Slut shaming

Marilyn Monroe

Agree or disagree?

I, for one, am totally confused about the way some people deal with the issue (and act) of sex.

Sex is just sex, right?

There’s a reason it’s near the top of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Humans are hard wired to desire, seek and consummate sexual acts.

Lately I have come across some pretty weird (I think) reactions from men about this issue.

Some men have deeply held ideas around female archetypes and aren’t able to integrate them into one complex human being.

They seem to think women fall into the following categories:

The mate girl - She’s allowed  to swear, tell dirty jokes and laugh at farts.

The hot girl - By definition, she is unattainable because if she becomes available, she then becomes …

The sex girl – Who has lost her appeal. She is someone guys booty call. She is no longer in the running to become …

The wife girl - This girl has to hold out and make the guy work for it. She probably nags, bakes cupcakes and has a cracking hip-to-waist ratio for birthing heirs to the empire.

Then there’s the sister, wife, mother, whore, martyr… the list goes on and on and on …

Men seem really confused about the fact that women can be all of these things at the same time. My friend Amy summed it up beautifully when she said, ’If a man sleeps with a woman and then tries to slut shame that woman, he needs to be cut off. Any man that you sleep with should be doing back flips and high-fiving you for sleeping with them – not hinting that you’re a slut and not good enough. Because if that’s the case, why the hell is he boning you?’.

The whole thing is paradoxical. What are we supposed to do?

My friend Tom would say, ‘Do whatever the hell you like’.

If you happen to be dating one of the men who is unaware of (or unwilling to change) this cultural programming, do you just deal with the fact that these completely irrational rules apply?

PS: Slut is an anagram of lust. Well there you go …

 

 

Comments
3 Responses to “Slut shaming”
  1. Lisa says:

    I’m lucky enough to be with a man who couldn’t care less was very appreciative (to this day) of some first-date love! I am reminded of the immortal words of Pablo Neruda:

    I am not jealous
    of what came before me.

    Come with a man
    on your shoulders,
    come with a hundred men in your hair,
    come with a thousand men between your breasts and your feet,
    come like a river
    full of drowned men
    which flows down to the wild sea,
    to the eternal surf, to Time!

    Bring them all
    to where I am waiting for you;
    we shall always be alone,
    we shall always be you and I
    alone on earth,
    to start our life!

  2. Bird says:

    I think the depth of future committed relationships is directly related to how much quality time and care is invested in building the pair-bond. And I don’t think having casual or drunken sex with a man — without that investment — is likely to lead to marriage.

  3. Natureboy says:

    Two points come to mind:
    - I’m not sure it’s just men that hold opinions on particular behaviour. I know many woman who are also brought up (programmed?) to believe in stereotypes and what is good/bad behaviour. There is a wide ranging societal idea of what it means to have sex with someone. Perhaps what you are talking about here falls under that too? See Bird’s comment above for an example.

    - If sex is just sex then maybe the guys in question are just looking for one part of those girls archetypes you mention. Perhaps you just haven’t found the guy that wants each type from you? Perhaps you have met him but just wanted one of the male archetypes from him?

Leave A Comment