Is Feminism Desire’s Kryptonite?

April 18, 2011

Ogi Ogas, a computational neuroscientist, and author of A Billion Wicked Thoughts, has ventured into enemy territory with a post at Psychology Today – Why Feminism is the Anti-Viagra. He’s aware of the risks, which is why he begins his article by whispering this:

Gender equality inhibits arousal.

Of course, he might as well have announced it with cannons – it wasn’t two shakes of a lamb’s tail before feminists came out screaming snark.

“The majority of women have submission fantasies. From classic romance The Flame and The Flower to classic erotica The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty to Twilight BDSM fan fiction, submission themes are immensely popular in cross-cultural female erotica. The fact of the matter is that most heterosexual women are wired to find sexual submission arousing–and so are most female mammals.”

Any woman being honest with herself knows this is true. That even includes, on occasion, ardent feminists. Nothing can produce the clit twinge faster than mental images of rough, unexpected sex with a favored male. Consider these quotes:

I have struggled with two competing images of the opposite sex: oppressor, and dream date.
J. Courtney Sullivan

I blame my recurring rape fantasy on the fact that I’m a feminist.
Tracie Egan

(By the way, Tracie Egan has shared the story of having paid a male gigolo to enact a forceful rape with her, according to Ogas. She’s also put together a list of articles proving that “Psychology Today Hates Feminism.” Since Psychology Today is a network of bloggers motivated by science rather than ideology, perhaps that should tell us something.)

Ogas: “Almost every quality of dominant males triggers arousal in the female brain: dominant scents, dominant gaits, deep voices, height, displays of wealth…women still want strong, dominant men.”

For insight into the effects of feminism on the SMP, Ogas interviews Angela Knight, a successful author of erotic romances.

“I think this is one of the problems we’re having in romance in general right now: our heroes have gotten a little too PC. We’re portraying men the way feminist ideals say they should be—respectful and consensus-building. Yet women like bad boys. I suspect that’s because our inner cavewoman knows Doormat Man would become Sabertooth Tiger Lunch in short order.”

Meanwhile, Ogas notes that the “massive popularity of dominance-themed websites for men” demonstrates that men have the opposite, and complementary arousal triggers.

“Our mammalian brains come wired with very ancient sexual preferences, quite prominent in the most popular forms of male and female erotica preferred by Homo sapiens. Men are aroused by being dominant and by submissive women, women are aroused by being submissive and by dominant men. In the bedroom, inequality beats equality.”

Note that final statement. Ogas is talking about what turns people on sexually, in the bedroom. He is not saying that women shouldn’t enter the boardroom. Rather, he addresses the loss of acknowledged differences between the sexes and its effect on relationships.

Women’s gains have undeniably been at the expense of men. In an era where women have an unprecedented amount of “power, independence and clout,” men have lost a corresponding share. Today, there are often two dominant people in the bedroom. As women grow more dominant, they exceed the dominance of a significant percentage of the male population, leaving them with a much smaller pool of men they find attractive. Even feminists don’t want submissive males, which is why so many of them are perpetually single.

Ogas explains why we can’t just educate, or even guilt people into rewiring their attraction triggers to accomodate feminism:

“Just as democracy has no effect on our basic taste preferences for sugar and fat, democracy doesn’t affect our basic sexual preferences for domination and submission.”

Linda Young, a counselor in private practice and popular media figure who also blogs at Psychology Today, responded last week:

Feminism is the Anti-Viagra, Not!

The crux of her argument:

“Feminism is about social, economic and political equity and is independent of what turns someone on in a bedroom or fantasy.”

What Young fails to address, or even see, is that as women have become more dominant in the social, economic and political realms, many have also become more dominant in the bedroom. It’s the reason men keep shouting from the rooftops that women’s career achievements don’t make them attractive sexually. Successful women in their 30s claiming that they’re single because they intimidate men has become a cliche. Intelligence is not a boner killer, but an aggressive demeanor is.

Meanwhile, Feministing had this rebuttal to Ogas:

Feminism, once again, blamed for, well, everything

The interesting excerpts from the article:

Courtney: One could be in a truly egalitarian relationship, that consensually and joyfully plays around with power dynamics in the bedroom. I would argue that the foundational equality of their relationship would actually make role play even more available to them.

SW: It is precisely feminism that makes role play necessary. If couples have to negotiate and agree to “experiment” with dominance and submission, isn’t that proof that they’ve drifted away from their own sexual natures? Why not inhabit the role each secretly craves, rather than pretend?

Lori: I appreciate that he’s attempting to speak publicly about women’s desire, and validating this as a subject, but his analysis lacks nuance and shames those women, and men for that matter, that dare to have fantasies about control with an immature scientific argument that amounts to little more than a feminist “gotcha” attempt.

SW: Ogas is not in the business of shaming. He’s a scientist. He describes a research finding he characterizes at startling:

In humans, the hormonal vagaries of prenatal development appear to cause a substantial portion of men to be born with active submissive circuitry. These men find sexual submission as arousing—or, quite often, far more arousing—than sexual dominance.

He also states that a much smaller percentage of women are born with “active dominance circuitry.” As we know, the internet provides, and BDSM communities thrive in every flavor. The point is that the overwhelming majority of humans are wired a certain way, and that is inconvenient for feminists.

Lori: Plus, dear Ogi ignores basic scientific studies that have demonstrated that feminism is damn sexy. A Rutgers University study found that feminism boosts sexual satisfaction for both men and women, and that having a feminist partner is linked with healthier, more romantic relationships, at least for heterosexual couples.

SW: Oh, I am so glad she referenced that study! I dug around till I found the paper and then proceed to wade into the regression analyses (so you don’t have to). I suspected, from long experience, that claims such as Lori’s usually reflect cherry-picking results, usually from a researcher with a specific, i.e. feminist, agenda. This proved to be the case.

Let’s have a look at what this study found. Spoiler Alert: Is feminism in fact “damn sexy?” Nope.

The Interpersonal Power of Feminism: Is Feminism Good for Romantic Relationships?

The paper is actually comprised of two 2007 studies conducted by feminist scholars Rudman and Phelan at Rutgers. Study 1 included 156 female students, and 86 males, all in heterosexual relationships. Subjects got credit for participation and the experiment was run in a lab. A questionnaire asked participants about their identification with feminism, and whether their partner was a feminist. It also asked questions to establish the relative degree of relationship quality, equality and stability.

Fearing that the first study did not adequately incorporate the full range of feminist experience, Study 2 was constructed to include 289 volunteers, 208 female, 81 male.

Rudman had found in an earlier study that “women and men who endorsed beliefs such as “men perform better sexually when they are in charge” and “romance depends, in part, on men being in charge,” showed low enthusiasm for feminism. This suggests that female assertiveness and autonomy, attributes that are instrumental for gender equality, are perceived as promoting sexual conflict. Study 2 afforded a check on the accuracy of this perception.”

The age range was 18-65, and the questionnaire was administered online. Participants were recruited from Craigslist, various Yahoo! and Google Group forums, and two psychology websites. The average education level was 14 years.

This study has been trumpeted by feminists for years, without any justification – well, I take that back, there is one tiny statistic they may take comfort from, which I’ll share in a bit. In fact, the study demonstrates clearly that female feminism has a negative effect on relationships, though not surprisingly,  the effect is mitigated if they are in relationships with male feminists.

The Studies

First, subjects were asked if they agree with the statements “I am a feminist” and “My partner is a feminist,” on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree).

Study 1 MeanStudy 2 Mean

F: I am a feminist.

6.26.2
F: My partner is a feminist.5.45.3
M: I am a feminist.4.95.4
M: My partner is a feminist.5.45.7

 

In other words, the degree of feminist identification among the participants overall was a big meh. Neither study was predominantly feminist in its identification, and no analysis was conducted based on the disparity within this response.

Subjects were then asked a series of question re relationship quality, equity and stablility. In Study 2, a question was added to determine the correlation between feminism and sexual satisfaction in the relationship. According to the researchers, this was because the first study missed the “fish/bicycle” generation of feminists, who were more qualified to weigh in on sexual matters.

Young women’s experience is inarguably limited, compared with older women, vis a vis intimate relationships, balancing them with careers, and with sexual discrimination.”

That is not inarguable. I would indeed argue that young women have a very different sexual experience than did the second wave feminists, one with much more physical intimacy and less emotional intimacy as characterized by hookup culture. The erosion of emotionally intimate relationships among young people has been steady since the Sexual Revolution, and picked up steam in the 90s when dorms went coed and hooking up became the collegiate norm.

Here are the correlations derived from the regression analyses. Don’t go away – it’s more interesting than it looks, and I’ll highlight the best bits.

Correlation of Feminism to Relationship Satisfaction
QualityEqualityStabilitySexual Satisfaction
Study 1Study 2Study 1Study 2Study 1Study 2Study 2
Women:
Self -.11-.35-.20-.43-.09-.24-.24
Partner.33.39.32.57.29-.30.32
Men:
Self.24-.12.44.27.14-.27-.20
Partner-.20.13-.29-.20-.03.40.33

 

The Findings

1. Being a feminist woman is negatively correlated to all measures of relationship happiness across the board.

However, having a male feminist partner was positively correlated. The researchers believe that this is the similarity effect. Women feminists are happiest dating other feminists.

According to the researchers, “It is not clear whether women feminists select like-minded partners or shape their partners’ beliefs.” They acknowledge that asking only one partner in a relationship about views on feminism is problematic, and that future research should attempt to ask both halves of any couple.

2. For men, having a feminist partner correlated to relationship dissatisfaction.

“[Men’s results] are the mirror image of women’s reports, [and are an indication] that feminism troubles relationships.”

3. Relationship length was negatively correlated to relationship equality.

The longer women were in relationships, the more disagreements arose around gender roles.

4. Study 2 results were similar.

“We found [that] feminism [was] a negative predictor of women’s relationship quality, equality, stability and sexual satisfaction.”

5. The statistic highlighted in yellow is the singular finding that has feminists kicking up their heels in triumph throughout the media.

It’s may be the most abused piece of data ever to come out of an academic research project.

Here’s what is says:

81 males, aged 18-55, whiter than the original group (72% vs. 56%) and 10% outside the U.S. found that while being feminist themselves decreased sexual satisfaction (-.20), having a feminist partner increased sexual satisfaction (.33).

Rudman and Phelan were unhappy with their results, and adjusted them for “suppressor variable effects.” Their explanation was weak and did not stand up to scrutiny, in my opinion. This reduced, but did not eliminate the negative results for women’s view of feminism in relationships.

The study authors conclude:

I. Feminist male partners may be important for healthy romantic relationships.

II. Feminism may also be healthy for men’s relationships. First, feminist men in Study 1 reported greater agreement about relationship equality. Second, men in Study 2 reported greater relationship stability and sexual satisfaction to the extent their partner was a feminist.

May be? The study concludes little, and has inspired no additional research since it was conducted. I’m troubled by the merging of Study 2 with Study 1, and I find the design of Study 2 especially poor. The Sexual Satisfaction finding seems flimsy, especially as women in Study 2 still felt that being feminist was detrimental to their own sexual satisfaction.

Obviously, Feministing’s claims are blatantly false. But what do you think about the bigger question?

Does gender equality in the bedroom inhibit arousal?

Are women turned on by male feminists?

Are women feminists hot in the sack? If so, why?

  • Flavia

    For men, having a feminist partner correlated to relationship dissatisfaction.

    Oh you don’t say….

    Something that Roissy touched upon is that as women become more and more masculine, they still desire someone that is more dominant than they are. This can be problematic as the alternative to a high T dominant woman can sometimes be a violent thug.

    Dream Puppy here btw, I am converging my online personas into one. Too many IRL ppl know me as the pup.

  • Flavia

    @GudEnuf:

    Equal in what way?

  • GudEnuf

    Women can never be equal to men because:

    Their brain fibers are “delicate”.
    Their spinal cord is smaller.
    They have a different skull shape.
    Their uteri drive them hysterical.
    Whatever theory is trendy today.

    The science changes, but the sexism stays the same.

    • @GudEnuf
      Wow, is that list from the late 1800’s? I think we’ve learned a bit since then.

      I don’t understand why as a woman you think I should be more like a man, and like it. I don’t want to have sex like a man. I don’t want to be pressured into studying a STEM subject. I want to be able to enjoy being female, without making apologies for it. That might include having children, or god forbid, even staying home with them.

      My being XX means that I have different genes, hormones and chemicals than you do. Isn’t it preposterous to think that we might be the same, act the same, look the same?

      The Sexual Revolution has made both men and women less sexy. That’s the ugly truth. Whether you’re dominant or submissive, having good sex means finding your opposite/complement. That’s just a lot harder to do with so many women behaving as sexual aggressors.

      Also, if dominant women wanted submissive men, we might at least have good matches, even if things were upside down. But they don’t. Feminists revile “nice guys” more than anyone else – that’s very clear from the feminist blogs. I recall one feminist – I think it was actually Jaclyn Friedman – saying in an interview with Amanda Hess that she is really turned off by feminist men.

  • wow, thank you.

    Does gender equality in the bedroom inhibit arousal?

    Yes. I get turned off by dominant women. Big time. My dick has trouble feeling it.

    Im fine about competing with other men about whose penis is bigger, but competing with a woman makes no sense: mine is bigger, hers is imaginary.

    Crabs get their big claws to compete with other males, not to compete with other females and their imaginary male claws.

    In bed this translates to lack of chemistry, a hard on hard thing. Two leads, lack of connection, bad rhythm.

    Are women turned on by male feminists?

    As far as I have seen, dominant women feel attraction for submissive males, and most feminist males I have known are submissive.

    So there might be a correlation: if you are a submissive male, become a feminist and you might land a dominant female easier. And you will have a rationale for putting her in the center of the universe.

    Are women feminists hot in the sack? If so, why?

    Nope.

  • @Gudenuf

    Why is it a bad thing or sexist to say in some things women aren’t equal to men?

  • Nothing wrong with, every now and then, pushing us down and getting on top during/leading up to sex.

    But, for the most part, and I think I can speak for most men, we derive a lot of pleasure from giving girls a good doggystyle. And, most girls love it.

    Submissive girls in the sack are the best. Furthermore, I’ve found most girls want to be led in the bedroom anyways, I doubt these feminist pairings are having awesome mind blowing sex.

    “Uh, honey? May I please finger you?” Wait what?

    • Submissive girls in the sack are the best. Furthermore, I’ve found most girls want to be led in the bedroom anyways, I doubt these feminist pairings are having awesome mind blowing sex.

      It strikes me that if men didn’t want submissive women, the whole schoolgirl/nurse thing wouldn’t be so popular in porn. The men slap the women on the ass and generally order them around. That’s what Ogas says – look at romance novels and porn to tell you where people are spending their disposable income.

  • Country Lawyer

    There is no such thing as equality in human relationships.

    None.

    Never has been, never will be.

    Hypergamy means that a woman looks for a partner better than herself.

  • Clarence

    Well, as the resident “switch” let me just say that while I don’t mind submitting to a sexy woman in the bedroom, I wouldn’t want to give her my balls. Besides, if she’s like every other woman I’ve EVER met, sometimes she needs spanked 😉

  • jessie

    @collegslacker – I agree, I think most of these feminist just need a good lay.

    That hairy legged pic gives me the creeps!

  • A cheerful little item, possibly related, here.

    • @david foster
      From Ann Althouse’s piece:

      She notes that people these days have a prurient interest in famous women not having sex:
      Think of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor or the former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. I can picture either woman in a big, beautiful bed with great sheets, the duvet scattered with legal briefs or policy papers. The bedside lamp burns a peachy, erotic glow all night as she works.
      So… Wolitzer just identified the prurient interest… and wrote some porn for it!

      This reminds me of a joke I heard about a couple of sexless (but maybe not) women I heard during the last presidential election:
      Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
      Because Janet Reno is her biological father.

  • JS

    “Feminism is the Anti-Viagra”

    Fascinating study. Next up: cheeseburgers are the anti-diet pills

  • GudEnuf

    I recall one feminist – I think it was actually Jaclyn Friedman – saying in an interview with Amanda Hess that she is really turned off by feminist men.

    Did she say she was turned off by feminist men, or turned off by men who go on and on about how feminist they are when really they don’t have a clue?

    Would like to see that source.

    • Shudder, quoting Jaclyn Friedman:

      So do you meet guys who pass the feminist test but then turn out to be disappointments for other reasons?

      JF: Oh God. There is a type of feminist guy who is so eager to fall over himself to be deferential to women and to prove his feminist bona fides and flagellate himself in front of you, to the point that it really turns me off. And it makes me sad, because politically, these are the guys that I should be sleeping with! You know what I’m talking about?

      YES.

      JF: Everyone knows what I’m talking about. And some of them are even really cute! I want to say to them, “If you could be a person, like a whole, complicated person, who I feel like I could crack jokes around, then I would really like you.” But they’re so serious about their feminism at every moment that I don’t feel like a person to them. I feel like I’m on a pedestal, almost. I know that they’re not going to disagree with anything I say under any circumstances. And I don’t feel like I can make a raunchy joke about sex, because they’ll be horrified. . . . I hate to be critical of our allies in any way, because we need them, but there’s something about that certain kind of hyperfeminist guy that makes them unappealing to date, to me. I suspect it has something to do with our internal conceptions of masculinity, which is terrible on my part.

      From Fucking While Feminist

      Worth a read. She allows that her experience with such men is limited:

      I’m mostly dating guys right now, which is fairly new for me. From my early 20s to my mid-30s I dated exclusively women and trans men. I’m not romanticizing that, like “it’s so much easier with women”—let me tell you, it’s not. But it’s a different set of questions you have to ask. I don’t feel like I can go in to these dates expecting dudes to know as much about feminism or sexuality studies or rape culture, the stuff that I live my life talking about and thinking about. I feel like I’m going to die alone if I do that.

      What is dating trans men? Is that a woman dating a woman who identifies as a man? Or a woman dating a man who identifies as a woman?

      Hey, how about responding to my earlier questions GudEnuf?

  • Workshy Joe

    Okay, so if the chick in the picture had dark hair, how come her hairy legs were blonde?

    If women were turned on by the thought of their man staying home, baking cookies, keeping house, looking after the kids, etc. then feminism would be all fine and dandy. Trouble is, they’re not.

  • Yuki

    I don’t think feminism, the text book definition, is as much of a problem for guys in the bedroom as an unyielding and brittle sense of female superiority is.

    Of all my partners the self-described sex-positive feminist is the best in terms of sexual compatibility and enjoyment for me. While she is very strong in her belief that she should not be considered ‘less’ or ‘beneath’ anyone because of her gender she has no problem with accepting my lead in the bedroom and has remarked on multiple occasions that she is actively excited by that dynamic. She will at times turn the tables and be aggressive or try to fight me into a submissive position but if I am not in that kind of mood and I fight back and don’t let her take control she doesn’t get offended and give me crap about it later.

    On the other hand I have been with women who are so proud and unyielding wrt their female ‘power’ that they turn their nose up at things like doggy style or giving head because they see them as ‘submissive’ and refuse to do anything that ‘seems’ submissive to a man. These sexual relationships didn’t last very long as such rigidity is a major turn off.

  • Yuki

    @Susan
    My understanding of the terminology of Trans people is that you ‘are’ whatever you say you are but you extend people the courtesy of indicated whether you are genetically what you say you are. So when a feminist/LGBT aware person says ‘trans x’ the ‘x’ is what the person identifies as and the ‘trans’ indicates that that identification may not match what the person has under the hood so to speak. So a trans man was born/raised a female and a trans woman was born/raised a male.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Susan,
    .
    Yikes, that picture kind of gave me the creeps.
    .
    You have a link to a Feministing thread. There’s another interesting thread on Feministe (well, interesting in a sociological observation point of view) where one of the main bloggers was commenting on this NYC article “The Sex Drive, Idling in Neutral”
    .
    Here’s the Feministe thread:
    http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/04/16/im-tired-of-having-sex/
    .
    It’s funny seeing the squabble. Seems like feminism and sex is a minefield…

    • @ExNewYorker

      Yikes, that picture kind of gave me the creeps.

      It wasn’t as bad as the hairy armpit one.

      Re the thread at Feministe, I only tuned in for 40 comments, and in that small sample there were several proclaimed asexuals, one person who said that most women don’t enjoy sex with men, and several people blaming monogamy for low sex drive in women.

  • The Unfortunate Rake

    In my experience, virtually all women want to be submissive in the bedroom. It’s just a matter of degree. For some, merely being given orders is enough, and going much further would be too much. For others, being slapped and choked and verbally degraded is just light foreplay. And some in the first category can be led to discover that they are actually in the second. I do what I can.

    Feminist women are trouble in the bedroom. I dated a professional feminist for awhile, and she was as screwed up as they come. With great self-awareness, she told me early on, “I want what any feminist wants. I want someone to fuck the shit out of me.” But wanting it and being able to do it are two separate things. When I fucked her doggy-style and pulled her hair she would feel so much guilt that she’d have to stop. She was terrified to come while being dominated. When she talked about a past abusive relationship (he beat her up regularly) there was a wistfulness in her voice. Feminism had such a grip on her mind that she needed a truly abusive man to break through her barriers and literally force her to submit. (Not my thing. Buh-bye super-hot feminist.)

    Women who try to be dominant in the bedroom are definitely a turn-off. When I was younger this kind of thing just confused me, and I’d roll with it if the woman was older and more experienced. But now I just view this attitude as a challenge. She wants me to overcome her token attempt at control as much as I want to overcome it. Men and women actually fit together really well when we stop trying to play roles for which we are unsuited. All boys should be raised with the knowledge that they are responsible for being the director, however.

    One important element of women’s sexually submissive fantasies that is often overlooked is the narcissism at the center of so many of them. Many women want a man who is not just out of control, but out of control because the woman is so desirable. For a lot of women, I think this is the point of the fantasy; the man’s dominance is a result of her beauty. I like to tell a woman that she’s responsible for my hard cock (true), and she’s about to suffer the consequences (also true). When she gulps and says in a playful voice, “I’m sorry,” I know we’re about to have very good sex.

    • Many women want a man who is not just out of control, but out of control because the woman is so desirable. For a lot of women, I think this is the point of the fantasy; the man’s dominance is a result of her beauty.

      Very true. And the man is also on his way to being hopelessly in love with her, helpless to resist her.

  • PuffsPlus

    @Susan:

    Re: Jaclyn Friedman’s interview with Amanda Hess, you’re remembering incorrectly (recall bias, I think). She did not say outright she didn’t like feminist men. In fact, she specifically states she wants to date feminist men:
    .
    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/03/26/fucking-while-feminist-with-jaclyn-friedman/
    .
    BUT…this is an interesting quote from that interview: “How do you find the feminist guy who won’t self-flagellate to the point of unfuckability?”
    .
    Evidently, there are men out there so mangina-ized that they turn off even Jaclyn Friedman, a woman who has mostly dated other women and transgendered men (i.e., former women).

  • PuffsPlus

    Oh, oops, sorry Susan, I missed your follow-up on the ever-unfortunate Jaclyn Friedman.
    .
    “What is dating trans men? Is that a woman dating a woman who identifies as a man? Or a woman dating a man who identifies as a woman?”
    .
    I had figured she meant women who now identify as men (like Chastity-to-Chaz Bono), but now you have me wondering. There are many, many more MtF trannies out there than the reverse. The dating pool of FtM trannies is probably quite small.

  • PuffsPlus

    “Okay, so if the chick in the picture had dark hair, how come her hairy legs were blonde?”
    .
    She bleaches them.

    • “Okay, so if the chick in the picture had dark hair, how come her hairy legs were blonde?”
      .
      She bleaches them.

      I confess I wondered if those legs could possibly really belong to that woman. It’s got to be photoshopped. I have never seen a woman with legs that hairy, she’d have to be one high T chick.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Ohh this one is old. I didn’t knew you would be interesting. I read a couple of the responses at feministing. Jezebel had a simmilar article like a year ago.
    The problem is “feminist science” works based on cherry picking, self selection and if they are forced to admit that a result can’t be debunked by their “logic”, then they use the magic stock phrase “Is Patriarchy’s fault, we are trying to overcome societal pressures and failing once the culture is female friendly we will enjoy sex with submissive men, because gender roles are a social construct…yadda yadda yadda”

    I really hope we advance on neuroscience to show this things happening on the lizard brain. I know tons of feminists will just deny the results, but I know some of them have enough brain cells to accept this things.

  • Rum

    My take on this is that “feminism” puts sand in the gears of heterosex by 1. Letting females natural hypergamy slip the leash and 2. In practice making more and more males into unattractive geldings.
    I mean, the basic dilemma is that the average guy wants to boink the average girl about 100 times more than she wants him anywhere near her. And that is even before girls are taught, like they are nowadays from kindergarten that men are weak and doomed and inadequate because they are not more like the female ubersex. And lots of guys will internalize this same message – because they want to please women – but instead get poisoned for life for being too trusting of the society that bore them.
    My guess is that 95% of women who say, “I no longer care about sex” would chuck their cloths off past their undies in a heartbeat if they thought they had a chance for an hour or two with Mr. Big (whomever that is for her).

  • Most feminists are in denial that unmasculine men are unfuckable, and yet Jacelyn is not. It doesn’t have any affect on her views, however…which means she is consciously pursuing an agenda to create dissatisfying relationships.

    • Most feminists are in denial that unmasculine men are unfuckable, and yet Jacelyn is not

      True, but she finds women and trans men fuckable, so she disparages feminized men while pursuing masculinized women? There is no way to unpack what’s really going on there, and I certainly don’t want to try.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    My take on this is that “feminism” puts sand in the gears of heterosex by 1. Letting females natural hypergamy slip the leash and 2. In practice making more and more males into unattractive geldings.
    I mean, the basic dilemma is that the average guy wants to boink the average girl about 100 times more than she wants him anywhere near her. And that is even before girls are taught, like they are nowadays from kindergarten that men are weak and doomed and inadequate because they are not more like the female ubersex. And lots of guys will internalize this same message – because they want to please women – but instead get poisoned for life for being too trusting of the society that bore them.
    My guess is that 95% of women who say, “I no longer care about sex” would chuck their cloths off past their undies in a heartbeat if they thought they had a chance for an hour or two with Mr. Big (whomever that is for her).

    My personal take is that feminism though that women could satisfy their hipergamy themselves, by becoming like men. Earning big bucks, joining the army, getting social status and so on, and to make men to become like women to compensate and find the elusive equality myth but it backfired on them, because this revolution was not based on science facts about gender, neither was carefully planned (I mean maybe with some massive brainwashing we could had gotten better results at suppressing gender, but then maybe that is just the mad scientist on me) but some philosophy about social constructs.

    My personal criticism of feminist has always being based on the fact that no one is reviewing the movement to notice that it has become corrupt, oppressive and decadent given that there is a ton of money to be earned of women in state of social siege, historically speaking all social revolutions go into this stages of flourish, peak and decadence and feminist is in due time for a new proposal (something that tries for the union of gender without forcing them into “new roles” and on fair treatment) or being replaced by a new movement. But I’m guessing they won’t let go without a fight, hence this “science”.
    My guess is that the fatherless daughters of this women will look around see the harvest of this social experiment and decide this is a mess and try and set it right, still is a long way to go.

  • rick

    Feminism is on its last lap or two.

    The pure reactionary nonsense, the hysterics, the total unwillingness to look at women critically in any way – these are the hallmarks of religious zealotry, not rational thinking.

    Glad I’ve taken the red pill – I don’t take feminists seriously anymore. Oh, they are dangerous, so that must be taken into account, but the rest of it is just silly social bullying.

    Besides, feminism has sown the seeds of its own destruction. The only reason men ever white-knighted was to get laid. Yes, really.

    Once the inevitable occurs and most men realize that pedastalizing and supplicating to feminist shit-testing does not result in tail, they will abandon it wholesale.

    Most human behavior is economic in nature – it took a decade for houses to become massively overpriced. But only a couple years to crash.

    The crashing of the feminism bubble will occur with stunning rapidity to the shock and heartache of 10-20% of American women, and to the great relief of everyone else.

  • Abbot

    “The crashing of the feminism bubble will occur with stunning rapidity to the shock and heartache of 10-20% of American women”
    .
    The gloating over that will be palpable and so. much. fun.

  • Clarence

    Sigh.

    Have any of you ever been to the submissive husband blogs beyond maybe a quick gander or two at enforced chastity or cuckolding? I’m not sure what percentage it is, sometimes it seems like a majority, sometimes a large minority, but there are a lot of men in that who either embrace radical feminism or female supremacy or both. Many of them are convinced a matriarchal/Fem Supremacist society is inevitable, a larger number that it is desireable. Once in awhile ..a great while..you’ll run into one who seems to know some game principles. I will state those few tend to have less worship of the female than the others and more pride in themselves as men.

    I guess I’m mentioning this in part due to sadness: many of the enemies of traditional masculinity are indeed these kind of men, indeed some of them enable the very worst of female behavior. But also I find it fascinating that they exist and yet the default assumptions of so many of them about what makes and would make women really happy are almost totally at odds with what the vast majority of women express here.

    Perhaps it really is a case that we all live in our own cocoons. Even Susan can only go so far: she allows that some men might be wired submissively and some women dominantly, but I suspect its even more complicated than that. After all, I’m both. I can serve (for a VERY brief and constrained time) and be served. I think its more like bisexuality, where most men go from “I’m always dominant everywhere all the time even in the bedroom and she better not LOOK at me funny or sideways” to ” Oh My Goddess: your humble toad begs to lick your toes clean today” being at opposite ends.

    Anyway, some random thoughts that I hope some find useful.

    • @Clarence
      Your comment reminds me of that Dear Woman video that’s been making the rounds. Here’s what I don’t get – I can’t imagine that many of these men can boast a vibrant sex life of whatever type they prefer. They must repel almost all women, and it can’t really take very long to figure that out, can it? The husbands celebrating female supremacy had better get over to Married Man Sex Life quick, or they are going to get hit with divorce.

      Re the spectrum of sexuality – I agree with you. And regardless of where one sits on that spectrum, there are plenty of people who enjoy a brief foray to another point on it. After all, that’s what role playing is. It’s just a question of matching fantasies – I once got very dominant with my husband during sex and his reaction was visceral and extremely negative. He was literally disgusted. Needless to say, that was a one off deal.

  • rick

    Submission?

    Not I.

    Free spankings for all the gals over at my place!!

  • dannyfrom504

    my most recent ex was VERY sub. she loved donimant men. i’m a dominant man (be it bedroom or otherwise) and even when i knew the relationship was going badly, i stil felt heistant to end it because we had such great chemistry ona man woman scale (she had persoanl issues that i had to disqualify her for).

    i have to agree with Yohami, a masculine acting woman is a total turn off to me. but as a man…i feel a certain obligation to not abuse said dominance. i’m VERY respectful, and go to great lengths to assure my lady is satisfied, balanced, and protected.

    • i’m a dominant man (be it bedroom or otherwise)….i’m VERY respectful, and go to great lengths to assure my lady is satisfied, balanced, and protected.

      TINGLE

  • Does gender equality in the bedroom inhibit arousal?

    Yes.

    We’re equal, I want us both to have fun. Our natural tendencies (you heard that right ‘blank-slaters’) seem to be that the man leads and the woman follows the majority of time.

    Are women turned on by male feminists?

    Some are. I remember meeting the husband of my Feminism lecturer (I studied it as part of my degree) and unfortunately he lived up to all the stereo-types, no balls, she wore the trousers in that relationship. They had kids so it must have been working for them.

    Are women feminists hot in the sack? If so, why?

    They can be if they are sex-positive as someone else mentioned. The kind of feminists who see women and men as equal but different and appreciate we are animals not ‘blank-slate’ robots.

  • @Nomadic

    “Some are. I remember meeting the husband of my Feminism lecturer (I studied it as part of my degree) and unfortunately he lived up to all the stereo-types, no balls, she wore the trousers in that relationship. They had kids so it must have been working for them.”

    Turned on and dutifully married are not the same thing. Turned on and being exclusive aren’t even the same thing. Why do you think alot of people break up with the fire goes? Sure they made children before but that doesn’t mean he lights her fire.

    They can be if they are sex-positive as someone else mentioned. The kind of feminists who see women and men as equal but different and appreciate we are animals not ‘blank-slate’ robots.

    That’s always weird to me. If she does realize that we are animals, then she also must realize that most men are not equal to the worth of most women biologically. Meaning, weak men aren’t worth weal women in the reproductive sense. Right?

  • VI

    Feminist women are a HUGE turnoff, both in daily interactions and in the bedroom. They are also very schizophrenic about the males they’re attracted to. You find feminists with either very dominant men who treat them like shit, or very submissive “men” who lay down their testicles for feminists to walk on without getting their shoes dirty.

    I have no desire to please a feminist in the bedroom. They just don’t push my buttons. I just jackhammer and go. Sometimes I don’t even want to finish.
    A feminine girl actually makes me want to keep going and going.

  • GudEnuf

    Wow, is that list from the late 1800′s? I think we’ve learned a bit since then.

    Each of these arguments have been proved bogus. And each time a bogus theory was shot down, a new bogus theory replaced it. Don’t you think it’s suspicious that this new evo-psych theories are “proving” the same prejudice that supported so many bogus theories in the past?

    “Isn’t it preposterous to think that we might be the same, act the same, look the same?”

    It’s a matter of degree. Sure, men and women might have some biological differences, but those differences are probably overstated (given our history of creating bogus theories to support his prejudice).

    having good sex means finding your opposite/complement.

    Said the smart, white, liberal, upper-middle class woman who married a smart, white, liberal, upper-middle class man. People tend to pair up with people are similar, not different than them. And as their relationships get more intimate, they become even more similar. I’m sure you’ve noticed that when a couple has been happily married for a long time, they tend be “in synch” with each other. When they get out of synch for too long, it’s bye-bye relationship.

    Feminists revile “nice guys” more than anyone else – that’s very clear from the feminist blogs.

    Feminists revile manipulative men who pretend to be nice guys, as self-flagellating men. (Although Hugo Schwyzer seems to be popular with feminists, and he hates men more than anybody). Pro-feminist men who try and engage women as equals (not lessers, not greaters) will find the SMP in feminist circles is very much in their favor. Guys like this can definitely marry up.
    P.S. I think Jaclyn would love to go on a date with me.

    • Don’t you think it’s suspicious that this new evo-psych theories are “proving” the same prejudice that supported so many bogus theories in the past?

      I always find it fascinating that feminists are quick to dismiss the “oxycontin myth” – and now you’re referring to “new evo-psych” theories. There’s a lot of scientific research being done that pictures and measures the various components of male and female brains, and they are different. Not better, not worse, and not the same. Researchers can measure brain activity in both sexes in all phases of mating and they are different. Hormones are released into the bloodstream throughout life, controlling the maturation process and the mating process. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that the sexes are very different. This is not newfangled pseudo-science. This is straight biology and anatomy.

      People tend to pair up with people are similar, not different than them

      People do mate assortatively wrt education, income, family background etc. And yet hetero sex is P in V, generally speaking. It doesn’t work with two identical parts. Push/pull, thrust/parry, hard/soft, submissive/dominant.

      P.S. I think Jaclyn would love to go on a date with me.

      If you say that the feeling is mutual, I’ll be floored. I cannot imagine that there is a single man alive that would find her attractive. And I’m not speaking just physically either. *recoils*

  • Anonymous

    Does gender equality in the bedroom inhibit arousal?

    No, because every relationship is different. Yes, the whole schoolgirl/nurse thing is popular in porn, but so is the dominatrix thing. Assuming that it is only natural for women to be submissive and men to be dominant in the bedroom only puts more expectations that would make certain people feel uncomfortable or even inhibit people’s desires to reenact certain fantasies.

    Are women turned on by male feminists?
    Yes and no. I am a woman and I only date men who are
    1) not sexist and 2) support ‘gender egalitarianism’ . I am not a fan of men who pretend to be “feminist” only to be liked by women in order to score with them. I like men who appreciate, respect, are capable of protecting and caring for, and who realize that they *NEED* females!


    Are women feminists hot in the sack? If so, why?

    As a woman and a feminist, I can only hope that being feminist doesn’t have have anything to do with being hot or not. Being hot depends on physical appearance for most part.

    I see feminism as a subset of egalitarianism or more specifically as ‘gender egalitarianism’. I believe that most people who call themselves feminist (let’s ignore the militant misandrists who have tried to subvert the term ‘feminism’) also support equality in other areas, but they’re just more focused on gender equality. Personally, I believe that both men and women have an equally important role in this world and mutual respect is the best way to make things better for all of us.

    “It’s the reason men keep shouting from the rooftops that women’s career achievements don’t make them attractive sexually. [..] Intelligence is not a boner killer, but an aggressive demeanor is.”- SW

    The problem here is that success and aggressiveness go hand by hand. I am sure these women are not competing with men because they want to intimidate men, but because they want an equality in opportunity.

    -Florence

  • Anonymous

    Oh and I want to clarify one thing: most feminists are not evil misandrists with hairy legs!

    -Florence

  • Esau

    “Oh and I want to clarify one thing: most feminists are not evil misandrists with hairy legs!

    -Florence”

    Is it the misandry part, or the hairy legs part, that you object to?

    And, what’s the proof of this? Or, are you just asking everyone to take your word for it? You may not be old enough to recognize this quote first-hand: “I can’t see how Nixon won, no one I know voted for him!”, but I’m sure you can see the point….

  • Abbot

    “Oh and I want to clarify one thing: most feminists are not evil misandrists with hairy legs!”
    .
    Perhaps. But since they are vastly outnumbered by non-feminist women, why would or should any man chance it with them?

  • Anonymous

    @ Esau
    A person doesn’t have to be a misandrist or to keep their legs hairy in order to support reforms on issues such as reproductive rights, domestic violence, maternity leave, equal pay, women’s suffrage, sexual harassment and sexual violence, which is what the feminist movement is about.

    If women are protesting by keeping their legs hairy, it is to raise awareness that “waxing”, shaving or laser-hair removal is not exactly a painless or pleasant process. It is also time consuming.

    -Florence

  • If women are protesting by keeping their legs hairy, it is to raise awareness that “waxing”, shaving or laser-hair removal is not exactly a painless or pleasant process. It is also time consuming.

    Ah. Its a protest. Can I support your cause by not using deodorant?

    • If women are protesting by keeping their legs hairy, it is to raise awareness that “waxing”, shaving or laser-hair removal is not exactly a painless or pleasant process. It is also time consuming.

      If feminist women rebuff all the traditional ways that women use to attract men:
      wear makeup
      remove body hair
      dress to flatter the female figure
      style hair
      act feminine

      …then they won’t attract men, right? The pool of men who want an overweight woman in sweats with crazy hair and hairy armpits has got to be very, very small. Which may explain why so many feminists identify as queer, i.e. non-cisgendered.

  • Flavia

    If women are protesting by keeping their legs hairy, it is to raise awareness that “waxing”, shaving or laser-hair removal is not exactly a painless or pleasant process. It is also time consuming.

    Ah…”raising awareness” – the favorite past time of do-nothing entitled brats raised on a diet of self esteem and high fructose corn syrup.

    The statement one makes when not shaving their legs is the same statement a man makes when they do not wear deodorant: “I am not beholden to the hygiene guidelines of my society.”

    You’re not changing the world. You’re not brave. You have not accomplished anything.

    Stop being so goddamn smug.

  • Abbot

    “Ah. Its a protest”
    .
    aka a whine. To men. Who are not listening. And don’t need to.
    .
    Here is a partial whine list:
    .
    Work life balance
    Repro rights
    Diversity
    IMBRA
    Inclusion
    Body image
    Political correctness
    Affirmative action
    Maternity leave
    Cultural Marxism
    Third party childcare
    Paternity leave
    Opt out myth
    Having it all
    Pay equity
    Fish riding bicycles
    Takes a village
    Mommy track
    Biological clock
    Gender role
    Career vs family

  • Abbot

    Ah…”raising awareness”
    .
    Typical. When feminists fail to get laws passed that impose artificial equality on men, they resort to broadcast whining or “raising awareness” as if men should care. When that fails, as it often does, they resort to a lower form of raising awareness, aka shaming and its a downward spiral from there.

  • Clarence

    Susan Walsh:

    You are correct, about the sex life in most of the cases I’ve seen.
    Between the ones who seem positively ecstatic about forced chastity or cuckoldry (admittedly a minority but very vocal it seems) there are plenty who put up with it because that is what their female companions want, indeed some of the wives/girlfriends write for the blogs or even write the blogs themselves occasionally. So quite a few of them get the vag a few times a year or less.

    It’s hard to measure their wives attraction for them, but you sometimes can. For one, how the guy says she treats him . If she writes, you can look for lots of contempt in their writing. Basically, look for contempt in treatment or language rather than anything else. I can say that some of these relationships seem loving, mutual, and with lots of hot sex, the majority seem to fall into the “not enough information is given to know” category, and some seem downright toxic with guys happy to do all sorts of degrading things for little or no recognition and the woman’s words or actions dripping with contempt or self-absorption.

    I’ve tried to argue this stuff with some of them before, but it goes in one ear and out the other.

    Anyway, here’s an example that is totally safe for both work and non-bdsm people as the post makes no mention of sex or S&M per-se:

    http://subservient-husband.blogspot.com/2011/04/female-superiority.html
    And this guy isn’t even really hardcore about it.

    An interesting thing is I’ve seen little or nothing in terms of studying the political orientations of male submissively oriented men, but I would bet that most are at least feminist or fem supremacy leaning.

    Which means I find that that the rare times that the 5 to 25 percent (I’m counting switchable males in here too) of males who aren’t strictly or mostly dominant in all aspects of their sexuality get mentioned in the manosphere we all tend to get lumped together, and criticized as a bunch of wimps who would want their wives messing around on them. So we are mostly ignored and when not ignored the prognosis is negative, which really sucks for me. Yet looking at this stuff, I can see why.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Clarence
    The thing is that the manosphere and the feminists are both extreme aspects of this whole issue, so they are both at odds.
    Susan is more or less trying to be Switzerland, but in this adversarial culture, moderates got it worse, because both sides want them to pick.
    I have issues with both sides and I agree on points with both sides, but then in my culture we are allowed to take a middle ground. In here it seems quite impossible, YMMV.

