Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abhead)
    You wouldn't many guys saying they prefer the company of males with strong political views, without caring at all what those opinions are. Most people dislike the company of those with strongly opposing to their own. It seems to me that the reason he doesn't care about the views of the women he is attracted to is because he doesn't take the opinions of said women seriously.

    To be honest I think the OP is a troll though.
    Thats not the case at all. I probably prefer to be in the company of people with opposing views, male or female, as it presents me with an intellectual challenge. I think you need to question your methodology, as your drawing a huge amount from my statement with no justification
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abhead)
    From person experience, and from what I have read in the media, a promiscuous male is usually portrayed in a positive light as a "stud" or a "playboy", or at most very slightly negatively almost in a joking matter as a "bit of a lad" or whatever. Promiscuous women on the other hand are often vilified.
    I know. I posted about this before. I however, was focusing more on how a lot of guys get 'congratulated' amongst their peers for being so promiscuous. They are called 'studs', 'playboys' or 'players'. We however, are deemed as 'whores' and 'sluts' from our female peers and other males. When was the last time you heard a bunch of girls 'congratulating' each other for being a ****? Men get away with doing this, if they wish to.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 35mm_)
    Why do keep focusing on what the other gender would do? If you're focusing on women, focus on them, don't keep role reversing because it sounds good. Some girls find men who are interested in the army attractive, that doesn't mean they fully understand what the army entails, it's history, and conflict.

    I think feminism in, in effect, a sympathy based exaggeration of past events. It may have been necessary in the past, but should the abolitionists for slavery still be active? No, because they've achieved what their goal was. So too have feminists. Why carry on? You're coming up with silly examples of sexism now, such as what the OP is proposing. If somebody finds you attractive don't complain, bloody hell.
    Back in the real world, slavery and sexism still exist.
    Both are less widespread and socially acceptable than before, which is a good thing, but we have definitely not seen the back off either issue yet.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BibblyBobbly)
    Read my earlier thing about Biology.

    To be brutally honest I think anybody who sleeps around with anyone is equally wrong, regardless of gender.

    TBH I just think you're trying to find something to moan about.
    Read Abhead's post #40.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abhead)
    Nope not really, its just possibly a bit belittling to say you like girls with strong political views without caring what those views actually are. Kind of like the "its really cute when you get angry" thing.
    I enjoy being around anyone with strong political views, as it shows me that they care about things outside of their own insignificant lives. Get over it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    I hate that term. :mad:
    There is no male equivalent, it exemplifies the double standards against women.
    What about man****?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jimdawg)
    Thats not the case at all. I probably prefer to be in the company of people with opposing views, male or female, as it presents me with an intellectual challenge. I think you need to question your methodology, as your drawing a huge amount from my statement with no justification
    If that is the case then fair enough OP, I probably shouldn't have jumped to conclusions.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abhead)
    Back in the real world, slavery and sexism still exist.
    Both are less widespread and socially acceptable than before, which is a good thing, but we have definitely not seen the back off either issue yet.
    Examples of slavery? In America we're talking about, that's where the abolitionists were located.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jimdawg)
    She's hardly the brightest spark, but she's governor of Alaska and a multi-millionaire, which are greater achievements than most people will accomplish.

    Its an element of attraction, get over it. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean you should ridicule/ deny its existence
    Hello? I was pointing out the stupidity of Sarah Palin. I never said anything about this 'element of attraction' being stupid. I agree with it, and I completely understand it. Please learn how to understand what you read, kthnxbai.

