SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Well, where do I fall? Since I would argue judging things, from food to clothes, to potential partners is completely normal. We judge thousands of things every day, it's how we make decisions.

Admittedly, and as eluded to before, I cannot exactly define whalers you lie. As noted above:

“I love that “judgers” in this thread (i.e., slut shamers) do not like being called out for judging others by non-judgers (i.e , anti-slut shamers), thereby admitting that that they judge, while not liking being judged. Makes me laugh.

On the other hand, I also love that the “non-judging” crowd (i.e.,anti-slut shaking) crowd is willing to judge someone for their personal convictions. Wait, aren’t non-judging persons supposed to be anti-judgmental?”

At first blush,and correct me if I am wrong, you don’t like being called judgmental, although you judge. So, you don’t likel being called out, I guess? No one made you an example, but you.

@ChamomileTea

Your premise presupposes that the person who is making a "conditional sacrifice" would be considered as an acceptable partner. If my husband had said to me, "I'd really like a partner who will engage in kinky sex acts with me, but I'll go ahead and settle with you since we have other things in common", I'd have said "thanks, but no thanks". I would want to know the facts and vote with my feet.

I don't think I'm alone in that either. I doubt very many people would like to believe that their mate was making some kind of grande sacrifice, rather than being honored to be with them. But it's not just an ego thing. There's something whiffy about a partner who keeps hidden contracts, something furtive and below board. I wouldn't find that to be acceptable or desired in a mate. It's dishonest.

Nothing hidden about any of this though. People ask their partner to explore, try out things, tell them what they like to do all the time. When the partner goes, "No, I don't do those things. I'd never do them. They're outside of my comfort zone.", most folks shrug and move on.

A lot of this feels like you're attempting to make out both sides as equally as bad, sinister, and deceptive. That's just dishonest and simply not true. People are fine with not doing a lot of these things, and foregoing exploring them. However, most of the time being fine with that is what is conditional. They're not hiding their desire to do these things either unless you think they should be constantly reminding their partner and pestering them about it.

@Drumsticks. Nah, don't care about being judged for judging others. I just dislike being told I can't do so, that it's somehow BAD, UNACCEPTABLE, etc. Which usually is hilarious because the people who are getting outraged are judging on their own.

Gender-specific? (seems most/all for hiding history are female). I ask this as it seems misandric undercurrent is more likely than the misogynic issue that some are attempting to propagate.

Emergent8,

I was asking this particular question to determine if there was a double standard in the entombment of previous history/activities, and if so, the motivation.

However, for the record, I believe "slut-shaming" term is being misapplied as the objective is not the shame, but to determine a course of action based upon a reasonable review of a person.

This was simply a pointed series of questions to determine perspective.

[This message edited by blahblahblahe at 4:41 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

A lot of this feels like you're attempting to make out both sides as equally as bad, sinister, and deceptive. That's just dishonest and simply not true. People are fine with not doing a lot of these things, and foregoing exploring them. However, most of the time being fine with that is what is conditional. They're not hiding their desire to do these things either unless you think they should be constantly reminding their partner and pestering them about it.

I agree, and, in a lot of ways, I'm following this thread both in interest to see the viewpoints, but, also, this is MY story personally. My W and I got together, and our sexual desires were pretty far apart. I said, "I'd like to try X, Y, and Z" and my wife responded "I don't do those things, if you want them, you need to find someone else". OK, fair enough. I was disappointed, of course, some of those things were important, fun, exciting or just intimate to me. But I loved her and accepted those were her limits. A compromise was made, and, in general, all the compromise in this area was on my side. She drew the lines, I stayed inside of them.

Well, for those who know my story, they know what's next. W has an affair and by date 2 has done everything with OM that was on the "no" list with me. X, Y, Z and a few other letters that I hadn't even thought about. The alphabet smorgasbord, if you will.

So, no, both sides are "equally sinister" here. I was honest and straighforward, my wife responded with limits that I accepted; but accepted based on faulty information. If she had told me the truth, "No, I don't want to do X, Y, or Z WITH YOU, RIO; but, with another man, I might", of course, I never would have married her, that would have told me everything I needed to know. Would that be "shaming" her? Before this thread, I would have said "Huh?!", but now, I'm not sure. It seems that any repurcussions based on her true statement (yes, I do them, just not with you) might be "slut shaming". Either way, shame, no shame, right or wrong, if she'd given me the "real answer".. Well, I wouldn't be here, that much is clear.

@Drumsticks. Nah, don't care about being judged for judging others. I just dislike being told I can't do so, that it's somehow BAD, UNACCEPTABLE, etc. Which usually is hilarious because the people who are getting outraged are judging on their own.

