Search this blog

Saturday, 21 October 2017

24 Signs She's a Slut!


I’m gonna find out how slutty I am by seeing where I score on these 24 ‘signs.’ Edit: also going to explain why I think they're garbage. (Very sexist that this all only applies to girls; bet things would be so different if girls asked guys this.)



1. Has tattoos. I want to get tattoos, but I don’t have any (yet). What if you have a tattoo saying 'I love my mum' or 'daddy's girl'? Or your child's name? Or a symbol you think looks cool and means a lot to you? 

2. Piercings outside of the traditional earlobe placement. Only my nose; have always thought tongue piercings look great, but apparently they hurt like hell and I love hot drinks. Dunno if I’d get any more piercings. Well loads of people do, male and female. Again, I think people just like the way they look.
SLUT FACE!

3. Has “slut face.” Dunno what the fuck that is. This maybe ---->
This is clearly made up garbage that most people really don't think about. What defines a 'slut' or a 'slut face' is totally subjective anyway.

4. Cusses a lot. Yeah, I curse a lot. I mean yeah, some people have a problem with cursing, but I don't see the correlation between swearing a lot and being promiscuous. 

5. Not ticklish. I think I’ve always been pretty ticklish, I just have a really sensitive body (hehe). Ok this is clearly retarded.

6. Broaches the topic of illegal drugs (even marijuana) without prompting. I don’t smoke weed anymore; if I ever talk about drugs it’s usually for discussion/curiosity purposes. Kind of sounds like 'don't speak unless spoken to.' There are loads of reasons why a person may do drugs; they're an addict, they're out with friends having fun, they want to experiment, they're depressed and have nothing better to do. Many young people experiment with drugs and alcohol anyway.

7. Has big tits. I always wished they’d grow, then when I got to 16-18 they did. Dunno if I’d say they’re big; I’m pretty small so maybe they look big on me. Just in proportion to be honest. Oh dear, too bad you CAN'T CONTROL WHAT SIZE YOUR BREASTS ARE. Unless you get implants; alright I know strippers and hookers all get implants. So does this woman: http://www.thezarinamachablog.co.uk/2017/05/only-skin-deep.html

8. Shows excessive skin for weather conditions. Hell yes; I hate wearing a lot of clothes anyway. If it’s hot, I wear less because, erm, it’s hot. If it’s cold, guess what; I wear more clothes! YAY, ROCKET SCIENCE! I think that speaks for itself really. 

9. Has extra body hair (arms, girl-sideburns, girl-mustache) and/or a low speaking voice. I’ve always had a low voice for a girl; as for body hair I shave as much as I can (be bothered). This really confused me, not to mention no one can control what kind of genes they have. Some people in certain parts of the world (e.g. Asia) have more body hair. And wouldn't you think someone would be more likely to fuck a lot if they were well-groomed and waxed?

10. Associates with confirmed sluts. I don’t really give a shit if my friends have shagged little or lots of people. Some have, some haven’t. Pft no comment.

11. Shows interests in girls, has “hooked up” with girls, or claims to be “bi-sexual.” I really want to hook up with a girl, that’s something I’ve lately become really curious in doing. He said in his article that bisexuality = hypersexuality. See if I was bi I'd find that really offensive; being bi doesn't mean you want to shag everything that you see. Being a man doesn't mean you want to shag everything that you see. Stereotypes do no one any good (I know, we all do it, doesn't mean it's right). I don't think bisexuals want to fuck the entire world; that's not how it works. 

12. Is currently, or was at some point, in a sorority. We don’t have sororities in the UK; Legally Blonde is a fun film though. I don't know much about these but I'm pretty sure guys also have fraternities. Notice how he doesn't bring that up.

13. Has travelled alone, or with only girls, to fuck-fest locations (e.g., Jamaica). My cousin and I went travelling round Europe two and a half years ago; I don't recall it being a 'fuck fest' though we got into a few crazy situations. Kinda racist to assume Jamaica is a 'fuck-fest' location. Why Jamaica specifically? Is there some stereotype about it? Anyway this guy probably thinks girls shouldn't be allowed to travel and should just sit at home all day grooming themselves for their husbands.

14. Was a cheerleader in high school. I was never popular in school; only popular girls do sporty shit. I don't get it? 

15. Went, or goes, to a known party college (e.g., Arizona State, USC, UC Santa Barbara). Nah, everyone at my uni is too focused on music and career goals. I did party a lot at York but I wouldn’t say it’s a heavy ‘party’ uni, I just wanted an excuse to drink as much as I could. Last I checked I'm sure ALL unis are 'party' unis to some degree. People drink and party at uni. Not everyone does, but a lot of people do. 

