Why is Sluttyness More Hated?

Originally Posted by mnemonicfx

If you have more women who are promiscuous, you will have more men who are promiscuous, the traditional men and women would feel uncomfortable.

This is true. But I don't think it fundamentally accounts for the social views against sluts.
I don't see it as an "I feel very threatened by him/her, so I'm going to view them as evil."
Instead, it seems more accurate that people simply have been socially conditioned to view it as inappropriate behavior (while men are simply treated to a different standard than women by most people).
I think it has less to do with evolutionary psychology, but more to do with social psychology (how our social interaction with others influences our beliefs and opinions).

Originally Posted by Azrael

Name me one motivating influence that is based upon actual logic.

The need for certanty, perhaps. But I digress.

Originally Posted by Ti Dominant

This is true. But I don't think it fundamentally accounts for the social views against sluts.
I don't see it as an "I feel very threatened by him/her, so I'm going to view them as evil."
Instead, it seems more accurate that people simply have been socially conditioned to view it as inappropriate behavior (while men are simply treated to a different standard than women by most people).
I think it has less to do with evolutionary psychology, but more to do with social psychology (how our social interaction with others influences our believes and opinions).

Where is that social conditioning came from?

A threatening condition and jealousy, will cause someone to view those who are causing this as something that needs to be controlled, ordered, or fight against. You can correlate this to how worker class feel threatened by the bourgeois class.

Master - Slave morality will of course play a part in how people perceived gender roles, and how they respect each according to their acts. But, basically that's just it.

There are sluts who are submissive, and sluts who are dominant. People also perceived them differently.

Originally Posted by marked174

This was very insightful, I never thought of it this way.

Having been around females for some time now... attitudes towards sleeping around are diverse amongst women. But the negative attitudes seem to concern values. Women who don't sleep around, view those who are sexually active, as having "no values" or "no self worth". Prostitutes or the sexually active, are typically seen as people who "sell their soul" by using their body just to get validation from a man. This automatically makes them an inferior creature, because as Ti has suggested, these women are viewed as being in league with "animals" who only wish to satisfy their own egos and urges, rather than to have strongly held values that prevent them in engaging in such an act.

Part of it might still be the stigma of having multiple sex partners, and the negative connotations upon which are laid on these people (dumb, sellouts, whores, tools, attention seekers). It's the fundamental attribution error at work perhaps

In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error (also known as correspondence bias or attribution effect) describes the tendency to over-value dispositional or personality-based explanations for the observed behaviors of others while under-valuing situational explanations for those behaviors.

I'm sure social attitudes towards women who sleep around are different in regards to men, because historically, women have not been equal with men in regards to status. There are many women (and men) out there who would see "sluttiness" as going back to the dark ages where women had to defer to men. The natural tendency then would be to attach many negative connotations to women who are 'easy' in modern society.

Originally Posted by marked174

The need for certanty, perhaps. But I digress.

How does that stem from logic?

Originally Posted by Azrael

People who do not desire sexual relationships often project that kind of superiority indiscriminately.
Regardless, the motive may switch there - I would bet that these specific people are more prone to disrespecting promiscuous men and women equally.

But to think that society in general organizes their prejudices based upon "prudence" is, to me, a vast overestimation of humanity.

Are you serious? There's a plethora of "Don't do that" rules in society that are passed down from generation to generation. These are nothing more than organized and general prejudices based on what people think is appropriate or inappropriate, on what is viewed as impropriety, and what is viewed as prudent and civilized, and therefore, socially acceptable. Just as we tell ourselves not to overindulge and feel upset with ourselves when we gain weight, society tells us not to wear inappropriate clothing and we feel upset with ourselves for looking out of place. It's no different. It's the superego, where social standards are imposed on people fundamentally.

Also, even if people who do not desire sexual relationships tend to be indiscriminate, it still doesn't mean that women hate women for being sluts because they are threatened, while men hate men for being sluts while they are threatened. On the contrary, it seems that most people in general tend to view women as sluts, while men are largely viewed in a different light. So again, the fact that some people are indiscriminate, which means that they still make judgments about others entirely on a basis not having to do with evolutionary psychology and relationship interests and notions of threats, seems to work better with my view than that view. If evolutionary psychology truly did explain this situation best, people who do not have interests in relationships would not have a reason - logically - to view sluts as immoral. And thus, the fact that they judge indiscriminately just becomes a very weak reason that doesn't really help your case out much at all. It's a) irrelevant to your point and b) actually works more in favor of the view I'm expounding.

Originally Posted by Azrael

Name me one motivating influence that is based upon actual logic.

Exactly. Our motivating influences aren't based on logic, and hence, aren't rational.
We have no logical reason to have sex, yet we have sex anyway.
It's basic instinct. It makes no sense. It just is.

Therefore, Entrepreneur cannot justify his statements on that basis.

Originally Posted by Nova

Having been around females for some time now... attitudes towards sleeping around are diverse amongst women. But the negative attitudes seem to concern values. Women who don't sleep around, view those who are sexually active, as having "no values" or "no self worth". Prostitutes or the sexually active, are typically seen as people who "sell their soul" by using their body just to get validation from a man. This automatically makes them an inferior creature, because as Ti has suggested, these women are viewed as being in league with "animals" who only wish to satisfy their own egos and urges, rather than to have strongly held values that prevent them in engaging in such an act.

Part of it might still be the stigma of having multiple sex partners, and the negative connotations upon which are laid on these people (dumb, sellouts, whores, tools, attention seekers). It's the fundamental attribution error at work perhaps

I'm sure social attitudes towards women who sleep around are different in regards to men, because historically, women have not been equal with men in regards to status. There are many women (and men) out there who would see "sluttiness" as going back to the dark ages where women had to defer to men.

What is it these "good girls" value? Is the state of their vagina the foundation of their self worth? (How tragic if so) Do these women see themselves so lowly that they judge themselves and others by who they sleep with? Is this the way they should be thinking? I would think that a woman should value herself and others by the amount of good that put into the world and the inspiration of others to do the same.

Originally Posted by Nova

I'm sure social attitudes towards women who sleep around are different in regards to men, because historically, women have not been equal with men in regards to status. There are many women (and men) out there who would see "sluttiness" as going back to the dark ages where women had to defer to men. The natural tendency then would be to attach many negative connotations to women who are 'easy' in modern society.

I do not see how many partners as a way to determine how "easy" or "hard" that woman is.
It depends on whether she is exercising her will or whether she is submitting to the will of others.

A prostitute will be perceived as sluttier than those who had multiple partners, just because they act based on their sexual independence.

Originally Posted by marked174

This was very insightful, I never thought of it this way. Still though, it implies that these women see sex as a service. It's like a business deal, and tat kinda makes them whores. I'm having a hard time with the "all women are whores" deal. I'm pretty sure that many woman don't see it that way.

*shrug*
truth hurts.