Hey Brandeye!
Which part am I wrong about? I didn't really say I had any position at all on the matter except to say:
"Personally, I see no reason to call women sluts. Then again, after reading this, I see there are at least *some* arguments that could be made. If nothing else, the whole question of skill. A woman just needs to say yes or alternatively just ask, a man has to do a whole lot more. "
If you're saying that a man does not have to do a whole lot more to get laid than a woman, well, I'll just laugh that one off. If you mean to say that I agree with what was said, well, I don't agree with women being called "sluts." I do however see some of the rational behind it (as presented in the arguments above).
You've probably had as many partners as I have (let me check the list, ah yes...) 26 or 27 (I have a double entry and I can't recall if it's the same woman). No harm to my psyche yet!
Of course, I just started having sex about 3 years ago now (and I'm mid 30's). So I guess I'm a bit more mature. TO prove my point about how hard it is for a man to have sex, only 2 of my partners weren't pay for play.
Pretty sure a woman of average attractiveness could have 30 different sex partners in 30 days if she put her mind to it. If she's very attractive, she could do 30 in 1 week (if her body was up for the challenge) and maybe even 1 day (in the right setting).
As for the harm to female's psyche's, I wonder if it's a chicken and egg thing. If there was no such concept of "slut" would women be harmed by having so many sex partners?
I'm still trying to figure out what I was "wrong" about.... A bit stumped to be honest. I just brought up the quote for discussion purposes. It's kinda interesting as a discussion piece dontcha think? I've certainly never heard it discussed and for that reason alone it's interesting (at least to me anyways)....