TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

52

CMVCMV: Society rewards men for being players because it's impressive. There is no slut shaming "double standard" (self.PurplePillDebate)

submitted by Askerman97_returns

Society rewards men for sleeping around because the man usually has to be either good looking, confident, rich or famous. Or all of these combined. This is why a 'player' is often exceptional in some regard.

Whereas a girl just needs a vagina, and lots of average looking/thirsty guys will approach her. There's nothing impressive about having a vagina and being easy.

There is no sexist "double standard".


[–]DesignerDebates3 small children in a trench coat[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children) | Copy Link

OP you have one more hour to start engaging in this thread or the post will have to be removed.

[–]TheReformist945 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

To be fair players aren't impressive. My mate is a chad and it's not impressive at all.

He won the genetic loterry, his chat is lame and what betas and upper betas come up with is alot more impressive in their bold, brave but ultimately futile attempts at attracting women.

He admitted what he said was lame compared to the things I come up with when chatting to women

[–]TotalBasturd1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's what r/Chadfish wanted to prove. Once you look good you can be boring, an asshole, a pervert, a giant idiot... and it will NOT matter because all women care about is that you look fuckable

[–]shoup88Report me bitch17 points18 points  (63 children) | Copy Link

I can understand the logic behind praising a man for getting laid because it might be a more difficult task for him. But why would you shame a woman for doing something just because it’s not hard?

People do things that are easy every day. We don’t shame people who are naturally funny for making people laugh. If someone is naturally good at sales, we don’t shame them for pursuing a sales career. And so on and so on.

Clearly there is something about the act of sex itself that people think is different for women than it is for men.

[–]concacanca7 points8 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. I dont think there is a reason to shame a woman for sleeping around. She's taking advantage of natural gifts and I'm certain that shaming comes from a place of envy when its unsolicited.

The bit where it gets murky is that, apparently, not wanting to be with a high n woman is considered shaming and that I think is absolute codswallop.

Lol downvotes? Really?

[–]The-Wizard-of-Oz-0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

No, but sleeping around makes them less attractive to many males. On the other hand you can think this of a form of manifestation of jealousy from other women due the obvious advantages of a wider mate choice,

[–]shoup88Report me bitch0 points1 point  (21 children) | Copy Link

Everybody has preferences but IRL nobody really wants to hear about it. Unless it’s some neutral or morally “good” trait like “must love dogs!”, talking about your preferences is distasteful.

Like I only really like tall guys, but I get why short guys don’t want to hear me talk about it. I’ll just quietly be attracted to tall men instead.

Edit: I didn’t downvote anyone. I’m at 3 upvotes right now, indicating other people are following our exchange.

[–]concacanca4 points5 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

I agree but you are comparing outward and obvious traits with something, at least initially, hidden. I mean look at Reddit, a lot of the shaming that happens on here is for guys who find out their gf has an extensive sexual history after they've been together for a while.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I still think if you loudly go around talking about your preferences unprompted, people are going to dislike it.

I don’t think reddit is a great example, because a lot of the time reddit users are not coldly stating a personal preference - they are shaming strangers for their sex lives. Especially guys who have been burned in the past. They’re angry.

The slut shaming seems to be loudest from the incels. I don’t think it’s a preference for them, it’s bitterness and disgust.

[–]concacanca0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

I still think if you loudly go around talking about your preferences unprompted, people are going to dislike it.

Well yes thats what I said.

I don’t think reddit is a great example, because a lot of the time reddit users are not coldly stating a personal preference - they are shaming strangers for their sex lives. Especially guys who have been burned in the past. They’re angry.

Eh? I'm talking about guys posting that they are uncomfortable about their gfs past and getting attacked for it.

Agree on the incels, the whole thing is transparent bitterness.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Hmm I don’t really go on male dominant subs where’d you see those kind of complaints I guess.

Unfortunately like in most things, the assholes are the loudest.

[–]concacanca0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Male dominated lol. Ok there was a thread on AskMen maybe 2 years ago that got picked up and run with by a bunch of online news sites where the majority of users were saying that they had a problem with high n counts but for the most part it doesnt come up in the more male dominated subs - in spite of their fixation on women and relationships.