It's quite funny. "I can bang the football team after practice and if you don't want to date me because of it, you're a dirty misogynist and slut shamer!!". Who's really "shaming" who here? The "dirty misogynist" is simply making a decision for himself based on observed behavior. If the woman getting "nexted" feels shame because of it, so be it, but that's not the intent, or doesn't have to be the intent; it's just a decision. However, the individual screaming misogyny at the guy making those choices for himself? What's the person doing? Sounds 100% like trying to "shame" the guy into taking a different course of action and accepting, because of that shame, that their belief that banging the football team isn't something they want in a GF/wife is somehow wrong?! Sorry, no, just because I like brunettes more than blondes doesn't imply, in any way, that I'm "shaming" blondes to dye their hair. If they choose to do so, fine, but it's not on me to decide to like blondes better, or to stop choosing brunettes because hair color shouldn't matter in a dating partner.

First, let me say that I can't keep up with this thread. I have not read all the posts since my last one. I have no idea if anyone responded to me or asked me a question. I have only read this last page since then.

Maybe we all make judgements ever day. Maybe some of us try not to. I try not to look at things as good or bad. They just are. I may decide that I don't like something. That's not the same as thinking it's bad.

Being judgemental toward people, which is what we're really talking about here, is deciding whether or not other people are good or bad based on your personal, subjective standards.

You look at me and think, she is not worthy of marriage because she has had too many sexual partners or is too overweight. You are saying that my worth is less than because of those things. You are judging me as bad. (Notice, I did not say you are bad for judging me.)

I see that you are judging me and say, "That's not ok. You don't know me." Again, not saying you, as a person, are bad or upworthy. I'm saying I'm not ok with your behavior.

I'm so tired of people who are judgmental whining about how we are all judgemental No, we all really judgmental emental. To judge means to determine if something is good or bad. That is very subjective.

Honestly for the most part I agree that dating and marrying someone who has similar views on sex isn’t shaming. I do take issue (and I know people will think this is ridiculous) with the word conviction here. I would liken it more to comfort level. If someone isn’t comfortable with having a high number of previous partners, then they might seek out someone with similar views. Fine. That totally makes sense.

But does having a higher number of sex partners make someone a bad person? No it doesn’t.

Does it make them less of a person than someone who has a low number? No it doesn’t.

It’s the assertion by a few posters that someone who “banged the football team” isn’t wife material. That’s my issue. That’s slut shaming.

You might be uncomfortable with it, but that’s on you. She’s not gross because she had sex.

Slut shaming is a pretty dangerous thing. When I was in school there was an assault on a woman working late in the chemistry lab. She was severely beaten and penetrated with glass objects. How do I know all of the details? They were all in the newspaper. Her family made a public statement because they were so worried that people would think she was raped. They didn’t want it to affect her ability to marry someday. She’s not a slut, it was just glass. Shudder.

I know most of us would argue this isn’t the same thing as “banging the football team” and it isn’t. It’s just sad that she was worried that people might think less of her. It’s why we need to stop stigmatizing women over sex.

Judgement is totally normal. It’s the feeling I’m getting from some posters that a woman with a sexual past is less worthy. It’s not about worth. It’s about what you’re personally comfortable with in a relationship.

[This message edited by Slowlygoingcrazy at 8:13 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

Being judgemental toward people, which is what we're really talking about here, is deciding whether or not other people are good or bad based on your personal, subjective standards.

I honestly think we're saying the same things using different words. OK, so you (my GF) banged the football team after practice. No, you're not "bad", but also no, I don't want to date you. Is that judging or just making a decision based on facts? No idea anymore. And there are a lot of things that fall into that category, I might not want to date you because you don't have green eyes because that's something that I really like. It doesn't make you "less than", it's just my personal preference.

However, the thing that's tough, while I can say it doesn't make you "less than", in fact, it DOES make you "less than" in MY eyes. My judgement of your appearance/past behavior/personality is all "stack ranking". One is better than the other. So I can see how this rubs people the wrong way, but, also, I think we're living in dream land if you think we all don't do this 1000's of times every week. Do I want skim or whole milk? No, one's not inherently better than the other, but I'm going to make a decision, that, FOR ME, one is more valuable than the other and select that one to be the lucky gallon that comes home with me. But my judgement isn't an indictment of whole milk, a backhanded way to say "nobody should have whole milk" or a suggestion that whole milk is somehow bad. It's just my preference, I'd rather have skim, so I select skim.

It’s the assertion by a few posters that someone who “banged the football team” isn’t wife material. That’s my issue. That’s slut shaming.

