Rape culture didn’t kill Rehtaeh Parsons. Slut culture did.

7 May

tread

Today you are going to witness JudgyBitch try to tread softly and quite frankly, that’s not one of my strong suits. I’m going to attempt a kid glove treatment not because I’m afraid of the subject matter – not at all – but because at the end of the day, a young woman is dead and she leaves behind a mother and father who are grieving and no matter what she did or didn’t do, she didn’t deserve to die.

christie

Christie Blatchford, writing for Canada’s National Post makes no similar effort.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/04/26/christie-blatchford-why-there-will-never-be-a-case-against-the-rehtaeh-parsons/

Christie does not reveal her sources, but let’s assume that as a respected and experienced journalist, she didn’t just make this shit up.

She begins by noting that the reluctance on the part of the police in Nova Scotia to press any charges has two possible interpretations:

1. The police are assholes who don’t give a fuck about rape victims

2. The police had NO EVIDENCE OF ANY KIND that would warrant charges

Let’s make note of the fact that the case was handled by a joint national and regional sexual assault team, led by a woman. They took over a year to collect evidence and consider whether or not there was any realistic chance of convicting anyone for anything. Eventually, the police team took the case to the local prosecutor, who was also a woman, apparently very experienced in prosecuting sexual assault offenders, and she also declined to press charges.

lawyer

The evidence was scant to begin with, and Rehtaeh’s statements were all over the place. It took her two weeks to tell the police she had said “no”.

Cue Anonymous. Demands to have the case re-opened were followed with some vigilante hackers posting the names of the alleged offenders, and Anonymous eventually had to release a statement that pointed to at least two of the named boys innocence.

anon

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — April 12, 2013 – 12PM GMT

Greetings from Anonymous.

Please be aware of the following facts:

1) One of the alleged rapists has made several public statements admitting that he did have sex with Raetaeh on the night in question. He admits she was inebriated at the time, also that she was throwing up during the act.

2) During his confession, he names three other boys and admits that they too took turns having sex with Rahtaeh that night as well. The names match with those we have confirmed during our investigation.

3) The individual making this confession is the same boy identified in the photograph. He has also admitted to being in the photograph and named the accomplice who took the picture.

4) All information, including screenshots of the confession, have been made available to the police.

5) Two boys have been implicated repeatedly whom we believe are innocent based on numerous testimonies given by individuals with first hand knowledge of the surrounding events.

6) There are multiple witnesses who were classmates of the alleged rapists that can confirm they were shown the photograph of Rehtaeh by them.

7) At the very least, there was a house with a minimum of half a dozen underage students consuming alcohol and engaging in sexual intercourse. What happened in this house resulting in the spread of child pornography. This much the police will agree to. No charges have been filed in regards to this.

red

Ooh, I really want to get a red pen and correct that grammar, but I’ll focus instead on what seems to have happened.

Rehtaeh and some “friends” got trashed and Rehtaeh had sex with multiple partners. Was it consensual? That question doesn’t look like it’s going to be easy to answer. At least some of it was, by Rehtaeh’s own admission.

Why?

That’s what I would like to know? What part of Rehteah’s life experience led her to believe that sex with a line of boys, one after the other, was going to result in anything positive or pleasant for her?

Ariel Levy wrote a book called Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture, and in it, I think she answers my question.

pigs

“A tawdry, cartoonlike version of female sexuality has become so ubiquitous, it no longer seems particular. What we once regarded as a *kind* of sexual expression we now regard *as* sexuality.

These are not stories about girls getting what they want sexually, they are stories about girls gaining acclaim socially, for which their sexuality is a tool.”

Ariel holds what she calls “lipstick feminists” responsible for this new raunchy version of female sexuality while still clinging to the idea that “proper feminists” have the right version of what women’s sexual experiences should look like.

lipstick

She’s absolutely correct that “lipstick feminists” promote sluttiness as a virtue, but completely wrong when she fails to understand the older generation of “proper feminists” have a deeply vested interest in encouraging young women to view themselves as fuck-bunnies and little else.

What is it that young women like Rehtaeh are supposed to get out of treating sex as something so casual one can line the boys up and ride them like a carousel? In a nutshell, it makes you equal to boys, because we all know boys care nothing for love or affection or romance or intimacy. Boys will fuck anything, amirite? The only way to be equal is to go ahead and fuck anything yourself.

romeo

Here’s another book, beloved by the organizers of “Slutwalks”.

ethical

http://feministcurrent.com/2585/were-sluts-not-feminists-wherein-my-relationship-with-slutwalk-gets-rocky/

The authors define slut as “a person of any gender who has the courage to lead life according to the radical proposition that sex is nice and pleasure is good for you.

How does that work out in practice? Oh, not so great.

http://www.thefastertimes.com/loveanddeath/2011/05/31/the-ethical-slut-revisited-why-i-am-no-longer-an-ethical-slut/

Remember Karen F. Owen who decided to fuck every athlete she could find at Duke? She recounts in excruciating detail each encounter she had, and ranks them all in terms of the pleasure she experienced. The one that gets the high score? (Subject 12)

http://jezebel.com/5652114/college-girls-power-point-fuck-list-goes-viral-gallery?skyline=true&s=i

That’s the one in which she felt most like a person. He made eye contact with her (how do you fuck someone who won’t even look at you??), treated her like a person, like her feelings mattered, like HE CARED ABOUT HER.

In other words, he acted like they had some kind of relationship.

And the reality is that most women want sex in the context of a relationship. Hooking up is being used BY WOMEN as a strategy to move into a relationship, to their detriment.

