The New Morality: There Are NO Perversions

HuffPost and Feminists: Stop ‘Slut-Shaming' Because ‘Sluts Don’t Exist!’

"Question: if there’s no such thing as a slut, how can anyone be guilty of “slut-shaming?”

Don’t dismiss it as one of those timeless philosophical conundrums (ie. “Which came first, the slut or the shamer?”). The answer is an important key to navigating the shoals of perpetual feminist outrage.

A key part of modern feminism seems to consist of dressing provocatively and then shrieking at men who are, well, provoked. And woe unto those who would suggest there are appropriate and inappropriate modes of dress or behavior. They are committing the unspeakable crime of “slut-shaming.”

The truth is, most people wouldn’t use such crass language. Feminists, however, are not most people. They’re happy to name a type of woman that they then say doesn’t exist. The latest example of this is a Youtube video by British videoblogger Hannah Witton, making the rounds on The Huffington Post and Yahoo!.

The video began with Witton asking, “What is so bad about looking like a slut, that you’d want to disassociate yourself from that?” She then read answers she received on social media to the question, “What is a slut?” Of course the answers she approves of bash men and “the patriarchy.” Then came the point:

“There is no such thing as a slut. People’s sexual behavior is none of your business and people can sleep with as many or as little people as they like and that does not make them a slut or it doesn’t make them a prude, it just makes them who they are and that’s their choices and it shouldn’t affect you.”

Witton then went on to claim that dress had no correlation with sexual behavior in this beautifully circular argument: “As much as you like to think it, there is no correlation. And also there is no such thing as a slut. So, however a woman dresses, she’s not a slut, because sluts don’t exist.”

Got it. Because there are no morals, then there are no moral failures. QED