16. Lost her virginity on the younger side (15 and down). Deffo not. Ok so this is one of the two only questions about sex, funnily enough. I can see why he would think this would contribute to promiscuity and there have been studies saying that people who start earlier start as they mean to go on (not that it should even matters; I mean so what?) BUT what if she did it with a partner she cared deeply for? Or more sadly, got forced into it?

17. Likes tequila shots or party drugs (e.g., Ectasy/MDMA). I'm in recovery so don’t drink or smoke weed anymore. Why tequila? Look, most people like to drink and take drugs when they go out. It's just a universal clubber thing, and guys do it too ya know. 

18. Is “friends” with DJs, promoters, or other small-time pseudo-celebs. Erm, I go to uni with DJs and promoters? Wouldn’t call them friends but everyone in the industry I’m entering is involved with people like that. Well this is just ridiculous.

19. Is an artist, or a wannabe “model” who has done “photo shoots.” I’m a musician; I did a photo shoot for my FB page, probably wasn’t the kind you’re thinking of. Also ridiculous; as an artist I AM MOST SEVERELY OFFENDED (not really) that you would make these stereotypes about artistic people! I mean unless a chick is doing naked photo shoots for her stripper page, I'm lost. 

20. Broaches the topic of sex first. I'm a pretty forward person, I have no qualms about initiating stuff with guys. What if it's with your boyfriend? And why can't girls broach the topic of sex first? Why do guys have to do 'all the work'? Some people are just naturally confident.

21. Has a bad relationship with her father and/or has divorced parents. I love my dad; my parents aren’t together anymore but I have great relations with both of them. Half of all UK marriages end in divorce; as for this 'daddy issues' stereotype I dunno. Yeah maybe there's correlation, maybe there isn't, and who cares anyway. Unless your dad was an arsehole who treated your mum badly or treated you badly or left her and you or wasn't around or something. Sometimes people have genuine reasons to have 'bad relationships' with their parents. Eurgh.

22. Describes herself as a feminist or with any of its jargon (“pansexual,” “demi-sexual,” “cis-gendered”). I’m not a feminist or adhere to any identity politics crap. Because automatically being a feminist = slut. Dumbarse.

23. Has an even, nice tan that she maintains. Does that only apply to white girls? Yeah this is stupid. Looking good and taking care of how you look (notice how he specifically says 'nice, even tan') does not equate to 'sluttiness.' 

24. Hair dyed a nontraditional color (e.g., blue). I dunno, what colour is my hair? Look traditional or non-traditional to you? Yeah this is dumb. One word can answer a lot of these 'signs': AESTHETICS.

Yeah this is a pretty stupid article, decided to answer for the hell of it. Check out this funny video by Jaclyn Glenn in which her and her friend answer it themselves:

7 comments:

  1. Isn't it ironic about this link as when I was explaining the "madonna/whore" thing to you, I was trying to tell you about all of the things that tend to come with the "slut" which are a part of it?

    I notice your list loses all of the nuance attached to these "signs". It made it interesting to see what he actually said and how you took it. Some things are clearly lost in your translation.

    Women who have "slut face" tend to have a predatory look in their face and/or a face that gives off a similar vibe to that of men who have been in combat.

    #23) I think you're completely missing the point here. "Girls with even, perfect tans spend a lot of time semi-naked, often in semi-public."

    Once you're ready to separate your personal feelings from this subject, it should be very easy to see what these things have to do with being a "slut" - whether you end up agreeing or not. They were explained pretty well in the article (except the slut face which I helped fill in for you) and they're all pretty accurate signs as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well this list was written by a guy from the 'return of kings' site, which is an extremely sexist and anti-female site and is part of this 'masculinism' backlash against feminism. I answered this not really taking it seriously. Clearly some things like tattoos, piercings, dyed hair and big tits don't necessarily mean someone is a 'slut.' You can't help the size of your tits and the other stuff could just be because you like how they look. And if you live in a hot country then obviously it makes sense to wear less clothing. There are literally two questions that have anything to do with sex. I just think it's all pretty laughable to be honest. And sorry but that 'slut face' thing sounds like nonsense to me.

      Delete
  2. Do you have any proof that the site is "extremely sexist" and "anti-female"? I know it's “anti-Feminist” and “pro-male”, but those things don’t translate to "extremely sexist" and "anti-female"; contrary to Feminist beliefs. You should also recognize that a backlash against Feminism has nothing to do with being against women.

    It seems to me like you not only took this post very seriously but very personally as well, especially since you distorted some of his points and context – whether purposefully or not.

    Actually, if you do a little research then clearly you'd know that women with tattoos, piercings and non-natural color dyed hair ARE statistically more likely to be a slut. Especially in the context given in the article. Big tits are not so much a reliable sign unless they're fake.

