So, what number am I?

kia

During a recent homework break, I was browsing through a bunch of websites on which I like to waste time, and I stumbled upon a piece written because of the newly-released Anna Faris movie “What’s your number?” Although I had seen the movie’s trailer many times before, I had never paid attention to its premise until I read this. After giving a brief synopsis of the movie, the author discussed the whole issue of the number of sexual partners a person has had and the subsequent judgments and assumptions that people derive from that number. This definitely hit home for me.

As a girl in college and a witness to our current sex culture, the number game is still definitely a challenge. I’m saying that it’s a challenge because I still hear fellow college students label girls that hookup (whatever that means exactly) relatively often with different guys as “sluts.” On the other hand, as many of you know, guys still take pride in having a high number of conquests and while some girls do look down upon those guys’ behavior, they still get to comfortably proclaim that number.

We, girls, can’t.

But, to be honest, I think this double standard is absolutely ridiculous. I have no shame in the “long” list of guys I’ve slept with. Hell, if you ask my friends, I’m actually kind of proud of my very good-looking track record. And, I’ve very consciously decided to have sex with each and every one of them.

This brings me to my next thought on this whole lopsided issue. Why is there a double standard? Why is it OK, and even an achievement when a dude adds another chick to his list, but an “oops-oh-no” when a girl does it?

I think it goes back to the whole “women must remain pure” nonsense of back in the day, as well as a balance of power when it comes to physical encounters.  This second explanation is the one that really irritates me. For a while, I’ve been sensing that when it comes to hooking up, and especially having sex, there’s a popular belief that men “get” sex and women “give it up” to them. So, that means that if a guy succeeds at convincing a girl to have sex with him, he accomplished something, and if I girl does have sex with a guy, she lost some battle and now should be ashamed of her weakness.

Yeah, right.

I personally like to give myself a pat on the back when I go out, meet a sexy dude, vibe with him, and end my night getting down and dirty with him.  I wouldn’t say that I derive my self-esteem from “accomplishing” this, but I’m definitely not feeling any kind of shame because of it. I did not screw up “give” him something I shouldn’t have.

I went out, I scored, good for me. So ladies, however “high” your number is, be proud and continue the good work.

Kia Kokalitcheva is the Sex on Tuesday blogger. Follower her on Twitter @imkialikethecar.

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • cboy

    She’s hot

  • http://anonymoustroll.myopenid.com/ anonymous

    You’re an atheist, as you deny the very basis of gender roles every religion in the world agrees upon. Thus, your arguments cannot be based in morality, but just your personal whims.

    • Guest

      I doubt that you can speak for “every religion in the world.”  Many religions through history have sanctioned promiscuity, and some have even had temple prostitutes.

    • Tim

      “every religion in the world agrees upon”
      Ha, ha, ha!!  You’ll wait a long time for this utopia.

  • c.lion

    I think a better question than “Why is there a double standard?” is “Why is there STILL a double standard?”

    Women are no longer bound by the physical constraints our ancestors evolved in, and for the MOST part not by the economic constraints of the past hundreds of years either. 

    What we need now is idealogical/moral equality. 

    Society can start to ostracize promiscuous male individuals. If it’s unattractive for a female to have had “too many” partners, it should also be unattractive for males to have had “too many” partners as well.

    Or the other way around. Males can shift their perspective on women’s sexuality. Women who fulfill their sexual needs are not any less moral than the males who do the same.

    In a perfect world, society would meet somewhere in between. 

    As individuals, we should take personal responsibility about the oppressive attitudes we are propagating when we call women sluts and whores.

    “That’s just the way things are” is not a good enough excuse. I don’t see any men spearing down their dinners after a three hour chase.

    Evolve.

    • Guest

      “In a perfect world, society would meet somewhere in between.”
      Don’t hold your breath.

    • Guest

      I think the argument you’re failing to respond to is that women are better off with few sexual partners.  It lessens the risks of incurable venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancy, domestic abuse, cervical cancer, desertion, and many other problems.  If all you want is an orgasm, you can masturbate.

      • c.lion

        I am by no means encouraging unprotected intercourse. It’s the 21st century, condoms and numerous forms of contraception are readily available to us as citizens of a post-industrial society.

