Some people probably shouldn’t try to make charts. I mean, take a look at this fucked up Venn diagram here:
There’s so much wrong with this diagram it’s hard to even know where to start. The letters are too small. “Narwhal” should be plural. The Sirens of Greek Mythology did lure sailors to their death with their songs, but they weren’t sea creatures. They were, rather, bird women – you know, with wings and everything. Also, while Miles Davis was indeed a thing (specifically a man) with a horn, to the best of my knowledge he never stood in a pond, at least not while playing said horn. And even if he had, it wouldn’t have made him a sea creature.
I suppose I should acknowledge that I’m the person who made this Venn Diagram. I would like to apologize for its many failings and for any damage it may have caused.
But, look, I’m not the only one who can’t design a diagram for shit. Consider this unholy mess, put together by Susan Walsh, a retrograde dating “expert” who runs a blog called Hooking Up Smart. Walsh devotes considerable energy to bashing feminists and sluts, sometimes at the same time. In a recent post, she attempted to spell out the economic costs of sluttery. This diagram was the result.
Even Walsh seemed to realize that it was a bit of a turd, and she offered it to her readers with a sort of apology:
I’m not an economist; this is really more of an exercise in common sense, as well as a work in progress.
No, you’re not. No it isn’t. And that’s no excuse. Essentially, Walsh just made up some bullshit, drew lines between different parts of the bullshit, and pretended it all made sense. There are so many things wrong with her flow chart that, as was the case with that Venn diagram above, I don’t know where to start. Graphically, it’s obviously a disaster.
And when you look at the, er, content of the diagram, it’s equally befuddling. Apparently the only possible results of a pregnancy that results from a “casual sexual relationship” being carried to term are “dropping out of school,” “promiscuity,” “substance abuse,” “violence,” and “crime,” followed closely by “prison,” then “EVENTUAL ECONOMIC STAGNATION!!!!!!!!!!” (And yes, she did use ten exclamation points.)
But my favorite bit of the diagram is the question “was sex consensual?” If it’s not, watch out! Someone might have to go to court! (For some reason she forgets to draw the requisite line to “prison,” perhaps because it is so rare for rapists to actually serve time?)
Here’s the thing, Ms. Walsh: sex that isn’t consensual is no longer an example of a “casual sexual relationship.” Sex that is not consensual is rape. Just as boxing that is not consensual is battery.
Walsh knows all this, of course. It’s just odd that in this diagram she seems to consider the supposedly dire consequences of “promiscuity” as far worse – for individuals and for society – as the consequences of rape.
She might want to make a few adjustments before she puts forth her next version of that chart.A better solution would be to simply delete it from her computer and pretend it never happened. That’s what I’m doing with my Venn diagram.
Aaaaah! I think that my life is complete now. =3
And, David! Please don’t delete the first chart! It’s Hi-larious!
EVENTUAL ECONOMIC STAGNATION!!!!!!!!!!
But I like your Venn diagram!
This post is hilarious, and I love it. That is all.
My favorite part is that most of the consequences of sluttery involve, um, spending money, which given that we’re in a recession because people aren’t spending money is a good thing.
FUCK! FOR ECONOMIC SOLVENCY!
I kinda like Walsh’s chart. That confused, contradictory mess of inflammatory rhetoric and sexism is what I imagine the inside of her head looks like. In fact, I’d like it if our resident trolls started explaining their beliefs via flowchart. How about it, NWOslave? Where exactly are the Rothchilds in the line of causality in the New World Order? How about the divorce rates – cause or result of Illuminati plotting?
I’m someone who has been promiscuous for years! Nearly 20 of them! I got my first STI from my husband. And that was just HPV which something like 80% of sexually active people get at some point in their life. He had it and didn’t know it. I get annual gyno exams. Are women really more likely to get STIs, or are they more likely to know it because they get their junk checked out regularly. I tend to think it’s the latter.
“STD symptoms? —> No. —-> STD symptoms?”
Did she just draw arrows at random?
It makes no sense to me, at all, that in a mostly heterosexual world, which we do live in, that women would have more stis then men. Even if women are more susceptible to them, they had to have caught whatever infection from a man in the first place. That is how that works. Infectious don’t magically gestate in promiscuous women.
Unless lesbianism is rampart, in which case it makes sense for significantly more women then men to be infected.
