Sally

Sexual Revolution

45 posts in this topic

YOU ARE SO RIGHT. I hate how promiscuous girls are called "sexually liberated." it's the exact opposite as far as I am concerned because in reality, they are just making their bodies mere objects to men. If all women held out until true love, or marriage, objectification rates would go WAY down. Sex and the City is a guilty pleasure of mine, but only because I enjoy laughing at all the characters (except Charlotte.) They always complain about how they're still single and no man takes them seriously, and I just think "maybe if you waited until at least the third date before putting out....?" If all a girl wants is too have lots of "fun," then fine. But I can't stand it when promiscuous girls complain about not being able to get into a committed relationship. Whether you are a guy or a girl, no one is going to take you seriously if you put out so early in the relationship.

The culture of casual dating/hookups is really just a game. Guys want to get sex ASAP while girls try to withhold sex for as long as possible. Once a girl gives it up, she essentially has lost and he will just toss her aside and move on to some other girl. I totally agree it's especially important for girls to wait till marriage. This weeds out all the douchebags will bail out but the right guy who wants her for her will take notice and wait with her.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thats the big problem right there. Your putting all the pressure on the women to wait till marriage or true love but the guys have no responsibilty and continue to seek action from girls without being penelazied. Its a pretty unfair standard, I know guys who sleep around alot and they get called man whores but it really doesnt have that big of a stigma to it. However if a girl gets branded as "easy" it will stick to her forever! In my experince most promiscuous people have low self esteems. Like their all happy when they have someone but the minute there single they think their ugly,and etc.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that relevant, but I just remember seeing recently on this TV dating program over here in the UK, "The Love Machine"...

It's a pretty shallow premise for a show, which is that you have one guy, then they have something like 8 girls that are revealed one at a time, then he has to decide based on looks alone whether he wants to go on holiday with them, or if he wants to ditch her and reveal the next girl. Which is pathetic in itself, but whatever... (They also do it the other way round, 1 girl choosing form 8 guys. You know, equal opportunities, and all...)

Anyway, so there's this one guy on the show, who, when they reveal a girl and ask him what he thinks, he says, "Nah, too much cleavage."

To which the male host replies, "Too much cleavage?", and the female host sort of jokingly asks him, "Are you a real man?" The audience were all laughing, thought it was hilarious...

I sort of thought to myself, "Well, doesn't that prove he's a real man, rather than a stupid sexist little boy?" I just thought it was pretty telling of British society...

xxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thats the big problem right there. Your putting all the pressure on the women to wait till marriage or true love but the guys have no responsibilty and continue to seek action from girls without being penelazied. Its a pretty unfair standard, I know guys who sleep around alot and they get called man whores but it really doesnt have that big of a stigma to it. However if a girl gets branded as "easy" it will stick to her forever! In my experince most promiscuous people have low self esteems. Like their all happy when they have someone but the minute there single they think their ugly,and etc.

Agreed. It's like society views men like that as being able to just "turn off" that type of behavior and settle down when they meet the right girl. But in my opinion it isn't that simple! You can't just change your character and values, etc. overnight! And I agree completely about the promiscuous crowd having low self esteems; that's been my experience as well.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thats the big problem right there. Your putting all the pressure on the women to wait till marriage or true love but the guys have no responsibilty and continue to seek action from girls without being penelazied. Its a pretty unfair standard, I know guys who sleep around alot and they get called man whores but it really doesnt have that big of a stigma to it. However if a girl gets branded as "easy" it will stick to her forever! In my experince most promiscuous people have low self esteems. Like their all happy when they have someone but the minute there single they think their ugly,and etc.

I think this is part of the reason why the divorce rate is so high. I think I'm making a bit of an extreme claim, but if guys (and/or girls) are used to hooking up with different people, how are they able to change their lifestyle/habits for marriage? It's difficult enough as a transition to learn to live together well, etc. that I think that only hurts committment.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thats the big problem right there. Your putting all the pressure on the women to wait till marriage or true love but the guys have no responsibilty and continue to seek action from girls without being penelazied. Its a pretty unfair standard, I know guys who sleep around alot and they get called man whores but it really doesnt have that big of a stigma to it. However if a girl gets branded as "easy" it will stick to her forever! In my experince most promiscuous people have low self esteems. Like their all happy when they have someone but the minute there single they think their ugly,and etc.