What is remarkable is that even women who write books about their sexual adventures and want to defend their sexual freedom end up telling the same story. In The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism (1994), Katie Roiphe speaks of feeling “almost sick with the accumulated anonymity of it, the haphazardness, the months and months of toweled men.” In Lip Service (1997), Kate Fillion recounts how she retroactively decided she was in love with every man she had had sex with, and how the power she got from sex “was the power to cause myself emotional pain.” Cindy Chupack, an executive producer and writer for the HBO series Sex and the City, gives us the details of her sexual escapades in The Between Boyfriends Book (2003) but confesses that she wants to be more than “a notch in somebody’s bedpost”; she is looking for a husband.

http://chronicle.com/article/The-Emotional-Costs-of-Hooking/65960/

None of that stops feminists from encouraging women, even very young women, to strip down and fuck any and every guy they meet.

proud

Everyone needs to start learning the obvious fact that sex is for both girls and guys. Women should not be shamed into waiting to have sex nor shamed for having it. I am not scared to say I enjoy sex. It has no effect on who I am as a person, so society: stop trying to convince me otherwise.

http://thefbomb.org/2012/07/i-should-be-allowed-to-enjoy-sex/

There’s even a special term for encouraging girls to treat sex casually: sex-positive feminism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive_feminism

Sex-positive feminism… is a movement that began in the early 1980s that centers on the idea that sexual freedom is an essential component of women’s freedom.

Slut = Freedom

What is that the feminists of the 1980s gained by promoting the idea that sexual freedom is an essential component of women’s freedom? Freedom to do what? Freedom from what?

This article by Tracey McMillan is instructive:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tracy-mcmillan/why-youre-not-married_b_822088.html

Her reasons for why women aren’t married:

You’re an angry bitch

You’re shallow

You’re a slut

You’re a liar

You’re selfish

You’re not good enough

Think about those things. Men don’t want to marry angry, shallow, lying, selfish sluts. Who would?

What does sex positive feminism promote? Women should be shallow, selfish sluts who lie to themselves about what they want and end up angry and …. alone. Sex positivism and feminism are both dedicated to fracturing the possibility of meaningful relationships between men and women. Men learn to view women as untrustworthy sluts (because they are) and women end up angry with men who reject them as serious partners.

angry

Slut-culture is a strategy designed to get women to hate and blame men for their own actions and decisions. It’s designed to put women into situations where aligning themselves with feminism seems like a solid, sensible choice. A way of protecting themselves. All without realizing that WOMEN are the ones hurting other women.

In the best-case scenario, women end up alone and rejected. More likely, they end up married to beta men whom they end up despising, thereby confirming that feminism is correct: men suck.

http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/why-sluts-make-bad-wives/

In the worst case scenario, they end up dead.

Being a slut didn’t empower Rehtaeh Parsons. It didn’t ensure her freedom. It didn’t make her strong and confident and empowered. It may very well have left her vulnerable to sexual assault. She wanted to blame the boys for what happened to her. And it’s possible there is some blame to go around. We don’t know the answer to that, yet.

But it isn’t boys who came up with the idea that casual sex is a great thing for girls. It isn’t the patriarchy that encourages women to fuck without commitment. It isn’t men who told women to parade around half-naked in some futile effort to make being a slut a virtue.

misogyny

It is misogyny though. Hatred of women.

And it comes from the very women who claim to stand against misogyny in all its forms: feminists.

Feminists want us to believe “rape-culture” killed Rehtaeh Parsons.

http://feministing.com/2013/04/10/rehteah-parsons-is-dead/

Bullshit. Slut culture killed Rehtaeh. And women who promote sluttiness should be made to answer for it.

Lots of love,

JB

 

EDITED TO ADD:  Look what  just went up on Jezebel

 

So, Girls, Fuck All of It

If you want to. Or don’t fuck any of it, if you don’t want to. Fuck women. Fuck men. Fuck no one. Point is, you get to fuck what you like, when you like, and your worth is not determined by some golden ratio of extreme boner tantalization vs. minimal boner touching. BONERS ARE NOT THE BOSS OF YOU. You are the boss of you.

 

http://jezebel.com/female-purity-is-bullshit-493278191

 

And god help the girls who take this advice.

 

…and does anyone else think that you get to fuck what you like, when you like sounds pretty rapey?  Guess getting consent only applies to men then?

 

ugh

64 Responses to “Rape culture didn’t kill Rehtaeh Parsons. Slut culture did.”

  1. M3 May 7, 2013 at 18:15 #

    Excellent post JB. Simply excellent!

    And i’m noticing a recurring theme here.. i made a very similar observation about feminism on another blog on a slightly different topic. Yet the same observation was made.

    Feminism = Misogyny = Hatred of Women

    My comment truncated:
    “I’ve come to learn feminists are the true misogynists. They hate everything about women and try and destroy any good qualities associated with women as being weak or pathetic, because they only value male strength characteristics.”

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/why-do-modern-women-have-such-filthy-mouths/#comment-3511

    • Z May 7, 2013 at 18:37 #

      Yes. This.

    • sqt May 7, 2013 at 18:58 #

      That about sums it up. Feminists have declared that everything inherently female is bad. The only “good” woman is one who tries to be a man. Stupid.

      • Z May 7, 2013 at 19:57 #

        I wish we had a like button.

      • M3 May 7, 2013 at 20:30 #

        Feminism decided that they were so jealous of men, the only way to find equality was to ape and emulate the VERY WORST behaviors a man could perform. Sleeping around, caddish behavior, being loud, brash, pompous, boastful, boorish, arrogant, aggravating and aggrandizing.

        And this is what they consider A RealWoman(tm).. a success story for all woman kind.

        Fucking idiots.

        • sqt May 7, 2013 at 20:56 #

          That is so true. I can only assume it’s because those are the only behaviors they are capable of emulating. It’s too hard to compete with the average man on an intellectual level and pretty much impossible to match him physically. But getting drunk and sleeping around is easy.

