To think promiscuous men should be shamed more?

[TheJoyOfWriting]

This, really. The whole body count discourse is the latest version of slut-shaming, as it's mostly aimed at women. Promiscuous men are still given status by other men and by women, too often.

The body count arguments that people use against women can be used against men just as easily. Promiscuous men are more likely to cheat. They are more likely to have STDs. They are more likely to have contributed to an 'oops' baby- it takes 2 to make one, and more likely to walk away after w no consequences.

Promiscuous men often dump women after pretending to be interested to get sex, esp on datjng apps, which fuel this kind of behaviour. Women tend to find ONSs less satisfying, often partly bc these kind of men often don't care about giving pleasure, just taking it.

The idea that a man's worth is measured by how many women he has sex with is very bad. It encourages men to treat women badly, and it fuels the incel culture by making men feel insecure & unmanly if they're not sexually successful.

Thoughts? I don't mean we should call Promiscuous men horrible names or talk about them like 'run through' or 'high mileage cars' the way some men do about promiscuous women. But I think they should be shamed more, by both men and women.

I don't think casual sex is bad per se, but I think the culture of it has got out of control, and Promiscuous men share a lot of the blame.

Nobody should be shamed. Shame is a killer.

That's great...the question is whether biology is still influencing our behaviours since we haven't had much time to evolve since the Pill..And BTW, couldn't people just use condoms before? What was the big deal : were they hard to get, or unreliable?

I agree sex shouldn't be a bargaining chip, I don't want to believe these theories...

Erm, the UK has a healthy (ideal) sex ratio of 51/49.

And in the microcosm of OLD, men far outnumber women so, by this rather weak theory, they should all be treating the women with supreme respect!

To continue your education on the matter: Countries which had a recent tradition of female infanticide, such as India and China, now suffer a chronic shortage of young women. Young men have responded by forming rape gangs, importing trafficked and enslaved 'wives' from even poorer countries, and massively swelling the numbers of brothels.

I don't know Marcia Guttentag but she sounds like a bit of a dipstick.

Condoms are unreliable.

Just how young are you? I'm quite worried by the amount you don't know.

the question is whether biology is still influencing our behaviours

Biology makes us want to have sex. There's no biological bargaining chip.

Tbf she sadly died before she could revise the book. And she was writing in 1970s US, where apparently sex ratio was a bigger issue. Need to check that though!

I'm 19.

BTW, are you sure condoms are THAT unreliable? Maybe they were more so in the 1950s. But this medical source says they are 98% effective if used perfectly, and that's what I always thought. Anyway, not an issue for me atm certainly, but it is definitely important to be aware ofc.👍

www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/9404-condoms%23:~:text%3DWhen%2520used%2520perfectly%252C%2520condoms%2520are,87%2525%2520effective%2520at%2520preventing%2520pregnancy.&ved=2ahUKEwjvjMKVp8qPAxXkhf0HHUbQL4UQFnoECBQQBQ&usg=AOvVaw3FqMZGn6pP2FppJeAXSBpQ

This is a v good point re India & China. Terrible for the women.

I remember reading an article called A Surplus Of Men, A Deficit Of Peace. This would ofc contradict Guttentag's argument. Will read up on this...

Great that you're going to investigate more 🙂

Condoms are rarely used 'ideally'. The article you linked goes right on to say "Typical use averages about 87% effective at preventing pregnancy. In any given year, approximately 15 out of every 100 people who rely on condoms as their only birth control get pregnant. Condoms can tear, leak or slip off."

That's only 85% effective - a big enough risk of pregnancy that women felt it wise to "bargain" for marriage, as their best hope of security if they got pregnant.

The Pill was the most significant liberator of women imaginable. For a very long time, women's primary avenue for liberation was the convent!

Head on over to the feminism board if you like, there are a lot of in-depth discussions about this.

I actually have a libido that's higher than what women usually have. How do you know that?

