Which of these three widespread gender-based double standards do you hate the most?

[Tooting Carmen]

-Slut/stud: a promiscuous woman is a disgusting whore, whereas a promiscuous man is a hero.

-Fair woman/dark man: in most ethnic groups and societies, it appears to be the case that women with dark hair and/or skin are stigmatised and marginalised much more than men with such features. This is evident in TV programmes around the world, where the women are noticeably lighter-pigmented than the men on average.

-Lesbianism is hot/homosexuality is not: lesbianism is at least tolerated, if not seen as erotic and praiseworthy - quite a few men even get aroused by their wives and girlfriends carrying out sexual acts with other women. On the other hand, the way that most societies view male homosexuality is much more negative, and certainly extremely few men would engage in sexual acts with other men to arouse their women. (I actually made another thread discussing this very issue).

[GrebluBro]

Third one..

I love it when two girls smooch.. if guys do it ..disgusting :puke

[Tooting Carmen]

Third one..

I love it when two girls smooch.. if guys do it ..disgusting :puke

Yet again, you obviously did not read the thread title properly.:picard1: I was asking which of the double standards you HATE the most, not which one you ENDORSE!

[GrebluBro]

Yet again, you obviously did not read the thread title properly.:picard1: I was asking which of the double standards you HATE the most, not which one you ENDORSE!
Third one again

I'm not endorsing Lesbianism despite I find it very hot. I also acknowledge and hate this double-standard, but I'd find it very disturbing.

Amanda-Seyfried & Megan-Fox
http://www.bohomoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Amanda-Seyfried-Megan-Fox-Jennifers-Body-105.jpg

[Kamal900]

i love on how its wrong to sexually harassing women even with just plain words, and yet a woman can touch a guy's butt cheeks without any problem.

[GrebluBro]

a woman can touch a guy's butt cheeks without any problem.

I think feeling is different

[Kamal900]

I think feeling is different

what i mean is that a girl can sexually harass men without any consequences.

[GrebluBro]

what i mean is that a girl can sexually harass men without any consequences.

1% of men will get offended..

[Tooting Carmen]

bump

[wvwvw]

I would say that sexism is the most annoying of the three

[Kale]

Yeah, sexism in general definitely. You can't be sexist if you are sexist against men, but you can be sexist if you aren't even sexist against women.

[Maleficent]

Voted for the first one because the other two will most likely never affect my life.

[Kale]

Voted for the first one because the other two will most likely never affect my life.

That's kind of disturbing.

[Longbowman]

The first.

[Seraph of the End]

1 and 3. I voted for 1 though.
Anyway, I know many girls who think homosexuality is hot, haha. Personally, I see it as the same thing.

[Moonbird]

I don't hate any of them.

[Longbowman]

'How come people like fair girls but dark boys.'

Even I think this is a bit tame.

[Moonbird]

'How come people like fair girls but dark boys.'

Even I think this is a bit tame.

Since I happen to be fair myself I would be a hypocrite to say I "hate" it when people say they like fair girls. :rolleyes:

[Longbowman]

Since I happen to be fair myself I would be a hypocrite to say I "hate" it when people say they like fair girls. :rolleyes:

Similarly I don't mind people liking dark-haired men :rolleyes:

But what is he saying, we should have the same beauty prejudices for men and women? It's just silly.

[Tooting Carmen]

But what is he saying, we should have the same beauty prejudices for men and women? It's just silly.

In most countries (including Britain) there is an egregious double standard where women are expected to look a lot lighter-pigmented than men. This is especially cruel in countries and ethnic groups where most people are dark-skinned (i.e. most of the world). For example, compare the vast number of blonde female newsreaders to how few blond male newsreaders there are on the BBC: http://tvnewsroom.co.uk/bbc/bbc-news/bbc-national-presenters-4315/

[Longbowman]

In most countries (including Britain) there is an egregious double standard where women are expected to look a lot lighter-pigmented than men. This is especially cruel in countries and ethnic groups where most people are dark-skinned (i.e. most of the world). For example, compare the vast number of blonde female newsreaders to how few blond male newsreaders there are on the BBC: http://tvnewsroom.co.uk/bbc/bbc-news/bbc-national-presenters-4315/

That's not a double standard, that's sexual preference. It's to do with testosterone, which darkens the skin. We like fairer girls because it's more feminine. We like darker men because it's more masculine. It's not sexism.

[Tooting Carmen]

That's not a double standard, that's sexual preference. It's to do with testosterone, which darkens the skin. We like fairer girls because it's more feminine. We like darker men because it's more masculine. It's not sexism.

Blah blah blah.

[Longbowman]

Blah blah blah.

Good counter. I don't think you understand 'double standards.' What next - should both men and women have double-ds and chest hair?

[Tooting Carmen]

Good counter. I don't think you understand 'double standards.' What next - should both men and women have double-ds and chest hair?

Of course not. What I mean is that, why should men and women who belong to the same ethnic group/race/nationality be subjected to different ideas as to what hair and skin colours are deemed 'acceptable' and 'attractive' and which ones are not?

[Longbowman]

Of course not. What I mean is that, why should men and women who belong to the same ethnic group/race/nationality be subjected to different ideas as to what hair and skin colours are deemed 'acceptable' and 'attractive' and which ones are not?

Because men and women may be equal but they don't look the same. Duh. Women have female sexual characteristics - which, as I've explained, stretch to pigmentation - and men have male ones. I don't know why you're carrying this cross.

Still, as it's arbitrary, it isn't a double standard, it's two different standards.

[Kalimtari]

I equally hate all three of these double standards
4 28.57%

[vibrant_]

I think if a woman carries herself well she's less likely to be affected by these double standards. However my opinion may be different from others because I live among super liberal people.

