"Women can get laid whenever they want. Their only job is deciding who they don't want to sleep with. Women don't even know what sexual scarcity is like."
"Men aren't attracted to women who don't have large breasts and small waists and symmetrical faces and no body hair and no blemishes and long hair and tasteful makeup and good dress sense and cheerful feminine personalities and correctly groomed toenails. Or if they're over 35."
I've never heard this explained. Although I suspect the answer--at least the honest one--is that "women" never included creatures like me and most of my friends in the first place.
(Also, the deeper you get in this shit, the harder it is to remember that gay people exist. Or any other kind of gender non-conformance. Really, the hardest thing to remember sometimes is that joy exists. That in the real world, sex is fun and love is wonderful, and both of them are often silly and sweet. That when I spend time with my boyfriend, it's not the culmination of an intense sexual power game, it's a chance to grill sausages and talk about robots and see his owl impression. [Owls, in our world, shake their heads rapidly from side to side and go "WHEEEE!" It's... complicated.] Reducing all this giddy humanity down to gender and sex and power isn't just wrong, it's incorrect.)
I think it's definitely that we don't count as women. A lot of us are effectively invisible to the kinds of people who make weird blanket statements about huge swathes of the population.ReplyDelete
Sample: there's a strip club on the end of my street. I've always sort of said about it, "Well, it sucks, but it doesn't cause any problems in the neighborhood."
One day I'm walking home and ahead of me is an attractive young blonde woman, head down and scurrying away from a group of men calling after her. I went up and offered to walk her home (she accepted) and she told me that this happens to her all the time.
She and I live on the same street; she's a petite blonde and I'm a vaguely dykey overweight brunette. She has experienced frequent harassment in the short time she's lived here; I've spent two years saying (and believing) "it doesn't cause any problems." That's the difference between that kind of man's idea of "women" and "whatever."
It also kind of explains the absurd 80/20 numbers. If 80% of the women aren't women--we're some sexless creature, at best--then sure, 20% of the men can have 95% of the sex with women.
Click and risk. I need to "click" with someone before we "go farther" most barbie dolls don't fit into my world (Southern Idaho recovering redneck). I like real women. Nobody likes saying "Don't spoil it by talking honey". The body is just a path to the mind.ReplyDelete
It works out okay if you assume that every woman can fuck /someone/ (an omega, to use the parlance). However, the alpha men that women are supposed to all want only like the conventionally attractive women. Alternately, you could claim that women want sparklesparkleTHERELATIONSHIPsparkle, and men will only give a relationship to hot women though they'll fuck anyone.ReplyDelete
Whether this bares any relationship to the world outside my window is an open question.
Wait, nope, just closed the question. (The answer's no.)
Hey Vinnie. Dumb women (and blonde, conventionally attractive women, two separate groups, mind you) are real women too. Sure, the body can be an incredible path to the mind, but the body all on its own is pretty awesome.ReplyDelete
Maybe you should take your own advice. :)
Sorry Miss L I would not like top spend an afternoon of sex with a women i would not like to just spend an afternoon with. "Don't spoil it by talking" is NOT afterplay.ReplyDelete
Vinnie - Sure, but lots of conventionally attractive women are the type you would like to spend an afternoon with. Plenty of "Barbie dolls" aren't dumb or mean.ReplyDelete
And although I can understand not wanting to sleep with them, dumb and even mean women are still "real women." There's really no qualification test.
Ok I need to kind of define some terms: Real women have a world view that can intersect with mine on at least some points. When I was 21 the biker that introduced me to strip clubs was horrified when he came back from a lap dance and found me discussing french literature with the young lady that just came off the pole. I have met a few women with a "Body by nautilus, brain by Cray." I don't reject attractive girls, I don't sleep with bimbo's.ReplyDelete
Vinnie, I don't think you understand. Let me shout for a second.ReplyDelete
EVERYONE WHO SAYS SHE IS A WOMAN IS A REAL WOMAN.
A lot of people tend to get prickly about this, because there's a history of using the concept of "real woman" to shame women for being (off the top of my head) trans, masculine or skinny.
I don't want to offend you at all: after all, I agree with your basic premise-- I don't want to date stupid people either! Although I'm happy that stupid people have other stupid people to date, and I hope they enjoy themselves muchly. But "real woman" is a very problematic term.
I have been increasingly frustrated with how I seem to fit this definition of "woman" (AKA FUCKABLE woman) when I really, seriously do not want it. Even now, I have a hard time explaining that I'd really rather be perceived as a fuck-ugly man than as a hot woman. Because the noun is more important than the adjective.ReplyDelete
Are bimboes therefore fake women or something? What does it even MEAN not to be a real woman?
Vinnie, what the hell? YOU don't get to define what a "real" woman is, or who is a real woman. You can only render your opinion, which is apparently that only SOME women are "real" women, and all the rest are . . . what? Stupid animals?ReplyDelete
If that's what you meant to say, then that really doesn't speak well of you, talking French literature with sexy dancers be damned.
If that's not what you meant to say, you need to think about what you're saying, before you say it, because you're coming across really badly.
"Although I suspect the answer--at least the honest one--is that "women" never included creatures like me and most of my friends in the first place."ReplyDelete
I think they also count catcalls and "creepy guys in bars" as legitimate offers of sex--two things which I don't think dudes experience much.
"Also, the deeper you get in this shit, the harder it is to remember that gay people exist. Or any other kind of gender non-conformance. Really, the hardest thing to remember sometimes is that joy exists."
Gah. Yeah, that perfectly sums up how I feel after wading into the land of PUA blogs.
Yeah, I've always hated this so much, as a woman who most certainly cannot get laid whenever she wants -- well, unless I throw out a few standards like "has respect for women" or "I'm decently attracted to this person".ReplyDelete
In fact, I just got an abusive message on OKC from some dude. Yeah! I'm rolling in action from teh menz! GO ME!
Is it wrong that after reading this post--which should be taken seriously and which obviously makes an important point--that all can think is how much I want to see your boyfriend's owl impression?ReplyDelete
I think a lot of this is born out of insecurity and categorizing people based on looks. Thinking of a guy who says, "Women can get laid whenever they want. Their only job is deciding who they don't want to sleep with." (like me 12 years ago), what I imagine is going on a large percentage of the time is that he is judging himself to be in say, the 70th percentile in terms of looks and goes after women he perceives to be in the 70th percentile, maybe even 80th in looks. So he gets interested in a couple of them, when lo, they end up with dudes who are in the 30th percentile in looks. "WTF? That's not fair, if I'm staying in my attractiveness league, but all the people in my league are getting people out of my league, how can I compete with that?"ReplyDelete
I imagine a number of the women in the, "Men aren't attracted to women who don't have large breasts and small waists and symmetrical faces and no body hair and no blemishes and long hair and tasteful makeup and good dress sense and cheerful feminine personalities and correctly groomed toenails. Or if they're over 35." category probably think the same thing, especially when they see something like this: http://cache.dealbreaker.com/uploads/2011/01/dennis-kucinich-and-wife.jpg
There are a few mistakes hypothetical guy at the beginning is making:
* The two or three women he has been rejected by in favor of a seemingly superior man do not generalize to all hetero-cis-sexual women.
* He isn't seeing the supposedly %30 women going out with the %70 men (see above) which would disprove his theory. Also he is too insecure to realize that such a thing is totally possible with him.
* There is no generalized percentage attractiveness scale anyway. Almost every person has a different measure which is usually not even a linear scale but a multi-dimensional manifold. (Although some people *cough cough* PUA *cough cough* are pretty linear.)
I think everyone should go easy on such people as this for a few reasons:
* When emotions and/or horniness are involved, it's hard to be rational, especially for some people.
* Once a theory has such as this has been planted, confirmation bias can easily take over. Confirmation bias is something pretty much everyone is subject to an extent. You can yell at people for it, but the truth is, it's a pretty common human tendency.