No I'm taking sex, relationships, relationship_advice etc. The 'sex positive' subs if you will. Its hardly a rare occurrence either. I've seen that sort of shaming happen on PPD enough.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

The relationships sub is a cesspool - why would any man post there about his secretly slutty girlfriend and expect sympathy? I assumed you meant male dominated subs because that’s the only place that makes sense to me to expect sympathy and understanding in that situation.

Asking Relationships to listen to you complain about sluts is like asking a vegan sub what to put on your hamburger.

[–]concacanca0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

If you think that people actually post there to rant about their slutty gf and not to ask for advice on how to work through it then idk what to tell you - you've made up your mind about it.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Like I only really like tall guys, but I get why short guys don’t want to hear me talk about it.

Short guys don't want to hear it only because almost every woman tells that. I mean, in the internet, at least.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I assume part of it is because it just plain old hurts their feelings, no? Like if someone told me brunettes were ugly.

That would bum me out.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I am ok with women saying they prefer blonde guys. I am a brunette. In fact, most women prefer brunettes, so I don't really find it hurtful that some women have different preferences.

"Ugly" is a loaded word, it's different.

Now, the vast majority of women prefers tall men. It's like, a girl with almost no tits would be hurted when a guy tells what she have heard a million of times: that men like bigger tits.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I’m sure men are using “loaded words” when they talk about their dislike for sluts.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Among men - yes. Why not? It's when you can use loaded words - when they don't hear you.

[–]ChadThundagaCockBorderline Personality Wrangler0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

You only like tall guys as in just taller than you or do they have to be giraffes?

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I’m generally attracted to guys around 6ft but there have been notable exceptions who are around 5’7.

I’m just over 5’4.

[–]ChadThundagaCockBorderline Personality Wrangler0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Would having a big dick make up for not being 6 foot?

I know a girl 5'10 with a 5'7 guy and asked her if height matters and she said nope as long as he has a big dick (or at least knows how to use an average one)

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

No, to me they have nothing to do with each other. Big dick doesn’t even cross my mind as a thing I want my partner to have. I would never think of it.

Beard, charm, nice fitting clothes, open attitude to psychedelics: these would all top my list before big dick.

[–]ChadThundagaCockBorderline Personality Wrangler0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

What's your stance on goatees?

[–]shoup88Report me bitch0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Eh, it can look good. I’m pretty flexible with facial hair lol.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Lol downvotes? Really?

What else would you expect from incels?

[–]concacanca0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Idk, bit of whining, bit of 'its over!', bit of counterarguments consisting of deeply flawed understanding of RP?

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, that too.

[–]happycheese86No Pill1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck Keanu Reeves. Fucker being a successful actor and just flaunting it infront of us non-actors. What a camera-slut. There's nothing impressive about your puppy-dog eyes, Keanu!

I should be praised for my butter commerical that I was slightly involved in, because unlike KEANU it was an actual accomplishment for ME.

/s

[–]BiggestOfBosses3 points4 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Because the things you enumerated have a trainable component, they're not naturally ingrained in a guy. An attractive woman is attractive because of biological factors, not taking into account going to the gym and maintaining a proportionate body. A fit girl is even more attractive than the same unfit, skinnyfat girl, but the skinnyfat version is still attractive. I haven't seen too many fit women that I wouldn't fuck if they were unfit, close to nil I'd say. Maybe I have low standards but if I don't find you attractive right off the bat, going to the gym won't help that. Now, how many women would meet their current muscular boyfriends in their earlier years when the BF only started going to the gym and still be attracted to him? Not many I'd say.

Of course, most guys wouldn't find a 400 lbs hambeast attractive. But even then you might find someone who likes the big gal. The opposite is way less common.

Being funny or good at sales doesn't "just happen". You have to expose yourself to factors to make yourself good at comedy or sales, like being very social, talking to a lot of people, in the case of sales, or being around other funny people, watching stand-up or whatever.