[Bobby Martnen]

-Slut/stud: a promiscuous woman is a disgusting whore, whereas a promiscuous man is a hero.


This one is there for a reason. It's very cheap for a man to make a woman pregnant - all he has to do is ejaculate. A woman who gets pregnant has to devote 9+ months of her life to the baby

Males and females have different reproductive strategies for biological reasons.

[Peterski]

That's not a double standard, that's sexual preference. It's to do with testosterone, which darkens the skin. We like fairer girls because it's more feminine. We like darker men because it's more masculine. It's not sexism.

Going by your logic, slut/stud is also just a sexual preference because innocence is seen as feminine, just like fairness. And testosterone is known for increasing libido, low testosterone people have lower sex drive and therefore are less promiscuous which is seen as more feminine. Promiscuous women usually have high (for a woman) testosterone levels.

[Longbowman]

Going by your logic, slut/stud is also just a sexual preference because innocence is seen as feminine, just like fairness. And testosterone is known for increasing libido, low testosterone people have lower sex drive and therefore are less promiscuous which is seen as more feminine. Promiscuous women usually have high (for a woman) testosterone levels.

Sure, and clearly a lot of people are into that.

[Peterski]

Sure, and clearly a lot of people are into that.

Just like a lot of women are into blond guys and a lot of guys like darker women.

[TEUTORIGOS]

Double standards could only apply if men and women are equal but they are not so the premise of the original proposition rests on quick sand.

[Longbowman]

Just like a lot of women are into blond guys and a lot of guys like darker women.

But as a general trend it's the reverse.

[Peterski]

But as a general trend it's the reverse.

Huh. You say so because you are Jewish and brunette. Until WW2 Nordic Man was considered the ideal in the West. I also don't think that fair women are more universally considered attractive than women who respect their body (i.e. non-sluts).

[Slavic Italian]

what i mean is that a girl can sexually harass men without any consequences.

Had my ass grabbed by a manager at work several months ago. You are correct.

[CertifiedCracker]

what i mean is that a girl can sexually harass men without any consequences.

If you can be sexually harrassed by a woman, you might wanna check between your legs. Seems you've lost something.

[Peterski]

Sure, and clearly a lot of people are into that.

Not really, nobody is into catching STDs.

Being a slut is not exactly about how much of sex she has, but with whom and in what situations.

But also most men value chastity and the majority of women value experience. It's just how it is.

[Peterski]

I would say that sexism is the most annoying of the three

Any girl can sell her virginity on Ebay or Allegro, while any guy cannot. This alone shows which virginity has more value, male or female. Are you going to argue against this? This explains the slut/stud double standard.

Just the simple laws of free market economy.

Don't ask why nobody wants to buy male virginity on Allegro, I have no idea. But it's true.

On the other hand, from time to time you hear stories about women selling their virginity.

[Óttar]

I don't like the lesbianism/male homosexual double standard the most. Whether two men or two women fuck or love each other is no one's business.

Slut/stud is not really a double standard in my eyes because getting laid for a decent looking woman is like shooting fish in a barrel whereas for men there is always at least a significant challenge.

[Kamal900]

If you can be sexually harrassed by a woman, you might wanna check between your legs. Seems you've lost something.

So..it's okay for women to objectify and sexual harass men without any consequences in your opinion? You see, that's why everything in the western world is completely Orwellian to it's core. Equality my ass.

[CertifiedCracker]

So..it's okay for women to objectify and sexual harass men without any consequences in your opinion? You see, that's why everything in the western world is completely Orwellian to it's core. Equality my ass.

Ok, let me put it like this. The very fact that you're threatened just kinda makes me think you're either gay or a pussy. I mean, shit, like I cant wrap my head around a grown man feeling unsafe because of a female. Id like to think im a very open minded individual, but goddamn grow a pair. I know its 2018 and times have change but this whole "equality" thing honestly is going to far. Theres a line.

[Kamal900]

Ok, let me put it like this. The very fact that you're threatened just kinda makes me think you're either gay or a pussy. I mean, shit, like I cant wrap my head around a grown man feeling unsafe because of a female. Id like to think im a very open minded individual, but goddamn grow a pair. I know its 2018 and times have change but this whole "equality" thing honestly is going to far. Theres a line.

-__- I was talking about the gender bias between men and women. Like, why do women get away with things like pedophilia, sexual harassment and objectification of men than the other way around? It's all most as if your saying that men and women are different..which they are. Again, the whole feminist ideology that women are just as good at doing things as men is pretty retarded statement. Western men are treated more like how women in the Islamic countries are treated, but less straight forward and blunt.

[Slavic Italian]

If you can be sexually harrassed by a woman, you might wanna check between your legs. Seems you've lost something.

Says the 18 year old with no life experience. When you are under a woman in a power position they can do a lot of things to manipulate you and make you look bad. You are a millennial with almost no life experience. You will learn some lessons the hard way. Life is not black and white. I know innocent people that have lost jobs over these situations because the woman was a well respected leader that kept her bad tendencies well hidden.

[CertifiedCracker]

Says the 18 year old with no life experience. When you are under a woman in a power position they can do a lot of things to manipulate you and make you look bad. You are a millennial with almost no life experience. You will learn some lessons the hard way. Life is not black and white. I know innocent people that have lost jobs over these situations because the woman was a well respected leader that kept her bad tendencies well hidden.

Sounds like you’ve got some repressed memories.

[Slavic Italian]

Sounds like you’ve got some repressed memories.

I know people that this has happened to. The world does not work in the "redneck' view that you have. There are women with a lot of power. You just can't kick ass in the real world nor can you just go to her superior especially if she has a high status and is well respected. You are expendable and they will eliminate you to protect her image. The system is not as fair as you would believe. Don't worry you will learn in time.

