Discussion Main / SlutShaming

If we want to be comprehensive about people being shamed for expressing their sexuality period... then I would argue that "slut shaming" is just as prevalent for men.

Consider how people view female sex toys versus male. Male sex toys are considered more depraved. Male homosexuality versus female. Male homosexuality is considered more depraved. Men who want to have oral, anal or anything other then missionary penis-in-vagina sex. Men who are into kink are considered more depraved and, in fact, more likely to be really desiring to subjugate and humiliate their partners through these disgusting acts. Male submissives in BDSM, also considered creepier and depraved then female submissives. Male dominants in BDSM, considered more depraved and violent then female dominants.

In fact the only domain in which male sexuality is seen as less shameful then female seems to be in quantity of heterosexual sexual partners and even then that's balanced out by shame towards men who chose _not_ to engage in sexuality either due to personal beliefs or asexuality.

Just thought of another area. Clothing choices.

Women are shamed for wearing "slutty" clothing, but men rarely make the choice to wear revealing clothing outside of certain accepting subcultures. This is because the shaming directed towards men in revealing clothing is not only massive but also menacing, to the point where men don't wear it at all.

Then again, men can wear less clothes without it being considered sexualised. Compare and contrast the reactions to a dude and a lady wearing tank-tops in hot weather. Hell, even a tiny speedo can go without comment in the right context.

So the reactions to men wearing sexualised clothing can be more severe, but what is defined as sexual is often much narrower.

Another thought is that male sexuality is seen as more potentially damaging then female so men tend to be more insecure about sexual behaviour on their part being wanted/acceptable.

Would that be classified as a form of shaming sexual expression?

'More' may be an overstatement - The Vamp is an old, old trope, as is its nastier version, the Black Widow. Men are seen as more physically intimidating in general, but not necessarily more sexually intimidating.

"but not necessarily more sexually intimidating."

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with this one. I think the penis is considered a weapon in a way that the vagina simply is not.

I think you're right, MIR. However, when a man is sexually aggressive, the threat comes by virtue of the possibility of violence. When a woman is sexually aggressive, I believe the threat is based on the overturning of gender norms, rather than the possibility of violence. See: Family Guy when Lois learns karate. "Brian, last night... Lois was the man."

^^ A different way, yes, but not necessarily a greater one. 'A woman's vagina is her greatest weapon' (with the subtext, admittedly, of 'because a sexist society won't allow her any others') has been a meme for quite a while. Even outside the overtly lethal stuff that is the Black Widow's stock in trade, you've got things like The Baby Trap, The Vamp's 'mind control of a powerful man through her hoo-haa', and so on. It's a quite different kind of paranoia, but similarly potent.

@ surgoshan

"I believe the threat is based on the overturning of gender norms"

There are a surprising number of men who fantasize about being submissive in heterosexual sex. More then fantasize about being dominant, apparently. Source: http://www.people.ku.edu/~phawley/Publications/HawleyHensley_JSR_%202009.pdf

Although I agree that it's likely exactly that, when it shouldn't be. There is no reason to see women as less capable of severe violence in pursuit of their sexual desires. Humans are the weakest animals on the planet and the most dangerous because we use tools.

@Iaculus

Yes, however those things are "sex+" issues. I'm just talking about the genitalia themselves. Men's are seen as literal weapons; women's aren't.

tl;dr: There are a lot of kinds of slut-shaming.

@MIR none of these examples given for men being slut-shamed are rooted in our reality. or possess any understanding of what the term entails cannot believe i am replying to something over a decade old! it was that fucking bad. "Men who want to have oral, anal or anything other then missionary penis-in-vagina sex." heterosexual men try to recreate porn scenarios, often coerce women into it or are influenced to think that these are every day practices because of how saturated our culture is in porn. not only that but anal is often only seen as degrading by the heterosexual men who do this. it is about degradation/domination, and when bisexual or gay men pursue these things it is not likely to be similarly motivated, though thats not to say we don't live in a hypersexual culture that loves porn. every other example you've given is easily explained away by the homophobia that pervades our society. "men rarely make the choice to wear revealing clothing outside of certain accepting subcultures" aka gay scenes and subcultures that predominantly match that demographic. no. theyre not afraid of being seen as sluts they are literally afraid of the pain of being outed whether they are gay or not. people are still killed for this. "This is because the shaming directed towards men in revealing clothing is not only massive but also menacing, to the point where men don't wear it at all" this is also a strawman. this is a strawman if it isn't just a shit understanding of how homophobia and biphobia works. this is the problem with designating "slut shaming" - what is actually the act of shaming and blaming women's sexualities - an issue of indiscriminate Purportedly Slutty Behavior being attacked. it's failing to see the bigger issue and how identities intersecting fit into it all

I think that that counts in some cases, especially if the parents insult the daughter (call her a whore, etc.) and if the rebuke seems unreasonable. But play it by ear.

