The slut issue

[Luna]

Well firstly you're assuming that it IS wrong in the first place, which is another discussion altogether.


If you're a chick and the comment hurts you then it means that deep down you're ashamed of your lifestyle, so taking responsibility and changing would probably be a good step. Alternatively you might be upset because this person is trying to upset you, and people tend to get hurt when people try to purposely upset you.


If it doesn't affect you, then that's cool, you're comfortable with who you are. Great. Haters gonna hate. Just don't cheat on a guy when you're in a relationship, that's never cool.

 

[William Dickbringer]

So I have a question...

We call someone a liar if they lie, especially if they lie a lot.

We call someone a cheater if they cheat, especially if they cheat a lot (Whether we speak from a videogame sense or a marriage-breaking stance)

We call someone a gamer if they play a lot of games... I could go on, you get the point.

So then why is it "wrong" to call someone a player/slut if they sleep around a lot? It seems to me like you're just stating the obvious with this, you know?

because of this double standard that guys are manly for sleeping with 20 women yet a girl sleeps with 1/4 of that she's a slut thus equaling she has no use to society other than to be a walking cum rag and nothing else

 

[Shadowstar38]

Right, so clearly something eluded you if you got it wrong and misrepresented it.

And we missed it? I have it down. You're the first one to give a reply that didn't address what I actually said.

I addressed what you said. Then we went on this little tangent because you decided it would be best to reply aggressively as possible.

 

[axlryder]

I would call a man or woman a slut if they were using dishonest or manipulative tactics in order to get sex, they were trying get sex from someone they shouldn't, they were trying to get sex in an inappropriate situation, or they were using sex to get leverage. In that sense, I personally have no problem using the word. I know a woman who repeatedly tried to get with a married man when it clearly wasn't okay. I called her a slut. When I worked at a bar one of my customers kept trying to grind me during my shift in order to try and get free drinks for her and her friends. I kindly asked the bouncers to remove that "slut". I know a guy who would go to bars and badger woman into having sex with him. I called him a slut too. To me slut is a word for scummy people in relation to sex. Not for people who just have lots of sex. I used to refer to prostitutes as sluts, but the word has such a negative connotation associated with it that those people don't deserve such a mean spirited label on the whole. Many of them are just trying to make a living by providing a mutually agreed upon service.

So, to the OP's original point, I'd personally say no, you shouldn't call someone a slut just because they like to fuck.

 

[Shadowstar38]

So you are being dishonest. Because asking me about a position I don't hold isn't addressing what I said. Misrepresentation is not addressing. Oh and I could be much more aggressive. Just like you could have been more honest.

My point is that I wasn't being dishonest. I read your post. You meant Y. It sounded like X. You could have easily made things more clear right after something sounded wrong instead of jumping to " you can admit you're wrong".

 

[DugMachine]

Because 'slut' has never been something positive. Call someone a slut (in a non joking way) and they'll probably be offended.

Why do we need to label someone with a strong sex drive anyways? I fucking LOVE sex but I've been with my girlfriend for over a year already. Take someone that's independent and sleeps with many and it's no different, we both love sex.

 

[Shadowstar38]

You jumped to it meaning something it really clearly didn't, unless, you know, you missed another obvious possibility.

And I notice how you're dodging that you didn't actually address it since what you said referred to something I never said.

>Implying I'm dodging
>Implying again that I'm missing points
>Implying you cant just make it clear what it is you were trying to say in the first place.

I swear. I thought we were talking about sluts at some point...

 

[Shadowstar38]

snip

snip

You're both detracting from my bicycle analogy.

Stoppit! Before you bury my witty comment entirely.

Sorry. I dont understand what's happening anymore!

Although the bike like was funny.

 

[lacktheknack]

Would you call them "whores"?

No?

Same reason.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Hmm, what would be the non-offensive alternative I wonder? "Promiscuous" has a negative connotation to it as well, so does "town bike" and other such terms.


Would "overly sexed" be good? Is there even a possible equivalent to "liar" or "gamer" when the subject is "women who have tons of sex"?

Try "vivacious". It means "full of life and energy", and works rather nicely as a non-derogatory term for someone who enjoys sex.

I think that's a bit too aloof and open to interpretation. You definitely can make it sound as such but we're going for a more precise thing here. One that can't be mistaken and explained away as something different than what it is without much effort.

If we're looking to coin a term, perhaps "dionysian", after the Greek Dionysus, the god of wine and ecstasy (not the drug).

Hehe, I'm actually Greek so I know what you're going for. I think something to do with Aphrodite (Venus) would be more appropriate though as she is the goddess of love and sex, Dionysus was more of the god of partying.


Actually, I think calling women "Aphrodites" would do.