Also, very weird that you keep referring to being gen z like it's you're whole identity.

May I ask, why don't you "agree with" casual sex, rather than it just not being something which is right for you personally?

I don't think a man's worth is measured by how many he has sex with. I wouldn't want to know! And I think it's actually quite distasteful for it to be brought up or asked. Personally I don't like the thought of my partner with other people - we all have a past but I don't need to know about the ins & outs!
And if anything, if they go around collecting women like trophies that would make my estimation of them go down. I would like to feel they are more selective or do something better with their time 😅🙈 and yes I would worry I'd be "another notch on their headboard"!

What consenting adults choose to do is not my business, or something I care to make my business.

If I ever felt the need to shame someone for their sex life, then I’d take that as a sign that I needed to get a hobby in order to do something even remotely productive with my time.

I've had some awesome ONS. I knew I was there for sex, they knew and we had a lot of fun. I've had a lot of sexual partners, both men and women. Honestly the only people who have ever slut shamed me in person have been women. The only time a man has its been online, by some self described incels type. In reality most people don't care.

I think perhaps it might be better if we all stopped shaming anyone for this, men or women.

Not going to lie, it's pretty obvious that you're really young. I have a feeling that when you grow up more and experience more life and meet more people that you will probably cringe at this post.

Oh I know, I love the feminism boards. Have mostly read GC stuff on there, I will seek out older stuff on this. People are probs wondering why I'm on Mumsnet at my age 🤣 I came bc I was looking at GC stuff (which obvs is harder to discuss in my age group) & that happily led me to FWR.

I know that condoms can break etc But from what I've read, this is much more likely if various mistakes are made (out of date, bad storage, and most common, apparently, incorrect usage) - eg. Below.

https://www.google.com/search?q=how+likely+are+condoms+to+fail&oq=how+lilely+are+condk&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCQgCEAAYDRiABDIGCAAQRRg5MgkIARAAGA0YgAQyCQgCEAAYDRiABDIJCAMQABgNGIAEMggIBBAAGA0YHjIICAUQABgWGB4yCAgGEAAYFhgeMggIBxAAGBYYHjIICAgQABgWGB4yCggJEAAYCBgNGB4yCggKEAAYCBgNGB4yDAgLEAAYCBgKGA0YHjIKCAwQABgIGA0YHjIKCA0QABgIGA0YHjIHCA4QIRiPAtIBCDY0OTVqMGo0qAIBsAIB&client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

I can definitely see the impact of the Pill on women's freedom. Ofc there were other options than becoming a nun, but that's why you had spinsters partly : they might be women who wanted to be independent, an forgoing sex/relationships was the only way to be assured of that.

Another thought, tho not directly thread-relevant...what about contraceptive implants? Were they around then? Or only allowed for married women? I think I read something like that...

🤣 Actually a lot of this is from various articles often by older women who argue that the only way to get men to behave better is for casual sex to be less accepted. They often speak as if they wish it could be different, but experience & observing the current situation means that they think that's the only solution

I think it's too pessimistic myself, and there's obvs other factors. Seems sad to think that men can't control their behaviour better.. And while there were complaints about hookup culture back in the 90s & 2000s, I think a lot of the issues are caused by other things like porn, only fans, to some extent dating apps efc

Neither men nor women should be shamed for being promiscuous, because nobody’s worth should be be judged on the fact that they enjoy sex with other consenting adults for its own sake.

Also, Mumsnet in general seems to shame men as much as women for shagging around a bit. The more I look at this site, the more I’m amazed at how many posters here seem to think any sexual behaviour, from either men or women, that isn’t straightforward PIV sex with a loving long-term partner, is disgusting 🤷🏻‍♀️

I know Mumsnet shames men for snagging, but that's not the general populations attitude, or at least women still bear the brunt.