  2. driversuz May 7, 2013 at 18:18 #

    Whoda thunk that getting blind drunk and fucking everything that moves might be a bad idea? Gee I don’t know, maybe most of humanity before modern feminism?

  3. Z May 7, 2013 at 18:26 #

    Sex IS nice and pleasure IS good for you. Where the disconnect happens for me is… why does it have to be with a bunch of random strangers or near strangers? Or some endless string of guys? Why can’t you have a lot of nice and pleasurable sex with a very limited number (like very limited over your lifetime) monogamous partners that you love and who love you?

    Nobody cops a squat in their front yard while their neighbor waters the tulips and just poops right there out in public… but for some bizarre reason sex is no longer a private and intimate and deeply personal affair, nope… it’s front lawn material! And invite tons of guys.

  4. Z May 7, 2013 at 18:35 #

    Annnnd I think people often miss the point that it’s not about women being shamed for having sex. The shame isn’t that she’s a sexual being… the shame is… the vast majority of women feel like shit hooking up all the time, so because they are “not that into it”, it reflects low self esteem and THAT is what the shaming is about. Women are not men. They’re not wired the same. They don’t want all the same things in all the same ways. Show me 10 women who GENUINELY (and without having some F’d up abusive childhood) want to have a bunch of random sex with a bunch of random guys and find that preferable to finding a man who will marry and love them, and I will stop “slut shaming”.

    • EMMA May 7, 2013 at 19:05 #

      Are you saying that men who have a bunch of random sex with a bunch of random women don’t have issues? Yeh, I dont think so. Maybe you’ll marry that guy (or are married to that guy) you can have him. Some man whore is not going to be the father of my children. Sorry.

      • Z May 7, 2013 at 20:03 #

        Well… actually… when he was in college, Mr. Z sowed some oats. But then he got bored with that and settled down. A lot of men sow some level of oats. And Mr. Z and I don’t want children.

        Also, I think at some point it becomes a biohazard for a guy, too. I’m not saying super slutty men are “great”, but there isn’t the same lack of self respect that it is when it’s a woman, IMO. Men don’t have a bunch of sex searching for love in all the wrong places. They don’t “pretend they like casual sex hoping secretly it will turn into something more, then beating themselves up when it doesn’t.”

        Men inflate their “number” to seem more studly. Women almost always try to downplay their “number” even if they’ve been brought up in slut culture and outwardly try to act like they’re all into it. Most female sluts aren’t that proud of their number.

        Nope. A lot of the man whores… genuinely like casual sex. It doesn’t make them cads. If a woman wants a man to commit to her, she shouldn’t be having sex with him until he’s emotionally committed, otherwise there is a large chance he’ll file her in the folder marked: “fun to play with but not to marry”.

      • driversuz May 7, 2013 at 20:19 #

        *sigh*
        “But men do it too!”
        True, and when practiced in the extreme it’s not good for them or anybody else, but two points to ponder:

        1.) Men and women think differently and “feel” differently. And they bond differently.

        2.) Most women are physically and emotionally attracted to sexually experienced men because it is (on an instinctive level) a sign of past “success,” which happens to be a decent indicator of future success – in all endeavors. However, while most men are PHYSICALLY attracted to nearly all “hot” women, most men are physically AND EMOTIONALLY attracted to less sexually experienced women. Less experienced women are more likely to bond closely and become loyal partners, which bodes well for future children.

        It’s not a double standard, it’s a successful reproductive strategy that increases the chances of our species’ survival and well-being.

        • M3 May 7, 2013 at 20:32 #

          +1

          But to bitter feminists.. it really boils down to thinking like a petulant child.

          “But he gets to play with that toy… why can’t I???”

        • Z May 7, 2013 at 20:35 #

          These are really good points! I love the “successful reproductive strategy” because ultimately it really is. We didn’t evolve a certain way because of an evil cabal called “the patriarchy”, and when we talk about “double standards” we’re trying to bring “fairness” into a discussion of biology, which really makes no sense at all and requires a feminist to try to make it work. :P

        • Emma May 7, 2013 at 22:10 #

          That was not my point. I dont “want to do it too” Gezus. You think people actually READ comments before commenting. My point WAS—To ME, it is equally as unattractive for men to be whores/sluts as it is for women to be whores/sluts.

          • sqt May 7, 2013 at 22:39 #

            I think she understood your post just fine- and addressed the subtext quite well. On the other hand, did you read and digest her response? Right there in the beginning she states that the extremes aren’t good for either gender.

            • Emma May 7, 2013 at 23:41 #

              *Sigh* “Men do it too?”

              I never said anything like that, and if she/he interpreted that to be the subtext in my comment, well their comprehension skills are way off.

              No…my entire point (again) was that BOTH men and women who sleep around casually are damaged goods. I would never find a man who casually fucks around to be attractive enough to marry and have children with.

              Read LostSailor’s comment. He explains it much better

              • sqt May 7, 2013 at 23:58 #

                No one is arguing that it’s desirable for men to sleep around. The point is that men and women face different outcomes when they do. Women are attracted to the whole “bad boy” vibe and driversuz was making the point that sleeping around can be viewed as a form of success for men. We can argue if that’s true or not- but I think it’s a pretty accurate statement.

                Look at this way. Warren Beatty was able to sleep with a ton of women until he was good and ready to settle down because he was good looking, rich and famous. George Clooney seems inclined to take that path as well. Many men can probably do the same if they choose if they have enough power and success to keep attracting women. But can a woman do the same? Most women who slut around, in my experience, end up bitter and alone. A woman doesn’t have to be pretty to be a slut- but a guy’s odds of sleeping around increase if he has looks or wealth.

                Most men are not the Warren Beatty type, but the question is if that’s a question of opportunity or desire. I’d like to believe that most men *choose* to be decent human beings.

