Why the double standard? Men can Women can't?

Question

Why is it that it is more socially acceptable for a man to sleep around than a woman. If a woman has a one night stand then she is nasty if a man does he's macho??? This is to other women do you find yourself verbally attacking other women who are "loose" or least judging them, but find that you are a little more forgiving with men?

Answer 1

Its very simple really, in a purely natural state, males sole purpose in life is to spread their genes further than their competition. More females equates to more offspring, and a much greater chance that the male's lineage will continue on.

Females who attempt to do the same are counter-productive to this situation, and I'm sure the stigmatism of sleeping around stems from this biological notion.

This is not to say that humans should act like this, it is simply how most animals reproduce, and we are all animals.

Answer 2

Who established it "more socially acceptable for a man to sleep around than a woman"?
The standards of morality in a society are set by the women.
Think about that for a minute.
They way women dress, their actions, and what they allow upon themselves.
Back in the early 60 before women's liberation took hold, Women dressed decent, their behavior for the most part was morally correct, there were no where near the women there are today that are shacking up and not married.
So, then came the fraise if the men can do it why can't we. And, the women wanted in everything they could get into in the so called Men's Worlds. Club, organizations, etc, you name it.

These have become the moral standards of today weather you like it or not.

The pill was invented, abortion became a legal birth control, the idea of marriage became out mooted, women did not need the man anymore to raise a family, and the man was needed only as a sperm donor. Women's dress became less and less. Everything hangs out now. Breasts, cleavages, mid-drifts, rear-ends, some women only wear what is necessary because of the laws, low rider jeans in some cases are nothing but a wide band right at the pubic hair. Thongs stick out from underneath. There are women in the clubs and bars just to be picked up just for one night. Criticize me if you like. Everything mentioned here is true.
Women do control and set the Morale Standards.

We hear the charge, men are in charge and are making the clothes that women wear. But, at the same time women do not have to buy and wear them.

It is not any more acceptable for a man to sleep around than it is for a woman. And, to say if the men get to do that, why not the woman does nothing to set a good moral standard for anybody.

It's like saying all the men get to rape all the women so we women should have that right to. Dumb isn't it. Well?!!

Women are the mortar that holds the home together, they are the nourishers, they are the binding of the marriage, like it or not they are the help mate to the man, not slave mind you, but help mate and the man and woman must have unity with each other to make it work.
Men and women can separate, divorce, what ever and live and raise children as single parents, though it was not meant to be that way.
Children do need both parents.
The man can leave and some how the woman manages on her own. Not always pleasant. But when the woman leaves the home and the children everything falls apart because that which binds it together is gone. When parents separate the children are the ones that really suffer.
In our society there is a humanist teaching. If it feels good go ahead and do it. As long as it brings you pleasure, to hell with anyone else.
I am saying if women would choose to reverse what is being done today and raise the standard of morality the men would follow and there would a surprising difference in the moral fiber in our society of today.

There is no double standard.

Everybody does what ever they like, bringing pleasure unto themselves

Answer 3

The answer is probably one you won't like...

The short answer is that women can be much more selective of their sexual partners than men can in general. This is compounded by the fact that men are usually expected to be the "pursuers."

A good analogy would be this. Lets equate sex, the act itself not the people, to food. Now if having sex with an extremely attractive person is "surf and turf", an average person would be "double cheesburger," and finally an unnattractive pairing would be "potted meat."

Now onto the people, Women would be likened to a person with access to a buffet, of course, there are different levels of access to be had with personal attributes taken into account, but I digress. Now if this person ate alot of "potted meat" when a simple trip to another table would allow access to better foodstuffs, one would wonder why said person would settle.

Now onto men, they would only get into the restaurant if someone gave them some money while they were waiting outside like a panhandler. Now they can choose to use the money they were given for one "surf and turf" or "ten potted meats." Some will still choose the surf and turf, but some will go for quantity instead.

Point blank women have the upper hand in choosing sexual partners, and in most sexual matters in general, and for the most part get to make the rules. In addition, no matter how high a woman's libido is, it's probably not as high as a man's. This puts them in a position to feel less pressure to sate their baser need for sex. All these aspects lead to the same thing, women have an increased liberty for choices.

This power does come with a downside, you can choose, and so you should choose, and not just throw yourself out there.

None of these are absolutes, though. If a man who has a choice doesn't choose his sexual partners, and just sleeps with anyone, he is also met with chagrin by other men. I personally think that women will gain more respect in these matters by exercising their own liberties USING responsibility. If you don't allow yourself to be marginalized, you won't be.

