By Lila Worgan

In the realm of modern dating, we have all been in the position where we are seeing or dating a man and he proposes the question of, “What is your body count?” It always feels like a sort of one-sided interrogation. Most women rarely feel inclined to pose such a question; the male body count is of no attention or interest to us. This is derivative of a social narrative in which men with high body counts are lauded as attractive and successful, while women face a contradictory social narrative where their value diminishes with each sexual encounter. 

The term "body count" originally referred to casualties in the context of war, but in modern times, it is more colloquially referred to as the amount of people one has engaged in sexual intercourse with. Fifty years ago, 91% of women were married by 30. Contrast that with today, where just a third of women are married by 30. This evolving dynamic of marriage and dating shows a clear societal evolution: people are experimenting with various relationships and opting to marry later in life. This trend naturally leads to a higher number of sexual partners for many. However, a concerning pattern has emerged from this change. Men are increasingly prying into women’s sexual history, using this information as a metric to determine their value and worthiness.

Here lies my issue with the discourse surrounding the concept of “body count.” It is both absurd and quite frankly lacking in intellectual depth that this question is routinely posed by men with the implicit expectation of receiving a response as close to zero as possible. The paradox emerges when one considers that despite this expectation, many men themselves engage in sexual relations with multiple partners while a plethora of women are perceived as having far fewer such experiences. The disparity in perceived sexual activity becomes particularly evident when considering that for every sexual encounter a man has had, there is an equivalent female participant. Most men would respond to this with the argument that there is a small number of women that engage in high levels of promiscuity. This perspective serves to justify their calculations of body counts and provides a rationalization for their behaviour. However, this line of thinking is deeply rooted in the Madonna Whore Complex.

The Madonna Whore Complex is a psychological complex commonly perpetrated by heterosexual males that places women into two polarizing archetypes: the “Madonna,” a woman who is pure, virtuous, and nurturing, or a “whore,” who is deemed overly sexual, manipulative, and promiscuous. Sigmund Freud, one of psychology’s greatest and most controversial names, originally coined this term to describe men in heterosexual relationships who no longer viewed their partners, for whom they had romantic feelings towards, as sexually attractive. In Freud's theory, men cannot differentiate between their love for their mother and their love for their romantic partner.Consequently, they compartmentalize their romantic love for women they deem suitable for marriage and motherhood, but have little to no sexual attraction to, while simultaneously devaluing women they consider promiscuous, but whom they sexually desire. The synopsis of the Madonna-Whore Dichotomy is that ultimately women have to be either pure and ‘virginal’ or sexual and forthcoming. There is no in between. The complex confines women to these narrow archetypes and fosters an environment where they are forced to conform to either the ‘Madonna’ or ‘whore’ role. This oversimplified perspective on female identity highlights a need to challenge the societal norms that propagate such dichotomies. 

It is imperative for men to introspect and recognize that their perception of women’s sexuality is skewed. In the contemporary world, most young women fall somewhere between the extremes of virginity and promiscuity. This challenges the rigid categories men have imposed to rationalize their thoughts dictated by the Madonna-Whore Complex. This complex is deeply ingrained in our patriarchal society, aiming to control the female body and diminish women’s sexual autonomy. The shaming of women with sexual freedom reinforces gender stereotypes and allows men to maintain a position of power. 

In William Simon and John Gagnon’s book, Sexual Conduct, they assert that human sexuality adheres to cultural scripts written primarily by heterosexual males. These scripts depict men as sexual pursuers who favour casual encounters while women are portrayed as gatekeepers favouring relational sex. The consequence of such scripts is the denial of sexual autonomy to women that is driven by the fear that assertive female sexuality will result in slut-shaming and render them unsuitable for long-term romantic partners. Men have constructed these scripts  because assertive female sexuality represents a potential threat to men’s social dominance. Men fear that women will use their sexuality as a manipulation tactic to emasculate them, therefore men feel the need to reduce female sexual autonomy to minimize the threat to their power. 

When put into perspective, it becomes evident that the inquiry into one’s “body count” is wielded as a tool to shame and subjugate women. It necessitates that women assess their worth based on their sexual experiences, while men assume a position of power and judgement. I encourage women to collectively refuse to dignify the misogynistic question of body count with a response. It is time to perceive the proposition of this question as not only highly inappropriate, but also deeply offensive. In future instances where you encounter such a question from a man you are seeing or dating, I suggest seriously contemplating disengaging from the interaction. This question signals adherence to misogynistic scripts that are often accompanied by the burdens of toxic masculinity. Taking a stand and choosing not to entertain such inquiries is an act of self respect. To the men who may read this and dismiss my words, asserting that they personally know many women with minimal sexual experiences, I implore them to reconsider their assumptions. Surprisingly, women occasionally provide inaccurate information.