She's Pure, He's a Loser : The Sexual Double Standard

Post Reply New Topic

Ok ok , we all know already about the "She's Slut , He's a Ladies-man" double-standards.... but those are in other threads.

The question here is , why often the word 'loser' is used to describe males? (non-independent men, men with no job , lazy men .....etc). Sure such women with the same qualities do exist too, but they aren't called losers as often.

and why in particular , men who are involuntary virgins are called losers ?

Is involuntary virginity in men an overall red flag sign of the man's "loserness"? and how accurate this sign is? Is the man's incapability of attracting any woman is a loser sign?

And why involuntary virginity in women are usually justified as "she's waiting for Mr. Right" or "There's no good men in my whole area" , and not as "loserness"?

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 21 Feb 2011, 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think nowadays it's more 'she's frigid' if she won't have sex.

Frigid is often used for the girl who's in a relationship , yet she rarely offers sex or show lack of affection to her partner , for whatever reason.

That's totally different than involuntary virginity.

Guess it's different around here.
It's either frigid, or too ugly to get laid.

Both of these double standards were created by men of ancient times.

In some of the religions that preceded the proto-judaic religions, and existed around the same time that judaism was developing, women would engage in fertility rights, in which they would spend some time as a temple prostitute, giving sexual favors to men in exchange for money or other resources. This wasn't seen as a negative thing and these actions may have been thought to ensure fertility, both in terms of harvest and children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_prostitution

I don't think there's anything particularly misandrynist about it, at least when it comes to involuntary celibacy.

It's a simple fact that women can have free, anonymous, mechanical sex with a man almost at will (although the vast majority don't, for obvious reasons).

Men generally cannot do this (at least for free), it takes a particular skill set that many men do not have, and those that don't are sometimes called "losers".

I don't condone any of this personally, I'm just sharing my observations.

I don't think anything negative about people who hasn't had sex. I certainly don't think it makes a guy a loser. I prefer it over to the double digits many of my male friends are in. I wish I could go back and undo some of my younger experiences. I'd happily get stereotyped if I could undo 4 or 5 of my sexual experiences.

Actually, one of my friends confessed to me not long ago that he was a virgin until his late 20's and had only one partner. I have enormous respect for that person right now.

These double standards do more harm than good. Men are too pressurized into having sex and women are too pressurized into not having sex and members of both genders often regret a decision regarding sex if it was due to societal pressure.

This isn't about who can and can't what. This is just about society's perceptions on men and sex, and women and sex.

I think the standard is based on the ancient tradition that women are prizes to be won

Those perceptions are wrong.

This is simply the logical evolution of the "double standard" in a society pathologically obsessed with sex, combined with the "liberation" of women and the increased societal pressure on men, especially as the economy gets worse.

It's the exact same double standard.

The double standard is that men are supposed to be sexually active, women are not.

The men and women who adhere to this are praised ("player" for men, "virtuous" for women).
The men and women who deviate from it are scorned ("loser" for men, "slut" for women).

Both are praised for adhering to the standard and scorned for deviating from it. The "double" part comes in because the sexual standards for men and women are in opposition to each other.

The only way out of this trap is to not scorn/praise for adherence to or deviance from the standard. That means any men who don't want to be called "loser" for virginity have to refrain from calling women "slut" for lack of same, and vice versa.

I get told "There must be something wrong with you" on a regular basis because I don't have sex very often, or date people.

At least guys have an excuse "Oh he can't get laid, its not his fault".

Very good point.

How does considering a man who hasn't had sex a loser have anything to do with womens lib?

You don't think this perception existed before 1966?