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 4 … 8 »
@Kathy
“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.”
I merely used Google, dear Kathy.
“baseball bat” site:hookingupsmart.com
Needless to say, I wasn’t rehashing any ‘beef’ – which did not exist in the first place -, I was merely citing you for other commenters at Dalrock’s blog as an example of the solipsism of tradcon women. I understand that parents are normally proud of their children and boast about their supposedly wonderful abilities to other relatives, acquitances etc. But to brag to complete strangers on the Internet about the sexual attractiveness of your jailbait daughter is bizarre. The fact that nobody besides me has found this odd is also bizarre.
@ jess – If the older ones are in relationships it’s because of the moral vestiges of their parent’s generation and trust me for us millenials these vestiges are literally gone. We’re in wonderland with no-fault divorce, open relationships, promiscuity, extreme pornography, gender bending and other immoral habits promoted as the norm. I’m guessing you and your friends are in their 40′s and 50′s and are a huge minority (10-15% like Susan said). You probably had parents (or grandparents) together that didn’t divorce and didn’t like NSA sex. You’re probably also upper-class with the wealth insulating you from the catalysm happening for the middle and lower classes in the UK.
the fact is nearly ALL my peers are married with kids. Nearly all of them ENJOYED NSA sex when younger.
I doubt you’re surrounded by decent folk as you claimed. What you’re supporting is almost as repugnant as what feminists support at The Good Men Project.
Susan–
I don’t. At all.
There was a dept of justice FUNDED study by feminist advocates that was behind the infamous April 14 “Dear Colleagues” letter from the Department of Education’s Title IX branch, that required them to use a 50.1% standard of proof for claims of date rape on campus, or else forfeit any and all federal funding, which all but 2 colleges in the US get. Plus it required/urged lots of procedural changes that were greatly prejudical to the accused (man). A horror show. Based on the utterly bogus study that “showed” that 1 in 4.5 college women were raped or sexually assaulted by graduation time. (Only the women themselves didn’t think so.) Incredible selection bias in who their samples were, plus they counted tipsy enthusiastic sex as date rape, though the survey respondents didn’t, and so on.
The Good Men Project is just a lame attempt of third wave feminists and their lackeys to lure potential men’s rights activists away from the so-called Manosphere. That’s pretty much all you need to know about it. Everybody should quit reading it and encourage others to do the same.
@ Byron
I’d agree, variety is awesome, and there is a drive for that. As Stalin would say, quantity has a quality all it’s own. I alluded to that in the post Jhayne responded to. That’s why I made the comparison so vastly lopsided, comparing a whole lot of sex with one girl to a small amount of sex with many girls. Looking back, the point I tried to make but was not clear on was the difference between the example alpha and beta – the beta technically had more sex, but was clearly the less happy of the two – not least because in the end he was getting just enough to keep him around.
Jhayne is right to say that there are a fraction of guys who would take the “lots of sex with one girl” option over the “small to moderate amounts of sex with lots of girls” option. I’m unwilling to estimate the percentage, since I have no studies to back it and my personal life has a heavily overrepresented nerd contingent (myself included). But I’d still pick the one girl over the many, assuming (and this is a hell of a leap) that she was a quality girl all-around. The red pill has thoroughly disabused me of any pedestalizing tendencies, though, so I’ve found without free passes, there aren’t a lot of girls my age who fit that bill. Closest one I can think of put on twenty pounds before I broke up with her. At this point it’s just about refining my Game and continually looking inward to make sure that the problem is actually in the girls, and not in my standards (last I checked, I think I’m being fairly reasonable).
Susan–
What research?? Links? That wasn’t my experience, and I was in college in an earlier semi hookup era.
susan,
honestly its the intellectual dishonesty that rankles most.
in March 2011 the Daily Mail On Line said 72% of both genders had at least 1 casual sex encounter whilst at college.
so who’s delusional now? me? you? daily mail?
are you seriously saying that only 9% of college girls are having casual sex?
thats a seriously bold claim Susan- you quite sure about that?
@Deti-” 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 do agree with this that meanginless sex consecutively will make it hard to bond in a lasting relationship. I had an ex-boyfrend that wanted me to be his casual sex partner, but he had a very hard time understanding why I wanted to wait for someone that I loved. I’m not interested in taking that risk.
@Jess and women enjoying casual sex with the right guy-
Sure, but finding the right casual sex partner takes just as much time as finding the right boyfriend IMO. Maybe it’s just me, but picking up some random guy at the bar doesn’t do it. If I was looking for a casual sex partner, attractiveness, intelligence, chemistry and sexual compatibility have to be there. What if a ONS is with a person that doesn’t satisfy you? I would rather just wait for a long-term partner.
Lastly, nobody seemed to respond to my immigrant parent that’s strict about dating or letting her adult daughter roam freely example as to why a pretty woman would be single fo a period of time. Any thoughts? Would any of you think that’s odd? I was also raised that it’s better to stay single for a long time than having multiple break-ups and jump from relationship to relationship. That’s just my background though.
@ Jess
Good lord Jess. Reread what Susan said. 91% of women in college claim to have had 0-5 casual sex/hookup partners. That means their number could be 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. The stat doesn’t say that 91% of women claim zero casual sex/hookup partners. It means the amount of casual sex partners/hookups a small spectrum for college women.
As I said Susan, in studies like your one finding that 90% of college women have 0-5 life time sexual partners, they usually only survey freshmen girls, because they’re herded together in large intro to psych and sociology classes and tend to be more compliant on doing what the prof wants, answer his or her survey. Also it’s not end of the second semester freshman girls either, but probably on average mid way through freshman year. That produces a huge downward bias on the percentage of college girls who when they graduate will have had 0-5 sex partners in their lives.
As well it’s a bit hard to square with the CDC’s finding that 75% of college women when the graduate will have had the HPV virus (although almost but not entirely always, with no consequence). Since most people, men and women, develop antibodies to HPV strains within a year, killing it off and making it non contagous, that 75% figure suggests a good lot of fucking partners going on for college girls by the time they graduate.
cynthia,
how charming- you are one warm and cuddly human being you know that?
im not upper class- thats a very small and privedged and lineal section of uk society.
I’m middle class (uk definition) but from a very traditional family (also middle class- possibly upper middle?)
my ‘peer’ friends are teachers, doctors, lawyers etc
my soon to be ex colleagues vary in background as i said
I meet all sorts at the w/e at my sports work.
I think I know a decent person when i see one. You know, law abiding, tax paying , responsible, caring, reasonable, charitable, reflective etc
You dont sound all that nice if I’m honest but maybe you typed in haste.
“I would be very interested to read what Schwizer and Neeley have to say about this development in the rad-fem movement”
The mere fact that such a website can even exist is further proof that Western civilization has passed its expiration date. There will be no dawn for a group of people who even tolerate such activity, much less support it. The current decline, as manifested in the disappearance of marriage and economic ruin, seems like Chinese water torture to me. Really, just get it over with already! Let the illegal immigrants, the Chinese, the Islamists, the Wall Street bankers or anyone else plunder it and pull it apart. It’s such a joke it’s almost not funny anymore.
“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.”
Yeah, because so-called pro-sex-positive feminists are not agenda-driven self-serving extremists, you see.
.
.
“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.”
These “people” are typically women who want to MEN to stop rating and comparing women based on past sexual behavior when its time to select a wife. Its been stated before but bears repeating [apparently]. Don’t be pestered by these go-nowhere balance redressers.
.
.
“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.”
Nothing like breaking down the Patriarchy by sucking its cock. And promoting it. Repeatedly.
.
.
“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.”
For many purposes, women are not tainted due to prior “experience” aka fucking. Lets dispel with the euphemisms for once, please. A man taking the first girl who says “yes” does not give a rats ass if she is “rebounding” “cycling” or seeks cock in order to form [empower] her obviously lacking character. So why this must be stated or is bothersome – how men view women sexually speaking – seems ridiculous. Just fuck and move on. Nobody cares!
.
Byron,
True.
Badger,
So , in short, the kind of women who say they’re “in a relationship with themselves”? I don’t have any of these attitudes ( to the best of my knowledge.) Except, perhaps, the “too proud to give a little ” bit but that’s more out of a wariness of vulnerability than *genuine* egotism, I think. Which, in turn, is a by-product of being taught to distrust any sentence that contains the words submit/follow/comply. But other than that I’m okay lol.
@ Jess
Don’t worry if anyone else is saying that there is a taint of hooking up, or if they’re just implying it – I’ll say it right out: “Too many sex partners, particularly casual sex partners, carries a high risk of damaging a woman’s ability to form long-term bonds with a decent man.”
Doesn’t happen every time, or to every girl with a history. But it does happen, whatever your personal experiences – if you’ve escaped that, good for you, the world is a better place for having fewer screwed-up people.
The Social Pathologist’s website has an article whose link I can’t find right now that makes it pretty clear. Remember, most women nod and agree when someone trots out the (completely accurate) data that people who marry under age 25 have something like a 10 or 12 percent higher likelihood of divorce, or how cohabiting first creates a similarly increased risk. Everyone sees those numbers and says, “that makes sense, I believe it.” But the moment someone can pull out data showing that going from one previous sex partner to two creates a 30% increased risk of divorce, or that having more than two partners prior to one’s husband puts her odds of divorce above 50%, no one buys it – not because it’s too big, or that it’s unsupported, but because it challenges their worldview and suggests that something they no longer have the power to change may affect them. People get scared when they realize that there is a very high chance (though not a certainty) that they are, in fact, damaged by their own hand and unable to form a proper bond.