* Tempering and controlling sexual impulses would definitely help, but we are pretty much bombarded by messages that say we don't have to all the time, the ones that tell us we should are few and far between, and of those that do, the overwhelming majority come from conservative religions that people trying to get laid probably aren't interested in.
* There are messages all around us that give us reason to be insecure. There are no doubt a lot of people who pick out others' numerous and inevitable flaws, excluding them as possible partners. However, I would posit that an even halfway introspective person can easily pick out their own flaws and self exclude without even giving other people chance to overlook them, or even in some cases, find them attractive (a lot of people do, in fact find bald men or small chested women attractive for example.) This is not to say that there are a huge portion of people who are insecure, but I would be willing to bet that of the people who make the above complaint about the general class of people they are attracted to are a bit insecure to some extent.
* When you are lonely (or in any sort of unpleasant physical or psychological state) it's much easier to find some external law or reason for it than to just accept that you haven't been lucky or the problem is yourself. People are always finding scapegoats for EVERYTHING. The German economy circa the 1930's is a good example.
Maybe I'm just naive, but I think "people are imperfect and insecure humans" is a more likely answer than "people are mysogynist and mysandrist assholes".
-Angus the Anonymous
The problem is "people are imperfect and insecure humans" and "people are misogynist/misandrist assholes" aren't exclusive concepts.ReplyDelete
You use the example of the German economy in the thirties as understandable scapegoating. That ended pretty fucking badly for the people they were scapegoating, didn't it?
Being a raging prick because you're insecure and being a raging prick because of your fundamental prick nature makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to the people you hurt.
Reasons are not the same things as excuses.
(I wrote half an angry rant about the Weimar economy and deleted it. Pet peeve.)ReplyDelete
What I really want to say is, yes, overly entitled people suffer because their insane expectations of life are constantly being disappointed. It doesn't mean they're right, it means they have one more reason to get over themselves already, they'd be happier.
The first is true, the second is a body-image anxiety reinforcing lie. The first is false and the second true from the perspective of women who chase alpha males. Also, male entitled prickish behavior is generally restricted by law and empathy in a way that Nazism...wasn't.ReplyDelete
The first is true, the second is a body-image anxiety reinforcing lie.ReplyDelete
So these guys you know who would go out four times a week and "score" with chicks...they were fucking fat women? Hairy women? Women with crew cuts? Women with a snarky, sarcastic sense of humour? Women wearing sweatpants and paint-stained baggy t-shirts?
Women with those interpersonal disadvantages are still better off than their male equivalents. There are simply not enough female fans of disadvantaged men in comparison, for whatever reason.ReplyDelete
Yeah, here's the thing, Eurosabra - outside of your twisted little community, none of those things is an "interpersonal disadvantage".ReplyDelete
What the hell, Eurosabra. As a woman with just a few "interpersonal disadvantages" (fat and socially weird, but young and highly sexual), I can tell you that plenty of guys have said no to me.ReplyDelete
Funny thing: it didn't always have to do with the "disadvantages." Some of those guys were into fat weird girls but just not me, or were into me but couldn't because they were monogamous (OMG) or didn't have sex without commitment (OMG OMG OMFG) or it just wasn't clicking between us.
Sex is about a lot more than the supposedly simple math of attraction.
And for the lovagod, Eurosabra, some women really can't get laid. Or they can get laid, but only in the very technical sense of "they can get a penis put in their vagina," but not by a man they're attracted to or who respects them or who will have any kind of relationship with them.
Hell, just about every man can get laid too, if he's willing to go that far, to say "I'll do it with literally anybody under literally any conditions." But almost no one is, because that's transparently a miserable thing to do.
So leaving aside the transparently stupid, getting laid in a way that's remotely desirable is difficult for both men and women, and both of them manage to make it happen somehow.
Do you realize that your posts (I'm assuming you have a filter set up for this) actually scare me off from posting about PUA sometimes? I know they're coming and I just cringe.
I would suspect that that's WHY he makes the comments. He certainly can't expect to be changing anybody's minds, so unless he simply adores the wank he creates, I don't know what else would make him so devoted to coming here.
You are proof positive that privilege can be miserable. In some ways, I feel like I SHOULD be agreeing with you. When we were a girl, back in high school, we are the sort you describe, in that we had many requests to our attention, and we tended to say no. Now that I ID male, however... well, beauty transfers over the gender line a little awkwardly, and the offers are much fewer.
Except here's the thing. I've never been so relieved.
Most PUAs would have said "fetishists", not "fans", and I'm aware enough that anything at all can be advantageous or disadvantageous. But truisms are eternal. Just admit that PUA describes reality for enough men that it's inconvenient for radical feminism.ReplyDelete
"Truisms are eternal?" Seriously? Man, ANYONE'S horseshit describes reality for SOMEONE. Hell, I could say literal Bible interpretation describes reality for enough folks that it's inconvenient for science! That doesn't make literal Bible interpretation TRUE.
Also, you give me no reason to BELIEVE your truisms. You just say it's true.
You aren't here for the shooting, are you?
Eurosabra - Well, if you're not going to listen to anything anyone says, I'm done wasting my typing.ReplyDelete
I'm not a "radical feminist" by any stretch, I'm more of a... a person who's been outdoors, in your case. The things I say seem self-evident to me because I see them in my friends and coworkers and neighbors pretty much anywhere I go. But then again, I know some friends and coworkers and neighbors.
Hell, just about every man can get laid too, if he's willing to go that far, to say "I'll do it with literally anybody under literally any conditions." But almost no one is, because that's transparently a miserable thing to do.ReplyDelete
Exactly. Yes, even an ugly woman (whatever that even means) could get laid anytime if she broadcasted her willingness and would accept absolutely any offer at all - but, surprise, being approached by some guy entirely because you're a hole to stick his dick into is not flattering or fulfilling.
And as much as guys say "OMG I wish I could have that! I would die to be carnally desired and treated like a piece of meat!" Trust me, you wouldn't. Not in the way that my hypothetical ugly woman is "desired".
Think it through carefully, guys. Imagine that you went to a club wearing your "I will fuck anyone" t-shirt and a woman approached you and when you tried to make polite small talk she cut you off with "Yeah, yeah, whatever. You have a dick, right? I'm sick to death of using a dildo on myself. I want someone warm and breathing on top of me for a change. What d'you say?" She's not attracted to you; she's zoning out whenever you talk so clearly she doesn't give a shit who you are or what you're like; she only approached you because she wanted to fuck someone and you made it known you were willing.
And if you do go home with her, it's a pretty good bet she won't give a shit about your pleasure. She doesn't like you or find you attractive so why should she spend any time learning what you like in bed?
Also, ask yourself: what kind of person sees someone (especially someone they find ugly) in an "I will fuck literally anyone" t-shirt and actually takes them up on it? (Hint: not supermodels.)
So...yay for me being a woman! I can have shitty unsatisfying sex with losers ANY TIME I WANT!!!
Epilogue: I am 6' tall with a 28" waist, ludicrously perky c-cup boobs, long legs, cute face. Many guys find me attractive, but many others don't, because people like different things.ReplyDelete
When you're a chick, going to a club looking like you tried to look pretty is (unfortunately) considered tantamount to wearing that "I'll fuck anyone" t-shirt, btw. I've been approached by plenty of guys who weren't especially interested in me but assumed I must be looking for sex (with anyone at all) because I was showing a bit of leg or cleavage. When I was younger and not as good at reading people, I went home with one of these guys on occasion - which is how I know that guys just "looking for a hole" aren't especially considerate in bed.
So technically I can get laid anytime I want, I guess, but if I hold out for someone who I'm attracted to, who's attracted to me, who treats me courteously and listens when I talk, who won't hack me into pieces and shove me in his freezer after the sex...well, the number of feasible partners goes way, way down.
I came for the waters. I was misinformed.ReplyDelete
There appears to be a zone of adequate non-relationship casual sex that women still turn down, if Yes Means Yes Blog is to be believed. The offering man's claims of safety and sexual competence may be true and yet not believed, because of the casual sex context.
Eurosabra - Okay. What do you want?ReplyDelete
What, in your perfect world, would women do differently?
(Would men do anything differently?)
Doesn't work as a hypothetical, because that would never happen, women may have sex for sex's sake but only with men they are already attracted to. Unattractive men don't get objectified. Does explain why women don't want losers, which is gatekeeper speak.ReplyDelete
Man, you're the only guy I know who can make "women only have sex with men they're attracted to" sound like a crime against humanity.ReplyDelete
I'd settle for women initiating physical contact when they feel attraction, which requires men to make them safe. I had shitty relationships, but I've never overstepped an explicit boundary or failed to clarify an implicit one--really, ask for clarification--and that's such a low bar even a sourpuss like me can meet it.ReplyDelete
Although there is a bit of denial of reality in my belief that the women who slept with me did so because I was the only one offering. Maybe there's research on attitudes of super low partner count people somewhere?ReplyDelete
If it's "women," plural, that's already not super low partner count. I seriously know some virgins who are way less neurotic than you about this crap.ReplyDelete
Sex is nice, man! It's a fun thing two people do together! Or sometimes they don't do it, so they do other nice things like read books they like or go for walks when it's sunny! GET THE FUCK OVER IT!
Man, I go off on a trip with sketchy internet access and come back to find a Eurosabra-stomping in progress. (Hey, I'm a non-existent over 35 married woman.) Carry on!ReplyDelete
I'd settle for women initiating physical contact when they feel attraction, which requires men to make them safe.ReplyDelete
I love initiating. Lots of other women do, to. So either you're meeting the wrong women or you're not so good at making them feel safe.
The entitled attitude would probably be the culprit. Lots of women won't so much as kiss a guy - even if they're really attracted to him - if they think he'll regard that kiss as some kind of sexual contract.
Hell, I date guys off of CL and that whole entitled attitude is the number one thing that sends me running. Why? Because if you are that fucking desperate I can't trust you to listen when I say no. So, therefore, I won't play, even begin to play. OTOH, I've responded to more than a few requests for FWB, because I really want a nice fuckbuddy or two, or a friend, but not a long-term relationship.ReplyDelete
And the number one thing that sends them away? I have white hair. AFAIK, most of them want sweet young things, who don't want them unless they need their bills paid, and so they bitch that nobody real answers their ads. Go figure.
Why some sweet young thing should want a mid 50's guy with a possibly non-functional dick beats me.
I'd settle for women initiating physical contact when they feel attractionReplyDelete
In my (limited) observation, Prickly is right that women don't often do this (some wmen do this, but if you're a straight man and your "strategy" consists solely of putting out signals and waiting for them to be picked up and acted on, I hope you brought a book).
Where we differ is that I think this is a product of culture rather than nature, and I think it's a culture that denies and suppresses women's swexuality and sexual agency rather than one that empowers women over men, and I think women who wait to be approached do it because it's how they've been raised rather than as a means of auditioning or auctioning or "shit-testing."
But again, that's in the real world, it may work diferently in LA and Tel Aviv and clubs.
I have initiated in every single relationship I have been in except in the one that ended in attempted rape.ReplyDelete
Because guys I'm attracted to don't approach me. Hell, for the most part, guys I'm not attracted to don't approach me either. At least I'm old enough that guys I'm not attracted to don't go to great lengths to mock me for my unfuckability.
Yeah, I would say the first one is true. True involuntary celibacy is when your standards for attractiveness dropped to the zero point and still nobody wants to put their penis into your vagina. Even though you keep asking and asking. Men often have sex with really ugly women just because they are availible. Come on, I see how men here offer fat and ugly women sex and even money for it. I don't see female equivalents of these offering fat old men money for sex. No matter how ugly you are, someone will have sex with you, because many men are that desperate. You'd have to lower your standards though. You might not be attracted to men you will get, but you WILL get laid.ReplyDelete
The second statement is just something men with tons of options say, since they can afford to be that shallow, and they are not the only men in the world. So it's not really a contradiction.
I hope you don't take my comment the wrong way, I just say things as I see them.