        That addresses risk of STIs, unplanned pregnancy and cervical cancer.My argument is for responsible, conscientious, adult men and women.As for domestic abuse: I believe this has more emotional implications. If a man hurts a woman once, I’m pretty sure it’s called battery. And again, because my argument is for responsible, conscientious men and women, I would expect such a conflict to be settled in a court of law.I’m honestly not sure what you mean exactly by desertion. The best I can think of is you are referring to a situation in which a woman has sex with a man because she thinks it will make him “like” her or even “love” her only to be “deserted” after the deed.Again, adult men and women. If you are even minutely inclined to use sex as a mean to establish a relationship, do us all a favor and stay home and watch the Disney Channel.

        • Guest

          “numerous forms of contraception are readily available”
          And the more men a woman copulates with in a drunken stupor, the more likely they are to fail or be ignored.

          Desertion generally means that a sexual partner walks away from his/her commitments and responsibilities, often to take up with someone else.  Have you not heard of this?

          I had to laugh when I read “my argument is for responsible, conscientious men and women.”  In our society, such rare people are generally not promiscuous.

          • c.lion

            Clearly you’ve never been sexually active. Do you have a personal anecdote or empirical evidence that there is a correlation between number of partners and  use of birth control that you would like to share with us?

          • Guest

            I have actually been sexually active, but you must be illiterate (or deliberately obtuse).  There’s been all sorts of research about sexual activity and the spread of infections.  Start here:  http://std.about.com/od/riskfactorsforstds/tp/topriskfactors.htm

          • c.lion

            You can call me illiterate but I’m not the person attempting to pass of opinions or causal observations as facts. The about.com article you suggest is written by a single doctor and lacks sources reviewed by the scientific community. 

            Furthermore, this article does not support your point

            “I think the argument you’re failing to respond to is that women are better off with few sexual partners.  ”

            In case you misinterpreted the original posted blog, it’s about DOUBLE STANDARDS. not a place to advocate for “abstinence or die of venereal disease” propaganda. 

          • Guest

            I’m not an advocate of anything except reasonable behavior.  The article I linked was stated to be merely a starting point.  Did you search elsewhere?  I think you jump to rash conclusions without reading or thinking carefully.  You’ve done it half a dozen times in relation to this one article.

          • Guest

            “lacks sources reviewed by the scientific community”
            Since you asked for a personal anecdote, I’m surprised that you now demand a rigorous protocol.

          • Guest

            “”lacks sources reviewed by the scientific community”

            But the article was reviewed:
            http://www.about.com/health/review.htm

            Are you sure you can read?

      • c.lion

        My question to you: why do you believe that WOMEN and not all PEOPLE are better off with few sexual partners?

        Men are equally susceptible to STIs if having unprotected sex. Unplanned pregnancy SHOULD be just as much a concern for men as it is for women.

        It is attitudes like yours that allow men to think they can run around without any sense or responsibility.

        • Guest

          “It is attitudes like yours”
          Really?  Where did I advocate irresponsible behavior?  I merely pointed out that promiscuity creates more opportunities for women to be harmed, perhaps seriously.  You may want to dictate what others think and do, but I doubt that can succeed.

  • http://anonymoustroll.myopenid.com/ anonymous

    There’s also the very obvious evolutionary-psych reason men want women who are chaste. All living beings have the biological goal of producing offspring (that are themselves capable of reproduction, but the parenthetical digresses), and humans are no exception. The woman knows, for obvious reasons, when a child is hers. A man does not, at least before DNA testing came around (which is still problematic–try telling your wife you just want to make sure the baby is actually yours by doing a DNA test), so he needs to know his woman is chaste. Otherwise, the offspring could be not his, but somebody else’s.

    Now, one cannot guarantee that the most chaste-seeming isn’t screwing your best friend, but one can be discerning and reduce the chances thereof. This Russian chick is hot, but after reading this, very few guys will find her to be wife material.

    • Guest

      Now that women have economic autonomy, there’s little reason to perpetuate marriage.  Unwed mothers can endure the consequences of their choices, and unwed fathers can rejoice.

      • http://anonymoustroll.myopenid.com/ anonymous

        Unwed fathers don’t rejoice–they pay large sums of money to support not only the child, but the child’s mother (de facto alimony) and do not get a meaningful relationship with their child.

        • Guest

          Really?  What percentage pay up?  And how many care that they have a child?  Black women in particular are paying a steep price for promiscuity.

