omething one hears modern females state repeatedly is “”it’s so unfair: when a guy has sex with lots of girls, he’s a stud; when a girl has sex with lots of dudes, she’s a slut.”” This is what I’ll refer to as the “”slut/stud”” argument. In its inception, this argument served the purpose of demonstrating the way in which the media and cultural artifacts portrayed promiscuous women negatively while concurrently portraying promiscuous men positively. In the past, this argument was valid; western cultural items definitely exhibited a double standard in regards to promiscuity (James Bond was a hero; Anna Karenina was a home-wrecking whore). In a contemporary context, however, the argument is less than tenable.

There are now cultural items that portray promiscuous women in a positive light – take television shows such as “”Sex and the City,”” for example. Consequently, it would seem as though the contention that promiscuous men get better treatment in art, literature and the media is no longer as valid as it once was, yet use of the slut/stud argument still persists. Women who engage in casual sex still implement it in defending their actions, indicating that a double standard still exists somewhere – not in cultural items, but somewhere else. Where? It exists in the minds of men, as they’re capable of being promiscuous without feeling the slightest pang of guilt, whereas women aren’t. Women impute more to sex than an orgasm, and it’s something for which they should be praised.

If women truly wish to transcend their subaltern status as “”the second sex,”” then they need to somehow instill in men the very sense of social/ethical responsibility to sexual partners that they themselves possess. But how can this be done?

One possibility is to boycott casual sex altogether. If women refuse to engage in sex purely for purposes of pleasure, males will be brought to their knees – they’ll be forced to appeal to women on a plane higher than that of visceral charm or sex appeal. Yet this proposed strategy for gaining gender equality isn’t without a few obstacles.

For one, males respond to such tactics with deception. How many times have women fallen prey to men who put on airs of sincerity and compassion, only to be left with unanswered calls and text messages subsequent to having sex with them and only to be relegated to the “”booty call”” list of these deceptive snakes? The fact that a man will do anything to gain access to the realm behind a woman’s zipper makes it vital that women forgo sexual relations with men – even potential soul mates – until they’re absolutely certain that their potential partner is worthy.

When women are promiscuous, they’re often lonely and seeking a warm body to wake up with, because the thought of waking up next to a stuffed animal or pillow is frightening. Women need to realize the feeling of loneliness they encounter between boyfriends is what actually brings more joy when a mate is found.

Males often refer to a female sexual acquiescence as “”giving it up,”” yet this epithet doesn’t capture the essence of what “”it”” truly is. “”It”” is something that, frankly, only a few select men deserve. Though the character traits of the men who deserve “”it”” may indeed vary depending on what each individual woman finds appealing, all of these men share a single trait: they appreciate it, not because it feels good or increases their status in the eyes of other men, but because it’s perhaps the ultimate expression of a woman’s trust.

Andrew McGhee is a physics
sophomore. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.