The Hypocritical Motivation Behind Female on Female Slut Shaming

By Gamal Hennessy

The concept of slut shaming is often associated with an inequality between male and female sexual expression. Men are praised for high levels of sexual activity while women are maligned. The majority of this social warfare was thought to be a product of male bias, but a new study suggests slut shaming is a powerful social tool for women to use against other women.

Researchers observed and interviewed college-aged women in a campus setting. They found slut shaming to be a form of abuse women from affluent families used to disparage women from less fortunate social circumstances. Shame was about income, not sex although sexual expression was the target of the attack.

“Viewing women only as victims of men’s sexual dominance fails to hold women accountable for the roles they play in reproducing social inequalities. By engaging in ‘slut-shaming’ women at the top create more space for their own sexual experimentation, at the cost of women at the bottom of social hierarchies.”

— Elizabeth Armstrong, Professor of Sociology at the University of Michigan

This isn’t a new phenomenon. The upper classes in societies throughout history have engaged in broad types of sexual expression and denied the same activity to lower social groups. Erotica and manuals of sexual techniques have been hidden away in private libraries. Only the rich could afford the services of concubines, courtesans or prostitutes. In modern eras, both the church and the state impose a sexually restrictive morality on the general population as they indulge in any and every sexual option imaginable.   

This systemic sexual repression is a form of class warfare designed to restrict upward mobility. Erotic capital, like financial, social and intellectual capital are transferable, giving a person with one type of capital the ability to trade it in for other types of social currency. (See Erotic Capital by Catherine Hakim) The difference between erotic capital and other forms is its distribution. Beauty, sex appeal and physical ability can’t be hoarded by certain classes and passed down through generations. In theory, anyone from any class can achieve a high degree of erotic capital. If society allowed free transfer of this currency, social mobility would suddenly be within reach of a wider section of society. Suppression of erotic capital through techniques like slut shaming reduces the utility of erotic capital for those who need it most.

Sexual intelligence and independence in sexual expression could be effective counter measures for this type of social warfare, but few women of any class have the training to develop those traits. (See Love in the Time of Smartphones) Until we treat sexual expression as a fundamental dynamic of society, tactics like slut shaming will continue to have a detrimental effect on everyone.

Have fun.

Gamal

Laws Don't Improve Society. We Do.

According to Foreign Policy Magazine, the rape culture of India isn't being reduced by public calls for castration, mob violence and harsher anti-rape laws. The problem might be getting worse. 

India Doesn't Understand It's Rape Problem

“The obsession with punishment “deflects attention from the accountability shared by the state” — its failure to address social norms that lead to sex crimes against women. These norms often emerge from legal and educational institutions that place little to no premium on gender equality. India’s preoccupation with capital punishment gives “individuals a way to distance themselves from potentially sexist beliefs they may themselves hold.”
”

— Kavita Krishnan, Secretary of the advocacy group All India Progressive Women’s Association

The problem isn't limited to India or our present issues with police brutality in America, pseudo religious extremism in Europe or mass murder in Nigeria. Governments can pass laws and crackdown on segments of the population, but our problems will continue until we change our individual perspectives and attitudes.

“The Holocaust was legal. Slavery was legal. Segregation was legal. If you use the state as a metric for ethics, you’ll end up disappointed.”

— Lex Loper

Consider the ongoing experience America is having with the LGBT community. Prior to the Stonewall Riots, homosexuality was a lifestyle shunned, attacked and rejected by mainstream society. They were blamed for HIV and accused of undermining the fabric of American society. In 2014, challenges still exist, but gay marriage is legal in a majority of states, same sex relationships in entertainment and advertising is on the rise and the mainstream has watered down gay culture in order to absorb it. 

This didn't happen because laws were changed to compel people to change their views. Views changed when anti-gay people understood some of their friends, family and colleagues were gay. Views changed when the two groups looked past the labels and started dealing with the people. Once the views were altered, the door to progress could open and then the laws changed. Of course, there are some people still fighting progress and other parts of the world are just as bad as they ever were. But change is happening among people first. Changing the law comes second.

If we want change, then we have to change. We can't just call for laws to be passed, demand people be fired, and wait for other people to change around us. Rape culture, racism and religious extremism are all macro level problems we can begin to reduce on an individual level. We won't be able to eradicate any of these problems, but changing individual attitudes can create a cultural shift and that kind of change can have more impact than passing a random law.

Have fun.

Gamal 

The Crossroads of Privilege

Each person in our society falls into multiple categories defined by class, race, ability, gender, orientation, education and others. As we move through different environments, our multiple forms of "membership" are perceived as positive or negative. This class gets attacked for X but has an easy time doing Y. This race is accepted here but not there. Navigating the different currents can be treacherous, especially when several factors come into play at once. 

A piece in the Huffington Post called Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person looks at the defensiveness certain people have when confronting the concept of white privilege. The author, who has the benefits of race but the challenges of gender and race, points out that white privilege (or male privilege or American privilege or cisgender privilege) isn't a magic wand anyone can use to erase all the other obstacles in their lives. It suggests most of us are dealing with a complex tapestry of issues which are only becoming more intricate as our subgroups grow.

““The concept of intersectionality recognizes that people can be privileged in some ways and definitely not privileged in others. There are many different types of privilege, not just skin-color privilege, that impact the way people can move through the world or are discriminated against. These are all things you are born into, not things you earned, that afford you opportunities that others may not have.””

— Gina Crosley-Corcoran: Author of the Feminist Breeder

I read the piece thinking about both my own complex relationship to the world around me as well as the multiple layers I want to build into my characters. I'm sharing it because if more of us saw each other beyond a singular two dimensional image we can turn our privilege into something positive.

Have fun.
G