If the only measure of an activity is that it’s risk-free, then Walsh has made an excellent argument for why one should not leave the house, have friends, or live your life at all. Too risky. What’s the point?
If you’re gonna be a slut, at least use contraception. It’s like the first rule of sluthood.
Um…that chart has a “weaker” causal relationship line from having been raped while drunk to habitual promiscuity (and the EVENTUAL ECONOMIC STAGNATION!!!!!!!!!! that leads to).
I have no words.
Since most accidents happen at home, even that wouldn’t work.
@ozymandias42
By that reasoning you would also support utterly idiotic ideas like Cash for Clunkers…. Might I suggest Googleing “Broken Window Fallacy”?
@ Teh OP
I happen to agree with Walsh in general. I think that lots and lots of premarital sex is probably a bad thing. But, promiscuity leading to the economic downfall of the United States? Show me the data. It isn’t enough to say that each one of those links has some sort of truthyness to it.
It’s not premarital sex if you don’t get married.;)
Five exclamation points is a sure sign of a deranged mind.
I’m not altogether sure where all the arrows go, but that’s okay because I’m also not sure how I would drop out of school if I got pregnant from a casual sexual relationship or how both having kids and not having kids leads to $$$$$ and !!!!!.
I’ve spent most of my twenties behaving beyond slutty. I have never contracted an STD. I have never got pregnant. I am now happily married. I have multiple degrees, all awarded with honors. I’m in a higher tax bracket than most of my peers.
I think I just imploded this moronic chart.
I saw this chart pop up on Twitter and I thought it was a joke. Then I saw the name. Then I sighed a lot and wondered how someone could use that many exclamation marks and not be a troll. But hey, it’s Susan Walsh… why would anyone be surprised?
I just discovered that I can no longer post comments to the pictures themselves.
Some of the magic has gone out of my world.
Why you should have sex before marriage if you want to, by Captain Awkward:
1. It feels good and is fun.
2. You learn things about yourself and other people, like, whether you are sexually compatible and what you like in bed.
3. If you do marry, you will know what you are getting into – with that person, with sex in general, and be more able to meet each other’s needs.
4. If you never marry, it’s not still called premarital sex, right? It’s just called sex. So if you never get married, you will have still participated in something amazing and fun that feels really good. This seems like a good solution for, I don’t know, people who can’t legally marry each other and also for people who feel the whole marriage thing is not for them.
There are risks, sure, like there are also risks in driving, walking outside, staying inside (most accidents occur in the home!), and graduate education (if you’re looking for expensive things to do!)
Also, your chart is way better than her chart, though I do see those problems you point out.
Whoops, looks like the forum has been hacked.
You were right the first time.
‘Narwhal’ is the plural of narwhal.
The Sirens were pelagic, and so are accurately described as ‘sea creatures.’
1) If you have sex, you may incur expenses. (You may also incur expenses if you go to school, buy a car, live in a home, or eat food.)
2) ?????
3) EVENTUAL ECONOMIC STAGNATION!!!!!!!!
But my favorite bit of the diagram is the question “was sex consensual?” If it’s not, watch out! Someone might have to go to court! (For some reason she forgets to draw the requisite line to “prison,” perhaps because it is so rare for rapists to actually serve time?)
I’m not sure what you are getting at here. If the point of the chart is that sex costs money, then court costs most definitely are a factor. The victim will have to give up time to appear at the trial at the very least, and that is assuming she doesn’t have her own lawyer, doesn’t have to participate in the defense at all (by giving up info), plus there is prep time, etc. There’s no doubt that court is costly for the victim, it’s part of the reason victims often don’t press charges.
As for prison time, the chart is (mostly) about the costs to a woman who has sex. How often do rape victims go to prison? Part of the problem with it is that the chart radically changes perspective multiple times. It starts on the scale of the victim and then switches to the scale of a society. Exacerbating that by switching from the victim’s perspective to the rapists wouldn’t help the chart any.
Personally I think it’s worth noting that the message of the chart is: use condoms. Nothing can protect you from the negative effects on the chart, because all of them stem equally from consensual and non-consensual sex. But using a condom allows you to have safe, consensual sex for pleasure with virtually no costs.
Not that the chart isn’t crazy bad. Just saying that the costs of court and exclusion of prison are reasonable things given its goals.
I think Walsh is trying to make the point that money spent on sex disappears from the economy, so the more sex people have, the worse off the economy becomes.
Of course, an argument is only as good as its premises.