    The guy didn’t say having those things couldn’t or didn’t mean that you did or didn’t “like how those things looked” and that shows that you are missing the concept: The point is that regardless of WHY you get those things, the women who DO get those things ARE more likely to be promiscuous. It's just like the connection that men who get tattoos and piercings etc. TEND to be more violent. There is *plenty* of research to show connections between these things, especially where tattoos are involved.

    Here’s the thing: Businesses don’t care about feelings/morals unless it involves their money; They care about what works so they can make more money. Many of these socio-psychological studies are paid for by businesses because they want to use the information to make smarter choices in advertising and marketing, as well as in their hiring process. If you have ever worked for a business and been involved in hiring other people – which I have been – you learn a surprising amount of psychology as you are trained to hire the people who are the least likely to get fired, have problems with the work or other people, be flaky and not show up, steal money and/or products, etc. One of the big things that is tied to many of those problems is tattoos.

    I know a lot of people are uncomfortable with the reality that if someone concentrated enough and had all of the right factors, they could predict your behavior before you do it, with a high rate of accuracy. (It often leads to a larger debate of determinism and fate etc.) As unpleasant and uncomfortable as it is to know this, it’s also beneficial and empowering to know because in some ways, it opens you up to better choices by recognizing connections beforehand rather than after.

    Also, if you read the guys article, it clearly says, "Sure, there are exceptions to all of them. You could meet a nun with a tattoo, or a ticklish slut, but these are — **especially the more of them that are evident** —some of most accurate predictors of sluttiness you’ll encounter."

    As he explained, none of these signs individually is a 100% giveaway that a woman is a slut, these are just all signs that make it MORE LIKELY; As the basic mathematical concept goes: The more signs she has [of being a slut], the more likely she is [to be a slut]. He even clarified in the comments: “I’d say if a girl only displays one sign–any of them–it’s unlikely she’ll turn out to be a slut. I tried to make clear in the piece that it’s about how many a girl displays–the more signs, the more likely she’s slutty, and the more intensely so.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also if you read the article, it clearly says, "Shows **excessive** skin **for weather conditions**." So your "obvious" argument is irrelevant. In fact, the way you responded in #8 was actually quite rude and disrespectful, because you twisted his words and manipulated his meaning/intent based on your personal feelings about the subject. He already gave you the out that if it's hot, you'll wear warmer clothes; which is the same thing you said in your response. He's talking about you wearing Daisy Duke shorts in the middle of cold winter or autumn rain etc, as he stated. It’s rude and disrespectful of you to try and make it seem like he meant something else just because you didn't like what he was saying to begin with. (In a discussion or debate, that would be a very antagonistic/immature attitude to have, that would hurt the conversation more than help it progress.)

      If you didn’t even bother to read the article then I don’t know why you’d bother to post about it. If you did read the article and missed those parts, it's probably because you were feeling too emotional about it all, to properly intake the information at the time. You can call the article "stupid" all you want but that doesn't make it any less accurate. How you feel doesn't change the facts.

      If you wanted to be objectively critical, we can say that:

      #7) isn’t true unless they’re fake
      #9) is as he stated; more testosterone in women can equate to higher levels of sexuality but different ethnicities should be taken into account
      #12 & #14) tend to be more regional – very true in some places but not true in other places
      #19) is a little more connected to the fact that women in the arts tend to be more liberal and women who are more liberal, tend to be more liberal sexually as well
      #21) is true for “daddy issues” but in terms of divorce, the age of the girl during the divorce is probably the biggest factor in this being true or not (the younger she is, the more connection; the older she is, the less connection)
      #23) does exclude women who can’t tan but for anyone who can get a tan line – of any ethnicity – holds a lot of weight

      & all of the rest are very accurate.

      The fact of the matter is, "slut face" is not nonsense just because you can't recognize it or don't want to. It's sometimes called the "1,000 dick stare" and it's actually a really good tell-tale sign for men to avoid the worst of those kinds of women. My mother has it, by the way, I know the face VERY well and so do many men out there. The face is similar to the "rapist" face that some men have as well - and I'm not talking about some "weird" faces like Steve Buscemi or Christopher Walken etc., I'm talking about this specific predator look in the eyes that tells you that you're not safe with that person. **It’s not nonsense at all, it’s very accurate and a very good survival instinct to have.**

      (And if the reason why you’re so uncomfortable about “slut face” is because you’re afraid you might have it, you don’t.)

      Unless you’re saying the article is laughable because of how true and accurate it is, I think your response shows how personally upset you get about this subject and how badly you want to hold onto your beliefs related to "sluts". Outside of this subject, you can be very smart and open-minded yet when it comes to this subject, you are very close-minded.

      Seeing your response to this article as a 3rd person helped me understand where *our* problems occur in these topics. When you really don't like what you're reading, regardless of the intent, it seems you stop "listening" and start responding to your feelings about the subject, rather than what's actually being said. Women especially have this problem because women are more emotional than men and less open to unpleasant truths. We have to work harder in this area than men do (though men have to work harder in other areas than we do).