Isn't wife material FOR ME. Just like 6' tall blondes (I prefer short brunettes) aren't wife material FOR ME. No, it's not "slut shaming" it's having a preference. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with blondes or women who enjoy gangbangs with the football team. They just aren't someone I would choose to date.

[This message edited by Rideitout at 8:15 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

I agree with RIO. Being given the opportunity to make a decision about what you want in your own life is not being judgey. It’s not deciding who is good or bad. It’s about deciding if someone is compatible with you and what you want in your life and future going forward in a long term mate. We are all entitled to that. It doesn’t mean anything else imho.

Neither men nor women should have to just accept something that they don’t want to when it comes to choosing someone they want to spend the rest of their life with if they don’t want to.

What happened with RIO is horrific. I can’t imagine that would be something I would ever get over. If my wh did things with ap that he refused me? That would be a deal breaker for me. I am sure I would feel resentment and like I was second choice forever. And if he decided to do it with me after dday, I would feel like he was doing it out of pity.

What is exactly wrong with being judgemental.

We do it each day, every day, anytime we have to make a decision. Could be something as simple as comparing apples in the supermarket.

To be under the belief that we can conduct ourselves in a certain manner and not judged for it is quite dillusional.

All actions reflect upon us, there is always a price.

If you want to be judgmental and act like you’re better than somebody else because they’ve made different choices, then go nuts. Nobody is saying you can’t do that. Just don’t get all mad when people call you out on it. At least own it.

And please stop comparing judging a person to things like picking apples and clothes. That’s just dumb honestly. Having a preference of a green apple over a red, or a preference on a brand of jeans, or even a preference of green over blue eyes, is not the same thing, or even close to the same thing, as deciding you’re better than somebody because you have fewer sexual partners, or a different color of skin, or a different gender, or sexual preference, etc. We all know what kind of judging we are talking about it here, but people are trying to downplay it by using silly comparisons to inanimate objects.

And it’s also not the same as saying potential partner A has green eyes and potential partner B has blue eyes, and since I like green eyes I’m more attractive to A. That just means A fits your preferences better and is better FOR YOU. She/he is not better than the other.

And don’t start with the “you’re saying I’m not allowed to choose for myself, I have to do this or that or date somebody with different values, etc.” because no, nobody is saying that at all. If you don’t want to be with somebody who has had more sexual experiences than you, fine. There’s nothing wrong with that. You get to make those decisions for yourself. In your eyes, you may even see yourself as being better than them because of it, and that’s also fine. But it does make you judgmental.

It seems like one of the biggest issue with various posters is nobody wants to be called judgmental even though they’re defending being judgmental and want to be judgmental, just please nobody dare point that out.

And Ride, she’s clearly in the wrong in your situation.

[This message edited by landclark at 8:52 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

To be under the belief that we can conduct ourselves in a certain manner and not judged for it is quite dillusional.

Surprisingly, I agree with this. We all need to own the choices we’ve made in life. I’m not ashamed of my past, nor do i feel guilty for it. I fully own it. I recognize there are some people who will judge me for it. That’s their right. I’m sure their judgment is based on a variety of factors, experience, religion, ego, etc.

However, it’s also my right to not accept their judgment or internalize it or believe that somehow I’m less than simply because that’s what they’re telling me I should believe. It’s up to me to find somebody who closely matches my preferences and values.

Which yeah, all makes a case for being honest upfront.

Edited to add: if you want to be judgmental, don’t be so delusional to think you’ll never be called out on it.

[This message edited by landclark at 9:37 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

I don't think being judgmental = slut shaming.

There is nothing wrong with being judgmental (although it is not a characteristic that is on my list of positives). It is wrong to assign bias by gender. All the intellectualizing and rationalizing that is going on cannot change the fact that women are judged unfairly with regards to sexual acts/history. What other reason would there be for the term "slut", which applies solely to women and is used solely to demean them? When it is said that she "bangs the whole football team', this is a discriminatory stereotype. If you would not marry a women with more sexual experience than you, it is a discriminatory position. OWN IT! if a man has more sexual experience before marriage, the woman is considered lucky as he will theoretically be able to please her in the bedroom. Why is the same not true of women?

Seriously, it does not surprise me in the least to read about "slut shaming" and the ensuing implication of women with lots of experience (and/or WW in general) in that capacity on this forum. I have posted several times about this issue. Sadly, it is a cultural

norm. Is it fair for the man in the original post to not want to have sex with his wife after learning of her sexual history? No, but it is what it is. He cannot help that he has internalized this cultural bias. I can only hope that the bias inherent in gender stereotypes will change in the future as people become more educated.

BTW, I love the "who is smarter and can use more complex vocabulary" contests. They do make me laugh, even if the issue is a disturbing one.

I don’t know if the guy in the article slut shamed his wife or not. My initial reaction was he was being judgmental, but honestly I should read the article before making that call. Are you allowed to PM me a link?

Slut-shaming is the practice of criticizing people, especially women and girls, who are perceived to violate expectations of behavior and appearance regarding issues related to sexuality. The term is used to reclaim the word slut and empower women and girls to have agency over their own sexuality.

This is what comes up as a definition. Is your judgment rooted in this (I don’t remember all of your comments other than neither of us knew what Eiffel towered meant, lol)? Then maybe it is slut shaming. However, it can be done by men and women. It is certainly not exclusive to men doing it to women.

as deciding you’re better than somebody because you have fewer sexual partners, or a different color of skin, or a different gender, or sexual preference, etc.

Literally nobody on this thread has said anything like that. What they (and I) have said is that "I would not date someone who did X" or "had a number higher than Y" or "was under 6' tall" or any manner of other things. I can't think of a single post where anyone said "I wouldn't date someone who slept with 100 people because I'm better than them". Now, they might think that (I don't; it's simply about statistics and probabilities for me), but not a single person has said that "This makes me better than them". I don't think I'm "better than" people who don't have blue eyes, but yes, I do prefer blue eyes in people I date and, if looking for a partner, I would rank that an important criteria for me. We all have an internal "points system", blue eyes +10 points, overweight -10 points, rich +20 points, great in bed +100 points and we use that internal system to determine "this person is better for me than that person". But, at least personally, I don't use that system to say "this person is better", but that "this person is better FOR ME" (which is an entirely different statement). And, honestly, we're being ridiculously obtuse to say that we don't all do exactly this internally whenever we are determining between 2 options. This job or that one; we look at the pros/cons and make a point based determination of what would be better for us and our family. This bunch of bananas or that one, same thing. And, for some people, when doing that point balance, they are going to rate "Gangbanged the football team" as -100,000 points, a deficit that simply cannot be overcome. Doesn't make banging the football team any more wrong or right than anything else, just that it's a strong rating criteria, and, probably what bothers people the most, it's a common rating criteria that's used to judge suitability of a female partner. Just like wealth/job status is a common rating criteria that's used to judge suitability of a male partner. Sure, both are "unfair", I should be able to live under a bridge and get a supermodel girlfriend, and my sister should be able to have an orgy 3X a week and then be able to marry a guy and deny him sex for years on end. Sure, and unicorns should exist (they are just too cool) and pets should live to be 100 years old so we don't have the feel the pain of losing them. We could "should" ourselves all day long, but, that completely ignores the reality of what "actually is" not what "should be".

And it’s also not the same as saying potential partner A has green eyes and potential partner B has blue eyes, and since I like green eyes I’m more attractive to A. That just means A fits your preferences better and is better FOR YOU. She/he is not better than the other.

Partner A banged the football team, partner B did not, and therefore partner B is more attractive to me. No "judgement" there, just a decision, or, to use your words, B fits my preferences better and is better FOR ME. It's literally exactly the same thing just applied to a different selection criteria (sexual past vs eye color).

All the intellectualizing and rationalizing that is going on cannot change the fact that women are judged unfairly with regards to sexual acts/history.

What's "unfair" about it? Because men aren't judged on the same criteria? If so, sure, I agree, it's not "fair" in EITHER direction. There are a lot of women who won't date men under 6' tall, is that fair? Especially when, UNLIKE banging the football team, there's absolutely nothing a man could have EVER done to avoid that judgement, it's just how he was born? Is the judgement unfair in both cases? Sure, I'd say it is. Is that going to change the reality that a lot of men don't want to date women who engaged in gangbangs and a lot of women don't want to date shorter men? Nope, not one iota. Because these "biases" are based in biology, not social programming. Women who are "easy", biologically speaking, endanger a man's bloodline. Until 50 years ago or so, there was absolutely no way to know a child was yours or not as a man, the way to ensure that was to not date/marry women who showed a history of promiscuity. And a man's height is a rough indicator of his ability to protect his family and dominate other men (same reason that muscles/being in shape are attractive qualities in men). Sure, not fair if your 5'5" and a naturally slight build. But that in no way alters the fact that a lot more women find 6' more attractive than 5'5".

What other reason would there be for the term "slut", which applies solely to women and is used solely to demean them?

Because sex is difficult for men to get and therefore an "accomplishment" and sex is available on demand for women and therefore denying themselves that pleasure is an "accomplishment". I explained this before, but, if you care to see this in history, look at being overweight. 100's of years ago, being overweight (and very pale skinned) showed that you were wealthy (lots of food to eat and not tan from working outside all day). Today, being overweight is basically the opposite thing (as is being tan). The reason is clear, because food isn't scarce anymore, now the "accomplishment" is to not overeat and exercise. Because very few of us "work the fields" now the accomplishment is having enough time to work on a good tan. It's not some inherent bias here, it's entirely do to the availability; if it's easy to get, the "point of pride" becomes resisting temptation. If it's hard to get, the "point of pride" becomes getting it. Take a look at the gay community if you'd like to see this play out; "notch count" isn't typically a point of pride for most gay men (any gay men I know) because sex is freely available from lots of other gay men for them. The point of pride for those I know in that community is "we've been sexually exclusive for XX years". Sounds a lot more like the deal for women, right? And it all has to do with availability of whatever the "thing" is and almost nothing to do with gender (outside of the biological problem of raising another man's child).

[This message edited by Rideitout at 9:50 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

Rideitout, I was illustrating the difference in what’s being discussed because some don’t seem to get the difference when they start comparing it to things like judging fruit.

Also, I was responding specifically to: What is exactly wrong with being judgemental. Not attacking you at all.

[This message edited by landclark at 9:45 AM, November 30th (Saturday)]

Definition of slut by Merriam-Webster: disparaging + offensive : a promiscuous woman : a woman who has many sexual partners

2 dated

a chiefly British, disparaging : an unclean or slovenly woman : SLATTERN

b : an impudent girl : MINX

Let’s imagine a world where I am single and start dating a hypothetical women and having sex. She says to me “In the past I have had anal sex (or insert whatever taboo act you want here), and I decided it’s not for me, I don’t want to do it anymore.” I would be 100% ok with that. I would not feel like less of a man because she wanted to do it with other men and not me.

However, if she lied to me, said “ew anal sex is gross”, and then I found a video of her begging for it, my masculinity would be hurt probably. At that point, she could still say “ok I did it for awhile, decided it wasn’t for me, don’t want to do it anymore” and we’d move past it. That would be a hard image to get out of my head, but if it was truly in the past before I came along, I’d get over it.

Now, if we eventually got married, I could honestly go the rest of my life without anal sex. But, if she were to then have an anal affair, THAT would be the point of no return for me. I don’t know how these other guys do it, but more power to you if R is going well! That’s not slut shaming her, that’s just me drawing a line in the sand and saying “this is the amount of abuse I won’t tolerate”.

My wife and I grew up in a very religious, conservative community. No alcohol sold in the entire town type of place. Sex was considered to be the most horrific sin. Handjobs were a big deal, and only the real slutty girls would have sex, or even oral sex. My girlfriend (Not my wife) and I would have sex, and she was considered to be a huge slut. Growing up with this kind of shameful attitude surrounding sex made me very afraid of experienced girls. I didn’t even know girls liked sex until college, when I started meeting normal girls who were sexual. For awhile I was afraid of girls who were more experienced, because of that stupid mentality that I was raised with. I eventually snapped out of it and had some fun.

But I was guilty of slut shaming. And I am ashamed of that now. My wife eventually became like all the other women in that town, sexually closed off (though we can’t forget her 1 month PA). I find women who own their sexuality to be fascinating now, and I respect them more than those who are prudish.

Because sex is difficult for men to get and therefore an "accomplishment" and sex is available on demand for women and therefore denying themselves that pleasure is an "accomplishment".

So since we are now being ridiculous, I’ll bite.

So a man who cheats multiple times is accomplished because it’s harder for him to do than it would be for me to do it? My WH got several women interested in him after we got married. I had several men before we even dated. So he’s now accomplished and my history shows a lack of accomplishment?

RIO

A little off topic, but this idea that women have a much easier time getting sex is interesting to me.

I would argue that anyone can get sex if they cast a wide enough net.

I’m sure I can go to a bar tonight and leave with someone if I want to. Would it be the first guy I talk to? Probably not. I might have to forego those who I find the most attractive in order to find one who is attracted to me.

Same goes for men. You talk to enough women, you’ll find someone who’s interested in you. She just might not check all of your boxes. But sex, if that’s the goal, will happen.

Maybe it’s that I live in a major city. I know guys who don’t make a lot of money or look conventionally attractive, but they get sex. Hell there’s an app for that.

Having sex with a super model is hard for both genders if you’re not a super model yourself. Finding someone to have sex with, that’s easy. Don’t we know it, we’re on an infidelity board.