Slut shaming serves, above all, as a fundamental pillar the modern community reposes its weight upon, the great turtle to all morality, so to say.
It should not be forgotten, however, that it is also perceived by many as an important pastime. Its success, that is to say - the amusement that ensues from the act of inflicting righteous shame upon a presumed slut is entirely proportional to the following factors:
- The number of definitions the vague term "slut" can acquire
- The wideness of the range of "shaming" techniques available on hand
- The last but not the least, the amount of participants
Taken literally, the term "slut" signifies a woman whose fortress is not well-guarded. One can see the relativity of this concept, as it depends entirely on the power in the hands of the attacker. This is the principal reason why every human being unfortunate enough to be born female is considered a potential slut and often treated as such.
Despite sexual desire being the principal motivation behind human actions according to Freud, slut shaming is not, or at least not always, associated to sex. As well as a teenage girl, who happens to bare a fraction of her body (no matter which) for a fraction of a second in front of a fraction of a camera, a slut can also be an elderly Cambridge professor researching into the role of slut shaming.
So it won't be the defence of the woman's fortress that will matter, but her efforts to undermine the fortress of the community proving it is not well-guarded. "Slut factor" is an interesting moral concept in that case, as a woman is not only a slut when she acts as such, but she is also usually a slut when she acts like she isn't.
Generally speaking, claiming that sexual desire is behind slut shaming reveals the speaker's lack of education. Slut shaming is a wholly independent factor, another important motivator behind our actions, after sexual impulse. The original statement simply becomes devoid of all sense, when one considers that men never shame the 'sluts' they are in bed with, for as long as they are in bed with them.
A woman, therefore, does not become a slut, but is born one. The propaganda of 'slut-like' behavior in popular press can do nothing more than make the 'slut factor' in a woman more obvious. As a matter of fact, the press does not even promote 'slut-like' behavior, as the woman reading it can only be a slut already.
Origins and morality
When morality was first introduced for women, slut shaming was, too, although it was not called that way at that time. Following the carrot and the stick theory, slut shaming was the stick, that is - the bitter part. The carrot was either martyrdom and subsequent canonization or lifelong status of a prude, on choice. During that era, but also during all the later ones, slut shaming revealed itself an essential ruling process of humanity. Had it not been for it, the world would have already fallen into the hands of those with no knowledge of this or other ruling processes of humanity.
Note that females that happen to be in the possession of the required knowledge are sluts by definition.
Morality for men is undoubtably less interesting to look at, mainly because it has never existed, but also when any such question arises, it turns out that man is virtuous when he runs around his town making sure women are. This idea has always made morality stand side by side with pleasure in male spirit. What links the two together is, as the readers have probably already guessed, slut shaming.
The term "slut shaming", as already mentioned, describes more than a moral concept, but all the intangible pleasure deriving from morality and a variety of tangible acts, such as painting the word "slut" in huge red letters on the house of a girl who goes out too often, and in addition, with the men who don't happen to be the artist himself.
What makes it a pastime is the number of possible techniques designed to make a woman feel ashamed for what she is or is not doing. It goes without saying that every technique can only be adopted towards a certain type of a woman, but as there are all kinds of women all around the world, slut shaming always feels new (as morality should feel).
With the advent of the internet, the activity became easier but, apparently, not less amusing; sometimes even more so, as the victim can never really escape, and so the practice is given a sense of sustainability, an important concept for modern-day people.
It should not be forgotten that any 'side effects' of slut shaming are never deliberate, when men are concerned, as the vision the 'shamer' has while fulfilling his moral duty is of a victim, who, on her knees, comes begging him to 'virtuously' marry her. When women are concerned (and they often are), they don't have any vision but the one their spouse or a holy text provides them with. So it is never deliberate from the part of the pursuer if his victim does not find the same way out as he does, for her, and manually ends her life. In any case, slut shaming is never over with one victim's death. Moral men should always keep in mind that many others need their support too.
The one aspect of slut shaming this text does not account for is the slut shaming performed in a group which is quite a common practice. It is not as different from "individual" shaming, in a way that the reasons behind the act remain the same, with the exception of herd instinct, which as we know, produces morality of the highest value.
To conclude, the speaker who condemns slut shaming as being a rudimentary, unnecessary and/or violent practice, is entirely illiterate, unless he is a woman - in which case he is also a slut. Such speaker forgets that if we weren't shaming our females, we wouldn't be fighting for them also.
- Or would it be the other way round?
- Amusement being, of course, attributed to the one giving, not the one receiving
- Giving birth to derivatives such as "moral pleasure", which become oxymorons the moment they leave a woman's mouth