Girls Are About To Get Even Sluttier

The sexual revolution happened because the pill appeared, many contend. Women on the pill no longer had to worry about getting pregnant, single middle class women increasingly had the ability to work and live on their own (away from the scrutiny of their families), and they could now put off getting married to focus on their career. But recently, a researcher has fingered another factor in the onset of the ‘sexual revolution’ – the end of syphilis. Historically, syphilis was a debilitating disease that would deform the faces of victims, and often kill them. It ravaged much of Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries.

A Rembrandt portrait of a man with syphilis

In 1943, it was discovered that penicillin is an effective treatment for syphilis. In the 1940’s and 50’s, syphilis-related deaths declined dramatically. Andrew Francis of Emory University has studied this period, noting that promiscuity increased at the same time; he goes on to conclude that because syphilis ceased to be a fatal threat, people went on to have sex with more people and with greater abandon. His study abstract states:

Measures of risky non-traditional sexual behavior began to rise during this period. These trends appeared to coincide with the collapse of the syphilis epidemic. Syphilis incidence reached an all-time low in 1957 and syphilis deaths fell rapidly during the 1940s and early 1950s. Regression analysis demonstrated that most measures of sexual behavior significantly increased immediately following the collapse of syphilis and most measures were significantly associated with the syphilis death rate. Together, the findings supported the notion that the discovery of penicillin decreased the cost of syphilis and thereby played an important role in shaping modern sexuality.

The case of penicillin is an interesting, cautionary tale. A cure for a debilitating disease would seem like the perfect example of something with no downsides; how could a cure ever be a bad thing?  But if Francis is right, even a welcome cure has its consequences, an impact to which many would object.

 The Next Frontier

Dr. Tariq Sadiq is a UK researcher developing a device as consequential as the condom and the pill — a way to test for venereal diseases quickly, conveniently and cheaply. The device would be a chip that connects to a smartphone; the user would deposit urine or saliva on the chip, and would receive an immediate response as to whether he or she had common sexually transmitted diseases, like gonorrhea or chlamydia. Sadiq is not alone; Another researcher at Columbia University, Samuel Sia, is developing a similar device, planned for use in African clinics and eventually rich countries. Tests that used to require a full laboratory to conduct can now be done with a small handheld or desktop device, with little to no human labor required.

STD infection rates have been climbing in the UK, where Sadiq lives. In the US, chlamydia has become more prevalent, but the rate for other STDs seems to have leveled off. Regardless of the trends, the threat of contracting an STD continues to put a damper on the prospect of having sex with lots of people. Some of this is unfounded, as AIDS and syphilis to a lesser extent are far more common among men who have sex with men than among heterosexuals, but STD testing is often expensive and inconvenient. It can cost hundreds of dollars even if you have health insurance, and few get it more than once or twice a year, despite having multiple new sexual partners every year. In addition, it may take weeks to get an appointment, and yet more weeks to get your results, at which point you’ll probably lose the paper it’s written on. All you’ll have left is a weak assurance to give your partner that “I’m clean.” Of course, the less scrupulous are content baldly lying about their STD test record.

With such testing devices, one would get results quickly and digitally. The results would be transmitted to an app on your phone, then you’d run the app and show your results to prospective sexual partners. Even if a test result were two weeks old, if the user has been having sex for eight years, over 99% of their sexual history is accounted for; unless they had some wild sex spree since then, the odds that the person has contracted an STD in the intervening two weeks are low. The test would be cheap, at $5 or less per use. Once people become comfortable sharing their data in this way, it might even start to appear in on online dating profiles. It’s hard to see how this wouldn’t catch on, in one form or another, given the obvious benefits.

The Response


The question posed above is a favorite of mine. If the case of penicillin and syphilis is any guide, electronic STD testing may usher in a new era of promiscuity. The responses above, as a statistical representation of how people would respond, is probably meaningless.

But even if you had a well crafted survey, whose sample reflected the population, the results would be near worthless. If you had asked girls in the 1950’s if they would be having one night stands given that syphilis was no longer a threat, they wouldn’t have said, ‘Well yes, raw dogging is no longer a problem! Waiting ’til marriage is a sucker’s game now, obvi!’ They’d have shuddered with disgust. They wouldn’t have foreseen that pre-marital, no strings attached sex would become the norm, just because of some medical innovations.

Recently, I spoke to a couple girls in their early 20’s, girls who were relatively chaste – they’d usually only have sex with men with they’ve dated for some time. The topic of STDs came up, and both of them were quick to conclude that they’d have sex with strangers more often and more quickly if they had better assurance that the man in question was free of STDs. To be honest, I was a little surprised by how forthright they were, and that they weren’t more critical of slutty behavior, given their own conduct.

