Slut Shaming

You with the face wrote: " So if men want to judge women as sluts for having an active sexual history, they can’t complain when they are judged as troglodytes."

No one judges women for having an “active sexual history”, that’s pretty much par for the course these days. An overactive history, on the other hand…

Yeah, “over” is a subjective term but it pretty much translates to significantly more than average. And it isn’t even “judgement” per se, as much as it is just not wanting to get involved.

Also, there is a belief, valid or not, outdated or not, that women on the far end of the bell-shaped curve in terms of sexual experience might have psychological issues driving that kind of behavior, an additional reason for not wanting to get involved.

In short, not everything with us guys is about dick size.

Everyone who puts a premium on this kind of thing has their own definition of what “over” is. That is largely what makes the whole slut construct a menance, because any women is theoretically at risk of being branded that way if she deviates from some behavioral standard that another person is treating like fact.

To some, a woman is looked down upon if she’s had sex before marriage. Some think it’s slutty for teenaged girls to have sex. Some think a woman who has had a history of casual sex is a slut. Then some think it’s all about the numbers. Greater than 15 makes them a slut, for instance. Doesn’t matter over what time period were talking about. They’ve known 15 dicks, that means something is wrong with them.

For you, it may mean more than average. For others (and I suspect this is mostly the case), it could just mean more partners than the guy himself has had. Which totally would explain why feelings of inadequacy get involved. A woman who is more sexual experienced more readily emasculates men who think men are supposed to lead in that domain.

Yes I get that. But there are ways of sussing this out that don’t require knowing her exact body count.

I’m just going off what you said, though.

This is pathetic. All you can do is dodge and make half-ass insinuations. That study was from the Journal of Sexual Behavior, a peer-reviewed scientific publication.

Maybe you’re the old white guy clinging to archaic notions.

LOL. Sounds like the benchmark in science publications to me. Go Tallahassee!

The article mentions that the group includes 17 year olds (those born in 1999) and predicts fewer numbers of partners, but more casual sex. It may or may not include oral sex. The article actually points out these issues to indicate the numbers may be flawed.

Its somewhat broader than that.

My daughter did this topic as her eighth grade honors speech. As an eighth grader, she chose to focus on slut shaming in middle school dress codes. Boys might find spaghetti straps “distracting” because shoulders are sexual. Leggings are not pants - because you can see too much of a girls butt (I used to think leggings weren’t pants, then I decided Audrey Hepburn - style icon - was wearing leggings as pants before I was born - I got over it - they’ve been pants since Audrey wore them). Shorts should be fingertip length (try shopping for fingertip length shorts for a teenage girl).

And the rationale for making girls cover themselves - so boys won’t misbehave. (And I suspect so male teachers aren’t distracted).

A woman doesn’t need to actually be sexually active to be slut shamed. She merely needs to dress, act, speak in a way that someone finds sexually threatening. “Too much” makeup, heels “too high,” drink your martini too fast, “gaudy” manicure - those are enough to get you slut shamed.

It overlaps with street harassment in some ways, except street harassment tends to be done by strangers with little power. Slut shaming is done by your coworkers, your boss, your teachers, your “friends” to let you know that your existence as a sexual being is threatening.

^ Along those lines, girls who develop early are targets for slut-shaming. It’s as if the fact that their bodies are sexually arousing gives people license to see them as manipulative, attention-seeking, sexual available, and freaky. I wouldn’t be surprised these girls were most likely to be victimized by sexual predators, not because their bodies are attractive as much as pervasive assumptions that girls that look like that are consenting to “trouble” just by existing.

Some of the stories I’ve heard from other women make me want to cry. How scary it must be to find yourself in elementary school being whispered about simply because you grew boobs overnight? As if puberty makes you a bad person, less innocent than the girls with girlish bodies?

This is a manifestation of slut-shaming that isn’t much talked about it, but to me, it’s evidence that many our hangups concerning female sexuality goes much deeper than the merits of anti-promiscuity preferences or whatever.

The slut bogeyman typically emerges in our lives right when we start finding new and exciting ways of sorting ourselves into cliques based on social norms; it also coincides with when we become acutely aware of our own sexual feelings. I don’t think this is a coincidence.

A girl that distinguishes herself early on a sex object–either by developing before her peers or by her own sexually curious actions–is giving others permission to use her as a source of validation at a time when the need for external validation is at its peak. If you’re a boy, not only do you have a safe outlet for relieving your own sexual frustrations by ogling, harassing, and groping her because she’s a “slut” and therefore is asking for such treatment, at the same time you can also ingratiate yourself to the pack who champions male sexual prowess.

And if you’re a girl, by starting whisper campaigns about her and withholding kindness and friendship, you can assert social power over her and establish yourself as her superior. You see how the boys talk about her and instead of questioning it, you feel proud of yourself for not doing anything that gets you treated similarly. Because you respect yourself and obviously the slut does not.