                • Emma May 8, 2013 at 00:25 #

                  I SAID IT WASNT DESIRABLE FOR MEN TO SLEEP AROUND! It was in response to Z’s comment about women not being desirable when they sleep around. And I said “NOR ARE MEN”!

                  Then you and others responded to the differences between men and women and evolution and everything else.

                  My point was regardless of all that, it is still unattractive when men whore around! You and your buddies are using my comment to create a whole different argument and Im saying my comment had nothing to do with your argument!

                  Geeezzz….

                  And I’m sure Z can find more than 10 women on the planet who genuinely like having sex-just for the feeling and nothing else. Those women should not be judged as fucked up or “from an abusive home”. That’s just how some people are. Its when people LIE to other women saying that ALL women are okay with casual sex, that’s when it becomes dangerous.

                  • sqt May 8, 2013 at 00:34 #

                    Are you incapable of having a conversation that grows off of the original comment? You seem unusually defensive and determined not to understand the progression of this conversation. I’m done. You clearly don’t want to have an intellectually honest discussion. All I see is a bunch of tantrum throwing for no particular reason.

                  • Nicky May 8, 2013 at 11:58 #

                    I think the point, Emma, is that everyone basically agrees with you that a man whore is pretty undesirable marriage material too – but *you* were acting like no one understood that. You said – ‘you can have him’, even though Z hadn’t really said much about men who sleep around (apart from obliquely, in the comment that we aren’t wired the same). She also didn’t say she couldn’t find 10 women ‘who genuinely like having sex -just for the feeling and nothing else’. She said 10 women who would PREFER to have random sex with random guys to love & marriage. (Which would, in theory, include the same amount of coitus – just with one man not many.)

                    You’ve gone off at a tangent, and people are simply getting back on topic. For men – sex can really be just sex. Biologically – they are investing one night (if that) in a one-night stand, and they can be gone. For a woman, there is biologicially a risk that she will be investing the next 2-4 years of her life in the results of that one night stand. Men who screw around sow their wild oats.Women who screw around are the wild field those oats get sown in! You can’t walk away from that. So yes – women who screw around indiscriminately *are* more apt to have ‘issues’ than men who do the same thing. The primal purpose of sex is pregnancy – that is a bigger deal for a woman than a man. Therefore sex is a bigger deal for a woman than a man. Therefore casual sex carries a far bigger risk for a woman than a man. (Or it did before contraception, paternity testing and child support!)

                    Oh, and I don’t think M3 was calling YOU a bitter feminist!

                  • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:35 #

                    Also… “genuinely like having sex just for the feeling and nothing else” still doesn’t presuppose most women don’t feel like used kleenex the next morning if they do it too frequently with too many different males. Even when women just want “casual sex”, most of them look for a fuck buddy they can do it with long term (maybe not to add too much to their “number” and for the hopeful discretion they can get from the male.) And many of them retroactively pretend they loved the man whether they really did or not.

                    Also, if a woman sees a man as a walking dildo and nothing more… isn’t it just much less drama and risk to simply purchase an actual dildo instead of ruining their reputation and raising their risk of STDs and pregnancy for casual one-night-stands. Do those women have NO risk aversion at all?

                  • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:38 #

                    meh, Nicky, I married a former man whore… but “former” being the operative word here. If he was “currently” engaged in that behavior when I married him he would not have been a desirable mate because I wouldn’t be sure if I could trust him to be loyal to me.

                    But… given that he’d come off a previous marriage where he was faithful, and had also had a period of total disinterest in the opposite sex (from where wife number one screwed his life to hell and back), and he had many strong indicators of good moral character, his youthful “playing around” was not a factor that weighed against him.

          • Nergal May 8, 2013 at 02:40 #

            “…it is equally as unattractive for men to be whores/sluts as it is for women to be whores/sluts.”

            I can’t see why. It should be highly impressive to you that a man managed to become something that he is categorically unable to be because the definition of slut disqualifies men outright.

            Do you also find male mothers unattractive? I know I hate it when a woman isn’t a good father to her children,it really burns me up.

            Look, I believe that,when you said it, you probably believed that men who have casual sex are not attractive TO YOU.

            I believe that you believe that. I also know from my experiences as a young man that until I was able to have sex with at least one female, I couldn’t have gotten any interest from other women for love nor money.

            It was only after 1 girl I had sex with went around proudly trumpeting her “conquest” and giving other chicks details about my penis size and sexual techniques and whatnot that I was able to formally enter the sexual scene. After that, the more young women and adult women I had sex with, the more women I COULD have sex with, until I couldn’t have had sex with all the women who wanted to have sex with me if I fucked them one after the other, all day, every day.I was booked up.

            Thankfully,I got off the cunt carousel before the rates of STD’s exploded. I love women,but there’s no woman worth a case of genital herpes or AIDS and I know FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE that they aren’t very responsible about protecting themselves from diseases when they’re in heat.

            So,I believe that you believe that what you are saying is true.

            In my experience, you’re completely full of shit.

            I have yet to find any group of women who actually prize a man’s virginity or treat it as anything other than a stigma or a joke. It actually is a huge liability to us these days.

            Male virgins are simply fodder for Rebecca Watson-types.

            • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:30 #

              This is partly why men with wedding bands get hit on far more than men without them. It’s social proof. He has been “vetted” by another female as worthy of committing to. That is wildly sexually attractive to most women. Needless to say it does not bother me that Mr. Z doesn’t wear a wedding band. Why do I want to attract more crazy bitches to him?

              Women, on the other hand, who are wearing a wedding ring (which I do), tend to drive off all but the most unsuitable males. Men see a woman that “belongs to another man” and that’s generally the end of that.

              @Nergal… out of curiosity was your wild and uninhibited phase during the early 80′s?

            • EMMA May 8, 2013 at 13:03 #

              Well I’m happy you believe that I believe me.

              “C*nt Carousel” yes, you definitely sound like husband material.

