How did slut-shaming become a thing in modern western society...

How did slut-shaming become a thing in modern western society? Did it become more noticeable after the post-vietnam cultural lashback?

Most women didnt dress like whores before now

>a thread died for this shit

>"post-vietnam cultural lashback?"
fuck i laughed

fuck sluts

I wonder who could be behind this?

...

a thread died for this

Umm... how is feminism a war on women? That's retarded. Besides, you wouldn't be getting laid even if there was no feminism.

It is manufactured bullshit. Most women who complain about slut shaming slut shame other women. Like most feminist topics, it makes no sense.

/thread

>Umm...
Reddit

Why do you think everyone cares about getting laid before marriage?

>Besides, you wouldn't be getting laid even if there was no feminism
What did he meme by this?

i remember reading up on prostitution in japan and china in the centuries leading up to the 20th century.

there was one observation, that it was pointless to call a slut if she didnt make any money from sex. i thought that was hilariously straightforward.

>that it was pointless to call a slut if she didnt make any money from sex.

opps should be

>it was pointless to call a girl a slut if she didnt make any money from sex.

Think of it in evolutionary terms. Patriarchal societies generally benefit from monogamy or asymmetrical polygamy and slut shaming is just a useful lever in enforcing this. The concept is as old as agriculture at least, not nearly as young as the Vietnam War

What's wrong with Femen? Do naked women trigger you so much?

there is no one to blame but women being petty among themselves

you can ignore reality (being a slut), buy you cant ignore the consequences of ignoring reality (getting slut shamed)

That doesn't address why women who fuck around are whores while men who fuck around are Chads.

It takes effort to be a Chad. It takes zero effort to be a slut.

>you can ignore reality (being a slut),

What reality are they ignoring?

Sure, but then why is it bad to be a slut? It can be "it's good to be a Chad, it's neither good nor bad to be a slut".

& Humanities

But seriously, people who get STDs spread and have more poorly-brough up babies aren't good for society, that's why.

that being a whore has consequences

Because it's not trustworthy. Imagine you want to hire someone for a job and some guy shows up with a CV filled with jobs where he only worked for a month. Doesn't look too serious.

I agree, but then Chad is also not trustworthy when it comes to a relationship, right?
Or if we're talking purely about sex then it doesn't matter much.

>that being a whore has consequences

Do you really not see how that's circular logic? "We shame them for having sex because women who have sex get shamed." Kinda stupid, no?

Because women and men think differently.
When a man sees a woman that has had too many partners he won't consider her a serious partner (except the bottom-tier desperate betas). Men can easily and quickly see if their like a woman.
When a woman sees a man who has had a lot of partners that elevates his status in her eyes. He's a wanted man. He's got something valuable that a lot of women saw in him. That makes this certain woman know he's a high-value man.

>>Because women and men think differently.
Ultimately, the key and lock analogy was right.
Thanks for the arguments m8

its not circular because men and women are not equal

>What's wrong with (((Femen)))?

A guy called Soros

Do you know what circular means?

>It takes effort to be a Chad. It takes zero effort to be a slut.

Ok, and what is the reason for that? Because men in general are much sluttier than women. So slut shaming still makes no sense, to say someone is bad because they are like you.

Slut shaming is done more by women than by men. They dislike any competition for male attention.

A slutty man means a man who is above a majority of men in spreading his seed.

Being a slutty woman takes far less effort than being a slutty man. The fitness indicated by "sluttiness" is far lower for a woman than for a man.

it's always been a thing, but with birth control the number of sluts has been increasing

Are you one of the raiders from the Californian uni?

I'm not sure what you mean. The reason for that is that women are much more selective than men.

Slut = woman. It's impossible to be a slut and a man, it's like saying a man can be an actress (inb4 trannies).

Men don't slut shame, they slut enable.

Women are the slut shamers

Being a chad requires immense amounts of confidence. Being a slut requires being basically passive. The whole thing about women telling other women to be slutty is them pretending to have confidence, but they usually don't and turn on each other. There are of course some exceptions though.

Here's the double standard:
>Men supposedly shame women for being sluts (not really, that's actually something women do to other women, but that's beside the point)
>Women don't shame men for being sluts
A wholly equitable solution for the double standard is for women to start shaming men for being sluts. If women swoon over chads, why is it a fault of all non-chads that they don't swoon over stacies? That just sounds like a different set of preferences to me.

