Is "Sexual Liberation" an Excuse for Promiscuity?

Some women claim to be sexually liberated, some admit to being sluts. Is there a difference, or is one just a politically correct term for the other?

I actually know someone who brags that she's had sex with over 100 people. I think that makes her promiscuous, and to put it quite plainly, a slut. She says that she's "sexually liberated". I have to wonder if people like her are mistaking the ability to express and enjoy their sexuality with having a free pass to bed everything that moves. I think that there's a big difference between sexual liberation and being promiscuous.

From an educated standpoint, it seems that sexual liberation would mean that one is free to enjoy their sexuality, and they're not burdened by ideas of taboo and tradition. A woman who's not afraid to try new things with her lover, or experiment with sexual aids to explore what makes her feel good would be sexually liberated. This would also apply to a woman who is confident about her body, and believes that she should be able to have satisfying sexual experiences wither alone or with a lover.

On the other side of that are women who will have intercourse indiscriminately with any willing partner. These women value their bodies as a commodity, and not as something of deeper value. Society frequently calls these women sluts and tramps, referring to their prostitute-like willingness to bed anyone, so long as they receive something in return, whether it be money, gifts or even social status.

I would say that the latter of the two above descriptions does not qualify as sexual liberation. Knowing one's body and knowing that they have the right to feel pleasure with it is not the same as being willing to give it away to anyone who passes by. I have met many women whom I would consider sexually liberated who are very choosy about their partners. They will have a great deal of intercourse and experimentation with those partners, but they do not take new lovers on a frequent basis.

It seems that some women also confuse liberation and kink/fetishism. One can be sexually liberated and not be into every "nasty" thing under the sun. Liberation would indicate a willingness for sexual exploration and finding what gives one the most gratification, but it wouldn't necessarily mean a willingness to do anything and everything with any partner. It is possible to have lines which one will not cross without being prudish or oppressed.

The extremes that are possible and the uneducated public perception may be partially to blame for many women not becoming sexually liberated. They believe that one is either a prude or a whore, oppressed or promiscuous. However, these are placements on one side or the other of the scale, and many women may not realize that there is middle ground to be had. A woman in a long, happy marriage could find sexual liberation with her husband in the privacy of their bedroom. Sleeping around need not come into the picture.

I myself found my liberation after becoming married. I had very oppressed and twisted ideas about sexuality and sexual pleasure. Coming from a family who considered sex and pleasure to be "wrong" and "dirty", I rather disliked the act and found it unfulfilling. After meeting a wonderful man I found that there was a wonderful world I had been missing out on. I think I could have bedded a hundred men and never learned what I did with one.

It seems that women simply use "Sexually Liberated" as a cover term for their promiscuous behavior. Perhaps they think it will keep people from thinking of them in a negative way. Unfortunately for them, few people are ever going to embrace the idea of a person sleeping around with numerous partners. Perhaps too these women don't understand that variety and enjoyment can be achieved with a single partner if one tries hard enough, or the fulfillment that can be achieved when love and commitment are part of the sexual experience.