  • Abbot

    Well for sure, Amanda hates PUA duping of feminism. And what blogger is she referring to?
    .
    See this video starting at time 13:35
    .
    http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/35528?&in=27:27&out=42:40

  • Flavia

    Jaclyn Friedman is quite a dog. Is she related to New York Times War Propagandist and metaphor abuser Thomas Friedman, btw?

  • No, because every relationship is different. Yes, the whole schoolgirl/nurse thing is popular in porn, but so is the dominatrix thing. Assuming that it is only natural for women to be submissive and men to be dominant in the bedroom only puts more expectations that would make certain people feel uncomfortable or even inhibit people’s desires to reenact certain fantasies.

    You best put down that crack pipe and pass it my way. Your rock dealer must be Mt. Everest cause you are on some strong shit. Dominatix as popular as schoolgirl/nurse? *rubs eyes* Are you for real? Next thing I know you’re going to tell me it’s a common fantasy of males to have their wives banged by another man while they watch. The dominatrix thing is not popular in porn. Ron Jeremy only know where you came up with that idea. It’s a niche and will always be a niche.

    As a woman and a feminist, I can only hope that being feminist doesn’t have have anything to do with being hot or not. Being hot depends on physical appearance for most part.

    And feminist ideas, not shaving your legs, not dressing feminine, show up on your outer appearance as well.

    The problem here is that success and aggressiveness go hand by hand. I am sure these women are not competing with men because they want to intimidate men, but because they want an equality in opportunity.

    Check job market, college attendance, young adult incomes. You got it in spades. You wanna chill out now?

  • This is probably the little secret among females and the reason feminists will die lonely.

  • Escarondito +1

  • Hi Ms. Walsh,
    You’ve done it again!-another thorough debunking of Feminist Church dogmas. Bravo!

    And, for your consideration, here’s the blog address to yet another sex positive Feminist, this time on the Blackhand side:

    http://lidia-anain.com/

    I leave it to you and your illustrious readers to check her out and come to their own conclusions in line with the themes of the current discussion.

    I’ve already addressed the dominant/submissive piece on my post “On Girl Game & Other SMP-Related Fallacies, which for the sake of discussion I repost the following excerpt:

    “Having said all that though, there are some things that Women who are more middling of the pack on the scale can do to make themselves more attractive on the market. I’m not anywhere near a Ladies’ consultant on this score, but I’ll just mention a few things based on my experience as a Brotha, and that of other Brothas I’ve known over the years:

    3. Submissiveness – A huge sign of attraction to a Man, let me tell you. Plus, you’re much more approachable that way. Trust me, a Sista who comes off like a ball-busting shrike can and will run off many a Man, and then these same Sistas have the nerve to turnaround and demand to know why ain’t no Brothas “coming correct”, LMAO! Well, the answer to that one is easy, Ms. Thang – it’s because when a Man thinks of stepping to a Sista in the club or other social gathering, images of a fistfight with Jason Bourne doesn’t exactly come to mind. A Woman’s comportment can take her a long way in our age of “strong, independent” Sistas; tone down the Angela Davis routine, and be willing to defer to your Man (or the Man courting you), and watch things turnaround for the better overnight.”

    There’s more that I could add, but many of your (largely Male, but with a few notable Female exceptions) readers have already done a fine job in this regard.

    Carry on…

    O.

  • Abbot,
    Speaking of Feminists having a parakeet over Game, I’ve been recently engaged in battle with one Ms. Clarisse Thorn, who is a self-styled “authority” on BDSM, by they way; fitting given the current topic.

    Anyway, she’s got a bee in her bonnet over Game as well, deeming it “unethical” and the like. I’ve addressed her and related matters recently on my blog here:

    Keeping It Real: The Game, Neil Strauss, The (Sexual) Politics Of Fear, & Why Both Clarisse Thorn AND Ferdinand Bardamu Got It All Wrong
    http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com/entry/65015

    Quick excerpt as follows:

    “”As some of my readers know, I’m fascinated by the pickup artist subculture (a community devoted to advising men on how to seduce women). It’s a very mixed bag. My feeling is that there’s good advice in the community for genuinely kind shy guys. But sometimes, it’s so mixed with misogyny and cold-heartedness that wading through it feels like panning for gold in a sewer…A good friend of mine recently told me that he’s been reading the blog of a misogynist pickup artist who I absolutely loathe. I was appalled. I provided a detailed feminist critique of this guy’s blog. My friend listened and understood, but in the end he said, “I hear what you’re saying, and I agree with you. The guy is an asshole and his advice is permeated with terrible opinions of women. But a lot of it is really good advice, and I don’t know where else I can find such good advice about women.”
    So says one Ms. Clarisse Thorn out of the Chi; she is among the umpteen Feministas out there who specializes in “sex positive” Feminism and, like her sisters in arms, has a particular penchant for “deconstructing” this and “critiquing” that. If you’re a member of the community – the Seduction community, that is – you’re familiar with her kind; they’ve made it one of their missions in life to, if not shut us down, than to somehow shame us into more “ethical behavior” by upbraiding the whole of the community based on the whacked actions of a few.
    In case you haven’t figured it out by now, my position here is to say that not only are both Thorn and Bardamu are wrong as two left shoes on the basic facts of the matter, big and small (big meaning sexual politics writ large, and small meaning the pickup community itself especially Strauss’ role in it) but they both severly misrepresent Strauss himself, someone who by every account I am aware of is just a cool guy. Which makes this post and the topic upon which it is based, all the more ironic, since Strauss’ latest book has as its central theme, “keeping it real” with his interview subjects, and which is something that deeply concerns both sides of the blogosphere – the Manosphere wants to “keep it real” by throwing literary Molotov cocktails at society filled with the gasoline of truth that the Wimminz have taken over; and the Femosphere’s chief concern with the Seduction community is that it peddles in “deception and manipulation”.”

    Worth a read and wholly in league with what Ms. Walsh is saying here and in previous (excellently written and presented) articles. These ladies need some and bad!

    O.

  • Confidunce

    Most “feminists” aren’t that much of a turnoff if you’re counting women who think they deserve equal opportunities in the workplace, at the polls, etc. This includes every single woman I’ve ever met. The problem is the “feminists” who are eat up with identity politics and confuse “equality” of the sexes with “sameness” of the sexes. They’re not attractive to most men, and they often find themselves with betas who are willing to accept the “equality means sameness” fiction. Many of these women are the ones who walk all over their men in broad daylight and then have the chutzpah to complain that they’ve lost their tingle.

    Of course there’s nothing wrong with this as long as it’s a tradeoff they’re willing to accept. (I don’t date Republicans even though some of them are pretty hot.) What grinds my ass is the Revisionist Hystery (zing!) that insists that, not only should women be allowed to act like men, but that we should all get a hard-on by thinking about it.

    • The problem is the “feminists” who are eat up with identity politics and confuse “equality” of the sexes with “sameness” of the sexes.

      I have no beef with “equity” feminism – which I view as meritocracy, no biases, no special priveleges.

      What grinds my ass is the Revisionist Hystery (zing!) that insists that, not only should women be allowed to act like men, but that we should all get a hard-on by thinking about it.

      Exactly. Women can choose to be as grungy as they like, but they don’t have the right to tell men what is hot, or to “re-educate” men about what is acceptable behavior, i.e. promiscuity.

  • Abbot

    “she’s got a bee in her bonnet over Game as well, deeming it “unethical” and the like.”
    .
    Its unethical because it demotes a woman’s absolute agency over her sexual expression and empowerment. If these paragons of women’s autonomy were really so concerned they would advise all women to marry young and avoid the possibility of being “had”

  • Abbot

    “not only should women be allowed to act like men, but that we should all get a hard-on by thinking about it.”
    .
    Wow. What a self-tortured misguided miserable bunch. Most concerning is the view foreigners have of American men who are blamed for allowing a segment of the female population to regress to such a level. Very embarrassing indeed.

  • Abbot

    “Women can choose to be as grungy as they like, but they don’t have the right to tell men what is hot, or to “re-educate” men about what is acceptable behavior, i.e. promiscuity.”
    .
    Only men get to decide what is acceptable and ultimately marriageable. That really pisses off feminists and spawned the slut-pozzy cult.
    .

  • Doug1

    Anonymous/Florence—

    “Does gender equality in the bedroom inhibit arousal?”

    No, because every relationship is different. Yes, the whole schoolgirl/nurse thing is popular in porn, but so is the dominatrix thing.

    As Escaronditon says through telling sarcasm, this is complete BS. Dominantix porn is a small niche market. The overwhelming majority of porn involves girls being submissive. Schoolgirl/nurse stuff is only one subset of the massive submissive woman type porn. She’s usually very sex hunger and active submissive, but submissive nonetheless.

    Feminism definitely inhibits bedroom hotness. It does it too ways: 1) attitudes brought into the bedroom and 2) propagandizing women to be more masculine and aggressive and to fight submission to men and men to be more docile, feminized, less dominant, and solicitious / pedestalizing of women. This propaganda has been directly primarily at white and Asian middle class and up guys and women, and has gone on pervasively in most/many white homes, schools from early grades, universities, and in the entertainment media.

    A good part of game is teaching men how to unlearn this feminizing, nice guy, non dominant, overly respectful propaganda. Guy who continue to buy into it are less sexy.

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh–

    I have no beef with “equity” feminism – which I view as meritocracy, no biases, no special priveleges.

    There are plenty of special privileges. Affirmative action for women. The EEOC “diverse impact” for gender discrimination, which assumes women and men are on average as good at all the same things, such as carrying passed out people out of burning and smoke filled buildings while wearing heavy protective clothing.

    Equity feminists are all up in arms when women don’t go into STEM fields or do as well in them as men, but it’s just fine with them that women now graduate from college at almost fifty percent rate greater than men (57% to 43%). If they cared so much for equality, where’s the feminist push to rectify that, or push as hard to do so as they could figure out?

    All feminism has become about women have the edge everywhere, and men being deferential top women, etc. Misogyny is thrown around by them constantly but misandry virtually never. The later is not even many spell checkers (until the user puts it in). That’s despite the fact that there’s vastly more misandry in everyday American entertainment and other media and culture than misogyny.

    • @Doug1
      Hmmm, I may have used the term equity feminism incorrectly. If so, apologies for the misdirection. Your comment pushed a lot of buttons for me, b/c I think feminists are just ridiculous on some of these programs.

      I believe in a meritocracy – give me the chance to compete and may the best performer win. In your example of firefighting, unless a woman can literally carry the weight of a man out of a burning building she doesn’t belong there. I’m all for women serving in combat, but only in situations where her body size and strength makes sense strategically.

      Larry Summers was right – women are not generally found in the long tails of the bell curve in the same numbers as men. They are also less analytical by nature. Most women don’t want to go into STEM fields, it’s not what makes them tick, and they probably are not as good at it, overall. That’s pretty clear.

      I just watched an interview with Amanda Marcotte that Abbot linked to, and she actually celebrates the lopsided ratio in colleges. This is so wrongheaded, in my view, it makes me want to shake her. Society cannot thrive if its males do not thrive. How can feminists not see this? They take a short-term view about what happens in their lifetime – and most of them do not reproduce.

  • What doug1 said.

    If feminism strove for gender equality, it would be called genderism or something on the like. All feminism cares about is “more power to women”, without constraints or rationale to such power.

    They will keep making demands and asking other people to jump through loops as long as there are men willing to listen and making their wishes happen, in the name of equity.

    Thing is, “equity” is an abstract concept, like justice, its men territory. Men are fighting to reach an ideal and women keep moving that ideal further, pretty much like in regular male/female dynamics, with the female raising her price as much as she can and the beta male trying to fill that gap for good so he can find more peace.

    At this point, I think the basis for gender justice has been set. We should work to make that work, meritocracy and no special privileges. For that men have to stop listening to what women say and go back to the objective reality. More alpha power.

  • Doug1

    Gudenuf–

    The science changes, but the sexism stays the same.

    The truth is sexist. Men and women are wired and chemicaled (hormones, etc.) differently to a significant degree.

    • @Jeffrey of Troy
      That thread is hilarious. I’m going to try and share some here:
      venn
      venn2
      venn3

  • Chico

    @ Florence,

    2) support ‘gender egalitarianism’ . I am not a fan of men who pretend to be “feminist” only to be liked by women in order to score with them. I like men who appreciate, respect, are capable of protecting and caring for, and who realize that they *NEED* females!

    Ah, but why can’t your feminist ass take care of itself? I thought that was the whole point.

  • jess

    my view is that feminism has massively improved sexual fulfillment for women. The days of the Andrea Dworkin model of feminism have long gone.
    A modern women these days wears make up and high heels, demands quality sex, a career, a family and a socail life.
    I also think that women have NEVER really been atttracted to wimpy/short/pushover men, regrdless of the era- including the 60’s.
    i do know of the odd couple that has a powerful women/weaker man dynamic and its, well…., a bit odd. (but all power too them).
    I think its up to a guy to hols his own in a relationship and be masculine. That DOESNT men being disrectful or sexist or defensive. It does mean not being intimidated by succesful or intelligent women.
    So do I think feminism has caused death of the boner? Nope. In fact its meant some girls more open with their sexuality to the delight of many men and women are more likely to enjoy and want sex more as better education means more orgasms.

  • Chico

    Some annoying behaviours that can be found in domineering women, IMO:

    1) Speaking for her man in social settings when he is right there
    2) Nagging
    3) Man-bashing or going on a big feminist political rant
    4) Bossing her man around
    5) Gloating about how intelligent, strong, or accomplished she is ad naseum
    6) Not trying totally non-weird sexual positions in the bedroom because “OMG a women should never submit to a man”, as was brought up earlier.

    In regards to #5, it is not a woman’s intelligence, strength, or accomplishments that are a turn-off. It is the bull-busting and narcissistic behaviours that are a turn off. If you have all these positive traits, why not be modest and let others pay you those compliments genuinely? No man likes a woman who is full of herself.

    • If you have all these positive traits, why not be modest and let others pay you those compliments genuinely?

      This is actually an excellent antidote to narcissism for both sexes. Best of all, the genuine recognition from others feels 1000 x’s better than boasting.

  • jess

    a few more points:
    .
    despite what some posters have claimed if you look at the development of feminism over the last 30 years, whilst of course female interests have been a priority there was always a keen awareness of male rights and in particular childrens rights. Feminism, taken in its entirety, is a humanist movement as opposed to just a female one. Those with a strong religeous background will rebuff that of course but if you consider things in an ethical framework it is the case.
    .
    also please understand the distinction between male and female desires. Whislt men and women ARE very different in many ways, sexuality isnt one of them.
    .
    Its perfect natural for both genders to WANT to be promiscious. The Science from the last 10 years is very clear. You may wish to look at the work of Helen Fisher, Laura Berman, Michelle Langley, Abby Levine or any journals on sexual anthropology.
    .
    This doesnt mean a human should not be sexually responsible but it does mean that the notion of the demure virginal girl being ‘natural’ is a nonsense.

    • @jess

      there was always a keen awareness of male rights

      This is totally untrue. What can you be thinking?

      Feminism, taken in its entirety, is a humanist movement as opposed to just a female one.

      This is totally untrue. What can you be thinking? Feminism seeks advancement for women at the expense of men.

      Whislt men and women ARE very different in many ways, sexuality isnt one of them.

      Helen Fisher’s work is all about the opposite of this. They are completely different sexually – different chemicals, different risk and rewards systems, different objectives.

      Abby Levine? Do you mean Ariel Levine? Because her book puts the blame squarely on feminism for creating the Girls Gone Wild/Ladettes.

      Not sure what any of this has to do with women being demure or virginal as natural. In any case, feminism has ensured that virginal, demure women are viewed as freaks of nature.

  • Jess, you´re cherry picking the facts I like and neglecting the ones I dont.

    So how about these hairy legs? or this:

    my view is that feminism has massively improved sexual fulfillment for women.

    How about the sexual fulfillment of men? the way I see it, feminism freed women from their beta hubby / captors, so more women can ride the infamous alpha cock. Nothing wrong with that, but are you seeing both sides of the coin?

    I dont see many men cheering because they are sexually fulfilled. The way you present it, its as if its one against the other. Feminist response? to push these unhappy men more.

  • there was always a keen awareness of male rights and in particular childrens rights. Feminism, taken in its entirety, is a humanist movement as opposed to just a female one.

    Feminism being about male rights? Do you have any facts to back this up?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Many of these women are the ones who walk all over their men in broad daylight and then have the chutzpah to complain that they’ve lost their tingle.

    I most add that it might happen the other way around sex starved wife article from the same site: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/divorce-busting/200804/sex-starved-wives

  • Stephenie Rowling

    there was always a keen awareness of male rights and in particular childrens rights. Feminism, taken in its entirety, is a humanist movement as opposed to just a female one.

    I read Jezebel and Feministing and I don’t remember the last time they raised “male rights awareness” but please be my guest.

  • Ted,

    Treating people (regardless of gender) in a way I would hate to be treated just makes me uncomfortable, unless I have their express permission. I recognize that men and women are different, but that doesn’t change the fact that I have certain mental blocks in place and circumventing them is very hard work.

    It IS hard work. The choice is up to you.

    A) You can take the fake easy road: run game on top of your persona, do it with unease, memorize stuff, do tricks, project this alpha persona in front of you, with the hopes some girl, after having sex with you, will fall in love with who you really are. So, tricking the girl into a relationship by exaggerating your unexistent alpha traits.

    This is the most commercial, exploited, talked, devilized, and it works, specially on drunken fake girls, and feels, in my experience, bad. But hey, its a huge world.

    B) Reduct game to principles and accept reality. Women are attracted to men. Men are supposed to be the kings of troy and women ditch and dont feel remorse for men that dont fit the mold. So you take the principles and understand the alpha beta women dynamics, then figure out a way you can change for REAL, internalizing and doing hard work and change your life in a way that both projects a real alpha, and is still you. So, the alpha version of you. You, but like God loved you.

    C) Do nothing and hope for the best. Maybe you win the lottery. Probably not.

    D) Complain.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    and most of them do not reproduce

    Err Susan I think that line was a little uncalled for, many of the members of manosphere are not planning on reproducing either. Unless you think is a factor oh their ideas you shouldn’t mention it for feminists either, my two cents.

  • @Stephenie
    My intention was not to criticize women who don’t have children. It was just an observation that feminists are not as tied to a future they won’t be alive for – their aims are very focused in the present. Those of us who are deeply concerned about American males not getting an education are taking a longer-term view. At least that’s my sense of it.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    My intention was not to criticize women who don’t have children. It was just an observation that feminists are not as tied to a future they won’t be alive for – their aims are very focused in the present. Those of us who are deeply concerned about American males not getting an education are taking a longer-term view. At least that’s my sense of it.

    Okay.

  • That DOESNT men being disrectful or sexist or defensive. It does mean not being intimidated by succesful or intelligent women.

    Where oh where did this lie start? Tell me people of the board, here is an SAT question for you.

    Q69. Which of these statements does not fit?

    A) “Dude, she’s with all her friends. It’s intimidating”
    B) “Dude, I heard that QB is talking to her. He’s intimidating”
    C) “Dude, she’s so accomplished in her academics and career. It’s intimidating”
    D) “Dude, she’s fucking banging. It’s intimidating”

    Wrong answers are no points. Correct answers are 100. Omission is a sign of social retardation and you will be force to attend remedial “Male Anxiety and it’s Cause 101”.

  • Esau

    Jess: “I think its up to a guy to hol[d]s his own in a relationship and be masculine. That DOESNT men being disrectful or sexist or defensive.”

    Jess, I’m just curious here: do you have any real-world, detailed examples of male behavior that you consider to be “masculine” which is _not_ also sexist?

    As the Spaniard said, you keep using that word, but I don’t think it means what you think it means. A few detailed examples, please, would help a lot.

  • jess

    1. sex fulfilment.
    yes i would accept that modern femisism has been good for women and alphas at the expense of betas. (but i think they are 30% not 80% like others here)(sorry for my crude categorisation but i like zippy posts)
    2. feminism and mens rights
    i didnt say feminism was ABOUT mens rights only, i said womens rights were a priority but there have been many occasion when they are aligned. For many years the feminist movement was closely aligned with black, gay, lesbian and transgender movements. Because they were experienced similar forms of discrimination and oppression. A feminist supporting the rights of a gay male is supporting make rights. A feminist supporting paternity leave is supporting male rights.

    • For many years the feminist movement was closely aligned with black, gay, lesbian and transgender movements.

      This is hilarious. The latter three are near and dear to feminist hearts because….they are those things!

      A feminist supporting the rights of a gay male is supporting make rights.

      No. They are delighted that the men they hate are coupling with one another.

      A feminist supporting paternity leave is supporting male rights.

      HAHA! Yes, so he can be a SAHD and she can hightail it back to the office! What if he has no interest in being the primary caregiver? It makes more sense for women t focus on maternity leave, but feminists resent women who step off the career track.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Jess
    Err just a quick read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights
    I think you are a bit confused about exactly what males rights are and how feminists don’t have use for them.

  • Anonymous

    Well, I dress up feminine, wear make-up, style my hair, wax off body hair, eat healthy and go to the gym and I am attracted to men. I am not a ball-busting, narcissistic misandrist and I don’t think that the feminist movement is about being one at the first place, but if I ever over hear a man making a sexist comment or action, I will definitely speak up, rather than acting “submissive” and letting it slip away.

    I also agree that certain negative attitudes towards men, aggressive domineering, refusing to make oneself look attractive for their partner, while expecting their partner to look and act at its best or most attractive way or to be turned on, are the way to bring a change, but only fuel more conflict between the sexes.

    I am also anti-promiscuity for reasons such as STD spread and emotional disturbance, but I have to agree with feminists on the fact that men can be hypocritical in their demand to marry a virgin wife or a wife with a low number, when they themselves aren’t virgin and have a high number. I think that it is reasonable to refuse to accommodate needs largely fueled by insecurities (such as their size and performance). I am not saying that having insecurities is not normal or human, as I have them too sometimes, but expecting someone to have a certain history of not being “had” by other is TOO much to try to accommodate!

    @Chico
    Ah, but why can’t your feminist ass take care of itself? I thought that was the whole point.

    By caring I meant more like nurturing and care for a family. I can take care of myself.

    -Florence

    • I have to agree with feminists on the fact that men can be hypocritical in their demand to marry a virgin wife or a wife with a low number, when they themselves aren’t virgin and have a high number.

      This is biological reality. We have evolved differently as sexes, and feminists cannot succeed in shaming men to abandon the sexual double standard. You may call it hypocrisy, but in fact it is largely outside the realm of choice.

  • OffTheCuff

    Equity feminists are all up in arms when women don’t go into STEM fields or do as well in them as men, but it’s just fine with them that women now graduate from college at almost fifty percent rate greater than men (57% to 43%). If they cared so much for equality, where’s the feminist push to rectify that, or push as hard to do so as they could figure out?

    That sounds like gender feminism, not equity. Maybe you’re using a different definition than I am, but as far as I know equity feminism isn’t about that — Christina Hoff Sommers would definitely not be up in arms due to lopsided STEM ratios: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_and_gender_feminism and she coined the term.

    • @OffTheCuff
      Thanks for clarifying the definition of equity feminism. That is originally what I intended to identify with. I have long thought of myself as being sympatico with CH Sommers, Camille Paglia, Cathy Young and Steven Pinker. I think that the label “feminist” has drifted so far away from this first wave concept, and so far into gender feminism, that most people are loathe to call themselves equity feminists, even though this probably represents a majority of the population.

  • good for women and alphas at the expense of betas. (but i think they are 30% not 80% like others here)

    hah, that just shows how invisible are non alphas for you

    i didnt say feminism was ABOUT mens rights only

    But you are saying its about mens rights AT ALL? or you wanna change that about gay men? Show me ANY form of feminism that takes regular men´s needs and rights in consideration.

    That if you insist on calling feminism a “humanist” ideology

  • jess

    3. sex differences
    I meant abby levine. i used a variety of people from scientists to well known personalities/sexperts to talk about the science or simply modern female sexuality. Helen fisher does describe key differences and motives for women but she also describes the reasons for female natural promiscuity and strong sexual preferences for certain masculine body types or characteristics. Basically there is reason why tall men make out like bandits on the dating scene.
    4. men being defensive/sexist
    mmmm. tough one. i really had to think of concrete examples. ok how about this:
    a girlfreind is being unreasonable at a party. a. slap her b. put up with it. c. tell her shes out of order
    .
    a girlfriend cheats on you?
    a. put her in hospital. c. put up with it. c. tell her shes out of order and either dump her or issue final warning
    .
    during a heating 5 way converstaion do you:
    a. boorishly talk over every one, b. shut the hell up, c make interesting and engaging conversation allowing all to contrbiute
    . do you have a
    a. crass offensive, sexist SOH, b. no SOH. c witty, satirical SOH
    .are you
    a. tall and excessively muscular, b 5ft 6in c. 6ft 1in
    .
    if you are mostly a’s you are a dick
    if you are mostly b’s you watch a lot of porn and do on line gaming
    if you are mostly c’s you probably have prety good luck with girls and have plenty of friends who like and respect you.

    ps that last question was just a wee jest for Susan

    • @Jess

      If you are mostly c’s you probably have prety good luck with girls and have plenty of friends who like and respect you.

      If you are mostly c’s you have tight game, and you dominate women. You also probably avoid feminists.

  • jess

    5. Florence- your post was so well put. your insecurity thing was the focus of quite a few posts last year.
    .
    6. Feminism.
    If you look at the development of feminism from the 60’s onwards the whole dogma/philopshy is based upon humanism. The rejection of religious roles imposed on men and women and traditional social strata. Feminism was often very entwined with 60/70/80 left wing politics which revolved around equality. Thats not to say these groups didnt fall out from time to time of course. Femisnism is about the idea of treating people equally regardless of what hangs between your legs. Im not going to post links to ancient feminist tombs here- if you re that interested pop down to your local library and read a few books from the feminist theory library. Germaine Greer is very readable for example. Dont bother with blogs- they are pretty supeficial and just about sex and shopping

  • Jess, how about ANYTHING to support your previous assert that feminism cares about the rights and needs of men?

  • jess

    7. evidence.
    Yohmai i just gave you 2 examples earlier. just scroll up.
    .
    8. Steph
    i looked at your link. most peoplle are aware of those rights- i’m happy to agree with many of them too. Soemtimes men and womens rights are aligned, someitmes they oppose each other. sometiems capitalism and socialsm are aligned, someitmes not.

  • Jess, where? number 5. maybe? if so, how is that about mens needs and rights?

    • @Yohami

      Jess, where? number 5. maybe? if so, how is that about mens needs and rights?

      Welcome to the frustrating experience of debating with Jess. Soon she will be providing links to trashy British tabloids to prove her points.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    8. Steph
    i looked at your link. most peoplle are aware of those rights- i’m happy to agree with many of them too. Soemtimes men and womens rights are aligned, someitmes they oppose each other. sometiems capitalism and socialsm are aligned, someitmes not.

    Can you point out all the rights on the wiki article that feminism champions? And example of those endeavours, please?

  • Thank you Jess, your list of male actions gives an accurate example of how men should act to be considered Alpha.

    ‘a’ all the way.

    So supporting men’s rights is to support gay rights?

    Well it shows where feminist priorities are.

  • Mike C

    Anyway, here’s an example that is totally safe for both work and non-bdsm people as the post makes no mention of sex or S&M per-se:

    http://subservient-husband.blogspot.com/2011/04/female-superiority.html
    And this guy isn’t even really hardcore about it.

    .
    OMG…I feel mentally scarred. Followed a few links and have to think it is some sort of joke. I have to admit the thought of it being real truly inspires a level of pure contempt. I can see why a super weak, submissive man inspires contempt in most women, because it has the same effect in me. There is something truly revolting in someone who embraces their own abuse and servitude.

    • @Mike C

      I can see why a super weak, submissive man inspires contempt in most women, because it has the same effect in me.

      From that site, these two quotes:

      Yes, it is a mutually accepted understanding between my wife and me that she is of superior intellect and possesses better judgment.

      It is her willingness to be my key holder and impose long term chastity that has made it possible.

      They don’t have sex! If that’s not proof of a flawed model I don’t know what is. Only a man filled with self-loathing could say this. In which case it’s not possible that any woman would find him remotely attractive.

  • Abbot

    I think its up to a guy to hold his own in a relationship and be masculine.

    .
    Yes, and it is entirely up to him to determine what masculine means and never ever up to women and especially feminists. Either accept it or move on.
    .

    A feminist supporting the rights of a gay male is supporting male rights.

    .
    How does that help men? I mean those who invent and run just about everything.
    .

    A feminist supporting paternity leave is supporting male rights.

    .
    Bull. Shit. Very few men care about this but many women do. Why is that?
    .

    I have to agree with feminists on the fact that men can be hypocritical in their demand to marry a virgin wife or a wife with a low number, when they themselves aren’t virgin and have a high number.

    .
    If the man gets what he wants and the woman he chose got what she wanted, why do feminists get all in a lather if he is proudly hypocritical? Because he got to empower a lot of feminist ass and left them all at the curb where he thought they belonged? Oh poo poo.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Mike C
    I keep saying men are the ones that hate Betas, SOME women might no get turned on by then, but they could still love them on a no sexual way, but men? They hate their gut’s. If you look at how a man reacts to submission on another male…is guttural. Its like that soldier on Saving Private Ryan that leaves the enemy soldier go to kill his comrades because he is shit scared. Men on the movie theater were completely revolted in a way that was far superior to women’s IME.

  • Octavia

    Just a few “across the bow of the ship” comments:

    1. There’s a difference between being in control and being controlling. People do what you want because pleasing you matters to them. When you’re only interested in being controlling, you actually confirm that you lack power.

    .

    2. Some of those who use Game don’t realize they’re advertising their powerlessness. Supposedly, they’re not ruled by getting pussy yet they’ve created an entire “art form” around it. Seriously…

    .

    3. An inability to find people who are compatible with you is not the problem of an entire gender. If you have made poor choices regarding whom you pursue, fix your priorities.

    .

    4. Just because your tactics worked with one guy/girl doesn’t mean those techniques will work with another. “All my other boyfriends/girlfriends liked it” isn’t an acceptable rule of engagement. Try getting to know a person on an individual level.

    .

    5. Some nice guys/girls aren’t all that nice. Chances are if you’re interested in the same men/women that an asshole finds desirable, you either need to take a closer look at yourself or just admit you’re an asshole too. Also, being nice doesn’t mean you’re qualified to be someone’s partner. Plus, being a STEM major doesn’t mean you’re any more inclined to be a decent human being.

    • An inability to find people who are compatible with you is not the problem of an entire gender. If you have made poor choices regarding whom you pursue, fix your priorities.

      Yes! More personal responsibility.

  • Abbot

    A modern women these days wears make up and high heels, demands quality sex, a career, a family and a socail life.

    .
    What exactly is a “modern woman” and where do they dwell? Can they be avoided?
    .
    Demands? From whom? Are there folks obligated or even available to meet these demands? What if they don’t want to participate or accommodate? Does this species [modern women] then go berserk? Makes attempts to “increase awareness” or lobby Congress for laws to calm her down?

  • @Steph

    That is because it directly effected the men. Also, notice in Saving Private Ryan that they allowed him into their crew of masculinity, therefore he must follow the same rules of men that the do. The fact that his was disloyal to their code is what infuriated the men in the audience.

    When a beta is not part of your crew and is being submissive, weak, or effeminate, you’re so wrong it’s terrible Steph. Mostly men are indifferent. Some feel pity. And some try to help the guy out. It is women who are mostly disgusted with beta males being in their presence. Men only get annoyed when the betas actions affect them, See, willy wonkas latest post on his friends acting beta and fucking up his game. See rivs post when he pedastals and we try to help him out. And Roissy does not hate betas to hate betas. When Roissy harangues on betas, he is haranguing on the beta that is in all men and is trying to beat it out of the man, not necessarily on betas being betas themselves. If you can’t understand that you have to understand that men will, can, and are effective at being brutally honest with each other as a way to grow. We generally don’t like, need, or want bullshit. If a girl rejects us cause we are fat, I don’t consider my boys my boys unless they say Esca you’re a fat ass bitch, lose some weight and fuck bitches get money.

    Steph take off your female eyes and see from a mans perspective. “Stop being a bitch. You’re acting like a bitch” isn’t a diss. It often the greatest sign of friendship and care men show.

  • Mike C

    I always find it fascinating that feminists are quick to dismiss the “oxycontin myth” –

    I think you mean oxytocin, right? Oxycontin is a narcotic. 🙂

    • @Mike C

      Oy, I can’t believe I made that oxytocin typo. BTW, on a recent spring break trip taken by a bunch of college girls I know, one guy who is known as a player and cad headed straight for the pharmacy (this was in Latin America) and bought out their supplies of Xanax and Oxycontin, no prescription required. He proceeded to be totally high on both for the entire week. The worst part is, a young woman who has only ever had one relationship or partner fell for him on Day One, and has been thoroughly corrupted. He’s had to take semesters off two separate times for rehab, yet she thinks he is “just so much fun to be around.” She’s also been talked into forgoing condoms. I wish she’d ask for my advice, but she knows better. Another one bites the dust.

  • Stephenie, I think we’ve already established that what you describe as beta is different to what is described as beta here.

    Alpha is defined as someone attracts women, Beta as someone who doesn’t attract women, and Omega as someone who actively repulses them.

    Also, other than our mothers men don’t care if women love us in a non-sexual way. Every man, if he is a man, wants women to want him, even if he’s not going to go further than light flirtation.

    I like Athol’s way of breaking it up into traits that women respond to. Alpha traits including courage attract women, and Beta traits like kindness keep them comfortable in a relationship.

  • Mike C, are you saying that we need to drug some into submission?

  • Mike C

    @Mike C
    I keep saying men are the ones that hate Betas, SOME women might no get turned on by then, but they could still love them on a no sexual way, but men? They hate their gut’s. If you look at how a man reacts to submission on another male…is guttural.

    I don’t think men hate betas. Fact of the matter is most of us our betas. It would be the equivalent of hating ourselves. Over the last few years, I’ve integrated a lot more alpha behaviors, but I’m not a natural alpha. I don’t hate myself or other guys like me.

    Now I do think guys hate cowards, and just completely spineless, super weak men who would take pride in being that way. It is the embracing of it that is really revolting. If the guy is trying to improve, become stronger, become a better man that is admirable, but to willingly embrace complete subservience and submissiveness. That is repugnant.

    Let me put it this way. If a super weak omega said sincerely “I want to change, help me to change” I would extend my hand in brotherhood and sincerely help him. If on the other hand, he took sincere pleasure in it, especially being someone’s doormat, then I probably wouldn’t give a second thought to sharing in the abuse and giving him what he seems to desire.
    .
    I think what it is, is that most men value self-respect. If you don’t respect your own dignity, then I will degrade you. You actually see this dynamic in the way some women are treated sexually. I know guys…basically good guys who will do the most degrading things sexually to certain women (sluts)….why…because they allow it….and embrace it…and if you allow it and embrace it then you deserve to be as degraded as possible. That is the mindset.

  • filrabat

    Some men are actually able to look past the “powerless” status of some of these men. I admit that I’m one of them, too. Yes, having at least enough power to get by is important, but not the end-all be-all of what a man is. To say otherwise is to imply that power and conforming to society’s gender expectations is more important than honesty, integrity, civility, and empathy in the compassionate sense of the term. To me, if a person is civilized, constructive, ethical, and such – I say “So What?

    Yes, it’s not conforming to conventional/traditional gender roles. Yes, it’s not exactly a huge turn-on for many women. But is it REALLY such a “sin” on the level of “deserving of contempt“? It’s hard for me to see how – given that they are not likely to be doing anything that in any reasonable way may be considered a threat to other people, their property, livelihood, and so forth.

    We’ve got enough societal pressure to conform as it is. Too many people having too many issues about how a person conducts themselves on nitpicky, non-character issues of who that person is. All in all, I have to say contempt for (as explicitly distinct from mere non-attraction) these men has more the result of petty personal distaste rather than the product of the rational thought process. The only reason why a man “has to” be “manly” is because society says so; and society’s say-so, as we’ve seen, is not a reason to believe anything at all – if it ever was one to begin with.

  • Clarence

    Stephanie Rowling:

    Thank you for your kind words. It’s true this section of the internet is rather “extreme”. Still, here you can get pure undistilled truth and here people aren’t afraid to seem judgmental. But yeah, often like you I do feel in the middle of several fighting factions as to what true manhood is, how one should approach feminism, etc.

  • Clarence

    filrabat:

    I agree. I find gay sex disgusting to think about, yet I wouldn’t dream of shaming gay people for it. It’s “not my thing” but provided it hurts no one it’s really not my concern. That’s where I think most here find a fair ground. Still, I’d rather people feel free to feel revulsion if that is really how they feel. It’s not “wrong” to be one way or the other. All one can really ask is live and let live. To the extent that any submissively wired male lets his orientation affect his sexual politics he is not really doing that. Instead he’s trying to impose something on men and women who do not want it.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    That is because it directly effected the men. Also, notice in Saving Private Ryan that they allowed him into their crew of masculinity, therefore he must follow the same rules of men that the do. The fact that his was disloyal to their code is what infuriated the men in the audience.

    What is missing on your (I mean all manosphere) idea is that on ancient times when men went into party hunting they were counting on numbers or strategy to beat the mammoth, the weak men on the group cannot be tolerated because their weakness will compromise their lives and survival precedes reproduction. That is why he is hated if they were playing chess and he wouldn’t follow the rules it wouldn’t be a problem, given that he being weak would end on them dying, don’t you think it makes sense from a evolutionary POV that men also were disgusted by weakness?

    Steph take off your female eyes and see from a mans perspective. “Stop being a bitch. You’re acting like a bitch” isn’t a diss. It often the greatest sign of friendship and care men show.

    But Mike was not dissing the submissive husband right? You are confusing what I pointed out. He described disgust.

    Also, other than our mothers men don’t care if women love us in a non-sexual way.

    I already know that from a man’s POV if a woman doesn’t want him he is insulting him, but this is not the way women process non-sexual feelings. Unless that woman already wants you or is an entitled bitch if you don’t want her she wouldn’t take it as an insult and most of the time she wouldn’t care. I meant from the female POV.

  • Clarence

    Mike C:

    I’m sorry if my link upset you. I figured most here had seen much worse than this. After all, last year for a bit there was series of discussions at Roissy’s and other manosphere blogs about cockuldry and I’m lots of those links were far more degrading than this, so I felt safe. I actually viewed this post as sort of a political manifesto, with very little sexual content per-se, so I felt it was safe for everyone.

    However, curiosity killed the Mike and you did follow a few of those links without me asking you to or warning you about them..maybe I should have left a warning about the links 😉

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I know guys…basically good guys who will do the most degrading things sexually to certain women (sluts)….why…because they allow it….and embrace it…and if you allow it and embrace it then you deserve to be as degraded as possible. That is the mindset.

    I know that men’s morality is very relativistic. But on the example above there was no way to know if the guy will hate himself for it or improve it. It was the mere actions that created the reaction from the men. Like I said above it makes sense for men to hate the weak men, they are a liability to the community.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Yes, it’s not conforming to conventional/traditional gender roles. Yes, it’s not exactly a huge turn-on for many women. But is it REALLY such a “sin” on the level of “deserving of contempt“?

    For what is worth I totally respect your POV and your ethics. I do know is no a path many men will take, due to their biology, but at least for me when I was single, a man with strong character and ethics, was a big turn on.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I don’t think men hate betas. Fact of the matter is most of us our betas. It would be the equivalent of hating ourselves. Over the last few years, I’ve integrated a lot more alpha behaviors, but I’m not a natural alpha. I don’t hate myself or other guys like me.

    Let’s change the words do men hate men, that don’t attract women and/or can’t get laid? I mean did you loved yourself when you couldn’t get laid by the women of your choice?

  • Clarence

    Stephanie:

    To be that way is to be ashamed. But no, other men might make fun and even shun you if they found out, but no, unless you are actively repulsing chicks or messing things up they will not hate you. Indeed, they might try to help you. So in my experience if you don’t scare the gals away you will get one of three reactions from the vast majority of men:
    A. Derision
    B. indifference
    C. Active help

  • @steph

    What is missing on your (I mean all manosphere) idea is that on ancient times when men went into party hunting they were counting on numbers or strategy to beat the mammoth, the weak men on the group cannot be tolerated because their weakness will compromise their lives and survival precedes reproduction. That is why he is hated if they were playing chess and he wouldn’t follow the rules it wouldn’t be a problem, given that he being weak would end on them dying, don’t you think it makes sense from a evolutionary POV that men also were disgusted by weakness?

    Steph. You’re the greatest cheerleader I can have. Did you notice the caveat where I said “where it effected them”? In saving private ryan they are on a life-or-death mission. And specifically in that scene, they are outnumbered, outgunned, outmanuevered, and out of luck. All the men are expected to man up at that time. Hunting a mammoth is life or death and everyone affects everyone. Why are you providing more examples to prove my point that men only really dislike beta men when it affects them personally? Also, why are you bringing up chess as an example? Unless this is a chess game in a Saw universe, who gives a fuck if your weak. I don’t even think there are rules of masculinity in chess. Anyone can clarify that?

    But Mike was not dissing the submissive husband right? You are confusing what I pointed out. He described disgust.

    Did not see Mike was talking about that blog and I do agree with him. So when beta actions effect you personally, or the beta actively enjoys submission, then he definitely receives disgust from women. But it must be said that in the former case, once the beta no longer effects the man he no longer cares about the beta unless it is to stop the betas future actions from messing him up again.

    Let’s change the words do men hate men, that don’t attract women and/or can’t get laid?

    Are you properly medicated tonight? It seems like you’re now moving goalposts just to try and get men to say that men hate men. I’m wondering if it’s just hard for you to understand that men hate the beta in men. Point and period.

  • No, men don hate betas.

  • filrabat

    Just to be reiterate – the contempt for weakness post has nothing to do with what’s sexually desirable. It’s about basic morality and ethics. To me, contempt for a weak man simply because he’s weak is the equivalent of contempt for an obese woman simply because she’s obese. These traits – no matter how unappealing, say absolutely nothing about other societally redeeming traits that person may have.

    As for Stephanie’s admittedly sound, plausible description of why pre-agricultural men hated their weak male members – it does make sense from an evolutionary psychology point of view. Back in the days when missing even one game animal meant “eat adequately or famine”, there remained an evolutionary justification of that mentality. But over the past few millenia and especially in the 21st century, contempt for weakness lost its evolutionary point. We don’t have to risk our lives to obtain food. We make our livings ultimately from people willing to “build a better mousetrap”, conjure up new kinds of products or services, or create some new entertainment form (or at least put new twists on the above) – none of which have anything to do with Alpha (in the macho/courage sense) traits. Yet..we’re still the same old human beings; for our psychological evolution has not kept up with our technological development. So unless you are in the police, the military, or employed in any position where literally direct hands-on physical security is an inevitable part of your job duties, contempt for weakness is pretty much a superfluous trait these days.

    While there ARE indeed limits to how much we ourselves and/or society can purge personal distastes – the good news is that we humans are pretty good at figuring things out. Our brains allows us to overrule our DNA and the reptilian side of our brains when need be. So we transcend animals even if we physically remain animals. Therefore, to refuse to think our way out of our contempt for the weak is IMO frankly insulting to human potential, knowing we have the ability to think on a “higher” level, but choosing to listen to the animal side of our nature instead.

    It’s frankly time for us to grow up as a species and enter the 3rd Millennium AD/BCE. Who knows? Our very survival as a species in this millennium could well depend on the ideas initiated by a weak person.

  • Mike C

    Mike C:

    I’m sorry if my link upset you. I figured most here had seen much worse than this. After all, last year for a bit there was series of discussions at Roissy’s and other manosphere blogs about cockuldry and I’m lots of those links were far more degrading than this, so I felt safe. I actually viewed this post as sort of a political manifesto, with very little sexual content per-se, so I felt it was safe for everyone.
    .
    Don’t sweat it. I was half-joking about the “mentally scarred” thing. I’m very much a live and let live kinda guy. Hey, whatever gets someone’s rocks off, go for it. That said, assuming that stuff is real some guy who is going to let his wife put his dick in a prison and set a schedule for orgasms or talk about obedience and subserviance to his wife really is a POS in my opinion that I don’t even have a shred of respect for. Again, if you don’t respect yourself, then I’m just a fool to give you even an iota of mine.

  • Mike C

    I know that men’s morality is very relativistic.
    .
    Actually, my sense is the exact opposite is true. On Myers-Briggs, I think men tend more to be judgers rather then perceivers. My sense is when it comes to things like “justice” and “honor” men are more likely not to be relativistic. For example, I think a woman if she has a personal connection is more likely to find a way around the abstract principle whereas for example a guy…say a father and son…the father is more likely to say “yes, he is my son” but he must be punished or pay his dues. In other words, I’d say a man’s moral code is more likely to be black and white according to some set of unbending principles whereas a woman is more likely to shift based on personal feelings.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Also, why are you bringing up chess as an example?

    You say that the guy no following the rules when you were talking about combat, like it was just a matter of following guidelines and no the fact that it was a life-death situation. Chess also has guidelines so that was the example is was not about guidelines only.

    when beta actions effect you personally, or the beta actively enjoys submission, then he definitely receives disgust from women.

    You mean men right?

    Are you properly medicated tonight? It seems like you’re now moving goalposts just to try and get men to say that men hate men. I’m wondering if it’s just hard for you to understand that men hate the beta in men. Point and period.

    Jason say that Beta is a man that don’t attract women sexually. I was just using the real definition of the word for clarification purposes. I said let’s change the word no the definition I didn’t moved the goal post I placed a light on it to make it look more obvious.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Actually, my sense is the exact opposite is true. On Myers-Briggs, I think men tend more to be judgers rather then perceivers. My sense is when it comes to things like “justice” and “honor” men are more likely not to be relativistic. For example, I think a woman if she has a personal connection is more likely to find a way around the abstract principle whereas for example a guy…say a father and son…the father is more likely to say “yes, he is my son” but he must be punished or pay his dues. In other words, I’d say a man’s moral code is more likely to be black and white according to some set of unbending principles whereas a woman is more likely to shift based on personal feelings.

    That is contradictory. The example you placed of the guy that will do what the women wanted because they are denigrated themselves is a personal feeling. The action is denigrating, the only reason they do it is because the other person allows it, if it was black and white they would not engage on it because the action itself is something they consider wrong on the moral code, the relation with the women is what makes their actions right, so that is relativist. In this is case is relative to the person that engages the action.

  • Mike C

    I mean did you loved yourself when you couldn’t get laid by the women of your choice?

    .
    I was extremely frustrated but I never hated myself. I was always proud of the person I was although I questioned “what was wrong with me”. After all, I was doing what I taught I was supposed to do and not getting the successful outcome.
    .
    Let’s change the words do men hate men, that don’t attract women and/or can’t get laid?
    .
    No. I’ve mentioned this before, but when I was bouncing an alpha really took me under his wing. When I finally broke a major dry spell, I think he was more happy then I was. Not sure if that is a universal principle. I’ve always been good at being “one of the guys” so it may just have been he liked me. I’ve personally tried to help more then a few guys in this area of life. To use a Clintonism “I felt their pain”. That said, a few have gotten argumentative or not seemed receptive to help and then my attitude quickly shifted to Fuck Off.

    Generally speaking though, I do NOT think men hate men who can’t get laid. Mostly they probably don’t care.

    • @Mike C

      No. I’ve mentioned this before, but when I was bouncing an alpha really took me under his wing. When I finally broke a major dry spell, I think he was more happy then I was. Not sure if that is a universal principle. I’ve always been good at being “one of the guys” so it may just have been he liked me. I’ve personally tried to help more then a few guys in this area of life.

      This is precisely what is going on at Rivelino’s blog, and it’s what I find very compelling. It’s a very real kind of support and friendship, with several guys spending considerable time and thought advising him and cheering on his successes, counseling him to avoid traps.

      That said, a few have gotten argumentative or not seemed receptive to help and then my attitude quickly shifted to Fuck Off.

      Remember that guy Steveo? You tried and tried with him to no avail, and you finally washed your hands of him. Same with a couple of other super angry guys here. As I recall, you insisted that guys take personal responsibility and do something, rather than repeatedly play the victim card.

  • Mike C

    So unless you are in the police, the military, or employed in any position where literally direct hands-on physical security is an inevitable part of your job duties, contempt for weakness is pretty much a superfluous trait these days.
    .
    True enough…but so what. Just because something is superfluous doesn’t mean it is non-existant, and unfortunately we can’t just switch off these ancient, primal feelings. A lot of things women are attracted to are superflous, but it is what it is.

  • We´re animals, which means:

    – Males are born and compete each other for the alpha throne. The fights are deadly but without animosity. No hard feelings, only business.

    – Males kill rival males that try to enter the comune and grab the females.

    – If some males dont want to compete for the alpha role, they are ignored. Some males serve the alphas, these are threated with respect, as servants.

    – Females are born and compete against each other for the alpha male attention. The fights are superficial but full of animosity, hard feelings and personal issues.

    – Females shame any rival that try to steal resources, male attention, etc, so they shame other females, mostly, but also rival tribes and strange individuals.

    – Females dont pay attention to the weaker men, but get creeped out and cry for help is one of the weaker men attempts to court her / have sex / reproduce. THATs when the weaker male might get killed by an alpha male. Still, no hard feelings.

    – The contempt females feel toward beta, non alpha males, because they feel in their guts they could have had better. Its not about reality, its about inborn aspirations.

    – Contempt for betas is exclusively female.

    – Men dont hate betas. Men live and die for ideals, so also hate for ideals. When a male turns hate into something close and personal, his pole becomes feminine, loses his alphadom, and usually dies as a result of it.

    – When a male hates because of his ideals, he initiates a war. Theres no war towards betas. What we have is an awakening process because most of us have been turned, and the equilibrium is reaching a breaking point

    • I love Yohami’s Discovery Channel principles as they apply to humans.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I was extremely frustrated but I never hated myself. I was always proud of the person I was although I questioned “what was wrong with me”. After all, I was doing what I taught I was supposed to do and not getting the successful outcome.

    Okay.

    No. I’ve mentioned this before, but when I was bouncing an alpha really took me under his wing. When I finally broke a major dry spell, I think he was more happy then I was. Not sure if that is a universal principle. I’ve always been good at being “one of the guys” so it may just have been he liked me. I’ve personally tried to help more then a few guys in this area of life. To use a Clintonism “I felt their pain”. That said, a few have gotten argumentative or not seemed receptive to help and then my attitude quickly shifted to Fuck Off.

    Heh okay. I think is probably more because he already liked you. I mean you USA) have a tons of jocks (successful with women) bullying the weak kids on HS. I don’t think this generosity is free for all penis carriers, IMO.

    Generally speaking though, I do NOT think men hate men who can’t get laid. Mostly they probably don’t care.

    Mmm could be, could be. Still the Spearhead and other similar sites, hates on men that seem weak and follow women’s orders and one of the first thing you see in the comments are: and they probably don’t even get laid or something along the lines. So my skepticism is not born out of my imagination, you can check how often the ability of get laid had women’s expressing hate for it vs the males and the difference is huge, YMMV.

  • Mike C

    That is contradictory. The example you placed of the guy that will do what the women wanted because they are denigrated themselves is a personal feeling. The action is denigrating, the only reason they do it is because the other person allows it, if it was black and white they would not engage on it because the action itself is something they consider wrong on the moral code, the relation with the women is what makes their actions right, so that is relativist.
    .
    I’m not following half of this here. All I’ll say is motivation matters. You can’t view an action in isolation without considering the motivation. The motivation affects the evaluation of it from a moral code perspective. In my book that isn’t relativistic. Relativistic means you keep changing how you apply the code depending on the person involved. For example, a woman might call one woman engaging in A,B,C sexual behavior a skanky whore, but if the girl is her friend all of a sudden a completely different set of rules applies. Guys are more likely to apply the same set of judgement whether the guy is no one to him or his best friend.

  • filrabat

    @Mike

    Maybe I didn’t make myself clear, but I was not in any way addressing what women find attractive in men. I was addressing deeper traits, ones related to basic human decency.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Men live and die for ideals, so also hate for ideals.

    As long as those ideals give them punani. Feminism is an ideal as well, but given that is not producing the desire result, men are not buying it anymore if all those feminist were undiscriminating sluts, you wouldn’t care about anything else.

  • To adress Escarondito´s point, men hate the weaker player when they lose because of him

    If I go play basketball and I lose because some guy is acting funky, he´s hated bigtime. If he refuses to man up, he´s losing his position on the team. And thats the end of it, and his nickname gets changed to “that pussy”

    And sometimes a guy´s behavior is repulsive so he gets group hate. Like the submissive husband – because he is infringing the ideal. Or if “that pussy” comes back and says “hey basketball players are loooosers anyway” he´s asking to get killed

    Some MRA guys have “that pussy”´s attitude, and they play the victim when they receive the hate they asked for.

    The world is so huge.

  • Mike C

    Men dont hate betas. Men live and die for ideals, so also hate for ideals.
    .
    Yes. And one ideal is that a weak man should strive for improvement, betterment, to become strong. That is respectable, admirable. The weak man should not embrace his weakness, and actually in complete perversity try to portray it as a virtue.

    Steph, you seem to want to sincerely understand some of this. I’d strongly suggest reading closely what Yohami is saying. I can’t articulate the “gestalt” of some of this as good as he does. It isn’t about hating the Beta the man, it is about the qualities/characteristics. It isn’t personal.

  • As long as those ideals give them punani.

    No, the ideal calling is stronger than punani. Thats why putting yourself and your mission before punani is the first step to become alpha, or a real man. If you have punani before the ideal, you get manipulated because punani becomes the ideal: pedestal. You´re screwed up.

    Feminism is an ideal as well, but given that is not producing the desire result, men are not buying it anymore

    Feminism is failing because its based of lies.

    if all those feminist were undiscriminating sluts, you wouldn’t care about anything else.

    Who cares if women are sluts, if all men are shamed into betas? still antinature.

    And I dont want all women to be “sluts”, I want all women to be MINE. Thats what has been imprinted on my brain. Its not realistic, but nature isnt about being realistic.

  • And one ideal is that a weak man should strive for improvement, betterment, to become strong. That is respectable, admirable. The weak man should not embrace his weakness, and actually in complete perversity try to portray it as a virtue.

    Yep, thats pretty good.

  • Mike C

    Mmm could be, could be. Still the Spearhead and other similar sites, hates on men that seem weak and follow women’s orders and one of the first thing you see in the comments are: and they probably don’t even get laid or something along the lines. So my skepticism is not born out of my imagination, you can check how often the ability of get laid had women’s expressing hate for it vs the males and the difference is huge, YMMV.
    .
    You are conflating two things here. The “don’t even get laid” comment is just a throwaway after thought insult. That isn’t what is triggering the “hate”. It is the weakness and “following women’s orders”. I had the exact same feeling triggered reading about that “subservient, obedient” husband. Frankly, I don’t what a subservient, obedient wife which is not the same as the Captain-First Officer dynamic that I am a believer in.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Mike C

    Actually both are relative judgment:

    From:http://carm.org/what-relativism

    * cognitive relativism (truth) – Cognitive relativism affirms that all truth is relative. This would mean that no system of truth is more valid than another one, and that there is no objective standard of truth. It would, naturally, deny that there is a God of absolute truth.
    * moral/ethical relativism – All morals are relative to the social group within which they are constructed.
    * situational relativism – Ethics (right and wrong) are dependent upon the situation.

    So your concept will be women are more ethical relativist (social group=friend) while men are more situational relativists (situation). I think.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    No, the ideal calling is stronger than punani. Thats why putting yourself and your mission before punani is the first step to become alpha, or a real man. If you have punani before the ideal, you get manipulated because punani becomes the ideal: pedestal. You´re screwed up.

    Wait aren’t the guys becoming Alphas to get punani? Everyone that enters and ask around and committing to the manosphere starts with: I don’t have luck with women, women don’t like me…so?

  • Mike C

    So your concept will be women are more ethical relativist (social group=friend) while men are more situational relativists (situation). I think.
    .
    Yes, if I lie to cheat you from your money that is wrong. If I lie to save a 100 lives, that is right. The situation is different.

    Now if I lie to protect my son if he has done wrong, that is wrong. I may do it for personal/emotional reasons but it is most certainly a failure to live up to a true code. The Mom is probably more likely to say “but he is my son” and feel perfectly OK to lie because the personal connection trumps the ideal principle. The Dad knows he was wrong to lie.
    .
    In terms of sexuality and sexual behavior, you see this in some women’s behavior with comments like “it just felt right”, “it just happened”. In the moment, personal emotions trump principles.

  • Wait aren’t the guys becoming Alphas to get punani? Everyone that enters and ask around and committing to the manosphere starts with: I don’t have luck with women, women don’t like me…so?

    Its a bridge. Alphadom comes first. If the impulse was just “punani” then in all the species, instead of the males competing with each other time after time, they would be all collectively raping women.

    That is the feminist fantasy. It just doesnt match.

    We have all these instincts because they work in favor of the specie. Men first compete with other men, and the winner gets the girl. If you get the girl without winning, you´re cheating the code – this is why a lot, a huge amount of men dont get “Game”, men want to play the rules and play fair. This is why so many men turn into betas, wanting to play the rules and fulfill the role, because they think thats how you win. –

    So no. When Im in my bedroom and dreaming about becoming a superstar and full of power, women, money, respect, its not “just” about women. If I was able to get all these women but do nothing with my life, I would feel empty and purposeless. This is the point of break for PUAs.

    Becoming alpha is a better deal.

  • Mike C

    Wait aren’t the guys becoming Alphas to get punani? Everyone that enters and ask around and committing to the manosphere starts with: I don’t have luck with women, women don’t like me…so?
    .
    That doesn’t mean they are or have to abandon the ideals that govern the rest of their life.

    Here is your homework assignment. Read this 100 times until it hits 🙂

    “No, the ideal calling is stronger than punani. Thats why putting yourself and your mission before punani is the first step to become alpha, or a real man. If you have punani before the ideal, you get manipulated because punani becomes the ideal: pedestal.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    In terms of sexuality and sexual behavior, you see this in some women’s behavior with comments like “it just felt right”, “it just happened”. In the moment, personal emotions trump principles.

    Men justify cheating as well “I’m a man” how that fits the code?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Here is your homework assignment. Read this 100 times until it hits 🙂

    I already read Rive and Doug and the others. And they ideal is only mentioned in relationship of punani and how much is falling and don’t do this, because you will not get punani, if the ideal’s success is measured on punani how come the punani is not the ultimate goal?…I mean if I tell you that I love my husband but I constantly was salivating over men, talking about them, telling how much I wish they will be with me, would you believe me?

    • I already read Rive and Doug and the others. And they ideal is only mentioned in relationship of punani and how much is falling and don’t do this, because you will not get punani, if the ideal’s success is measured on punani how come the punani is not the ultimate goal?

      Stephenie has a point here. It’s true that Riv’s blog is all about punani right now – he’s even decided to join a church group in search of more! The minute he ended his dry spell Doug and Danny were introducing the harem concept as if he is now ready to try solid food.

      To be fair, Mystery Method is 100% about punani. As Yohami says, doing the “tricks” without real self-development doesn’t work because the man begins to hate women as well as himself for the whole charade. We are all familiar with men who feel this way – perhaps Roissy is the best example of all.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    If I was able to get all these women but do nothing with my life, I would feel empty and purposeless.

    I actually understand that and I might believe it from you, the others…I explained above. There is little talk about anything but punani and is amount, is hard to believe they are in for the journey and no the destination.

  • Men justify cheating as well “I’m a man” how that fits the code?

    For starters, I dont defend “cheating” because its acting backstage. But. Men are supposed to have harems, not to be in monogamys. If a man decides to stay with a single woman, fine with me, and I do that from time to time, but the wiring is clearly, clearly designed to make you go and spread your seed wide and abroad.

    Then “the code” is not morals, and the code isnt prewritten. Men change the code as the culture changes. The basis, what I described with the animals post, never changes.

    And then some cultures are just corrupt. America is becoming one.

  • Mike C

    I already read Rive and Doug and the others. And they ideal is only mentioned in relationship of punani and how much is falling and don’t do this, because you will not get punani, if the ideal’s success is measured on punani how come the punani is not the ultimate goal?
    .
    Well…I certainly can’t speak for the two of them, but I’d bet the totality of their daily lives isn’t 110% about getting punani with every action and thought governed by whether or not it is going to get more punani. I suspect women and punani is just some fraction of their thoughts and endeavors. It just so happens though that is the main subject discussed on the blog. For myself, my trading is 100x more important then punani, but I’m not going to be talking about stocks and chart patterns on this blog or anywhere else you might read, so you wouldn’t know that aspect of my life. I’m sure Doug and Riv have a lot more going on then just how to get more punani. All that said, the great irony is that you have to be able to get it before you can deprioritize getting it. When you aren’t getting it hardly at all, it can consume you but once you are it is no big deal.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    but the wiring is clearly, clearly designed to make you go and spread your seed wide and abroad.

    So a woman is not blame a woman for cheating? According to the manosphere “science” the woman is wired to bang the stronger man if she cheated the man was clearly stronger, so she is also following a code?

  • I actually understand that and I might believe it from you, the others…I explained above. There is little talk about anything but punani and is amount, is hard to believe they are in for the journey and no the destination.

    Its because they were deprived. A hungry person can only think of food. Sexual reproduction IS the ultimate goal. But again, to men, that comes in “mission” form, and ultimately that mission is stronger than life and death and punani.

    Heard of men dying for an ideal? in mass?

    The minute you put punani before your mission, you´re lost. There are countless of epic stories about how the whole empire got ruined because the hero sucumbed to pussy. This is why some decided to simply hide pussy – Islam – and keep the men virtuous

    If punani was the sole and direct goal, there wouldnt be virtuous men. Men would just gang rape every woman on sight regardless of whos alpha or not. This is what feminism portraited and wished was true. Universal gang rape fantasy. Its not going to happen.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    When you aren’t getting it hardly at all, it can consume you but once you are it is no big deal.

    Actually I was reading Obsidian post saying that if you are reading this post chances are you are no getting laid… and that reminded me that I asked my husband if he ever heard of manosphere/Game. No wonder he didn’t 😉

  • So a woman is not blame a woman for cheating? According to the manosphere “science” the woman is wired to bang the stronger man if she cheated the man was clearly stronger, so she is also following a code?

    Of course she´s following a wiring: Hypergamy.

    By the way Riv is following his mission thing, in his case, becoming a photographer. Not sure what Doug1 is doing.

    And then this is a blog about hookups, what do you expect the chat to be about?

  • All that said, the great irony is that you have to be able to get it before you can deprioritize getting it.

    Just like with any other body needs, sleep, hunger, socialization, etc. Remove it and it causes a havok.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    If punani was the sole and direct goal, there wouldnt be virtuous men. Men would just gang rape every woman on sight regardless of whos alpha or not. This is what feminism portraited and wished was true. Universal gang rape fantasy. Its not going to happen.

    I don’t believe on the myth of the gang rape males is their natural state, so no need to even mention it. But men that are not investing on society because they are not getting punani are the real form that punaniless men reacts, with apathy. So males are indeed motivated by punani.

    And then this is a blog about hookups, what do you expect the chat to be about?

    Not talking about this one in particular, but if a blog is titled becoming alpha and every single post talks about how much punani are you getting and all that, what do you want me to think? Is not called punani talk is it? 😉

  • But men that are not investing on society because they are not getting punani are the real form that punaniless men reacts, with apathy.

    Men are being pushed down and their dreams squeezed. Its not “just” about being sexless. The gender itself is being repressed, castrated, demonized, and theres no payoff if you play by the rules.

    Attempting the natural instincts on the current society is a big joke. You have to break from society to find yourself, and thats a lot of pain not everybody can handle.

    Apathy? sure.

    So males are indeed motivated by punani.

    Of course.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Men are being pushed down and their dreams squeezed. Its not “just” about being sexless. The gender itself is being repressed, castrated, demonized, and theres no payoff if you play by the rules.

    So you just quit?…makes sense actually, is like a global gender depression.

  • Yep I had to break out of society. That happened naturally because I was an omega, society had no role for me. So I quit from society and cheated, then came back in, in a totally different, undeserved position.

    Actually I have done that a few times and Im about to do it again.

    Rather than play the game, I jump in between holes. It works, but not everybody can do it. We have to fix society so people can move continually towards a goal and actually get there.

  • filrabat

    @ Mike C

    And one ideal is that a weak man should strive for improvement, betterment, to become strong. That is respectable, admirable. The weak man should not embrace his weakness, and actually in complete perversity try to portray it as a virtue.

    To paraphrase (without endorsing the legal shenanigans of) Bill Clinton — it depends on what the meaning of “better” is. To me, self-improvement necessarily starts with defining “better person” for yourself, rather than swallowing mainstream society’s definition of it. I’m not saying all of mainstream society’s definitions are crap (though I think a lot of them are, but that’s another topic). What I am saying is that if you truly think having more of that “something” is a sign of a better person, then to you that person is a better person in spite of what mainstream society says “a person better than you currently are” is, not because mainstream society says so.

    If someone decides to lift weights, take karate, or join a book club, birdwatching, getting a new style, take an ‘impressive’ vacation, new haircut, whatever, simply because he’s somehow sees that within society’s definition of “self-improvement”, it’s not TRUE self-improvement – it’s just following superficial fads. Any one of the above would be a self-improvement only if he had a genuine, deep down passion for the activity in the first place. It’s even worse if he confuses self-improvement with increasing his sex appeal. Not only is it phony and self-deluding, it’ll make him less marketable because the women who catch his eye are very likely going to see this as a fake him. What kind of sex appeal is that?

    The simplest route for him is very likely to be to recall his pre-puberty days, then searching his memory for what interests he had back in those days that would carry over quite well into the adult world. Then, he should reacquaint himself with those interests and pursue them with a passion. That immediately cancels out the punani-chasing factor when determining what his real interests (and hence his base for true self-improvement) are. That seems much more likely to be a true, sustainable self-improvement – for he’s being his authentic self, and very likely a more confident self.

    @Stephanie

    Wait aren’t the guys becoming Alphas to get punani? Everyone that enters and ask around and committing to the manosphere starts with: I don’t have luck with women, women don’t like me…so?

    Yohani and Mike covered a lot of it for me. The vast majority of them are doing it to get punani¸ true. Still, I understand the ethical PUAs* do indeed stress being yourself and building up your confidence independent of your sexual status before even dipping your toe in the water of the marriage market. The men who get all “hoped up” (not a typo) about finally getting laid are trapped in the societal assumptions “Get laid and join the rest of the male crowd” or “I can’t truly be happy without getting laid” (Mike and I discussed this briefly on an earlier thread**). As I said above, that’s just more of letting society dictate to you what even your very ideals should be if you don’t want to stop being weird, stupid, a huge wuss, etc. Real self-improvement begins the moment you “meet yourself again for the first time”.

    **For the context, start here and endhere. Be sure to read Testify’s and Mike’s posts in between these links.

    *I can’t name specific names because I don’t pay close attention to the PUA scene due to it not being relevant to my personal life, but I have seen anecdotes by plenty of male posters that such “ethical PUAs” as described do exist.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    @Yohami, @Mike C, @filrabat

    Thank you for the patience and the time you take on explaining this to me. Is very enlightening. I just wish you would be more united as a group, a manosphere manifesto could be linked every time we got a man-hater (I probably use that term now it seems that I’m bashing feminism way too much) trying to place all of you together as mere punani chasers and pick up artists. I know you have no faith on female rationality, but I did see a lot of women that are more active on the femalesphere more out of inertia more than real conviction and that I consider rational enough or at least open minded enough that could be “educated” into the real meaning of all this if only there was some more female friendly way to put it. And this is not a critique, I know very well that you thing you already did enough and trying to comfy the women to let them in is not deserved. Just a comment of how good I think it is to have it all, defined without punani appearing to look like center of it. 🙂

  • In terms of sexuality and sexual behavior, you see this in some women’s behavior with comments like “it just felt right”, “it just happened”. In the moment, personal emotions trump principles.

    Yes, in women, emotion overrides everything.

  • You can never bash feminism too much. 🙂

    I suspect that the punani is a way of measuring progress. Ironically enough the men are still trusting the judgement of women in what it means to be a “real man” however they are trusting what women do, not what they say. If a woman is displaying indicators of interest then it’s a sign you’re doing something right. YMMV

  • Mike C

    Thank you for the patience and the time you take on explaining this to me. Is very enlightening.
    .
    You’re welcome. One thing I’ve learned from many of these discussions is just really how different the male and female perspective are. The differences between men and women go so much deeper then just different genitals. And that at the core is the fundamental factor that makes a good chunk of feminist thought pure nonsense because there are no sex differences. Everything is just a social construct. Women are just men with pussies instead of dicks. If you start with a garbage premise, then pretty much most of what flows is going to be wrong.
    .
    I just wish you would be more united as a group,
    .
    Not going to happen for the most part for a number of reasons. Really, any guy with a life, a mission to pursue, doesn’t have the time and inclination to go marching in the streets and burn his jockstrap.
    .
    I know you have no faith on female rationality, but I did see a lot of women that are more active on the femalesphere more out of inertia more than real conviction and that I consider rational enough or at least open minded enough that could be “educated” into the real meaning of all this

    Not true to say no faith. Women like you, Susan, grerp, countless others I’m sure are voices of rationality, reason, sanity, and really IMO it is up to women like you to effect some changes. You’ve got call your sisters and friends out on their bullshit. You’ve got to speak out against the nonsense in the womens’ studies course you take. You’ve got to act more like a guy and call that BS out without worrying about offending. Sometimes the only thing that wakes people up is a slap and splashing cold water. Most aren’t going to listen to me, but they will listen to YOU.
    .
    if only there was some more female friendly way to put it.
    .
    Gotta get past the whole fear of offending and just call it the way it is. Sometimes reality isn’t nice or friendly.

    • You’ve got to act more like a guy and call that BS out without worrying about offending.

      Interestingly, being controversial has become fun for me, but it wasn’t at first. Last summer when the hard core feminists came here and we argued like crazy I felt sort of sick to my stomach. As I settled into the debate, I began to enjoy it. Now I really don’t care one bit if someone calls me terrible names – which has been happening lately on various blogs. Often I even find it amusing. This enables me to be a far more effective voice for my views, IMO.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Gotta get past the whole fear of offending and just call it the way it is. Sometimes reality isn’t nice or friendly.

    Is very interesting that you acknowledge that women and men do think differently, communicate differently and see the world differently and here you think that if you talk to women like men you will get attention from then…I’ve seen it on action. It won’t work.
    The reason those crappy self help (and that stupid Gift of fear) books sell is because they know exactly how to make it look women friendly, engrossing and empowering words, changing their minds while making it feel like they were always right all along. This is one the big barriers we have on this instance.
    Also Susan (and I don’t mean to offend you) is better with men than with women like grerp, the fact that both don’t like women that much, works the way around women don’t like them that much, when I was on school I noticed this there are women’s women and men’s women, few can slide on the middle or go back and forward. So they too can only attract women that already can “talk male” so to speak.

    Not wanting women friendly, is like wanting to make peace with the Klingons without learning their customs and language, do you remember how long did we were at war with them right? Same principle.

    I would say, IMO, probably Aldonza and Hope could translate better. They seem to glide between too very good. Hope visits manosphere a lot and see to had earned a spot (of course there is the issue that she is foreigner they can just dismiss her affinity as patriarchal indoctrination, of course she could just accuse them of western explaining) and Aldonza doesn’t post much but she catches the meaning of male things many way without losing the female POV.

    • Also Susan (and I don’t mean to offend you) is better with men than with women like grerp, the fact that both don’t like women that much, works the way around women don’t like them that much, when I was on school I noticed this there are women’s women and men’s women, few can slide on the middle or go back and forward.

      This is an interesting observation, because my whole life I’ve been a woman’s woman. I’ve always had very close female friendships, and zero platonic male friendships, other than those we have as a couple.

      I think my independent analysis of the SMP has aligned me naturally more with men. I’m essentially telling women to stop doing what they’re doing, so I suppose I often come across as a scold. The women who know me and tell me stuff would assure you that I don’t judge, but lately I’ve been wondering whether it wouldn’t be better if I did…:) They have a way of asking for my advice and then doing the exact opposite.

  • filrabat

    @Stephanie

    Thank you for the patience and the time you take on explaining this to me. Is very enlightening.

    [tips muh’ Texas Stetson* while on a horse] Much obliged ma’am 😀

    I know you have no faith on female rationality

    I’ll be crucified for saying this but…I don’t have much real faith in male rationality either. AFAIC(onerned), true rationality is about the ultimately important things – ones going well beyond gender. My personal reactions are just based on observations, readings, and personal life experiences (filtered through my own perceptions, values and attitudes, of course).

    *Actually Texas is not my native area at all (that’d be north Louisiana).

  • Stephenie Rowling

    [tips muh’ Texas Stetson* while on a horse] Much obliged ma’am

    [wearing southern belle outfit] Thanks 🙂

    I’ll be crucified for saying this but…I don’t have much real faith in male rationality either. AFAIC(onerned), true rationality is about the ultimately important things – ones going well beyond gender. My personal reactions are just based on observations, readings, and personal life experiences (filtered through my own perceptions, values and attitudes, of course).

    Heh you remind me of my little brother growing up we were not that close (7 years apart) but he used to tell me that I was an idiot, now that he is a man tells me that every day he respects me much, because now he realizes that the stupid runs amock and I was smarter than any male or female he meeted…backhanded compliment but he is my little brother I just punch him when he wants to play wiseass with me. 😉
    I don’t know my personal theory is on 20-60-20. 20% of people are smart and trendsetters, leaders, visionaries and in the other extreme 20% people are really stupid, incapable of coherent though and the rest 60% majority are followers, needing direction, guide and the right information and when there is no a strong leadership they get lost, so most people are just lost at this point in time. So they are no irrational they don’t have a frame to flourish the rational big brain, YMMV.

  • Mike C

    I’ve seen it on action. It won’t work.
    The reason those crappy self help (and that stupid Gift of fear) books sell is because they know exactly how to make it look women friendly, engrossing and empowering words, changing their minds while making it feel like they were always right all along. This is one the big barriers we have on this instance.
    Also Susan (and I don’t mean to offend you) is better with men than with women like grerp, the fact that both don’t like women that much, works the way around women don’t like them that much, when I was on school I noticed this there are women’s women and men’s women, few can slide on the middle or go back and forward. So they too can only attract women that already can “talk male” so to speak.

    Not wanting women friendly, is like wanting to make peace with the Klingons without learning their customs and language, do you remember how long did we were at war with them right? Same principle.
    .
    Well…………..I guess things are just fucked then and gonna stay that way 🙂

    You’ll probably see more and more guys either try to learn to be players or just bail…heck Roissy has high school age guys writing him…. WTF

    http://roissy.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/reader-mailbag-fast-times-edition/

    Eventually, a tipping point will get hit where it is no longer possible to ignore or consider impolite talking about the 100,000 pound elephant in the room.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Eventually, a tipping point will get hit where it is no longer possible to ignore or consider impolite talking about the 100,000 pound elephant in the room.

    I never say is impolite, is ineffective, is the same that trying to indoctrinate male into getting it up by hairy fatties. You cannot unwire it that I think that was a principle of game, wiring is what it is. But then maybe you are right maybe among the women one or two eventually will translate and things will start to be discussed on a female friendly way.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Not going to happen for the most part for a number of reasons. Really, any guy with a life, a mission to pursue, doesn’t have the time and inclination to go marching in the streets and burn his jockstrap.

    Oh come on you are saying that the nobles on genders that one that will die in mass for an ideal can’t do the same at this point in this so important matter??! What you need is a real crisis and a leader. The way things are most people live on social bubbles so males are isolated and mainstream is covering the truth, but also there is on a leader for the pack of men to go and march the streets and burn their jockstrap (that is a very funny image BTW :)) but I agree nowadays is harder to get men to organize, too many interests and even though punani is not the goal, is a the mobbreaker ;).

  • What you need is a real crisis and a leader.

    Thats it. I think men have trouble organizing about this because it feels like whining. Its way easier to project an enemy outside and go fight it, than siding with the weaker men in a beg for justice.

    But yes, bring a real crisis and a leader and we´re done. If the enemy is so considerate to wear an uniform, even better.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    If the enemy is so considerate to wear an uniform, even better.

    As long as the uniform is not slutty schoolgirl/nurse 😉

  • that would make the goal unattainable

  • Stephenie Rowling

    “that would make the goal unattainable”

    How the mighty have fallen… :p

  • chris

    “I believe in a meritocracy – give me the chance to compete and may the best performer win. In your example of firefighting, unless a woman can literally carry the weight of a man out of a burning building she doesn’t belong there. I’m all for women serving in combat, but only in situations where her body size and strength makes sense strategically.”

    Susan, thats called classical liberalism.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

    Feminism could be considered to be some subset of social liberalism.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism

    • @Chris
      In many ways I am a classic liberal, but not entirely. I do have some socially liberal views as well. For example, I really liked GW Bush’s immigration reform plan. I say let’s grant amnesty to everyone who’s here and take it from there. I also support some affirmative action for socioeconomically deprived applicants in college admissions. Some might say that I’m inconsistent, but I have no difficulty squaring my various views.

      I’d say I’m a pragmatist, but if I truly were, I probably wouldn’t write this blog 🙂

  • chris

    @Mike C
    .
    “Now I do think guys hate cowards, and just completely spineless, super weak men who would take pride in being that way. It is the embracing of it that is really revolting. If the guy is trying to improve, become stronger, become a better man that is admirable, but to willingly embrace complete subservience and submissiveness. That is repugnant.”
    .
    I believe the reason it is repugnant to most men is becuase deep in our hind-brain, all men desire status, as women are attracted to men with social status, and here in this instance, is a man who is trying to attribute social status to himself for some completely arbitrary abstract trait which deep in your hind-brain you know isn’t what social status is attriubted for. Instead your hind brain is telling you,
    .
    “ugg.. status no go to weak coward…ugg… status go to big monkey that beat up weaker monkey…ugg…me beat up weaker monkey… me get status… me get position…me get sex!.. UGG!”
    .
    I myself am a reasonably intelligent and civil man but there were times in college where I would hear snobby, effete law students who, while in the computer labs surrounded by other law students who are working (including girls), going on about how good their grades are and how much higher status they were than everyone else, and I would experience the urge/impulse to beat the crap out of them and completely dominate them infront of everyone (including the girls). Naturally I would inhibit this urge, but nontheless the reason for its existance I believe is attributable to what I described above.

    • there were times in college where I would hear snobby, effete law students who, while in the computer labs surrounded by other law students who are working (including girls), going on about how good their grades are and how much higher status they were than everyone else, and I would experience the urge/impulse to beat the crap out of them and completely dominate them infront of everyone (including the girls).

      Is there anyone who hasn’t felt this way about law students? 🙂

  • Stephenie…”Heh you remind me of my little brother growing up we were not that close (7 years apart) but he used to tell me that I was an idiot, now that he is a man tells me that every day he respects me much”

    “When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”

    –Mark Twain

  • Abbot

    like a global gender depression

    .
    Not global. thank you very much. But happily being witnessed among feminists so so proud of their chemically-induced freedom. You lay in the bed you make. Or beds as it were.
    .

    A modern women these days wears make up and high heels, demands quality sex, a career, a family and a socail life.

    .
    Yep, demand [protest, raise awareness] and all they get is this:
    .

    In terms of sexuality and sexual behavior, you see this in some women’s behavior with comments like “it just felt right”, “it just happened”. In the moment, personal emotions trump principles.

    .
    Pill empowerment! Hear them roar

  • Confidunce

    Pardon me for the half-formed thought, but I wonder if it’s fair to blame feminism for bitches being bitches. Since I refuse to allow a woman who acts like a bitch to hide behind the aegis of “feminism” (just like I don’t let racists who are black hide behind calling me a racist), then isn’t it just fair that I not blame their bitchiness on feminism?

    Extremists misappropriate political movements. That’s why I don’t blame Republicans and the Tea Party movement for crazy people like Tim McVeigh or Jared Loughner, even as those guys were parroting conservative dogma when they turned terrorist.

  • OffTheCuff

    Thank you for the patience and the time you take on explaining this to me. Is very enlightening. I just wish you would be more united as a group, a manosphere manifesto could be linked every time we got a man-hater (I probably use that term now it seems that I’m bashing feminism way too much) trying to place all of you together as mere punani chasers and pick up artists.

    See what Mike said. Guys who really have made it to the level of self-awareness generally aren’t going to spend time tilting at windmills. They have better things to do. Let the haters think that all Game is just about deception… that’s their problem. I’m here not to convince anyone of anything, but more to lend support to women who actually are receptive to hearing things out. So Mike’s on the money, any real convincing of the skeptical will need to be done by women. Even Obsidian picked his battles, and challenged Susan instead of… oh, say someone more like Kay Hymowitz.

    On outer-game vs. inner-game. I discovered inner-game, that is, conscious self-improvement for your own intrinsic reasons, before Game proper. For the hopeless chumps, outer game *can* be a gateway to inner game. Some may not be able to do so, or not really want to if they’re content with superficial results. I agree with Yohami that inner game is the real deal, but disagree that you can start without outer game to possibly get there.

    The difference, to me, is this: inner game will cause your outer game to show up effortlessly. You won’t have to think up lines or routines or schtick, because those ingrained beliefs will radiate out automatically.

  • That picture almost made me lose my lunch…

    But the way I look at it, not everything that is good for society is good for the bedroom. We can have equality and all that good stuff in the workplace, but when it comes down to attraction, I’m the head honcho. I like for her to be enthusiastic and take charge sometimes but when the clothes come off it’s not a democracy anymore!

  • OffCuff

    I agree with Yohami that inner game is the real deal, but disagree that you can start without outer game to possibly get there.

    Yeah, never said outter game isnt necessary. What I pinpoint is relying on the book and running it as a facade / religion

    The difference between reading a jokes book to learn how to be funny & come up with your own humor, VS memorizing every joke on the book and repeating them to nonsense.

    There are many types on intelligence anyway. Some people need to rehearse, practice, imagine, EVERYTHING, from tennis matches to job interviews to how to kiss a girl. Then when reality happens and they werent prepared they go back and rehearse the new scenario, pile confidence and retry.

    Not my thing. I prefer the batman / juggler approach, to learn skills and put them in my toolbox, then accessing them them as needed, but keeping my hands free as much as possible.

    The difference, to me, is this: inner game will cause your outer game to show up effortlessly. You won’t have to think up lines or routines or schtick, because those ingrained beliefs will radiate out automatically.

    Yes!

  • Stephenie Rowling

    no prescription required.

    My husband was totally amazed at how you can get even the most dangerous drugs without prescription on my country. I mean everything from Prozac to abortion pill, just need the money. Also medication is stronger on LA, my husband used to buy his migraine pills in my country because the guatemalean pills were more effective. We guess that in here the pills are in the lower concentration possible to void legal actions over any side effects, on LA I think the laws protect the company so they can afford to use stronger medications, to keep competing for the results.

    I think my independent analysis of the SMP has aligned me naturally more with men.

    Could be. But I mostly meant that if you take a look at the way the articles are written they are not women friendly, so it might be just the writing style, plus we got a couple of trolls that when they come here make this place look less cozy. Of course again I’m not telling you to change anything is just an observation from the outside.

    They have a way of asking for my advice and then doing the exact opposite.

    I don’t think this is a female thing. I had my share of advising both genders, in all possible ways, logical and with facts and then feeling up like Cassandra, totally predicting the outcome and no listening. I think most people make a choice first and then look for validation, of course some of my friends had listened to me and avoid a big problem, so it really depends, and but is always usually the minority.

    Stephenie has a point here. It’s true that Riv’s blog is all about punani right now – he’s even decided to join a church group in search of more! The minute he ended his dry spell Doug and Danny were introducing the harem concept as if he is now ready to try solid food.

    Heh the way manosphere blogs looks from the outside reminds me of this:
    http://www.collegehumor.com/video/149026/nicks-commercials-girlss-costume-warehouse

  • Mister Y

    Susan Walsh, the ‘equity’ that you champion comes with baggage (“all men are rapists and that’s all they are”, “fish/bicycle”). The ‘equity’ you champion has never had a problem with Affirmative Action, either. AA is 40 years old. It is embedded into the legal system, along with other feminist legalisms.

    You, Ms. Walsh, unquestionably benefited from AA, one way or another in your career. You may not have asked for it, may not have even known of it, but there can be no doubt that at one or more points in your career, you were selected for a promotion, or a plum project, etc. over an equally or more qualified man, because of your sex.

    Probably you cannot see this, but from my perspective you are someone who has eaten her cake, and now pretends she did not do so in order to appear virtuous.

    It is the equity feminism you preach that lead, inevitably, to “men’s fault” divorce and marriage 2.0, to “reviving Ophelia” and the active discrimination against boys in K-12 education and now also in higher education. It is the equity feminism that you preach that led to ‘disparate impact’.

    You can say, well, I didn’t want those things. Sure, and the first few snowflakes at the top of an avalanche chute can’t hurt a fly — but nevertheless, those first few snowflakes trigger tons of snow that gain enough momentum to wipe a building right off of the ground and carry it hundreds of meters away.

    Because feminism leads to an entitled, demanding, attitude, feminists can only be attractive to submissive people. And since feminists are still women, in time they will (with some very few exceptions) come to despise the submissive who is seeking only to please them.

    Feminism is indeed kryptonite to desire, for any normal man. It is no accident, as you point out, that the more devout a woman is in the cult of feminism, the fewer living children she is likely to have. I have been to memorial services for left wing feminists, and one thing that stands out every time is the lack of children. At most, one child is mentioned. I have been to memorial services for fundamental Christians, and at least two children are mentioned, more typically three or more.

    The demographics are clear, and as you rightly point out, feminists as a group are not concerned about the future, because no one they know will live there.

    Feminism is a variation of Marxism, be it 1st wave / suffragette, 2nd wave, equity, equality, 3rd, 4th, 10th, whatever. The dialectic of “oppressor/oppressed” can always be seen, be it “all men are rapists and therefore all women are rape victims or potential rape victims”, or some other form.

    Marxism does not accurately model the real world. That is why it fails. Feminism does not model the real world at all, that is why it is doomed to fail.

    Although feminism may well take down Western civilization with it…

    • @Mister Y
      I think you are confusing equity feminism with gender feminism. Equity feminism does not give special privileges to women, it assumes equality. If you think I’m a nasty old feminist b/c I’m unwilling to repeal suffrage, you’re right – NFW. All of the negative effects you mention are real, of course, but I don’t see the Reviving Ophelia problem as being a result of equity feminism, which says that girls should be given equal opportunities, not an advantage over boys. Women who believe in female supremacy held sway over legislators and other public sector employees, at all levels of government. A liberal media helped pave the way for a very unbalanced promotion of girls over boys and women over men, the effects of which we see now. And it is the gender feminists that fail to acknowledge the problem. The women I mention as equity fem’s are fighting that view, and being attacked regularly by the feminist establishment.

      You, Ms. Walsh, unquestionably benefited from AA, one way or another in your career. You may not have asked for it, may not have even known of it, but there can be no doubt that at one or more points in your career, you were selected for a promotion, or a plum project, etc. over an equally or more qualified man, because of your sex.

      This is certainly possible. If so, I’m unaware of it. All I can say that if this was the case, they made a good call. I have been a top performer in every coed group I’ve ever been in. And I think I do OK holding my own in the manosphere 🙂

      I have been very open about having benefited from the Women’s Movement. It’s not so much a case of being given special treatment, more that no one prevented me from getting educated or having a career. By the way, I’ve experienced blatant sexual harassment as well – it’s not all fun and games for women in the workplace – especially back when I started in the 80s.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    So Mike’s on the money, any real convincing of the skeptical will need to be done by women. Even Obsidian picked his battles, and challenged Susan instead of… oh, say someone more like Kay Hymowitz.

    That is a mistake IMO. Before feminist movement we had a ton of women that had jobs, and became important and rich by their own means, it was not after someone organized the women that this accomplishments were reached by the majority of women (whether they deserve it or not, depending on many factors) so really you will need to support of as many women as possible like the early feminist movement was also aided by men, but women found ways to talk men into . But like I said above men move on packs if one of the guys become visionary enough you will probably will organize each other, but you will need a huge motivation, like a big tragedy, even Athol that is the closest to a leader and whose public image is perfect for being a manosphere speaker: married former virgin and with a family and a supportive wife he cannot be accused of taking advantage of women or being a womanizer so he had a clean past, is mostly doing it for business. Also I don’t know if he will be a charismatic speaker, that is 50% of any movement.
    Anyway I’m just rambling now, I used to be politically active on my country and this ideas have so much potential that I’m just outlining what I would do if this was organized as the social change it shows to be. But then again I’m getting ahead of myself maybe the man that will put all the pieces together is in HS now, one never knows who is reading this blogs and has the right combination of factors and motivation to get it out.

  • jess

    to susan, yohami, steph etc,
    .
    my 2nd point was the one i was referring to
    .
    british tabloids- thats not quite fair susan- you know full well i was no fan of those newspapers but knew someone who worked for them and knew about their street surveys. thats the only reason i supplied the links. it just so happened it overwhelmingly undermined your particular stance – had it supported your stance no doubt you would have heartily approved.
    .
    i should say this is 18 months ago too!
    .
    feminism per se- Susan you are painting a rather crude picture of feminism that doesnt do you or your arguments justice. I have gone on marches when younger to support gay rights as did many of my friends. These groups do feel an affiliation and I think most members would find your descriptions of their altruistic motives as pretty repugnant. I will put it down to mischievous wit.
    ps. Men themselves have campaigned for many years now for UK paternity rights- it was not, as you hint, a feminist conspiracy foisted upon them. (for pity’s sake…)

  • Abbot

    the more devout a woman is in the cult of feminism, the fewer living children she is likely to have

    .
    buh by

  • jess

    female supremacist?
    never met one myslelf. I think both genders have their flaws and virtues.
    I like Susan, have witnessed sex harrasment from time to time. I have had it in and out of work.
    Happily my gender hasnt prevented my career paths and im happy that its now illegal to do so.
    In many way, feminism has won quite a few battles there- all it ever wanted to do was remove barriers and allow people to follow their dreams as opposed to traditional diktat.
    But its not perfect as SW says and still in Western countries women dont have earning parity even if you take account of maternity issues. The same is true of ethnic minorities which is why there is still a place for racial monitoring to ensure discrimination cant creep back.

  • Jess, Im still waiting, please.

  • jess

    hi yohami
    yes its point number 2 above. its about 25 posts up.
    .
    i particularly like the one regarding paternity rights becuase it promotes equality (tick box), its good for kids (tick box), its good for men (tick box) and it was intitiated by men FOR men, with the support and approval of many feminists.
    .
    as for the development of feminist theory my age/alcohol ravaged brain cant give you chapter and verse on key quotes and figures, you just have to read any relevent intellecutal publication. Avoid the firebrands (like Dworkin please) and you will see its not about hurting men, far from it, its about valuing ALL humans equally. Feminism is about HUMANE treatment. In the UK many feminists campaigned against nuclear weapons on HUMANE grounds. They were famous for it. Its easy to critise any pressure group but IF YOU were part of a minority or felt oppressed in some way your outlook would be different. Humans tend to react very predictably under certain conditions.

  • Jess, is this point 2?

    i didnt say feminism was ABOUT mens rights only, i said womens rights were a priority but there have been many occasion when they are aligned. For many years the feminist movement was closely aligned with black, gay, lesbian and transgender movements. Because they were experienced similar forms of discrimination and oppression. A feminist supporting the rights of a gay male is supporting make rights. A feminist supporting paternity leave is supporting male rights.

    I responded that these are not men needs or rights at all. Stephanie gave you the link to a men rights website and you said Feminism sympathized with some. I waiting.

  • Octavia

    @ Stephenie/Mike/Filrabat, the exchange about morality, relativism, motivation, principles, etc., was one of the best conversations I’ve seen on this blog. I’m glad I was privy to it.

    @ filrabat says: April 20, 2011 at 1:26 am
    “…true rationality is about the ultimately important things – ones going well beyond gender.”

    Great comment! That’s really the crux of the issue. I think that many of the matters that are seen as driven by sexual characteristics and/gender are really about a person’s ability to be rational.

  • filrabat

    @Octavia

    @ filrabat says: April 20, 2011 at 1:26 am
    “…true rationality is about the ultimately important things – ones going well beyond gender.”

    Great comment! That’s really the crux of the issue. I think that many of the matters that are seen as driven by sexual characteristics and/gender are really about a person’s ability to be rational.

    I’d say both yes and no. Yes in the sense that most of what we tend to find sexually appealing is not THE most important part of a truly trusting, loving relationship. No insofar that – as a tendency – men and women have different ideas as to what a loving relationship is.

  • filrabat

    @Chris, @Susan,

    Regarding law students.

    In this case, I’d argue these ‘effite’ law students were really just trying to ‘alpha’ themselves through bragging. I hardly see it as any different from physical/swagger alphas lording over others. Both kinds of “alphaism” are distasteful to me. In fact, I’d be hard-pressed to call bragging and showing off true alpha traits at all; for the same reason that people starting high-iq conversations merely to show that they’re smart is not a true alpha trait — they’re just doing verbal behavioral “blinging” and nothing more. All style and no substance. A true alpha simply does what’s natural or deeply-implanted second nature, and just….is.

  • jess

    To yohami,
    Yes that’s the one and they are very much male rights.
    If a feminist supports gay rights for example they are hardly female rights are they?
    Same for black rights.
    Those on the left have often lumped these issues together and fought for them wholesale because the are humane issues… Respect, equality and tolerance for all humans.
    this is not the same as a USA whilte supremacy group which preaches that whites are superior. Feminism preaches that women are equal to males ( not better or worse).
    The femisnt sub movement which is campaigning for the outlawing of Islamic stoning of women ALSO wants to prevent males suffering similar punishment.
    The sub movements which lobby against forced clitoral removal and other tribal oppressions also lobby for education for girls AND boys.
    .
    If you are genuinely interested in world wide feminist issues and their humane outlook visit some charity based websites, I would advise others to do the same… It’s easy for certain humane issues to get lost in the Libya, Japan news reporting.

  • filrabat

    @Anonymous 8:35pm

    All that proves is that feminism is not monolithic. None of us are saying women shouldn’t have the same opportunities to user her talents, knowledge, and experiences as men. No “barefoot, pregnant, slaving over the stove with no vote” sentiments from them or me.

    What we’re opposing is a branch of feminism that are more than just out of touch with human nature, but are counterproductive to relations between the sexes and – at worst – penalize men for being men (divorce laws in marriage, “sex positive” feminism*, man shaming, etc).

    *I also oppose “sex positive masculinity” (if it be called that) too; for the same reason I oppose its feminist counterpart – both types ultimately contradict themselves. “Sexually liberated” women are now urged to have all the sex they can; “Real Men” likewise”. Even worse is that both take a very arrogant attitude toward those with “low numbers”. I though being “liberated” meant being free to choose what kind of sex life (or not) you want to have. All this “low number” shaming is simply hypocritical. Brings to mind the cliche “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.

  • Jess,

    If a feminist supports gay rights for example they are hardly female rights are they? Same for black rights.

    So you are saying for a feminist to care about a man, he has to be either gay or black? if Im a regular dude (non black nor gay), feminism doesnt care about my rights and needs?

    Or. Stephanie gave you a link to a men rights website. You said Feminism sympathized with some of these causes. Show me which ones.

  • Jess

    That anonymous post was from me-Jess.
    Yohami- Generally white males don’t need too much support because they had all the power. But if that situation was to be reversed I have no doubt they would be entitled to sympathy and support.
    The oppressed white farmers of zimabwee got such sympathy for example.
    As to steph post I think many feminists would have sympathy for the issues of conscription, Suicide and Violence. Do bear in mind wiki have put up a ‘ non neutral’ sign on that site.

  • Jess

    To filrabat,
    Actually if you read this blog there have been alarming posts from men saying the very things you mention in your 1st paragraphs.
    And some of the links are appalling… Really nasty stuff I shant repeat here.
    Extremists aside, I don’t mind sex positism of either gender providing it’s safe.
    I do support individual decision making, I wouldnt deride a girl or boy with one partner. PROVIDED they were sexually satisfied.
    .
    I do have some sympathy with those unhappy with the divorce laws though. I broadly support uk and USA systems but I suspect the pendulum has gone a little too far towards the female side and I know a few women that privatley agree with me. Of course many men would agree me, I will take that as a given.

  • Generally white males don’t need too much support because they had all the power. But if that situation was to be reversed I have no doubt they would be entitled to sympathy and support.

    Can you show any evidence of that sympathy and support when the male gender is displaced / powerless?

  • Octavia

    @ filrabat says: April 20, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    “…as a tendency – men and women have different ideas as to what a loving relationship is.”

    Can you please expound upon this? It’s an idea I’ve seen/heard before but not everyone means the same thing by it.

  • Abbot

    white males don’t need too much support because they had all the power

    .
    well certainly not from the likes of feminists. Likewise, they do not need any denigration which is constantly dished out from feminists. Fortunately, and to the dismay of feminists, it has no affect. Feminist impact on white men is trite ONLY because its accepted that feminists are relatively few in number and dust in the wind due to self genocide.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    I myself am a reasonably intelligent and civil man but there were times in college where I would hear snobby, effete law students who, while in the computer labs surrounded by other law students who are working (including girls), going on about how good their grades are and how much higher status they were than everyone else, and I would experience the urge/impulse to beat the crap out of them and completely dominate them infront of everyone (including the girls). Naturally I would inhibit this urge, but nontheless the reason for its existance I believe is attributable to what I described above.

    Heh I just watched All Star Superman (is perfect if anyone here is a fan) and this was Lex Luthor’s reasoning to hate Superman. He is so perfect do to pure luck of being alien and places all human men to shame by comparison (of course I disagree with his reasoning Superman is perfect for how he is, any other kryptonian wouldn’t be as good as he is and is shown on the movie). He must be destroyed. Is interesting. I do wonder how a real world with a Superman will fare, will women’s hypergamy make them all compete for him forgetting all other human men…is an interesting idea to ponder.


    I also oppose “sex positive masculinity” (if it be called that) too; for the same reason I oppose its feminist counterpart – both types ultimately contradict themselves. “Sexually liberated” women are now urged to have all the sex they can; “Real Men” likewise”. Even worse is that both take a very arrogant attitude toward those with “low numbers”. I though being “liberated” meant being free to choose what kind of sex life (or not) you want to have. All this “low number” shaming is simply hypocritical.

    Cosigning this….Mmm I would like ask you about something regarding this but I don’t want to do it, in front of the kids, would you ask Susan my gmail account?

    Brings to mind the cliche “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.

    Heh I often like to say that feminism is “the movement that freed women from being oppressed by men so they can be oppressed by other women” 😉

    men and women have different ideas as to what a loving relationship is.

    I’m on the firm believe that if a man or a woman have a different idea of what a loving relationship is, they shouldn’t get together romantically not even by mistake. Problems all over.

  • Clarence

    Well, Susan, to be fair:

    http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/inherent-female-submission-follies-ogi-ogas-is-full-of-shit/#more-2578

    Of course, I have next to no respect for this man, Thomas, as he is inclined to throw any man accused of sexual assault under the bus. Still, he is right in that there is a lot of this we do not understand.

    And of course here’s the Feministe take on it:
    http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/04/12/feminism-makes-boners-sad/

    Though I think the point is well taken that the science for much of this stuff is far from settled, I think the real reason feminists have such a visceral reaction to this stuff is that unless the female tendency to prefer submission in some form is totally a cultural artifact, they know they have no chance to create their perfect world where male and female sexuality is, on average, interchangeable. For the submissive men, it’s more like they know they are likely to remain a minority and their sexual fantasy land will never come to be. I beg leave for one more “kinky” link, though there is once again, nothing explicit.

    See the BDSM artist have to explain to our “heroic” submissive husband two things again and again:
    A. Of all his artwork the BDSM stuff is the less popular
    B. Of his BDSM artworks, the femdom stuff is the less popular and usually by far.

    http://tamaraintrouble.blogspot.com/2011/04/rene-tempora-mutantur.html?zx=8b5ac5fc59ea6f75

    I LIKE femdom of a mild type, and I think dominatrices can be muy sexay, though about 75 percent of the BDSM Dungeon scene is a “meh” to me. But I have never deluded myself that most people share my kinks. Not that I’m ashamed of them -difference makes the world go round, after all.

  • Clarence

    @Mike C:

    Ok, I’m glad you were just joshing then. I really did not aim to offend or traumatize, and I know most guys around here are made of sterner stuff.

  • Esau

    Jess: “Generally white males don’t need too much support because they had all the power.”

    Jess, have you ever actually met any white males? Obviously not, or you wouldn’t have been able to write that with a straight face.

    Perhaps we’ll have an “Apex Fallacy” trophy designed just for you, since you do seem to be in a league of your own with this delusion. Meanwhile, I can recommend this post from Alek Novy

    http://aleknovy.com/2009/11/04/the-hierarchy-most-men-are-at-the-bottom/

    The frame titled “This is How Feminists View The World” seems to describe your (mis-)perceptions perfectly.

  • Abbot

    From the Novy link:
    .
    “Female hypergamy + modern democracy/capitalism + birth control = feminism.”
    .
    “feminism is simply “woman’s instincts gone extreme”
    .
    and this one verifies the 80/20 dynamic:
    .
    “There was a study where they showed that your average woman, if given to rate random men in a room – will rate 80% of guys as being below-average.”

  • Abbot

    More from that Novy site. So sorry to the feminists. You’ve been duped into being a bunch of externally-directed disposable warring automatons who live a tortured and torn existence. Time to abandon ship.
    .
    Birth control and abortion create the irresistable possibility for women to pursue the men at the top (the only ones they are attracted to) with reckless abandon. Feminism, the sexual revolution, new leftism of the 60’s etc were simply sociopolitical movements that arose in response to these forces. This is why feminists are supposedly “against” capitalism, war while seemingly obsessed with emulating and attracting those men who are best at it. Feminists are jealous of the male “winners” of such competitions and the few high value women who can attract such men for more than casual sex. IOW, leftism/feminism is the fallback strategy women use to destroy those they are jealous of; it is a form of female intrasexual competition at its very heart.
    .

  • Doug1

    Susan—
    .

    The minute he ended his dry spell Doug and Danny were introducing the harem concept as if he is now ready to try solid food.

    .
    What I was really doing was encouraging Rivelino to keep seeing Crystal, while also keep working on picking up other girls. I think his default thinking was to either pedestalize Crystal and immediately pledge fidelity to her as his girlfriend, or to just have Crystal as a one time thing, or a few times. That wouldn’t work as well for his sense of abundance and confidence as he’s working on becoming alpha.
    .
    I gave him some harem management fundamentals to increase the length of time he’ll be able to manage to do those two things at the same time. Managing a girl in a harem for a long time takes more alpha pull and skills than he’ll probably manage to get in time to keep Crystal in that slot. But he might as well prolong it. But maybe not. Her having been a former fat girl helps (she has an image of herself more like a 5 or 6 in some ways most likely), as does the apparently really strong sex they had.

    • @Doug1
      I know that you want what’s best for Riv, and he clearly thinks you know how to help him get it. I respect that. Of course, once he’s had his full makeover, I’ll be keeping my fingers crossed that he’ll be monogamous and make some woman happy, but I know that’s not always how it goes. I did see you comment at Riv’s that you knew I would not cosign your harem advice, haha!

      In the meantime, it’s clear that Crystal has a big smile on her face, so who am I to throw a wrench in the works?

  • Doug1

    Anonymous–

    but I have to agree with feminists on the fact that men can be hypocritical in their demand to marry a virgin wife or a wife with a low number, when they themselves aren’t virgin and have a high number.

    There’s only something hypocritical about that particular double standard if you think men and women are the same. They’re not.

    Most men have a wired in preference for girls who haven’t been promiscuous in someone they emotionally commit to (love in a LTR) and especially that and financially also (marriage). It takes a lot of propaganda, which sex positive feminists work mightily to inundate Anglosphere men with, for most men to think otherwise. It is generally true though that the threshold for what men will consider promiscuous is a lot lower for a beta guy with a low count himself than an alpha guy with a higher one.

    In contrast most women don’t very much. Again that is without a lot of propaganda. In this case that comes mostly from the religious right, but also partly from non sex positive older feminists.

  • Abbot

    It takes a lot of propaganda, which sex positive feminists work mightily to inundate Anglosphere men with, for most men to think otherwise.

    .
    It takes a lot of desperation. I don’t envy them. Such a futile thankless worthless job with little pay and undefined results, whimsical mockery notwithstanding. If they actually directed all that effort to meaningful endeavors they could become productive and respected members of society.

  • Jess

    To Esau and yohami,
    I really don’t think I’m in a minority when I say that in recent history white men have had a disproportionate amount of wealth and power… Com’n now?
    Are you serious? I think perhaps you are teasing?
    I know the USA now has a black president right now but for a multicultural society the presidential roll call hasn’t been that full of women, blacks or openly gay men.
    .
    In terms of the modern issue of displaced white guys (I think that was your point yohami) there are support structures in place (medical, advisory, etc) but I would welcome more. I’m not sure I would go as far as roissy buy if guys can be taught how to make themselves more attractive then i guess thats no bad thing.
    .
    I still maintain things are not quite as dire as some are making out. There were wallflowers of both sexes when I was at school and college. People do notice each other, even if it’s to pass unkind judgmemt or comment. The younger people I spoke to recently put it at roughly 3 equal divisions, hot, average and unattractive. Whilst opinion can rage over whose in average it’s quite easy to put people in the 1st or 3 rd category. And the last category has always existed. I remember the loners at college who never had girlfriends and the unhappy girls who went the entire degree course without so much as a kiss. Feminism may have shifted things a tad but not hugely from what I have been told.

  • filrabat

    I have to side with the claim that “men can have high number counts but not women” is hypocritical, especially when it comes to having a woman with a really low number. First, men carry STD’s just as easily as women. Second, men are just as responsible for birth control as women are, so if a child results the man is just as much at fault. Third, as a man, I can say that once a guy gets plenty of opportunities for The P, then he’ll just keep on doing his thing until he can’t do it any more. IOW, if one woman isn’t enough, then a thousand aren’t enough.

    Yes, it may be the “human nature” thing to do, but as I said before, nine times out of ten “human nature” means “the animalistic side of our nature, raw impulse”. Therefore, I tend to take “human nature” counter-arguments with a grain of salt and little more. That’s how we got beyond swinging in the trees – not to mention abolishing a “human nature” thing such as slavery, plus making xenophobia socially unacceptable – by using our brain to overrule our emotional desires.

  • Jess,

    Men used to have all the power. Right now, men are being squashed. I think we need a smarter movement to take care of both genders and bring something that works for everyone, and it can be feminism because feminism doesnt care about men, it cares about women, as long as women are the enemy of men, and cares about gays, blacks and minorities, as long as these minorities are also enemies of men.

    You say Feminism wasnt femme centric but that it cared about the well being of everyone. I called you on it and you werent able to bring some examples. When pushed against the wall, your resource here is to go agaisnt the so evil white men again.

    Do you realize you cant get a social model that works for EVERYONE, as long as you trace a line and make it all against one of the genders?

    Feminism has to die. We need a humanism that takes care of everyone.

    I asked you for examples of Feminism taking care of the needs and justice of men. These dont exist.

  • *and it CANT be feminism because feminism doesnt care about men

  • lofl

    feminists and sex positive feminsts are one and the same their agenda is male bashing…..feminism has branched and taken many forms and waves.The entire female blogosphere is filled to the top with misandry.They often disguise themselves as sex education sites and the like among other mediums…..you really are a sad lot.The entire feminst movement can be blamed for 73% of all suicides in the U.S. being white males.Yes,you played a huge role in disenfranchising so many.Credit where credit is due.Oh we reap what we sow ladies and payback is nigh.When a great percentage of your men do abandon you for good very soon….you will care.Trust me you will.

  • Abbot

    I asked you for examples of Feminism taking care of the needs and justice of men. These dont exist.

    .
    A WARNING TO FEMINISTS
    .
    Men, especially white men, are not known for coming together and collaborating on self serving social causes that exclusively benefit the needs of white men. They tend to be individualistic and adversarial and do not care for each other so much. Sure, there are small efforts here and there to change that, but nothing in a big way. Given the size, wealth and proven ability of white men to get things done, feminists are very very lucky that this is true. But keep pushing. Just keep on until the current ineffectual nagging reaches a tipping point. If men decide to organize against your whiny little girl tantrum sandbox there will be nothing but a wet spot left on the ground.

  • Hellion

    This article is so on the mark. I can attest to this. Most heterosexual women indeed are sexually submissive and wish for a man to be dominant over them.

    This is something I am sensitive to because I myself am a sexually submissive man (though not a feminist). Finding a genuinely dominant woman to form a relationship with is incredibly hard, because such an overwhelming majority of women are submissive.

    It causes me a lot of grief precisely because I *do* seem to have the attributes that supposedly attract submissive (or should I say ‘normal’) women. I compulsively rebuke any kind of authority, my employer and I constantly fight about my behaviour at work, I drink like a fish and smoke like a chimney, almost everyone I know says I am emotionally cold and distant. Some of my co-workers actually say that they are scared to approach me because they’re afraid I’ll yell at them if they say something stupid.

    I didn’t even know that this kind of behaviour is being encouraged around the blogosphere as ‘game’ to be employed to woo women. It does work, sadly, but only on the submissive girls, who are a total turn-off to me. There have been plenty of girls who’ve approached me, but they’re all the same. You know the ones, who giggle and pretend to laugh at every little thing you say, their eyes look so keen when they look at you and their voice becomes all sing-songy when they talk to you. But they do nothing for me. Absolutely nothing. In fact, my dick shrinks into my body when they act like they are trying to please.

    Intelligence doesn’t intimidate me, it turns me on. A woman making more than me wouldn’t intimidate me. I’d be totally cool with that. It would be a dream to be in a relationship with an older, wise and sexually dominant woman for me. But all these supposedly intelligent, high-flying career women are usually sexually submissive. I know. I’ve tried my luck there.

  • jess

    hellion- this isnt really the right site for you perhaps? maybe you would be better visiting some niches sites or craiglist or something? because you are right.. I think the women you want are likely a small minority.
    .
    yohami/abbot- i beleive i did you perfectly clear examples but you are not going to accept them so we will have to agree to differ on that point.
    .
    whilst there are a few hardline feminists that perhaps leap at an oportunity to male bash they are a fringe group. The vast majority of women love and respect men and want them to prosper.
    .
    And I dont see a squashing of white men either. they have lost previous priveleges of course but now its a level playing field for men, women, blacks, gays, transgenders, mixed race, disabled persons and any any other sub division you care to mention. Thats a good thing no?
    .
    You still have an opportunity to vote, have sex, have a career, have children, attempt public office, spend cash as you see fit, go on holiday, disagree with me openly, eat fine food, enjoy access to advanced medical assistance, surf the net and gain qualifications.
    .
    You do realise that kings and queens have lived and died and not known such privilege dont you?
    .
    Time to look on the bright side?

  • Abbot

    they have lost previous priveleges of course but now its a level playing field for men, women, blacks, gays, transgenders, mixed race, disabled persons and any any other sub division you care to mention.

    .
    White men run and rule everything and enough “change” has been doled out by them to keep the peace. If the playing field “feels” level, then we’re good. No “privileges” [merits] have been lost. Not. One. Thats a good thing no? Must be, as you seem to be happy and happy for us.
    .

    You still have an opportunity to vote, have sex, have a career, have children, attempt public office, spend cash as you see fit, go on holiday, disagree with me openly, eat fine food, enjoy access to advanced medical assistance, surf the net and gain qualifications.

    .
    Exactly and as always without any impact whatsoever from any subdivision you care to mention. With the modern added “privilege” of never interacting with select subdivisions and basking in the feminine benefits of others.
    .

    You do realise that kings and queens have lived and died and not known such privilege dont you?

    .
    The combination of birthright and merits is outstanding! Thanks for the accolades.
    .

    Time to look on the bright side?

    .
    Yes, for many years enough has been doled out for you to do that.

  • Hellion

    hellion- this isnt really the right site for you perhaps? maybe you would be better visiting some niches sites or craiglist or something? because you are right.. I think the women you want are likely a small minority.

    aww… did I make you uncomfortable dear?

    I just made the post to agree with the fact that most women want their men to make bitches out of them in the bedroom. About this site discussing ‘game’ and alphas/betas or whatever, I have never had trouble attracting the silly, giggling airhead types. I am still in my twenties. So I didn’t come here looking for pointers. Just came across this article and decided to attest that yeah, despite the feminist babble, the vast majority of women want to be treated like a piece of meat by their men in the bedroom.

  • Abbot

    the vast majority of women want to be treated like a piece of meat by their men in the bedroom.

    .
    Desire cannot be isolated to a place. And its plain to see that they struggle with their desire to be dominated in all realms of society. People are free to go against nature but are out of line when blaming others for the suffering that results. Yet, here we are.

  • Jess,

    yohami/abbot- i beleive i did you perfectly clear examples but you are not going to accept them so we will have to agree to differ on that point.

    No, you didnt. I can accept the examples if you provide any.

  • Abbot

    No, you didnt. I can accept the examples if you provide any

    .
    Its sort of sad that its this way. Repeat what you want reality to be like enough times until it becomes “fact.” A testament to feminism. Anything that has to redefine itself, first with waves [what are they on now four, nine?] and now with whatever direction the wind blows. Imagine if the the US Constitution was that malleable – we would have a nation without conviction, a failed state. Feminism is fickle like this because, well, its run by women. So its largely dismissed and a bone is thrown its way every so often because some politician needs votes or because some inane protest du jour just grates on people and they just want. it to. stop.

  • Abbot

    Oh well. Time to move on, or back, to the wave that worked. Or do you want to carry on in misery for another decade ladies?
    .

    I am now going to write something that will enrage feminists the world over, and provoke an outraged backlash in the columns of online feminist website Jezebel (which already has an entire section that monitors me, entitled Keeping Up With Jones).
    .
    I don’t believe women are like characters in Sex And The City. We don’t shout and writhe and pursue sex as heartily and relentlessly as men do. It does not occupy our every waking moment.
    .
    The truth is: we don’t really enjoy sex that much. And we definitely don’t want sex as often as men do. That is a cold, hard fact.
    .
    The only reason we do have sex is to get a man, keep a man, steal his sperm and flatter ourselves that we are attractive.
    .
    The decades of feminism, the millions of dishonest features in magazines like Cosmopolitan, have misled us. We are not equal to men when it comes to libido. We grow up. We have other priorities. Sex slips onto a backburner, sliding to the bottom of an almost endless list of things to do that day.

    .
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1379070/Id-man-paid-sex-affair–deeply-provocative-thought-provoking-confession.html#ixzz1KAaEZtMN

  • Abbot

    New post topic:
    .
    Are feminists pimping, promoting and taking credit for the obviously easy access to male genitalia as quick feel-good non-judgmental validation activities in order to draw women into the fold?

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Abbot
    I actually disagree with that article. I do enjoy sex a lot,and I do think most women do. I mean what is the clitoris only function on the human body?
    Is different than men tough, men don’t need to know or even like the woman to get off on having sex with them and they are aroused by a new punani, where women need to have a deeper connection to the man, and they don’t seek variety as much. Men like sex, period, women like sex with someone the choose for whatever reason, period.
    Is as different as mating strategies a man could be very aroused by a new lover, while a woman gets to be more aroused and satisfied by an old lover that had built a meaningful relationship with her,YMMV.

  • Abbot

    a woman gets to be more aroused and satisfied by an old lover that had built a meaningful relationship

    .
    Thus the ruination of feminist-mandated zombies in the casual SMP

  • Chuck Pelto

    TO: All
    RE: Heh

    Looks like my comments are no longer acceptable on this thread.

    Not that I didn’t expect that in the end.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [The Truth will out….]

  • Mike C

    Interesting article. I always enjoy these articles when you get a woman saying specific things so it really is “straight from the horses’s mouth” so to speak as opposed to just some guy hypothesizing some principle. That said, I recognize that just because ONE woman says something doesn’t mean it has to apply universally to ALL women, but probably more true than not.
    .
    I want to highlight a few things from the article:
    .
    “I believe that sex with a prostitute doesn’t really, in the greater scheme of things, matter one jot.

    Yes, of course it’s seedy, it’s exploitative, demeaning and risky healthwise, but as far as damage to a relationship goes, I believe an affair is so much worse than your husband sleeping with a prostitute.

    An affair means he loves someone else more than he loves you. An affair means a man is intimate with another woman — and by this I don’t mean sex. They read together in bed, they share poetry, they giggle and they talk. They share memories.
    .
    One of the things I believed for quite awhile is that men and women have a MASSIVE difference in the importance of sexual loyalty. Comments BY WOMEN like above seem to support that hypothesis. I think generally speaking men prioritize SEXUAL loyalty/fidelity while women prioritize EMOTIONAL loyalty/fidelity. I think there is an extensive laundry list of evo psych/biological reasons why that is the case but don’t want to go down that road in this comment.
    .
    If the above is true, and I think it is, what are the implications of that? I think it goes a long way to explaining the sexual “double standard” and “hypocrisy” of promiscuous men versus women and why it is probably totally sensible and actually justified. Assume promiscuity is correlated with future likelihood of extramarital sexual activity. I’d bet a zillion dollars that is in fact that case.
    .
    Anyways, if extramarital sexual activity isn’t something that “mortally wounds” a relationship for many women (as evidence by the article) then a man’s previous sexual history isn’t that important. In contrast, if sexual fidelity is something men put a massive importance on, and extramarital activities do “kill the relationship”, then previous sexual history is extremely important and is why men are rightfully concerned about it.
    .
    Put another way, for a number of reasons including his emotional health, a man is going to put a very high priority on wanting to avoid women with a high propensity for future extramarital sexual activity. In contrast, if this article is accurate (and again it is a woman writing the article), it appears that women don’t get quite as “damaged” from a guy doing the same.
    .
    All that said, I am not trying to excuse or justify any sexual cheating, but simply that difference in biology probably result in very large differences in the perceived seriousness of the offense.
    .
    On a totally different note, apropos of this thread, I was bantering with my GF just a little while ago and she said “maybe I’ll let you fuck me later” (shit test alert). My response was “you won’t let me do anything, I’ll take what I want when I want it”. She then responded it “it turns me on when you talk like that”. LOL inside my head. Game principles work and I think most women do in fact want to be sexually submissive and be “taken” (and most of the women arguing the contrary simply aren’t introspective enough to recognize and deal with their innermost desires).
    .
    Funny, because 10 years ago I wouldn’t have responded that way. Without studying this stuff in the detail I have I wouldn’t know the “right answer”. I probably would have stumbled and bumbled about doing some “nice thing” so I would be “allowed”. I would have failed the shit test, and turned her off.

    • @Mike C

      My response was “you won’t let me do anything, I’ll take what I want when I want it”. She then responded it “it turns me on when you talk like that”.

      This is not the first time I’ve been struck by the excellent communication between you two. You are obviously very well calibrated re the sex piece – I think that’s somewhat rare. The fact that she can tell you that obviously means she’s going to get more of it, and it lets you know what works. I love it that she is 100% comfortable inhabiting the submissive role. You two really do sound terrifically compatible.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Mike C
    I don’t know Mike C. Like I mentioned cheating is the national sport in my country and IME, cheating hurts sexually a whole lot, but a woman in love rather endure the cheating than leaving the man they love, I know a few women that cheat and most of their husbands just believe whatever thin lie they say, so my guess is that a man in love just gets on denial of any sexual activity because he also knows that is worse to accept it because she might leave him.

    The question is if you knew your GF cheated on you would you leave her, coldly and falling out of love with her right there?

  • Mike C

    I don’t know Mike C. Like I mentioned cheating is the national sport in my country and IME, cheating hurts sexually a whole lot, but a woman in love rather endure the cheating than leaving the man they love
    .
    I don’t know either…obviously I’m NOT a woman so I don’t and CAN’T EVER KNOW how sexual infidelity would feel on a scale of 1-10 of emotional pain. I can only go by what I read and have heard, and the sentiment communicated in the article is something I’ve come across now multiple times which is that it doesn’t seem like sexual infidelity registers at a 9 or 10 or even 7 or 8 for most women? Again, I’m not trying to excuse any cheating behavior. I’m just trying to point out that men and women probably experience it much differently in terms of magnitude. I get the sense that for women it may be even be more of a hurt ego or wounded pride rather then the sort of visceral thing that cuts really deep. In some of the public cases with politicians it almost seems like the public embarrassment was more the issue then the actual activity?
    .
    Again, from an evo psych view this would make perfect sense because if men are wired to be polygamous it would make sense women evolved to not be crushed by it, whereas if men evolved to want to avoid the risk of cuckoldry then sexual disloyalty would have a huge effect.
    .
    I know a few women that cheat and most of their husbands just believe whatever thin lie they say, so my guess is that a man in love just gets on denial of any sexual activity because he also knows that is worse to accept it because she might leave him.
    .
    Well…you were right up to that very last sentence. I think many men (and I’m relying on personal experience) can’t deal with the reality of sexual infidelity so they’d rather create a dream world where the lies make sense rather then confront the reality their wife or LTR is servicing some other cock.
    .
    I’m 99.9% sure my ex-wife cheated me during our marriage although I never got conclusive proof. I can tell you it was one of the most horrendous emotional experiences of my life and when she told me she had not I definitely went through all sorts of mental contortions to try and believe that she was telling the truth despite all signs saying otherwise.
    .
    The question is if you knew your GF cheated on you would you leave her, coldly and falling out of love with her right there?
    .
    I honestly cannot answer that with absolutely certainty although I’d say probably 95% yes, I would leave the relationship for that reason. It is interesting to me that you make the connection that isn’t necessarily connected which is that I would have to “right there fall out love with her” in order to leave her. Odds are I would still love her on some level although probably simultaneously hate her in some way for that action.

  • Stephenie Rowling

    Again, from an evo psych view this would make perfect sense because if men are wired to be polygamous it would make sense women evolved to not be crushed by it, whereas if men evolved to want to avoid the risk of cuckoldry then sexual disloyalty would have a huge effect.

    You are forgetting the part were most STD’s are passed to women by men that slept with other women, and most of them killed them on the past (Siphillis and Gonorrea were horrible) and left women incapable of conceiving, from an evo POV, women have many reasons to fear sexual infidelity as well.

    I don’t know either…obviously I’m NOT a woman so I don’t and CAN’T EVER KNOW how sexual infidelity would feel on a scale of 1-10 of emotional pain. I can only go by what I read and have heard, and the sentiment communicated in the article is something I’ve come across now multiple times which is that it doesn’t seem like sexual infidelity registers at a 9 or 10 or even 7 or 8 for most women? Again, I’m not trying to excuse any cheating behavior. I’m just trying to point out that men and women probably experience it much differently in terms of magnitude. I get the sense that for women it may be even be more of a hurt ego or wounded pride rather then the sort of visceral thing that cuts really deep. In some of the public cases with politicians it almost seems like the public embarrassment was more the issue then the actual activity?

    The thing is women reports had been so different, I mean how many women cheated and fell guilty 40 years ago and compare it with the numbers now, the same can be said for many issues, marriage, kids, ONS…so I talk from my experience and even though I do know some women that reason that they are not going to leave their man to other woman, there is a lot of other reasons they stay with a cheating man, regardless of how painful it is or no. Maybe there is some sort of preselection, but also there are many women that if they left their cheating husband on the past (and this is what my mother told me) were accused of not being understanding or no truly loving then. I don’t like to blame society for many women’s choices, but women are herd creatures if you make certain behavior being shamed enough they can use the hamster on 100 km per second and convince themselves of many things. Including that sexual cheating is not that big of a deal unless the man leaves.
    IME sexual cheating is a huge turn off and many women that had forgiven their husbands take a long time to be able to have sex with them again, or enjoy sex with them again (my best friend that was very sexually active took at least 1 year of therapy and her husband winning her over for her to be able to go back to the level of enjoyment they had) so if it was as simple as that they desire wouldn’t be affected, but it does. Why would you think that would be? Politician’s wives are also a part of a herd, we don’t know if at that point they actually loved their husbands or the status they had as first ladies more.

    One of the things I noticed on cheating is that men in their great majority cheat for sex with a new punani, but women cheat for many other reasons, sometimes is for sex, sometimes is revenge, sometimes is because all their girlfriends are doing it and it becomes part of the herd behavior, sometimes to get some closure…Really the few times I had encountered adulteress their reasons keep varying and varying and usually there is a girlfriend/sister/mother/grandmother that did it before or is doing it that somehow, convince them that is okay and that if men do it women should be doing it too. I think that is one of the reasons is easier for a men to help a friend to cover up for cheating than for women, most time women will turn their backs on a cheater, they might know that people will judge them the same?
    Maybe is hamster-wheeling, but at this point I would say every case is different.

    I’m 99.9% sure my ex-wife cheated me during our marriage although I never got conclusive proof. I can tell you it was one of the most horrendous emotional experiences of my life and when she told me she had not I definitely went through all sorts of mental contortions to try and believe that she was telling the truth despite all signs saying otherwise.

    I’m really sorry you experienced that, but you are not alone women I knew will believe their husbands are not cheating even after finding the other women underwear on the car is pathetic but you have to do what you have to do, I guess.

    I honestly cannot answer that with absolutely certainty although I’d say probably 95% yes, I would leave the relationship for that reason. It is interesting to me that you make the connection that isn’t necessarily connected which is that I would have to “right there fall out love with her” in order to leave her. Odds are I would still love her on some level although probably simultaneously hate her in some way for that action.

    The connection is mostly out of the same reasons women stay but I do know some women that leave, that cry while signing the divorce papers but still do it, so again. I would take with a grain of salt all this cheating is different for different genre.
    And I’m not implying you are justifying cheating at all (I think you are one of the few male commenters here that actually consider cheating a good reason for any women to leave their man).
    I’m just adding my input about the issue, because again sadly I had some experience watching this behaviour’s and I live on a culture were being politically correct is still not widespread so people are more open about their reasoning, if they have them of course.