Jan 092013
 

One of my most popular posts is ”It’s No Surprise That Young Men Are Getting Fed Up With Women Faster Than Any Other Group Of Men” about how men under 30 are getting fed up with women.  It continues to be linked to and generate hits for this blog even though it was written close to a year ago.  It also continues to get new comments, but recently a woman named Cynthia commented on that post in a bizarre attempt to redefine the term, “slut”:

You should also realize, that I would not call these girls sluts, I mean they only sleep with attractive guys, not any guy.

This is quite possibly the most bizarre way to get out of being called a slut that I have ever seen.  And Cynthia is a conservative, too, once again showing that conservatives are obsessed with making the world “safe” for sluts. Nothing Cynthia tries will work because the term, slut, is impervious to being redefined since men will use the word, “slut” as we wish.  Even if you don’t have sex with unattractive guys, you’re still a slut, women, and nothing will change that.

  13 Responses to “You Can’t Redefine The Term, “Slut””

  1. Perhaps Cynthia would prefer the term “groupie.”

  2. Cynthia also seems to be trying to help counter the feminist griefers that come here to comment on how our mannood is lacking. I don’t fault her for that. I think, in may ways, true conservatives are more prone to acceptance of red pill wisdom. After all, the argument can be made that game is merely a restoration of traditional masculinity. Roissy himself said that in a previous era, game would primarily be used for the benefit of wives.

    • Many conservatives are more accepting of reality at times, but they still hold forth the female imperative. Their seeming support of a return to traditional masculinity is not because they care about the well-being and happiness of men, it is so the man will return to provider roles for women. Therefore they are not really accepting of red-pill wisdom at all, as the red pill should remove any social or personal obligation from men to care for women.

  3. It’s a laughable comment.

    Of course sluts sleep with attractive men, dunderhead. It’s the attractive men who get to sleep with lots of women. Sluts aren’t any less selective about who they will spread for, they just will spread more often once that selective group is in range. Sluthood isn’t “those women aren’t selective” — they are just as selective as any other women are. Sluthood is about spreading the legs quickly for a man they find attractive — simple as that.

  4. LOL, so a woman can sleep with 200 men and still not be a slut, as long as she turns down all the unattractive men she doesn’t want anyway? That’s setting the “good girl” bar pretty low…

  5. PMAFT,

    There are a number of comments at Dalrock’s that you will like, starting with this one :

    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/a-criticism-too-kind/#comment-66697

    It is an epic thread.

    • That thread should be required reading for any man seriously considering marriage, to give him a good idea of what he’ll be up against if he does go through with it.

  6. so she’s holding out for men who are only willing to meet her price.

    no, I guess that isn’t a slut. there’s another word for that, but slut isn’t it. grats ladies, you are no longer known as sluts.

  7. O.T
    But shouldn’t you do an article on this?
    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/scientists-rewrite-rules-of-human-reproduction-7624708.html

    (Unless you already did, and I missed it).

  8. Great blog, btw, just found it recently

  9. Each word shall mean exactly what I want it to mean at any moment in time I want it to have that meaning. Or, as Deti would say, she’s hamsterbating.

  10. Saying that a woman isn’t slutty because she only sleeps with attractive guys, is like saying a 300-pound woman isn’t obese because she only eats gourmet food.

  11. My 3cents on the matter:

    The word ‘slut’ has lost its power. Therefore, it is useless to use it.

    Let me explain:

    1. There’s Power in Numbers

    In the minds of people, and especially of women, what is popular or common is viewed as correct. So when your definition of ‘slut’ includes about 98% of Western women, the result is that the word does not have a powerful shaming effect. ‘Slut’ is a shaming word. The whole purpose of shaming language is to single someone out for something. But when 98% of a whole gender of people are ‘sluts’, no individual women feel singled out for being a ‘slut’, because she is in the company of millions, perhaps even billions of other women. This is a fundamental weakness of all shaming words: their power is dependent on there being only a small number of fringe people that it applies to.
    The only reason the word used to hold power is because the majority of women were not ‘sluts’, or at least pretended not to be, before the “sexual revolution”. But now the majority of women, by your definition, are sluts – so the word has lots its power to single anyone out.
    And as feminism spreads to Eastern countries, more and more women will become ‘sluts’, and the word will become less and less powerful.
    It is much easier to shame a group that is in the minority, than it is to shame a group that is in the majority. Attempting to make shaming work on a majority group of women will fail. There are too many of them, and their numbers are growing, not decreasing.
    In a world where only 5% of women are ‘sluts’, it’s easy to make them outcasts and alienate them. But in a world where it’s 98% of women…it’s not possible. Even if you somehow managed to do that, you’d just have all of the men competing against each other for 2% of the female population. It cannot work.

