why is it, that society is so disgusted with female sexuality?

>>17470752
I don't feel like any of this is true.

>>17470752
You're arguing against something that doesn't exist. People generally dislike flagrant displays of sexuality from either sex, or from neither.

you're not gonna get an adequate answer here, read a book on this shit.
can't recommend one as i have no interest in it.
try your local library.

>>17470757
it might vary greatly depending greatly on where and how you life, but for me, this holds true and it doesn´t make any sense to me. not even a tiny bit

>>17470766
I personally don't think women should behave the way men do in relationships. They're supposed to be the better ones. The family structure falls to shit if the woman is out fucking around. We need them to hold the family down. The man isn't needed so much in this regard.

>>17470752
Very few people making this argument, and just as few of their opposition, seem to recognize that there is a whole specteum of behavior between "Victorian-era prudery" and "girls gone wild". Please tell me you recognize the spectrum.

>>17470752
well first of all women are more judgmental then men because they feel like they have to compete with the girls who are sluttier. also males still have it worse because the government punishes male sexuality by making them pay child support and throwing them in jail if they don't. also men get shit on for having sex toys while women don't.

1. more people are for female sexuality than not. You're talking about a small, but stupidly loud, minority here.

secondly, I have a couple theories. Just on a purely physical standpoint, women harbor far more responsibility in sex than men. We're the ones who get pregnant. If there were no social or legal obligations/guidelines, men would just impregnate women left and right with no regard at all.
We have to harbor basically all the responsibility of spitting out hellspawn and overpopulating the earth.
Yes, I know it takes 2 to tango, but you can't physically see the man's involvement in the creation of this bastard the way you can women, therefore it makes them easier to blame for it.
Back in the day before there were a variety of birth control, ingraining into women the idea that they shouldn't have sex was a form of birth control. By shaming women away from sex, they stopped the village from becoming overrun with a billion babies, or at least slowed the inevitable doom. This idea was just very strong and carried over for many years, even to now despite the fact that if you have even two brain cells to rub together avoiding pregnancy is hella easy.

The other idea I have, is that biologically women are just not supposed to enjoy traditional sex. Our fucking sex organs are not designed to feel nearly as much pleasure from PIV sex as it would for men, if at all. Our most pleasurable area is the small fucking nub above theWhen something like 70+% of women get nothing out of penetration (the only biological sexual need to reproduce), it's easy to brush women off as not needing/wanting sex. And if you do you're the weird one.

>>17470752

>I'm not triyng to defend actual sluts

than you're part of the problem. what makes their sexuality bad but urs okay?

>>17471417
>if you have even two brain cells to rub together avoiding pregnancy is hella easy.

This is not the case. Even including things like abortion as basic contraceptive care, the world is full of people that should not but still do have kids, because people are retarded as a rule.

>>17471441
But that's exactly what I said lol, if you have 2 brain cells tor rub together avoiding getting pregnant is easy. Unfortunately there are these fucking retards who clearly lack those 2 brain cells spitting out children like they've got a deadline. They aren't smart enough to use protection, and they aren't smart enough to wait until they're financially, emotionally, physically, etc, ready to start having kids. They're fucking morons.

>>17471424
I think by "actual sluts" OP means like, the people who sleep around with for example, people in relationships and they know that fact, or people who sleep with literally anyone without even knowing them for half a second and without protection.
And why that sexuality is bad is because you're contributing to the betrayal of another human being, which makes you a shitty excuse of a human being, or you're gaining and spreading diseases willy nilly or getting recklessly pregnant and populating the earth with even more unwanted children.
I personally don't care about people who have a quickie after only meeting for a couple hours, or those who have a new person in their bed every single night, I don't see those people as sluts.
The ones who knowingly cheat or help others cheat, and the ones who have just plain reckless sex, I will call sluts because that behavior should not be encouraged just for the fucking safety of human kind.

>>17470752
bcus men control the media. if women controlled it then men would look like dirty lazy gross and stupid people.

Are you fucking blind? Female sexuality is promoted constantly in our society. Girls can get away with anything they want now of days because it makes them "empowered" or what other excuse feminism gives them. Every girls is a whore now of days and everyone seems to be ok with it.

I actually like girls who are flirty. it's cute. But girls who show skin much like with short shorts etc literally appear to be promiscuous. No body complains when a boy shows skin because nobody cares about how a boy looks.

>>17470752
It annoys me when I realize that she is just being flirty for fun. She enjoys the attention and wants to be desiriable, but has no plans to take things further and she acts like this with everyone.

I don't mind flirting if it's serious. But I don't try to hit on girls I am not into so I wish they wouldn't do that to me or other guys. Its gotten to the point that I just assume almost all women just like feeling sexy and getting attention from a bunch of guys they will never actually, well, have sex with.

>>17471417
>Back in the day before there were a variety of birth control, ingraining into women the idea that they shouldn't have sex was a form of birth control. By shaming women away from sex, they stopped the village from becoming overrun with a billion babies, or at least slowed the inevitable doom.

If I can disagree a little. It's less about "birth control", it's more about that having children, feeding them and leting them grow was a bitch in the old days. We need to talk about 2 things here.

1. You want two people to form a family, because it's a lot easier to feed children in two people. Being single mother pretty much meant starving along your children (if you even managed to surive pregnacy and birth on your own). So you want father around. You want father to be sure that you are faithfull to him and for him to be sure that he is having his own children, because if he leaves before children are independent, you will all starve.

2. In old times there were no retiring and pensions, no old folks houses, no social programs and if that wasn't enough making savings was bitch and keeping saved money was a bigger bitch still. Your best bet at having comfy old age is to have children to care for you when you are old. To do that you want for your daughers to have stable, strong relationships with men.

>>17471503

you're making a lot of assumptions for OP. when she chould ahve said 'im not defending people who are cheaters' as opposed to 'actual sluts'.