Skanks

[Anne Gilbert]

Larry:

> Evidently at UCLA "slut" has become sex-neutral, and there have been
> a number of instances I recall (I still notice them) in the popular
> media (movies, magazines, "Friends", etc.) in which men are describes
> as, or more usually called, sluts for being promiscuous (another term
> that was applied exclusively to women/girls back in the day but has
> now gone co-ed)--"Why, you slut!" (often used ironically).

The "neutralizing" of "slut" is a new one on me. . . but then I don't watch
things like "Friends", and it's been a while since I've been in groups that
use "slang".  So there's a lot I don't know.
>
> I don't have enough first-hand knowledge of the application of either
> "skank" or "skanky" to know if it's universally female-only; I was
> just struck by the fact that (at least among UCLA students) when one
> sexually pejorative term applying only to women is generalized,
> another one is born.  (The usual prediction would be that even if
> "skanky" can be applied to men in some circumstances, only a woman
> can be "a skank".  But it might be interesting to see if these
> words--even the noun-- can apply to men within the gay community.  I
> suspect that this was a factor in the growing sex-neutrality of
> "slut".)

You're probably right on both counts.  I wouldn't be surprised.  But OTOH,
for obvious reasons, I'm not familiar with gay community "language".
Anne G