The Good Men Project has been a real sh*tshow lately. The site’s founder, Tom Matlack, found himself labeled an ALLY FAIL by radical feminists the other day. They’ve been feasting at his blog for months, but they didn’t hesitate to devour the hand that feeds them …I imagine that by now Matlack looks like he submerged his arms in a tank of piranhas.
Interesting “feedback.” I really thought the MRA guys were crazy until I engaged the wrath of the feminists. Insane.
Tom Matlack
I’ll dish up the dirt at the end of the post, but first I want to call your attention to Is Feminism to Blame for Hookup Culture?just published there by Neely Steinberg. It came out of this whole kerfuffle, and in it she offers a contrast of her views with the views of feminist Hugo Schwyzer.
I mentioned to Hugo that I was intrigued by our contrasting positions—his steadfast defense of feminism and critiquing of men versus my critiquing of feminism and steadfast defense of men—not because we disagree in the ideological sense, but because of our tendency to stray from defending our own gender.
Hugo went first. Choice bits:
…My views about pleasure-centered sex education are very much rooted in what I’ve lived through and what I’ve seen.I’ve been married to four women, been “in love” with twice that many, and for a brief but intense period in my 20s and early 30s, I was very promiscuous. I now live very happily in a monogamous marriage. I’m not haunted by what I did, nor did the tremendous variety of experiences I had when I was younger spoil any opportunity for fulfillment with just one partner in an enduring relationship. Without compromising her privacy, I can say that my current (and last) wife’s life prior to our marriage was not dissimilar to my own. The intimacy we have today is at least partly a consequence of our experiences with other people, not in spite of them.…Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners. They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older.…I do regret the pain I caused other people. Rightly so. But what my life has taught me is that insight and compassion are rooted in experience; you can’t advise about what you don’t understand. My own ability to be a patient father, a faithful husband, a decent teacher and mentor isn’t in spite of my wild sexual choices when I was younger—it’s in large part because of them, and the lessons I learned.…I want to equip young people to discover their own sexuality and to make informed, pleasure-centered, empathy-centered decisions based on what they discover. I want them to know that they have the inner resilience to recover from the “silly” and “vapid” decisions they may make.
Here’s Neely:
I happen to think most women aren’t all that interested in having a lot of [casual sex] for purely sexual reasons, with multiple partners no less. And I’ve come to believe that feminism’s inability, and at times refusal, to acknowledge differences between the sexes has been disingenuous and has gravely backfired on women, leaving them ill-equipped to discover what really feels good and right to them.…I was told, by the 10% of women who are capable of effectively and consistently compartmentalizing their emotions when it comes to no-strings attached sex, that emotions were overrated, anathema even, and could easily be separated from sexual acts with another human being, to unapologetically unleash my inner slut (there’s that word again). It was our right (rite?) as women, our responsibility as sexual creatures, to show the world we can fuck like men do, have instantaneous orgasms, and feel faaaabulous while doing it in our 4-inch Manolo Blahniks. Countless women bought into this lie, only to realize years later that it doesn’t, in fact, feel so great most of the time, and that actually, there’s nothing all that empowering and liberating about spreading your legs with wild abandon.
On her years in the hook-up scene:
It’s as if I needed the crutch of Vodka to tell me what I was doing was an awesome idea, because without it I’d know better. I wasn’t alone. It was happening all around me. My friends, female acquaintances, countless women I’d met briefly over the years—we were all in the same boat. Post-college, we could pursue our careers and hobbies and passions full-force but were unable to form lasting attachments, to believe that a man wanted us for anything more than a quick hook-up, to understand what real intimacy was about.…If feminism’s goal was to eradicate the falsehood that a woman’s worth is tied to her sexuality, it has failed on many accounts. All I learned from drunken, fleeting hook-ups over the course of a decade was how much I was being viewed as a sexual object by men, as a vagina who happens to think and feel, rather than a thinking, feeling human being who also happens to have a vagina.
And finally on the feminist movement itself:
I understand everyone’s journey is unique, but I think young women today are looking for different, more tempered voices other than the I-am-woman-hear-me-roar variety, for tangible, strategic dating advice (such as, if you want a relationship try developing emotional, spiritual, and mental bonds with a man you like or just started dating by delaying sexual gratification—yours and his).
The always insightful Stuart Schneiderman had this to say about the article:
Very few men openly identify themselves as feminists. Still, many men happily mouth the basic tenets of the feminist credo. They may not understand what they are saying, but they support the cause because they feel grateful for what feminism has done for them.Take Hugo Schwyzer. He has been married four times. He has had countless casual sexual encounters and no small number of relationships. Manifestly, he feels grateful and perhaps endebted to feminism for having provided him with so much free love.So, he defends the feminist party line.In debating Neely Steinberg Schwyzer does not dispute that feminism, especially sex-positive feminism, has helped create the hookup culture.Yet, Schwyzer thinks it’s a good thing, for him, for his fourth wife, and for everyone who wants to learn from experience. Being anything but a gentleman Schwyzer lets on that his fourth wife can match him hookup for hookup.
…As it happens, Steinberg is far more cogent and thoughtful than Schwyzer. In truth, Schwyzer doesn’t seem to be thinking at all.
He wants young women to see their hookups as learning experiences. It’s amusing to see an ideological zealot defending the value of experience. What would Schwyzer say if experience taught people that feminism is exploiting young women to advance its ideological agenda?
I thank Neely for bringing these opposing views into the open where they may be examined and discussed. Neely’s post came out of a furious Twitter squabble when Tom Matlack pissed off the radfems by objecting to Schwyzer’s post In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent, and then by daring to suggest this:
Men and women are different. Quite different in fact. But women would really like men to be more like them.
I can’t imagine Neely’s article is going to help Matlack get back into the Piranhas’ good graces, but if he continues to speak out against man hating and female supremacy the Good Men Project will be a much better blog. Voices like Neely Steinberg’s need and deserve to be heard.
By the way, for my view on whether feminism is to blame for hookup culture, see How Feminism Got Drunk and Hooked Up With a Loser. Shoot, does the title give it away?
{ 1062 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 … 8 »
I had to stop visiting the Good Men Project because everytime went there and started reading, my blood pressure soared to dangerous levels. I have zero respect for Hugo based on what I’ve seen there, and what I’ve read about him from other places, HUS included.
He has another article up there now about “rape culture” and how all men should just accept “being innocent until proven guilty”. What a load of crap. I don’t know how he can sleep at night!
this looks really good.
but does it mean we are done with the other post?
I’m always so confused about the word hookup and what it means, because to each person, it means something so different.
When I went to college, coming from a big city, I thought it meant sex. I got offended when my friends said, after finding out I went on a few dates with someone and he gave me a goodnight kiss,”Oh, you guys hooked up!” Then I found out from people that hooking up was everything from kissing to grinding on the dancefloor to fullblown sex, to all those things ONLY if you met them that same night, to all those things EVEN if you were in a relationship.
This doesn’t have much to do with the post but I think the definition of hooking up was watered down to make it seem like the girls who stop at first base are the same as the girls who let strange guys make home runs on them night after night. “No one can be shamed, because we all hookup!” The fact that people would go out of their way to do this means that there IS something shameful about sex with randos.
And while, on some level, maybe men can handle it better than women, I think men are affected as well. I know a guy who is well into the double digits who confides in me that he wishes he made different choices; he’s now a few years out of college and struggling to just bond with people, and the women he attracts have had similar histories to him, and don’t want to bond. I have a male friend who lies about his partnercount because he doesn’t want to be shamed and made fun of, and also partially because he feels so guilty; he’s a Christian and is always asking God to forgive him for his lustful actions, but doesn’t get his crap together and just stop. We’re a society that has valued at least the illusion of monogamy for centuries. That is what we are based on. And when it’s broken men and women suffer.
This is a fascinating perspective that I’ve never thought of. I’ve made many conversations about “what does the term ‘hookup’ really mean?” But I’ve never examined it in the context of feminism.
The REALLY interesting part is that one time, the shaming got turned on its head. This girl basically told me I didn’t belong in conversations between her and another friend because I was a virgin, that my makeout “hookups” weren’t real. Once you lump everything in to one pile, it’s easy to turn things around and shame the virgins while praising the sluts.
Ugh…terrible stuff from Hugo and the rest. Reading the GMP site was like listening to Socialists during the Cold War talk about the benefits of collective ownership after the Soviets had invaded another country. I’ll be damned if I’m going to take advice on relationships from a four-time marriage loser like Hugo.
@BSD
Great and thoughtful comment there. The vagueness of the term hooking up does a few things. It provides plausible deniability – women can admit to hooking up but claim they didn’t have sex. Men can swear they only went with the ugly chick because they were so drunk. The term itself is very impersonal, so there’s little accountability attached to it. I don’t know who started using it first – I wonder if I can find out.
Rivelino,
neely sounds sharp
She does. If this is the same Neely that I used to see on Roissy’s website, then she really is sharp. I hated how the guys over there gave her a hard time for nothing. She stood her ground though. It came to a point that Roissy was getting complaints from other guys about her commenting “too many times” (as if there’s some type of quota).
I liked Neely here.
The Good Mangina Project is just a sick joke anyway, a pretend ‘men’s’ site run by feminists whose idea of progress is to continue to shame men & advocate discriminatory misandrist policies. It’s entire purpose is to distract & confuse men who are out there knowing that something is wrong but not knowing what.
I would much rather listen to an excellent new commentator I’ve just discovered who goes by the name of ‘Girl Writes What’. This video of hers in particular has impressed me greatly:
http://youtu.be/vp8tToFv-bA
@Byron
In the twitter battle there were these men, calling themselves Feminist Father and such, who were totally obsequious. They assured Marcotte that many men look up to her, and one even suggested they should write a manual of stuff men should never say. All this because Tom Matlack, who has a high tolerance for man shaming, had finally had enough.
Renee,
That was Neecy on the Chateau blog.
That sounds heinous, Susan, I don’t know if I have the stomach to go expose myself to such hellish realms any more. Maybe I’m getting old.
@Byron
I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.
In other words: remove the stigma attached to being an impulsive, slutty dolt. Awesome.
Why the hell does casual sex qualify as a legitimate form of introspection anyway? Introspection requires brutal honesty, and gender feminism is, by definition, insincere.
I’m sorry to hear that Susan. It’ll pass though, remember.
Cheer up, Susan. You’re at the cutting edge…Girl Game.
Which consists in part of encouraging young women to stop thinking with their hormones and grow up.
His demons are many, and the idea that a guy like him can even begin to represent men, or anyone else for that matter, is ridiculous.
Hugo Shizer has been on a decades long self-flagellation journey in order to get the approval of feminists. He will say anything he can in order to get his token pat on the head. Every time I read his garbage I have no problem imagining him looking back over his shoulder at his doms like Marcotte like hey look! I wrote something else you will really like! Please, tell me I’m a good boy again! I am a good boy, right???
Sue,
You’re doing an amazing thing on this blog. It’s really one of a kind. Don’t let the haters get you down.
I love the way Americans blame or declare wars on various things, from inanimate objects to abstract concepts, but never people.
“Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners”
Reassurance from whom exactly? Whom would women want to hear that reassurance from the most? What group of folks needs to be “turned around” regarding their universal manner of thinking? Who exactly are sex pozzies taking aim at?
Hugo is so self-absorbed. Does he realize how many cats are homeless right now because he married his similarly experienced wife?
Abbot,
LOL I really liked this one too. Women can get reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sex partners by…. looking for sex partners to get reassurance of their worth? For real, a few of my friends had lists they’d brag about.
“The term itself is very impersonal, so there’s little accountability attached to it. I don’t know who started using it first – I wonder if I can find out.”
Its got to be the same people who invented and constantly spout plausibly deniable disgustingly cutesy terms like:
know her body
explore her sexuality
discover her boundaries
Its the people who are attempting, albeit failing, to relabel “fucking”
Do men EVER explore their sexuality? Really?
Find the people who contrived those meaningless terms and you would then find the first people to hide behind, and continue to hide behind the “hookup” shield
Nothing but a bunch of fuckers who dont want to face what they really are, especially when its time to get someone to commit to them.
.
I cannot imagine any man wanting his SO to use a 4 inch Manolo Blahnik while she was with him, but that’s just me.
Remember “baby with the bathwater”? Do you remember my earlier “blame it on the Boomers”post? Ok kids, gather ’round and let Uncle Tom go over this again.
First off, there’s a lot of overstatement above, but, like the pea that the princess slept on, there’s some truth. The confining Puritan-lite ethics prevailing in the 50s inspired the reaction first described in “The Feamle Eunuch”. Boomers started with the idea that women were being exploited and the “equal pay” position was actually the one that go tseriou attention. Sure there was a lot of bullshit about bras burnign etc. but the impetus was in the rigth direction, focus on the $.
Now I was there when women first hit the professions and businessin a serious way. In 1981, there were no women judges, partners, CEOs, execs, physicians represented in the generation ahead of us. That’s roughly when it started. It was a good thing.
But something else started, not such a good thing. May have cropped up i Women’s Studies or Radical Fem college courses. No one’s finger prints were on it. The economic push for equality ., same pay for same work. conflated into men and women are the same.
Men=Women=same; NO ONE ADMITS TO CREATING, ADVOCATING, PROSELYTIZING, OR EVEN THINKING THIS. Like the “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” mutant virus, it came; it’s still here.
Meditate upon that. I’ll be back later-I’m going into my decompression chamber to ruminate.
“a few of my friends had lists they’d brag about.”
that is akin to unearned bragging by an alcoholic who is surrounded by effortless access to all the cheap, abundant and easy to acquire booze available every city block
Abbot,
Yeah no kidding. I hope the lurkers are listening. 100+ makeout partners/30+ sex partners is not something to brag about.
I had an interesting conversation with someone that relates to this article. I was talking to a male acquaintance today about my last relationship. He asked me how long it had been since we broke up. I told him that 4 months have passed. He told me that I should go to a bar/club, find a guy, and sleep with him. He said I should start looking for a relationship again after having a few ONS. He told me that by having ONS, it will take the “edge” off and desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men. Seriously, wtf?
That was a case of not understanding the differences between men and women for sure. Just because that technique might work for men does not mean that it will work for me. If I followed his advice, not to mention Hugo’s, I’d end up worse for wear.
“30+ sex partners is not something to brag about”
Unless getting laid is the only goal…and will become the ongoing default limitation as a consequence well before that number is reached
@Sassy
Seriously? He’s talking through his hat, Sassy. Time takes “the edge” off a dead relationship, IF it was a real relationship to begin with. And even then, it takes LOTS of time.
I don’t think there’s a substitute for that.
“having ONS, it will take the “edge” off and desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men”
Not bad advice if you are ok with a very limited set of future suitors
@Sassy
Pretty sure I’m stepping into a snake pit, but here goes…
We men are problem solvers. Tell us a problem, we will try to ascertain a solution. We don’t “just talk” about things. (Which is also a difference between men and women, hmmm…)
Your friend here gave what he thought was a possible solution. I don’t know everything said of course, and the suggestion comes off as dumb in this context.
But his reasoning holds one useful point. “Desperation won’t be a factor when interacting with future men.”
In this respect I can speak for a large group of men, due to personal consensus – a desperate woman freaks us out!
There’s many reasons for a woman appearing desperate. Biological clock ticking, financial trouble, poor self-worth, masochistic tendencies, etc. etc. Alert! Bad things with this one. Eject! Eject!
Long time periods between relationships is a red flag for such. We tend to think you’re driving other men away, and we’d rather not find out why! (Even if it’s a perfectly legitimate reason.)
So, you’ve clearly decided to ignore the advice. All well & good. But note that he wasn’t trying to hurt you with it – quite possibly, he was trying to help you with presentation toward future men.
Eh? Since when do we care about the bottom 20%?
All kidding aside, I think that you really are at the brink of developing Girl Game. That’s going to be invaluable in the coming years.
Is this true for other male commenters? If so, I find it worrisome…
At GMP, there is a piece on letting boys be girls. The comments point out that the implication is that boys being boys–trained to not be compassionate, for example–is bad and having them be like girls is the cure.
I wonder about GMP. Is it guys trying to get the approval of women in general or feminists in particular? Is it a bunch of folks who mine their navels and think the result applies to all of us? Is it a bunch of folks who just love having their name on a piece published on the ‘net? (full disclosure. I’ve been published in small tech mags, the first half dozen times for free and made a couple of hundred bucks thereafter and it’s a HUGE ego boost.) And if you want contiuing exposure, maybe making plausible mountains out of molehills is the only thing you can think of.
The pieces about being better men almost without exception begin by pointing out a flaw in men’s character that is either extraordinarily rare or completely irrelevant, or merely different from the writer’s view, and tells us we have “hard work” to do to fix whateverthehellitis.
I kind of like pointing such nonsense out. I’m laid up due to a detached retina and some of heavier work around here is on hold. So there’s the GMP to keep me amused.
Girl Game? Please tell us what in the world for!
And seriously, please think about that. If you can put to words a cogent explanation of what it is that “girl game” might bring to the lives of young women, what it might bring to couples and how those benefits would come about, then you too will have made an invaluable contribution, SayWhaat.
But a word of caution. If what it brings is merely attention, then chalk it up as a failure, for nothing will come of it.
@ Chris_in_CA
Thanks for the feedback. I know he wasn’t trying to hurt me with his advice. I am aware, however, that his particular advice (having lots of ONS) would do me more harm than good.
I don’t think I interact with men in a desperate fashion. I’m not really high strung and hell bent on finding a guy by any means necessary. I would like to have a good man in my life, but I don’t think having a bunch of ONS is going to lead me any closer to finding him. As Abbot said above, having lots of casual sex is going to limit the pool of available men who will be attracted to me on that principle.
He was seriously projecting what would be best for a man onto me, which doesn’t work. I could see how having sex with a woman or two would take the edge off for men, but that doesn’t apply to women. Men having casual sex, to a certain extent, doesn’t hurt their value to future suitors. It does for women. If I hopped on the carousel, I know I would be pissing off and turning off the men who value a non-promiscuous woman. How is limiting the available pool of men even further a good strategy to finding a man from a mathematical standpoint?
groan…this stuff again!
i had a few flings when younger- thoroughly enjoyed them!
now in a great LTR with children.
MOST of my peers had a few finds too. some crappy but most enjoyable.
provided its safe, in moderation and without the use of drugs/alcohol I can’t see the issue.
Having a few flings taught me about what i did and didn’t like- how guys can vary and true compatibility.
My SO and I have histories which involve some very good memories- its part of who we are. He is cool enough not to care about it and likewise true for me. We choose each other when we both had many other options- why? cos we were crazy about each other.
I can’t emphasise enough how alarmist and misleading all this stuff is. The idea that women are ‘tainted’ if they have a bit of sexual experimentation in their youth. Its so silly in this day and age. I just hope younger girls can treat this stuff with the contempt it deserves.
@ Joe:
No, Girl Game has little to do with attracting a man, and more to do with KEEPING him. Attracting men is the easy part. Flipping him into wanting a relationship with YOU is considerably more difficult.
@SayWhaat
Obviously I’m not other male commenters (and I would like to hear from others!). But, consider the following.
Let’s say we have a female 8 at, say, 25. She hasn’t had a relationship for 4 years. This is by choice, as she focused on school & work. I’ll even say she didn’t hook up in that time.
Goes on a date. Tells the guy she hasn’t dated in years. Guy naturally asks her why not.
Our 8 says something like, “Oh, no time for it. Besides, hadn’t met the right guy.”
This woman is very attractive. She can hold a conversation. She comes across dozens of men every week who’d gladly take her out and/or bang her senseless.
Guy she’s talking to knows this. So what’s his first thought?
“She’s either bullshitting me or she’s bats*@! crazy. Otherwise she’d have had plenty of dates in the past 4 years. Something’s wrong.”
Neither of these are positive impressions of the woman. Both however are derived from the current SMP, feminism’s outreach and the alpha bang/beta pay dynamic. So it’s not an unreasonable assessment to make.
Also, are Joe and I the only ones who think we need LESS gaming from women, not more?
Jessica Valenti laments:
“Women cannot continue to be the markers by which men measure their manliness. And while the myth of sexual purity is primarily about women, its impossible to dismantle that womens worth is connected to their sexuality without also dismantling a conception of masculinity that is reinforced so fully by that myth. We’re only as pure or impure as men deem us to be – they’re the ones with the power to define and control”
The universal male way of thinking is not a myth. Wish Jessica luck in her “dismantling” project. Same goes for the balance redressers here attempting to glorify “a few flings” as some sort of marriage preparation.
“I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh.”
Ah, Suse, you are damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Easy for me to say don’t worry about it, but, take heart in the fact that those who deride you have either not read your blog at all , or
are at the very VERY low end of the intelligence distribution on the bell curve.
For some reason, Dalrock’s has attracted many bitter ex spearhead commenters lately, who seem to be claiming the site as their own.
They are not interested in rational debate or solutions but only derision and retribution.. sigh..
It’s a damn shame really, because Dalrock posts some very good stuff.
@Chris_in_CA:
Haha, depends. Are you a relationship-guy or a PUA-type?
What if she’s had plenty of dates, but none of them were the right guy?
Chris, I hear ya. And I was trying to be polite as possible when I implied just that. The hookup culture seems to be both sides playing Guy Game. If you’re not an Alpha, the girls always win.
But SayWhaat answered the point well. Girl Game would be, apparently, not about the same thing as Guy Game. Different goals, different strengths, different approaches and philosophies. That is as it should be.
If a girl told me she hasn’t dated in years, I would try to feel it out. Does it mean she hasn’t hooked up or just hasn’t formally dated? But if it were neither, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
In fact, I’d feel like a million bucks being the one who broke the dry spell.
Sassy,
Don’t focus on the literal advice but the intended meaning behind it. I think Chris explained it quite well. It’s possible that he wanted you to to adopt a more effective frame, but basically just messed up the delivery. To guys, casual sex = being loved, desired and/or successful = improved self-esteem = frame of abundance. So maybe he just wanted you to get a positive source of validation? A happy woman is probably a woman with improved odds.
(Wait. Does that mean guys can sense a long-term single woman the way women women can sense desperation? What sort of intuitions do men have?
)
I’ve heard many variants of this thought process. If I had a nickel for every man or woman who has asked me “Why is a girl like you still single?”, I’d have a crap ton of nickels.
Guys tend to like non-promiscuous and discerning women, but being those two things limit the amount of men a woman is involved with. If I’m not cavorting about with every Tom, Dick, and Harry, I have essentially cut out a huge portion of my dating pool. I’m not dating/hanging out with nearly as many men as a promiscuous girl would, so I appear weird as a result. What’s a girl to do?
I would like to know this as well, thanks.
@SayWhaat
Neither. In the past I was a relationship guy. Nobody wants to hear the story, so I’ll skip it and say I’m MGTOW. I’m learning a little Game when I feel like reading up. No end goal to it, though.
As you say, if none were the right guy – entirely possible. But statistically unlikely for women above say, a 7. If they had no relationship whatsoever for years, the common perceptions are not favorable. Pick any:
-Carousel rider
-Bats@#! crazy
-Too busy for a relationship
By the way, that example came from real life. Former roommate of mine. Turns out she was BPD and attacked him two weeks after the date with some gardening tool.
We have intuitions, but they don’t usually work, for two reasons:
1. Most guys are more desperate than you.
2. Most guys who aren’t desperate at all are just patiently waiting for you to shut up so they can take you home and try to have sex with you.
The rest of us can be pretty intuitive.
“Think of the last time a guy asked you “how many people have you had sex with?…the answer is heavily factored by many men in determining whether you are girlfriend, wifey or wife material.”
Heavily factored! Many men!
http://www.vibevixen.com/2011/12/the-purity-myth/#comment-3289
FINALLY! A feminist admits – Its about what and how men universally think and how THEY determine what qualifies as “wife material.”
And what is the sex poz and feminist solution? Telling women to fuck more, have flings, learn about men via genitalia variety, get pumped and dumped to men’s advantage…. and that your future SO is just going to have to deal with it. Aint exactly working, is it?
I like Neely. Even if she was hooking up drunk on vodka in college. She’s brave to take on the whole sex positive movement as a woman.
Feminism in it’s current form has become as restrictive, rigid an punitive to women as the patriarchy it originally sought to overthrow; yet it continues to blame the patriarchy for ills of the world. Way to give women choices and equal rights (NOT). Rights come with responsibilities, accountability and require discernment and critical thinking. Rad feminism leaves no room for the moderate woman or man and refuses to take any responsibility for the role the movements collective actions had have in creating the current sorry state of affairs. Having the legal, social right to do something does not automatically make it mandatory behavior nor does it make it the most well advised behavior. Each person has to make that decision for themselves based on their truth, and values.
Each individual should be accorded dignity, respect and accorded space for self actualization as long as it does not negatively impinge on others who may not agree or share the same values.
Times have changed women have made great strides in terms of legal recognition. It is not ideal – inequality among people still exist – society has evolved but the feminist message still seems to be we are oppressed by men. It has not evolved to adapt to factor in the changes that have occurred in society. The movement appears to have married the message and the method to the detriment of achieving objectives and alienating and even harming by stepping on the rights and equality of other people in the process. In short in so many ways it has become that which it started out to change.
@ Susan
IMO, the fact that you’ve managed to piss off both the feminists and the MRA types is a sure sign that you’re doing something right.
@susan
“I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s.”
Eh. It’s just one guy, as far as I can tell.
“it continues to blame the patriarchy for ills of the world”
Lately, the main focus of feminism is an obsession with how men universally place women in wife and non-wife piles if just one of the criteria for doing so is past sexual behavior. It drives feminists bat shit crazy.
Why is that?
Offtopic: More bad news from the trenches: Young couples are scared shitless forom marriage, as they are avoiding divorce.
A big portion of the angst women feel about hookups, I think, is the disconnect between ego and accomplishment, how good they think they should feel and how good they actually feel. Some women can handle it – good for them. But it’s not healthy to have too much of an ego relative to one’s actual capabilities and accomplishments.
Deep down inside, a girl knows after a hookup that it wasn’t a big deal – that the guy would have banged just about any girl above a 3, and she was just the first one to say yes. She knows it’s not an accomplishment, she knows it doesn’t mean she’s hot stuff, and she knows that now she’s just a notch to him. Compare to the ten Facebook duckface-photos she took, the two hours she spent on her hair and makeup, the hundreds of dollars on her heels and outfit. Tremendous time, money, and effort spent on the outward trappings of confidence, then an entire night spent acting the part of the confident, outgoing girl – and when it’s over, there’s no substance to back it up.
Is it any wonder most girls can’t handle repeated applications of this kind of night?
Whereas the girl in the loving relationship has the full substance to go with her effort and demeanor. No disconnect.
The gap between confidence and accomplishment is not a healthy one.
Ok, I read to the bottom – more like 3 guys. Oh, well.
@Abott
“Lately, the main focus of feminism is an obsession with how men universally place women in wife and non-wife piles if just one of the criteria for doing so is past sexual behavior. It drives feminists bat shit crazy.”
Do you have some examples (other than Tom, I guess)?
“Is it any wonder most girls can’t handle repeated applications of this kind of night?”
Is it any wonder that a man would not willfully want to dedicate his life to a “repeated applications” girl?
“The gap between confidence and accomplishment is not a healthy one.”
When done assisting them with pseudo empowerment, weed out the unhealthy or avoid it altogether by going way way south or far far east.
First of all, the fact that Hugo’s on his 4th(!) wife should totally invalidate anything he says regarding men, women, and relationships.
Second of all, wtf is he blathering about?
I’m not a father, so maybe I just don’t get it, but how does having indiscriminate sex with dozens of partners, some of whom you barely know, prepare you for raising healthy, responsible, contributing members of society? I’d love it if Hugo could give some concrete examples of how a past sexual experience of his helped him as a father.
This is true, but the way he attempts to tie it to his sexual experience is utter crap. Experience of people as human beings with ideas, emotions, and needs all their own can awaken compassion and insight, but I hardly see how casual sex can lead to this type of experience. Nobody’s really opening up to their partner in a casual hook up. You’re acting like animals, not people, when you hook up.
Is it just me, or wouldn’t it be better to teach them not to make silly and vapid decisions in the first place?
This Hugo, is he some sort of sex pozzy feminist icon? Seems like they would worship him as in a cult they would want all [desirable] men to join.
A selection of tweets from Amanda Marcotte:
- Your view of men and women in this piece doesn’t reflect any men or women I know.
- Would you say I’m a “dude”? I curse a lot and don’t like mommy telling me what to do, either.
- For all men feel constrained, imagine what it’s like to be a woman, and the one expected to not even have those urges.
- I’ve just honestly never had that sitcom existence where I’m like, “Gah! Why do they think sex is so great?” Uh….
Wow. . . . just. . . .wow.
I was going to comment on each one, but really, what’s the point?
“Ok, I read to the bottom – more like 3 guys. Oh, well.”
There are also a few on the previous thread .
Kudos to Rum for speaking up and supporting Susan.
The main protagonist (and you would know to whom I am referring Susan ) is dumb as a bunch of rocks. I had the displeasure of engaging with him on the Eat Pray Cats thread.. Bad move. The guy is best ignored. The amusing thing is, that he thinks he is one helluva smart and funny guy..And it REALLY shows.
A couple of losers showed up to get on the bandwagon. Including Hollenhund who was still going on about a comment I made on your blog six months ago, and he linked to it. *ROLLS EYES* I really think that some of these people just don’t have a life. Fancy H scrolling through all those comments just to locate a light hearted comment of mine in which I said that my daughter was a good looker, just so he could rehash his beef. Ha ha ha..
Humorless, much?
Truly, these dimwits crack me up. They are beginning to sound like cracked records. All water off a ducks back to me..
I have to say though that as far as tolerating criticism and accepting opposing points of view you that you are very gracious Susan. Many other bloggers have a glass jaw and cannot put up with it.
Obviously you cannot please everyone… Besides, you are a woman so you lose points on that score.
There was a post a while back about a survey of roughly 22 year olds on how many sexual partners they had, and the results seemed more believable than most other similar such surveys.
It was pointed out that men and women’s “numbers” tracked each other. But a subtle point was that men were over represented among the less promiscuous.
About (IIRC) 30% of males were virgins and about 30% had less than 5 partners (but more than zero). The numbers were similar for women, but slightly different. It was about 25% of women were virgins and 25% had less than 5 partners.
The double standard really is a myth in several ways, among them that (all) men don’t easily have endless amounts of judgment-free casual sex (with 30% of them being virgins in their early to mid 20s). It’s also a myth in that it’s not really that, all other things being equal, women are judged more harshly for being promiscuous. What seems likely is that there is assertive mating, in that men and women with similar “numbers” end up together. That makes sense, right?
The thing is, there are 60% of women with 5 or fewer partners and 50% of men with 5 or fewer partners. Similar to how 25% of college educated women will not be able to find college educated men to marry, about 10% of women will either not marry or marry a man who was much less promiscuous than she was.
I think this corresponds to reality: People are still hooking up, people are still marrying, the world keeps turning. Women being judged as promiscuous (because they can’t find a man who was at least as equally promiscuous as they were) probably only has an effect on the margins.
kathy and A:
awesome comments
some of the guys here are very ‘fringe worthy’ (not to mention cringeworthy!)
@jess
I prefer to think of myself as “spongeworthy”
Hi Susan,
Your quote:
“I know the feeling. It’s Crucify Susan Day over at Dalrock’s. I wish I didn’t even know about it. It’s hard to take sometimes. Ugh”
From what I can tell it’s only 1 commenter who is trying to crucify you and Dragnet made a great defence of you there. Not to mention Dalrock’s post was basically agreeing and parrotting yours anyway. And you’re old enough to complete the saying:
“Imitation is the purest form of f_____”
I don’t think you can really claim crucified status for it.
Isn’t it interesting how, when feminism has holes poked in it during a discussion, women show up to downplay the issues & decry men…
@Abbot
I just want to say welcome back, I figured this post would bring you out of the shadows…:)
@Munson
I remember the advent of gender equity the same way. I can recall my father encouraging me to succeed in a man’s world. But he sure didn’t think men and women were the same. Now we’ve got the full-blown “gender is a social construct.” Not only that, but you’re a pig if you think there are two genders, when in fact there are an infinite number of possibilities.
@Richard Aubrey
Sorry you are off your feet, that sounds terrible! I hope you recover quickly.
@Jess
You are particularly focused on justifying casual sex as a choice. That is not what this article at GMP was about. Both Neely and Hugo acknowledge that feminism ended dating and made casual sex pretty much the only dish on the menu. Both acknowledge that women are miserable as a result. Hugo’s answer is to tell women to cheer up, it’s all part of the beautiful person that you are (which is what you said too). Neely says, “If it feels like crap stop doing it.” Neely’s right – 90% of women don’t thrive on a diet of casual sex. You’re in the 10% – and you can thank feminism for making it so easy for you to get NSA sex and a pat on the back.
No. To be honest, they’re right, bro. For most people, these issues are just passing concerns. They get on with their lives, get married, have families, or don’t, and never rant or rave.
@Jesus
Neely has a special gift – she’s a diplomat. I know she shares my POV, yet she’s over there at GMP forcing Marcotte to take her seriously. She and Hugo are on great terms. Everyone likes her, she’s not divisive. The blogosphere needs more writers like her – I’m certainly not one of them.
She is also remarkably honest and objective about her own experiences. She’s mid-30s, I think, in a serious relationship but never married. Yet she communicates no defensiveness or personal agenda. She isn’t seeking validation for her past choices. She holds herself accountable and is open about her mistakes.
I like her enormously, and she’s so smart, it’s a joy to read her.
I’m not criticizing you personally, but you realize that most guys would cringe at the thought of a woman with 20 some-odd partners, right?
Not to your face, but, yea….
“You are particularly focused on justifying casual sex as a choice. ”
and all the unpredictable and for most women unpleasant outcomes that such a choice leads to. The female lurkers here, once again, are not buying the self serving bullshit.
“you can thank feminism for making it so easy for you to get NSA sex and a pat on the back.”
Feminism is contrived and unnatural and has therefore led to perversion and its nasty cousin, unhappiness. How many more years of this is necessary before the pain becomes overtly unbearable?
@Sweetsue
That’s a great summary of where feminism went wrong, and it’s encouraging to hear more women saying what you did. I too find many of its tenets alienating and harmful, not just to me, but to all women. I find is especially harmful to men. Feminism has become toxic, in tone and in practice.
“most guys would cringe at the thought of a woman with 20 some-odd partners”
Well, not when it comes to getting laid. That would be silly. Every woman serves some sort of purpose, as does every man.
It’s a bit OT at first, but only a bit; it’s not directly connected to the promotion of hookup culture per se (at least, that I can see), but I think poisonous feminism is also greatly at fault for bringing on the betapocalypse of the last generation or two of men. The evidence is live before us.
Linguists will tell you that words are defined against their opposites or compliments, and so those are always present even if unspoken; e.g. simply using the phrase “compassionate conservatism” silently implies the existence of an earlier kind of conservatism that was not compassionate. Similarly “the good men project” inevitably implies that men are not basically good by default, but work has to be put in to making them that way, or in finding the exceptions who are. This meshes perfectly with what I believe is common knowledge, that The Good Men Project is essentially feminist through and through — from what I can see, basically all the writers and topics are feminist-approved — because that’s been the armature of feminism in the US for the last 30 years: the idea that men are basically, essentially bad, born with some original sin, in a way that women are not. (I hope I don’t have to argue this point; anyone inclined to bleat NAFALT has already conceded the basic case IMO.)
Now, it’s hard for anyone not there at the time, to describe how much legitimacy the feminist cause had in America circa 1980. To all appearances, they had fought for and won an historic advance in human culture: never again would it be acceptable in polite society even to suggest that women should not be able to get an education, to own property, to take professional jobs, or to run for office. But the movement had too much momentum to stop or reconsider, and so when it plunged onward from basic equality of citizenship to talking about the unmatched, unquenchable evils of patriarchy and rape culture — as we see at TGMP — that enormous legitimacy was spent in convincing the culture that men are essentially bad, and it is men’s uncorrected impulses that are the root and source of everything that is wrong in the world.
Thus, the betapocalypse: several generations, now, of men being raised to internalize the idea that we are essentially bad, and so their first task becomes to apologize for their maleness and anything connected with it. And from this poisoned seedling we can see the whole wretchedly unattractive side of the beta cluster blooming forth: the posture of self-blaming, of hesitating and seeking approval, the reflex to ask for permission first, hiding and being ashamed of lustful feelings, the subconscious attitude that he is intrinsically unworthy until/unless he can first redeem the original sin — not an easy task, if you’ve never even been told what the sin exactly was! Think about it: the whole sorry spectacle of decrepit betatude is the song that rises from the staves of guilt for the new original sin.
It used to be that only a handful of unlucky men, who had really toxic mothers, grew up with this kind of complex of feelings, and they were curiosity items for psychologists. But since some time around 1980 in the US poisonous feminism, through its hold on respectable, polite public discourse, became the toxic mother to at least two generations of men; and the consequences have been disastrous — for obvious reasons — for men and women both. The betapocalypse may or may not be directly related to the rise and promotion of hookup culture; but it’s certainly a disaster in itself that feminism needs to (but never will) answer for.
@Odds
That’s the best Cost/Benefit analysis of hooking up from a POV I’ve ever seen. A very low ROI!
Agreed, which is why college counseling centers are overrun with young women desperate to receive counseling directly related to hooking up.
A,
I always thought the 80/20 paradigm seemed exaggerated… this is the best hard evidence I’ve seen disproving it.
I would also say that adding to the notion of this 80/20 idea is the concept of the carousel watcher: a girl who never really gets on the carousel but wishes she could, or tries but fails. I was no carousel rider in college, but I’ll admit that during my sophomore year, I was a carousel watcher. Went out with my friends regularly. Had some dance floor makeout hookups. I was still kind of a “prude” (losing my virginity was never an option in that setting), but I had the same mindset, kind of, as a carousel rider: I needed hookups (mostly just makeout hookups) for validation.
I can see how that’s upsetting to men… that for every girl with over 10 partners, there might be 2 who are too shy or “prudish” but have the same mindset. Which is why Susan should do workshops at freshman orientations.
Thanks to all for the encouragement re my hurt feelings. I was feeling sorry for myself, but I’m over it. I respect Dalrock enormously, and I am flattered when he links to me – he’s very smart and discerning. I need to learn to resist the temptation to peek over there. I signed up for this gig, after all.
One thing that always surprises me is how many of my haters readily quote comments from the threads. They’ve never left a comment here themselves, but they’re ready to cut and paste like crazy from some of the ridiculously long threads. These people must have a lot of time on their hands to read a blog they hate from cover to cover.
Chris in CA-I can see why some men would think “She’s either bullshitting or she’s batshit crazy”, but here’s my explanation as to why I was single for awhile.
Coming from an immigrant family, my mom only wanted me to date men from my culture. I got a lot of date offers from white men, but I turned them down out of fear of disproving my parents. Unfortunately, the men from my culture that I met didn’t interest me. Since I was living with my parents during college/graduate school (which is again expected in that culture), it wasn’t easy sneaking a white man behind my parents’ backs. So, I felt like I had no choice but to stay single. Once I moved out of my parents’ house, I was able to go out on a lot of dates and did get involved in a long-term relationship. Yeah, it’s kind of embarrassing to explain to that I was pleasing an overbearing and xenophobic mother, but oh well.
“counseling centers are overrun with young women desperate to receive counseling directly related to hooking up”
Notwithstanding a certain “type” of woman, its not a woman’s game. 1948 = 2011. Deeply speaking, nothing has changed. Had enough, ladies?
@Esau
This rings so true it sent shivers up my spine. It does play out in the SMP but it goes much deeper than that. Feminism has been soul-destroying for men.
Esau,
Your entire post fascinates me and really makes me think about “betatude” and how it affects relationships and marriages. Question: do you think it’s possible that this “betatude” indoctrination, created and promoted by the feminists, is in part responsible for divorce rates?
And, if so, how can women deal with the reality of this indoctrination if they want successful LTRs/marriages? It’s clear that it is ingrained in our society, that we can’t just reprogram millions of men and boys.
@ Olive
The 80/20 paradigm is alive and well. The basic premise, that 20% of guys have 80% of the sex, seems to stack up to reality just fine. Just using the two data points listed, you can’t prove much, but you can infer a lot from basic experience.
30% of early-twenties guys are virgins. No need to get into that one.
30% have had 5 or fewer partners. Of those 5 or fewer partners, likely 2 or 3 were hookups, likely one-time things. Even if they weren’t, how many of those 30% of guys are actually able to say they were with one girl for longer than a few months? Most of them, probably. And likely, they’ve had long dry spells in between. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a man who has had 5 sex partners has actually had a whole lot of sex.
So 40% of men claim to have had 6 or more partners by their mid-twenties. That’s a lot of partners, in some cases – but how much sex does it translate to? An alpha male could pull a girl a week, get 52 notches in a year, but only have sex once a week during that time – not really a lot of sex for a year. A beta could have a steady girlfriend, get sexed twice a week for six months and think he’s in paradise, then once every two weeks for the next six months and consider it better than nothing – but that’s an average of only 1.25 times per week for a year. Not a lot (and not enough).
Now, those are all hypothetical numbers – made ‘em up on the spot, don’t quote them, not trying to use them as “proof” of anything. I’m just saying that it’s well within the realm of possibility that, of the 40% of guys with 6 or more partners and 30% of guys with 5 or fewer, the actual amount of sex they are having might not be that high for a significant fraction of each group. I’d rather have sex a hundred times with one girl than one time each with ten girls – novelty is awesome, but dry spells suck.
On a related note, for girls who like sex, you can have it a thousand times with one guy and it won’t be as damaging to your SMV as sex one time each with 10 guys. Just try to pick a guy who isn’t a scumbag; they’re not that hard to find.
Odds,
It seems I have misinterpreted the 80/20 paradigm. I thought the premise was 80% of women are having sex with 20% of men? Apparently I was wrong-o. Oops.
Linguists will tell you that words are defined against their opposites or compliments, and so those are always present even if unspoken; e.g. simply using the phrase “compassionate conservatism” silently implies the existence of an earlier kind of conservatism that was not compassionate. ****Similarly “the good men project” inevitably implies that men are not basically good by default, but work has to be put in to making them that way,*****
Esau, that is one hell of an astute observation. Regarding the “Good Man Project” everytime I hear that I want to throw up. Tom Matlack gets no sympathy from me. I have zero respect for sycophants. These guys who want to curry favor with the Amanda Marcotte’s of the world remind me of the parable of the scorpion and the frog:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog
Your entire post fascinates me and really makes me think about “betatude” and how it affects relationships and marriages. Question: do you think it’s possible that this “betatude” indoctrination, created and promoted by the feminists, is in part responsible for divorce rates?
Yes
And, if so, how can women deal with the reality of this indoctrination if they want successful LTRs/marriages? It’s clear that it is ingrained in our society, that we can’t just reprogram millions of men and boys.
Engage in the process of introspection and self-evaluation that you are doing. I saw you are blogging vis a vis Badger. If there is going to be substantial change it will be because many more women emulate the path you are going down.
Hey Susan,
I’m publisher of The Good Men Project, and just wanted to say thanks for the shoutout, dirt and all. Tom’s arm is healing nicely from all those piranha bites. Let me know if you’d ever like to contribute or cross-link.
Lisa
Susan
I put in a timely good word for you at Dalrocks place. You may or may not like what I said, but I did feel that your intentions, at least, should not be dragged thru the mud by barely literate, nose-breathing wankers…without a reply.
I mean, you mean well, in a sense that is rapidly fading from any existence in our feministic gynocracy.
The fact that Hugo Schwyzer has more fem cred than Tim Matlack shows that the feminist movement is more concerned with what you say than what you do.
Hugo Schwyzer abused his teaching position by having sex with his students. There is nothing that Tim could possibly write on his blog that would disrespect women the way Hugo Schwyzer has. So are all the big-name feminist bloggers so cuddly with Hugo?
@ GoodEnuf
Feminists found, in Hugo, a man who fully endorses a woman’s right to cuckold. This is literally too precious and rare a resource for them to give up. Are you surprised they would throw a few young female students under the bus if it served their purposes?
@ Odds: Must be.
Hugo says he stayed in academia because his peers claimed he was doing too much good to leave. To me, that just shows how morally bankrupt academia must be. “Feminist” professors established a precedent of tolerating student abuse, in order to protect their buddy.
@ Susan
Ugh. Rmaxd on Dalrock’s seems pretty dense. He seems to refuse to see the need for people to grow and change their opinions after seeing the shock of reality the SMP presents. You’re honest about your goals as you continue to search for solutions to meet them.
Honestly I hate some of the ideas and language of the PUA and game communities. I connect with people that see it as tools but not a way of life. I understand MGTOW as people fed up with it and without the energy to try and find a solution, but opening using the same shame tactics they decry against you and the commenters here that are in pain and in search of a solution or lifestyle that makes them happy….. Ugh
They be hatin’
I’m curious. I’ve been reading the articles posted and linked on and off as I find time. I see the stuff with Hugo and Neely, but I don’t see anything about this Matlock guy you reference in the first part of your blog.
Where’s the article that got him deep in the shit show with the feminists? Am I just missing it somewhere?
Love Neely’s thoughts. Never read her stuff before. She seems to approach things very practically and honestly. I’ll have to try and read more of her stuff.
@Cheerful Sadist #73 85 88
I need a good night sleep before I take on the Boomers, my fave group to bash. Maybe I’ll be so inspired that I’ll write something so great that the Millenials et al will rise up “Planet of the Apes” style and really start building the Boomer concentration camps (let’s keep the good thought!). As for haters, you can’t hate someone you don’t respect (fear is a sub branch of respect, its toxic cousin). It’s a price to be paid for having “edges”, and you (and me) are pretty edgy. Chin up. As for feminism doing a number on us guys, well, not me. I’ve never met a woman who identified up front as a “feminist” although have met many whose politics, social mores and overall worldview (ahh “Confederacy of Dunces”-great book; a pity) were consistent. As you can probably gather reading me, I’m not a shrinking violet so any real feminists would either recoil, adapt, ignore, or simply integrate my worldview which is not inconsistent with the feminism I knew. I did have a girl put a empty cheese container on my head during a anti-feminist rant I was doing. I was only half serious, but when she did that I walked out and thus lost my job. Guess what-we “hooked up” (we called it one night stands-oh yeah, you know) years later in law school.
From Olive:
“Question: do you think it’s possible that this “betatude” indoctrination, created and promoted by the feminists, is in part responsible for divorce rates?”
Yes. Because men were given this advice: “Be nice, be yourself”:
http://theprivateman.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/mom-was-wrong-a-personal-narrative/
A generation of men have been trained to be beta but with women still wanting alpha characteristics. That’s a recipe for failure.
“Does that mean guys can sense a long-term single woman the way women women can sense desperation? What sort of intuitions do men have?”
I don’t know about a sixth sense, but there are some women you just get the idea they are single for a reason – the reason being a malignant personal or strategic factor like offering easy sex for commitment, being too picky, being too proud about being “awesome,” too proud to give a little, rejecting too many prospects “as if,” you get the idea. There’s just a sort of personality that exudes most of those traits, and that personality happens to be actively repulsive to most men.
Women who have busy but non-superficial work and personal lives and just haven’t prioritized dating don’t fall into that category for me.
On social constructs:
Roosh had a line in one of his books where he said “Usually feminists are
extremely easy because they don’t believe in “social constructs” like “whore,” “slut,” and “cum dumpster.””
Susan wrote:
“I can’t imagine Neely’s article is going to help Matlack get back into the Piranhas’ good graces, but if he continues to speak out against man hating and female supremacy the Good Men Project will be a much better blog.”
Maybe Matlack could just start deleting the posts of the radical feminists and others he disagrees with like other bloggers do.
So 40% of men claim to have had 6 or more partners by their mid-twenties. That’s a lot of partners, in some cases – but how much sex does it translate to? An alpha male could pull a girl a week, get 52 notches in a year, but only have sex once a week during that time – not really a lot of sex for a year. A beta could have a steady girlfriend, get sexed twice a week for six months and think he’s in paradise, then once every two weeks for the next six months and consider it better than nothing – but that’s an average of only 1.25 times per week for a year. Not a lot (and not enough).
@Odds…
This reminds me of an episode of Will and Grace… Grace is dating Woody Harleson and they are discussing sex numbers, and Grace doesn’t want Woody to be intimidated because she has a high number lets just say 30… Woody says that it doesn’t bother him and reveals that his number is 5.
He defends his number by saying that with those 5 women he had A LOT of sex… so they add up the number of times they had sex with these partners Grace is at 250 and Woody is at 3,856.
The moral of this story is that quality mate selection with get you quantity sex ~JS
The main warning sign men get from long-single women is the same women get from men – bitterness coupled with desperation. When women are younger, men will sleep with them despite their personality flaws, but as they get older & their looks fade, men will tend to steer clear of women with mean faces & obvious issues. And, for women who already blame men for everything wrong in their world, this of course just adds to their baggage. If you don’t like ‘Men’, after all, why should men like you? And vice versa, of course.
A woman happy being alone for awhile is actually a good sign for girlfriend material, my present GF had spent a year on her own before I came along, just getting herself together, working on herself. That only made her more attractive to me.
“Usually feminists are extremely easy because they don’t believe in “social constructs” like “whore,” “slut,” and “cum dumpster.””
Years of pre-spinsterhood male servicing begins immediately after that first non-accomplishment easy to get penis, pill and self-worth cocktail.
Jhane,
this has been gone over here much more thoroughly before but it really doesn’t work like that for men : on a purely biological level, the goal is to be with as many partners as possible, so the promise of ‘regular sex’ is really quite a dull proposition to most men. I mean, if you fall in love it’s great to be with that special person, but to dangle that like a carrot in front of the male population will probably not get you the results you want.
Will & Grace was a show made entirely for a gay & female audience, I wouldn’t take any cues from it in its depictions of the realities of heterosexual relationships, & especially not second-guessing the reactions of men.
“this has been gone over here much more thoroughly before but it really doesn’t work like that for men : on a purely biological level, the goal is to be with as many partners as possible, so the promise of ‘regular sex’ is really quite a dull proposition to most men. I mean, if you fall in love it’s great to be with that special person, but to dangle that like a carrot in front of the male population will probably not get you the results you want.”
@Byron…
I was simply responding to Odds post, in part motivated by the response from Megaman to my tongue in cheek comment “the boys love variety”… he emphatically stated that he did not.
In real life the dudes I know fall squarely into two camps those that want and desire sex with as many women as possible, they argue that monogamy isn’t natural nature of men.
The other camp belongs to what Significant Other calls “The Woman Conversation”… it is when you meet Woman and your only desire is to hit her over the head drag her back to your cave and sex her frequently in many, many different ways. These men claim that this is the natural nature of men and all the other banging is just a hunt for Woman.
I don’t have any proof but I think both sides speak the truth and from a primitive place… I truly believe their could be an evolutionary divide.
Just as there are some women who follow the biological directive that says she needs to sleep around to assure she has a provider for her offspring leading to hyergamous behavior
And other women who are wired to bond with one mate at a time regardless of the risk of her offspring may face if he doesn’t return from the hunt.
It makes sense that if behaviors are genetically encoded that risk takers and those more attracted to them would be more inclined to take the route of having multiple partners.
Where as the more cerebral, and risk adverse would be more inclined towards monogamy because they were more interested in building and growing from a foundation.
This is just a personal theory based upon observation and the divergence in evolutionary mating behaviors that I have read over the years ~JS
“I would also say that adding to the notion of this 80/20 idea is the concept of the carousel watcher: a girl who never really gets on the carousel but wishes she could, or tries but fails. I was no carousel rider in college, but I’ll admit that during my sophomore year, I was a carousel watcher. Went out with my friends regularly. Had some dance floor makeout hookups. I was still kind of a “prude” (losing my virginity was never an option in that setting), but I had the same mindset, kind of, as a carousel rider: I needed hookups (mostly just makeout hookups) for validation.”
@Olive…
We used to call these “the girls who watch the coats and hold the purses”… except the goal was getting guys to ask you to dance, buy you drinks, and call you for a date, not hooking up in any form
Even making out in the club with the hottest of guys was given the side eye and met with a suggestion that you stop drinking and get something to eat, preferably at home.
I noticed that these girls went one of three ways… they got a boyfriend and stopped going out, they made improvements to their appearance that got them more attention from men, or they became sexually aggressive and promiscuous.
The funny thing is that when I was in college the girls who wanted boyfriends or had a more feminine appearance or tried to make improvements to attract men were the ones who were shamed.
I broke with the women’s studies crowd because I was tired of being criticized for dating, wearing lipstick and mini skirts… basing my appearance on sexist patriarchal standards.
What was interesting was that neglecting your appearance and having sex like a man was considered accepting yourself without artifice and exploring your sexuality without shame.
Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that promiscuity would become the predominate goal of the SMP.
When we went to see Reality Bites in 1994 no one wanted to be Vicky ((Janeane Garofalo’s character) she was her early 20’s with a 40+ body count and a HIV scare when one of her hook ups tested positive.
We rooted for Ethan Hawke and Winona Ryder to get together, and they did. We wanted to see the sequel with them married, successful in their careers and making babies… and to see all that goes into making that work.
While I am still on the fence about slut shaming, I have to acknowledge that the female heard mentality can go in either direction depending on the goals of the heard.
The best advice I can offer to young women trying to negoticate today’s SMP is to align with other young women who share your values and goals ~JS
@Lisa Hickey
Thanks for stopping by! I’d be happy to write a piece at GMP. I can think of many topics, but none that wouldn’t drive the feminists into apoplexy. For example, I’d love to write a piece on traditional masculinity, and how the Women’s Movement made it shameful. Read Esau’s comment at 10:50 above to see what I mean. Are you interested? Feel free to shoot me an email at walsh.susan1@gmail.com.
@GudEnuf
I linked to the Twitter squabble – you should check it out. The fawning and obsequiousness of the men sickened me. Tom Matlack got into bed with feminists and now he’s questioning how his blog turned into some crazy version of Occupy GMP. Hugo is a boot licker, plain and simple. And he has a platform.
@LeapofaBeta
Here’s the twitter battle:
http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-wrath-of-the-feminists-a-discussion-of-masculinity-gender-and-feminism/
Here’s the article that got the feminists so wound up:
http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-feminist-i-used-to-know/
@Mark
Yeah, I’m not sure. He says the blog has a woman CEO, and Lisa Hickey commented here saying she is the publisher (maybe they’re the same person?). So it’s not clear to me how much control Matlack has over the blog. Given how much the blog has deviated from his own vision for it, and how unhappy he is about that, I’d say he lost or ceded control somewhere along the way.
Susan, this is the best artical to date. Should be a real eye opener. I would agree only maybe 10% of women can have sex like a man, with zero strings. That is still a very large number of women. More importantly it explains very well what many women go thru, who have a fair amont of partners. Instead of them feeling good about themselves, they actually start feeling used and cheap after some time. The smart ones break the cycle and find a better way to a relationship. I think it is a hard cycle to break, however. Normally the woman has to sink pretty low to want to change. For many women sex is like a drug. They feel lonely, they have sex to get their fix and it works, temporarily Then they sink a little lower and need the fix again. It is self medicating. It becomes a way of life for some women. Tough road to hoe (no pun intended.)
Also congrats on the new site. It is VERY easy to navigate thru now.
““She’s either bullshitting me or she’s bats*@! crazy. Otherwise she’d have had plenty of dates in the past 4 years. Something’s wrong.”
Neither of these are positive impressions of the woman. Both however are derived from the current SMP, feminism’s outreach and the alpha bang/beta pay dynamic. So it’s not an unreasonable assessment to make.”
@Chris in CA…
The problem is that when I read mansphere blogs they describe that an 8+ non carosel rider is the ideal girlfriend and has the most wife potential.
But based on your comments and those of other men they either don’t believe she exist or is trying to ‘game’ them.
Isn’t ironic, don’t you think… a little too ironic, I really do think.
Real talk how is this any different than the women who say that all men aren’t sh*t regardless of their demonstrated behavior.
I also wanted to add because you profess to be MGTOW… you guys need to be mindful of what you prescribe for your younger brothers of the struggle.
My daughter broke up with her last boyfriend because he would do things like tells her he was almost at her front door and he would leave her waiting downstairs for 45 minutes because in truth he hadn’t left the house.
He would tell her that he was attending classes (at a community college) and getting good grades he just wasn’t sure what he wanted to do with his life.
When the truth was that he had dropped half of his classes and was getting lousy grades because he wanted to spend the day playing video games.
The final straw occurred over the summer when he told her that he had decided to become more involved with the Boy Scouts and become a conselor at a Cub Scout summer camp and was going to pursue a forestry degree and she was over the moon proud. That is until she found out that he was late filing out the paper work for a camp conselor and his dad had to pull strings to get him a dish washing job at the camp which he lost because he, even though he was staying at the camp site, couldn’t make it to work on time.
She confided in me recently that the reason she wouldn’t invite him to her birthday party was even though she was trying to be cool with him is that he accused her of some horrible things and called her some nasty names over text.
He accused her of being a hypergamous carousel rider… even though he did not spell it correctly … I have seen the saved text on her phone.
She also showed me that he was MGTOW posting the stuff all over facebook and never getting married because of what she put him through.
So his life since last summer has involved him moving into the basement, barely going to school and playing video games until he goes to work with his mom at his part time job at a furniture store… he has an older brother on a similar path.
If this is the path that you are advocating that young men follow I would offer that you advise better… because at this rate he won’t be able to attain basic survival or be able to maintain a internet bill on his own much less rent and other basic utilities.
I feel like my daughter doged a bullet, but I feel really sorry for this boy.
So if you are going to advocate MGTOW I would suggest that you give them a better blueprint or these young men will end up more screwed up that the feminist have made women ~JS
Susan Walsh said: @Jess
“You are particularly focused on justifying casual sex as a choice. That is not what this article at GMP was about. Both Neely and Hugo acknowledge that feminism ended dating and made casual sex pretty much the only dish on the menu. Both acknowledge that women are miserable as a result. Hugo’s answer is to tell women to cheer up, it’s all part of the beautiful person that you are (which is what you said too). Neely says, “If it feels like crap stop doing it.” Neely’s right – 90% of women don’t thrive on a diet of casual sex. You’re in the 10% – and you can thank feminism for making it so easy for you to get NSA sex and a pat on the back.”
———-
To be honest I hardly think it needs a justification. Life is for living and enjoying- and people enjoy sex very much. Yes, some people are not that great at sex or are incompatible but my peers and I had some great instances of NSA sex. Its not as good as LTR sex granted but it can still be pretty damn good.
Having said that I have always promoted moderation and safety and I wouldn’t support utter hedonism.
But the odd slice of cake now again is good for you.
My main point here is the absurd hint that women are somehow ‘tainted’ due to prior experience. Its a crock- and it bears repeating (apparently).
I agree with ‘if it feels crap stop doing it’, and thats the point- sometimes it can be orgasmic, life affirming and a blast. Oh yeah and ‘empowering’. Especially when on a rebound or simply a particular time of the month.
Am I the 10%? well I have been out of the game a while now- but – Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?. Virtually all will go onto to LTRs and kids. So gonna have to agree to differ on that one.
“This doesn’t have much to do with the post but I think the definition of hooking up was watered down to make it seem like the girls who stop at first base are the same as the girls who let strange guys make home runs on them night after night. “No one can be shamed, because we all hookup!” The fact that people would go out of their way to do this means that there IS something shameful about sex with randos.”
@BSD…
This sh*t right here… YES!
Your entire commentary was so brilliant and insightful I truly wish that I had written it myself.
In part because it contains many observations that I have made and discussed with my older peer group… you have given me hope, because if you ‘see’ it and get it then it is possible for others.
Viva monogamy revolution!
I am in total agreement that the whole hooking up meme was started to water down promiscuity and make dating obsolete.
I think hooking up is like crack… the first hit is free but the other hits will cost you dearly… girls you better watch out.
And with a New Jack drug we need some New Jack cops to bust the peddlers.
Brava girl… keeping speaking to reach those I can’t ~JS
@Rum
Thank you for your honest feedback. I appreciate it very much, and I don’t take issue with what you said. Actually, I’m glad I went back to Dalrock’s and read the thread. There were several interesting comments there, including some good constructive criticism. I find that helpful. There are some men I am never going to please, but I think I could do a better job sometimes getting the message out.
For example, I’ve been seeing a lot of claims that I am pro-relationship only so that women can get what they want. That wouldn’t work – we all know that women cannot drag men into relationships against their will. I believe that the majority of men and women want relationships, and the majority (80%!) are struggling to find them in this SMP/hookup culture. I do care deeply about both men and women.
Another frequent criticism is that I’m trying to keep men down by making them comfortable about being beta. The opposite is true. I firmly believe in the value of many of the traits we call beta. I firmly support less dominant guys ramping up their confidence and social dominance via game or any other kind of self-development that works for them.
Finally, I’ve been accused of being anti-PUA and anti-MRA. In both cases, I recognize that incentives drive behavior. People have their reasons, and every right, for choosing how to spend their lives. I simply counsel women wanting relationships to avoid PUAs or players like the plague, just as I counsel men who want relationships to avoid psychos/bitches/sluts. As for MRAs, I’ll never please them, because like feminists, they do not seek equity. They seek acknowledged supremacy. I’m not down with that goal. And they tend to derail my comment threads, which is annoying.
@Munson
Funny, I never have thought of myself as edgy before – I’m pretty much the opposite in my personality. And I feel HUS is hardly extreme – I think I’m saying what most of us feel. I’m speaking for a HUGE silent majority here, or trying to. Yet, you’re right, my motives are suspect by those to the right and left. I guess that makes me an outlier, when I thought I was smack in the middle.
>>Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?
Having NSA sex isn’t the same thing as enjoying NSA sex.
“They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older”
This is great.
Here’s what I need to hear: “Eating caviar, truffles & foie every day and quaffing Chateaux Margaux like water will not make you fat nor have any adverse impact on your health or finances.
I really need to hear that. Will someone please say it to me?
thx
“Am I the 10%? well I have been out of the game a while now- but – Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?.”
@Jess…
Just stop because you know you are dirty… playing at being provocative.
Stop it because you know that this is a lie… and it the worst form of female bitchassedness hating.
YOU KNOW most chicks aren’t even going to orgasm in this scenario… let alone the relationships and bonding that they are desperate for.
But chicks like you want to perpetuate the lie to validate your own decisions…
Stop it.
You have been out of the game for a while now so why don’t you give peace a chance and give these other girls an honest shot that you never got or chose.
Why lie
Cause if you are as grown as I think you are, you know that once you have seen certain things you can’t unsee them and you just have to deal with them…
You just have to cope.
I ask you, on a human level… to stop.
The pretense and lying that you have done to make it possible to deal with what you see in the mirror in your own head, when you are alone and lonely.
Bullshit your mom, family, girls, co-workers, lovers… do what you gotta do to live with yourself and survive.
But don’t deliberately mislead the young girls who have a chance that you didn’t have to find love and have a moment of special
Just stop and let them go…
Pretty please ~JS
@ Jess – You Said: “Im guessing 70% of young girls enjoy NSA sex at the moment?. Virtually all will go onto to LTRs and kids.”
Not with my son if I have anything to say about it.
And I highly doubt 70% of young women are enjoying NSA sex. Of course, I guess that depends on your definition of enjoy. Since it has been shown that women do not usually have orgasms from NSA/ONS type sex, I guess it must be the wonderful mind-altering experience of being used as a sex toy they enjoy so much…
I can’t prove you are wrong, but unless you have links to studies, you can’t prove you are right.
WHAT???? And I was wondering why he wasn’t on your blogroll any more.
That’s just…
JS- what a truly bizarre comment!
Well assuming you are serious in your views….
i dont think it is a lie to say the majority of young (uk) girls are having non LTR sex.
I accept that actually TOO much is happening and this is evident in the STD epidemic london has.
This not mean to say that NSA sex is the root of all evil- I am happy to support digital sex as an alternative, a bit of moderation in frequency and moderation in drink/drugs which can lead to risky behaviour.
I certainly don’t subscribe to name calling like loser, slag, virgin, slut, fatso etc
Women do orgasm with NSA’s though not nearly as much as with LTRs. This doesnt stop them from being fun- thats why its so damn hard trying to stop STD’s
I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.
by the way- I am in an LTR with children…you appear to have missed that.
ps. nearly all my peers have sexual histories and guess what…. they also are in LTRs with kids…. all very conventional now you see.
Ted,
well there probably is some research out there on the topic but I daresay we could find links supporting each others stance.
I would agree that orgasms are much rarer than in NSA’s than LTRs- no argument there.
But with the right guy/gal NSAs can be very exciting and enjoyable. And I had a bunch of wonderful flings when younger- as did a whole bunch of my peers. I have friends who said the best sex they ever had was during a fling- so I’m sorry but it does happen.
Also you said ‘used’ but I regard sex as a mutual endeavour. I don’t regard girls as orifices that are used by guys. you have this ancient concept in your head which explains your antagonism on the issue- its just not necessary.
“Here’s what I need to hear: “Eating caviar, truffles & foie every day and quaffing Chateaux Margaux like water will not make you fat nor have any adverse impact on your health or finances.
I really need to hear that. Will someone please say it to me?”
@Escoffer… +1
And can you add… trader joe’s cookie butter(peanut butter with crushed up ginger cookies) topped Elvis brownies (made with bacon, bananas and peanut butter), rib eye steaks and bourbon to the list.
If I can I will have a REAL happy holiday.
I’ve been really, really good this year ~JS
TMatlack may be taking a step in the right direction, but there’s still this:
“@TheRealRoseanne MRA is for men’s rights and the fringe is pretty crazy about how men have been mistreated in divorce and elsewhere” -TMatlack
No, the average college dropout can see that there is no gender equity/equality in divorce. It’s unfair to target the fringe group’s interpretation when non-fringe people are making rational arguments. Sort of like when mainstream feminists have to explain that Andrea Dworkin is not the current president of feminism.
I’m starting to wonder why people encourage NSA sex. What purpose does it really serve? Encouraging it is not the same as refraining from discouraging it. It takes encouragement for women to keep engaging in it even if they need to a ton of vodka to participate.
On the other hand, the increased frequency of NSA sex could lead to a society where beta types are no longer left fighting for scraps at the edge of the sexual marketplace.
Susan, I don’t think you really appreciate how cutting-edge you are.
Game is undergoing a schism. There’s PUA Game on the one side, Courtship/Marriage (CM) Game on the other. Similar methods, but very different goals. PUA Game being purely about sex, CM Game being focused on solid long-term relationships.
But you’re introducing something new. Girl Game. Which is CM Game…for women. A hard-headed realization that the current culture hurts women in the long term, and should be dumped. It demands that the user toss out the feminist misandry and develop some intelligence, good manners, and the sort of common sense their great-grandmothers had; but the rewards in upgrading Marriage Market Value are considerable.
Its the Red Pill For Women. And will probably have a bigger impact than the Red Pill For Men
@Jess
“i dont think it is a lie to say the majority of young (uk) girls are having non LTR sex.”
Its a lie to say that most enjoy it. There are studies that say its a lie. Until you find studies, back off or be labeled a hack trying to feel better about your own mistakes.
Great for you if you can enjoy NSA sex. Go away and stop advocating that everyone MUST enjoy it. You’re ruining the lives of men and women by doing so and only making PUA’s happy.
Hugo Sc hwyzer: “…Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners. They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older.”
But a woman’s number of sex partners can affect her (self-)worth. Maybe not for every woman but it does for some. And her partner count, depending on the number, will probably make her unacceptable as a wife to many men. And her partner count DOES make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships when she’s older, because it makes it harder for her to bond to one man. I can testify first hand to that. Women ignore this at their peril.
@ Jess – “I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.”
Well your life experience doesn’t jive with most of the published studies I’ve seen regarding women and casual sex. Most don’t enjoy it, and many end up with diminished capacity to form good long-term bonds with men later in life. Its great that casual sex “worked” for you, but that doesn’t mean it will work for all. We here at HUS tend to call bullshit when we see it, and just like a few men here trying to promote open relationships, what I see you posting is indeed a load of fertilizer.
And being married with kids now proves nothing. The real proof will be if you are still married in 25 years…
jess December 20, 2011 at 9:43 am
“JS- what a truly bizarre comment!
Well assuming you are serious in your views….
i dont think it is a lie to say the majority of young (uk) girls are having non LTR sex.
I accept that actually TOO much is happening and this is evident in the STD epidemic london has.”
Jess… bizarre is relative… you are advocating that these girls continue to ride a slippery slope even thought the consequences are obvious with the STD epidemic you are experiencing.
“This not mean to say that NSA sex is the root of all evil- I am happy to support digital sex as an alternative, a bit of moderation in frequency and moderation in drink/drugs which can lead to risky behaviour.”
Once again advocating the slippery slope when you have experience in where that ride ends.
Honestly if these girls go digital with the current mores makes it more difficult to moderate drink/drugs because that is something that takes maturity and maturity takes time.
So why encourage them to do what doesn’t work.
No shots fired at your lifestyle… but you have a child in a LTR as do I and I wouldn’t advocate this path even though I have faired better than 99% of the women who have made similar choices.
No judgement just facts.
“I certainly don’t subscribe to name calling like loser, slag, virgin, slut, fatso etc”
I don’t advocate name calling, slut shaming but let’s be honest… it is much harder to participate in promiscuous activities when you don’t think everyone is doing it.
“Women do orgasm with NSA’s though not nearly as much as with LTRs. This doesnt stop them from being fun- thats why its so damn hard trying to stop STD’s”
This is untrue…because most men who are down for NSA are NOT concerned with providing the woman with a pleasurable experience… this is what we call across the pond a ‘pump and dump’.
I was told by a male friend with my best interest at heart that for men the need for sex is like going to the bathroom… they are grateful that the bathroom is there when they are in need but they don’t want to spend the night let alone have a relationship with the room of requirement.
“I do have some life experience and perspective and will always seek to expose people like you for the ‘extremists’ you are. Sorry- its an act of conscience you see.”
No girlfriend you aren’t exposing me… because I have been where you are trying to go… and not to brag but by most standards I have been EXTREMELY successful in the face of adverse circumstances…
In the words of MC Hammer “you can’t touch this”… really you can’t.
And even with my ‘success’ I am here to tell you that most don’t want to tread my path… because real talk they couldn’t.
So if you have a conscience then you should tell these young girl to run, don’t walk in the other direction.
And if you don’t I will proudly call bullshit… and call you out as a liar.
Because 99.99% of the time NSA and ONS will not net a positive result for women… anyone who survives is an exception.
“by the way- I am in an LTR with children…you appear to have missed that.
ps. nearly all my peers have sexual histories and guess what…. they also are in LTRs with kids…. all very conventional now you see.”
You know what, so am I… but you know what I have that you don’t… title to property, a retirement package and a trust fund for my kid… who just turned 18 and has college/university paid for.
You are not married and I guarantee that you haven’t negotiated nearly as well… because you brought no other value than sex and reproduction and you couldn’t negotiate marriage… if not for yourself than for your child.
How do I know…
Because you are still telling other girls that slutting around is okay.
So you and your girls don’t still don’t know what you are in for.
Let me know how that works for you~JS
leapobeta,
its not a lie- you are just overstating a particular dynamic.
Do I know women who have woken up in the morning and regretted the drunken and poor quality sex of the previous night- YES
Do I know women who found casual sex unsatisfying- YES
Do I know women who have gone on to marry their ONS- YES
Do I know women who had a month long, erotic, wonderful fling after a ONS- YES
Do I know women who think LTR sex is superior to ONS sex- YES
Do I know women who thought the ONS sex was so-so but enjoyed the overall seductive experience – YES
Do I know women who’s best ever sexual experiences were on a ONS- YES, though in a minority
All of the above is factual. If you to visit ‘Psychology Today’ you will find one article that says 50% of guys enjoy ONS sex and 25% of women do. thats a figure I could buy. Its not completely clear though if they mean the actual sex or the overall event. They go onto explain that women’s enjoyment depends upon their comfort levels, their attraction to the guy and his skill level and physical compatibility. Amen to that.
And again- what mistakes are you referring to? I have kids now and I look back on most of my flings with warmth and affection- with the exception of a few guys I had a great time. And even the ones I didnt really enjoy I dont actually regret as such- it taught me stuff.
This seems like an important article of faith for you that girls cannot really enjoy NSA sex. Im sorry to burst your bubble but with the right guy, they really, really can.
As to what I tell others- I have a simple mantra: try stuff in moderation and in safety and do things that YOU enjoy.
If you hate the idea of NSA sex dont do it. If you enjoy it then fine. Neither choice is better than the other and they both have pros and cons.
@Jhane Sez
I guess Roissy and Roosh really do have incredible reach.
@Jess
But the post didn’t say that. Hugo actually suggested that a lot of casual experience has made him a better man. Neely spoke for herself, saying she felt tainted by the experience. She described her friends as feeling the same way. You’re arguing against a point that was never made.
The stats show very clearly that only a small percentage of women pursue regular NSA sex in college. Jess is delusional. 91% of female college students have had 0-5 partners.
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/04/28/hookinguprealities/whos-really-having-sex-in-college/
When I took a good hard look at my mission I decided to remove all links that were incompatible with it. Dalrock is not, but his readers hate on me quite a bit, so that’s no good.
@Mike M.
Thanks for that view, I’ve not considered it.
Only if I can get them to swallow it. Thanks for the vote of confidence, though.
@Ted D
Jess is not married. She’s cohabitating with two kids.
Yep, just noticed that Susan.
Jess – so, your not in a marriage, yet you claim success. Here at HUS, the end goal for women is to get married and stay that way. By those standards, you really haven’t done so well.
To each their own. I won’t bash you for living how you want, but I personally don’t feel like your story is really one to use as an example of what young women should do. I hope it works out for you in the long run.
Jhane,
congratulations- you have just anointed your self high priestess of utter BS.
I have for a long time recommended moderation for all lifes guilty pleasures.
And no matter what the government or pressure groups advise, some people will follow self destructive courses.
the fact is nearly ALL my peers are married with kids. Nearly all of them ENJOYED NSA sex when younger.
Im in the process of changing jobs and will be a leaving behind a pretty big team that I had gotten close to over the past few years. They represent a cross section of uk culture with different ages and backgrounds. They all have a pretty healthy attitude towards sex which completely embraces occasional casual safe sex. The older ones are in LTRs, the younger ones are either playing the field or have boyfriends/girlfriends. They all seem pretty sensible, decent folk to me.
So your assertion that anyone surviving a ONS is an exception is self evident BS.
And your stuff about my personal and financial arrangements? have you gone mad? apart from the fact you are wrong on nearly every count how would you possibly come to that information?
Are you saying you know who I am perhaps? I prefer to keep myself anonymous on here but if you know my identity perhaps you can tell me the name of the company I work for?
Olive—
The shaming of virgins or much less so near virgins is ENTIRELY the work of second wave feminism.
Yeah there’s always been a contingent of men who whisper about what they’re missing, but that’s not shaming. It’s also historically been rather soto voce, except in the most ribald circles.
I would be very interested to read what Schwizer and Neeley have to say about this development in the rad-fem movement:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/radfem-hub-the-underbelly-of-a-hate-movement/
Susan–
That’s probably subject to the usual distortion in these types of studies. That is they survey all college students, or actually most often freshmen mostly in large introduction to psychology or sociology classes, for ease and lower costs.
Survey only the last semester of seniors and you’d get a significantly different answer is what I’m saying.
@Susan #75
I wouldn’t say feminism and hu culture have ended dating. What I’d argue is that it’s created another option, or another “track”. The vast majority of my male friends, ranging from 10s to 3s, do BOTH dating and casual sex. And mostly the way they make the distinction is by deciding whether a girl is “date worthy”. If she’s not (not hot enough, not smart enough, etc), she gets put on the casual sex track, where it’s all booty calls. Somehow the girls who get put on said track have a hard time figuring out that’s what they’re on. Honestly, it’s not very hard when you only see a guy when he’s drunk, between 10 PM and 8 AM Friday-Sunday.
However, the girls who are worth dating (fun, smart, attractive) almost always do get taken out on dates, because the guys consider them worth the time/money/effort. Mistakes get made (I once ended a date after 30 minutes because the girl was as dumb as a rock, and I’ve dated one or two HU girls), but generally that’s the pattern. I will admit that is far different than in college, where many of the girls I knew (even very attractive ones) had not been on a single date by graduation.
I also had an interesting conversation with my friends’ coworker the other week which is a bit sad, but validates your work here. This girl is 25, very smart, successful (works at a BB bank in trading), and pretty cute (maybe a 7). She spent 30 minutes complaining to me how hard it was to have a relationship in NYC for a young woman of means/intelligence, and I had to agree with her. She told me her last boyfriend, who wasn’t as successful or as attractive as her, broke up with her because she made a “funny noise” when she slept, and because he didn’t like her cooking. The only reason a guy could possibly get away with that in this day and age is because there are a dozen other women lining up for him afterwards, which is sadly the case. The college-education gap that you’ve spoken about many times is already starting to have a big impact.
@Doug
They did survey all college students, but research shows that hooking up drops dramatically for women after freshmen year, and mostly stops after sophomore year. I think it’s a pretty good study. You can’t dismiss every piece of research that doesn’t support your notions. Every study is a piece of data, and this one was a Dept. of Justice study on sexual assault.
Hugo Schwyzer (how the hell do you pronounce that name, if there was an “a” between the “w” and “y” I could deal, but nope, I usually have to look his name back up again cause I can’t pronounce it, damn him) – is a massively feminism obsequious mangina. “He” himself proudly proclaimed that his second wife was an obligate, solely, lesbian, a fact that should have been obvious to him. She only allowed him totally just servicing her with oral sex when engaged and for two weeks back from their honeymoon, and then cut even that kind of sex from him off completely then, yet he remained in this marriage for 18 months. Plus he blames himself for going alcoholic on her largely as a result, and not her one smidgen. “He’s” a women’s studies prof at a third rate Cali college total joke.
Over at the Good Man Project they disabled the voting yea or nea on comments a couple of months ago. Could that possibly because Hugo had a large tendency to be massively vote nea by the readers there???
susan,
the thread responses however do contain ‘tainting’ claims dont they? so i haven’t argued against non existent statements have I?
1 2 3 … 8 »
{ 5 trackbacks }