In my long ago youth I heard my college gal friends refer to certain guys as "dogs", essentially saying that they "sniff" around every woman, etc. etc. This does not have as "bad" connotation that "slut" or "bitch" has.
<br><br>In the old folk songs the bad man, the untrust-worthy seducer, was often referred to as a "rake." This term is not used much anymore. Also in the first half of the 20th century the term "masher" was used for a man who was some variation of "date rapists" or "stalker" or "compulsive seducer" or even a person who offers a woman money to sleep with him. Like Hemingway's Nick, I was never quite sure what sort of behavior the term "masher" was supposed to describe so someone correct me here.
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/3/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Guest</b> <<a href="mailto:lbodownload@yahoo.com">lbodownload@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br><br>--- joanna <<a href="mailto:123hop@comcast.net">123hop@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<br><br>> The worst term of contempt for a man is "queer" or<br>> "homo" -- in the<br>> straight community. This is the analog of "slut".
<br><br>Yes, i agree that if we're treating slut as a more<br>general pejorative, homo is a good equivalent.<br><br>I suggested "horndog" because like slut it implies<br>excessive/ indiscriminant sexual behavior.
<br><br>"That guy's a total horndog. He'll screw anything in<br>a skirt."<br><br><br>>In<br>> this culture, a man<br>> can never be demeaned relative to a woman, therefore<br>> his relations with<br>
> women can never result in a demeaning term.<br><br><br>Well, I half agree. A man's relations with women can<br>result in a demeaning term, but he is not demeaned<br>relative to the woman.<br><br>Where i come from, a "horndog" could be someone who
<br>lowers himself by screwing "unworthy" females.<br><br><br>> Likewise, a woman can always<br>> be demaned in her relations to men, therefore<br>> "slut." Women are non<br>> subjects therefore their relations to one another
<br>> are meaningless,<br>> therefore "dyke" may be descriptive, but it is not<br>> analogous to "faggot."<br>><br><br><br>mostly agree<br><br>> Even in my son's generation, one of the main sayings
<br>> is "bro's before ho's."<br>><br>> Joanna<br>><br><br><br>I am probably around your son's age then. Believe me<br>the bro's before ho's code of conduct is not much<br>adhered too in actual practice.
<br><br>__________________________________________________<br>Do You Yahoo!?<br>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around<br><a href="http://mail.yahoo.com">http://mail.yahoo.com</a><br>___________________________________
<br><a href="http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk">http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Jerry Monaco's Philosophy, Politics, Culture Weblog is
<br>Shandean Postscripts to Politics, Philosophy, and Culture<br><a href="http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/">http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/</a> <br><br>His fiction, poetry, weblog is<br>Hopeful Monsters: Fiction, Poetry, Memories
<br><a href="http://www.livejournal.com/users/jerrymonaco/">http://www.livejournal.com/users/jerrymonaco/</a> <br><br>Notes, Quotes, Images - From some of my reading and browsing<br><a href="http://www.livejournal.com/community/jerry_quotes/">
http://www.livejournal.com/community/jerry_quotes/</a>