Few men desire promiscuous women.
Many women desire promiscuous men.
Ergo, being promiscous is perceived as a positive trait for a man while it is a negative trait for a woman.

Only true answer in the thread


From a man's perspective, more sluts = more fucking opportunities = good, from a woman's perspective, more sluts = my vagina is devalued = bad

I know people at UC Berkeley.
Why does an old man who looks to be on his final years scare you? What power does he have that you don't?

>Men don't slut shame, they slut enable.

You think this thread is full of women?

>modern western
Nope. Slut-shaming is a product of all conservative cultures.

India/China/Japan/etc are all like this in regards to female promiscuity

I suspect the only ones that aren't slut shaming are ones without culture

>A wholly equitable solution for the double standard is for women to start shaming men for being sluts.

Why does anyone need to be "shamed?"

Billions of dollars to fund millions of rioters, satan.

& humanities strikes again.

>lemme start a bait thread about something as old as boiled water by asking a retarded question with smart words like ''''western society'''' and a question mark

go fuck yourself you candy ass roody poo

What about the biological difference between man and woman? Because that's the root of sluts shaming.

Dollars have no value, so his only protection is a fantasy. He is just a feeble man, and yet you think he is even a threat is silly. Money is just power for the surface world people. Real power is something different.

no the root of slut shaming is female dominance hierarchy

it dosent work if young females just flaunt their soft bits and jump from cock to cock, cause thats basicaly cheating, thats why theyre called sluts if they do it, and shamed

True but the basic reason is that if a woman gets impregnated she has to wait 9 months, and a man doesn't have to


This is a hard limit and feminism will never change it. Maybe science will: slut shaming might end if artificial wombs become the main way of reproducing.

The Patriarchy has always slut-shamed, it's just now women are sick of it and standing for their rights.

it is full of cucks who take woman side (i.e. slut shaming) in matter that is against their interests

Why is that? Are women naturally inclined to open their legs easier than men? Men also compete for women attention.

>it is full of cucks who take woman side (i.e. slut shaming)

You think these neckbeards are taking women's side despite clearly hating women in general?

Do you think history starts with the 1960s? Calling a woman a "slut" or equivalent could get you sued, killed, or worse in earlier times (varying a great deal from one social context to another). Still can, sometimes, like if she has a husband.

As the social penalties for both promiscuity and naming it got lighter, both became more common. This happened over the course of the 20th century in Western society.

>hy is that? Are women naturally inclined to open their legs easier than men?

Think of it like this.

Women only want the top 20% of guys. Men would have sex with the top 80% of women.

There's a mismatch between the appetites of men, which mirrors a strategy of spreading seed as wide as possible, and the appetites of women, which mirrors a strategy of getting an alpha to commit to her for reproduction. If she can't marry an alpha, she'll marry a beta and cuck him with an alpha.

>Men also compete for women attention.

The bottom 80% compete with another for table scraps. there's no competition for the top 20% of men.

Because any man would fuck any woman given an opportunity, but not the other way around. Being woman is easy mode.

>Women only want the top 20% of guys. Men would have sex with the top 80% of women.

That's actually not true though, so whatever else you're saying based on this premise is invalid.

>Because any man would fuck any woman given an opportunity
Do you honestly believe sexual attraction works that way? Seems like this is something mostly autists and neckbeards would be prone to doing.

>That's actually not true though, so whatever else you're saying based on this premise is invalid.

How is it not true? Women are far more selective than men.

EX: Tinder. A handsome face can get away with admitting mental disorders. The woman will try to rationalize and tolerate it because he's handsome

If you have an "average" face, any admission of flaws will have the woman packing.

Yes, women are more shallow than men. The only thing which, remotely, surpasses looks is the ability to make a woman laugh.

Thanks for wrecking Occupy Wall Street, the lot of you.

>Do you honestly believe sexual attraction works that way?

Are you a fucking woman? It'd make sense for a woman to have such a lack of empathy to not understand the difference in the sex drive between men and women.

Read testimonials by female to male transexuals. Every single one of them mentions a sex drive that they couldn't imagine as a woman.