      Delete
    2. The fact that you don't see the connection between most of these signs - some of which are painfully obvious - and that you chose to omit the context of these points made, would have to root from:

      1) You're not a very bright person and have hard times with concepts and connections etc.

      OR 2) You're lying and don't want to admit that these signs are accurate.

      OR 3) You're emotionally uncomfortable with this specific topic and those feelings you have are clouding your better judgment; Keeping you from seeing this objectively and accurately.

      Obviously I believe it's #3. It's obvious that it's NOT #1 as you talk about connections and concepts on other posts and are clearly not a dumb person & I don't think it's #2 because I just believe you to be more honest than that.

      If you believe that women are equal to men, then you should work on #3 because it’ll make you a more balanced person. **It’s not balanced to reject reality just because you don’t like it.** At some point you have to be able to say “I just don’t like it.” rather than that it’s “nonsense” or “stupid” when it’s actually accurate and clever.

      For example: You can claim that Prince had no talent, but then everyone would know that you just have some personal hang-up about Prince, because from an objective standpoint, it’s obvious that he was VERY talented. So the fact that you’d have to pretend he wasn’t, rather than just saying you don’t like his music or style or whatever etc., would show people that you have to make up lies to comfort yourself, rather than being mature and stable enough to just be honest with yourself and others.

      When you go out of your way to distort this guy’s article, it’s very telling about how YOU feel about tell-tale slut signs, otherwise you’d be accurately arguing his points, like I did in the “objectively critical” part of my comment.

      Delete
    3. Hey, I think you may have taken this the wrong way. I saw a video of a youtuber I really like taking this test and I thought it would be fun to take it. I did think the article was kinda dumb and answered it honestly but I can't say I took it 'to heart' and I literally didn't know 'slut face' was a thing I thought he was making it up; nothing to do with me thinking I have it. Even a lot of the comments on her video say that they thought it was a troll article or thought it was a bit ridiculous.
      'Return of the kings' is a sexist site (have you heard of Roosh V? He contributes to this site and writes his own blog) that says women should be valued for their 'fertility and beauty.' (It says so on the 'About' page). I do see some of their points about wanting to bring back masculinity and feeling like society has become too 'feminized' (which is what I meant as it being a backlash against feminism - not necessarily positive or negative just stating that) and they want to reclaim 'masculinity' and all that. They're just very extreme, this 'manosphere' thing where men on the internet write blogs and meet up and try to return to 'traditional' values and whatnot. So yeah they're basically the 'male' version of feminism; masculinism or meninism or whatever 'ism' they call themselves. I think you've really minsinterpreted me here; this was not meant to be a serious post. I mean some of my answers may have annoyed you but that's because they're sort of taking the piss. It's like one of those Buzzfeed quizzes that people answer for the hell of it.

      Delete
    4. What makes you think I took anything the wrong way?

      I don't really care if you thought the article was dumb or ridiculous or made-up or whatever, that is your prerogative. I just think it was really rude and disrespectful for you to misrepresent the author's words by purposefully presenting them out of context. I could respect that you don't agree with what he wrote if you were actually responding to what he wrote but I don't respect that you wrote a post that claims to be in response to what he wrote yet misrepresents what he wrote.

      I'm sure a lot of the people who had hurt feelings after being exposed to the list were putting it down as "unrealistic" but that's why feelings don't beat facts, objectively.

      I don't see how the site is sexist and I think it's extreme of you to jump to that. No, I don't know who Roosh V is but even if that person was a sexist, that wouldn't make the entire site a sexist site. Hillary Clinton is a sexist but that doesn't make the entire Democratic party sexist.

      I read their 'About' page:

      1. It doesn't say anything about SHOULD, it says "A woman’s value significantly depends on her fertility and beauty. A man’s value significantly depends on his resources, intellect, and character."

      Those are evolutionary facts. Those aren't sexist statements no matter how much you personally don't like them or disagree with them or think they should be changed through social engineering.

      2. How are they being extreme?

      3. I don't see how you are trying to make them "basically the 'male' version of Feminism" and I think it has to do with your misunderstandings of Feminism. There is a group of men called MGTOW (Men Go Their Own Way) and THAT group is the 'male' version of Feminism, as their goal is a division of the sexes just like Feminism's goal is.

      This site, which promotes a healthy family unit and balanced roles between men and women, is more like the opposite of Feminism, not a male version of it.

      I don't know why you think your answers annoyed me but you tend to project onto me a lot. I'm not annoyed by your answers, I'm disappointed by the lack of integrity in some of them.

      Delete

If you enjoy my posts check out my debut YA novel. Out now on Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07F44CMNJ