I met up with a friend to discuss an art project yesterday evening. At least, outwardly that's what happened. It's possible that beneath the surface, he was only acting nice to get sex from me, and I was only acting "friendly" to use him and rub in his face that he wasn't getting that sex. I mentioned this aloud, and we laughed and made fun of it, but maybe he just felt he had to do that so he wouldn't kill his chances. The mindfuck never ends.
The Venusian Arts : The Four SIrens and the legal changes feminists have instituted to obstruct beta men have created a climate where men have invented techniques and strategies to adapt to the more challenging marketplace, only to exceed their aspirations. This is a disruptive technology in its own right. All of us know a man who is neither handsome nor wealthy, but seems to have amazing success with women. He seems to have natural instincts regarding women that to the layperson may be indistinguishable from magic. So how does he do it?
Just as "hypergamy" is his ten-dollar word for "slut," "The Venusian Arts" are PUA by any other name. Why you would want a woman when they're evil monsters who will take all your money, I'm not sure. I guess it's just the "sports car you can stick your dick into" factor.
Anyway, in this case the Venusian Arts don't exist to get women, they exist to plug a hole in the theory: if women are horrible monsters, why do some guys seem to have satisfying relationships with them? It's inconceivable that they might actually be bonding to the women and double inconceivable that women might be bonding with them. Clearly the only answer is woman-taming magic.
Men who comprehended the concepts (a minority) and those who could undertake the total reconstitution of their personalities and avalanche of rejections as part of the learning curve (a still smaller minority) stood to reap tremendous benefits from becoming more attractive than the vast majority of unaware men.
Ah yes, if it doesn't work you must be misapplying the principles! You're such an idiot, next you'll be telling me you can't even see the Emperor's wonderful clothing.
Among the most valuable learnings from the body of knowledge is the contrarian revelation that what women say a man should do is often quite the antithesis of what would actually bring him success.
This is one of those parts that's really disturbing to read. Because I'm stuck in the body of a woman, and I'm only able to speak with a woman-voice. Could there be a sign or something I could hold up when I really mean what I'm saying? Maybe I could talk in a deeper voice when I say things that aren't lies? Some sort of signal?
For example, being a needy, supplicative, eager-to-please man is precisely the opposite behavior that a man should employ, where being dominant, teasing, amused, yet assertive is the optimal persona.
Oh yeah, I always go around telling everyone I want a needy, supplicative man. "Why can't a guy follow me around laughing too hard at my jokes and giving me weird awkward compliments while never actually being sexually assertive," I always ask my girlfriends. When I go on dates, I tell the guy, "you better start whining and wheedling now, mister," and see what he does.
As for dominant men, of course I really like dominant men, but that's a different use of the word. But I only like dominant men who are capable of talking to me on the level too. If a guy won't break out of his "ho ho, I am Lord King Man, you wanted to say something to me, that's so funny" persona long enough for us to have a goddamn conversation, well, we're not going to have a conversation.
I know, a woman just said what she wanted, how quaint, everybody do the opposite now.
An equally valuable lesson is to realize when not to take a woman's words at face value. Many statements from her are 'tests' to see if the man can remain congruent in his 'alpha' personality, where the woman is actually hoping the man does not eagerly comply to her wishes.
Again, I only have a lady voice! I am incapable, in this framework, of communicating when I actually mean "please go away, you're making me uncomfortable." Or even things like "can you hold my drink" aren't big planned-out tests, I just have to go potty and it would be gross to bring my drink in there.
It's important to point out at this juncture that I didn't go to Lady School. I just got dropped off in this world with no directions, and nobody ever took me aside and said "hey, you're a member of the Lady Club, here are the techniques you gotta use." I don't really know anything about relationships or attraction that guys don't. I'm making it up as I go along too.
Similarly, the 'feminist' Pavlovian reaction to call any non-compliant man a 'misogynist' should also not be taken as though a rational adult assigned the label after fair consideration. Such shaming language is only meant to deflect scrutiny from the woman uttering it, and should be given no more importance than a 10-year-old throwing a tantrum to avoid responsibility or accountability.
Whereas someone sticking their fingers in their ears and yelling "I can't hear it when girls talk, LA LA LA" is clearly nothing like a kid throwing a tantrum.
And this is such a 10-year-old-level attempt at a mindfuck, too. "I know you're going to call me a misogynist, therefore... I can't possibly be one?" Yeah, even my sarcasm-quote couldn't follow the logic there the whole way through.
