It's not surprising that guy's think this way - it's very convenient. But is 'wisdom' the right word?

All those who despised whores because they are whores are worst than the whores;

And just what is ... "a healthy sexual appetite"?  Do you really believe a woman's could be the same as a man's. Every guy on this
Forum knows that every day, we see dozens of women that we'd be happy to shag at a moment's notice. The only reason we
don't do it  is because the gals won't let us.    Now, imagine if the gals had the same sexual appetite as us.    
The world as we know it would come to an end. We'd all be so busy shagging each other that nobody would get an education
and nobody would have the time or enegy to do any work. We'd go back to the stoneage.       

Prostitution is the worlds oldest profession.
Men use money to take advantage, to get what he wants;
Woman uses her body to take advantage, to get what she wants.

Usually the woman get the short end of the stick/straw.
This because she is the one who stays at home,
Is more emotionally inclined,
Is in the receiving end.
Selling a commodity which has a very short shelf life.

Are you saying that women's holding out is the key for the whole human race to progress constructively? I would like to think people have more self discipline than that.  

The only reason why women not being as promiscuous as men is because of social value blended with religious brain washing. I assure you that women get as horny as men all the time.

Please correct me if I am wrong. I can't think of a culture that doesn't look down on prostitute. Do you think any girl dream of being a hooker when they grow up? Can you imagine a kid's mom going to the kid's class to do a show and tell on her profession as an escort?  

Now, let's throw in the bisexual part. If a woman is sleeping with another woman, they aren't viewed as much as a slut. On the contrary, people find that a turn on. And why is that?

My god man, you've certainly lived a sheltered life! I've had girlfriends who were insatiable! Most women don't act on it, because it's considered not proper - they want the guy to make the first move, but the desire is there! (You may think it's an exception, but I think it shows what women are really like: do you know how much time lesbians spend screwing each other.)

And sex drive is an interesting topic. I had one girlfriend (and there were others), a Taiwanese chic, who would always climax 10 times in one hour of lovemaking; each more powerful and longer than the last! That is 10 orgasms to my paltry 1. I felt like Leonard Bernstein conducting the 1812 Overture. Just once, I wanted to feel what she was experiencing.

Male fear of female sexuality is a common theme in feminist literature, by the way.

Good point! And again it comes back to biology - no chance of her fathering another guy's kid, and no threat.

Yes, but that's with one man, not multiple partners. Man's nature is to want multiple partners.


Now you're the one who's underestimating women. Contrary to what some people think, women have not been brainwashed
into acting against their nature and it's insulting to suggest that they have.

Modern women know what they want and they go after it. And what most of them want is a stable relationship with one man.
And they want to be faithful and they want their man to be faithful.

If 2 women are in a stable relationship, they're not sluts. If they sleep with a different woman every night, they are sluts.

This is just the simple definition of the word 'slut'.

The woman whom she's having a relationship with probably thinks her partner is a slut (probably more in a name calling nature). To me? I would think, cool. Maybe I can get to have sex with her (the promiscuous one) easier. And the word slut would never come to my mind.

No, you jump back and forth in the criteria you're using. You're appealing here to literal definitions, when up to now you've been an advocate of the normal guy's point of view, and no normal guy would consider a girl who indiscriminately sleeps with many women a slut. That guy, IF he felt anything at all, would want to participate. The word slut is applied exclusively to women who sleep with lots of men.

Then I'm not a 'normal guy' because I would definitely consider her to be a slut, same as a girl who
indiscriminately sleeps with many men. Why would it be any different?

Why indeed? But that is not how the term is used, and in all your previous posts you insist on understanding words as they are commonly used, so I think Escrit's point is valid. A woman who fucks lots of women is a stud, a woman who fucks lots of men is a slut.

I feel the same about the word 'mistress'. The Merriam Webster dict. (the Oxford dictionary in not available online) gives this definition of whore: a woman who engages in sexual acts for money. So then why is a mistress not a whore? I don't know the answer.

And I'm really suspicious of reducing everything to biology to account for the different standards applied to male/female behavior. Biology is often just an excuse for someone to do what they want with an easy conscience?

Biology IS important in understanding the origins of our behaviors, but it doesn't always justify them. Saying that guys are naturally promiscuous and can fuck who they want without criticism whereas women who do the same are sluts, is bogus.  That confuses nature with ethics. Even the law doesn't recognize this distinction. A guy who is caught cheating on his wife (in the West, at least) must pay dearly for it.

Look, I really don't know where this thread is going. I certainly don't have any reason to want to consider wives whores; it's just that I think the terms we use and the reason we use them are destructive, unfair, confused and illogical. I think when express ideas on the subject, we're just mouthing 10 thousand-yr-old opinions that no longer make sense, and it's always the women who suffer.

It probably takes something like psychology, athropology, and sociology to get in depth on why whore is such a derogatory term. For some reason, I think religion has a lot to do with it, especially in the Western civilizations.

Yes, religion.

Our God's a real prissy guy; he really, really cares about what you do with your dick.  All of the religions that arose out of the Middle East (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) distrust sexuality and are oppressive of women. And they share these characteristics because the nut jobs who thought up these moral codes all belonged to the same Semitic tribes that brought you the burka (full-body veil), the stoning of women for adultery (guys, however, needn't worry), and honor killings. Orthodox Judaism is very misogynist, and the Pope never misses an opportunity to tell us that the ONLY purpose of sex is to bring more Catholics into the world.

It is interesting to compare Japan with the West in this regard. The Japanese have a much more relaxed attitude toward sexuality and prostitution.  In all my time in Japan, I never heard the word 'whore' used as an insult. It's not uncommon for a girl to ocassionaly turn to prostitution to put together some extra cash and for fun. Nobody thinks twice about it. A guy would would marry a WG, and nobody would even consider the idea that a WG was somehow untrustworthy or incapable of love. Japan is the most sexually guiltless society I've ever encountered. Tho there has recently been an uproar against enjo kosai (compensated dating), that's only because 14 yr-old girls have begun selling themselves to buy Gucci bags. In Japan, prostitution is always assuming new forms. When I last there, it was telephone dating clubs where you can hook up with some OL for a quick and anonymous trip to a love hotel.

Because of the relatively relaxed attitudes towards prostitution, nobody assumes that engaging in prostitution says anything important about your moral character. Therefore, nobody is stigmatized with silly statements like "once a whore, always a whore". A girl will hook her way through college and then get on with her life, without having to bear any burdens.

I have the Oxford - is any other dictionary worth reading?. Whore just refers to prostitute. Prostitute is ... "Woman who offers
her body to promiscuous sexual intercourse, esp. for payment ....."

The word 'promiscuous' is important to me. That's why a mistress, concubine or wife, who is faithful to one man, is not a whore.  
Can't argue with the Oxford ... Game, Set and Match.      

I find it hard to believe that the world's most complete dictionary uses only one word to define whore. You're cherry picking guy. The Oxford Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language has how many volumes and weighs how many kilos?

The fact that other dictionaries define the word without the use of the word promiscuous demonstrates the ambiguity of the term.. Then there is the meaning of 'whore' in other languages. The key concept is alway sex for money (when used to describe the way a woman supports herself). I repeat my earlier statement that 'mistress' is a pretty word to allow the financially better off a fig leaf of respectability.

But I'd like to see the Oxford Dict include this in their definition for whore:

A girl who has had sex with someone other than the the user of this term, whether she has been paid or not.

Your insistence on promiscuity indicates again that what guys don't like is women screwing other men. That's why a guy will call a girl who has cheated on him a whore, even if she hasn't gotten anything out of it but a good time.

You think it's OK for a woman to accept money for sex without any damage to her reputation - it just depends on the type of arrangement. That may be the accepted position. I think it often involves our lying to ourselves.

You could visit a girl in the James Lee Mansion for years, leaving behind 500 HK each time and she wouldn't be a whore, but as soon as some other guy fucked her for money, poof! she's a whore.

The question I began this thread with was just a starting point to ask what people meant by the term 'whore'. I wanted to show that there is a lot of self-serving sexist baggage that comes with the term, that our attitudes towards whores are hypocritical. Hypocritical because what we really mean is that it's OK for the sweet innocent thing to accept money from us for sex, but if she does it with anyone else, she's nothing but a whore, less of a person, and not capable of genuine feelings.

1) Not long ago (a few hundred years, maybe less, over several thousands years of human history)  it was impossible for women to file a divorce against men. But man could divorce woman with no problem.

2) Married women most likely have to change their last name (surname, family name, etc). Why is that?  Although it is a bit more popular for women to retain her maiden name (her last name), I would guess at least 95% of the women would still have to change their last name to her husband's.