(First published at The Spearhead)
“Any man who sets foot in a strip club faces a potential moral dilemma:
How would I feel about this if it were my daughter?
I am cavalier in this regard because I have no desire to be a father. I can, and have, let a stripper grind my leg until she bled and my only regret was tipping her. However, I recognize that there are breeders among us who do not share my apathy.
For some, the answer is simple: Don’t go to strip clubs. For others, the solution is not so cut and dry. My own moral emotions are such that, if by some unfortunate accident I ever spawned a daughter, I would do everything in my power to keep my kid off the pole.
Having a daughter would not stop me from going to strip clubs. I would be an authoritarian parent, but keeping my own daughter from being a slut would not necessarily change my own behavior toward other existing sluts.”
My objection to this circumstance is not the hypocrisy of the do as I say, not as I do mentality. My objection is that taking advantage of a system without contributing back to it is exploitative. In the world of Slut Economics, these exploitative fathers who safeguard their daughters’ virtue while taking advantage of some other man’s slutty child represent a kind of redistribution.
Redistribution is an economic model in which some suffer for the benefit of others. Redistribution ignores the value of the individual. Robert Nozick summed it up best;
“There is no justified sacrifice of some of us for others. This root idea, namely, that there are different individuals with separate lives, and so no one may be sacrificed for others.” (Anarchy, State, and Utopia; p.33)
While other men are missing soft ball games and dance recitals, these selfish fathers are tending to the emotional needs of their daughters. The exploitative fathers do not provide the necessary emotional neglect for their daughters to develop the loose morals and substance abuse to become a top-tier slut.
How dare they?
It’s the Problem of the Commons, really. If every man in town is allowed to graze his cattle for an hour a day, the system can sustain itself. If every man thinks that he can take a little extra without hurting things, every man will. Before you know it, the commons are ruined.
I would reckon that there are many more exploitative fathers than there are the opposite. Furthermore, I suspect that more girls are driven to the pole by unintentional neglect than by the deliberate effort of some considerate soul looking to put back into the system that he has benefited from.
I also recognize that some fathers fail to protect their daughters’ virtue. Despite their best efforts, some combination of factors beyond their understanding or influence conspire against them.
Statisticians do not seem devoted to the task of monitoring the ebb and flow of the Slut Economy. My intuition on the matter tells me that more men are inclined to prevent their daughters from being sluts than not. The amount of happy accidents and failure-fathers cannot keep up with Slut Demand unassisted.
How does the Slut Economy sustain itself with such rabid demand when so many men are dead-set against contributing back to the system?
The answer is efficiency.
The raw efficiency of the individual slut is responsible for the success of the system. Consider the following:
One stripper spinning around a pole can service the “stripping needs” of hundreds, if not thousands, of men in a year. If only 1% of a stripper’s clientele manages to produce a slut, then the system can self-sustain.
. . . And that’s just stripping.
One porn actress can fuck dozens, if not hundreds of men in her first year alone. With the popularity of MILF porn, a girl who starts out dancing in her twenties and ends up in porn can have a full and rewarding career. By 40 she will have serviced the slut needs of thousands of men.
Between the men she danced for, screwed on film, and the multiples more who have tugged off to her streaming videos, one slut is worth her weight in cocaine.
This is why Tiger Woods is an asshole.
Tiger Woods has laid claim to over a dozen Mistresses. Mistresses are sluts. However, Mistresses are sluts who are not living up to their potential. The Mistress Ideal is a devoted woman, servicing the sexual needs of one married man who provides her with money, attention and sex.
Under different circumstances, a Mistress might service any number of men larger than 1. I will concede that several of Tiger’s ladies were porn stars. While Tiger did not stop them from their slut duties – if anything, their Mistress premium comes from from their being porn stars – he did keep the others from operating at maximal efficiency.
How many men did Tiger Woods inadvertently deny service?
Call Tiger an over-Alpha, call him whatever you want. Idolizing his behavior is like rooting for the enemy. Tiger Woods represents the worst kind of exploitation. In the terms of Slut Economics, Tiger Woods is an anti force multiplier.
A man who goes to strip clubs, or has sex with prostitutes, is one thing. He takes up a space on the dance card. Tiger Woods was a selfish bastard. Tiger collected Mistresses who were “sought after” women. He then validated his own self worth by having exclusive access to (most of) them.
Mistresses, and the men who keep them, are a blight on the Slut Economy. Men like Tiger thin the herd. Even if the individual women he kept would not have fucked you, they might have serviced someone else along the hierarchy. Somewhere along the way, in the blurry gray lines of social networking and alpha-beta hierarchy, some slut was sitting one rung higher up the ladder because of Tiger.
Somehow, because of Tiger Woods, some poor bastard went home alone.
Get FKIN