 

[A Distant Star]

Because using the term slut puts a value judgment that really shouldnt be there. It's OK for some one to have lots of sexual partners so long as they are safe about it, and its not OK to shame them for it.

 

[Shadowstar38]

> Pointed out that you didn't address something
> Proved you were missing a point. Or dishonest.
> You're lying. Likely again.

We were, but then you couldn't actually address what I said...

I cant address what you said at this point because you muddied up this conversation so much with accusations of dishonesty I don't remember what the point of any of this is. Now are you going to stop with the insults so we can get back on track?

Did you disagree with the first thing I posted on this thread?
If yes, why?
What is your point you keep accusing me of misrepresenting?

 

[Overusedname]

Problem: when did "slut" come to mean "a woman who is honest about her sex drive, and enjoys sex?"

Outside of porn, I'm guessing more or less never.

Look up the slut-walk.

It's the women's equivalent of black culture redefining the n-word, and LGBT redefining Queer.

Also, the OP does realize that Slut is a derogatory term for sexually open women and Player is a term of praise for men who do the same damn thing, right?

Right...?

....I'm not gonna like the answer to that am I?


Edit:

I fundamentally don't get the "Let's reclaim this or that word!" thing. You* want to be called a slut, but you want it to mean something else and to have to guess which definition people are using? If that's what floats your boat, well, no skin off my ass, but not for nothing, I'd just rather people stop calling one another sluts.

It's nice to disarm bigots. The N-word has become a joke or a term of endearment. Queer is a badge of pride. That kind of stuff helps people disarm the ones who'd use those words against them.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Also, what is an 'unhealthy amount of sex'?

Isn't it obvious? It's anyone who's having more sex than I am!

 

[Shadowstar38]

> Pointed out that you didn't address something
> Proved you were missing a point. Or dishonest.
> You're lying. Likely again.

We were, but then you couldn't actually address what I said...

I cant address what you said at this point because you muddied up this conversation so much with accusations of dishonesty I don't remember what the point of any of this is. Now are you going to stop with the insults so we can get back on track?

Did you disagree with the first thing I posted on this thread?
If yes, why?

Funny, do I really need to tell you how this works? You can go back and read what I already said. I pointed out my issue with it already.

What is your point you keep accusing me of misrepresenting?

You seem to have an issue admitting it.

Meh. This has been dragging on for like 15 messages and it was way too much trouble.

I dont believe I misrepresented anything. We disagree on this issue. There is nothing more to be said here.

Sorry thread. Let me bring you back with this relevant picture.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Okay, so in other words you don't get how there's another option between face value and taking it negatively.

I didn't say that...

but face value isn't the only way to take it besides negatively.

You said it right there even. I get this.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Okay, so in other words you don't get how there's another option between face value and taking it negatively.

I didn't say that...

Well you're defending your dishonest representation again.

but face value isn't the only way to take it besides negatively.

You said it right there even. I get this.

Which is why assuming I said negatively was incorrect when all I did was say face value was not a reasonable option.

I am not being dishonest or defending a dishonest representation.

Saying that I am, over and over, doesnt make it more true.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Okay, so in other words you don't get how there's another option between face value and taking it negatively.

I didn't say that...

Well you're defending your dishonest representation again.

but face value isn't the only way to take it besides negatively.

You said it right there even. I get this.

Which is why assuming I said negatively was incorrect when all I did was say face value was not a reasonable option.

I am not being dishonest or defending a dishonest representation.

Saying that I am, over and over, doesnt make it more true.

I pointed out it was wrong and you're back to saying it's true, so at this point dishonesty is the obvious answer.

Plus you always fail to address inconvenient parts of my posts.

I guess by inconvenient you mean the second part. The thing we were atually talking about. You keep coming back to me being dishonest. Which I've establish is something we can't agree on. Stop going back to that and I can actually get to the part that matters.

 

[Risingblade]

Apparently judging others makes you a bad person. Meh who cares slut slut sluttily slut slut slut.

 

[Caffiene]

Let me get this right.
Liars - lie.
Cheaters - cheat.
Gamers - game.
So sluts must.... slut?

This.

Liar, Cheater and Gamer are all the direct noun form of the verb. "Slut" is not related (etymologically speaking) in any way to sex or sleeping with people - there is no pattern there, it has nothing in common with the other words. Sex doesnt even have a verb sense like lie, cheat and game do - there is no such word as a "sexer" (edit: except for a person whose job is to determine gender, usually of livestock animals).

At best, the line of reasoning in the OP could vaguely argue that a slut is somebody who "sluts". Again, that proves nothing about how it relates to sex.

If OP really wants a word that fits the pattern - try "copulator", or "fornicator". Both words that directly mean "somebody who has sex", and dont have additional insult or judgement attached.