For anyone seeking advice on the Venusian Arts, there is one rule you must never break. I believe it is of paramount importance that the knowledge be used ethically, and with the objective of creating mutually satisfying relationships with women. It is not moral to mistreat women, even if they have done the same to countless men. We, as men, have to take the high road even if women are not, and this is my firm belief.
Wow, what a fucking saint. You're like if Mahatma Gandhi fucked Mother Theresa and the baby took lessons from the Dalai Lama.
Anyway, the "even if they have done the same to countless men" is the sort of thing that sounds like you're not mistreating women now, but you'd definitely be justified if you did, and bitches shouldn't push it.
This was a short section, but I have to go to work soon, my shift at the Testicle Removal Factory starts bright and early, so I'll just post up when I've got now.
I recommend that all comments on "I just knew you bitches would cry misogyny", from misogynists, should be replied to only with references to poop. No more rebuttals. Just poop. This may seem like a frustratingly childish and debate-stalling tactic, but it takes one to know one, POOPHEAD.
"I know you're going to call me a misogynist, therefore... I can't possibly be one?" Yeah, even my sarcasm-quote couldn't follow the logic there the whole way through.ReplyDelete
Presumably the reasoning is if they cackle "you're playing right into my hands!" often enough no one will notice they don't actually have a strategy (if I may stretch the metaphor a bit).
I have to wonder... given his example of "woman says she wants X, I interpret it as Y, and she's not interested, therefore she must want not-X," what does he think men do?ReplyDelete
I mean, a needy, supplicative, eager-to-please woman is what he *says* he wants, but given the likelihood that he's going to "punish" that behavior by acting hatefully if not abusively toward her, it must mean that he really wants those hateful, ball-breaking bitches he complains about.
(Actually, I wouldn't be half surprised.)
For anyone seeking advice on the Venusian Arts, there is one rule you must never break. I believe it is of paramount importance that the knowledge be used ethically, and with the objective of creating mutually satisfying relationships with women. It is not moral to mistreat women, even if they have done the same to countless men. We, as men, have to take the high road even if women are not, and this is my firm belief.ReplyDelete
The thing is, the way he says it's his "firm belief" that women should not be "mistreated", he implies that this is a matter of belief, something that could be up for debate.
This is just the equivalent of a legal disclaimer. It's so no one can accuse him of inciting violence and hatred with his bullcrap.
Venusian Arts. Ah ha ha. I'm with whoever it was who was reminded of Doctor Who the last time that came up. I guess that's why chicks dig Time Lords.ReplyDelete
So is "Venusian arts" an actual honest-to-gods mythological reference, a "Women are from ..." allusion, or a claim that he is a space alien?ReplyDelete
Wow! I don't know who is more fucked up in the head, the PUA's or the psycho who wrote this post. Maybe you should start dating, you deserve each other lol :)ReplyDelete
"Venusian arts" is supposed to be the equivalent of "martial arts"--Venus for love, Mars for war.ReplyDelete
Anon - Huh? You hate PUAs and you hate me? Um, who don't you hate? "No one" is an okay answer I guess.
Well, say what you will about Misandary Bubbleheads, they sure are trying their little hardest to create a world of their own a la Tolkein and Frank Herbert. I'm curious about the Four Sirens and how they came to rule this mystical land. I'm guessing that being trained in the Venusian Arts involves fighting with a light saber while blinded, or at least the purchase of a detailed strategy guide written by Mr. Bubble himself.ReplyDelete
"Mr. Bubble" made me think, "they'd better stay away from Michael Buble!" ... random, I know.ReplyDelete
If you are not yet aware, Michael Buble is being stalked by a Velociraptor.
Look at all these loser bimbos who can't get a man.ReplyDelete
Holly can't discuss anything without becoming hysterical (since she has no exposure to people with an IQ higher than 60), so instead advertises her own helplessness through which she confirms what the article says.
It looks like Female Masculinist is right, when she says this is how Holly would behave.
I'm really serious when I say you don't even make sense. It's not like you make sense but you're wrong, it's more like... huh?ReplyDelete
This is just a bunch of insults, they're not even about me. It's like being a brunette and having someone scream "DUMB BLONDE BIMBO" at you, it's not as hurtful as it is confusing.
I don't even find it confusing, it's just incompetent Dadaist-wannabeism. It doesn't even manage the successful "WTF? I have to think about that!" of a good surrealist piece.ReplyDelete
I mean, at least if the anon were parading through here calling people filthy manticore-eaters it would show a little creativity in application of fiction.