              Also, Im positive you were just so amazing in your first sexual conquest that women couldnt stay away, with your big penis and all. But more importantly, you don’t think that you were more confident in yourself and women fed off of that energy? That ideally, it was you changing as a person that made you more attractive to women? I don’t doubt that women like having sex with a sexually accomplished male. But again, I don’t think its attractive when a guy is out riding the “C*nt Carousel” and no, that does not make me full of shit. Everything in moderation, it applies to both men and women.

              I don’t prize a man’s virginity, but I don’t think its a stigma or a joke with women. Its not uncommon for a guy my age to be a virgin, maybe in your age group-not mine. And its usually other MEN who make fun of a guy who is a virgin. Not saying women go running to virgins, but its not that big of a deal if they’re under a certain age.

          • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:23 #

            Hey Emma,

            Sorry this is a little long.

            Right. To you. And that’s fine. But I don’t see it that way and you were asking me what I was saying… and what I was saying reflects MY views. Not yours.

            For me the biggest issue isn’t ‘unattractive because of sluttiness itself’. It’s what it says about the person based on who that person is and what motivates them. (Though I do agree at some point you are a biohazard, male or female. And that is problematic.)

            A lot of men can have a lot of “fun, casual sex” and it not unmake their world or reduce their self-esteem or hurt them emotionally. It doesn’t necessarily reflect poor self worth for a man to be a man whore.

            It also doesn’t ‘necessarily’ reflect poor self-worth when a woman does it… but the odds are much greater that it does.

            I don’t have a personal problem with women who are sluts when that is just their honest and uninhibited sexuality expressing itself. If it’s not damaging their hearts (metaphorical hearts) and minds and they feel good about themselves, more power to them. Though I hope that they realize going in that… MOST high quality marriageable males will not find sluttiness attractive in a potential mate. If they can accept that MOST men will not consider them marriage material due to their choices… again… more power to them.

            We can’t control what other people think and like and want and don’t want. Too many girls now are being taught that a man who doesn’t want to marry a slut is just some horrible double-standard asshole… just like a man who isn’t super attracted to fat women or acerbic personalities is somehow some kind of patriarchal oppression tactic.

            We can’t control the desire of others. And yes, that includes women… but again MOST women do not actually want to be sluts. Those who really do must weigh and measure the consequences of the society they live in and the life they want and what they may want in the future before making their choices.

            That’s all I’m saying. So no, I disagree that it’s the same. I don’t personally judge men as harshly. I chose to marry a man who had “sown some oats”. He had significantly more partners than me. That does not really distress me. I don’t “think” he would have automatically passed me over if I had a higher partner count… but if he had, that would have just been his honest feelings about it. Though I suspect that I became “marriage material” in his eyes in part because I was a “good girl” who came from a “good family”. Fair or not… it is what it is and women should base their choices based on what they want long term, not based on what makes their lady parts twitch at any given moment.

            But if YOU feel it’s equally gross for both men and women, okay. You also have a right to what you find attractive or unattractive and to avoid people who you find unattractive for personal relationships.

      • LostSailor May 7, 2013 at 22:05 #

        Indeed, men with high partner counts can be damaged goods as well. Men who continually screw a never-ending line of anonymous women coarsen themselves toward relationships. It might be a good “reproductive” strategy on a mindless evolutionary psychology level, and yes, they make lousy relationship material, but the truth is this isn’t the behavior of most men.

        A man will likely have a higher partner count than a woman, but usually the discrepancy isn’t that large. Both sexes should prefer a low previous partner count in an SO or spouse.

        • Emma May 7, 2013 at 23:44 #

          THANK YOU! Thank you LostSailor! Obviously, as per other comments, I am incapable of conveying how I feel via blog comments. I’ll work on that. Until then, I agree 100%….

        • Z May 8, 2013 at 00:51 #

          Meh, it wasn’t a deal breaker for me. What a man does in his college days and what he does later are not necessarily the same things.

          • judgybitch May 8, 2013 at 00:59 #

            Agree with you, Z.

            True story told to me by my husband’s MOTHER who hoped to scare me off, I think.

            During his undergraduate college days, Mr. JB had a clipboard hanging on a nail beside his bed.

            No really. He did.

            On that board he had tables listing the names of all the women he was dating, their phone numbers and notes about previous conversations so when they called he would know the last things he had said to them.

            Juggled up to six women at once.

            What a slut!!!

            I found it hilarious. I still do. Because some part of me understands that women who are unwittingly part of a harem of six, tossing sex at a hot guy in the hopes of landing a Barbie Dream Castle and a wedding veil are fucking retards.

            I suppose it isn’t very nice that I laugh about Mr.JB abusing the mentally challenged,

            But they mentally challenged THEMSELVES. They picked a really dumb strategy and got schooled.

            Boo fucking hoo.

            I can’t summon any sympathy for women like that. They’re just stupid.

            • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:45 #

              LMAO @ “women who are unwittingly part of a harem of six, tossing sex at a hot guy in the hopes of landing a Barbie Dream Castle and a wedding veil are fucking retards”.

              You probably aren’t threatened by most women for the same reasons I’m not. It seems a lot of women were not given the manual and don’t understand how this game is played. That’s how Mr. Z slutted it up in college, but later when he met me knew almost immediately that I was one to marry.

              Silly, sluts… marriage is for ladies. (Oh, I’m going to have to do a blog post with this as the title.)

              • EMMA May 8, 2013 at 13:37 #

                Z…I agree/disagree but understand where you’re coming from as much as judgybitch’s blog.

                Link your blog please. Thanks.

                • Z May 8, 2013 at 14:41 #

                  It’s linked in my name. I’ll shut up about it and just leave it in my name link so I’m not all my blog blah blah blah because ugh.