Graphic Credit: The Sexonomist

With the diminished threat of contracting STDs, more and more women will have sex with less prior commitment. Even women who answered no to the question above, claiming that concerns about STDs will not change the number of men they sleep with, will become sluttier.

Imagine a girl named Becky, a six out of 10 on the looks scale. As Becky holds out for increasingly little commitment from a man before agreeing to have sex with him, the pool of men willing to try and bang her increases. Where before, when Becky waited until the engagement or the wedding to have sex, no man higher than a 6 on the status scale would have sex with her. Currently, Becky waits until the third date or fourth date to have sex, but men 8 or above on the status scale can’t be bothered to stick around that long, for the most part. With the threat of STDs a thing of the past, Becky will start having one night stands regularly, and may even approach men outright with coy offers of quick sex. Even a high status man is happy to sleep with a plain woman like Becky, as long as she lets it happen quickly and easily.

Of course, this transition has already been happening for several decades; eliminating the threat of STDs will just hasten it. Some women are already having sex with strangers they just met, and more will join them in the ensuing years. More women will spend more time single, and less time in committed, exclusive relationships. As they choose to have more sex with less prior commitment, they will get more attention from high value men, men who would have ignored them when they were slower to have sex.

The plain men who would commit to these women will stop being appealing after all those romps with handsome and charming men. When and if these women do get married, they’ll secretly hold their husbands in contempt, as pathetic lame creatures who have quietly robbed them of their independence. After all, these husbands have no hope of measuring up to the men of her youth. She will have infrequent sex with him and her libido will disappear. Health ‘experts,’ inevitably, will consign this to aging and a lack of ‘communication,’ and we’ll forget what it’s like to meet a girl who doesn’t have a permanent seat on the cock carousel.

Read Next: All Girls Like Muscular Guys

33 thoughts on “Girls Are About To Get Even Sluttier”

  1. Interesting article about human behavior depending on how epidemic a disease is. Where does genital herpes fit into the picture? I heard it was on the rise, and to quote Eddie Murphy “You carry that shit like luggage your whole life.”

    1. Herpes & HPV are infections of the entire genital region; in other words, condoms don’t protect against these infections, they’re transmitted merely by genital contact…no penetration necessary. Just wanted to make sure everyone knows while we’re on the topic. This device could potentially eliminate the spread of these infections…given that people generally use good sense, which of course, they generally don’t.

  2. With this kind of technology, you can not only show that you are clean, if you are bold enough you can demand your sex partner test themselves on your phone(keep a spare chip) to show they are clean. I wonder how many men or women would demand that.
    Of course most people won’t bother securing the privacy settings on their phone, which means companies will be able to start tracking sexual activity this way.

  3. ‘Superbug’ gonorrhea could change all this.
    It is a strain of gonorrhea first reported in the MSM last July (and not since, curiously enough) which was found first in Eastern Europe (and has since appeared in Japan).
    At that time, it was 10% of all total reported cases but was expected to be on the increase; it was also treatable (at that time) by only ONE antibiotic!
    Google this new threat to the privileged princess’s ‘lifestyles of the whores and harlots’. This is truly nasty stuff…

      1. Looks like this new “super bug” is yet another primarily gay STD…
        “Nearly 21,000 new cases had been diagnosed in 2011, with more than a third of cases in gay men and more than a third in people who have had gonorrhea before, the UK Health Protection Agency (HPA) said in a statement.”
        Since gay’s were one third of new cases, it follows that most old cases were probably disproportionately from gay men as well.
        Red pill advice of the day: Keep your dick out of men’s asses…

  4. As usual, the government will force this test on men on behalf of women and make it a felony for men to pressure women to take this test. As usual, feminist democracy will continue to treat men like 2nd class citizens for the benefit of women and their feeeeelings
    PS: Never ever serve the military, you are serving a female supremacist state agenda

  5. On the other hand, no new antibiotics have been developed in quite some time, and strains of completely antibiotic resistant untreatable gonnareah have existed since at least last December. It’s quite possible that the threat of STD becomes a lot more dangerous before it becomes better.

    1. As long as the test can test for it, its existance doesn’t change anything. AIDS doesn’t have a cure either but if it can be ruled out then you’re good to go so to speak.

  6. An interesting idea, but forgive me being skeptical of this just like the “sexbot” revolution. Sure it will happen some year, but not just yet, though it’s fun to contemplate how it all plays out. Let’s just not get all crazy goofy about it like with the “666 ID chip in my head!”

  7. What about HPV? Supposedly that is the most common STD in the US, with statistics estimated 70% of men and women between the ages of 20 and 40 have it! And condoms do not protect against it and it can lead to cancer.