[CertifiedCracker]

I know people that this has happened to. The world does not work in the "redneck' view that you have. There are women with a lot of power. You just can't kick ass in the real world nor can you just go to her superior especially if she has a high status and is well respected. You are expendable and they will eliminate you to protect her image. The system is not as fair as you would believe. Don't worry you will learn in time.

You’d be surprised how much a firm backhand can fix.

[Slavic Italian]

You’d be surprised how much a firm backhand can fix.

Once again you are a stupid kid. You do not realize how ridiculous you sound. I owned a business for over a decade. I do not even need to work and I'm not even 50. You are going to learn a lot of difficult lessons. I have lived in Europe and the Middle East and served in combat zones when I was in the military. You have no life experience and no true understanding of the world. I bet you do not even work. You think you are some bad ass that can get away with hitting a strong woman? Hahahaha

[Longbowman]

Huh. You say so because you are Jewish and brunette. Until WW2 Nordic Man was considered the ideal in the West. I also don't think that fair women are more universally considered attractive than women who respect their body (i.e. non-sluts).

>pretending the trope of the 'tall, dark and handsome' man doesn't exist in the West
>pretending the vast majority of male film stars aren't dark-haired

No, even before the war dark-haired white men were considered ideal by the majority. See also: Rudolph Valentino. That's not to say blond people were always considered ugly, don't be defensive. If I were biased I'd pretend being 5"10 was also considered ideal but it never has been. I'm not sure what being Jewish has to do with it - I find that comment to be beneath you. If you think I'm being biased, and I were Jewish and blond, would I still be defending brunets because most Jews are brunets, even though I wouldn't be? You can do better than this string of logical fallacies and emotional responses.


Not really, nobody is into catching STDs.

Being a slut is not exactly about how much of sex she has, but with whom and in what situations.

But also most men value chastity and the majority of women value experience. It's just how it is.

'Not really, here's why they shouldn't.'

If you don't know anybody who in fact does like that stuff, you must live under a rock. Obviously they're a minority, but they exist. As you yourself say, 'most men prefer chastity' which implies some men don't, so don't be disingenuous. It's not like you to take things personally, like you are now.

Although there are degenerates who like and even strive to get STDs, in general, most people don't want STDs. However, people are not usually clear thinkers and people get STDs without wanting STDs, hence the spread of STDs. They undergo risky behaviour because they enjoy the behaviour without wanting the negative repercussions. Saying 'people don't want to do x because it often leads to y' is naive and silly because people do want to do x whilst ignoring or remaining ignorant of the possibility of incurring y.

[ChildrenFromTheSun]

Slut/stud is not really a double standard in my eyes because getting laid for a decent looking woman is like shooting fish in a barrel whereas for men there is always at least a significant challenge.

Even if we assume this is entirely true (which I don't entirely agree to), how would that explain why "slut" has, or should have such a negative connotation? I mean, what's wrong with being sexually active in general?

[Peterski]

'Not really, here's why they shouldn't.'

If you don't know anybody who in fact does like that stuff, you must live under a rock. Obviously they're a minority, but they exist. As you yourself say, 'most men prefer chastity' which implies some men don't, so don't be disingenuous. It's not like you to take things personally, like you are now.

Although there are degenerates who like and even strive to get STDs, in general, most people don't want STDs. However, people are not usually clear thinkers and people get STDs without wanting STDs, hence the spread of STDs. They undergo risky behaviour because they enjoy the behaviour without wanting the negative repercussions. Saying 'people don't want to do x because it often leads to y' is naive and silly because people do want to do x whilst ignoring or remaining ignorant of the possibility of incurring y.

I never claimed that nobody is into that. But even the ones who are into that, will usually fuck the slut, but not marry her. Which is really what causes the whole butthurt about the slut/stud double standard. Sluts are butthurted because they are not considered good wife material. They are not butthurted because they cannot get laid. Obviously they can.

But they can't secure a worthy husband due to what they perceive as an unjust double standard.

There is no such stigma attached to being a stud, but that's because women have such preferences.

Also the truth is that most of good looking women are not sluts. Sluts are usually pretty average.


>pretending the trope of the 'tall, dark and handsome' man doesn't exist in the West
>pretending the vast majority of male film stars aren't dark-haired

No, even before the war dark-haired white men were considered ideal by the majority. See also: Rudolph Valentino. That's not to say blond people were always considered ugly, don't be defensive. If I were biased I'd pretend being 5"10 was also considered ideal but it never has been. I'm not sure what being Jewish has to do with it - I find that comment to be beneath you. If you think I'm being biased, and I were Jewish and blond, would I still be defending brunets because most Jews are brunets, even though I wouldn't be? You can do better than this string of logical fallacies and emotional responses.

You just sound racist.

First of all white men, no matter dark or blond, are not considered more attractive because of being more evolved or something like that, but because they dominated the world. Women are attracted to the victors. If the Aztecs colonized Europe, Aztec men would be considered the ideal. That whole argument about testosterone making you darker is not even relevant, because the effect of testosterone on pigmentation is minimal. Genes affect pigmentation way more than hormones do.

During WW2 blond Nordics were selected for Lebensborn, while brunette Jews went into gas chambers as subhumans, even if they were tall and handsome. No German woman would even look at a Jewish man at that time.

What is considered attractive has a lot to do with what is shoveled into your mouth by popular culture at a given point in time. In Nazi Germany people were brainwashed into believing that blond is superior and dark is inferior.

Now it's the other way around, maybe it is some kind of "allergic overreaction".


That's not to say blond people were always considered ugly, don't be defensive.

I'm not blond and I'm quite Med-looking myself, so I'm not being defensive. But yeah, the level of Mediterranist supremacy on this forum is sometimes tiresome (and when you attempt to debate them, you get labeled a Nazi or a Nordicist).