                  And thanks. :)

            • M3 May 9, 2013 at 19:47 #

              Spinning plates.. he was doing it right! lol

  5. Clover May 7, 2013 at 20:07 #

    As a girl who once thought it would be ‘totally cool’ to have an orgy (though luckily not at a time in my life when the opportunity was available) I think I get part of what stimulates this behaviour. It’s not about the sex, not really, whatever anybody says. I’m in my 20s and plenty of my female friends have never even had an orgasm, including the slutty ones. Plenty don’t like sex, but they have it anyway.
    In the end, it’s about attention, and how it measures value. When I wanted to sleep with a bunch of people, it was because I wanted to be so attractive that that was an option for me, despite the social taboo. I wanted to be acknowledged as valuable, desireable, important – and I thought that enticing strange men into bed would prove that I was all these things. But it never happened, and luckily I received acknowledgement from other quarters, because I was clever and slender and creative and really involved in a lot of projects. It took up my time, and it won me the attention I craved, though admittedly, it was still acknowledgement of my attractiveness I craved most.
    For girls who don’t happen to be slender, or academic, or confident, I can see how the lure of sexual acknowledgement could be too strong to resist. The trouble is, the more it happens, the less casual sex seems like a socail taboo, and the less any individual instance of attraction seems to matter. To measure up againt girls who are maybe prettier or more talented in other areas, sleeping with a LOT of guys might seem like the only way to measure one’s own value in light of this sexual inflation.

    • M3 May 7, 2013 at 20:37 #

      Part of the race to the bottom and lowest common denominator that feminism helped open up, or pandora’s box if you will.

      By removing slut shaming, it allowed women of lesser stature to usurp the traditional laws that governed the SMP and assortive mating. Using the lure of easy sex, a women who had no chance (and by all accounts no right) to be seen with the the high status alpha who should have mated with the head cheerleader, by cheapening the price of sex, it forced all women to start playing into hookup culture. Now sex is the default start position, and girls who don’t want to or are naturally uncomfortale being sluts are left in the lurch and passed over while their slutty sisters clean up and ruin the system. Men of means have more access to sex and less incentive to plant roots. Men of lesser means lose out and go play world of warcraft. And society slowly withers.

      Fuck you very much feminism. You just killed western civilization. Hope you’re happy! :P

      • Clover May 7, 2013 at 21:35 #

        I’m not sure that all is lost. I learned that guys actually want more than ‘easy pussy’. Lots of my male friends don’t want to get laid so much as share their lives with someone nice. Sure, not many would turn sex down if offered, but these guys want girlfriends. If girls can just get over themselves and their desire to be centre-stage, they’ll find it easy enough to get a boyfriend just by being kind and attentive. They might have to offer sex too if the dude in question is getting it elsewhere, but not always. A friend of mine who had a bit of a reputation as a player has settled into a steady relationship which, at 6 months and counting, hasn’t moved into the bedroom yet. He says he doesn’t mind waiting ’cause he loves her, and it’s not like he’d be bothering with a relationship at all if it was just for sex…since after all he can get that anywhere.
        In the end, hopefully the people building the relationships that lat and produce kids will be those born from mutual love an respect, rather than desperation and lust. I’m not confident, but I’m going to be optimistic for now.

      • Days of Broken Arrows May 7, 2013 at 21:54 #

        That’s part one, and a good assessment of it. Part two is that women lose the ability to bond after they’ve been with umpteenth guys. Google sluts and oxytocin (no quotes) to find a bunch of articles about the scientific basis for this. Also, the more men a woman has been with, the higher the chances of divorce — who wants to lose in the end?

  6. Renee May 7, 2013 at 22:49 #

    I’ve always had the belief that sometimes women have casual sex because, well, they like having sex. Nothing more, nothing less. No different than some men who have periods where they “sow their wild oats”. I’m not saying that it’s OK, because it’s not – for either gender. And yes I know that men and women are different.

    What I’m getting at is how problematic it can be to frame the casual sex of women always in terms of there being a reason or purpose for it. Like gaining power, ~finding yourself~, finding something….. I’m sure there are women who do it to move into a relationship, but it is possible for women to have sex because they enjoy sex. Again, I’m not saying that it’s OK.

    • judgybitch May 7, 2013 at 23:30 #

      Renee, I agree with you 100%. There ARE women who just revel in physical pleasure. They fuck because they like fucking, and I have absolutely no problem with those women. I don’t think they should be shamed or ostracized or face derision.

      My point is that feminism is trying to tell women that casual sex is morally superior to sex within a committed relationship with someone you love. It’s teaching girls that there is something empowering and liberating about fucking without strings.

      And for most women, that simply isn’t true. And it’s breaking their hearts to the point they tie ropes around their necks and kill themselves.

      If you genuinely LIKE a good gang-bang, well, I can’t understand you, but I am not threatened nor do I feel I should be able to stop you from doing that – go for it.

      But most women will feel like giant pieces of shit after doing something like that and telling them it’s some kind of moral or personal or cultural failure is just a huge lie.

      And the lie is what I object to.

  7. Rob Jones May 8, 2013 at 00:40 #

    True story, which I’ve probably told before on this site but I’ll tell again because it’s relevant to the post . Dated an awesome girl for a year. She cooked, was really feminine, had a great career and seemed to value men. She was enormously sweet to me and won my heart. We got along great and I thought we were on track for something serious.

    One night we were drinking with friends. She mentioned she was a lipstick feminist (not in that many words) and had no problem sleeping with a lot of guys when she was single. She also mentioned NSA sex was liberating and that women had every right to sleep around just like guys do.

    Obviously, the relationship ended. I didn’t tell her why – I just slowly distanced myself from her. She knew it was something about her NSA comments because she tried to backtrack on them, but by then it was too late.

