do understand it. What gives you the impression that I don’t understand that? The whole “men are considered studs, women are considered sluts” dichotomy is exactly what you’re talking about - aggressive hostility and ridicule directed at women who are sexually promiscuous.
I even said it in my very first post in this thread:
I also said, later:
I fully realize that being a “slut” is seen as a moral failing and a very negative thing.
All right, I can see this. I was seeing this as more “She doesn’t actually like kissing girls so she shouldn’t sing about it!” - which seems ridiculous to me - instead of “She isn’t performing her song about kissing girls convincingly and seems like she is just phoning it in,” which I totally get.
IF you truly realize all that, you should also realize why some rational calculation regarding the ease of getting sex is a very poor explanation for it.
No. Not seriously. Also, you totally mangled my name - it makes sense, since you obviously also had a great deal of trouble reading everything else I wrote.
Whatever, Agent Bauer, I’ve read your screeds on man/woman relationship dynamics before. This is all pretty much the same thing. Men have to put up some serious A game in order to convince the dames to have sex with them, while the women stand by and pick the dancing fool who amused them the most. Yeah, we got it.
At the levels that we’re talking about - very high numbers of sexual partners - yes, basically.
It’s totally possible for guys to have sexual relationships, both short-term and long-term, that arise naturally out of their interactions with women in their social group. This is the conventional “dating” and it doesn’t always require tremendous amounts of work.
But at the level where a guy is sleeping with dozens or hundreds of different women - the level where people are calling him a “stud” or a “player” whereas a woman who did the same thing would be called a “slut” - yeah, it takes A-game on the part of the guy. He can’t accomplish this just by looking good.
Many times, when discussing someone they know who is extremely successful with women, I’ll hear a guy say something like: “man, how does he do it?”
Would you ever hear people say the same thing about an attractive woman who slept with a succession of 50 or 60 men over the course of a year? No. You wouldn’t.
I can’t believe some people are acting like what I am saying is such an unconventional, out-there thing.
Either way, sex sells and commercial pop is a product that embraces that.
Is this really all that surprising?
ETA: this thread just made me think about Kylie Minogue and her song Can’t Get you Out of My Head (youtube to video). It is a perfect piece of pop perfection, but nothing more or less than the music the OP is complaining about from KP.
I am also reminded that Amy Winehouse, when asked about Kylie Minogue once, replied “she isn’t a musician; she’s a pony.”
Tits or no tits her brand of simplisitc pop is way better than most other studio-produced success. She is waaaay more than average-looking. California girls is catchy and I liked it before I knew the singer’s bra size.
I too think she isn’t the airhead idiot she portrays as a singer.
Whatever you want to say about her, she sure is bringing out some peoples’ “issues” here.
Not that I really care to debate the slut / not slut issue (jeez, what is this, 1954?) but she’s always irritated me because she seems like sort of a cock tease and an over the hill one at that. Her stupid little girl hairdo (at least she’s changed it) and wide eyed Betty Boop wanna be personna really got on my nerves. You’re twenty-six, dear, it’s okay to act it and even encouraged to woo males your own age. I’ve always cringed at the thought of her and Russell Brand because I feel sort of embarassed for her. I know I’m in the minority here but I’m a big fan of Brand and he may be a freak but at least he’s not a poser.
there isn’t? i think there is. an ugly girl who is promiscuous is a LOT more looked down on than an attractive girl - and way more likely to be called a slut rather than just… “fun”. definitely. as for the poor vs rich? how about a hound dog vs playboy? How about a pimp vs hugh heffner? For females what about Kim Kattrel being a a cougar, but if she was broke, on foodstamps, and has 8 kids she’d be a drain on society? you’re kidding yourself if there aren’t any moral distinctions there.
There may be a more complex mechanism, but i think as a thumbnail sketch, it’s rather accurate. Put it this way… a teenager who gets too tipsy on ill-gotten booze and throws up all over himself is just a kid experimenting. He had to work for that booze, and there’s an inherent “can’t fault him too much” attitude. you take that same teenager and add 20-30 years where getting booze is really nothing more than an afterthought and he boozes to the point of puking? well damn. that guy is a flat out stain upon society. similar dynamic, no?
I just listened to this link back-to-back with Perry’s “California Gurls.” You’re right, they’re both perfectly good disposable pop songs. Very catchy and Minogue’s and Perry’s voices are good enough to serve the purpose.
The electric acid surrealism of Perry’s videos gives me a headache, though.
I’m gonna keep giving you the benefit of the doubt even when you say stuff like this, because I know where you’re at with regard to your male/female dynamic and impressions and whatnot. (damn, I’m articulate today, haha)
Argent, I think you’re sincere and I think this is a pretty interesting convo we could take to Great Debates, or the Pit if it gets bad, lol. I actually have another tangentially related topic that could be desperately strung together if folks wanna play. Yeah, I’m gonna go on over to GD and get the ball rolling if I can make a coherent post (not sure at this point today, it was a gooooood weekend, :D).
I said back on page one that I wasn’t sure exactly what it was about Katy Perry’s persona that I found so distasteful. After all, she’s hardly the first performer (male or female) to become famous more for being sexy than for being talented. Reading your post I think I’ve figured it out. Twenty-six isn’t old, but it’s way too old for this nymphet shtick. It’s kind of sad and creepy. If I imagine a 26 year old male version of Katy Perry – singing gender swapped versions of her songs and wearing some sort of skimpy, colorful little boy style costume, possibly with replicas of dessert foods highlighting his sexual attributes – he seems more like a deranged pedophile than a fun and sexy guy.
Before anyone jumps on me, I want to be clear that I am not suggesting that Katy Perry is into sex with minors or anything like that. My point is that I think a similar routine would be judged a lot more harshly if it were coming from a man. Fair or not, the fact that Katy Perry is a woman means her act seemed merely “icky” to me in a way that I couldn’t articulate. I actually feel a little less negatively about her now that I’ve been able to pinpoint what it is about her persona that just struck me as wrong.