  • Guest

    Are you a bonobo?

    • cynthia

      are you a neanderthal?

      • Guest

        Irrelevant.  The sexual proclivities of Neanderthals aren’t known.

        • c.lion

          They did go extinct for a reason…

          • Guest

            Because they were outsmarted?

  • Somebody

    The double standard exists for a reason.  Guys don’t get preggers, only girls do.  A small percentage of girls are on the pill, while the rest rely on condoms for birth control.  There is still a considerable population that does it bare (risky).  

    Women are labeled a slut more by other women than men, but still men prefer the women to have partners in the single digit range while men are in the double digit range.  Mostly, women expect men to have more experience and practice makes perfect when it’s time to perform the deed.  Sort of like when a man leads a woman on a dance floor.  When it happens that a woman is very experienced in bed, well it’s like two people trying to lead on the dance floor and it doesn’t go so well.  

    Men expect girls private area to be neat and smelling of roses, but if she keeps pretending she’s a porn star, it’s going to end up smelling like a landfill, and nobody wants that.  Four thousand years it’s been this way, so it’s genetically taught that men are more promiscuous and women are prudish.  

    Also another thing to keep in mind, when a women confesses to a guy her “number” of partners, we guys remember that, and should marriage happens, it will be a ticking time bomb that ends the marriage in a way the husband calls the wife a slut and it will hurt because it’s true.

    By all means, women should have as much sex as they can, but it’s a gambling roulette, once the girl has an STI, she’s pretty much killed her chances of a marriage or a baby, and part of her measly income will go towards drugs to manage the symptoms.  Not to mention a life time of poor self-esteem for maybe an hour’s worth of fun.  

    You only have one body, you can treat it like a temple or like a hotel room, just be an adult about it.

    • Guest

      “it’s genetically taught”
      Perhaps you mean generically.

    • sam

      Your reply is so misogynistic and wacky, I almost don’t think I should reply because it seems too far gone. Did you go to Cal? For shame!

      “When a woman is very experienced in bed, it’s like two people leading..”
      So men – how many of you prefer a woman who knows absolutely nothing about your body or pleasure in the bedroom? Since when did sex have a “leader”? How in the hell did you conclude that all men know what they are doing enough to lead? So confused.

      “Men expect girls private area to be neat and smelling of roses”
      GOOD LUCK finding that rosey smelling vagina! I’m pretty sure most vaginas smell like… VAGINA, not flowers. Go fuck a rose if that’s what you’re expecting from all the women you encounter. How many sexual partners one has does NOT determine bodily odor by the way, what science classes have you been taking? “Four thousand years it’s been this way” AWESOME grammar used to express that arbitrary bit of information!

      Second to last paragraph.. I would have plenty to argue I’m sure, but I just can’t quite discern what you are trying to say with those terrible grammar skills.

      “Once a girl has an STI, she’s pretty much killed her chance of marriage”
      Where did you get this information? I want to see the statistics to back this one up. Women getting an STI have a harder time getting married, but it doesn’t affect men? Because women love to marry them some STI carryin’ men. And for some reason, I just don’t find your blanket claim about STIs killing marriage chances credible. Maybe because it’s some made up subjective bullshit. “Lifetime of poor self-esteem” Why don’t you shove that arm chair psychiatry right back up that dark hole it came from, you don’t know and can’t report on all the lives of women with STIs.

      “Just be an adult about it” Oh, the irony of your last line. 

      • Somebody

        I see common sense alludes you.  You should keep your ideas to yourself as you have confused a incomprehensible rant with objective criticism.  
        Oh, and good luck with your lifelong STI as you have expressed very little concern for the prevention of risky behavior.  I would say GO FuCK yourself, but it seems you are well versed in that department.

  • http://anonymoustroll.myopenid.com/ anonymous

    Uh, it’s a scientifically-proven fact that men are many times more likely to have sex with random woman than a woman is with a random man.
    http://www.elainehatfield.com/79.pdf

    Rationalize it to yourself however you want, but no self-respecting man is going to want to marry a woman who opened her legs up to every frat-boy that looked good enough. You’re very attractive, obviously, but when a guy you’re interested in in the future googles you and reads this, you’re going to be a lot less attractive in his eyes.

  • Alas

    I appreciate you Russian girls putting out so frequently but where did the Asian girl go?