I’ll admit, there is a plausible alternate explanation: maybe too many sex partners damages a woman’s ability to identify a good man, rather than to bond with him. But I doubt that, given that the number of decent guys out there is certainly higher than 50% of us.
If we want to throw in anecdotal evidence, do you really think it’s that hard to find women who feel used, cheapened, or dare I say damaged by their hookup experience? They exist, and there is good evidence they are the majority – the highest number I’ve seen who enjoy casual sex is the number you gave, 25%. Hardly a majority, and certainly not enough to justify telling every girl to go out and try for themselves. It’s irresponsible just for the damage it does to their feelings, never mind the reduced (though not eliminated) ability to find a quality man, or the potential harm to their future man’s feelings (which those men are entitled to, and which are every bit as valid as the woman’s feelings about her past).
Really, don’t discount men’s feelings either: is it really so weird to be put off by the idea that a girl was willing to risk pregnancy or STDs with a dozen men whose names she did not even know? Or to wonder that, if she was unable or unwilling to commit to any of them, if she might be unwilling to commit to you? Or to worry that she may pine for one or more of the alphas in her past? It’s probably a side effect of the same pattern-seeking behavior that allowed men to codify math, physics, and zone defense, but we see patterns in a girl’s love life and draw conclusions along the same lines.
I can’t think of a better word than “tainted” to describe a woman who feels regret and pain for her sexuality and has a harder time bonding with a decent man as a result. If a girl can live the promiscuous life without being tainted, good for her – I wish her and her future man nothing but happiness. But trying to tell girls to go out and live that life, when the majority will only be worse off for it, it irresponsible at best, outright malicious at worst.
sassy,
if you read susan’s post she said i was delusional with my 70% comment. As you can see my comment is quite correct.
doug,
yes- excellent point.
I still have friends who work in health care and say that the std epidemic is beyond control. The idea that only 9% of college girls are having sex is laughable. They would argue 70% of girls are having REGULAR casual sex. There is certainly lots of ‘friends with benefits’ going on.
I would be surprised if the USA was that much different from the UK on that score.
Jess, the Daily Wail has pretty much zero journalistic integrity.
@ Jess
My post to you was about the fact that you misinterpreted the stat Susan gave. Also, Susan and a few of the readers here thought your 70% stat was delusional because of the context. You said 70% of women enjoyed casual sex/ONS, which is simply false. Had you said that 70% of women have had a casual sex experience, there wouldn’t have been an issue. Implying the enjoyment of the casual sex is what makes your stat a bit delusional.
“Really, don’t discount men’s feelings either: is it really so weird to be put off by the idea that a girl was willing to risk pregnancy or STDs with a dozen men whose names she did not even know? Or to wonder that, if she was unable or unwilling to commit to any of them, if she might be unwilling to commit to you? Or to worry that she may pine for one or more of the alphas in her past? It’s probably a side effect of the same pattern-seeking behavior that allowed men to codify math, physics, and zone defense, but we see patterns in a girl’s love life and draw conclusions along the same lines.”
The above are universal and global feelings of men. Feminists know that. Then why do they despise men for having these feelings? It would be like men despising women for having maternal feelings. This is why its such a blessing that feminists are a tiny minority of women on Earth.
Ted,
We could have got married but I didn’t really like the idea- I used to be a hard line feminist- 80′s style. My SO wasn’t overly bothered- we are in love and thats what counts.
But since then Ive mellowed and with my 2 kids and a catholic family- we may just get married somewhere down the line. I know his family would prefer it too- and I suspect our kids would too.
But the fact remains that within my college peers (thus yes- limited to middle class parameters) are all luvved with kiddies. Yet in differing degrees they had casual sex and for the most part, thoroughly enjoyed it.
I have asked people to furnish details of people they know who are childless and alone due to their sexual history – virtually none has been forthcoming.
Jess—
Most women ARE tainted and not in a “somehow”way by tons of casual sex. Not tainted for fling purposes, they’re often or usually the most sexually fun for that, not needing to be broken in and in early stages of my life, sometimes teaching me some stuff. Well except for the hardened variety, they’re not so much fun.
However I’ve never had a slut fall deeply in love with me. Feel real affection for me, yeah, real deep sexual attraction to me such that she wants to hold on hard, yeah. But deep emotionally bonding love/adoration, never. With good girls, quite often. I work to try not to break their hearts and not go on too long if they look like they’re falling deep, and I’m not in return, actually.
The meme that sluttery in women very most often for women to not be able to fall deeply in love, is not just a deeply ingrained male instinct, it’s also the truth.
As well there’s this. About all promiscuous women who are cute 6’s and up have had several if not more full on alpha lovers for flings or ONS’s, almost always both. (The flings are often soft harem ones for him.) Betas of all stripes tend to fear, and be right in fearing, that they’ll have a hard time measuring up in sexual attractiveness to them, not only remotely and in imagination, but in actual in the bed practice. It’s not so much a matter of technique exactly or necessarily, but emotional impact.
So yeah most men who aren’t immersed in believing feminist propaganda, especially but not only betas, don’t want to marry a “former” slut. I also imagine you understate your “experience” level around here.
Btw, are both your kids by the guy you’re living with? You’ve not pressured him to marry you because you make more dosh, innit? You get the same child support=also stealth alimony regardless from him, but you don’t have to kick over any of your investments etc. to him if you two break up, right? I mean I’m the same way on that, but openly say so, unlike you.
“Too many sex partners, particularly casual sex partners, carries a high risk of damaging a woman’s ability to form long-term bonds with a decent man.”
His wretch notwithstanding.
Jess don’t let the bitches get you down……we both know there ARE women who enjoy NSA sex and come out of it just fine…we both also know the opposite is true. Experience is a great teacher and some commentors here know not of what they speak. I know a ton of people who tested the sexual waters and went on to live conventional married lives as partners and parents. It is still my contention that a lot of women who do not handle their promiscuity welll had issues before hand. They probably should have avoided that lifestyle in the first place. For people to state that all or most women are tainted from the experience is hogwash. My life experience alone proves that to be false. People with a fear of heights. Should not rock climb. Women who hookup for the wrong reasons shouldn’t hook up. I admit some women do not handle it well while others do. Other people here need to face that reality. Also most promiscuous people DO find a mate.
I think there’s a cultural divide. Europe is the most open, then Australia, then America, then Asia, and finally the Middle East. Within regions there are local differences as well. It’s not just sex, but also intersexual interactions, ideas about touching, hugging, kissing, etc.
When I was growing up, little girls and boys did not play together at all. I only interacted with other girls. In mixed-gender classroom settings, the teachers sat a boy and a girl together because they knew we wouldn’t mess with each other or talk to each other. It’s not quite the same as purdah but definitely a palpable barrier between girls and boys. Here in America, little kids play in mixed groups all the time and are quite friendly. My husband played with his father’s friend’s daughter starting from a toddler age.
Between relatives I never remember much hugging, but family members here hug all the time. People kiss as a greeting in some parts of Europe, but I never saw kissing even on television when I was young. Pre-marital, public kissing would be seen as taboo in some parts of the world, while kissing is no big deal for most people while dating in America. The French kiss was considered tres scandalous when I was younger, too. I had a hard time imagining even kissing a guy I didn’t already have a lot of feelings for, so I couldn’t do dating or casual hooking up at all.
Western third-wave feminism looks very different Eastern feminism in this regard. In Asia feminism is more about stopping female infanticide, homicide, trafficking, selling women as property, etc. I respect feminism more when it’s more about basic human rights issue, rather than the luxury and pleasure of sex. It’s like the obesity epidemic in the first world. There are lots of ills that come from too much pleasure, and saying “let’s just embrace the promiscuous behavior and accept all the fat people” sounds really… over-indulgent. That’s my personal perspective on this though.
sassy,
if you read up i have repeatedly said that women tend to prefer LTR sex to ONS. I had also said that ONS sex can vary tremendously in quality.
Of the 70% that are having NSA sex, its difficult to accurately say the percentage that disliked the ‘entire’ event against the % that that enjoyed just the sex itself. Perhaps they loved the flirting, the snog in the taxi, the ripping off of the clothes but not the drunken, inept sex that followed.
Im saying that to claim just 10% of women ever enjoyed NSA sex is just untrue (see Psychology Today). its not delusional to say that. To say most women PREFER LTR sex is entirely fair however.
Have none of your friends ever enjoyed a sexual act outside of an LTR? never ever?
“most men who aren’t immersed in believing feminist propaganda, especially but not only betas, don’t want to marry a “former” slut”
If it was only a small minority of men, feminists would not be on the hissy fit warpath regarding this topic. The universalness is the real reason for all the angst, balance redressing, “exposing extremists” and on and on.
Doug1,
sorry my dear but your post is apparently entirely imaginary.
You see Susan maintains that you nor anyone else have never uttered such things.
I am merely arguing against a figment of my imagination – so you have now just disappeared in a puff of logic…
“most promiscuous people DO find a mate.”
Since promiscuous women are in the minority, with enough effort and determination, absolutely. There are just enough men to go around for them
Erm, because when you don’t orgasm, sex is awesome, especially when it’s with someone you don’t know!!!
Jess, I don’t know, but it sounds like you’ve been out of college for a bit. It also sounds like you live in the UK… I don’t know much about the UK, but I know most of us are thinking of casual sex in the U.S. drunken frat house setting. I had ONE casual sex experience (oral, no P and V) and it was miserable. So miserable that I hoped never to see the dude again. And yet, the next day it was a brag-worthy moment. It’s brag-worthy because it’s not about the enjoyment of sex, it’s about intra-sexual competition and seeking validation, from men and from your friends. I guess the only enjoyable part may have been hearing my friends say “good for you!”
Oh sure, I have friends who “enjoy” casual sex. As in, they spend their nights out scavenging for guys (like they’re on a treasure hunt), snatch up one or two, make sure they know about each other, pick one, and then pray he’s the one who wants a relationship. That has largely been the goal of casual sex, for all of my friends (even the ones with 30+ partners): get a relationship. If the guy isn’t relationship-worthy, he’s cast aside, but if he is, oh man. It’s a slew of phone calls and text messages. I even had one friend who threatened to report a guy for rape if he didn’t start responding to her online messages, and the sad thing is he would’ve been found guilty because she was blackout when it happened.
I know that you want casual sex for women to be just like casual sex for men, but the reality is it’s not. I have tons of stories to prove it.
@Jhane
Oh, I would gladly offer advice on MGTOW. But it would derail the thread, and Susan’s already stated she doesn’t like hijacks. Maybe I’ll do a forum thread later.
Someone posted earlier (Guestopher I think) about fringe elements and judgements on MRAs. I happen to agree. And I note that we’re once again back to decrying men when women make poor choices.
Are young men screwing up? Yes. They’ve been told some pretty conflicting things in recent years. And oh look! They’re still being told them, by ridiculous farces like GMP. Some will end up losers. Some will have horrible lives with feminist women. Maybe a few will get lucky and come across a decent woman (and yes, that IS getting lucky).
If you don’t like what I say? Don’t read it.
@ Jess
Remember when you wrote this. This is the quote everyone had an issue with.
We then called you out on the inaccuracy of that statement. It was only then that you switched your tune. I call things as I see them. You made a claim. We all took issue with it, then you backpedaled and tried to rephrase your original statement.
I take pride in the type of people I call my friends. My friends and I have similar mindsets and pretty much avoided the carousel. All of my closest friends and I remained virgins until after college. Most of my friends have sexual partner counts of less than 5. I have a few acquaintances who I interact with occasionally who engage in casual sex, and they are train wrecks. They come to me with stories of guys who they claimed have hurt them in some way, but these women brought their pain upon themselves, for the most part, by sleeping with men first and asking questions later. The girls I know who have large partner counts aren’t happy at all.
They loved it because it made them feel desired. That’s why LTR sex is so much better, because you KNOW the guy desires you. Let’s be honest, ONS sex is about guys getting variety, there’s no emotional attachment. Men compartmentalize. We can’t.
I know this was meant for Sassy, but my friends never enjoyed it in the physical sense. They enjoyed it in the “yay someone desires me!” sense.
I remember hearing a story about one of my friends going at it for 2 hours, and finding this fact brag-worthy. I was a virgin at the time, so I didn’t understand that going at it for two hours sounds like running a marathon without drinking water. That’s just called bad sex.
Cosign. I know three. One probably has borderline personality disorder. One is rather insecure. The other is a snotty bitch who tries to be all “strong woman” but becomes totally helpless and clingy in relationships.
Olive—
The 80/20 meme aka the Pareto principle, as kinda been shoe horned into Roissy’s observation that about the hottest 40% of young women (cute 6’s and above) are the one’s having casual fling sex with only the top 15-20% of men in casual sex attractiveness (15% are some kind of alpha, but some greater beta’s sometimes get fling sex with 6’s as well).
What might be true is that 80% of the cute and hot girls who sometimes go for casual sex are getting it one with 20% of men, mostly alphas but some greater betas as well. I’d guess the other 20% of cute and up girls that sometimes go for casual are at the time in a LTR with a guy their own sex rank or one above.
As for what percentage of young and middle 20s girls sometimes go for casual, Susan really downplays that with I think probably cherry picked studies, but most anecdotal evidence indicates a lot more that she says. I haven’t cared enough to study the literature on that.
Abbott millions of former sluts are now married..do you deny that?
Doug,
Thanks for the clarification. Maybe the girls who “sometimes go for casual” are actually the carousel watchers I mentioned above?
Susan,
I want to send you a link by email. Somewhere on your site I saw a Gmail address but I can’t find it now.
sassy,
no i have maintained a consistent tune regarding casual sex and studs for years now- check back through older threads.
i guessed at the 70% and then looked it up to finds its 72% (not such a bad guess eh?)
Everyone I have spoken to on a personal level has a horror story of a guy who turned violent, or was impotent, or smelly, or premature or a nut job or whatever.
But all also had some good experiences to report including orgasmic and/or exciting sex. They also spoke of excitement and passion and validation.
Thats just the way it is. This is also reflected in reports I have had beyond that peer group.
Also if you remained a virgin till after college you will have to accept you are in the minority whilst I am in the majority. Right or wrong thats just the way it is.
olive and sassy
i also know a few highly promiscuous types that are ‘train wrecks’- so what?
i also know a few ‘chaste’ women that are deeply deeply unhappy and lonely.
does it follow that all chaste women will become so? Nope.
this is why moderation is the key. A few flings on ones youth won’t do much harm.
if you party hard 3 times a week and have unprotected sex with alcohol, and drugs all the time expect an early grave.
So I suggest informed moderation is more desirable than abstinence or over indulgence.
correction to comment 187:
i meant STD’s not studs!- honestly!
Tom–
They are. But how many of them ever adored their husbands? How many of them got the highest SMV husband they could have gotten if good girls who got married in their mid 20′s. How many of them end up cheating? How many of them are responsible for America’s 50% divorce rate?? How many of them exact horrific divorce theft on American men.
It’s true that American feminism has propagandized a good proportion of men to suppress their natural instinct to not fall in love with or marry sluts. It’s true that’s propagandized a good proportion to not be too inquisitive or insistently so on such matters. To their eventual detriment.
Jess – IMO it wouldn’t make a rats ass bit of difference if every women in the world LOVED casual sex, I would still pass on any woman with a high casual partner count for an LTR, and advice my son, and any other young man that would listen to do the same. I have NO desire to invest my time, money, and love into someone that spent so much time in the shallow pursuit of physical enjoyment over the possibility of a meaningful relationship, regardless of how old they were, how young and “stupid” they were behaving, or any other excuse paraded out to explain such self-centered and self-destructive behavior.
I am glad you made it out “unscathed”, but that doesn’t change anything. I got a divorce and didn’t get reamed by my ex-wife in court, but that doesn’t mean most guys aren’t getting royally screwed by the U.S. family court system. I am the exception, how about you?
@ Jess
Actually, I am in the majority. 91% or women report to having 0-5 casual sex partners in college.
It’s really the women who are relatively promiscuous (more than 5 partners) who are in the minority.
Care to state which group you were a part of in college? I think I already have an idea though, based on your promiscuous horn tooting.
@Doug1:
Susan is right about hooking up stopping after sophomore year. This isn’t the 70′s. Most people go crazy freshman year and then tone it down as they get older. My friends who are now mostly juniors and seniors are now in stable relationships, even the two girls I know who are in the double digits in terms of sex partners.
It’s pretty normal for that to happen in college. It’s also not unusual to see people who got together even at graduation (despite not knowing eachother the previous four years) get married shortly thereafter. From what I’ve seen it seems like people get together at the end of college and if they can make it to the 24-27 age range and still be together, they get married.
So now 95% of women have 0-5 parners by their mid twenties?
And only 5% of women have more than 5 partners by their mid twenties?
WTF is happening here. Wishful thinking denial agenda or just, WTF?
I’m with Olive and Sassy.
I have yet to meet a happy slut. In my experience, Samantha Jones does not exist. Or if she does, then she’s extremely rare.
@Sassy5619:
I’m not siding with Jess but I’ve witnessed girls lie about their numbers outright. Also a lot of girls do thinks like anal/oral sex and don’t count it. It’s not the most common, but I don’t think those girls constitute a minority as small as 9%. Though maybe now that I do the math in the head not even 9% of my friends has a partner count above 5. I don’t know. Hmm…
BSD- i find it hilarious that american girls and an ex president do not regard anal or oral congress a form of ‘sex’. wonderfully convenient denial.
Sassy,
I dont think I detected your response- do you accept that being a virgin at the end of college makes you a minority or not?
As for my college history- i lost my virginity at 18 and was faithful throughout college. compared to the vast majority of my peers i was unusually chaste (with the exception of the Christian Union types)
As to the survey Susan quoted its 37% i think that had 0 sex partners. the researchers confessed they had a low response rate and even if we assume girls didn’t ignore oral sex etc then 63% had between 1-26 partners at college. The figure suggests 54%+ had between 1-5 but I think thats very conservative for the reasons people have already pointed out.
BSD,
Yeah I agree with this. Girls do lie about their partner counts, or try to discount oral sex. I had friends who had separate “makeout” and “sex” lists, but oral sex didn’t even fall on the radar. That’s fascinating, actually. Like oral sex is something to be ashamed of in and of itself (and I have NO idea how many friends did anal. Something else that never came up).
Anyway, if anything, the fact that girls lie about their partner count further indicates that they regret casual sex, or are ashamed of it. Even despite the virgin shaming and sensationalizing of hookup culture. That ought to tell you something.
emily,
C’mon Samantha (indeed all the SATC) cast are ‘c***ts’.
(sorry Susan- but I think you will agree there are times when even that horrible word is called for)
nobody here is suggesting that women model themselves on revolting characters from poor quality sit coms.
Myself, I am suggesting that indulging in a few flings at college is not such a terrible thing. (if thats what you fancy doing).
that doesnt mean there is plenty wrong with an overly brutal and sexualised media and appalling conduct from college jocks etc.
and dont get me started on paris hilton and their ilk.
but the demonisation of casual sex as being the ‘slippery slope’ to sodom and the gnashing of teeth is silly.
@ Jess
I have already stated that women like me are in the majority. I classify this by saying that, according to the study, 91% of college women claimed 0-5 casual sex partners in college. I am a part of that majority. That small spectrum is what constitutes the 91% stat. Within that stat, a varying level of sexual experience is included (virgins to moderately experienced women).
No one is suggesting that. But we are suggesting that women are encouraged, via the college female herd mentality, to engage in casual sex as a method to “explore their glorious sexuality” and we all believe it’s bullshit. I have done way more sexuality exploring in my current LTR than I ever did in my few casual hookups. I don’t see why the “casual flings” are necessary, and in fact, I suspect they are detrimental to the sense of self-worth of many women.
Doug or some guys understand that there are some wonderful women out there who are in fact not tainted and are mature enough and secure enough to approch the situation as an adult.
As for women and divorce. I would think most women who want a divorce and have had a sexual past are probably a little more liberal so they are less apt to put up with their mans cheatin g or mental abuse….just saying.. I totally disagree that having multiple partners dimishises a womans capability to form long lasting bonds. BS in my view. Some yeah probably but tbose were most likely unbonding types to begin with
Tom – “I totally disagree that having multiple partners dimishises a womans capability to form long lasting bonds. BS in my view. Some yeah probably but tbose were most likely unbonding types to begin with”
Then we will have to agree to disagree. I’ve seen enough evidence both personally and in numerous articles/studies that indicate lots of casual sex does in fact prohibit many people’s (men and women) ability to form and maintain a bond in an LTR. In essence, the more casual sex a person has, the less deeply they will feel love and devotion. There are certainly enough stats out there showing how the number of partners increases the chances of divorce. And even if it isn’t true 100% of the time, do you want to take the risk? I don’t, and I believe most men don’t, seeing as the laws are stacked against them when that formerly promiscuous woman decides she is bored/tired/not attracted to her husband and rolls out the door with half (or more) of his wealth.
NOTE: I am not saying that conservative women do not get divorced, or that promiscuous behavior is the cause of all divorce. What I AM saying is: if your wife has slept around a lot prior to marrying you, she is MUCH more likely to divorce you and take half of your stuff. I’ve already dodged the divorce court bullet once, I am going to do my best to never have that gun pointed at my head again. And I WILL be telling young men to tread carefully on this hallowed ground. I want people to marry and live “happily ever after”, but I refuse to throw more young men under the bus to achieve that goal.
Wow, this was what it was like when I first came to HUS: the big ongoing slut debate.
I don’t really care for statistics. What I do know is that I have many male friends, and none of them would knowingly commit to a formerly promiscuous woman. Unless that woman had undergone some serious changes. SERIOUS changes.
Hugo wants us to reassure women that their worth has nothing to do with their sexual history. Newsflash: it’s not true. When you’re considering whether or not to commit your life to a woman in a loving, sexual relationship, then her sexual history is totally relevant. Does that mean that formerly promiscuous women will never be good partners? No, of course not. Sue, for example, seems like she has a wonderful marriage.
It’s not a question of whether or not the promiscuous sex makes them damaged human beings, it’s a question of whether or not you trust this woman.
Hugo Schwyzer has been married 4 fucking times. The dude has absolutely no clue about the value of commitment. He’s spouting bullshit about how his earlier sexual escapades has made him a better husband. But, reality check, a better husband wouldn’t be getting divorced three times! Schwyzer is actually exhibit A for why you don’t want to get involved with promiscuous people.
Encouraging people not to involve themselves with casual sex is a good thing. What does one get from involvement–a few hot orgasms (maybe)? What kind of lasting benefit does fucking a stranger have?
People get all up in arms about Sue, but really, they’re just trying to defend their personal choices. Former carousel riders WANT to believe that the experience was a positive one. Men who marry promiscuous women WANT to believe they’ve made the right choice.
If you rode the cock carousel and went on to live a meaningful life, then good for you. If you married a former carousel rider and she turned out to be a good woman, then great. But don’t try to act like the carousel experience is full of meaningful life lessons in empathy and understanding. Fucking people you don’t know has nothing to do with empathy and understanding, and in fact, is really just an avoidance of it.
“These people must have a lot of time on their hands to read a blog they hate from cover to cover.”
Hating and trolling are first world problems as far as I’m concerned. Hugs over the issues at Dalrock.
I had been busy so I haven’t had chance to comment be back with more time in a few days but I echo your welcome back Abbot! I truly missed him he at least is fair about hating on sluts without praising the mighty cheating penis. *kissinthecheek* to him
Hey Jess easy now I was a college jock….lol..but you know you make a valid point. It was ridiculous and almost childlike how many of those guys spoke about women in the locker room. I was not an angel and had my share of the groupies but I was never a kiss and brag type. These guys would go on endlessly about certain women what they did if they were good,easy,etc. NO repect for women at all…probably in some cases, well deserved. The locker room at a major college is like player central. Worse than most people imagine
olive “no-one is suggesting that” – yep they are- I actually stole their phrase.
im not sure i would ‘encourage’ someone to do anything- if they fancy it give it a go but please be safe.
if you dont fancy it- then one shouldn’t feel pressurised to do it. simples.
And if you do fancy it, then go for it. Don’t let anybody stop you. Just don’t complain that a lot of men aren’t into marrying that type of woman.
Jess,
Respectfully, you don’t know what it’s like “in the trenches”. Your generation came from stable two-parent households, tried the whole sexual lib thing for lulz and then just got married (as expected) without a peep. There weren’t any consequences for you because you were protected by having full access to both cultures; you could hook up AND settle down. We don’t have that safety net any more because the Hugos and the Jaclyns of the world restricted our options in the name of freedom. So, it’s pretty irresponsible of you to suggest that a few flings won’t hurt, as if girls can just flit between the two systems. As if men don’t know.
I followed the link to Hugo’s page, and now I can hear my heartbeat in my ears.
I’m seeing something here from Jess and from Hugo’s page that I think we need to address. This is about quantity.
What I mean is, Jess and Hugo seem to be saying that a few casual encounters won’t ruin a woman for life. I don’t think anyone here would even argue that. (maybe Abbott! Missed you around here!) But there is a HUGE difference between a women that had a few casual experiences along the way, and a woman that spent years jumping from bed to bed with ONS/FWB/Hookups. The first I can totally understand, some people have to try something before they know if its right or not. In those cases, one or two casual encounters seems normal and healthy. But IMO, any woman that “enjoys” casual sex for any length of time is simply too much of a risk. If she likes it so much, how would I ever be able to trust her to NOT like it after she is with me? Will she be craving the kind of exciting sex she had before she “settled down”? Hell, did she “settle down” simply because she couldn’t get any of her manwhores to marry her?! Was I her plan B? (or C, D, E…) Having a relationship is hard enough, I don’t want to be competing with my wife’s past for the rest of my life. Especially when that past wasn’t encumbered with all the extra work that goes into a relationship. I’m sure the jock she screwed her senior year will look WAY more appealing than me when the roof springs a leak, or I get laid off. He didn’t have to deal with everyday shit. All he had to do was lay her like pipe and leave.
tom,
With all due respect, it sounds like you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you say this:
Then this:
So, some women deserve to be discussed in the locker room, but it’s BS to assume that a woman cannot form long-lasting bonds if she’s ridden the carousel?
Question for you: would you be interested in dating a carousel rider who deserves to be talked about in the locker room?
sassy,
you can wriggle all you like- if you retained your virgnity whilst at college, then on the particular measurement of zero partners you ARE in a minority. As I only had one partner at college I too was in a minority for the particular specific measurement of 1 partner.
If you are in a majority on ‘post college’ partner counts that happen to be in a range 1-5 you may well be right- i wasn’t disputing any of that.
Personally I can attest that a string of sexual flings I had later in life were far, far more enjoyable than a safe but dull and suffocating relationship that had outgrown itself. My experiences taught me how good sex could be- beyond my wildest dreams. If you have had 4 partners (I’m guessing) then I suspect you may already be aware of how sex can vary. If someone isn’t that sexual then it may not matter a jot- but if they are then this self- knowledge may well be very important for their long term happiness, particularly if they want a happy and secure marriage with children.
Jess – “Personally I can attest that a string of sexual flings I had later in life were far, far more enjoyable than a safe but dull and suffocating relationship that had outgrown itself. V
I would counter that the sex in your “dull and suffocating” relationship was probably less than stellar because your relationship was “dull and suffocating”. I truly believe you can learn EVERYTHING you need to know about sex from ONE person. As long as you both are dedicated to meeting each others needs and desires in the bedroom (or wherever you are having sex…) there is no reason for the sex to be bad. There is plenty of info available about sex, and as long as both people are willing to experiment there is no reason for “dull” sex.
The flip side to that is: if your relationship sucks, there is a damn good chance sex INSIDE that relationship will suck as well. Sex with my ex-wife was awesome early on, but by the time she decided it was over (because even though I was miserable I was willing to stay because I made the commitment) our sex life was so bad that we both gave up even trying. So obviously it wasn’t that we weren’t good sex partners, we just didn’t care enough about each other to put in the effort.
Ted no way to know if having a lot of sex partners damaged the woman for bonding or if a woman who would have trouble bonding had a lot of sex partners……a liberated type of woman probably will not stay in an unhappy marriage. Ms goody two shoes mary who would never rock the boat..don’t put all the blame on the woman. Some of us treat women like shit and deserve to be left. I still am surprised men still think once a woman has experienced variety she will some how become bored with you and divorce you. BS…there are a lot of reasons people divorce. That’s as much water as me saying goody two shoes leaves you because she never got to know another man sexually and the curiosity is killing her. Does THAT HAPPEN? Sure it does and so does the bored wife situation. But to say it is because she misses variety is probably false.
Isabel is correct. You don’t understand the pressures to jump on the carousel because you aren’t part of my generation. My generation has taken the sexual lib. thing and run with it, and we are shamed if we don’t partake. Dunno if you come around a lot, but SayWhaat is having a hell of a time finding a guy who doesn’t mind that she’s a virgin. That’s preposterous, and probably never would’ve happened in the ’70s.
But in my experience, it’s not pressure from the guys to jump on the carousel, it’s pressure from the girls. Did you not read my comment at the beginning of this post, when I said I’d been shamed by a girl because I was still a virgin? Literally, she told me I “wasn’t as good of a friend” because I didn’t share that common experience of riding the carousel. That only made me want to ride the carousel. Kind of. Watch, anyway.
excess,you are right men can father babies at age 80+
whereas women’s fertility takes a notable hit at 38 (uk nhs graph)
but genetic disease rates do increase the older the man is (uk nhs site)
but yes, overall, mother nature has been kinder to guys on this particular issue.
luckily childbirth doesnt hurt at all so she’s been kind to us there eh?
olive- i was a student in the 80′s!
i was slight and quite pretty- you dont think i had pressure to have sex!
despite my unwashed jeans and jumper i was refusing guys every week. even the friends of my boyfriend tried it on.
i always found it easy to refuse their advances – you dont have to accept drinks or get into taxi cabs or not leave the parties at 11pm.
although i have never been a big drinker or drug user so that probably helped. I accept your point that the pressure is there though.
I am a very sexual person. I simply don’t engage in casual sex. I unleash my sexuality with a man I’m in a relationship with and only him. To say that sexual people need “self-knowledge” is iffy. I don’t see how going out and banging a bunch of dudes or having several flings teaches anyone anything even remotely related to a happy marriage with children. Having a good sex life is important in a marriage, but a woman does not have to ride the carousel to know what is enjoyable for her sexually.
olive
oh and that friend of yours? she sounds like a bit of a dick- sorry about that.
Tom – statistics show that promiscuous people tend to divorce more. There was a link here to a study that showed the chances of a woman divorcing later in life increase as she adds partner count.
Frankly I don’t care WHY a woman divorces a man. What I’m concerned with here is that the numbers don’t lie. And the numbers say women that have had a lot of sexual variety are more likely to divorce. So, when choosing a women to be a wife, it would be VERY wise for men to seek woman with low sexual partner counts.
Does that make sense to you? It makes perfect sense to me.
sassy,
well you may be right- its certainly an opinion I too once held.
Experience did teach me otherwise but that doesnt mean that would be true of all people.
Perhaps you found that the sex always was awesome with your LTRs and you have a very good intuitive self knowledge- thats totally cool.
Some people prefer a bit of experimentation whilst young, and for me, if its safe and in moderation, thats cool too.
I think there is space for both approaches in this world and as with most things they have their pros and cons.
ted,
have you got those stats you mentioned to Tom?
the last set of stats i saw showed only a marginal increase of divorce risk for high number count partners.
J
>> olive- i was a student in the 80′s!
I’ve seen posters who were students in the 90′s claim that their experience was WAY different than the current hook-up culture. A lot can change after 20 years.
Jess,
Alright that’s cool. Happy for you that you got offers. I rarely got offers. That’s the infuriating thing about this discussion… you don’t seem to understand that there are girls who would be really bad for the carousel lifestyle (most of them, IMO), but they try to ride it anyway, egged on by people who say “give it a go! A few flings would be good for you!” People like Hugo, who seem to think that the carousel will affirm for the girls that they need not worry that their worth is based on their number of sexual partners. Maybe Hugo’s goal is for women to realize that they can be worthy of love even if they have high number counts. In fact, he’s encouraging the reverse: girls think they aren’t worthy of love UNLESS they have high number counts. That is a huge friggin’ problem, because not only is it killing girls inside, it’s flat out wrong. You see this from the men: JM said he’s less likely to trust a girl who had been promiscuous in the past. Ted D said this as well.
Ted,
also just saw your earlier post.
looks like we have a small area of agreement then- that a few flings might even be ‘healthy’ (i really do think that actually).
i also get your ‘boredom’ dynamic you mention. I have actually known a few girls that experienced that and its mentioned in a very underrated book by Michelle Langley about female adultery. So you have every right to factor it in BUT in my experience if a women loves a guy and they have kids, thats pretty much it for life, including those that had enjoyable flings earlier in life.
If you married a girl you loved would you drop her like a hot stone if the sex got a bit boring or her breasts weren’t quite as big as that girl from the hilday of 96′? C’mon now.
All relationships have their risks- keep your eyes open sure, but most people are not in it to fleece anyone.
ps i should say that i have for a long time been against the anti-male divorce court bias in the UK and USA.
pps I have seen this bias overstated/exaggerated from time to time, mind you.
Xcess, and anyone else who feels like insulting Sassy’s pic for no good reason,
Please go away, as you are not adding to the discussion. Kthanksbye.
Olive how is that talking out of both sides of my mouth? I do not believe in most cases women can not have the desire to bond fucked out of them unless there are special circumstances. I do think many damaged women become promiscuous and the damage was already there, in most cases…….what that has to do. with “boys” in the locker room I have no clue. You may have misunderstood me.. I was saying some of the women they talked about deserved no respect, not that they deserved to be talked about. My advice to young men is to select a mate very carefully, promiscuous or not. There are a lot of damaged women who are NOT promiscuous just as there are some promiscuous women who are not damaged. I have carefully selected a former promiscuous woman and am engaged. She is successful in business, a great mom, funny, intelligent, confident,sexy,high libido,decent golfer. I’m a lucky guy… I doubt she would have been of football locker room fodder because she was choosey in who she slept with.
@ Xcess
Awwww, aren’t you adorable. This is how many fucks I give about your comment……………….0
I don’t care if you blocked my photo. Do what you want to do.
As for the blonde comment, I have no desire to be blonde. I’m very proud of being African-American and the way I look. Nothing you say is going to change that.
@ Olive
I know right? Thanks Olive. What’s up with some of the people commenting on my photo as of recent? Did I offend someone that I’m not aware of or something? Funny how these same people never post photos of themselves on here. My guess is that they are hardly noteworthy in the looks department.
Jess – I’ll try to dig up the posts here later regarding partner count and divorce rate, its here somewhere.
“If you married a girl you loved would you drop her like a hot stone if the sex got a bit boring or her breasts weren’t quite as big as that girl from the hilday of 96′? C’mon now.”
Of course I wouldn’t. However, if my ability to “love” was diminished by spending years having casual sex, yeah I might. And although I agree that most women do not get married hoping to “fleece” their new husbands, that is exactly what they do when 5-10 years after the wedding they find themselves bored and the “I love you but I’m not IN love with you” comes out. The sad part is, in at least some of these cases, the woman probably only married the guy because she wanted to “settle down”, or wanted her “special day”, or maybe she just wanted some extra financial security, but love probably had very little to do with it at all. I believe those women tend to be the ones that had their “fun” when they were young, and once they realize they can’t get those guys to commit, or that they want to have kids, they stop looking for guys they find attractive and look for guys that can keep them comfortable financially, and then get bored with them and bolt later, taking much of the man’s hard work with her.
Again, I’m not saying all of this is because of casual sex. But if casual sex increases the likelihood of this happening, wouldn’t you steer WAY clear of promiscuous women?
emily,
there was so much sex going on in the 80′s I cannot really see how they could have had more sex. Orgies in your local TESCO maybe?
We had to have a massive uk safe sex campaign cos of the ‘new’ AIDS thing.
Olive,
I hated the attention- still do. It was mostly jerks that tried it on.
Yeah, I guess its annoying if people are bugging you to do things you don’t feel happy with. To be fair, this is the message the uk government is always saying- ‘never feel pestered to do x, y, z’. We have a big TV campaign at the moment on it.
As to wether guys get turned off by something you did or didn’t do you cannot win.
Somee guys dont like chaste girls, some dont like experienced girls.
So you may as well do whatever makes you happy- within reason.
ps please believe me when i say the guys on here do not hold majority opinion. and for heavens sake dont go to the other ‘extreme male’ sites- you will get one twisted take on humanity!.
Most guys put ‘number count’ way down their list of qualities.
They may have their preferences but its not a deal breaker for most.
If you have any male friends why not ask them?
Would they reject their soul mate because she had 11 partners at college etc ? that kinda thing?
@ Xcess
Awwww, aren’t you adorable. This is how many shits I give about your comment –> 0
As for the blonde thing, I have no desire to be blonde. I’m very proud of being African-American and the way I look. Nothing you say is going to change that.
@ Olive
I know right? Thanks Olive.
I agree. When I was a virgin, carousel riders used to tell me that I should definitely sleep with more than one person, as I won’t know what I like until I experience a variety. And I believed them.
Since then, I’ve come to realize that sex takes practice, and that two people have to really care about each other and be interested in pleasing each other to make it work. I mean yeah, the first few times I had sex it was miserable and awkward, but it didn’t set the tone for the rest of my sex life.
I’m probably not a good judge of this since I’ve only had sex with one person, but it seems like the “sexual incompatibility” junk is a story people tell girls to scare them away from sticking with one partner, or waiting til marriage/engagement. It might also be a story carousel riders tell each other to make themselves feel better about riding the carousel. I could be totally wrong about that though.
Xcess – I’m not sure what you are attempting to do by picking on someone’s avatar picture, but other than showing your maturity (or lack thereof) it doesn’t help your cause.
I for one think Sassy appears attractive. I can’t say if she is “hot or not” as the picture is small and only a portrait. But I can say that based on that picture and what I know of her from her posts here, I think she is a very attractive young woman and I believe the difficulty she and other young women here are having finding a relationship are perfect examples of how screwed up things are in the SMP.
To each their own. Its cool you found a way to block it. I’m sure everyone here would miss your witty posts and deep intellect here. *rolls eyes*
Xcess,
i dont know if you were joking- but your ‘sassy’ comment appears completely unacceptable.
Susan- forgive me, I may have misread things, but perhaps his post should be deleted?
@ Xcess (re: your comments about Sassy)
Dude, is that really necessary???? (Although I should probably know better than to feed the troll…)
Jess,
My BF actually told me he’s glad I never had sex with anyone else so he could have me all to himself. He’s a pretty laid back guy and I can’t picture him reading any MRA sites and agreeing with their positions, but it seems that he, too, prefers a woman with a low number count. He was a virgin too, so that’s significant. And also something I was happy with when we first started dating.
But maybe I’ll take a poll of brother’s friends during Xmas break lol. On second thought, they might think I’m trying to hit on them, so maybe not.
Olive—
I don’t think most of them are ashamed of it exactly. They have feminist memes in their heads to insulate themselves from that, but some are defensive, yeah. They know good girls like you won’t like and may try to shame high numbers. What’s mostly going on is they know there’s a good chance that highish numbers being generally known about them will disqualify them for LTR seeking guys, and they usually want that with a hot enough guy, kidding themselves on what level will commit to them. So most girls with high numbers lie their numbers down or avoid talking about it or are indignant about being asked about it. I think girls tend to lie numbers down even in their own heads. E.g. they don’t count lousy ONS sex, they don’t count oral as others have said, they forget about ONS’s easily and maybe kinda on purpose and don’t count them, they don’t count “was never gonna go anywhere and no one will know” vacation sex, and so on.
Jess “Most guys put ‘number count’ way down their list of qualities.
They may have their preferences but its not a deal breaker for most.
If you have any male friends why not ask them?
Would they reject their soul mate because she had 11 partners at college etc ? that kinda thing?”
Well, I WILL tell you that any woman that told me she had a high partner count wouldn’t make it that far. “soul mate” is a term I used to believe in, but it comes with so much baggage that I cannot put faith in it. Soul Mate implies that there is only one person in the world that is perfect for you. As much as I believed it in my youth, I know beyond all doubt that it is untrue.
So, no I wouldn’t leave my “soul mate” because she used to be a slut. I would stop dating a woman because she used to be a slut, WAY before it got that serious.
Of the men I know (who are admittedly in their 30′s and later) partner count does indeed matter. It is right up there with how many failed relationships/divorces they’ve had as well. I won’t say it is primary focus, but I would say that it is top 5 in all cases, and I know of at least one other guy in my circle that has walked away from women because of their promiscuous past.
It isn’t the number so much as how they got the number, however. For me, a woman with 10 past sexual partners with only 2 or 3 being casual and the rest being LTRs is acceptable where a woman with say 6 but all or most were casual is not. Its the mentality of casual sex that I find repulsive. I value my body and my sexuality too much to waste it on someone that doesn’t value it at all.
@ Xcess
Uh huh (Yawn).
To all those who are coming to my defense, thank you. I really do appreciate it. I’m starting to get the feeling that comments like these are more about my race than my looks. The best way to insult me, they think, is to try to insult how I look instead of saying, “I don’t like black people” or “I don’t find black women attractive, as a whole”. I’d much rather they be upfront about that than to take a jab at my appearance instead.
I make it a point not to play the “race card”, but I’m starting to think it’s accurate in this sense.
olive,
its true that mutual discovery in a LTR is a wonderful and erotic thing.
but honestly, sexual compatibility HAS to be there to some degree.
Just because you didn’t experience a problem it doesnt mean others haven’t.
Some of my lesbian friends said they didn’t even know for sure they were gay till they kissed their 1st girl in their 20s.
i know of several women who married very young as virgins and found themselves completely sexually incompatible with their husbands- one of which was impotent. He has specifically sought her out because of this issue. As they were catholic she had the marriage annulled but nonetheless not a good situation.
There is an old saying of ‘try before you buy’- it may not be appropriate for all, but I would wager its wise advice for most.
“My BF actually told me he’s glad I never had sex with anyone else so he could have me all to himself. ”
Cosign. I’m not that hard core about it, but I have to say there is something unsettling about knowing a bunch of other men have “enjoyed” your GF/Wife. I’m good with it if it was LTR based, but if it was casual it just feels dirty. Here I am looking at a woman I love, that I think is a wonderful person with so many great qualities, and out there are a bunch of guys that think she was a great piece of ass. Unattractive on SO many levels!
sassy,
yeah i got the race vibe too- i would like to think i was mistaken.
my SO & I both think you are very pretty btw.
Meh, race issue or just an asshat. I don’t care either way, it still says a lot about his character. And what it says isn’t good…
Wrong.
http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/resources/FAQ.html#Age
I don’t know if anyone else has posted this (haven’t finished reading yet), but your interpretation of the statistics is inaccurate.
Ted having sex with several people doesn’t have to limit your ability to love deeply. It might, the already damaged perso,n but for a healthy minded person I just can’t fathom it. That’s like saying too much mastujrbating will make you go blind.
Olive every generation thinks they invented sex..my mother told me it wasn’t called the roaring twenties for nothing..lol. I was in college in the hippy era.you knowthe “love the one you’re with” orgies. Free love..we had as much sex as any generation, the numbers show that..that generation hasn’t fared well but I don’t believe it was the sex. The war was stopped by our protesting (something this generation is clueless about being the sheeple they are) technology was just taking hold and we werfe one of the first spoiled generations. Not near as bad as this one however.
Xcess—
It’s not just ability to conceive that goes down fairly rapidly after 30 and very rapidly after 35, especially for first births, these also a much greater risk of significant birth defects like Down’s syndrome as women’s fertility declines. Women should aim to have their first kid in their late 20’s.
To me the following life pattern makes a lot of sense for college women. Graduate from college, find a non advanced degree job in a big city, look to have a LTR not necessarily for marriage yet but bear that in mind, another ltr more hoping it’s gonna turn into marriage, be seriously looking for a husband by 24, aim to get married between then and 26-7, pop out the first kid right away, then a year or so later get preggers again, stay home until youngest is in nursery school or kindergraden, then perhaps a period of a part time job, then when the kids are staying longer in school get an MA in a good jobs prospect field that interests her, then go into that field. Voila.
@ Malia
How is what I said incorrect? I was referencing the quote Susan made early on in the post below.
Ted D—
Agree. I’d never marry or for that matter let myself fall in love with a high numbers girl. I don’t tell them that however.
tom,
That’s cool about your SO, it sounds like you trust her so more power to you. You’re right, I did sort of misunderstand what you said above, so I apologize. I still don’t know that most men would be down with dating/marrying a former carousel rider, but Jess has proposed that the views of men around here aren’t the same as men in real life. Like I said, will have to poll my brother’s friends during Xmas, he has about 9 guys who regularly come to the house.
It’s not about your race. Bellita is brown though I don’t know what ethnicity she is.
It’s because you constantly go on about “being attractive” and when you write about yourself you do write as though it’s an advertisement or at best, marketing copywriting.
—–
As to how you are wrong, you were a virgin until graduation, I just showed the stat that you are not in the majority by a long shot. Secondly, knowing that >90% of women report 0-5 partners, does not tell you the distribution of those numbers. Even without data, once could simply use a bell curve and deduce that the majority would be in the middle 2-4. There’s no way reasonable for you to deduce you were in the majority, when you were clearly at zero.
It’s not even a logical assumption based on the limited data you DID have.
I’m not even on Jess’ side with the entire argument, I just don’t know why people like to constantly twist numbers to make themselves seem more common when they aren’t (and this goes for both sides).
jess- outlier
sassy- outlier
Xcess–
I agree that your post at 230 to sassy is pretty personal and offensive. People are attracted to different things. Girls hate that sort of thing and this is supposed to be a girl friendly place.
Interesting stuff. Sassy, I’d be interested in your take on this, since you’re not a casual sex girl, but I believe you’ve had more than 1 partner?
Now THAT is a sucky situation. A good reason to not wait til marriage (I used to be on that bandwagon but I jumped off it a couple years ago).
Ted so what if there are guys who think my lady was a great piece of ass..She is. It was before she knew me, loved me, accepted me. Sex is VERY SPECIAL between us because we both know we have had others, could get others but we both choose to keep the sex special just for each other. I am secure in knowing that she loves me and has all the qualities I want in a woman. Any idea why it would bother you so much…btw I would be more wary of a woman who has had 8 relationships..might mean she isn’t good at them.
Jess–
A little bit, as men age past their 40′s and 50′s. Not nearly as much as women aging through their thirties increase it though.
Husband ten years older than wife works in lots of ways. Well 7-10.
Tom–
Your an alpha and married a promiscuous single mother??
Ooh, I am going to correct myself. That post says that 37.2 have 0 sexual partners and another 54.1% are 0-5 so THAT is clearly the majority. Although we don’t know the distribution within 1-5, we most definitely know it at 0.
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/04/28/hookinguprealities/whos-really-having-sex-in-college/
— correction again— another 54.1% are 0-5 so—
another 54.1% are 1-5 so
I just need to stop typing
Sassy–
ONE study probably of college freshmen girls (easy to survey in large groups in large into to psych or sociology classes) midway through that year, SAY that’s how many men they’ve slept with in their life. I think that’s a cherry picked study and frankly can’t believe the true numbers are anything like that upon graduation. There’s far too much, vastly much, anecdotal evidence to the contrary.
Yup sexual non compatability is not a myth. Lots of cases where long time partners have split up only to find a whole nother sexual world out there with another person
@ Susan
You can’t really think that—it’s just a few of the guys.
In any case, here’s a link to my limited defense–and critique–of your efforts:
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/committed-to-the-trail/#comment-25383
@ Malia
I have said from the beginning that I was in the majority percentile of that stat based on the range (0-5, note how the zero is included in that range). I never said virgins were the majority at college, not even once. I only said the majority of women have 0-5 partners in college, which includes me. I don’t understand what’s confusing about that.
Notice how the 37.2% in addition to the 54.1% equals 91.3%? That’s the stat I’ve been talking about. 91% of college girls claim, in that study, that they have had 0-5 sexual partners.
I also haven’t been going on and on about my looks in this thread. I have mentioned it from time to time in other threads, but not ad nausea and not in this thread.
Yes doug I did. We actually met as a one nighter. There was something different about her. We kept seeing eachother and after a few months fell in love…her kid is a non issue.. he is a gfrat kid and a very good athlete..we relate well
Oh I get it. It’s not that. YOUR situation was clearly broken out- 0 partners at 37.2%, yet you continued to lump it in with others to say “the majority of women are like me”.
No, they are not.
Even if you add the 0 stat to the 1-5 stat, that still does not mean the majority of women are LIKE YOU. 5 is way different than 0, wouldn’t you agree?
THAT is what I’m talking about. Trying to broaden the range of how something is defined to make your group seem more common.
It’s no different than Jess talking about 70 something % of women enjoy casual sex. NOTHING in the data points to that. You BOTH are drawing broad boundaries, and merging groups and fuddling numbers to avoid the truth that your collegiate behavior and her post collegiate behavior makes BOTH of you OUTLIERS.
Malia,
At the risk of pissing you off, I’m going to respond to these comments, because IMO they were uncalled for.
We have this habit, at least in the U.S., of throwing all people belonging to racial minorities in the same category. In reality, the experiences of an Asian, for example, might be very different from the experiences of an African American, and there are different stereotypes for each. It’s true that Bellita doesn’t discuss her SMV, but it’s not fair to throw her and Sassy into the same category in terms of racial minority status.
And that’s rather catty. Hardly anyone around here complains about Sassy discussing her own SMV, which, for the purposes of her situation in the SMP, is completely relevant to some of the points she makes. Often, she just wants to make it clear that the SMP is really rough for a pretty girl who gets approached by many guys, because the guys often approach her just for casual sex purposes (the most shocking one was when she got asked to have a threesome with a dude and his gf?? That would never happen to me!).
I’m probably a 6 and I take no issue with Sassy discussing her SMV. I think it’s relevant, and I don’t think it sounds like she’s advertising herself.
P.S. Anna described herself as a 9 in the forum and no one gave her shit about it. She’s blonde. My guess is if people couldn’t see Sassy’s pic, they would take what she says at face value. So I, too, think Xcess’s comments were racist in nature.
Jess—
US state levels of child support=also stealth alimony particularly for high earning men in high tax states appear to be 50% or somewhat more than that higher than British levels.
Also I really think alimony is hard to justify in this day and age, certainly for more than say 3 years is she wasn’t working and isn’t getting child support=also stealth alimony. I say that really as a compromise. I can’t really see why any alimony is necessary.
First, I brought up Bellita because she is clearly not white and she also has her photo in her avatar and no one has made a remark like that about her looks.
Secondly, no one has COMPLAINED about Sassy, but it’s not the first time a commenter has taken a dig at her writing about herself in such a way.
We don’t agree, but that doesn’t make me wrong.
Actually, it’s not because Sassy’s discussion of her SMV is her OWN evaluation of her SMV.
Doug not married yet but engaged
@ Olive
I have a different take on things than Jess does. I agree in the importance of sexual compatibility, but we disagree on how to go about finding a compatible partner.
I fully support a man and a woman exploring each other sexually while in a relationship. I don’t understand the desire to explore a person sexually that you barely know or aren’t in a relationship with. A lot of the potential for a woman to be satisfied during sex stems from the overall trust and security she feels for a man. A part of the love making process for a woman involves letting down her mental guards enough to relax and enjoy the experience to the fullest extent. It explains a lot why most women report not having orgasms during ONS. There is very little trust and security in those situations, so they can’t relax enough to achieve orgasm.
It’s like expecting to get a good night sleep when you know a tiger is sleeping in the same bed with you. The on edge instinct humans have when they aren’t in a completely safe environment is natural. Whether women are willing to admit it or not, having sex with a stranger or random person subconsciously triggers that instinct. Your body and mind can’t fully relax when the hindbrain signals danger.
according to the student beans.com 2011 survey of 2200 students across the uk:
54% have used the morning after pill
61% have had 5+ partners at college
the average number of partners across the country was 6.
the brits count fingering/oral/anal activity as sex unlike the americans
i suspect this is a more accurate picture
Bellita I believe said she was from the Philippines. Been there. They vary a good bit in hue.
Wow..all I can say is wow. Xass is a moron. Sassy I like your attitude
I’m citing a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice. That’s a hell of a lot more credible than your source.
FWIW, the UK sounds like some sort of casual sex horror show. I believe our SMP is quite different, though has trended generally in the same direction.
@ Malia
The original intent of Susan citing that stat was to show men here (and Jess) that most women are not extremely sexually promiscuous in college or enjoying it. Lots of men are under the assumption that most to all college women are slutting it up big time in college, when that isn’t the case in the study. In comparison to the percentage of women who had more than 5 sexual partners in college (9%), the less promiscuous percentage of women (91%) was by far the majority.
I referred to this fake lie detector study to determine whether and how much women lie down their number of sex partners, yesterday I believe it was. It’s relevant to today’s discussion.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3936-fake-liedetector-reveals-womens-sex-lies.html
Susan said she thought the numbers only went from 3.5 to 4 or thereabout. Doubling is big.
I simply do not believe that only 9% of women have had more than five lifetime sex partners by the time the graduate college, what with the CDC saying that 75% of women have contracted the HPV virus by then, usually harmlessly, but from sex.
And that’s rather catty.
Pot… kettle. Do you even read how you write about other women? That was way tame compared to what you write.
“75% of women have contracted the HPV virus by then, usually harmlessly, but from sex.”
Maybe they all fucked the same janitor.
@Doug1
This was by Mary Eberstadt at the Hoover Institution. Unfortunately, I got a 404 on the link.
I’ve seen this elsewhere too but don’t have time to hunt for more links right now.
@Zach
When I say dating is dead, I generally am referring to college. I’m encouraged to hear you say it gets more common afterwards, though. I do hear a lot about online dating, and it’s interesting. Some of the guys want to go on one date and then prefer to move to “meeting up” and group “hangs” even when they like the girl. Others stay with more formal dating.
@Sassy 280
My point still remains and is still validated by data.
Having said that… (i.e. moving on to another point)
As much as I hate to agree with Jess and Doug, that particular study had too small a sample size to be consistently used for data points, and when compared to other data (actual real studies) it doesn’t seem as reliable of an indicator of how the numbers actually pan out.
That doesn’t mean that it’s not an indicator of behaviors, just that those numbers cannot be used in an absolute sense. I.e. those numbers do indicate that most women are not having lots of casual sex PARTNERS in college, but that doesn’t mean that their actual numbers can be taken as statistically valid fact.
And data coming from campus health centers, etc, is most definitely going to trump that data.
@Doug1
I don’t know why this makes me happy, but it does.
Yeah but actually I think it might be the same commenter. I remember comments of a similar nature awhile ago, and they were along the same lines, written by a dude. Some guy used the word “butterface.” Even if they were different commenters, the comments were written by men, were offensive in the same way, and were low blows and didn’t contribute to the discussion. In any case, who the hell can actually see Sassy’s face in her thumbnail picture? I can’t.
Right, but do you think people would take digs at Bellita for discussing her SMV? I can’t picture that. Besides, no one took digs at Anna for discussing her SMV.
She evaluates her SMV based on the attention she gets from guys. Guys don’t stare at me in the street, so I’m pretty sure I’m not an 8. In any case, I don’t know why you’re taking digs at her for it. Just the other day you had some comment about women being down on other women around here, and how you thought it had to do with intra-sexual competition. IDK, after that comment this seems especially ironic. This is the first time I’ve seen a woman weigh in negatively on Sassy’s evaluation of her own SMV.
@Doug1
For the record, I deplore the 50.1% standard of proof.
What feminist advocates funded a govt study? That’s hard to credit.
Susan Walsh–
Was that the same department of Justice commissioned but not conducted study (conducted by feminist advocates) which “found” that one in 4.5 college women have been raped by the time they graduated, all by far most of those being classified as sexually assaulted or raped didn’t see it that way themselves?? It egregiously used the rad feminist currently being pushed for definition of rape to one including tipsy consensual sex she regrets in the morning. The
advocacy piecestudy also did wretchedly bad sampling that was full of selection bias, it was online by invitation at a number of colleges and got only low percentage response rates from the colleges they survey. Utter garbage and mere propaganda in other words.But it this piece of garbage was sited by the Department of Education’s civil rights side as a major reason for their infamous April 14 letter to all US colleges that if they wanted to keep on getting any federal money, they’d better under Title IX lower the level of proof for date rape and sexual assault in campus disciplinary hearings (with expulsion being the ultimate sanction) to 50.1% more likely it did rather than didn’t.
Crimey, girl makes an accusation now at college for any reason (and there are a lot of false rape claims), guys likely to be toast since there’s a tendency to believe her in this atmosphere at least a little more than him in a he said she said. If sex did happen, and he can’t prove he was elsewhere at the time, finished. Turns American justice on it’s head in a feminist misandrous hysteria about non existing levels of rape on campus.
Still not a reliable indicator.
You know, I really don’t care how she evaluates her SMV. I did notice the “I’m attractive and…” and “I’m attractive, but…” and maybe literally a day or two before the first person went in on her, I remarked (offline) to Jhane Sez that I wondered how long it would be before someone started taking shots.
I honestly do not feel that the shots taken are because she’s black, but rather because she can be a bit obnoxious about the whole thing. So THAT is why I don’t think it’s about race.
And that’s JMO. You guys see it another way, it’s all good.
Susan–
Other way around. In the study I talked about just above Justice funded them.
I don’t know why I failed to notice this before.
He doesn’t have a problem with my facial features. He has a problem with the fact that I don’t have blond hair or blue eyes. That must be the epitome of attractiveness to him.
Does anyone have a spare blonde wig lying around and an extra pair of blue colored contacts? I will look like a Frankenstein Beyonce with that crap, but I aim to please (barf).
Neely is stating honest, consequential realities while Hugo is merely trying to justify his irresponsible and ill-informed choices. Hugo touches on some of the consequences of his own actions but doesn’t skip a beat in glossing over them with further justifications as follows:
“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.”
So, causing other people unnecessary pain is a small price to pay for pure, selfish indulgence? Hey, you might learn something! That women actually have *hearts*! And ‘Lo! And behold!’ they *don’t* want a man to treat them like a used condom! That is some groundbreaking stuff right there! No man could *ever* be expected to know such a deep and profound truth without years of experience in indulging their selfish whims and desires! Ok, I’ll quit the irony now.
Feminism, like so many other movements had noble intentions but was misguided and the proof is now in the pudding. The fact is, men and women are slightly different in every way and always will be (a fact any child knows without having to think about it for a second). However, they are nowhere near as different as many would have us believe who wish to disavow any real responsibility toward the opposite sex. Any horrible behavior can be so easily brushed aside by, “You just can’t understand me, just as I can never really understand you.”
A year or so back, a Duke student published her sexual activities, including grading her partners.
What is interesting is not merely that the guys treated her like dirt–they were pigs–but that they expected to. They expected to be able to treat a woman like dirt and have nothing to pay for it. In other words, either she’ll be back for more, or there is a more than sufficient supply of women will be just as willing.
How did the pig-men learn this?
Experience is my guess. Plenty of women willing to be treated like dirt by guys known to treat women like dirt, which, after a while, seems like a pretty convenient situation for the guys.
What would one of these women do if they met a really good guy?
I”d be interested–come to think of it, not really–how many of the NSA/ONS incidents were similar. What percentage, I guess, would be interesting. If it’s high enough, it’s training a certain class of guy that he can be a pig and still do just fine.
Tom – masterbating may not make you blind, but there is some indication that too kuch porn + jerking off CAN greatly decrease a man’s ability to get off with his mate.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence. Seems like the flip side of the casual sex is bad for women issue to me.
Malia–
I don’t think whites tend to be very good at judging the attractiveness of black women to black men, except at the extremes. Whites can tell that Haley Barry and Thandy Newton are real attractive, and that Oprah isn’t, but in between?
Susan–
Not really it didn’t. He said he wanted full sex. It was more his self flagellation at the alter of feminist women I think. Proving himself a “good man”.
Yeah, because I always specifically take digs at people for discussing their looks around here. ::rolls eyes:: Actually I happen to like most of the women commenters here. I like Jess even though I don’t agree with her, I appreciate her tone. I like Sassy too, and I haven’t always agreed with her either.
And yeah I know your post the other day about female intra-sexual competition was aimed at me. I don’t get what your beef is with me, to be honest, but you could’ve just said you had a problem with me, instead of sneaking it in. I know I’m not perfect, and I’ve done a lot of introspection since coming to HUS. My goal here is to be honest about myself and to learn. I bring baggage, including a long history of being excluded and antagonized by girls and women. You probably bring baggage too. It’s not my business to try to analyze that, or to call you out on it, and if you feel that I have done so in any way, I apologize. But I do think you specifically took digs at Sassy in this case, and it’s honorable of Sassy to ignore it. But in light of your comment about taking digs at women, I thought it only fair to call you out. If you have anything else you wanted to say, I’d appreciate it if you e-mail me, not post little comments that you think I might not read. My e-mail is on my blog.
All the spinster lit memorists, including your own Hepzibah Anderson, who wrote Chastened.
@Everyone
Uncle Tom here. You will recall in our last discussion that I was suggesting to you that the Boomers are largely responsible for conflating “women deserve equal rights with men” into “women and men are the same”. Before I explore that, let’s pause and reflect; actually, lets decide what we agree on. Do we agree that hook up sex is, on balance, a good deal for the guy, not such a good deal for the gal? Do we agree that treating sex as sneezing, something that comes on somewhat uncontrollably, provides a brief instant of intensity in elimination, followed by satiation,unconnected to anything else, satisfies practically every major need the male has and almost none of the females’? Because if that’s wrong, if chicks are just like guys and want and need the same things in the same way at the same time, then well hell go at it, recreate something akin to the gay community mid-70s/early 80s, anonymous couples having at it in the parking lot or similar, returning to club or similar, thence back with someone else, on and on until some vagrant mutant variant of an obscure strain of DNA issues forth to kill millions but, failing that, you can continue off in to the (black and) blue horizon.
Excuse that digression. But if we have an issue, and we have to for me to have a point, then we need to start from some basic premises. My basic premise is that the anwer to both of those questions is yes. If you don’t agree, stop reading; there is nothing here for you. I especially mean certain of you manosphere types; you know who you are. You are tiresome; if you wrote well, you’d at least be provocative, but you don’t, and aren’t. Your writing is turgid, flabby. Your thinking is at least marginally clear, but what you think is horseshit. You’d have a better time puffing each other up, indulging in the fantasy that you have something approaching rapier wit (you don’t), that you display it with laser-like precision (you can’t), to a group of equally talented raconteurs (they aren’t, you aren’t).
So go to it.
If we do agree that women and men aren’t the same, and that at least some part of the current malaise is attributable to a failure to recognize the same, some of you may ask:where did that idea come from? In an earlier post I laid out the initial background which Susan rightly noted was called “gender equity” i e the idea of equal pay for equal work. Now, you have to recall that the template for the women’s movement, as for practically all movements post WWII , was the black civil rights struggle. In that very time, or not too long before, there had been a big set to over “separate but equal”. The idea was we’ll give blacks equal facilities, education, etc. but separate ones. Total crap. Supreme Court weighed in that separate was inherently unequal and that was that. If you adjust the dial just a tad, you can see how separate can be replaced with “different”. Different is inherently unequal. If women are entitled to the same rights i e are not to be treated differently, shouldn’t we also see them as the same as men?
I think somewhere in there there is an analogy to the green monkey virus that made the jump to AIDS. It percolated in women’s studies programs (I’ll study you; bend over-SEXIST!) where makeup-less humorless unironic hairy-legged women’s field hockey/softball type bowl-haircuts lipless colorless odorless non-caloric pigment free massively-upper-armed chunky black-or-rimless-glasses-wearing butt-hair-thicker-than-a-shelter-collie theoretically-arch-interpersonally-acidic more-butch-than-the-Dallas-Cowboys bull-dykes (I could have just said bull-dykes but I decided to be peremptory) who busy themselves concocting hot-house flower nonsense which they know will never last 2 blocks away from the campus upon which the barricade themselves against a world which supports, but has no use for, them, they being content to snear at the same while they await tenure so they can really take the lid off their smoke-tossing self-reflective nowhere navel-gazing bombastic claptrap.
Like I said, I don’t think the idea was explicit. I think if you said to one of the above “Are women and men the same?” she’d have said “no” inwardly thinking “women have pussies, and, like potato chips, I’m not going to eat just one or 2″. It germinated though, the logical conclusion to a whole series of thought-exercises, nudged along by the laplickers, and the damn thing broke out, carried off campus by innocent young women who maybe took a class or 2 (DANGEROUS: every lesbian believes that a straight woman is just 3 drinks away from a gay “fling” if not more; title of my next article) and, as they approached the job market, took this germ with them.
I saw the first wave I still remember this weird outfit they wore: converted a men’s jacket to a woman’s, white blouse, some sort of red neck thing that resembled a tie, dark blue Puritan-style pleated skirt-it was sort of like taking the man’s blue suit, white shirt, regimental tie and having Ben & Jerry make an ice cream out of it. Harrison Ford described it best: “What a woman thinks a man would wear if he was a woman.” These be the Boomers, and I think that germ was in there too. And now we’re stuck with it.
Class is over. Leave your papers on my desk. Ladies, be sure to take advantage of Prof. Munson’s specila private tutorials.
We have a whole new set of male commenters who get to learn how annoying it is to try and debate Jess
@doug
Not sure what your point is but it should be painfully obvious that sassy doesn’t date black men exclusively.
I’m not surprised, I’ve heard this before, but it’s still chilling.
Olive, I thought it was funny that Rivelino was perturbed by our not wanting hours of thrusting, lol. I’ve been known to glance at the clock and exclaim that Lost was coming on soon.
Mark,
you can email me at walsh.susan1@gmail.com or use the form on the Contact page.
« 1 2 3 4 … 8 »
{ 5 trackbacks }