    This is a tragedy on several levels; She was an otherwise sweet, marriageable woman who pissed in the soup of a solid relationship because she was sold a bill of defective goods by feminists. Her slutiness (or even her acceptance of slut culture as positive social proof if she was bluffing) made her fall in rank from Marriage Material to the Hit it and Quit It bin. Finally, it made a solid, up and up man who is considered a catch (if I can say so humbly) completely want to remove her from his life.

    But this is the hardest part: My friends didn’t understand, since most of them like sluts and didn’t understand why I couldn’t continue dating a girl who “just liked sex”.

    • Sam Forma May 8, 2013 at 01:36 #

      That has to be the stupidest most pathetic reason to break up with a woman I’ve ever heard.

      And your story illustrates that you’ve completely missed the point of JB’es article (which was great BTW).

      • Nergal May 8, 2013 at 03:11 #

        Sounds like a good reason to me.

        Any kind of feminist is out for me when considering a relationship.

        In fact,if a woman doesn’t explicitly describe herself as an MRA or red pill woman to me, I probably wouldn’t even fuck her these days even if I was extremely hard up.

        I’ve got options. If I can use those options to help the men who’ve been chewed up and spit out by feminism,just by not fucking feminists, I’m going to exercise that option.

        I don’t give a damn if it seems petty.

        • Sam Forma May 8, 2013 at 03:24 #

          I didn’t say it was petty. And I wasn’t talking to you.

          What I said to Rob Jones, was that it was a stupid reason to stop seeing someone.

          Rob called her a feminist, she never claimed to be one. Basically he got out of a relationship with a “marriageable” woman because he’s a pussy (illustrated by his passive aggressive “break up”).

        • sqt May 8, 2013 at 05:13 #

          I’m with you. Slutting around is a deal breaker. I think sluts have ruined it for the good girls so I have no damn sympathy.

          • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:49 #

            same here.

      • Z May 8, 2013 at 12:48 #

        Why do you get to control someone else’s desire?

        So what if you think it’s stupid. If you want to marry a slut, go marry one. Why shame Rob for what he doesn’t want?

        Rob probably isn’t overly attracted to obesity or women who don’t brush their hair or ever apply lip gloss, either. Mate selection is not the point at which it is wise to be PC and pick what someone else tells you you “should want”.

      • Rob Jones May 9, 2013 at 01:42 #

        No, my story shows the consequences of JB’s article: Sure, a girl can hang her slut card up for a solid guy, but does that mean her past is truly not relevant anymore? In my case, no.

        Call me passive aggressive, judgmental or whatever, but why would I choose a girl with that kind of history? Knowing the risks of divorce (more likely with sluts), cheating (more likely with sluts), diseases (more likely with sluts), and less ability to emotionally bond (sluts), it doesn’t seem like a sound investment.

        Also, there are some things you can’t be direct about. This is one of them. Any mention of, “well you slept around and I’m not comfortable with that” will be interpreted by the Feminist Imperative as weakness – as an inability to “man up” and be “secure” in my “manhood” by accepting a woman’s choice to be a slut.

        Sometimes the best thing a man can do is quietly downgrade a relationship when a woman shows signs of being indoctrinated by destructive feminist ideals. This isn’t something that can be argued, negotiated with, or subject to long heart to hearts. Feminism is more powerful than any one man’s rational words.

        In my case, feminism won, and a good woman lost a good man because of it. I wonder how many other relationships feminism is fucking up as we speak.

    • Clover May 8, 2013 at 08:37 #

      Hmm, I don’t know if I’d have done the same in your shoes, but of course I can’t see the minutia of the situation. All I can say is, it’s possible to have moved on from sleeping around and now want a long term comitted relationship, and yet not be ashamed of having been slutty in the past. To me, it’s probably better that she ‘owns’ her past than lies about it.
      I can see how this might have merited a long sit-down conversation about how seriously she was taking monogamy now, but it sounds as if your relationship wasn’t actually close enough to talk about your problems openly…in which case I suppose ending it may have been appropriate. Still, it’s not her past that’s the problem in that case, it’s the over all relationship dynamic.

  8. Marlo Rocci May 8, 2013 at 02:37 #

    Consider:
    If we define what happened to this girl as rape, then we have extended the definition of rape.

    If we extend the definition of rape far enough, then the majority of girls may be classified as rape victims.

    If the majority of the girls classify themselves as victims of rape, then it will become the normal state of being a girl as someone who has been raped at some time.

    Such that:

    The non-rape victim will be considered abnormal.

    Resulting in:

    Girls who have not been raped feeling rejection and self esteem issues.

    And boys:

    Will have a greater amount of their sexual activity classified as rape.

    Such that:

    The boy who does not rape will be considered abnormal or unmanly.

    Resulting in:

    Boys that feel they have to rape to prove their manhood.

    And there, folks, is your path to the real rape culture. So as you can see, all sides have an interest in keeping the definition of rape confined to some very specific parameters.

  9. openlyatheist May 8, 2013 at 08:18 #

    I had to make my first post on this awesome blog because you mentioned the Tracy McMillan article, JB. Feminists do not care for the notion of women having faults. I noticed several Feminist retorts:

    “You’re an angry bitch.”

    Becomes:

    “Being single is not the same as being desperate.”

    http://fearofsyndication.wordpress.com/2011/03/15/on-accusations-excuses-and-truth/

    Becomes:

    “Life happens.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/LIVING/02/22/why.not.married/?hpt=Sbin

    Becomes:

    “You are single because you are single.”

    http://thoughtcatalog.com/2012/why-youre-single/

    Each article goes further than the last to absolve women of any faults whatsoever. In other words: if relationships do not obtain, it can ONLY be the fault of men. It MUST be that way, since women have no faults.

    I find it fascinating the lengths Feminists go to celebrate their lack of need for men. (Except when they want sex on tap, which men provide.) Even the most zealous MRA/MGTOW I know tend not to speak of forsaking relations with women as something to be aspired to. Rather, men end up doing it because relations with women have become too disastrous for us, too dangerous, or women just plain don’t want us any more.