A guy is undesirable and has to work to become desirable (desirable as in people want to have sex with you). A girl is already desirable and has to filter through the undesirables, and having a shitty filter is grounds for dismissal. This is general and how I view it. NOT ALL NOT ALL NOT ALL, of course there are exceptions but this is general, once more.

Personally, I don't view you as a lesser person overall if you've had sex with a lot of different guys. As a potential long term partner though I wouldn't want anything to do with you. You'd be a fuck buddy at the most. And again, this is a general rule of thumb and I apply it discriminately. Maybe someday I'll meet a slut that's been with 300 guys and I'd be smitten and want to marry her.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch8 points9 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

That doesn’t address my point at all - you’re just reiterating the part I already said I understand.

Why would you shame somebody for doing something that comes easily to them? Why is having casual sex a bad thing for women, rather than a neutral thing?

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

>Why is having casual sex a bad thing for women, rather than a neutral thing?

It's bad for everyone (but it's worse for women), you know, with all them STDs, unwanted pregnancies, higher risk of being assaulted, etc.

Personally, I believe casual sex cheapens relationships in general for the person engaging in that kind of behavior. That may sound esoteric but there you go, that's my stance.

Now, I wouldn't shame them, I'd just be like, "What a fucking retard" and be on my merry way. I'd never take time out of my day to correct someone's egregious behavior unless they were hurting someone else. You do you, dollface, fuck as many guys as you want.

> Clearly there is something about the act of sex itself that people think is different for women than it is for men.

Well, it is. I thought it was a generally accepted take. Sex is way riskier for women than for men for the simple fact that women can get pregnant.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

If casual sex is an objectively bad thing, why praise men for getting a lot of it?

You’re basically saying casual sex is good for men and bad for women. That’s a double standard, no?

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I think you might have reading comprehension issues. The first words I replied with were, " It's bad for everyone."

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

And prior to that you indicated that men should be praised for doing it.

You’re inconsistent.

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Where?

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hm, you don't belong to the crowd of men that appraises studs and shames sluts. While the OP does.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

It's bad for everyone (but it's worse for women), you know, with all them STDs, unwanted pregnancies, higher risk of being assaulted, etc.

Then you should appraise celibacy and shame anyone who has sex without intention to have kids.

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

You're using appraise wrong but whatever. No strings attached sex will always be a part of the human experience, of course, what I'm saying is people could find safer ways to engage in it, namely finding a fuck buddy, making that relationship exclusive and fooking. The alternative, being the town bike/cumrag, is dangerous in my view, with the risks outweighing the momentary satisfaction of your cravings.

I do appreciate celibacy and the idea of being content with yourself but that's not what I'm talking about. And I'm not shaming anyone, I just silently judge and think they're dumb and icky.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

making that relationship exclusive

This is the part some people don't want. Some people want variety. Not all humans are monogamous.

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

And that's risky behavior, therefore it is shamed. What are you getting at? I was merely offering an alternative.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

When men participate in that behavior it does not get shamed.

[–]jackandjill22Red Pill misanthropic, contrarian1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Mental backflips.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT1 point2 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

We make fun of rich people that are only rich because they were born into wealth and then have a chip on their shoulder about it.

Thats what most sluts are, they arent quietly being sluts, theyre being provocative about it too.

On top of that, as others have pointed out before, I think it has a lot to do with a "primal ick factor". The same way many people Instinctually are repulsed by shit, blood, snakes, spiders etc.

Guys who were repulsed by sluts were more likely to pass on their genetics because theyd go for a non-slut instead. The problem with sluts is that a guy wont know if another dude has already got her pregnant (unless she is already showing) and so he might end up raising another man's kid.

Slut shaming also comes from women as well. Women might say they dont care about other women being sluts, but women being sluts as a group goes against the female imperative, the more guys can play the field, the less likely they are to settle down and especially not on women's timelines. "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free". It lowers the value of pussy. Diamonds wouldnt be so expensive if millions of pounds of them flooded the market. Not to mention it also adds more temptation for men to cheat.

At the end of the day, being repulsed by sluts is no different than women being repulsed by virgins, short men, disabilities etc. Attraction is a visceral reaction not based on logic, its subconscious and unconscious desires you dont have any control over. If guys are repulsed by sluts, theyre repulsed by sluts. Its not necessary to publically ridicule sluts, but its not necessary to publically ridicule short men either and women love doing thay.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Thank you, you are proving my point. People see women having casual sex differently than they see men having casual sex. It stems from disgust, not a cold measured reaction based on how hard men work for it.

There is a double standard at play.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I think working hard for it is a factor as well. Thats why I added the "rich person who didnt earn it but has a chip on their shoulder" analogy

Even if it is a double standard, does it matter? The SMP is inherently a double standard, men and women are held to different standards. Male and female sex is valued differently because it has different value. When women are ready to go to war for virgin cock then you'll have a point. Most women dont like virgin men, most guys dont like massive sluts. There is no way to even out double standards without extreme authoritarian measures.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

OP is explicitly saying there is no double standard. I am taking apart his argument. I don’t have a point beyond “OP is wrong”.

Double standards are fine and unavoidable and universal. You’re not disagreeing with me.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

Is it a double standard when people have different obstacles? Like, is it a double standard for a special ed kid getting praise for running as fast as me while I would get made fun of if he beat me?

Doublt standard usually means the input was the same but the outcome was different. But in this case the input as well as the output are different

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You already agreed that there is a visceral, primal component to judging women who engage in casual sex.

Honestly it seems like you’re disagreeing just to disagree.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe that that is a factor but not the only factor

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Doublt standard usually means the input was the same but the outcome was different.

Wrong. The input was different, but irrelevantly different to the issue.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

How so

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

The same input means the same person/group of people.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

How is it irrelevent is what im asking. The input would be different then because men and women are different groups

Edit: The input is the effort

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

We make fun of rich people that are only rich because they were born into wealth and then have a chip on their shoulder about it.

We make fun of them, because the money they have could be ours. N counts women have can't be men's unless every man secretly is gay.

N counts are not even limited like money. When one's N count increases, no one's decreases.

If anything, according to your analogy incels should make fun of Chads having casual sex with girls easily. Only that follows.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

The equivalent to someone havimg sex with a bunch of people they are attracted to is someone having sex with a bunch of people theyre attracted to.

Incels do hate chads, they dont like that they have unearned privelege which is the same reason people are mad at the rich guy.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

The equivalent to someone havimg sex with a bunch of people they are attracted to is someone having sex with a bunch of people theyre attracted to.

So? Chads have it easy and do not face shame.

[–]CamoWoobie10000Women are SHIT0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

They do tho, there's a "fuckboy" "player" "manwhore"

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

A fuckboy is the one who tricks girls into sex with him. Chads don't have to do it.

"Manwhore" is rarely used.

[–]brodudedoggman 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

I can understand the logic behind praising a man for getting laid because it might be a more difficult task for him. But why would you shame a woman for doing something just because it’s not hard?

It’s not that it’s easy. It’s that men find it disgusting. For good reason too. Women that sleep around are more likely to have STD, have mental health issues and are generally untrustworthy. Sad, but true.

[–]shoup88Report me bitch1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why are you arguing with me and not OP? This is a CMV post. You can make a top level response as it appears you also disagree with OP.

[–]ArcheryDude10112 points13 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

While it may be shameful for a woman to admit that she's slept around, it's not fair to assume that men are not shamed in some sort of way as well. It is shameful for a man to admit he has never slept around. Personally, as a guy, I don't care about the fact that I'm virgin, but I am not going to advertise it needlessly.

[–]TueMoiJaimeCa0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

It is shameful for a man to admit he has never slept around.

Can't agree more.

I don't care about the fact that I'm virgin,

There is a lot of men who dont want to talk about their sexuality or even mention it because they are virgin even with their closest friends. I personally experimented it a few times and i can assure you that it is very shameful.

[–]ArcheryDude1011 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Thank you for the backup bro. Lowkey thought I was going to get an angry feminist response, but its nice to have someone respond in support for a change.

[–]TueMoiJaimeCa0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

My pleasure my dear friend.

[–]xayawarriorprincessradfem7 points8 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I halfway agree with you.

It's certainly more impressive for a man to be sleep with a high number of people than it is for a woman - but that does not mean a woman should be shamed for sleeping with a lot of people. It's neutral for women, an achievement for men.

[–]wtffellificationWe all love women5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

its neutral for women just as much as virginity is neutral for men

[–]BiggestOfBosses2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

> It's neutral for women

If only. I mean either they're both neutral or one is an achievement and the other is "shameful", whatever that means. You can't have both. Personally, I think they're both blown way out of proportion. Both the praising men side and the shaming women side.

[–]nemma8831/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You can't have both.

...Why ?

This seems like a arbitrary limitation. Things can be positive for some without others having to be in the negative. It doesn't seem like something that has to zero out.

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

It's just how I see it.

Plus, if you can't keep a partner then I see that as being negative. Yeah, yeah, you're gonna say, "Well, maybe she doesn't want one." Then she's just using sex to get validation, which you can view as either right or wrong. At least have a decent exclusive relationship with a fuck buddy, less chance of getting diseased that way. That's my stance on it.

[–]nemma8831/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Plus, if you can't keep a partner then I see that as being negative. Yeah, yeah, you're gonna say, "Well, maybe she doesn't want one." Then she's just using sex to get validation, which you can view as either right or wrong. At least have a decent exclusive relationship with a fuck buddy, less chance of getting diseased that way. That's my stance on it.

I mean, I agree with that part but it's not something that could only be said for women specifically.

I don't disagree with the premise overall someone doing something to which they start of at a disadvantage is more of an achievement than someone who has a easier time at it, but having a easier time equating to negative is very specifically ring fenced to sex. Like women in Technology. They start out at a disadvantage. The are celebrated more as it's more of an achievement. The idea men in tech should be shamed because they are playing a easier mode is a bit weird. We don't do that, but our premise or logical leaps are supposedly the same.

Likewise, RP also believes at a point in time in age, average man's SMV is higher than average woman's SMV. Surly then at this point, a post wall woman should be more celebrated more than a man for having sex because it's harder for her to do so.

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean, I agree with that part but it's not something that could only be said for women specifically

Yeah, goes both ways but in general women desire relationships more than men.

Surly then at this point, a post wall woman should be more celebrated more than a man for having sex because it's harder for her to do so.

Harder compared to her younger self, still easier than a man in general. It does get harder to get laid as an old woman at a certain age, like late 40s, 50s, then yeah, it's commendable if she gets regular sex.

Like women in Technology. They start out at a disadvantage. The are celebrated more as it's more of an achievement. The idea men in tech should be shamed because they are playing a easier mode is a bit weird. We don't do that, but our premise or logical leaps are supposedly the same.

Lol, okay.

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Society rewards men for sleeping around because the man usually has to be either good looking, confident, rich or famous. Or all of these combined. This is why a 'player' is often exceptional in some regard.

You can have a high N count if you're into drugs, alcohol, swinging and not be good looking or rich or famous.

[–]nemma8831/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Society rewards men for sleeping around

How? What does society provide to men for sleeping around which is separate entity to what is provided for the reasons WHY he is able to sleep around.

Maybe other than recognition from other men in niche internet forums.

[–]wtffellificationWe all love women0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

what does “society” reward men with for sleeping around? more sleeping around

[–]nemma8831/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

what does “society” reward men with for sleeping around? more sleeping around

Seems a bit redundant. If they already have the capacity to sleep around it's not really being rewarded by anyone to continue doing it, just business as usual.

[–]wtffellificationWe all love women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

lets not pretend some (many) women dont flock to these ‘fuckbois’ exactly because they’re fuckbois.. especially in high schools, but that doesn’t make it irrelevant

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"Society" shames men for sleeping around now as being fuckbois, failing to commit, manchildren, not "manning up", and all kinds of other nonsense, while simultaneously (somehow) applauding and lionizing women for sleeping around (despite: who are most of them sleeping around with? Men lol).

Individuals, sure, many of those do the thing

[–]_Tumbleweed-Gym Thot4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

You really don't have to be anything impressive to be a player. You just have to be prepared to fuck fat and ugly hoes, and maybe hot sluts if you're lucky, off Tinder.

I know loads of fat, ugly, broke loser guys who do great on Tinder. Just lower your standards.

[–]BiggestOfBosses4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

What a load of rubbish. Even those "fat and ugly hoes" have dick served to them on a silver platter, no effort required, so as a dude banging all those "fat and ugly hoes" you still have to be more skilled than the average schmuck.

[–]_Tumbleweed-Gym Thot2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You don't have to be skilled to get a mentally ill ugly hoe to sleep with you. Just send them a dm offering to finger bang them.

[–]wtffellificationWe all love women1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

no you have to be skilled. the skill is called “immunity to disgust and dignity”

[–]BiggestOfBosses0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Tone down the idiotic nonsense spewing lmao.

[–]concacanca1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

True to an extent. One of my friends has a pretty high n count and all of his 'conquests' are women the rest of us wouldnt have touched on our worst day.

[–]happycheese86No Pill0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Men bitch about women being either too picky or not picky enough, but deep down they are the pickiest. You can have fun or be a judgemental prick, not both. Goes for all genders.

[–]concacanca1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean I think that everyone should be picky but I'm happy for people who aren't. Go have your fun.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]allweknowisD8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I will never understand why men that want to sleep with women also want to talk shit about women that sleep with men

[–]PristineBiscuit3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Usually Because those women wouldn't sleep with them.

[–]happycheese86No Pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It should be on our money.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a CMV. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to have your view challenged may be inferred from one or several of the following:

  • Asking few or no genuine questions;

  • Seeming more interested in arguing or convincing others than understanding opposing views;

  • Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

  • Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

  • Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

  • Explicit statements of an intent to change the other posters’ minds; or

  • Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to CMV OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]SweetLikeTupeloHoney0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Society actually does not reward men for being players. Maybe in movies or the fantasy realm but no where else. My husband is in a 90% male profession. The men who are in charge represent the highest moral fabric - good ethics, strong families, well behaved children. No one is a senior position is a player. The men who rotate through women are often discussed by the group as unstable and immature. They may get an occasionally pat on the back for she's hot but it is never a pat an of admiration or respect. In fact, most men who do not have relationships are encouraged to attend functions/awards ceremonies by themselves instead of with a random girlfriend.

[–]wingbarkplacid not flaccid when im kissin’ on a bitch0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s praised in men because getting women to sleep with them tends to mean the man is high value. Having lots of men willing to invest time and resources and commitment into a woman BEFORE sec signals her value. Women sexual strategy is to be selective while men’s is basically buckshot.

It’s not because of how impressive it is but because the metric for what is a highly valuable person is different for men and women

[–]happycheese86No Pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Run of the mill "WOMEN are the SEXIST ones by being so EASY by just having a VAGINA" aka I'm jealous and more women should want me.

[–]Barneysparky0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Society is awarding women who spend upwards of 18 hours a day on their apperance. One day there will be dolls. Untill then there will be Instagram models who spend their entire lifetime looking good for your consumption. It's silly work, but so are other jobs and they are your celebrities.

Spending 18 hours a day learning how to work a puck or a ball seems just a frivilious.

[–]poppy_bluBeware the freight train4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“Society” doesn’t reward these women, thirsty men do.

“Society”’ isn’t buying that emo chick’s bath water, men are.

Much like people who complain that “society” rewards athletes and celebrities who then buy overpriced tickets to go to games or watch their movies. You can’t complain about the problem while being the problem.

If men don’t like that women get attention and money for just being attractive, they can stop giving those women both of those things at any time.

[–]persceptivepanda261 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Found the guy who "could've been in the NFL", fucked his knee, and looks upon it begrudgingly

[–]Barneysparky0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Spend 6 hours a day on hockey and you can be that good as well. Same with makeup and hair.

I don't begrudge hockey players I'm just a Canadian. Celebrity for being good at something is just what it is.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter