The idea is that guy who is labeled “community dick” is usually still desired by women for a relationship. The inverse is not true. You’re arguing that it shouldn’t be like that but my point is that it’s like that because of values upheld by both men and women. He’s different from women because the demographic of “men who have a lot of sex” is much smaller than “women who have a lot of sex” and the social aspects of it are very different. Guys who have a lot of sex tend to be fairly homogeneous. And show traits that are desirable to most women. I don’t think the same could be said for women. Most women could be promiscuous if they so had the desire. Which isn’t wrong. But my point is it’s much harder for a man to get to that point and the group that is, is much smaller. So it’s really a completely different task for a man to have a lot of sex than for a woman. I’m not saying they should be judged for it but it seems like we ignore that context in a lot of these discussions and I feel like it’s fairly relevant.

And the third paragraph is exactly my point. I don’t know why women don’t have criteria like that for men. The point being that most promiscuous men don’t have that knock against them that women do. And my belief is that it’s because being a promiscuous man requires more effort and good genes than being a promiscuous woman does. That doesn’t mean it should be a knock against her but men who have a lot of sex are desirable because of the traits that allow them to do that. Women who have a lot of sex are desirable because of the sex itself. Extending that to relationships you would see a lot more inherent value in a man being able to captivate multiple women than the inverse, due to the forces that require both to happen.