Quote of the Day
A lot of people have opinions like:
- no man would ever seriously date a whore
- promiscuous people have relationships that fall apart
- this is setting everybody else for so much drama
- slutty people are secretly suppressing their actual hatred of the lifestyle etc.
This all feels so bizarre to me. I live in a culture where none of the ‘slutty people are unhappy and failing at relationships” thing is true – or rather, not moreso than it is in non-slutty cultures. It seems like it’s hard for people to envision how a life might work where there’s a high contingent of happy, slutty people.
…
So to help visualize, here’s some instances from the lives of myself and people I know. Names are changed, and some details are slightly altered to preserve anonymity.
- We know a lot of each other’s fetishes. “I’ve been horny lately,” says a girlfriend of mine. “Oh,” says the girl groupchat, “I’d recommend trying to bang Mike. He’s really into this thing you’re into.” But another girl chimes in – “Actually I’m not sure, Mike is definitely into x but I think you’re actually more into y, and it might not work out. Worth trying, though!
- I’m hanging out with a group of friends, which includes Bob and Alice, who are married. Bob and Alice are getting ready to try to conceive a baby; they’ve moved into a group house with other soon-to-be parents for communal support, we’ve discussed birth control methods with Alice and how her sexual behavior is going to change once she enters the ‘active conception attempts’ phase.At one point someone mentions how big Bob’s dick is. I’ve had sex with Bob, and I agree that it’s big – I say that whenever Bob approaches at orgies, the other guys tell me ‘oh you’re in for it now’. Most of the other women there have also had sex with Bob. Alice says something about how her husband’s dick is big but she didn’t realize it was that big, and then we tease her about having high standards for dick sizes. We discuss the one other person at an orgy who had an even bigger dick – what’s his name – someone remembers. We agree that it was probably girthier but not necessarily longer.
- A friend of mine is a mega slut, with bodycount in the multiple hundreds. She married a very successful guy, spent the marriage helping her husband get laid and having threesomes, and now has a few young kids.
- I’m hanging out in a group of friends and their friends and I overhear someone saying “well you guys might find this weird but I’m actually monogamous”
- My boyfriend is having a girl he’s dating over. He’s mentioned he’d be interested in banging her casually in the open, and I say sure. She’s sitting on the couch with us, and he starts having sex with her in front of me (with her consent). It looks nice so I ask the girl if she’d like me to take photos of them. She says no. About ten minutes later (still in the middle of getting railed on the couch) she says “actually I changed my mind, photos would be nice”. I’m like daw ok, and I get a lot of photos of them having kinky sex. I text them to her afterwards.
- “I was at Susan’s garden party, sheepishly admitting to just having had sneaky sex with someone in the closet. Susan overheard and said “wait you should fuck my husband!” and went over to get him.”
Aella
June 25, 2025
Anecdotes From The Slutcloud – by Aella – Knowingless
I did not post the entire set of examples. This is just a sample.
Some people live in an alternate reality. And it could be someone in the same room with you without you knowing. In some ways, this is totally bizarre to me.
Is there some psychological dysfunction involved? If so, which reality is dysfunctional? Is it possible to even test for dysfunction? How would you create a test that was not biased in favor of the test creator?
Perhaps it is “simply” a culture difference with a different set of tradeoffs being made. But again, how do you determine which culture is best for society? Or is it something that just doesn’t matter, like people having different hobbies? It maybe it does not have any significant social impact, and it would be inappropriate to apply social pressure to conform to one cultural norm over the other.
It is so mind twisting for me that I find it to be a fascinating puzzle.
A lot of that looks strange, indeed. An obvious question is how much of it is fiction rather than reporting of real events.
On “dysfunctional”, a useful test is whether anyone involved or connected is either harmed or made uncomfortable. If not, then one could reasonably argue you’re dealing with differences of taste.
For example, think of religious groups that expect members to follow certain modes of dress. Would I, as a non-member, feel comfortable wearing a turban or a kippah? Probably not. Would my wife, similarly, feel uncomfortable wearing a hijab? I doubt it. A burqa? Not a chance. But plenty of people wear these things, and while some no doubt would rather not and conform because of the pressure to conform, I’m convinced plenty of them are sincere adherents who follow the rules of the group because those are the rules and they are happy with them.
I have talked to a significant number of people who report similar things. I don’t think it is fiction. At least what might be fiction here closely matches reality other people have related to me.
It is like you would know if a non-gun person created a fictional account of gun culture. It would be inconsistent with what people in the gun culture report.
Even adjacents within a culture can be more jarring than those outside. Fudd-culture is closer to anti-gun then it is to casual IPSC or three-gun participants.
Fudds in this conversation map to once-a-year, only-for-procreation sex people.
Boomershoot participants are more like “My wife and I have worked out what we like best, so send the kids to the grandparents, we’re going to have a long weekend of running up the orgasm count; please bring that package in from the front poach, we’ll need that”.
In the sexually non-monogmous culture context, the analog of Fudds is, according to some of the people I have talked to, is Vanillas. It extends to things like a vanilla vacation, party, or cruise.
Are the Boomershoot analogs Vanilla Sundae With Extra Fudge and… Chopsticks?
It appears to be deliberately hidden (for certain definitions of “hidden”) with the code word “lifestyle”. So it is a lifestyle vacation, cruise, or party. People are in the lifestyle, lifestyle friends, etc. In Aella’s writings, she refers to polyamorous or just poly people.
Academic sex researchers refer to it as consensual non monogamy (CNM). In older research, 1970s and 1980s, you will find “swinger” is typically used.