  10. Lord Highbrow May 8, 2013 at 13:50 #

    Had a bit of a laugh when I read this sentence in one of the Jezebel links:

    ‘There are lots of athletes on the list, including many players from Duke’s lacrosse team, whose behavior has come under scrutiny in the past, though they were cleared of wrongdoing.’

    They just can’t bring themselves to say ‘cleared of false rape allegations’. I imagine the author typing that sentence through gritted teeth, knowing the truth yet desperately trying to ignore it. No matter how fast her hamster runs, the truth is out there (and in her head as well).

  11. Luke May 8, 2013 at 23:08 #

    On male vs. female chastity/monogamy, from the online book “The Garbage Generation” by Daniel Amneus:

    p. 135:
    “From the feminists’ point of view subsidization by an ex- husband is as good as subsidization by a husband; but from the man’s point of view the difference is total. The husband who works to support his family works to secure his own role and to stabilize the civilization made possible by patriarchy. When he works to subsidize his ex-wife he is undermining the institution of the family and the patriarchy of which his ex-family was once a part– working (under compulsion of the legal system) to wreck civilized society rather than stabilize it. He is an unwitting and unwilling (but helpless) recruit in the warfare of the ages, that between matriliny and patriliny, pressed into service to fight for the enemy, matriliny.

    p. 136:
    The feminist/sexual revolution is not a breakthrough but a throwback. The breakthrough was the creation of patriarchy a few thousand years ago, since when the primary business of society has been to maintain patriarchy by stabilizing the male role within the family, a role now being undermined by the enforced subsidization of ex-wives by ex-husbands–the enforced subsidizing of matriliny with money formerly (and properly) used to support patriarchy.

    Feminists protest against the double standard required by the regulation of female sexuality. The double standard is an essential part of the patriarchal system. Male sexuality requires less regulation because it is less important. Male unchastity sets a bad example and demoralizes wives who find out about it, but otherwise damages society little. Female unchastity destroys the marriage contract, the family, the legitimacy of children, their patriarchal socialization, the security of property and the motivation of work–destroys civilized society.

    (Men accept a double work standard, requiring them to be more dependable, more committed to their jobs, willing to accept more arduous and dangerous labor and to exercise more self-discipline– the things which account for their earning more than women in the job market.)”

    • Luke May 8, 2013 at 23:09 #

      More:
      p. 137:
      “This hated double standard places a burden on women but rewards them lavishly for accepting it. It gives them the bargaining power which makes men willing to raise their standard of living by an estimated 73 percent. Female sexual autonomy forfeits this bargaining power; legal regulation of women (enforced by a guarantee of father-custody in divorce) maintains it. Feminist books are written about the unwillingness of men to “make a commitment” to support women and about the unmarriageability of educated and economically independent women, those with the highest divorce rate. These women would be beneficiaries of sexual regulation, which would make them non-threatening to men and therefore marriageable. Their superior education and talents– often combined with superior personal attractiveness–would become assets to themselves, to their families and to society if there existed an assurance that these assets did not act, as they now commonly do, as incentives to divorce.

      Would it not be fairer to regulate both male and female sexuality with equal strictness? No; male sexuality isn’t important enough. If ninety percent of male sexuality were regulated the unregulated ten percent would create as much sexual confusion and illegitimacy as the ninety percent–if females were unregulated. The regulation of ninety percent of female sexuality would, on the contrary, prevent ninety percent of sexual confusion and illegitimacy, and that is why society must insist on the double standard, which both stabilizes society and gives women greater bargaining power because it makes them more valuable to their families and to society. The woman’s chastity gives the man assurance of a family; the man’s motivation, created by his assurance of a secure role within this family, gives the woman a higher standard of living. This is the complementariness which makes patriarchal civilization possible. The arrangement is now being destroyed by the removal of the man’s assurance of a secure role within his family.”

  12. Luke May 8, 2013 at 23:35 #

    Tucker Max’s take on the Karen Owens powerpoint slide brouhaha:

    http://tuckermax.me/karens-owens-and-the-duke-fuck-list/

    I don’t agree with his beliefs that sluttiness is that universal or harmless. I do think he has some apt observations, tops of which are:

    1) that she did NOT want this thing publicized, that it was akin to a diary she showed a couple of female friends;

    2) that she was NOT empowered by her sluttiness, but let herself be (my words) a voluntary “comfort woman” (WWII in the Pacific reference).

  13. Random Angeleno May 9, 2013 at 00:41 #

    Double standard actually went both ways:
    Husband promised his resources in exchange for his wife’s promise of fidelity.
    Wife promised her fidelity in exchange for her her husband’s resources.

    Worded another way, women are expected to accept sexual regulation in order to access a man to provide for her children. Her fidelity is important because her husband has to have the reassurance that her kids are his, that he’s not providing resources for some other man’s child(ren).

    So if I’m with someone who talks about the sexual double standard, I ask her if she’s going to pick up the check. Simplistic yes I know…

  14. Kyle March 10, 2014 at 04:56 #

    “you fuck what you want, when you want.” Like other women? That sounds VERY rapey.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Silly Sluts, Marriage is for Ladies | missannethropez - May 9, 2013

    [...] I couldn’t resist that title. I was talking with JB in the comments of her blog and blurted that out (if one can blurt in typing form), and then decided it needed to be a blog [...]

  2. Lightning Round – 2013/05/15 | Free Northerner - May 15, 2013

    […] Slut culture killed Rehtaeh Parsons. […]

  3. Seduction versus coercion:  accountability is such a bitch | judgybitch - April 8, 2014

    […] argued this before, and I’ll argue it again:  it’s not masculinity that insists men are little more than rutting […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,309 other followers

%d bloggers like this: