Opinion Nobody Should Care About a Woman’s ‘Body Count’

Link (Archive)

Nobody Should Care About a Woman’s ‘Body Count’​

Ever since elon Musk’s lackeys began fiddling with the algorithms of X (formerly Twitter), I have noticed a distinct shift in the content that is pushed onto users. My “For you” tab is now a nest of tradwives, shoplifting videos, and that guy who has strong opinions on trouser creases. It is also home to the kind of old-fashioned misogyny that I once thought was on the decline.

And that’s because X, a small social network beloved by journalists, is now providing a window into a much bigger part of the internet—one that is simultaneously absurdly popular and almost invisible to outsiders. It is the interlinking Venn diagram of Twitch streamers; mixed-martial-arts, wrestling, and boxing fandoms; manosphere influencers; and video-game commentators. The way that these guys turn up on one another’s podcasts, X feeds, and livestreams—and their habit of physically fighting one another for money—makes them seem like a younger, more ripped version of the Intellectual Dark Web.

One of the obsessions of the worst parts of this group—call them the Influential Jerk Web—is “body count” discourse, in which women (always women) are shamed for the number of sexual partners they’ve had. The phrase has gained popularity so quickly that Jason Derulo has just released a song about it. Now, Derulo is okay with a high body count—“all that ass, must be good at math,” he observes—but others are not. “A lot of the world’s problems could be fixed if women walked around with their body count on their foreheads,” the professional kickboxer turned sexist influencer Andrew Tate said in one viral clip. A bit rich, you might think, coming from a self-confessed former “pimp” who is currently awaiting trial on human-trafficking and rape charges. But Tate is only one of many influencers who talk like ayatollahs while adhering to the beauty standards of Ryan Gosling in Barbie.

These men provide Gen Z and younger Millennials with a very old template for masculinity filtered through the new visual grammar and vocabulary of YouTube, Twitch, and TikTok. Take the mixed martial artist Dillon Danis, who is scheduled to fight the YouTuber turned pro wrestler Logan Paul in a boxing match in Manchester, England, on October 14. In the past five years, “influencer boxing” has become a lucrative content machine. Logan and his brother, Jake, who have more than 20 million YouTube followers each, have led the trend, alongside the British streamer JJ Olatunji, better known as KSI. Their venues are located across the world, in places such as Texas and Saudi Arabia, and the fights make thousands of dollars on pay-per-view. Influencer boxing is characterized by the kind of pre-match smacktalk familiar from professional wrestling but internetified. And that means, unfortunately, a torrent of sexually inflected misogyny.

Scroll down Danis’s X feed and you’ll see what I’m talking about. Over the past few weeks, he has relentlessly targeted Paul’s fiancée, Nina Agdal, posting photographs of her with her exes, digging out Instagram posts in which she is somewhat scantily dressed (she’s a model), claiming that he could put any prize money toward “HIV medication bills for Nina’s exes,” implying that she has dated everyone she has ever been photographed with, and calling her a “whore.”

This tsunami of slut-shaming nestles between other insults, such as mocking Paul’s failed NFT project, CryptoZoo. In return, Paul has taunted Danis about his dead father. Most fans will therefore see the cracks about Nina Agdal as professional-wrestling-style kayfabe—building up the hype for the fight so that Paul is trying to not just win the match but defend his honor. Pro wrestling is a highly choreographed sport; many fights are billed as “grudge matches,” and the Paul brothers’ internet-era innovation has been to bring its obsession with storylines to boxing. (In 2019, Logan Paul claimed at a press conference that KSI’s family didn’t love him. Four years on, the two men own the sports-drink company Prime together.)

But one person who apparently doesn’t find the posts funny is Agdal herself. On September 6, she filed for an injunction under New Jersey’s revenge-porn laws, accusing Danis of posting a “nonconsensual, sexually explicit photograph” of her, “displaying full frontal nudity, to millions of social media users in the course of a relentless, ongoing campaign of cyber harassment and bullying against her.” She was granted a temporary restraining order. Danis deleted that photo but falsely claimed that Agdal was trying to put him in jail. (She is seeking damages.) “This is actually wild,” he added in a post that, according to X, has been viewed 18 million times. Danis presented the lawsuit as his opponent’s camp trying to tank the October 14 fight, adding: “Logan Paul is a dead man walking.”

In feminist circles, Danis’s behavior would be classified as “DARVO”: deny, attack, reverse victim and offender. The sympathetic character in his version of the story is himself, a man threatened with jail for engaging merely in some lighthearted badinage—shh, don’t mention that it was at the expense of a woman who never asked to be involved with this circus. When Agdal understandably complained about becoming the focus of his fans’ aggression, Danis called upon 2020’s favorite misogynist trope: “Nina Agdal will be called Karen Agdal till further notice.”

I can’t be the only one who thought we had left overt, unapologetic sexism like this behind. What is most striking about Danis’s feed is how masculine his world seems—life is a competition between men, and women are just the prizes (or the liabilities). Tate, whose public comments give little indication that he enjoys spending time with women, shows the same attitude. Maybe these guys are obsessed with “body counts” because they treat life as one giant scoreboard.

whether or not Danis sees his posts as kayfabe is irrelevant. At least some portion of his audience won’t, because he is tapping into well-established anti-feminist talking points. In this worldview, the most humiliating thing that could happen to a man is failing to control his woman, an attitude that puts men into a torturous position of constant precarity. Other humans are by definition uncontrollable, no matter how much you intimidate them or patrol their behavior. But tell that to the late-Millennial and Gen Z influencers trying to shame women so that they will “behave”—and not embarrass the men who are deemed to be in charge of them.

Misogyny occupies a sweet spot in our culture—it is frowned upon enough to make young men trading off it feel edgy, but it’s typically taken less seriously than racism. Its post-#MeToo resurgence has led to members of the Influential Jerk Web coming out with phrases you might have thought died out with 19th-century laws on acceptable forms of wife beating. In 2021, the livestreamer Sneako notoriously confessed that he had watched his girlfriend have sex with another man at a party, and told the Peer to Peer podcast: “It felt like somebody was taking something from me, like someone was violating my property.” He was at pains to note that wanting to watch another man have sex in no way suggested that he was bisexual, which suggests a brittle borderline homophobia is also part of the deal.

Two other things are worth noting about the body-count discourse. The first is that some people on the edges of the Influential Jerk Web have consciously rejected its exhausting sexual monitoring of women. The left-wing streamer Destiny, for example, was raised Catholic but is now in an open relationship. His partner Melina Goransson regularly mocks Danis and other bro streamers, and recently retweeted a post by another user that read: “Quickly now! Do some push ups!! That’s how we change the world!! Now go home and call women whores for not acknowledging your existence and making their own money!!”

The second thing is that, in accordance with Rule 34 of the internet, the straight male anxiety that Danis and Tate are tapping into has been translated into pornography. One of those joining the pushback against Dillon Danis was the influencer Adam Grandmaison, better known as Adam22. He has a podcast with his wife, Lena Nersesian, or Lena the Plug, where they interview a female porn actor and then sleep with her. Last month, though, Nersesian slept with another man instead. Amid all the mockery about Lena’s body count and how Adam was a cuck, the video went viral—so viral that he bought her a $400,000 Lamborghini to celebrate its success. Tate criticized them, telling the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that “this is what the Matrix wants from you as a man. They want the woman in charge, and the man below, with no backbone … I would argue, in nearly any household where the female is dominant, everyone is vaccinated.” Unfazed, the couple went on a podcast with Tate and invited him to take part in a threesome. (Tate declined.)

The intense interest in Grandmaison and Nersesian’s relationship makes sense: If the worst thing you can say to a man is that his partner is a “whore,” then there’s money on the table for whoever will admit to reveling in his wife’s high body count. And that’s the real lesson here. The internet has smashed all kinds of taboos, but without taboos, how can people feel the thrill of breaking them? The Influential Jerk Web has brought back sexual shame not just to control women but to extract pleasure from doing so.
 
. Gonna power level here a bit but I've had experience with women of loose moral fibre which I didn't mind at all cause it was all the same to me. I met my current mrs who was a total virgin literally never done anything sexual in her life and it was like night and fucking day

One of the lassie's I was going with at the time was really into anal and no pun intended it's a fucking shitty experience.

I would hang the chads with the same rope I use for the whores. Sexual deviants deserve to be thrown in a woodchipper. Now will you cease using this trite argument?
Tell that to Brigadoom.
You all are arguing with someone who has her own thread here: https://kiwifarms.st/threads/margaret-pless-idlediletante-stan.16090/

She doesn’t argue in good faith and wouldn’t know what that means even if she tried.
Ohh love a good ad hominem. You can't beat what I'm saying so you pivot to my thread. Let me guess, you're gonna post my photo next. Or say my name. And then you have the temerity to say I argue in bad faith! Hah~
 
You know you can find people on the Internet who say the earth is flat, right? Just because you read it on pol doesn't make it true.
So yeah, I call bullshit. You read this from some community of men who are equally uninformed about women as you. It's the blind leading the blind around here.
Funny thing, I possess the faculties of reason, discernment, and discrimination that allow me separate bullshit garbage like flat earthism from things that ring true based on what I and others observe. A quick internet search yields two ny times articles talking about the death of courtship and the rise of hookup culture.


There is another article also on from the NY times talking about hookup culture and tinder exacerbating hook up culture. I could spend days compiling evidence demonstrating this.

Arguing with you about this is to argue what is plainly obvious to anyone who has ear and eyes. Incidentally, I do not look at pol. just further proof you are utterly incapable of expressing an interesting, original thought.
So yeah, I call bullshit. You read this from some community of men who are equally uninformed about women as you. It's the blind leading the blind around here.
Uninformed about women, coming from the likes of you insists men and wome are the same and should therefore be held to the same standards. The funny thing is I have named a number of mainstream references that buttress my position, including a New York times article, a best seller, and an underrated 80s flick that does not get nearly enough attention. Finally, I marvel that you think I give any fucks whatsoever as to what you think or what you call bullshit. Actually I do in an inverse way, sort of how being on the opposite side of Al Sharpton or Blackie Mushmouth lawyer Benjamin Crump is a good sign I am on the right path.
Do you walk around on the street and the women have little numbers above their heads of how many people they've fucked?
No but as a man I can tell you that at a certain point a woman reaches a bodycount where the prospect of sexual relations becomes repulsive.
If not, then this is not "plain to see". It sounds more like manosphere ranting than anything else, and it's pretty hypocritical since some of the men here assembled freely admitted they fuck around but prefer women who never do.
It is not hypocritical you stupid fucking pig because MEN AND WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT. From the perspective of evolutionary psychology, the cost of promiscuity was much higher, including likely pregnancy, which incurred the risk of death until about 150 years ago. These conditions that have existed for thousands of years are hard wired into our brains. It is also very different for a man to be promiscuous than a woman because it is easy for a woman to be promiscuous because of those differences dictated by evolutionary psychology. As I also pointed out, and yet another contention utterly unrefuted except by spergy outbursts of "manosphere" and "pol," the dynamics of male and female attraction are very different, with women putting MUCH more emphasis on social proof than do men. Women are actually attracted by a man's success with other women in a way that simply does not exist in male sexual attraction.
When men do this they're Chads, but you hold women to a completely different standard. And there's no real excuse for it nowadays.
It is a completely different standard because MEN AND WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT. No matter how much you hare-brained feminist shrews and yentas insist otherwise, they are different. It takes skill, social proof, and being top flight socially and physicslly for a man to be promiscuous. Any woman above a four can find a partner on any given night. Not so with men. Did you see that portion from the New York times article where some college gal admitted that the ratio of men to women on campus is tangential because the women are vying for the same ten to fifteen to twenty percent of men who are already successful with women, something men don't care that much about.
 
Última edición:
Funny thing, I possess the faculties of reason, discernment, and discrimination

It is not hypocritical you stupid fucking pig because
Is this some of that cool male reason and discernment you claim to possess?
No matter how much you hare-brained feminist shrews and yentas insist otherwise, they are different
Never said we weren’t different. I said that being obsessed about women’s body count is an evo psych urge that doesn’t serve much purpose today. Especially if there’s no way to know what anyone’s “body count” is without asking them, and frankly, most women won’t tell you because they realize any positive non zero integer would send you into orbit.

I don’t think hookup culture is good; it sucks. Men use women and toss them aside like trash the moment they get their nut. It is particularly bad in colleges. The women who think they’re getting ahead this way are sadly misguided. but I don’t think deriding them as “the town bicycle” is fair or productive, especially if you yourself have had your share of trysts.

Also. Why are you obsessed with the sexual habits of college girls? I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say it’s not because you’re a hot guy in college snowed with Bumble requests. This isn’t the first time, either. As the French would say; mind your own sex life.

@Stan what's your bodycount?
Sorry. I don’t kiss and tell.
 
Never said we weren’t different. I said that being obsessed about women’s body count is an evo psych urge that doesn’t serve much purpose today. Especially if there’s no way to know what anyone’s “body count” is without asking them, and frankly, most women won’t tell you because they realize any positive non zero integer would send you into orbit.

I don’t think hookup culture is good; it sucks. Men use women and toss them aside like trash the moment they get their nut. It is particularly bad in colleges. The women who think they’re getting ahead this way are sadly misguided. but I don’t think deriding them as “the town bicycle” is fair or productive, especially if you yourself have had your share of trysts.
The fact that some women feel the need to lie to men does not detract from the fact that I am objectively taking on more risk with a higher body woman than I would be with a lower body count woman. STDs, other people's kids, other people's failed relationships are just a few of the things I can expect to deal with when I date a liberated kween. I'll concede that maybe they don't deserve to be shamed, but do I not have a right to know what I'm getting myself into?

And do you know how you solve the hookup culture question? You reintroduce shame to those that participate in it, men and women alike. More sexual education isn't going to help, handing out condoms isn't going to help, the only thing that reliably discourages antisocial behavior is to introduce consequences, shame being the easiest we can levy on an individual level. Why should I not spit on those that hack at the fabric of society so they can feel a bit of temporary pleasure? You ask me why we should shame them, how about you give me one good reason people like that deserve to be treated as anything other than the dangerous malcontents they are?
 
To an extent, I agree. One or two previous partners throughout a person’s life is to be expected; some experience in dealing with relationship ups and downs can be helpful in long term commitments. Especially if before 25 years old; there’s a good chance both lasted over two years.

However, if you’ve had over ten exes before 25 years old that is an indication there’s a common denominator, which most likely is a lack of commitment or poor impulse control. Can also be a red flag of untreated trauma.

Add in the attempts at normalizing life ruining diseases such as HIV and AIDS, it’s no wonder people are becoming more averse to high body counts regardless of gender. Most STDs can cause infertility, and for someone who wants children that would be devastating if their infertility was caused by their partner being a slut.
 
Yes.

A key that opens many locks is a good key, but a lock opened by many keys is a shitty lock.

Deal with it.
Loose men deserve to be slut shamed like people do to loose women. HIV cases would be lower if both weren’t whores. Gay men in particular are the worst and they have the highest rates of STDs in comparison to straight people and lesbians.
 
The fact that some women feel the need to lie to men does not detract from the fact that I am objectively taking on more risk with a higher body woman than I would be with a lower body count woman. STDs, other people's kids, other people's failed relationships are just a few of the things I can expect to deal with when I date a liberated kween. I'll concede that maybe they don't deserve to be shamed, but do I not have a right to know what I'm getting myself into?
If there’s no objective way for you to verify what she says how can you be sure your prospective is being truthful? Tbh if someone asks me my body count, I won’t answer because I know a trick question when I hear one.
And do you know how you solve the hookup culture question? You reintroduce shame to those that participate in it, men and women alike. More sexual education isn't going to help, handing out condoms isn't going to help, the only thing that reliably discourages antisocial behavior is to introduce consequences, shame being the easiest we can levy on an individual level.
This isn’t the case. Shaming alcoholics just makes them drink in secret. Shaming gay men just led to cottaging culture. Shaming fat people causes them to retreat into an igloo made of food.
Why should I not spit on those that hack at the fabric of society so they can feel a bit of temporary pleasure? You ask me why we should shame them, how about you give me one good reason people like that deserve to be treated as anything other than the dangerous malcontents they are?
Apart from it being common courtesy not to spit on people? Well..
“Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.”
Bonus Jewish content:
“That which is hateful unto you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the whole of the Torah; the rest is commentary.”
Yes.

A key that opens many locks is a good key, but a lock opened by many keys is a shitty lock.

Deal with it.
We are not locks and keys. Even if you “open” a woman once, that doesn’t mean she’s going to open for you every time. Metaphor doesn’t match the situation; c-.
 
@Stan

Yeah, and I'd be willing to bet they'd be drinking more and eating more if there wasn't that social shame applied to them. You're basically just saying "Well sometimes people circumvent the rules so why bother doing anything?" So what exactly is your final solution to the hookup question? Just love and accept them and hope that they learn on their own?

Ahhh, a hoe using the Bible to try to convince me that I should forgive every social transgression and tolerate every form of evil without question. Classic. Now do the one about "he who is without sin cast the first stone".
 
men shouldn't have a high body count either. sex is icky and the more sex you have the ickier you are

when a man puts his penis in a vagina, the vagina squeezes it and makes it smaller. if a man keeps having sex with different women soon his pp will be reduced to ash.
 
@Stan

Yeah, and I'd be willing to bet they'd be drinking more and eating more if there wasn't that social shame applied to them. You're basically just saying "Well sometimes people circumvent the rules so why bother doing anything?" So what exactly is your final solution to the hookup question? Just love and accept them and hope that they learn on their own?

Ahhh, a hoe using the Bible to try to convince me that I should forgive every social transgression and tolerate every form of evil without question. Classic. Now do the one about "he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Sociology reasearch suggests that is not true. And since I'm not a WHINER like @Norbert the Tiger (Norbert the Whiner? lol) I'll link some info to support that:
You're not enlightened for abusing Hillel's words. You don't even understand Christianity, let alone Judaism. But you'll butcher both to serve your real religion: progressivism.
When was the last time you went to church, big boy?
Why is the notion that churches and synagogues would preach mercy and forgiveness so alien to you? Have... have you ever been to church??
 
Atrás
Top Abajo