What are the differences between a slụt and a womanizer?

Question

What are the differences between a slụt and a womanizer?

Answer 1

Fascinating post Khan!

I would just inject that men do as well secrete oxytocin and it does assist them in bonding, its' just that male hormones tend to minimize the effect (however not eliminate altogether) while female hormones tend to amplify them.

However that does not explain the social discrepancy here.

Is it OK for a man to be a womanizer? That seems to be your inference. There is a clear double standard at play.

And what I wonder is, how did it become ok to be a man of bad behavior but it remains shameful to be a woman of questionable behavior?

Shouldn't they BOTH be looked down on?

(and in answering your question, my apologies, I think the difference in the two WORDS are strictly social reinforced connotation)

Answer 2

Just the gender the term is applied to.

Answer 3

a 's**t' is typically a woman who'll have s*x with anybody anywhere.  A womanizer is a male who surrounds himself with woman through his 'charm' but is only capable of using them for his own purposes which may or may not involve s*x.

Answer 4

Ahem...... A s**t is a promiscuous woman ; albeit a womanizer is a man who knows how to charm a female into bed to remind her of her ways to please a man on a sexually intimate level.

Answer 5

A s**t is a female.  A womanizer is a man that picks up women.  I guess a womanizer can pick up a s**t.

Answer 6

None really.  Though the word sl ut can be applied to either gender whereas womaniser cannot.  Unless the womaniser happens to be a L*****n.

Answer 7

Nothing but usually a womanizer gets more from his victims than s*x.  Both however have the same amount of chance of a shot in the @ss

Answer 8

The difference is the way that society in general views them.  Words only have the power you give them, and men have taken the sting out of terms like womanizer by refusing to acknowledge that it's a negative.  If women started to openly take it as a compliment, words like "s**t" would lose their punch and take on the same impact as "womanizer" or "stud."

Ever notice how terms like that often don't have a male counterpart that contains the same inference?  Terms like s**t, s***k ho, painted Jezebel, tramp, trollop, strumpet, pr!ck tease and charity w***e all have very negative connotations.  The masculine versions would include player, stud and ladies man - all pretty much accepted and not particularly negative.  In fact, many men are proud of being these things.  The only male counterpart I can find with an exclusively negative connotation is cuckold, which is terribly archaic.

Answer 9

Very little.  They are both sides of the same coin.  One is normally the aggressor and the other the passive and compliant object.

Answer 10

one is a woman, one is a man.

Answer 11

Ha, funny joke (probably reported soon enough)...

What's the difference between a sl*t and a b*tch?

A sl*t sleeps with everyone.

A b*tch sleeps with everyone, except you.

Has anyone noticed how no-one says 'manise' for a woman going on the pull for men?  I'm going to start using it all the time now :-)

Answer 12

It would seem, at least on the surface, that a womanizer has malicious intent.  But if a s!ut was not honest with her intent from the start, I would see that there could be emotional fall out for her partners, if they thought her affections were real and genuine...

Of course, I am assuming that you mean s!ut to be a female.  If thats not the case, and you mean a male...then really I see a big difference.  Generally, male s!uts are fairly honest in their intentions where, again, the womanizer seems to be a person with ill intent...

Answer 13

A womanizer can make a good woman a s**t by his actions

A s**t cannot make a good man a womanizer

Answer 14

none really.

Answer 15

the first is what women call other women who sleep around and the second is what women call men who sleep around.