We can all think of a dozen insulting terms for a sexually promiscuous woman. (The “skank” debate brought that to light.) Are there any insulting terms for a man who has a large number of partners? (I don’t hesitate to call men sluts, but it hasn’t caught on among the general population.)
On a related note, why does our society see promiscuity to be more of a vice among women? (Due to the nature of het sex, a woman has a greater risk of catching an STD from a promiscuous man than vice versa.)
I, too, use “slut” to descibe men, but as for uniquely male descriptions of promiscuity, all I can think of right now is “player”. Alternate spelling: “playa”.
As for why promiscuous women are considered sluts, my response may be more appropriate Great Debates. I don’t think promiscuity is necessarily negative. I think in some cases (certainly not all) it suggests confidence and a level of comfort and control of a someone’s own sexuality. Some people see women having this much control over anything as “bad”, hence the derogatory term.
There are other reasons too, but outside of GD, I’d just be wasting bandwidth on it.
Alphagene
The most notable term is Lecher, or Lech. Player is a common new term, but is frquently used in a positive, or neutral context.
Scammer, was common in my college, but not widespread, also not necessarily negative.
Masogonist applies, but has a more evil and violent connotation.
As for why. I’m sure the debate could go on forever, but i’d cite a few major contributions. 1) Women are naturally prone to nesting (settling and starting a family). Going against this speaks of a woman who goes against the idea of family (a bad thing is most’s eyes). 2) Historically women are second to men, and males have been being adulterous and lecherous for eons, without fear of reprisals (now there are lawyers, we need time to change). 3) Women bear a greater risk from slutty activity, especially preganacy. This reckless behavior is ugly. (Yes, it takes two to tango, but the women are stuck holding the bill so to speak (before patrimony)) 4) Finally and most importantly: Women can get it anytime they want, men really need to try hard. This puts more responsibility on the women to be careful of their actions. Men=take what you can get=lucky. Women=take what you need=greedy.
The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opinions to me. The distinction is
yours to draw…
There are terms for a man who has a large number of partners, but they are not considered as insulting (probably because the behavior was not considered as inappropriate; in a society where racism was truly extinct, “nigger” would not raise an eyebrow): libertine, rake, or hedonist
Many such terms are literary or historical allusions: Lothario, Don Juan, and Casanova. These can be interpreted as homage to outstanding performers of the past as easily as insults.
Probably the only terms in this vein that are truly insulting are those that suggest the titleholder might have desired considerably more partners than he actually succeeded in persuading: lecher, goat, dirty old man.
“Player,” however, does not always have a negative connotation for men as “slut” does for women.
“[He] beat his fist down upon the table and hurt his hand and became so
further enraged… that he beat his fist down upon the table even harder and
hurt his hand some more.” – Joseph Heller’s Catch-22
Engels, Hume and a couple others have suggested that the more against female promiscuity developed when people (men) started having possessions. I’m going to put this in the most simplistic terms possible - their theories are a lot better developed than this - but basically the idea is, men wanted to know the kid was really theirs (for inheritance reasons) and developed the idea of female promiscuity being really bad in order to shame women into not sleeping around.
Never regret what seemed like a good idea at the time.
My friends often refer to a promiscuous man as a slut or whore, but then again my friends and I are all gay, so that might have something to do with it (…girlfriend!)
Well, there was that whole Victorian belief that men are evil, filthy, swindling, animals and women are chaste, god-fearing, and pure. When this notion was popular (I think in the 1800s and dwindling into the early 1900s), it was believed that it was the woman’s supreme job to keep the man in line. She was the defender and protector of all that was good and holy. Any woman who broke this image and slept around was severely berated (as in The Scarlet Letter). When a man was promiscuous, especially when married, it was frowned upon but it was also seen as a failure on his wife’s part because she didn’t keep him in line.
I’m drawing on some theories put forth in a Sociology text that I read several years ago so I don’t remember much more of the particulars.
The theory about men needing to know whether a child was theirs or not, I believe, fits nicely as a explanation of how the Victorian beliefs developed.