I'm not pressuring women to do anything. It's douchey guys that are pressuring women for sex. I'm just looking out for women's best interests. I think it'd be great if everyone, both guys and girls waited. But given the reality that many guys these days just want sex, it's especially important for girls to hold off on sex to weed out the jerks. Not because of stigma, but because of practical considerations. It would be like a guy being careful in dating so he doesn't end up with a gold digger who just wants his money. Is it fair in either case? No. But good and decent guys and girls have nothing to lose for being more selective. If anything, it's the bad apples that lose.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But given the reality that many guys these days just want sex, it's especially important for girls to hold off on sex to weed out the jerks.

You hit the nail on the head!!! Best way to weed out guys ever!!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what would you tell a woman whose husband doesn't want to use a condom? I have heard from several guys that one of the pluses in their eyes for marriage is that they no longer have to worry about condoms. I get the point that birth control is definitely a factor that has led to the "hook-up" culture, but when women wanted access to birth control when it first came out, a lot of it did deal with family planning. Birth control came out in the 1920's, way before the 60's and 70's sexual revolution. It was a way for women to gain control of their bodies and reproduction!

Condoms break and if your husband doesn't want to use one anyway, then guess who's pregnant now. I remember hearing stories about my great-grandmother trying to keep track of her menstrual cycle only to still give birth to 13 children, not even including the miscarriages. Not everyone wants to be the Duggars and birth control has helped a lot of women with that!!!

There may have been drawbacks both physically and socially due to birth control, but I don't think it should be seen as the devil either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I caught a commerical on tv today and it was regarding a class action lawsuit against several varieties of the pill, I only remember Yaz and Yasmin of the top of my head they were saying how these caused serious side effects and to contact the law firm if you were adversely affected. I remember only a few short years ago when Yaz and Yasmin were overpromoted everywhere like crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going back to vince's first reply, i have to ask -- doesn't anyone think that there are negative effects on men in the hookup culture? i don't think it empowers them, and i don't think it benefits them. when men immerse themselves in it, they become less able connect to people on a personal level and maintain good, healthy relationships. how can you when you're turning the most intimate physical expression possible between two humans into nothing but a meaningless, faceless, repetitive act? this hurts us all, men and women alike: it hurts our bodies(STDs), it hurts our hearts(relationships), and it hurts our soul, our art. i hope humanity moves past this soon -- i'd dream to see something again like the british romantic period in poetry, when even the little things in life were valued as sacred and meaningful. life was art, then...it actually meant something to us.

...the educated "us", anyway.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going back to vince's first reply, i have to ask -- doesn't anyone think that there are negative effects on men in the hookup culture? i don't think it empowers them, and i don't think it benefits them. when men immerse themselves in it, they become less able connect to people on a personal level and maintain good, healthy relationships. how can you when you're turning the most intimate physical expression possible between two humans into nothing but a meaningless, faceless, repetitive act? this hurts us all, men and women alike: it hurts our bodies(STDs), it hurts our hearts(relationships), and it hurts our soul, our art. i hope humanity moves past this soon -- i'd dream to see something again like the british romantic period in poetry, when even the little things in life were valued as sacred and meaningful. life was art, then...it actually meant something to us.

...the educated "us", anyway.

Agreed. I think it affects both sexes equally in their own hearts and minds regardless of how society portrays it. From my experience the guys I know or know of that get around alot have low self esteem and are in my opinion more likely to be depressed and/or unhappy with their lives.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Condoms break and if your husband doesn't want to use one anyway, then guess who's pregnant now. I remember hearing stories about my great-grandmother trying to keep track of her menstrual cycle only to still give birth to 13 children, not even including the miscarriages. Not everyone wants to be the Duggars and birth control has helped a lot of women with that!!!

There may have been drawbacks both physically and socially due to birth control, but I don't think it should be seen as the devil either.

I am definitely pro-birth control, as keeping track of your menstrual cycle (as you've stated) is hardly reliable. I don't see it as evil, or preventing life or whatever. But you definitely need to be cautious of side-effects for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether or not you agree with the quote in question, I think it's incredibly refreshing that there are definitely people and groups "rebelling" against casual sex/hookup culture, and realize that the only people that casual sex/hooking up "liberates" is men... as if men needed to be liberated any further.

Forgive me as I digress slightly. There was a book published several years ago that advocated a return to romance, chivalry, modesty etc. and it was a powerful book which is probably why it sparked a firestorm; the author was blasted by groups and people who held less traditional views of sex. This author even received death threats! At the same time, she received tear jerking letters of support from young women who were disenchanted with the hook up culture and who felt that there was something wrong with them because they didn't want casual sex.

Would you guys would be interested in seeing an article/book review on this book or not really? Be honest, there's plenty of other stuff to write about.

Are you talking about the book Female Chauvinist Pigs? That was a book highly critical of raunchy/hook-up/

Girls Gone Wild culture. It was making a calling towards sex supposing to be an intimate act etc. It's a great book. I'd highly recommend it.

But, the author got a lot of criticism from feminists who believed in hook-up culture, to chauvinistic men to etc. But, also got a lot of letters from women thanking her for writing the book and for pointing out what was wrong in culture that they couldn't quite articulate. So, yeah, great book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sophie-

"Well because of men's "rights" to have casual sex, women had to face pregnancy, social rejection, and slut-shaming." I must say, that had me laughing. Men have a right to have casual sex? Oh my, now that is late breaking news. I'm not sure where you've been, but both men and women have had the right to have casual sex since . . . the dawn of mankind, even before birth control. If Christian values were applied equally to men and women, men would also face social rejection, etc.

"I do think it is completely unfair to say women can't have casual sex while men can enjoy it as much as they want without being judged." How are women judged by having casual sex? Every act of sex does not result in pregnancy. So all women should be able to have casual sex with no consequences? It's interesting that this statement is found on an abstinence web site. I've only seen that sentiment expressed by militant feminists over the years.

"However, for the sake of female health, I don't think the birth control pill should be used?" I'd like to get 60 MPG in my car, but my birthday is in March.

"No one should be having casual sex without condoms anyways, even if the girl is on the pill." If two people are waiting, how do condoms enter the equation?

"Of course, if I had it my way, everyone would wait until committed relationships but that won't happen." I thought this site was about waiting until marriage, not "committed relationships."

My intention is not to be disrespectful Sopie. I'm just being totally honest - and sometimes that involves a little sarcasm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The sexual revolution, which rode into town on the backs of those pink plastic cases of birth-control pills, was, after all, not so much a matter of sleeping around as it was of having the ability to decide when you were going to have a child, and then deciding how many children you wanted to have."

Disagree. For the vast majority of women, I think the pill is a ticket for sleeping around. Preventing children from being born is a side effect, which is not the same as birth control. I view birth control as something that is agreed upon in a marriage, and I don't think many people buy pills for that purpose. I've never even supported the idea of birth control - whether it be pills, condoms, etc. That may sound pretty radical, but it's what I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sophie-

"Well because of men's "rights" to have casual sex, women had to face pregnancy, social rejection, and slut-shaming." I must say, that had me laughing. Men have a right to have casual sex? Oh my, now that is late breaking news. I'm not sure where you've been, but both men and women have had the right to have casual sex since . . . the dawn of mankind, even before birth control. If Christian values were applied equally to men and women, men would also face social rejection, etc.

In the vast majority of cultures, casual sex was once greatly looked down upon, especially for women. Yes, men could get away with it as long as they never knocked a girl up, but the truth is that (at least in my culture) casual sex has become the social norm and therefore feels like a "right." You're male, so you probably aren't aware of this but slut-shaming is an incredibly common attack against women.

"I do think it is completely unfair to say women can't have casual sex while men can enjoy it as much as they want without being judged." How are women judged by having casual sex? Every act of sex does not result in pregnancy. So all women should be able to have casual sex with no consequences? It's interesting that this statement is found on an abstinence web site. I've only seen that sentiment expressed by militant feminists over the years.

I don't quite understand what you said there. But what I meant is that women ARE heavily slut-shamed when it comes to casual sex. Men are called studs, not sluts. And generally a guy who has had multiple women is seen as cool, suave, and attractive. It's hard to explain this to a male. And I am never okay with casual sex, I just hate that females get treated differently when it comes to it.

"However, for the sake of female health, I don't think the birth control pill should be used?" I'd like to get 60 MPG in my car, but my birthday is in March.

I know nothing about cars.

"No one should be having casual sex without condoms anyways, even if the girl is on the pill." If two people are waiting, how do condoms enter the equation?

I was talking about casual sex, not waiting (this thread is on the Sexual Revolution.) Everyone knows condoms do a lot to help prevent catching diseases and such. And some marries couples use condoms do because one of them may have chlamydia, or herpes, etc.

"Of course, if I had it my way, everyone would wait until committed relationships but that won't happen." I thought this site was about waiting until marriage, not "committed relationships."

Unlike most people on this site, I am an atheist an therefore do not view casual sex as a sin. I do, however, strongly value it and feel like everyone should wait until committed relationships because that will help slow down abortion rates, the spread of diseases, the amount of broken hearts...

Also, again, this thread is on the Sexual Revolution, not WTM.

My intention is not to be disrespectful Sopie. I'm just being totally honest - and sometimes that involves a little sarcasm.

I wrote all these comments a while ago, so I don't really remember what was going on in my head when I did. It looks like I was thinking that the sexual revolution seemed to free the make sexuality (because girls held out until marriage before, or at least didn't sleep around,) and yet slut-shaming rates soard and these women who were doing what the men were doing were seen as sluts, whores, etc. Not many men can understand how detrimental slut-shaming can be (http://intentious.com/2012/03/18/the-nobility-in-slut-shaming/) I don't approve of casual sex, but it doesn't mean I am okay with slut-shaming women while guys just get "boys will be boys."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone knows condoms do a lot to help prevent catching diseases and such. And some marries couples use condoms do because one of them may have chlamydia, or herpes, etc.

Em, actually...

http://www.medinstitute.org/public/126.cfm

Condoms reduce your risk of getting HIV by 85% ("Hey, man, I'm going sky-diving tomorrow!" "Great! Hey, you can borrow my parachute! Don't worry, it opens 85% of the time.")

For diseases like gonorrhoea, syphilis and chlamydia, the risk reduction is "significantly lower" than 85%

For diseases like HPV and trichomoniasis (Wow, I've never even heard of that one!), "conclusive evidence is lacking" for condom effectiveness.

Sure, they probably help prevent catching diseases a little, but I don't think you can really call it "safe" sex...

xxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Em, actually...

http://www.medinstitute.org/public/126.cfm

Condoms reduce your risk of getting HIV by 85% ("Hey, man, I'm going sky-diving tomorrow!" "Great! Hey, you can borrow my parachute! Don't worry, it opens 85% of the time.")

For diseases like gonorrhoea, syphilis and chlamydia, the risk reduction is "significantly lower" than 85%

For diseases like HPV and trichomoniasis (Wow, I've never even heard of that one!), "conclusive evidence is lacking" for condom effectiveness.

Sure, they probably help prevent catching diseases a little, but I don't think you can really call it "safe" sex.

xxx

I never said they prevent completely, I just said they do a lot to help. 85% is a lot, compared to 0%. Either way, I don't use them so I'm no expert, obviously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jegsy - For some cultures, those diseases may not be diseases after all - but rather things they strongly value not getting. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jegsy - For some cultures, those diseases may not be diseases after all - but rather things they strongly value not getting. :)

Have you ever heard of the TV show called Girls? There was this one episode where Hannah, the main character, gets an STD. She has to get her cervix or something "scraped" out so she doesn't get cancer. I don't remember the details. Anyways, her friend Marnie tries to cheer her up by saying that "all adventurous" girls deal with this stuff. At the end, Hannah is no longer upset and writes "all adventurous girls do" on her Twitter. Now that HORRIFIED me.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now