    If you know anything about Alaska and how she became a 'multi-millionaire' you'll realise it's not much of an achievement, but I won't go into that.
    Besides, she's having money troubles now.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I love guns and I have hairy legs.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by interrobang)
    What about man****?
    The central point is that there cannot be an equivalent term because society condones promiscuity in men and condemns it in women.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Failed123)
    I know. I posted about this before. I however, was focusing more on how a lot of guys get 'congratulated' amongst their peers for being so promiscuous. They are called 'studs', 'playboys' or 'players'. We however, are deemed as 'whores' and 'sluts' from our female peers and other males. When was the last time you heard a bunch of girls 'congratulating' each other for being a ****? Men get away with doing this, if they wish to.
    It's harder for men to get laid than women, which is why their friends 'congratulate' them. Why would you congratulate a woman for simply spreading her legs?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 35mm_)
    Examples of slavery? In America we're talking about, that's where the abolitionists were located.
    http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/Wo...1/EDOC9102.htm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/6459369.stm

    British/European examples, but the same happens accross the western world. There were also abolitionists here btw, not that it is really relevant because you were trying to claim slavery doesn't exist at all anymore.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phil2008)
    It's harder for men to get laid than women, which is why their friends 'congratulate' them. Why would you congratulate a woman for simply spreading her legs?
    Why is it harder for men to 'get laid' as you term it? You are basing this on the outdated and stereotypical assumption that women do not enjoy sex as much as men.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abhead)
    http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/Wo...1/EDOC9102.htm
    news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/6459369.stm
    Is that the best you could find?

    Firstly, it refers to domestic slavery, not political slavery. It was also written in 2001, it's not recent. And it's also in Europe, not the USA (which is what we were talking about: the abolitionist cause).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abhead)
    There is no biological reason why women shouldn't have a lot of sex.

    There are girls who are proud to be promiscuous but the majority of society judges them in a negative way.

    Being paid for sex =/= being sexually promiscuous

    "slut" doesn't just refer to prostitutes.
    Only a few days out of every 28 days is sex productive in a woman, so there is no reason for them to breed more often than that. However, a male can breed every day as his sperm regenerates very rapidly.

    I feel the stigma attached to women being sexually promiscuous comes from the world's oldest business, as women have been selling their bodies a lot longer than men have been (in the broad public eye anyway)

    You're just trying to find something to be upset about.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phil2008)
    It's harder for men to get laid than women, which is why their friends 'congratulate' them. Why would you congratulate a woman for simply spreading her legs?
    Another guy said the same thing last time. How difficult it is is irrelevant. Sleeping around is sleeping around regardless of your gender. Besides, why would you congratulate a man for shoving his penis in a vagina? It hardly takes any skill.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BibblyBobbly)
    It's not fair! Guys can be called cocks but girls aren't!! Blatant sexism to be honest.
    No, they're called ****s instead.

    the idea that man-whore is equivalent to "slut" is just patently a silly thing to say - for one, it's only been made into a male "insult" by tacking the world 'man' onto whore, yet another word to describe a promiscuous female. I bet if you looked up the origin of man-whore, it wouldn't be much older than 30 years, maximum. It's a colloquial, recent phrase, which isn't even remotely comparable to words like "slut" or "whore".

    there are plenty of examples of this sort of discrepancy in the english language - the word for an unmarried, and single woman is spinster. the same for men? bachelor.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Failed123)
    Another guy said the same thing last time. How difficult it is is irrelevant. Sleeping around is sleeping around regardless of your gender. Besides, why would you congratulate a man for shoving his penis in a vagina? It hardly takes any skill.
    Mate, you're missing the point. They want something to whinge about, they're militant feminists. It doesn't matter whether they're right or wrong, they see injustice against women everywhere.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OhNO!)
    No, they're called ****s instead.

    the idea that man-whore is equivalent to "slut" is just patently a silly thing to say - for one, it's only been made into a male "insult" by tacking the world 'man' onto whore, yet another word to describe a promiscuous female. I bet if you looked up the origin of man-whore, it wouldn't be much older than 30 years, maximum. It's a colloquial, recent phrase, which isn't even remotely comparable to words like "slut" or "whore".

    there are plenty of examples of this sort of discrepancy in the english language - the word for an unmarried, and single woman is spinster. the same for men? bachelor.
    Blokes get called ****s too you know. You're making a fuss over nothing. You are aware that my comment about blokes getting called cocks was taking the piss don't you?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 26, 2009
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.