What about a women looking to start a family? She can't seriously consider taking looks over work ethic and behavior.

>without culture

Everyone has culture you retard, you might think it's superior or inferior but it can't just not exist in a human society.

Modern women have access to the most handsome faces in the world thanks to film and television. That media exposure raises their mental bar for what constitutes the "settle for it" line.

In small cities and villages, Sasha only saw the faces of local men and her system of evaluating men was based on that pool. With the advent of mass media, the pool is enlarged to a global scale.

And nowadays, a woman wants to "settle" down when she can't command the attention of a top male.She'll spread her asshole for him, even with kids and a husband, if an upper-status man gives her attention.

Want to know how I know you're a woman?

Because holding yourself on a moral high horse over anyone else makes you feel incredibly justified, and when you have 2,000 people in the same room doing the same thing you feel incredibly empowered.
I stopped paying attention to it when it became okay to slut shame the trumps wife because of their last name as opposed to any actual logic.
Not that she doesn't deserve it, it just would make more sense for people like me to not have to defend her for doing what the fuck she liked.

>EX: Tinder. A handsome face can get away with admitting mental disorders. The woman will try to rationalize and tolerate it because he's handsome
>If you have an "average" face, any admission of flaws will have the woman packing.

Completely pulled from your ass.

So you'd fuck a 500 pound hambeast no questions asked? The fact that everyone's level of standards would be pretty much nonexistent seems exaggerated tbhfam.

Most people make up standards as they go. If I'm not getting the 9,5, or even 3 out of ten I'll settle for the two to get my dick sucked.

Try it yourself. Make two false facebook accounts. One of them with a picture of an 9/10 or 10/10. The other one should be a "mere" 6-7/10.

The difference in response rate and attitude towards revealed weaknesses is shocking. Except for 1 girl, asian with a math degree, all the matches for the handsome guy tried to be emphatic and expressed similar situations to show sympathy.

Most of the matches for the 7-8/10 guy were unmatched almost immediately as soon as some confession of mental problems came into view. The only ones who didn't unmatch were fat women.

>
So you'd fuck a 500 pound hambeast no questions asked?

Even in a society with obesity as a mass problem, a 600 pound hambeast is in the top percentile for fatness amongst women.

None of that is true, though. /r9k/ is not a legitimate source of information.

>Maybe science will: slut shaming might end if artificial wombs become the main way of reproducing.
I'm never in the idea that science (or culture, really, for that matter) can change our fundamental biological drives and attitudes.
Maybe if, a few thousand years from now, we can alter our DNA and our form, then yes, But not otherwise.

This was in San Fran btw.

How is it not true? Women gush over actors with facial features and symmetry that might not have existed in a peasant village or in a small town.

How is that not a factor in molding perceptions of what constitutes "acceptable" and "attractive" in women?

>what constitutes the "settle for it" line.
>if an upper-status man gives her attention.
Why are looks alone the motive for a women to go after a man in a family context? Couldn't Sasha declare that she ultimately prefers the men in her village for their personality traits in spite of inferior looks? The former is definitely more important in long.

>The former is definitely more important in long.

You don't understand the strategms that abound when there is a perceived "ability of choice" for women. There's a reason why they slut it up throughout their 20s and as soon as the combination of biological clock and less frequent attention from high-status men hits, they go for men they would have never considered just because they perceive them as less likely to uncommit their attention.

The problem is that they still try to elicit attention from higher-status men behind their partner's back.

CONT

But there's one exception. The ability to make women laugh. More than money, power, and looks, if you can tickle her funny bone, you can tickle something else...

So people who are natural comedians have a big advantage in pulling women. Unlike handsome men though, you can only tell a man is funny if you're in close range and spend time around the man.

>How is that not a factor in molding perceptions of what constitutes "acceptable" and "attractive" in women?

I don't have to know how, I just know that it empirically doesn't. The r9k narrative is simply not true. The data do not support it.

CONT

Being "realistic" about women doesn't mean you hate them. It means that as a man you have to evaluate your own self-worth and not treat rejection as personal. It pays to appear confident but it also pays to evaluate your life strategy.

EX: Don't plan on marrying 'till age 60. I plan to be in the top percentile of physicality for that age, at the very least, while building a nest egg and starting a few businesses.