We bring all of this thinking into adulthood and act as if there is a rational, intellect-driven basis for it. But really there is nothing more to it than a bunch of juveniles taking the puritanical messages they’ve absorbed from adults and converting it into rules that make their sad little junior high school experiences less complicated and morally ambiguous.

And to add to the complexity of the equation - in a diverse school, white and Asian girls usually develop slower than their Latina and Black peers. Turning middle school into a cesspool where sexism and racism intertwine for a special kind of personal hell. My white teacher friends point out that its usually the black girls that get the worst of institutional slut shaming - a skinny white girl who wears leggings as pants might get away with it. The black girl is far more likely to have the body type - plus the racism inherent in being a “troublemaker” for going to school while black - to have it turn into a disciplinary action.

Hahaha… Roseanne Roseannadanna?

As I understand it, adult-film actors are regularly and frequently tested for STDs. The real risk is in marrying a former porn star, i.e. one who refused to be tested and left the business, or who tested positive and was forced out.

Nothing speaks to this more than an afternoon at the local inner London outdoor swimming pool. It’s not about girls from what I could see, Latino and Black culture is a whole lot more relaxed about, say, 14-year olds doing their thing.

White girls, more middle class at least, don’t have any sexual inclinations until at least 16, and then it’s only with that special boy - unless they have Latino and/or Black friends and mom is out of sight.

I literally don’t see a peer ‘shaming’ angle. No idea how that could even exist in this society.

I totally agree with you.

School age girls and adult women should not be considered the same because I believe that as you get older, you gain entitlement to what can be worn. For instance, I never dared to wear red lipstick until I was almost 35 years old.
With respect to how a girl or woman dresses, it’s not only how well developed a woman is but her overall body type. Some women just give off a slutty vibe and it’s not always intentional. Some women are just friendly and smile a lot but that can be taken the wrong way, I know from personal experience.

The most important thing I wanted to say about this topic is that shaming anyone for anything that is based on another’s opinion is bullshit. Shame someone for whom you have concrete proof of something they should be ashamed of… people who litter, park in handicap parking spots, pedophiles, animal and child abusers, rapists, murderers and corrupt people in power, liars…

Depends on the slut

I disagree. I think if you want to wear red lipstick at fifteen, go for it. Or high heels - heck, might as well wear the heck out of them before your knees give out. Wearing clothes that make you feel confident and pretty has nothing to do with your “slut status.”

Now, I’ll simultaneously argue that its important to understand how you look to others and if you are being tacky in an inappropriate situation. A micromini and bright red lipstick might not be the best choice for church - regardless of if you are fifteen or fifty.

Really? What if a micromini (or a string bikini , for that matter) is just the thing to make you confident at church? Your just flaunting what God gave you, after all. Don’t let ANYONE tell you what to wear or how to act!

Like, I’m kicking myself now for my self absorbed prudity in disapproving of the pole-dancing booth at the community fair. Strangely, I thought it odd that they would encourage elementary school age girls to pole dance and that their parents would go along.

But, hey, I also think it’s weird that first grade teachers (and the parents of first graders) seem to think that it’s the cutest thing ever to have the little girls sing ‘Santa Baby’ every year at the Christmas pageant. Guess I’m just a fuddy-duddy.

What’s the difference exactly? “Most people think that wearing a micromini for church is inappropriate” is fine, but “Most people think that wearing a micromini when you’re 15 is inappropriate” isn’t?

As soon as you admit that “it’s important to understand how you look to others”(and we all do, in the extreme case, getting out naked will get you arrested, regardless how pretty and confident you feel this way, and despite being naked not causing any objective harm to anybody else), the cat is out of the bag. It means that other people’s opinions about how you should or should not dress matters, and that they have a say in what is appropriate to wear, what is unacceptably provocative, and so on, even though society’s perception is a completely arbitrary cultural artifact.

Because one is you deciding you are going to be “tacky” according to someone else’s standards and wear a micro mini to church and the other is the refusal to acknowledge that people will judge you for it - or stating they are wrong when they do.

Go ahead and do it. Don’t be surprised when the congregation gives you the fish eye.

To take this away from slut shaming - you want to have swastikas tattooed on your knuckles - go for it. Don’t be shocked when your employment prospects are limited. At least red lipstick and the micromini can be changed easily.

We shouldn’t slut shame, but we should also acknowledge that people respond to the choices we make in how we present ourselves. One is the adherence to an ideal, the other the pragmatic acknowledgement of reality.

Regarding the last sentence, I’m not sure it’s desirable (or even possible) to have a society without culture.

It actually is a black-and-white issue, and your problem is that you view women as objects. You gave two examples of property crimes (stolen laptop and stolen money) and then equated them with a violent act against a human being.

There is absolutely no excuse for raping someone, drunk or not, clothed or not.

And when it comes to slut-shaming, the double standard is real. Why are women who sleep around viewed as sluts, but men who do the same thing aren’t?

It doesn’t take a genius to see that there is no moral debate to be had here.

Of course there’s no excuse for raping someone. No one has said that there is. However, a woman can increase or decrease the probability of becoming the victim of violence by her actions. Pointing this out is not slut shaming.