How to determine which “reality” is functional? Fortunately for us, God, or mother nature if you prefer, has been running this experiment since civilization began. Promiscuous societies who live in large groups tend to suffer severely from sexually transmitted diseases. Enough so that their effective reproductive rate quickly craters. Such behavior is only tolerable to Mother Nature in highly isolated groups. The Inuit people of the arctic come to mind. Not a lot of outsiders bringing in STDs your group has little resistance to, at least until European whalers show up to trade for ivory and the clap.
Citation needed.
Roman’s were famous for their orgies for centuries without suffering that fate.
STDs did not arrive in Europe until Columbus brought them back from the Americas.
Syphilis is probably a mutation of yaws. Gonorrhea was definitely present in Europe prior to New World contact. There are references to Chlamydia from about 1550BC.
I stand corrected. https://copilot.microsoft.com/shares/4gMtB9LgqmTZdvqEQkhq5
It was just Syphilis that probably came back with Columbus.
Before anything else, you have to define your terms, and come to agreement with your correspondent on them.
What is functional? What is dysfunctional? Do those change with the intentions and goals in someone’s life? What’s the baseline, and who gets to determine it?
Someone who believes he/she needs to live a very long time will have a different set of definitions than someone who wants to join the 27 club.
But, really, as long as you aren’t hurting others, and are fulfilling your assumed obligations, most of this discussion is moot.
The Consensual Non-Monogamy (CNM) people insist monogamy is dysfunctional. Families torn apart over someone having recreational sex with someone they will probably never see again while they are out of town? That is crazy! That is dysfunctional.
Marriage means monogamy! If you aren’t monogamous, you aren’t really serious about marriage. Non monogamous marriages are “married” in name only. Non monogamy is the destruction of marriage. It is a communist plot! That is crazy! That is dysfunctional.
How do you test it? Easy. No, really. It’s simple.
Which lifestyle is most likely to produce the largest number of kids who are not screwed up? Kids who can go on to be reasonably good parents themselves?
The purpose of sex is reproduction, not personal hedonistic pleasure. Duh.
Men, everywhere and across all recorded history, have a duty to provide for and protect the family and tribe. Women have a duty to bare and raise children. If either of those duties fail, then the people disappear, a dead end. If you are Christian, you have failed to “go forth and multiply,” as well as indulged in various sins. If you are not religious, then you win the Darwin Award for removing your liniage from the gene pool and flipping of your ancestors struggles (or perhaps just a DA, 3rd class for substantially reducing your genes chance of survival down the road, even if they are barely holding on via a single child, or a seriously messed up kids).
Just like there are introverts and extroverts, and neither one is “wrong,” they are not the same. I am sure some pro-poly couples produce good kids, just like normal monogamous couples, and some normies produce “problematic” kids. But what do the statistics say? The poly boss-babe with a rocking body who has bedded rocks stars, top pro athletes, has a four-digit body-count, and never has a child, is, ultimately, an utterly replaceable economic cog and total genetic failure.
I don’t have the statistics at hand, but historically speaking strict monogamy tends to produce the most productive economies because most men have a family to work and provide for, and waste less time either fighting for scraps or defending the harem, and as such I’d bet that the offspring outcomes are better, too.
Most women would love to have access to, and offspring from, the fittest males, the top 10%. Most guys also have little interest in wasting their hard-earned resources on someone else’s spawn. The women don’t care who pays for supporting their kids, as long as someone does. That’s why the welfare state is such a catastrophe; it incentivizes women to make Uncle Sam their sugar daddy so they can sleep around, while making most men nothing but economic tax-slaves.
(cont)
When the majority of men see themselves as little more than tax slaves to be exploited, with slim to none chances of having their own wife and kids, the mass of them give up and check out, and rather than work hard to support a family, they take the easiest path with the least pain that is, if only barely, “good enough.”
Slutty women (generally) don’t want to sleep with bums and losers and slugs with no ambition. They want to sleep around with “high quality” men, for some definition of the term. Average women turn their back on average men, and the spiral starts.
Poly is a luxury lifestyle of the relatively well-to-do that usually happens just before a civilization crashes; it destroys the middle and lower classes because, as HoeMath points out, the bottom 70-80% of men become largely invisible to a majority of women, they are not-people. Meanwhile, many mid women who can get a man for a night and have a kid, and have a whole string of hook-ups with top 20% men, but not have a father in her kids life (which, statistically, has very poor outcomes) because they are no HQ men willing to stick around. Why should the average guy fight for a system that gives him nothing but pain and taxes?
So, if people want to be poly, do it behind closed doors with other definitely poly people, preferably past the age of child-baring, and let the average dude have a chance (and keep your civilization from crashing and burning).
Great hypothesis. Now show us the data to support it. Perhaps the divorce rate for people in monogamous versus CNM couples. And/or high body count versus low body count before marriage.
I consider that to be a matter of mutual expectations/understanding/agreement, trust, and honesty.
If you can’t tell your spouse what you’re doing (no matter what it is), there’s a mismatch & there’s a relationship problem. If you can, and the response sounds something like “ok sweetie, just remember to stop by the grocery store on the way home,” it’s all good.
In theory, noting wrong with CNM as long as the terms of it are clear to both partners in the relationship, and they abide by them.
BUT…..”Mama’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe”.
DNA testing is a recent thing, and prior to that what worked was the woman excusively having sex with the same man (at least i theory). How many women could that man have sex with? As many as he could support, and that the woman/women would accept.