Why the ****/stud, *****/cassanova dichotomy is not (completely) a double standard

[TheMillersWife]

Originally Posted by Caddy1316

I'll make this ultra simple:

Being a s l u t: Easy
Sleeping with many beautiful women: Hard

Here's the problem with that dichotomy:

Beautiful Women is an entirely subjective thing... and in order to prove that the achievement was well-earned, we would need pictures of every single woman that guy has bedded. What if it turns out that they're all ugly? Or even mediocre at best? Does that make him less of a stud?

Isn't it equally as difficult to get a great looking guy to bed a mediocre or ugly-looking woman? Shouldn't she then be praised for the notches on her belt if she has managed to pull all the Hollywood Gorgeous men?

Just seems like a completely idiosyncratic conclusion....

[Mighty_Pelican]

What does the OP's theory mean for men who have the luxury of turning down sex from attractive women because he has so many options?

Another double standard I've seen is that if a man turns down sex, it is considered a grave insult to the woman.

If a woman turns down sex, it is not considered a grave insult to the man.

[cindersslipper]

SIut = women who sleep with other men but not you.