It's a long-term strategy but I wasted my 20s on bullshit and I have to pay the price. I'm just thankful I live in a society where information about better nutrition and health has been found in certain channels. Being feeble is a mix of choice and ignorance of ways that keep you fit 'till death,

What do you mean? Almost every girl I knew growing up in LA has slutted it up with low-level musicians and low-level media types.

Which reminds me of cocaine. Any woman will submit to temptation. Unless you're ugly in which case the offer seems excessively creepy.

But this might be a Los Angeles dynamic more than a global one.

Great key v shitty lock

Adultery happens for many reasons and it's less common outside the west.

Self-worth isn't based on looks alone which is what you are saying for a women's choice on partners.

Women only caring about >muh looks is not practical for them in a biological nor a child rearing sense. There is always the possibility of pregnancy, which a woman has to bear the burden of more so than a man. A partner that is a more stable provider is more advantageous for a long-term commitment like a child.
If you think that modern women finding sexually attractive men to be sexually attractive is a strong argument in favor of it being the only factor that goes into it, maybe you should get your head out of your ass.

>Self-worth isn't based on looks alone which is what you are saying for a women's choice on partners.

Looks are the most important obviously. But it doesn't hurt your looks if you still look healthy at an age where the most popular representations are walking chair using senile clueless zombies. So to speak.

Older men represent durability and safety to younger women. The problem is that most older men engaged in stupid dietary, physical, and mental behaviors which catch up with them.

And yes, men pride themselves on their ideas and yadda yadda. Half because men are idealist (who pretend to be pragmatic) and half because they're just faggots who don't understand how truly shallow women are. Unfortunately symmetry and beauties are secondary signals of a good genetic code that has been preserved. so their shallowness is not stupid, for the most part.


>Adultery happens for many reasons

If you're having trouble with a woman in your first year, she's trouble.

If you're having trouble with a woman during your 20th anniversary, you're probably a beta faggot with a gut who hasn't shown any of that sexy power of masculinity in years.

>If you think that modern women finding sexually attractive men to be sexually attractive is a strong argument in favor of it being the only factor that goes into it, maybe you should get your head out of your ass.

I was talking about how mass media presents hyper-aesthetic images of the top men from various societies.

That's literally a unique situation in the past ten thousand years or so of modern humanity.

And how does that change anything, you still keep constantly asserting that looks are the only factor that goes into choosing a partner. Anything else is just autism you think justifies your claim. You did it here many times more.

How come my friends and I haven't received any money

CONT

And this doesn't address the difficulties that come from facing a female population where

1. 25% of them are on antidepressents. No female mice are used to test drugs. Only male mice. It's one of the weird standards of medical testing when looked from the outside. So not only do a significant portion of women use "legal" psychoactive drugs, they're using drugs that might have different effects based on biochemical differences between men and women.

2. Uses the BCP as if it were candy. As opposed to a hormonal modulator that exacerbates the most histrionic tendencies of women.

It's not the only factor. But it's a prime factor, especially in the age of Tinder.

I never said it was the only factor, only that it was a prime factor that overcomes even the disadvantages that confessing mental illness brings.

Oh but he would have a better chance of getting laid without feminism as we would be more likely to have legal prostitution available.

Women are the property of men and potential men, men hate the idea of semen that doesn't belong to them being in their property so they shame women for acting like animals.

>but think about how the girl feels
HAHAHAHHA fuck off

>Looks are the most important obviously
Why? Picking the dumb, homeless stud over the financially stable, average looking guy would be disasterous for a future family.

>Looks are the most important obviously. But it doesn't hurt your looks if you still look healthy at an age where the most popular representations are walking chair using senile clueless zombies. So to speak.
Right but most people don't marry in their senior years.

Remember, I'm speaking purely in a wedlock context. Looks would be the most important factor in other romantic relationships not involving marriage.

I've lived in LA and elsewhere,
It's a human thing
people of both sexes are slutting it up at maximum effort.

How long has Tinder been popular though? A few years? Is that going to suddenly override the possibility of pregnancy even with the addition of birth control and aeons of evolutionary conditioning?

Mass media on this scale is a new thing. It hasn't aged
>ten thousand years or so
Like you claimed earlier.