Answer 4

If some one gives you a answer that is empirically supported and is a functional biological theory, such as "derovius" gave you, why do you jump all over it? Is it because you are all ideologically driven? Is it because you can not tell the difference between ultimate and proximate causation? Is it because you can not tell the difference between description and prescription? As he said, it is the ultimate difference in reproductive strategies that help cause this dichotomy between men and women. This has been suspected since the time of Darwin and empirically shown in experiments for almost 50 years. It is no secret in evolutionary biology, so why is social science so ignorant of the truth. We know why; ideology, political correctness, post-modernism and failure to come to grips with our evolved heritage. You social scientists are sowing the wind and all the rest of us will have to reap the whirlwind.

PS Baba Yaga. I was talking about ultimate, or long term behavior. That which is basic and universal to humans, from a long evolutionary past. I view culture as the parameter on that behavior; not the arbiter. Take this as an example of what I mean. All humans show horror at the display of, say torture, but Japanese were once thought not to show such, on average. It was found to be a display rule of Japanese culture. Filmed in private, they showed all the reaction that would be normally expected of humans. In the presense of the experimentors they went right back to show no expression to the horror shown. Many such universals have been found, hinding under the parameters of culture. The universals so outweigh the exceptions that a human nature position is quite supported in the scientific community. At least among evolutionary biologists.

Answer 5

I don't know what rock some of you climbed out from under... but women were not perfect moral beings before modern times. Both sexes have been sexual throughout history. Women were "expected" to be pure, but rarely were not, just the same as men. I agree with the first poster- men are the ones who impregnante, they are the ones who spread the seed and women are counterproductive by seeking out the male. That is a very basic and carnalistic approach though. Morally- women are supposed to be and are expected to be pure and virginal, opinions of them are lowered when they sleep around. Men just have been held in a lower moral standard than females.

Answer 6

Up until the last century women were essentially owned first by their father's and then passed on (reason behind the custom during wedding ceremonies) on to her husband, who would take possession of her. Any woman who was not a virgin was considered less valuable since their could be some uncertainty of who child she was carrying. That is why rape is still charged the equivalent of a crime against property. A woman who was sexually active could not hope to get a husband and would be a burden to the father until doomsday. This was not considered a good thing and it would bring shame upon the family. This is why the double standard.

Answer 7

It's the old "Madonna/whore' dichotomy: black/white, good/bad..also known as 'binary thinking'.

EDIT; johncm49
I"empirically supported and is a functional biological theory, such as "derovius" gave ... you are all ideologically driven?
NO. I do agree with what evolutionary biologists have to say underscoring the differences between the (short-term) objectives for males and females of many animal species - including humans. Though both M & F are hardwired to get their own genetic material 'out there' the strategies employed may be different, even seemingly at odds. I say short-term objectives because the larger picture (of course) is human evolutionary development. HOWEVER, 'verbally attacking other women who are "loose" ... judging..." is a social construct because it is NOT the same accross cultures:

“Evolutionary psychology is the science that seeks to explain through UNIVERSAL MECHANISMS OF BEHAVIOR why humans act the way they do."

These 'codes of conduct' are societal constructs and they are not unversal. What may be deemed SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE behavior for women in Denmark may not be deeemed socially acceptable in Eritrea - but may still be acceptable in Hong Kong. This tells me that the 'standard' for female behavior is fluid and depends upon a host of intervening variables (culture, sub-culture, time in history- and others): in light of this then YES, this 'double standard' is real. Perception is subjective because it requires INTERPRETATION: we are not merely on 'auto-pilot'. Evolutionary psychology acknowedges that culture remains a potent force shaping human behavior.
The correct answer to this question is that "yes", there is a 'double-standard' in evidence.

EDIT:
" I view culture as the parameter on that behavior; not the arbiter" and I do too. Of course, how could it be otherwise? The 'hard' science backs this up. However, the "judging' of female behavior to which the poster alluded is the end product of cultural bias. I am not talking about the behavior itself - I am talking about the manner in which the behavior is perceived - a societal construct which varies accross cultures.

Answer 8

No I don't like how men sleep around either. This is why a man should be allowed to have more than one wife. Because then he won't be compelled to cheat with prostitutes, concubines, and mistresses.

Answer 9

i dont have different opinions of a "loose" woman than a "loose" man - i lose respect for both of them. i think what you are saying though is legit - and i dont know why a lot of people have different views on men than women - its not right.

Answer 10

Because women get pregnant and if wifey gets pregnant with bad boy X hubby has to pay.