  8. I promise, the “end” of venereal disease was huge part of the sexual revolution, probably more than the pill. Gonorrhea and Syph were probably more a fearful retardant to sexual activity as any fear of pregnancy. And as I entered high school, both were part of the scare programs, more so than pregnancy, that schools and culture imposed on young people as a way keep them away from sex. It was almost like a given for me when I was 14, “go to a hooker, get VD.” There was a lore passed around by guys about getting up after sex and pissing quickly to avoid VD. The whole acronym VD has disappeared and the new STD created because VD lost its fear factor with the advent of antobiotics. The reality was that it was all bullshit anyway. No way High School boys in America had VD. But it gave girls cover for refusal.
    And what the “end” of VD really did do was to kick the props out one of key objections that girls would have during 60s and 70s style anti-slut defense. So once pregnancy and VD were not a factor then men could pressure and push without those obstacles. I felt that in mid 80s when the AIDS scare was running wild, women jumped right on AIDS as a shield to pull back into the Anti-slut defense arsenal and gave them cover room once again to object in the way VD had given them before. From 1970 to about 1985, first night sex was very common and dropped of again after 1985 until hookup culture and condom use became widespread.

  9. My college has one of the highest STD rates in the country so I would think it might work to reduce how often women have sex here based on the number of women and men that are likely already infected.

  10. Uhh, the plain men won’t want to marry. If they need sex they could just visit prostitutes, (the STD checker cuts both ways here in the sexual conflict between men and women).

    1. The Pill for men was invented decades ago but when they floated the idea in a market test study to men, they didn’t get any takers. However, now you can get reverse vasectomies in the USA I believe. They have been used now for years in India already where the procedure was invented.

      1. I know this post is 2 years ago but I am responding to it. The male pill had tons of side effects against men. They will never make a pill for men and if they do it will only destroy our hormonal responses to women, sperm numbers and so on. Why risk depending on the government who hates men to give us anything?

  11. Reading this I was like, “Oh boy, that could be cool to get easy ass.” But the girls that I have met that are the “LOOSER” types that I find I’d rather not deal with, let alone “GET ON.” Believe you me, maybe I need to talk to more girls, but the girls I’ve spoken of are extremely manipulative, LOVE LOVE LOVE attention, feel no remorse for leading men on or using them, getting nasty or immature when the man pushes for them to go out, and have pretty crappy personalities…and unfortunately a beat up look to their face. THIS BEING SAID…I am a large framed man (no not fat) guy who is pretty popular, well dressed, has no problem making friends, good looking, own my own home, know how to cook, clean, and all that SHIZNIT, and OH! I AM NOT A WUSS…so needless to say, I am willing to push a little bit to get a phone number, date, whatever, but if I feel disrespected and like I am being manipulated, I will tell girls the thing between their legs didn’t just show up when they were born and ignore them after that. (YES, I have said this in real life…which as you can guess makes them love you more) So as you can see I’m not into playing the IDIOT BETA MALE GAMES of kissing up to get a woman to get her to accept you. NO, I’m one of those men you can respect. NO THANKS!!!
    I’m sure there are women who are high status, no not just arrogant bc they are cute, but accomplished woman, who have numerous partners, but not the ones I have met. And, I wouldn’t hold it against girls if they had numerous partners, and the guys were good looking, built, funny, popular, and had an awesome magnetic personality. (LIKE ME) THEN I COULD UNDERSTAND WANTING TO GET WITH THAT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE~INITIALLY~ ATTRACTED DUE TO LOOKS, NO? BUT i have heard of the girls above “hanging out” with fat druggies…and probably doing the deed…Yeah, that says something about a girl…if she lets anyone just hit it, no doubt a feeling of,”EWW!” sticks in my mind along with a message telling me not to go near her.
    The whole argument for me in this hook up culture and the fact that hook up culture maybe about to explode (according to this article) is :
    You know they are out there, and I get A LOT of female attention already, without trying. It’s just I never push for anything because I don’t feel the need to because I’m not VIbing with the girls I talk to. BUT…EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, I meet a girl who I have to work at when I initially talk to and she pushes back verbally when I push at her…THAT’s WHAT I LIKE. Girls have to have game to. Maybe the landscape of wuss men has convinced them otherwise, but if they want someone who’s not a wuss, I need a display of confidence or you aren’t getting my time…UNFORTUNATELY, most of the woman I meet who are like this, already have boyfriends…and I have an abundance mentality, and just move on…no need to fist fight someone, who might actually be a pretty cool guy, over a woman.
    Also, the loose girls I have talked to, are a lot of flirty talk, so I think it’s on, and then they become scared of me because I actually have “game” and don’t have the mentality of “OMG, I “M TALKING TO A GIRL!” …again, thank the hordes of wuss man for letting girls push them around. So when they do finally meet someone with masculine energy, the run back in your hole mentality comes out because they are out of their element.
    Like I said, I’m not a wuss. I am playfully mean to girls ACTUALLY, but for the looser girls it seems they want you to all out mistreat them…like if you could get them to cry or play head games more points for you. I like girls who are feminine and like a strong man, and want to feel protected. I’m not a caveman, but seriously, is nothing more adorable than when a woman acts playful, smiles, and is light hearted? Or she throws a little temper tantrum to see how you react, and you just gush at her, and tell her to settle down with maybe a pat on the head to accompany it? Or do you not feel manly when your woman all out cries because she is having the day from he**, and you grab her and hold her and tell her, to just let it all out and that you aren’t going anywhere? Or maybe she is being *itchy and you tell her to settle down you aren’t in the mood. And when she doesn’t you firmly tell her her behavior isn’t okay, and then you ignore her, until she finally comes back around. You ask her what her behavior was about, and when she owns up to it and apologizes, you ask for a hug, and tell her she’s special to you? Sorry, if I made anyone puke, but yes girls do like to act this way and test men. It’s a part of life…we just have to accept it.
    Overall, I ‘d be down to settle down for good if I found a strong willed, not *itchy, woman who I really clicked with. But it seems I am seeing a lot of **anks and scraps lying around. I think the hook up culture, has given rise to the idea that it’s okay for girls to look and act like the female things from the Jersey Shore, and maybe that floats the boat for some guys… it sure doesn’t for me. Also, I’ve read that many youngsters in the hook up culture feel hurt from it and actually desire relationships, but won’t pursue them since it’s not the popular thing to do, they came from a broken home so being monogamous seems scary, etc. Which is sort of sad, but it is their life, so don’t feel sorry for them. I think really the whole chip thing and everybody having an iphone will just push the culture idea to the max…which might be cool for some people who are fully not into relationships…but I think the hook up culture will eventually be replaced. I am actually pretty sure, strong families and morals WILL come back around EVENTUALLY…Probably when this younger generation has kids, and they realize how crap filled their teens/early 20’s were, they’ll want to protect their kids and guide them where their parents failed them.
    Also, sorry for writing a book, but I love a good and thought out discussion. Feel free to read and reply.
    Also, of interest, if you want, feel free to look up chemical bonding and how it affects people when they hook up. NOTE: The stuff that your grandmother told you about loose girls being bad choices for wives and mothers (If you want to have a good chance at staying married) has some scientific facts backing it up. PEACE OUT!!!