Since you think being Gen Z is so important to your point (it shows your age and inexperience and "I'm young so I know better") I'm speaking as someone just outside of Zillenial

No one should be shamed for sex. Women probably lie when asked about casual sex because it's still somewhat frowned on for women to be promiscuous

It sounds like you've maybe had some religious influence as well tbh

I mention being Gen Z bc I think it's important that the sexual culture of today is v different from pre Internet generations. I do think that casual sex probs had much fewer negative effects for previous generations bc they lacked the Internet.

I'm not saying that I'm young so I must know better. I have formed my opinions from reading various books/articles and my own observations. Some by older authors, but many not. If you want to denigrate someone's opinions based on their age, that's up to you.🤷‍♀️

I know I'm inexperienced & as I've said, I am still deciding what I think about things. But that doesn't mean that I can't have any considered opinion.

I agree women lie. But I don't think that explains all of it. For one thing, it makes sense that women would have a biological tendency to be more cautious about sex given the risk of pregnancy.

@TheJoyOfWriting, contraceptive implants came after the Pill. The first one was invented in the mid-60s but didn't go into use until the 80s. I seem to recall some scandal about them being trialled on African women before they received approval, but have no details and it might've been a scare story. Irrelevant to this topic, anyway: sorry.

Women became able to be 'spinsters' after the two World Wars, which depleted male populations leaving a (slightly) better range of career options for women. I've compressed a lot of complex and interesting history there, of course.

Before 1914, the only women who could live independently were from well-off families. They could achieve full autonomy if they had a decent inheritance: the rules against women owning property/investments and having bank accounts would be relaxed for them because they were wealthy customers.

Large families would sometimes keep a younger daughter at home to care for the parents in old age. These girls had no more control of their destiny than their sisters who were 'married off'. A young middle-class woman could become a governess to a wealthier family, moving from one oppressive household to another but retaining some freedom by not having children of her own. Pretty much the only other opening was to join a convent.

Working-class women could become live-in servants or, if very lucky, join the family business without being required to marry (this was only possible if she had no brothers).

Absolutely none of these women could risk having sex. Of course, it was quite likely to be forced on them. If this got them pregnant, it was a disaster. They'd be fired from their job or sent away to some remote boarding house for 'fallen women', where nobody would see them being pregnant. Their babies would be sold or killed.

Do you know about the Magdalene Laundries? The last one, I think, closed in the 1990s.

While I was a kid in the 1960s, a few older girls from my street disappeared for nine months and came back with their spirits broken. My mum explained what had happened. One girl returned to her parents' with a baby, but she was never the same feisty chick she'd been before. The adults all raved about how heroic her parents were to take her in.

Hormonal contraceptives and legal abortion gave women their freedom, though there were still a lot of legal and economic hurdles to overcome. This was only 60 years ago! It took a couple of decades for society to adjust its attitudes somewhat, so we're probably looking at around two generations of women having genuine choices on how to live their own lives. It strikes me as more than tragic that things seem to be sliding back, before the revolution's really found its footing. Never underestimate the patriarchy's sneaky persistence.

Yes, we can debate the morality of shaming and, as you’re suggesting it as a course of action, we must.

So - do you, OP, think that shaming people is a morally-sound strategy for influencing behaviour?

I’m an older poster - for context.

Just to state my position, I’m as far from promiscuous as it’s possible to be - I’m an old romantic who could never separate sex from the idea of love, trust, romance and a longterm relationship. But I have no problem with promiscuous men or women as long as they’re not deceiving anyone. I suspect promiscuous men are far more likely to do this than promiscuous women. (Is that unfair?)

I’m also a fierce feminist and while some may disagree with this - I think a lot of contemporary feminist thinking about sexual relationships plays RIGHT into the hands of promiscuous men. It suits their agenda very nicely, thank you.

Also - OLD is a promiscuous man’s dream. It works for men absolutely perfectly but just on MN, the number of miserable, insecure and hurt women indicates that the balance is very much in men’s favour.

Why should they be?