I dunno, I actually laughed out loud. He's come out the other side of annoying and nonsensical to funny for me, which is why my suspicion he's actually a parody created by another commenter is getting stronger.ReplyDelete
I'm fairly sure they're all the same guy. He has this consistent obsession on Female Masculinist and how the fact that a woman hates women means that it all must be true, women must really be evil.ReplyDelete
Or something. I would love a clear statement of thesis from this guy. For example, are one-day-old female infants evil? If a woman was raised by wolves and had no knowledge of contemporary civilization, would she be evil? At what point do MTF transsexuals receive the Book of Evil? Are female animals evil? Are hermaphroditic animals half evil?
Inasmuch as I am sexually available, sexually submissive, and not receiving any money or assistance from men, shouldn't I be a relatively acceptable woman? I'm not even sure what I should change about myself to be more in line with these guys' wishes. I guess being a slut is bad (but being choosy is also bad), so I need to pick just one unattractive man and focus all my efforts on submitting to him.
Wait, I'm a loser bimbo who can't get a man?ReplyDelete
I thought I was a femmroid.
I r confused. My little brain is all hurty. I think I'll go swoon.
I just had a first date with a divorced woman who 1. asked me out, 2. didn't get the marital home in her divorce settlement, and 3. paid for my drink.ReplyDelete
My mind is BLOWN. And that was even before I saw the most recent Anon's comments.
Wow... just trying to wrap my brains around the logic this guy is using.ReplyDelete
Also: I thought you might be interested in this:
For your next Cosmocking.
Which I really enjoy btw.
A lot of the quoted text here sounds like your standard Fetlife internet dom.ReplyDelete
Thinking a bit more on the subject in general, I realized that people like the writer of The Misandry Bubble are focused on one thing: Some women are assholes to men. This is true. But they also ignore that some men are assholes to women. And some men are assholes to other men. And some women are assholes to other women. And because of societal factors, there are many kinds of assholery that take very different forms depending on which of those four gender combinations you're talking about.ReplyDelete
Or possibly they merely dismiss those things as insignificant because they aren't affected much by them personally and have problems empathizing with others. Likewise, some of the more extreme feminists only care about the opposite kind.
Their proposed solutions for female-on-male assholery would do little or nothing to diminish assholery in general, and if successful would likely result in the reverse (male-on-female assholery) being nearly doubled to fill the vacuum. But the Beta males and former incels will get laid, so who cares about women?
That whimsically nonsensical anon makes me laugh. Plz post more comments anon :).ReplyDelete
Why can't we all just admit we're pretty goddamn fine the way we are? I mean, Jesus Christ.
Creepy "nice guy" gets turned down by women and doesn't get laid. BIG FUCKING DEAL.
Reminds me my girlfriend and I didn't have sex yesterday. It obviously means she is cruelly laughing at my sexlesness and rejoicing at the fact that I didn't get laid!
And god knows how many manipulative creepazoid techniques I have to use just to get her to take off her shirt. BITCHES MAN.
The guy who wrote that misandry bubble thing must be one sad fellow indeed in this world full of wimmins who don't like to sleep with weirdass losers.
I mean, I felt that the PUA stuff was the least problematic because it was obviously from a paleocon position that was hostile to PUA. And, well, if TMB is an accurate map of my world--and it is--it's going to color my relationships with others, although any real power I have is totally mediated by social institutions to the point of powerlessness. At most I might be a rejected juror, thrown off by a feminist ADA for my pro-male tendencies. Like the modern intellectual French, German, & Israeli political right-wing, MRA represents a wistful plea for that which once made men great, the Victorianism which parallels now-dead Liberal Nationalism.ReplyDelete
Look at all these loser bimbos who can't get a man.ReplyDelete
Actually, I've been reading these with my man, and we've been having a good laugh toghether. :D
...MRA represents a wistful plea for that which once made men great, the Victorianism...
I don't hear "wistful" so much as "bitter". It's a bunch of white dudes thinking that they should rule the world because of their white dudeliness, and being angry that they don't.
Try convincing anyone in the world who is not a middle-class-and-higher white male from a colonizing power that "Victorianism" was a good thing.
Now I'm curious. What power do you think that you, personally, not some hypothetical Everyphallus, would have if you lived in this Victorian utopia?
Holly is a butt slut (i.e. a woman who revels in anal sex), plain and simple.ReplyDelete
Her attempt to appear intellectual is doing more to make the truths in The Misandry Bubble apparent than anything that MRAs could do.
I mean, I didn't even know about The Misandry Bubble, but thanks to Holly, I found it, and am glad to see someone put people like the butt slut in her place.
I laugh about how none of you misogynists has the courage to discuss Female Masculinst. Heh.
I hate how women who won't have sex with me have all this sex. And they act like they enjoy it just to disprove the marvelous theories laid out in The Misogyny Bubble! Damn them!ReplyDelete
I checked out the "Female Masculinist", and found it a very entertaining comedy blog, great for a laugh. The mental acrobatics that the author had to go through to try to avoid admitting the existance of discrimination against women really highlighted the ludicrousness of such a position.ReplyDelete
@Anon 1:39 - This is Holly's site. Holly chooses the subject. If she chooses to discuss "Female Masculinst" then so will we, if we feel like it. Otherwise we'll shut up and wait for the next entry. What you are trying to do is called "subject derailment". This is something only poopheads do. Are you one? ;-pReplyDelete
Can you imagine what Anon's reaction was when he discovered the existence of sex blogs written by women?ReplyDelete
ANON: Why are so many women having sex, but none of them are having sex with meeeeeee? And then rubbing it in my face by writting personal blogs about it? Those bitches are so meeeeeeean!
(Anon reads avidly while bitter tears of loneliness well in his eyes)
ANON: Who needs them anyways! They're all just sluts! I'm better than them!
(Anon continues to read, enthralled)
ANON: ... I wish this wasn't the closest I've ever been to having sex with a woman...
(Anon starts sobbing uncontrollably, but manages to keep reading through his tears, while angrily *fapping*)
What in the name of God does my anus have to do with anything seriously.ReplyDelete
Also, the Misandry Bubble doesn't actually say women are stupid (in so many words), so what truths? Am I collecting unfair amounts of alimony or filing unfounded rape charges and no one even told me?
Female Masculinist is just some random hateful crazy person. (The fact that she's female is entirely uninteresting. Hateful craziness happens to women too.) I don't "have" to respond to every time someone says I'm a brainsucker from Planet Quorgak, there's a lot of them on the Internet and my time is limited.
I <3 "Venusian Arts." I like it when Uranus natives attempt to explain How Things Work to us here on Earth. It makes my inner anthropologist all tingly.ReplyDelete
...she said before even reading the "butt slut" comment. Um, golly.ReplyDelete
"Holly, you ignorant butt slut..."
Tedious troll is tedious.
Can I recommend a policy of insisting nonnies pick a damn pseud and stick with it? It doesn't weed out all the trolls, but it at least makes them work for .3 seconds, and then you also don't have to do the "no not you nonny, I mean other nonny, the one before nonny, nonny" routine.
say what you will about Misandary Bubbleheads, they sure are trying their little hardest to create a world of their own a la Tolkein and Frank HerbertReplyDelete
And John Norman.
Look at all these loser bimbos who can't get a man.
I don't want a man. But I seem to be missing a key part of the usual definition of "bimbo," so you'll have to find some other reason to dismiss me. Sorry.
Well, my personal predicament is a bit shaped by my experience as an Israeli Jew of long-settled heritage, so the period eighteen-twenty-mumble to 1901 wasn't utterly horrible for me and mine, as it probably was for Holly's ancestors, and of course Zionism made us White Men (of Harlech?) and we got to play the Great Game. We are, in fact, the only people still playing.ReplyDelete
I would have a lot more leverage in my relationships in that my body would not be inherently "read" by women of my own culture and language as emasculated and asexual compared to a Nordic ideal. Marriage, even arranged marriage, would still be a real factor in my community's life. (In fact I am the only one of my relatives who has NOT affiliated with Chabad as a consolation prize..)
You're basically arguing that very definite things which would be better are not mine to have, and how right it is that I, in particular, do not have them.
You're basically arguing that very definite things which would be better are not mine to have, and how right it is that I, in particular, do not have them.
You're really broadcasting your self-centredness and sense of entitlement. The world does not owe you - or anyone else - a wife. Nor are you owed a spot on the pedestal of "masculity", which in an ideal world would not exist anyways.
You don't have the same unearned privileges as men did in the past (though you still have male privilege). Boo hoo. Get over it.
The usual. Do you understand that many men would reply the same to women's concerns, such as street harassment, rape, etc, and that they are right to do so?ReplyDelete
There is a difference between, "I have a right to a wife and to be exalted for my masculinity" and, "I have a right to be treated like a human being instead of a fuck-object".