    1. It sounds like you just like girls who need a new daddy in their life. Being a real man doesn’t necessarily mean you have to be condescending to woman you supposedly care about. (Who the f*ck tells an adult to settle down, then pats their head, and expects a good response)
      ” Or she throws a little temper tantrum to see how you react, and you just gush at her, and tell her to settle down with maybe a pat on the head to accompany it? Or do you not feel manly when your woman all out cries because she is having the day from he**, and you grab her and hold her and tell her, to just let it all out and that you aren’t going anywhere? Or maybe she is being *itchy and you tell her to settle down you aren’t in the mood. And when she doesn’t you firmly tell her her behavior isn’t okay, and then you ignore her, until she finally comes back around. You ask her what her behavior was about, and when she owns up to it and apologizes, you ask for a hug, and tell her she’s special to you?”

  12. Good point Lemons. I really do not understand why any man serves in the military. It was once an noble thing to do, but now, the military is the enforcement and protection arm of the feminist state. In other words, the men in the military (e.g., the guys that do the dangerous stuff, like fighting other men that want to kill them) are working against their own interests.

  13. “When and if these women do get married, they’ll secretly hold their husbands in contempt, as pathetic lame creatures who have quietly robbed them of their independence. After all, these husbands have no hope of measuring up to the men of her youth. She will have infrequent sex with him and her libido will disappear. Health ‘experts,’ inevitably, will consign this to aging and a lack of ‘communication….”
    You speak as if this is going to happen in the far future.
    What you describe here is already happening NOW. As I write this.

  14. So the women are gross sluts, what does that make the men sleeping with them…..prince charming? Or is he maybe just a disgusting slut too?

  15. You can find legitimate cause and effect correlations like this everywhere in society.
    The invention of the car indirectly contributed to the obesity epidemic by making it easier for landwhales to travel, for example.
    Even technology has its downsides…one could argue the religious implications of that…if one had the time 😉

      1. Even back when we were using horses we were still limited in travel because a horse can only go so far without fuel AND rest, just like your everyday organism. A car has no such drawback insofar as a need for rest.
        This would naturally require the rider to walk on foot unless he or she wanted to sleep or congregate with others etc. Nowadays a car makes it so we don’t have to walk anywhere we don’t want to unless we choose to unless of course it breaks down or we forget to put in gas. How am i wrong exactly?

Comments are closed.