Why do women still get judged so harshly for having casual sex?

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

F. Scott Fitzgerald famously called the Roaring Twenties – which happened on the heels of the 1918 flu pandemic – “the most expensive orgy in history.”

Now, as more and more Americans are vaccinated, some are saying all the sexual energy pent up over the past year will be unleashed, with Yale sociologist Nicholas Christakis predicting a summer marked by a surge in “sexual licentiousness.”

Women, however, might face backlash for exploring their post-vaccination sexuality. In a new study, we found that women – but not men – continue to be perceived negatively for having casual sex.

This stereotype persists even as casual sex has become increasingly normalized and gender equality has risen in the U.S. and much of the Western world.

Specifically, both men and women assume that a woman who has casual sex must have low self-esteem.

But that perception isn’t based in reality. So what might be driving this unfounded stereotype?

A belief held across religious and political divides​

Although the idea that women’s sexual behavior is linked to their self-esteem is a common trope in film, television and even some relationship advice sites, we documented just how entrenched this stereotype is across six experiments published in Psychological Science.

In one experiment, we asked Americans to estimate the correlation between people’s sexual behavior and their self-esteem. We described those people as being a man, woman or simply as “a person,” without providing any information about their gender. We then described that man, woman or person as having a lot of casual sex, portrayed them as being a serial monogamist or provided no information about their sexual behavior.

We found that Americans tended to associate monogamy with high self-esteem, especially for women. More striking, they associated casual sex with low self-esteem – but only for women.

This belief was surprisingly widespread, and across our studies we found that both men and women hold it.

We wondered: Was this stereotype the product of sexist beliefs? Could it be due to participants’ political ideology or their religion?

But time and again, we saw that this stereotype transcended a number of markers, including the extent to which someone held sexist beliefs, their political views and their religiosity.

What if a woman says she wants casual sex?​

However, people might believe that women don’t want casual sex in the first place. For example, people might assume that women have causal sex only because they’re trying and failing to attract a long-term relationship. In fact, such beliefs do seem to influence the stereotype about women’s self-esteem.

Specifically, the more that Americans believed that women don’t actually want casual sex, the more these Americans tended to associate women’s casual sex with low self-worth.

This finding inspired another experiment. We wondered what would happen if we told participants that a woman was actually perfectly happy with her casual sexual lifestyle. Might that change their beliefs?

But even this factor didn’t seem to stop the stereotyping. Participants still saw these women as having low self-esteem. And they even perceived a woman described as having monogamous sex – but who was deeply dissatisfied with her monogamous sex life – as having higher self-esteem.

Here’s the kicker: Among our participants – the same ones who showed this stereotyping – we found virtually no association between their self-esteem and their own sexual behavior.

These findings are similar to those of psychologist David Schmitt, who conducted a survey of more than 16,000 participants drawn from all over the world, and also found little association between self-esteem and casual sex.

And in our study, it was actually the men who reported having more casual sex who also tended to have slightly lower self-esteem.

Do our Stone Age brains play a role?​

So why do people hold this negative assumption about women who have casual sex – especially if it doesn’t hold water? The short answer is that we currently do not know, and associations between sex and self-esteem in the real world are complex.

Some people might wonder if the media is to blame. It’s true that women who have casual sex are sometimes portrayed as being somehow deficient. But this doesn’t tell the whole story. Even if popular media perpetuates this stereotype, it still doesn’t explain why people would feel compelled to portray women this way in the first place.

Another possible explanation is that the stereotype extends from reproductive biology, in which men have historically had more to gain from casual sex than women, who – since they risk getting pregnant – often have to bear greater costs, on average, than men.

Yet today, newer technologies – like birth control and safe, legal abortion – allow women to have casual sex without being forced to bear some of those unwanted costs. Perhaps, then, our Stone Age brains have simply not yet caught up.

Whatever the origin of this stereotype, it’s likely to foster prejudice and discrimination today. For example, people perceived to have low self-esteem are less likely to be asked out on dates or elected to political office.

This stereotype might also have led to seemingly well-intentioned – but ultimately misguided – advice directed toward girls and women about their sexual behavior. There is a cottage industry built around telling women what sort of sex not to have. (Searching for books on “friendship advice” on Amazon yields fewer than 40 results, but searching for “dating advice” returned over 2,000.)

In Western society, women are rarely disparaged for breaking glass ceilings to become leaders, professors, CEOs and astronauts.

So why do they continue to be denigrated as they become increasingly open and willing to go to bed with others at their own whim, of their own accord?
 
to women, a man becomes more valued the more women he has been with
This is largely a myth that stems from the misunderstanding of pre-selection (having some relationship history) and mate-choice copying the way it typically happens for humans (attraction to men who are desired by more women). When it comes to people who actually sleep around, the results are somewhat similar for both sexes.
 
I'm 99% sure most people judge men and women who sleep casually around the same. I think the big difference in whether or not youre 'judged' is how much you broadcast it.
 
Man whores are gross too. STDs don’t care how good your game is. In fact, I immediately see a man that has a bunch of casual sex automatically less attractive.
 
I like how it tries to push you to imply you can't hate both. I hate both. I only hate women even more because I am a guy and part of me wants a family despite the shit future the world had. I don't want the mother of my children to kiss my kids goodnight if that mouth has been around dicks, simple as. I would unironically die alone before going near these people. Your partner should be someone you respect, if you sell yourself short and don't have high standards it's pathetic.

Also love the articles, screech all you want only 2 kinds of men will suppor sluts. The cucks and the guys who have no interest in sticking around, no amount of articles will make people settle for you becuase sex is tied to reproduction and is a huge fucking deal. You can't really get more into a persons core values than talking about their views of family.
 
to women, a man becomes more valued the more women he has been with. they see success with women as an indicator of high social status, which is very attractive to women.
to men, a woman becomes less valued the more men she has been with. they see promiscuity as an indicator of unfaithfulness, which induces anger and hatred in men.
Exactly. It blows my mind that the 'educated', 'facts-oriented' 'scientists' behind The Conversation somehow refuse to acknowledge this absolute fact. Everyone who has ever interacted with men and women for any period of time innately understands the romance game. And yet every couple of years an article like this will come out anyway, as if it's some big mystery that nobody respects sluts.
 
You can't have it all..... rational people understand this, the pampered trophy-for-waking-up generation, raised on a belief that feelings rule all, do not. This is especially true of the women, who want to be able to swap between "empowered and beyond male objectification" and "irresistible sexual being, aren't YOU jealous?" like you or I swap winter tires on the car, depending on their mood and the political winds, and are finding that life, ultimately, doesn't work that way. The life you've built (or not) by 40 can't be reset. No matter how many of the "right" TV shows you watched or how hard you hashtag that promiscuity is "Just a social construct" .

You actions WILL affect how others view you, and you ultimately cannot write that script.
 
Last edited:
Honestly if you look religion as a rule book to get people to behave so society can function and eliminate the deity parts most do contain aspects of not fucking everyone you meet.

The reason women catch specific heat for it is that in old society having a fatherless child was really really bad. Chances are you and that baby were going to starve. The reasons for stoning non-married mothers were more linked to the burden the fatherless child would be on society than ideas of purity before the introduction of monotheism and just were codified by God hating whores. We discuss it in terms of morality and shit because thats the way the language evolved, but realistically prior to welfare systems being a single mom was more than a struggle and it isn't even easy now in most cases. In fact, a lot of things people view as sexism is directly linked to babies.

Women didn't go to war because one man can produce a lot of kids, but women not only have a shelf life before hitting menopause but also can't get pregnant for the 9 months they carry a baby. Women at war can also get raped and birth a child that is part of your enemy and weaken your tribal purity. Humans aren't really that much more complicated than male lions who murder the children of the previous lion when they take over a pride.
 
was that suppose to be a example of something that is easy? I have no idea how to swap tires on a car or even change a tire

You go to a tire shop and sit in the waiting room reading 10-month old copies of Field & Stream for 30 minutes, and then someone named "Duane" tells you the car's done...... that's as easy as it gets!
 
Evolutionary Biology. A male can inseminate many women without having to wait long periods of time. Women can effectively mate once a month and once they are inseminated they will be unable to mate for 9 months at a minimum (usually several years more if the child survives).

A women who sleeps around is not doing anything productive on a biological level, while a man is doing something biologically productive. From this biological fact stems our religious/social/psychological dislike of women who sleep around and passive acceptance of men sleeping around.

It also doesn't help that, due in part to how long it takes to create a child, women evolved greater emotional capacity in order to attach to the male who inseminated them and further incentivize that male to support them. Thus women take sex a lot more seriously for the above reasons. So when males see women sleeping around and not taking the mating act seriously, they become a less desirable mate due to the expectation that the women will attach to the male and take care of the children.

I am being very scientific and I know there are going to be people who go "that's not how I think". What needs to be understood that this is the basis of the more complex reasoning and social rules that have evolved from our biological development as a species.
 
Last edited:
Would you rather drink beer from an beer bottle that is opened for the first time or from a beer bottle that is full of nigger cum due to it being fucked by nigger dicks?
Would you rather get a new thermometer or used thermometer that's been up a bunch of asses?
 
We're at Threat Level Natsuki. THOT PATROL MOBILIZE!
thot.png
 
If they don't want to be judged for casual sex than they shouldn't broadcast it over the Internet.

Beyond that, no matter if man or woman, whoring around tells me that those people aren't emotional stable or capable to have stable relationships and might as well use sex instead of booze to find validation and comfort. Still, you can die of both in nasty ways.
 
The raising a family point plays a role as well. Woman gets a train ran through her before she decides to settle down and you are the last guy to engage in a serious relationship with the intent of raising a child. There are questions of loyalty, whether as a man you can satisfy her needs, whether or not she is going to have a guy on the side, or if you are going to end up being just another guy in that long train she ran through when she leaves you for someone else. Now some of them get around this by finding beta male providers who will bankroll/provide for them while allowing them to have other men fuck them.

As for the stigma of women over men. That's thousands of years of society and genetics deeming it to be the case. As a guy, general points for longterm relationship are most likely a) not a bitch/get along well with them, b) good looking in the guys eyes, c) capable of raising children with the father well and d) loyal to the family unit (husband and children). Points c and d get called into question if they are whoring around and having multiple men in them.

I'm certain for some women it's the same thing. If a guy is open about him piping 50 different women and fooling around, probably not going to be "the loyal provider/a good longterm partner" you want. Might be the guy you go to if you want some dick, but you likely wouldn't take him for a longtime partner.
 
Back
Top Bottom