You see the difference, right? The first refers to privileges. You don't have a right to a life-long partnership with another person, you have to earn it. You don't have a right to be looked up to and admired, you have to earn it.
One thing you do not have to earn is the right to be treated like an autonomous human being.
Rape and street harassment are physically threatening and actively harmful. Unlike women not wanting to boink you.
I can't believe I just had to explain that.ReplyDelete
Do you understand that many men would reply the same to women's concerns, such as street harassment, rape, etc, and that they are right to do so?ReplyDelete
Where did you say you were raped?
Oh what the FUCK Eurosabra. Did you just really compare not being given an arranged marriage to being raped? Seriously what the fuck.ReplyDelete
Question: who specifically would you like an arranged marriage to? Maybe you just want "a woman," but we've got to pick someone to take it for the team here. Would you settle for maybe a 6, or are your rights being violated if it's anything less than Megan Fox?
I think it would be pretty keen to keep you in my basement as my own personal ass slave and feces disposal unit, but unlike you I recognize that I do not have any particular ethical right to your big fat mouth, despite the fact that it is almost certainly perfectly formed by Xenu himself for the express purpose of having the fat fragrant hershey logs of every man, woman and domesticated animal you have ever met deposited in it. Nor does this recognition of societally and legally mandated personal boundaries cause me to sulk and write long sissy-fit screeds to the Internet protesting that fundamentally unlovable social failures are allowed to consume precious food--food which might be used to FEED THE STARVING NATIONS OF AFRICA--that isn't directly excreted from someone's pulsating starfish. Unlike you, I am able to use my imagination to determine that, however much pleasure it might give me to ejaculate the liquified consequences of last night's dinner at the Mexican restaurant into your starving, gaping maw, you yourself might have other ideas regarding productive use of your time.
Also I don't own a basement, which would kind of put the kibosh on the whole thing.
Did you ever know that you're my hero,ReplyDelete
and everything I would like to be?
I can fly higher than an eagle,
'cause you are the wind beneath my wings.
Well, there is a fetishization of consent in the modern world, such that the poor German govt. couldn't actually punish the killer and eater of the poor fellow who consented to be killed and eaten for anything other than "inappropriate disposal of human remains", and the mess that was the Goel Ratzon case had to be argued by the State Prosecutor in Israel on the grounds that slavery was welfare fraud, because all of Ratzon's luv slaves swore they consented to be his luv slaves. And the same State of Israel allows Islamic religious law to permit polygamy while ruling that Sephardic Jews, some of whom were permitted polygamy by Jewish religious law in Morocco into the 20th century, are subject to the rulings of the State's Chief Rabbi that polygamy is an Arab thing, except in the case of a nice luv-slave guru like Goel Ratzon, who isn't doing anything as impudent as belonging to a Jewish religious minority at odds with The State.ReplyDelete
Hippie woman-slavery good, Arab polygamy (read slavery) good, traditional Jewish polygamy bad, because not baba-cool enough and not White European Jewish monogamy.
You'll excuse me a bit if I'm puking a bit too much from the hypocrisy to do time in your love-shit-pit. Besides, can't you find SOMEone who is turned on by that sort of thing?
You astound me, sir.ReplyDelete
If a man wishes to be cooked and devoured, I see no reason whatsoever why he should not be indulged at his earliest possible convenience, provided he is free of worms and mad cow disease.
As for your obviously well-nurtured beef with Israeli marriage law, I fail to see its relevance here and suggest you take it up with them and not me.
The point is that, while I am dropping a delicious deuce down your dripping dump-hole, you will be unable to use it to spout forth incoherent grudge-mongering, and we will all be the better off for it. For you see, I have made extensive study of your posting history on this site Pervocracy, and have come to the conclusion, aided by powerful calculating devices, that the closest any human being will ever come to loving you is during the instant of ecstasy and relief they feel upon extruding onto your chest, after much weary toil, the remains of the steak and ice cream they are very much regretting the consumption of. They might then express this affection by taking a toilet-bowl scrubber and rubbing it in a bit.
Think about it.
I uh, I fetishize consent. It's such a bad fetish that I can't even get aroused without it.ReplyDelete
Fuck, I can't even have erotic dreams about people who haven't given consent to sexual interactions with me. I was seeing this guy once and we hadn't gotten to negotiating the sexytimes part and so I obsessively dreamed about ... going out to Chinese food with him.ReplyDelete
It was the most sexually tense Chinese food ever, but it was still, y'know, chicken with cashew nuts.