That negative attitude you mentioned is something that comes up frequently enough in books, films, comics, and other forms of media to be notable; therefore, it is a trope.

Because it's unnecessary. "It's this really bad thing, and oh by the way it happens more to women than men." Let the examples themselves be evidence of that. All that line adds is pointing out injustice toward the female gender, which is fine but not trope relevant.

But really, I won't fight it. If you think it fits, then it can stay. It just looks, from my perspective, that the feminist agenda sweeping through the Internet is hooking its claws into this site and taking away media-based objectivity in favor of pushing a point.

Again, I don't see how pointing out a fact (that slut shaming happens to women more than men and women are held to different standards) is pushing any sort of point. Besides which the concept of slut shaming is also intrinsically tied to feminism since the term was invented by feminists to describe an issue (mostly) women face.

I won't even touch on the other stuff you said.

It's been redeleted.

Rightfully so, I'd say. That paragraph is supposed to be a quick definition... such analysis has no place there. The Double Standard is all over the page. There's no need to repeat it on what's supposed to be a pithy description of the trope (especially with 100% made up statistics thrown in).

No it does not. Not everyone is involved in a relationship. The majority of Ethical Sluts do not use any form of manipulation but only good consent and do not betray anyone because there is no partner there to betray.

Regardless of the fact that not everyone who is promiscuous is in a relationship or is manipulative, this article is still heavily biased toward the idea that promiscuity is not morally wrong.

Editing for too much angry TMI.

<was taken care of>

Is being a slut shameful or not? Well, the answer is simple:

• In some works, it objectively is.
• In other works, it objectively is not.
• In yet other works, it is ambiguous.

TV Tropes is about works.

You don't have to actually be promiscuous to get slut-shamed. In certain eras and certain cultures, women could get this for having premarital sex with a single guy. Slut-shaming generally happens when other people don't approve of your sexual behavior or perceived sexual behavior. (This refers to consensual sexual behavior BTW - rapists and other predators absolutely deserve to be get shamed.)

And is even that something TV Tropes should be soapboxing about? Not the double-standard part, mind you, but the basic, gender-neutral idea that premarital sex is sinful? There are plenty of intelligent and well-intentioned people who believe that, after all. Or is traditional religious morality not just outmoded, but so self-evidently wrong that it doesn't even deserve sympathetic treatment?

That's a distinction that's really not evident in the article as written. It seems to take the modern autonomist feminist line (with its abject horror at being "judged") that traditional morality is intrinsically sexist, and therefore the only way outside of sexism is to obliterate all the old norms that gave society order and meaning. That's something that I think bears a lot more discussion. If we should not stand athwart history, we should at least take a critical eye toward its more torrential rumblings.

Edited: wrong topic reply

It's absolutely impossible to find examples of class warfare in history prior to Marx. Evolution didn't happen before Darwin invented it. Before the discovery of nuclear physics, no one ever noticed the sun.

Nope.

...You're not a very astute student of history, are you? Both the OP's statement and your B are completely, utterly wrong. Like, no room for debate, you are just completely factually wrong, and I'm a little amazed you might have ever thought it was correct.

Also nope.

There can be one, but TBH anything would sound like feminist-pushing propaganda. I'm not saying there are perfectly justifyable cases out there, though.

I support this.

I really couldn't say; recall that things like this tend to get slammed hard by MR As at the best of times. However, I put it through the YKTTW, got examples, got hats, edited this way and that, and added it. I hope it's here to stay. Perhaps in the interim the internet got a little more savvy about misogyny and religious prudery?

Good work!

I have read the book, and you have a point. To Dimmesdale's credit, he all but publicly begs Hester at one point to name him as her lover, saying that it's possible that the man in question (referring to himself, of course) really wants to come clean, but is afraid to, but that she'd be doing him a great favor by revealing him. Needless to say, he's very much afraid, with reason, of what would happen to his reputation were he to be exposed. So I don't think there is a double-standard.