I'm just surprised that this male Mestizo user above me thumbed up your posts, because we both know that "dark and handsome" double standard is not about Mestizo men. What I'm saying is that there is nothing objective or inevitable about this double standard. Any effect that testosterone might have on pigmentation is really minimal compared to the effect of autosomal DNA, which is what really matters, and this applies both to skin and hair, not just to hair.

We also know how pigmentation evolved in Europe over the last 10,000 years - generally Europeans were gradually evolving lighter hair and skin. How does it line up with claims of darker being naturally superior? Also, can you prove that levels of testosterone in Europe were declining when European men were evolving blonder and lighter?

BTW, I'm more attracted to dark-haired women with not so fair skin than to blondes with very fair skin.


>pretending the trope of the 'tall, dark and handsome' man doesn't exist in the West
>pretending the vast majority of male film stars aren't dark-haired

>pretending Hollywood was founded & is run by Scandinavian-Americans, not by Jewish-Americans
>pretending the last 10 ky saw selection for dark skin, dark hair and lower testosterone in Europe
>pretending testosterone affects pigmentation more than just slightly and auDNA is unimportant

[Peterski]

I will tell you why I personally don't fancy sluts. I don't fancy sluts because it turns me on when a girl is hard to get. And sluts are the opposite of hard to get. They are as easy as prostitutes. Or can you find me some sluts who are hard to get at the same time? It's not for religious reasons in my case. Some people don't fancy sluts for religious reasons, but it's not the majority. The truth is that there are scientific and evolutionary reasons for that, to a larger extent than for any pigmentation preferences. Of course people who don't like this double standard will call you a religious bigot or emotional etc. if you disagree with them. Just like Mediterranist supremacists will call you a Nazi if you disagree with the dark man / fair woman double standard.

[Peterski]

Even if we assume this is entirely true (which I don't entirely agree to), how would that explain why "slut" has, or should have such a negative connotation? I mean, what's wrong with being sexually active in general?

It's not necessarily the case that slut has some super negative connotation. Rather just not as positive as stud.

Slut has a neutral to mildly negative connotation. It was more stigmatized in the past. Stud is not negative.

Being a slut is just not considered a positive accomplishment by anyone, neither men nor women.

[Bobby Martnen]

It's not necessarily the case that slut has some super negative connotation. Rather just not as positive as stud.

Slut has a neutral to mildly negative connotation. It was more stigmatized in the past. Stud is not negative.

Being a slut is just not considered a positive accomplishment by anyone, neither men nor women.

Being a slut is negative though, it shouldn't be viewed positively.

Sluts can trick their husbands into raising another man's child, studs can't trick their wives into raising another woman's child.

[CertifiedCracker]

Once again you are a stupid kid. You do not realize how ridiculous you sound. I owned a business for over a decade. I do not even need to work and I'm not even 50. You are going to learn a lot of difficult lessons. I have lived in Europe and the Middle East and served in combat zones when I was in the military. You have no life experience and no true understanding of the world. I bet you do not even work. You think you are some bad ass that can get away with hitting a strong woman? Hahahaha

and now you’re arguing with folks half your age on the internet.

[Slavic Italian]

and now you’re arguing with folks half your age on the internet.

I only try to prevent them from making asses of themselves in front of foreign people.

[ChildrenFromTheSun]

It's not necessarily the case that slut has some super negative connotation. Rather just not as positive as stud.

Slut has a neutral to mildly negative connotation. It was more stigmatized in the past. Stud is not negative.

Being a slut is just not considered a positive accomplishment by anyone, neither men nor women.

Last time I checked, I definitely holds a negative connotation. Perhaps not where you live, but where I do, I wouldn't dare call any lady a slut. I does seem like it will eventually lose its negative connotation though.

However, there are actually other terms for women that hold a positive connotation and similar definition as stud. Such as "foxy" :p

I find "slut" is more meant as an insult to random ladies who aren't considered the most attractive or not attractive at all, yet is still sexually active. That is especially with desperate or men with "poor taste" :rolleyes:



I'm just surprised that this male Mestizo user above me thumbed up your posts, because we both know that "dark and handsome" double standard is not about Mestizo men. What I'm saying is that there is nothing objective or inevitable about this double standard. Any effect that testosterone might have on pigmentation is really minimal compared to the effect of autosomal DNA, which is what really matters, and this applies both to skin and hair, not just to hair.


That's not even why I "liked" his post. So the real reason shouldn't matter to you.

And for the record, I don't call myself "Mestizo" and am definitely not a fan of the term...

PS: I'm "Sun Shield Pakal" from ABF.

[Longbowman]

Also the truth is that most of good looking women are not sluts. Sluts are usually pretty average.

Of course we mostly agree, although someone is marrying sluts.


You just sound racist.

:rolleyes:


First of all white men, no matter dark or blond, are not considered more attractive because of being more evolved or something like that, but because they dominated the world. Women are attracted to the victors. If the Aztecs colonized Europe, Aztec men would be considered the ideal.

As I understand it the average European male from England, France and Spain is not blond, so this supports my argument.


That whole argument about testosterone making you darker is not even relevant, because the effect of testosterone on pigmentation is minimal. Genes affect pigmentation way more than hormones do.

No one made this argument.


During WW2 blond Nordics were selected for Lebensborn, while brunette Jews went into gas chambers as subhumans, even if they were tall and handsome. No German woman would even look at a Jewish man at that time.

Of course. However, this was a three-year period after which the Germans got buttraped by the Slavs and Anglos. Also, their leadership was mostly brunet.


What is considered attractive has a lot to do with what is shoveled into your mouth by popular culture at a given point in time. In Nazi Germany people were brainwashed into believing that blond is superior and dark is inferior.

A seemingly self-defeating effort by Hitler, Goebbels and Goering.


Now it's the other way around, maybe it is some kind of "allergic overreaction".

Hitler tried to mess up the natural order and he failed :rolleyes:


I'm not blond and I'm quite Med-looking myself, so I'm not being defensive.

Could have fooled me!


But yeah, the level of Mediterranist supremacy on this forum is sometimes tiresome (and when you attempt to debate them, you get labeled a Nazi or a Nordicist).

Obviously the Mediterranean is superior (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/british-men-leapfrog-ahead-in-lover-list-tlx96zrh075). However, dark hair is not a preserve of the Mediterranean.


I'm just surprised that this male Mestizo user above me thumbed up your posts, because we both know that "dark and handsome" double standard is not about Mestizo men. What I'm saying is that there is nothing objective or inevitable about this double standard. Any effect that testosterone might have on pigmentation is really minimal compared to the effect of autosomal DNA, which is what really matters, and this applies both to skin and hair, not just to hair.

Exactly, it's about European men, north and south, so why are you objecting?


We also know how pigmentation evolved in Europe over the last 10,000 years - generally Europeans were gradually evolving lighter hair and skin. How does it line up with claims of darker being naturally superior? Also, can you prove that levels of testosterone in Europe were declining when European men were evolving blonder and lighter?

What's your hangup about testosterone? I never mentioned it.


BTW, I'm more attracted to dark-haired women with not so fair skin than to blondes with very fair skin.

I also have some irrelevant anecdotes.


>pretending Hollywood was founded & is run by Scandinavian-Americans, not by Jewish-Americans
>pretending the last 10 ky saw selection for dark skin, dark hair and lower testosterone in Europe
>pretending testosterone affects pigmentation more than just slightly and auDNA is unimportant

Jewish Americans made it successful due to people liking them for having dark hair.

[Peterski]

Neither of you really raised any relevant counterarguments to my points. You responded in a trollish way. :rolleyes:


What's your hangup about testosterone? I never mentioned it.

You did, you said that darker traits indicate higher levels of testosterone. You don't remember your own posts?:


That's not a double standard, that's sexual preference. It's to do with testosterone, which darkens the skin.

As for this:


Last time I checked, I definitely holds a negative connotation.

But more among women, this study found that mainly women are responsible for this double standard:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130603142237.htm


Women reject sexually promiscuous peers when making female friends

Date: June 3, 2013

Source: Cornell University

Summary: College-aged women judge promiscuous female peers more negatively than more chaste women and view them as unsuitable for friendship, according to psychologists.

College-aged women judge promiscuous female peers -- defined by bedding 20 sexual partners by their early 20s -- more negatively than more chaste women and view them as unsuitable for friendship, finds a study by Cornell University developmental psychologists.

Notably, participants' preference for less sexually active women as friends remained even when they personally reported liberal attitudes about casual sex or a high number of lifetime lovers. (...)

Across all female participants, women -- regardless of their own promiscuity -- viewed sexually permissive women more negatively on nine of ten friendship attributes, judging them more favorably only on their outgoingness.

(...)

So slut-shaming is mostly by women, and I'm sure that they love to gossip about this and call each other sluts.

[Longbowman]

Neither of you really raised any relevant counterarguments to my points. You responded in a trollish way. :rolleyes:

it's a trollish subject


You did, you said that darker traits indicate higher levels of testosterone. You don't remember your own posts?:

from 4 years ago? no. Do you?

[ChildrenFromTheSun]

Neither of you really raised any relevant counterarguments to my points. You responded in a trollish way. :rolleyes:

I never was interested in your argument against Longbowman in the first place nor have I ever bothered arguing against you. So I'm not sure why I'm of your concern on whether or not I raised any relevant counterarguments.



But more among women, this study found that mainly women are responsible for this double standard:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130603142237.htm



So slut-shaming is mostly by women, and I'm sure that they love to gossip about this and call each other sluts.

Interesting, but my point was that not meant to be taken as if only men find "slut" negative and slut-shame. Funny you claim that I raised no relevant points when this isn't exactly the most relevant/necessary counterpoint.

[Zroota]

Male homosexuality is only found disgusting because a man in today's society is already seen as 'gross'. So seeing two of them getting it on would just double the gross factor. Whereas with two beautiful girls being engaged in a sexual activity, it doubles the sensual factor and is perceived as even 'sexier'. Most straight men would have this thought. I don't think it should be a double standard. It's a mere sexual taste. But yes, people shouldn't use this to discriminate against male homosexuals (which is a form of misandry, in my eyes).

I also do hate how promiscuous men are seen as heroic, and the women counterparts are seen as shameful sluts. That's the worst double standard and is blatantly hypocritical.

[Peterski]

is blatantly hypocritical.

These two articles explain it:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201004/why-more-intelligent-men-not-women-value-sexual

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2335683/Women-dont-want-friends-girls-sleep-men-dont-care-mates-do.html


- Study found that females don't want to be friends with 'loose' women

- Psychologists say that women's reaction could be evolutionary and that they are seeking 'to guard their partners from a threat to their relationship'

- Promiscuous women are at risk of being isolated and experts suggest they make friends with men who would be more accepting of their behaviour

[Longbowman]

The science is in lads

http://i67.tinypic.com/2jeqk4p.jpg

[Tooting Carmen]

The science is in lads

http://i67.tinypic.com/2jeqk4p.jpg

The guy on the left still looks like a Nordic god compared to you and at least 80% of other Jews. xD

[Peterski]

The science is in lads

Yeah, they prefer darker men because they prefer uglies, the science is in lads:

https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/why-women-want-ugly-husbands-2017-7

https://i.imgur.com/xduvKLG.png

They would be so sad and depressed with an attractive fair guy! :rolleyes:

[Longbowman]

Yeah, they prefer darker men because they prefer uglies, the science is in lads:

Do we care? We don't have to look at ourselves during sex ;)

[Peterski]

The science is in lads

Can you post the link to that article or study? I tried reverse image search and found only /pol/ and 4chan. :p It also claims that White men are preferred by other races. But that is 1) most probably US-made science which applies only to American circumstances and 2) it doesn't control for the ethnic & racial structure of the population. After controlling for population structure (i.e. White people are the majority of any dating pool in the US due to being the majority of the population), this is the picture which emerges:

https://unsafeharbour.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/messagestorace-corrected.jpg

^^^
Conclusion after adjusting for these factors, is the opposite to studies which don't adjust:


It seems as if, despite their claims to the contrary, minority groups are actually more racially selective than whites, although all groups have some preference for their own race.

Sources:

https://unsafeharbour.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/racial-preferences-in-online-dating/

http://web.archive.org/web/20110321174958/http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/what-if-there-were-not-so-many-white-people/

[Zroota]

The science is in lads

http://i67.tinypic.com/2jeqk4p.jpg
Women have always liked men with dark haired, tan men. But these men are still white or European. So it's not like they're "racist" if they reject a blonde white man. They just prefer another Caucasoid group.

P.S. In my Middle Eastern eyes, that 'attractive' dark guy is still European looking as hell. People of my ethnicity wouldn't think he's a MENA or anything close to that. Lol.

[Tooting Carmen]

Women have always liked men with dark haired, tan men. But these men are still white or European. So it's not like they're "racist" if they reject a blonde white man. They just prefer another Caucasoid group.

P.S. In my Middle Eastern eyes, that 'attractive' dark guy is still European looking as hell. People of my ethnicity wouldn't think he's a MENA or anything close to that. Lol.

Black men are often popular with other women, but MENA and especially South Asian men not that much. (That said, Bollywood actors definitely are at least the equals of their Hollywood counterparts when it comes to good looks nowadays).

[Longbowman]

Women have always liked men with dark haired, tan men. But these men are still white or European. So it's not like they're "racist" if they reject a blonde white man. They just prefer another Caucasoid group.

P.S. In my Middle Eastern eyes, that 'attractive' dark guy is still European looking as hell. People of my ethnicity wouldn't think he's a MENA or anything close to that. Lol.

I'm not coming from the perspective of someone who doesn't look European.

[Peterski]

The science is in lads again:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/do-women-date-short-men-fancy-match-study-dating-height-dad-bod-brunette-blonde-a7935766.html

[Peterski]

But this is actually interesting (it explains the "stud" thing):

https://sci-hub.tw/https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/sf/sox066/4555229?redirectedFrom=fulltext

https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/sf/sox066/4555229?redirectedFrom=fulltext

https://theconversation.com/what-about-young-men-who-are-having-unwanted-sex-88677

"Going with the Flow": How College Men's Experiences of Unwanted Sex Are Produced by Gendered Interactional Pressures
Jessie V Ford
Published: 17 October 2017

Abstract
While scholars are giving greater attention than previously to sexual assault against women, they have ignored the fact that men report unwanted sex as well. This article examines thirty-nine heterosexual men's narratives about their experience of unwanted sex in college. My analysis of these data shows how unwanted sex with women is interactionally produced through a process where men seek to save face and to make sense to others. Unwanted sex relates not only to interactional processes, but also to the content of what is considered acceptable behavior in heterosexual interactions. That is, cultural norms governing gender provide the content for what allows a man to save face and for his actions to make sense to a female partner. In particular, men consent to unwanted sex because accepting all opportunities for sexual activity is a widely accepted way to perform masculinity. Findings also show that men conduct their sex lives in the shadow of presumed gendered reputational consequences. They fear ridicule if stories are told portraying them as the kind of man who does not jump at any opportunity for sex with an attractive woman. Moreover, it seems that women, as arbitrators of men's sense of self, may play an important role in policing masculinity and upholding gender expectations, at least in undergraduate sexual cultures. Amidst current attention to sexual assault on college campuses, I argue for a closer look at the importance of interaction and the implicit gendered rules of what is considered acceptable and masculine in heterosexual interaction. (...)

Depending on how survey questions are phrased, somewhere between 7 percent and 27 percent of heterosexual men report an unwanted sexual incident during college (DiJulio et al. 2015; Flack et al. 2007; Ford and Soto-Marquez 2016; Peterson et al. 2011). (...)

In accounts of unwanted sex, heterosexual men frequently describe women using verbal or psychological pressure. (...) turning down a sexual opportunity may make a man lose face precisely because he is a man (Gagnon and Simon 2011; Pascoe 2011).

(...)

Notable throughout my interviews were the ways men accounted for unwanted sex as something necessary to avoid a problematic interaction. Men gave different reasons for having unwanted sex -
some men emphasized not wanting to confuse or hurt women while other men emphasized what others might think of them. Nearly all men, however, explained that being face-to-face with a woman who wanted to have sex created a situation that had to be addressed. Having unwanted sex was one way to manage such a situation. By describing unwanted sex as something that happens to manage the interaction, the men provide insight into the importance of interactional processes during sex:

You said you felt pressure to keep going?
Definitely.
Was that from her?
Yeah. I kinda felt.... But it was me too, based on the situation. Felt like I had
to go all the way. It was just necessary.
Necessary?
Yeah.
Why not stop it?
It would have felt weird to me. I can’t see myself.... I don’t know. I wouldn’t have done that.
–Jeff, twenty-five-year-old senior

(...)

When describing sex, male respondents did not talk about uncontrollable biological urges or powerful female seductresses so much as they described a normative commitment to keep the interaction going smoothly:

What if you’d stopped it?
Yeah. She might think I was a little strange.
Strange?
Like she got rejected…. I think she would feel weird or surprised.

(...)

Markedly, the men I interviewed often had a good idea of what they wanted to happen sexually during interactions. For example, some men only wanted the interaction to involve kissing, touching, or oral sex. Other men became aware that they did not want to have intercourse but were unsure how to direct an inprogress sexual encounter to achieve this goal.

(...)

Across interviews, two main interactional processes—saving face and making
sense—were common features of unwanted sexual experiences. Some men had
unwanted sex to save face in an encounter that was becoming uncomfortable.
Other men had unwanted sex because it made sense to do so in a progressing
sexual encounter. For twenty-one-year-old Adam, it was a case of the former.
Unwanted sex began unfolding after a party. During this party, he kissed a
woman who continued to “hang out” after the party had ended. At this point, it
was late at night, and he recalled being tired, somewhat drunk, and ready to
clean up after the party. In Adam’s account, he initially tried to avoid this
woman by going downstairs to his room. She proceeded to follow him downstairs.
Next Adam told her that the “party is over” and “everyone’s left.” In
both of these gestures, Adam attempted to strategically, and perhaps politely,
end the interaction. He recalled, “She just wouldn’t leave.” Adam did not want
to have sex because he was currently interested in another woman. He was also
tired from hosting, and it was late.

Their interaction became “generally uncomfortable,” in Adam’s words, as she
continued to stay. She eventually started kissing him. She told him out loud that
she “really wants to have sex.” Adam calculated his options, then made a conscious
decision to “go through with it” rather than stopping the interaction. When
I asked him why he did not more overtly ask her to leave, Adam said, “I could
have told her to leave, but I didn’t. Because, I guess I didn’t want to be rude. Yeah.
I’m not very confrontational. I can’t imagine telling her to her face I want her to
leave. That would have been harder for me to do [laughs] than going through with
it and possibly damaging her. It’s kinda shitty when I think about it.” Asking her
to leave would have been harder than having sex with her. He thought this despite
his worry that he may have hurt her feelings by not contacting her afterward. I
argue that Adam went through with unwanted sex because of expectations embedded
in that interaction. He could not imagine asking her to leave or explaining that
he did not want to have sex—which might cause them both to lose face—so he
had sex to smooth the interaction.

(...)

On my paper questionnaire, Adam checked the item indicating he had sex he
“did not want” because “someone verbally pressured” him. He describes the sex
that night as “unsatisfying, “impersonal,” and “meaningless.” He says, “I mean
I even faked an orgasm. That was a first. I didn’t think guys ever had to do
that…. Even physically, like it just wasn’t, it didn’t feel good enough to make me
climax. There was just like nothing there for me.” It appears that to smooth the
interaction, Adam feigned the most polite exit of all: a proper climax. This
served to save face for Adam and his partner. By doing this, he ended the sex in
an acceptable way—an action in line with traditional sexual scripts, which dictate
that sex ends with male climax (Gagnon and Simon 2011).

(...)

The Role of Gender in Interaction

As the accounts above imply, men frequently drew upon gender expectations and hegemonic ideals of masculinity as an explanation for unwanted sex. These included expectations for men to want sex, to always be ready for it, and to amass sexual experiences with attractive women. In my sample, men described having unwanted sex to project an image, to keep up a reputation, and to take advantage of a sexual opportunity. Men worried that disrupting an encounter could result in them being viewed as a “pussy,” “virgin,” “jerk,” or someone who is “gay.” It is notable here that these terms are very different from the kinds of terms (i.e., “tease,” “prude”) applied to women who say no to sex.

(...)

For nineteen-year-old Max, unwanted sex unfolded as he left a party. He was leaving at the same time as a female friend from his dorm, so they left together.

Max explained, “I did not want to do this [sex]. Not at all. She was a really nice girl. But I didn’t think she was that hot. I’d say she’s really attractive…. But it just wasn’t that type of relationship…. It was more like a sister relationship. I never had a sister, but like I would give her advice and stuff, apply for things together. So it was...yeah...I dunno, just that.” Contrary to the stereotype that men want sex from women whenever they can get it, Max explained that he was happy with their relationship as friends. Although Max described her as not “that hot,” he told me she was objectively “pretty cute” (...) In the elevator back at the dorm, she began kissing him. The encounter progressed into sex, which Max described as “physically forced” on my paper questionnaire.

You said you have had sex forced on you.... Was it this time?
Yeah, that was that time.
What do you mean?
I feel like it was just so many people that had been saying it [that he
should hook up with her] for so long that I was like this is not gonna
stop so I might as well. Then kind of just because she wanted it. I
couldn’t really shrug her off or something once she started kissing me in
the elevator. That would’ve been weird to me.

While Max referred to peer pressure and her feelings, he also explained that rejecting
her would be “weird.” When I probed further, Max explained that the
reason it would have been “weird” had to do with gender norms. He said,
“When a girl comes on to you, you’re just like ‘ok, I’ll accept this’

(...)

Studies of hegemonic masculinity and gender norms suggest that men are
often policed or nudged into behaving in certain ways (Pascoe 2011).

(...)

Importantly, these accounts from men also show that men seem believe that
women’s reports will be credible to other men and women. This implies that women’s
interpretations of events have consequences for men’s sense of self. If it is
critical that men perform masculinity respectably, even in private dyadic contexts,
this underscores women’s role in policing masculinity and in upholding
gender expectations.