It must be terribly hard being so submissive that you are only able to become aroused when someone else gives their consent for you to do so. "Slave, you may now become aroused." Is that it?ReplyDelete
Chinese food is actually terribly easy to negotiate compared to sex, because no one insists on feeling sexual arousal in your presence as a prelude to Chinese food such that you may only eat with those who are attracted to you, and it is legal to sell Chinese food in most jurisdictions where sex-for-money is illegal. Normally, I would say that Chinese food was a clue that I wasn't getting laid, that I was going to be a witty conversation partner and nothing more.
How did you make the concept of only being sexual with someone with their consent sound weird? It's amazing.ReplyDelete
By being deliberately obtuse and framing their consent to your arousal as the necessary and sufficient condition for your arousal, instead of what you meant, that their consent to sexual activity (not to your arousal) is a necessary but not sufficient condition for your arousal.ReplyDelete
I absolutely could not find a common physical or behavioral denominator in the women who were attracted to me, so I was forced to conclude that I was the only one offering to fuck them, which made everything make sense, including their sudden attraction to me.
Okay, okay, I sometimes pop ladyboners without asking. But I really won't even masturbate thinking about someone unless I know they wouldn't mind.ReplyDelete
And more importantly, when it comes to really doing things with someone, consent is really really really really super really important. I'm more concerned about someone being hugged without their consent than I am about someone having strips of skin ripped off with their consent.
I absolutely could not find a common physical or behavioral denominator in the women who were attracted to me, so I was forced to conclude that I was the only one offering to fuck them, which made everything make sense, including their sudden attraction to me.ReplyDelete
....Or, y'know, they were attracted to you because they were as individual human beings and there's no fucking cheat code.
Is that it?ReplyDelete
No, you creeptastic piece of scum, it's not it.
I cannot bring myself to be surprised that Eurosabra of all people cannot imagine a profound respect for someone's "No" or "Not yet" as something other than a demi-Gorean piece of fetishistic fantasy porn.
I can only hope that if he wanks off enough to the idea of respecting people's boundaries something Pavlovian will happen.
It's more that I have experience of consent being implicit and non-verbal and rejection being plentiful, early, and explicit, such that I've even had partners who were (or post facto claimed to HAVE BEEN interested) withdrawing consent because I ASKED, because my masculinity wasn't "intuitive" enough to deal with their implicit, unspoken consent. It is true that I deal with enough passive, male-initiative-dependent sexist women that I might as well throw in the towel and become a Gorean (or the local variant, a Goel-ian, I guess).ReplyDelete
Really the issue isn't non-respect for boundaries on my part but the fact that I am only ultra-rarely INVITED to have sex, and when I do have sex it's almost always a case of accurately reading an implicit non-verbal invitation and proceeding ultra-cautiously step-by-step. "If you talk it ruins the moment etc."
Really? People were going to fuck you but then said no because you asked? Shit, man.ReplyDelete
I think you're better off without them.
Is anyone complaining about the idea of consent being non-verbal? Unless, Eurosabra, you're a rapist (though of course it doesn't count when a feminist says it) and your side of that is "she consented, but non-verbally." That's something people rightly object to. But genuine non-verbal consent? It's tricky to pull off, and I wouldn't recommend leaving it at that, but it still counts as consentReplyDelete
Me, I'm complaining about Eurosabra being an insulting douchebag who seems to think that suffering from the delusion he understands any of my kinks means that he gets a free pass on making creepy and offensive insinuations about why my motivations have to be dysfunctional. (And, unfortunately, he saw fit to share his wankfest delusionality with me.)ReplyDelete
This "implicit consent" strawman has nothing to do with the actual specific jackassery perpetrated; it's just another one of Eurosabra's "Pity poor me, I only want people who won't say they want me" hijacks intended to occlude fundamental assholery.
Girlfriends... heh. The use of the word by straight women always makes me wonder. What about the lesbians? Which women are their girlfriend and which ones are GIRLFRIENDS? ..ReplyDelete
Dalai Lama is a tyrant who wants the people of Tibet to obey his every command, and Mother Theresa could best be described as a friend, lover and upkeeper of the horrible status quo, she was thoroughly evil. They are/were not saints.ReplyDelete
Great post otherwise, though!
LOL, you're ~so~ edgy, brahDelete