    2. It’s an Empty Threat

    Social disapproval in the form of shaming language carries serious consequences, but only when the shaming language has power.

    A woman who was known to be a slut 100 years ago had little hope of finding a husband who would accept her. And that was the ammunition behind the shaming language: the threat of losing out on a good husband. A good husband meant provision and income. If a woman did not have a good husband, she’d have to marry a poor man, work a labor-intensive job, or become a prostitute for survival. So women had very good incentive to avoid the label of ‘slut’.

    Today, however, women aren’t entirely dependent on husbands for provision and income. Therefore, a good husband becomes more of a ‘want’ than a ‘need’. So the threat of not being able to get a good husband due to being a ‘slut’ is not as powerful; she may lose out on something she wants, but not something she needs.

    In addition to this, as we all know, most “blue-pill” men will still marry a woman regardless of whether she’s a virgin or not.

    Hence, in this society, the word ‘slut’ is an empty threat. There are no serious consequences of being one.

    Even with men marrying less and less, it doesn’t look like the word ‘slut’ is going to be able to regain its original power: because marriage to women would still be a ‘want’ and not a ‘need’ for survival as long as women can get jobs that don’t require heavy physical labor and aren’t dependent on husbands to support them.

    3. Dependent on need of Approval

    Whether shaming language holds any power or not depends on whether or not the person cares about other peoples’ opinions. Women may care about their social reputations more than men, but this seems to be steadily decreasing as they exhibit more and more behaviors in spite of men not approving of these behaviors. As the need for approval decreases, the power of shaming language decreases right along with it. Just look at the “Slutwalks” – women are marching out in public calling themselves ‘proud sluts’…let’s face it: the word ‘slut’ no longer has any power as a shaming word. It’s something women are now “proud” to call themselves.

    This goes hand in hand with point number 2: as husbands become less of a necessity, the approval of men becomes less important.

    The “Slutwalks” also fit in very well with point 1 (power in numbers). Women will march on the street in large groups declaring pride in their ‘slutiness’, but women would never do that individually if they were not surrounded by women who were also sluts. As I said, there’s just too many of them for women to feel any shame in it.

    4. It’s Useless

    …Which leads me to this conclusion: the word is now useless. Because of points 1, 2, and 3 combined, you can say the word ‘slut’ all day, but it wouldn’t have any effect. You are free to use the word ‘slut’ if you choose, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s become an empty threat.

    Sluts may not be good people, but there’s too many of them, they’re growing in number, and they’re becoming more and more careless about others. Trying to use shaming language against large group of people who don’t care about anyone’s thoughts but their own is like talking to a wall.

    Women are “proud” to be sluts these days…there are so many of them that they’ve been able to take something that used to be an insult and basically not give a shit about it anymore. The word is an empty threat; it has no power behind it anymore (because of points 1-3).

    The only way the word’s power would be reinstated is if the majority of the male population went MGTOW, Western society collapsed completely, and we had to start all over again with women being dependent on men (which would eliminate points 2 and 3).
    And with a large part of the mens rights movement being anti-traditionalist, I don’t think the dependent housewife role would fly anymore after that.

    Any society in which women can live independently will have a large portion of women who are “sluts”, because the word’s power is dependent on a threat that doesn’t exist in that type of society (see point 2). There is a reason why “sexual liberation” happened around the same time as women got into the workplace.

    So, in any non-traditionalist society, use of the word slut is futile because its shaming power is severely decreased.

    In addition, I have a fifth point to make clear…

    5. Many women are Solipsistic

    If there is an objective definition of the word ‘slut’, it doesn’t matter to women, due to the solipsistic mindset.

    And whatever the objective definition is, the word doesn’t have any power anyway and is not likely to regain it, due to points 1-4.

    I repeat:

    Trying to use shaming language against large group of people who don’t care about anyone’s thoughts but their own is like talking to a wall.

Leave a Comment. (Remember the comment policy is in force.)

%d bloggers like this: