Forget male rape survivors! Ignore the bullying of teen boys! Pay no attention to the marginalization of fathers! Today, NSWATM will discuss the single most important issue facing men of all classes, colors, and creeds: the inability of straight white middle-class men to get laid.
Too long have the slut-feminists and their mangina lapdogs hidden the truth of female sexuality! The feminists know that the true source of their power is their pussies. Without the Holy Grail of a vagina, what man would pay attention to the sack of meat surrounding it? Even the wimpiest white knight, “this is what a feminist looks like” shirt stretched over his jiggling fat, would turn MRA instantly if not promised a short-haired feminist chick on a bender.
The feminist-industrial complex has lied to us about the true nature of female sexuality by saying that women really want emotional connection with nice men who bring them roses. In fact, women are fucking men they met an hour ago in the bathrooms of dive bars; they spread their legs on the uncomfortable futon of an unemployed DJ. Meanwhile, an intelligent man with a good IT job, who would treat her like a queen and be a good provider for her children, is lucky to get a kiss on the cheek or be treated as a waddling plain jane’s emotional tampon.
This is the dark face of female sexuality: hypergamy. Their love juices flow freely for an alpha male, which is to say, for an asshole. If a man treats them like shit, their biomechanical imperative says, he must have dozens of women after him– how else could he treat one of them so awfully? They crave his come, especially during ovulation, so they too can have sexy sons. They tingle for a man with options. Their rationalization hamsters justify that it is just the once– or they’re empowered– or they’re SURE this one will commit!
Beware, nice guys! Even when you marry a “quality woman” who says she’s not a slut, after you drop her home from your romantic stargazing proposal with a ten thousand dollar ring, an alpha male will be fucking her without a condom and jizzing all over her face. So sure that that kid’s yours?
Some say that the only solution is for all men to learn Game– that is, to learn how to imitate the characteristic douchebaggery confidence of a man with options. His prideful stand, his masculine air, his piercing gaze: most men, with six months work, could learn to imitate these traits and, while they may not achieve the rampaging manliness of a true alpha male, could experience a pussy fountain like they had never imagined before, and the concomitant bliss. However, female hypergamy is a fickle mistress: once all men are players, the best at Game will still reap the benefits of multiple loving long-term relationships with beautiful women, while the only sex those inferior would get is a divorce raping up the ass.
Others argue that the solution is a return to patriarchy. Perhaps that is better: at least in that system every man gets a wife guaranteed to not be a slut, to look up to him, to obey him, and to marry while still young and fuckable. The male desire for polygamy can be dealt with by confining the sluttiest sluts (that is, anyone with The Pervocracy in their feed reader)to Houses of Entertainment where they may entertain men the only way that anyone cares about.
However, that dreams too low. After all, the necessity of being a “provider” to dependent women and children is too hard a burden on men.
I propose pussy communism. All women between the ages of fourteen and thirty (when they become unfuckable) will be available to all men, on demand, whenever they like. Once they hit The Wall and have their pussies stretched out by too many cocks, women will be assigned to clean homes, raise children, and make sandwiches for whatever drooling lesser omega wanking it to anime porn will have them.
Some may argue that this plan violates core principles of our democracy. Admittedly, going against capitalism and competition hurts me deep within my soul. However, capitalism only applies to men, ruthless and competitive, not the silly women. Besides, women already give their pussies to the undeserving: what difference does it make for them to fuck a weirdo nerdboy DM than a black thug with a sixteen inch cock?
I believe after some examination everyone will agree this is the only way.
Wow! First time I’ve seen this site. I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately about how feminism often presents as an authoritarian female domination movement that uses social pressure to force behavioral compliance, rather than the equality movement that it often bills itself as, and how I choose to accept or interact with self-identifying feminists who attempt to use that social pressure on me, possibly without being consciously aware of what they’re doing (in fact, I recently lost a friend this way, not that we were actually very close). Anyway. From my personal experience with depression and dating woes,… Read more »
dancinbojangles, If posters that regularly complain about their own social anxiety and the rejection they/other het men face being the initiators expressed an understanding that its possible the person on the receiving end do as well, I’d agree with you. If I hadn’t made suggestions to flyingkal that have helped me in similar situations, I’d agree with you. If I hadn’t suggested some books that go deeper than PUA “solutions” (who AFAIC exploit men with mental health issues), then I’d agree with you. I’ve gone beyond acknowledging the pain and negativity het men face without trying to “one-up” or “win”… Read more »
@Colette Wedding: Get yourself some self-awareness, you’re doing the exact same thing. That was Gaius’ point. “not[ing] the importance of remembering the other person” could just as easily be applied to daelyte’s posts. Either way though, time to disengage, don’t you think?
“Not quite, cohabitating men do spend more on travel not transportation. In fact, single men spend more on their cars than married men.” So then my original point still stands, and it makes sense that single men spend more on transportation than married men. “I don’t understand this. I’m not sure we’re even talking about the same thing. I was talking about your friend who thinks “she must be passive or be a slut and get laughed at”, and wondering how many men vs women think this way, because I surely don’t” You don’t understand it because you refused to… Read more »
@gaius, I think you deserve a slow clap for that.
clap
clap
clap
@Gaius:
I was trying to write a long, clever reply to your post but could only come up with one word.
Yes.
@Colette, Daelyte: Um, I know it’s not my place to comment, and I have no authority to intervene in any sense, but it almost seems like (SEEMS LIKE) you’re playing Oppression Olympics. Could it be possible that, statistics aside, both men AND women are shafted by the dating game as it exists in our culture, and that the trying to assess how BADLY either group is shafted is kind’ve ignoring the fundamental problem of men AND women being shafted by double-standards and inegalitarian starting conditions? I only mention this because I find myself agreeing with BOTH parties, and not on… Read more »
@Colette Wedding: Concerning the Success Object thing: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-28/news/30211835_1_match-com-patti-stanger-pamela-j-smock http://blog.match.com/2012/02/02/introducing-the-singles-in-america-study-by-match-com/ http://blog.match.com/2012/02/10/money-cant-buy-love-singles-on-the-economy-by-dr-helen-fisher/ http://www.city-data.com/forum/relationships/1419943-how-do-unemployed-men-get-women-3.html This seems to be where I got that 80%… but the original article is in spanish: http://www.pagef30.com/2011/01/survey-68-of-men-would-date-unemployed.html “In other words this entire time “travel” should have been “transportation”? Thus cohabitating men spend more on *transportation* than single men whereas that isn’t true for single versus cohabitating women, correct? I’ve lost the original link at this point but I’m going off of what you said.” Not quite, cohabitating men do spend more on travel not transportation. In fact, single men spend more on their cars than married men. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607265,00.html http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/inkomen-bestedingen/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2009/2009-2993-wm.htm… Read more »
@Gaius :
That said: a lot of PUAs I’ve met seem to hold a “feminists are uptight, ball-busting [insert gendered insult of your choice]” and view their behavior as a way of “sticking it to the [woman].”
Lots of these guys blame on feminism all the problems they have with women and they become PUAs to get their revenge on women. And becoming PUAs doesn’t solve their problems with women or their problems of depression and loneliness, so they just become angrier.
Daelyte, “It doesn’t, but it narrows the dating pool for some men, and shows to what extent men and women’s impression of normal dating dynamics is still gendered.” Except your example came from dating site statistics. “I’m sorry, I was confusing travel with transportation. A single man without a car is widely perceived to be a “loser”, whereas a single woman isn’t under as much pressure to spend on expensive personal transportation. Car-related expenses take a big chunk out of single men’s budget.” In other words this entire time “travel” should have been “transportation”? Thus cohabitating men spend more on… Read more »
@jpsord: I’m kind of shocked that you’ve never met a man who thinks women initiating sex with a man is a slut. I’ve met such men, but I can’t say I’ve ever done more than that. I try to avoid them as much as possible and exclude them from my social life. @Daelyte: Most PUAs I’ve met have been reactionary in the sense that they view their behavior as a kind of fuck-you to what they perceive as feminism. Granted: what they perceive as feminism may NOT, in fact, be feminist. For instance, owing to Ozy’s law, I’m of the… Read more »
@jpsord: I’d say that the majority of the people I grew up with – male and female both – thought women who pursued sex were sluts and were bad people. If you want, I can try to remember the dates that I met all of these different people, but it’s gonna be mostly estimates from the 1990s! The real world consequences of a woman getting identified as a slut in the community I’m talking about consist mostly of losing respect and social status. People can be meaner to sluts, and the pool of men willing to actually date women who… Read more »
@Gaius:
Look up reactionary.
1. Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative.
2. An opponent of progress or liberalism; an extreme conservative.
3. Opposed to change; urging a return to a previous state. Very conservative.
4. Opposed to change, progress, or reform; extremely conservative.
If it’s not what you meant, you may want to rephrase that.
@Daelyte:
Like I said, it’s my gut reaction. I have no facts or evidence to back it up, nor is it necessarily even valid as a hypothesis.
That said, I didn’t say they were conservative; I said they seemed childish and reactionary. =)
@Doug S.: “You’ve been curious about a new dating service that has been promising, and apparently delivering, the seemingly impossible: nearly everyone that has passed their screening, which has been most applicants, has ended up married within a year, and all of those marriages appear to be happy ones. When you investigate, you discover their secret: they’ve got magic love potions that actually work, and they offer the clients the chance to share one with someone that seem to be compatible. Would you want their service?” Sounds suspiciously rape-y. Is this compatible person going into this willingly? If so, the… Read more »
@all:
My gut reaction to PUAs: they seem childish and reactionary.
@Doug S. You’ve been curious about a new dating service that has been promising, and apparently delivering, the seemingly impossible: nearly everyone that has passed their screening, which has been most applicants, has ended up married within a year, and all of those marriages appear to be happy ones. When you investigate, you discover their secret: they’ve got magic love potions that actually work, and they offer the clients the chance to share one with someone that seem to be compatible. Would you want their service? Absofuckinglutely not. I’m not interested in zombies. I’m interested in partners with agency, who… Read more »
If I may pose a couple questions: 1. Has anyone ever actually met a man who held the belief that women who take on the initiator role are sluts? If you have, could you please (to the best of your ability) offer up the date of your meeting this man, and his age as of that date. 2. In which set of circumstances – found in modern society – is it possible for a hypothetical person who does hold this belief to shame women they see as slutty? I ask the first question because I honestly have never met a… Read more »
@Colette Wedding: I’ll try to be nicer this time, with maybe a touch of levity. “What it doesn’t do is determine what an individual woman is going decide about an individual man.” It doesn’t, but it narrows the dating pool for some men, and shows to what extent men and women’s impression of normal dating dynamics is still gendered. My point was that I think it’s one more subject gender movements should have something to say about. Another article regarding the costs of dating for men: http://gothamist.com/2011/06/12/new_yorkers_dont_spend_enough_on_fi.php “Ahhh, now you’re talking about men already in a relationship. Did you ever… Read more »
Daelyte, Understandable, but it creates a bigger problem once I’m forced to go back and explain something else in addition to replying to your response that doesn’t even, in context, make much sense. Further whether you wanted to condense your posts or not, it doesn’t prevent you from reading what I said in context to begin with. Even when you, now, have explained why you replied with what you did, it doesn’t make sense in context. Flyingkal, I didn’t find your post harsh one bit! As for the content, first I want to say I understand and can empathize. I’ve… Read more »
@rmyoun06 : It seems to be another predatory self-help scam, just like faddish diets, astrology-based health advice, and that endless parade of business advice books about how Sun Tzu can get you rich. I agree. But what’s worst is that many guys who are scammed by PUAs and are a failure with women just want other guys to fail like them. A few years ago, there was a blog were a guy was saying he was trying to pick up women in hardware stores and other public places and he was failing miserably. The blog was full of PUAs and… Read more »
@Colette Wedding: I was going to write a long rebuttal but the further I got the more clear it became that you have me all wrong, and that perhaps my intentions aren’t clear enough. So I’ll deal with that before proceeding any further, that way it won’t get lost (as much) in the discussion. “For another, I address that in the same paragraph which you smugly respond to after breaking down what I say so that everything is out of context.” While I may sometimes cut quotes short in my replies, it’s only to reduce my otherwise novel-sized posts. I… Read more »
@rmyoun06: I totally agree that the current PUA paradigm falls into exactly the traps you describe. The problem I find with many criticisms is that they imply that the concept itself is axiomatically flawed or misogynistic, and I disagree. Certainly, your reasonable criticisms are not included in those.
@dancinbojangles: I can’t speak for anyone else, but my objection to PUA stuff is twofold: (1) It seems to be another predatory self-help scam, just like faddish diets, astrology-based health advice, and that endless parade of business advice books about how Sun Tzu can get you rich. (2) Judging from PUA blogs, many of the specific things it tells people to do are cruel. I don’t have any general objection to people “us[ing] social dynamics to influence an outcome” – that’s what we all do when we ask for a favor with a smile. I object only to the specific… Read more »
A quick thought: Much of the objection to PUA and such seems to center on a strange notion of reality. Like, if someone says something spontaneously and due to their own personal temperament, it’s OK. If someone says or does the exact same thing to try and influence a situation, it’s manipulative, regardless of whether or not he is trying to conceal his true temperament or attitude. A couple months ago, I saw a video where the speaker described a tradition his grandmother had: She would hug him tightly once on meeting, then later ask if he could still feel… Read more »