It’s hard for men to say no?
Yeah. It’s uncomfortable.
How is it uncomfortable?
Because first I don’t really like to make people feel bad about themselves.
Also there is this social pressure that men like sex a lot and women can
choose yes or no. So I guess it makes you unmanly if you don’t want to
have sex. Maybe, probably. Unconsciously honestly. I was not thinking
that at the time. Yeah, looking at it, maybe that’s one reason.
–Greg, twenty-year-old sophomore

Greg articulated how gendered content worked jointly with interactional processes
to facilitate unwanted sex. For Greg, saying no to sex was uncomfortable.
In a generic (nongendered) sense, it could make someone “feel bad” if you
turned down their invitation. She could lose face; he could lose face, and this
action might not make sense. Next, gendered content is layered onto generic
interactional pressures such that turning down sex becomes “unmanly.”
Women, in particular, may “feel bad” if their sexual invitation is rejected, due to
sexual double standards. In the context of gender norms and hegemonic notions
of masculinity, interactional processes push men toward unwanted sex. With
these pressures combined, some men have unwanted sex.

(...)

Andy—who views sex as something special to be done with serious girlfriends—
avoided sex by being more direct. However, he chooses his timing carefully:

I’ll straight up say, “There’s something you should know. We’re not
gonna have sex tonight.” I’m not gonna wait until they try to do it and
be like “no” because then if you say it in the moment then they feel bad,
like “oh god I’m sorry,” or upset. I don’t want it to be a surprise really.
But in the end it is a bit of a surprise because they were expecting it in
the first place. I guess in most cases I did want to be with them, but just
not intercourse.
So, you think it’s a surprise?
They’re definitely a little surprised by it that a 20-year-old guy is turning
away sex, but I feel like I would rather surprise them as little as possible
with that.

(...)

Connor successfully avoided an unwanted sexual encounter with this woman by
telling her to stop and physically removing her from his lap. He succeeded by
“resort[ing] to physical force.” Connor explained that sex with someone more
“drunk” is not desirable because he could get in trouble and it is not right. This
came up frequently in interviews. Given the emphasis on sexual assault on campus,
men were wary of sexual advances from women who appeared intoxicated.
Therefore, one credible way to avoid unwanted sex was by acknowledging that
she was intoxicated.5

(...)

Finally, unwanted sex could also be avoided when an interaction was interrupted
abruptly. For example, Luke did not want to have sex with a woman but
ended up having it anyway during a party. When they were interrupted midway
through, he was able to stop the sex.

(...)

Discussion
To understand how unwanted sex occurs for men, I argue that it is necessary to
understand the power of interactional expectations and how they are gendered. (...)
Men’s accounts showed that, sometimes, interactional dynamics only pushed toward unwanted sex
because gender norms informed the content of (1) how men were expected to act;
(2) what men were expected to want; and (3) what actions might make men lose
face with their partner or others. For example, men feared being made fun of by
others and considered a “wuss” if they turned down a sexual opportunity.
Therefore, I argue that some of what occurs to produce unwanted sex for men can
be explained by gender-neutral theories of interaction, but much of what occurs
cannot because what saves face or is expected depends on a person’s gender.
As reviewed above, Goffman posits that general social rules constitute what
he calls the communicative morality of interactions. My findings here provide
evidence supporting an idea of Goffman’s—one that is often overlooked—that
communicative morality cannot work without being overlaid with the normative
(Goffman 1983). That is, communicative morality inevitably implies a
more substantive morality, which in this case is informed by gender norms.
What college men’s accounts of unwanted sex make clear is that gender tends
to attach itself to substantive morality so that the rules of interaction are gendered
in important ways.

The discovery that men sometimes have sex because they fear what women will
think of them informs our understanding of gender, power, and masculinity.

(...)

My findings suggest that women have more power than is otherwise understood because
women’s accounts have consequences for men’s sense of self. Findings also show that men
believe women’s reports of the interaction will be credible to others.

(...)

Although more research is needed, men’s accounts reveal a common perception that they had unwanted sex by their own volition. As a result, they did not frame these encounters as sexual assault and reported few traumatic effects.

My results have indirect implications for a debate in the literature on women’s
sexual victimization as to whether the men who commit assault are malicious or
confused. One side argues that men understand women’s refusals, but deliberately
force sex anyway (Lisak and Miller 2002; Sanday 1990). The other side
argues that men are young, drunk, and clueless, and that much sexual assault results
from miscommunication (Abbey et al. 2014; Tannen 1991). Against this
claim, Kitzinger and Frith (1999) provide evidence that men are able to read
social cues about refusal in other situations.

(...)

Conclusion

In this qualitative interview study, I have explored what it means for a man to have
unwanted sex and the processes by which it happens. My findings indicate that
with sex, as in other areas of life, as theorists argue, interaction proceeds by all parties
trying to accomplish normalcy. No one wants to lose face or to make no sense
to others when it comes to sex. What is striking is that, although these college
men’s experiences involve sex, which we sometimes assume to be a largely biologically
driven affair, these men report deploying the same tactics for the same reasons
that a person tries to keep the banter going when talking to someone at a dinner
party. People try to fulfill interactional expectations, even when the cost is high.
I find that gender-neutral processes of interactional smoothing, though important
to my analysis, were not sufficient to explain men’s accounts of unwanted
sex. At least in the context of heterosexuality, gender is also key to the expectations
and policing that men face. What allows a man to save face or make sense
is substantially informed by gender.

Moreover, men conduct their sex lives in the shadow of presumed gendered reputational consequences. They fear ridicule if stories are told portraying them as the kind of man who declines sex with an attractive woman.

While much research has been conducted on women, more research comparing
men and women is still needed to understand the gendered content of norms
in sexual contexts. For example, men claim that rejecting or avoiding sex is
“weird” or “strange.” Do women draw upon similar language, or are there differing
ways that women account for unwanted sex? Does the expectation that
men want sex more than women, and the existence of a double standard where
women may be judged more adversely for casual sex than men, give women
more freedom to stop events from leading to unwanted intercourse, such that
when they do have unwanted sex, more coercion has been involved? Further
comparative detailed accounts of women’s and men’s sexual experiences are
needed to increase our understanding of the gender of sexuality, and how it is
layered onto interactional processes."