In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Time to Declare War

I’m with MzNicky: There is a War on Women, and we will fight back. But what if fighting back means not fucking?

We’re at war here, ladies. One might call it a new kind of war. There won’t be much need for reproductive choice if there’s no reproducing, or anything else, goin’ on. Think of it as boycotting a corporation—which, really, it is not unlike— and hit ‘em where it hurts.

Of course, the bad thing about this war is that it hits us where it hurts, too. It probably won’t have much of an effect on wingnut super-religious conservative guys who either (a) aren’t getting any to begin with, (b) are getting some, but feel so guilty about it that they torment themselves enough already, or (c) have “bought the cow” and are getting some occassionally in the dark with their eyes closed for the purposes of procreation and who think the female orgasm is a myth. So, you know, they’re probably a lost cause.

It’s those fair-weather liberal men we need to concentrate on. You know the type: The ones who will swear their allegiance to women’s rights, until it comes to actually doing something about it, or until someone suggests that that perhaps supporting equal rights means losing a few votes in the heartland. Then they’ll argue that, really, it wouldn’t be so bad if Roe were overturned — it would leave our basic bodily autonomy and fundamental human rights in the hands of a majority vote, sure, but it would probably win the Dems a few elections. Or maybe they’re all about other liberal causes — anti-war, anti-racist, environmentally conscious — but when women’s rights come up, they just kind of shrug their shoulders, say it’s not really an issue, and go back to talking about sluts and bitches.

Will the Lysistrata campaign ever work? If not, it’ll mostly be because we just like sex too much. Abstinence blows. (And I speak from a fairly authoritative position on that one). I’m also reluctant to offer pussy as a prize for being a good boy and voting the right way, which is basically what withholding it amounts to. I’m of the mindset that if someone doesn’t think you deserve basic human rights, it’s probably not a great idea to sleep with them in the first place.

However, if we focus on refusing to share our bodies with people who don’t think those bodies are worthy of respect, I’d say we could have a pretty decent campaign underway. Don’t do it with anti-choice men. Don’t do it with men who claim to be pro-choice, but who think that reproductive freedoms should be political bargaining pieces and basic rights should be left up to the tyrrany of the majority. Put women’s rights on the same level as civil rights. We all agree that being a racist bigot makes you a complete fuckwit, and I’d venture to guess that most of us wouldn’t be so quick to brush aside our friends’ use of the n-word, their support of “state’s rights” when it comes to slavery and segregation, or their assertion that whites are naturally “different” from other races, and those differences just happen to be superior and explain why white people pretty much control everything in this country. That, I imagine, would tick us off to the point where we probably wouldn’t want to be in the same room with that person, let alone in the same bed. We need to hold sexism to the same standard. Don’t waste time justifying why some liberal men will call women “bitches” any more than you would justify using the n-word. Don’t waste time justifying why some liberal men think it’s ok to turn women’s rights to our own bodies over to the states, when you wouldn’t try to justify the argument that we should turn slavery or segregation over to the states. Don’t justify the argument that men are naturally superior — or a veiled form of that same argument — when you wouldn’t try and justify an argument of racial superiority.

Women’s rights are human rights, and anyone who has the audacity to argue against those rights is a sexist fuckwit who doesn’t deserve your attention or access to your vagina, even if he is a “liberal.” It’s that simple. If he doesn’t support your rights, he doesn’t support you. I’ve done the shitty mental gymnastics of trying to get out of this one, but misogyny is misogyny. Even if he does read the news paper, has great lips, listens to cool music and votes like a lefty.

Disclaimer: I’m not trying to prescribe anyone else’s sexual choices for them, even though that’s what this post sounds like. I’ll leave that up to the religious right. Fuck who you want to fuck. You aren’t a bad feminist if you do, or a good feminist if you don’t. These are just some long, rambling thoughts.


60 thoughts on Time to Declare War

  1. It probably won’t have much of an effect on wingnut super-religious conservative guys who either (a) aren’t getting any to begin with, (b) are getting some, but feel so guilty about it that they torment themselves enough already, or (c) have “bought the cow” and are getting some occassionally in the dark with their eyes closed for the purposes of procreation and who think the female orgasm is a myth.

    No. You know what? This is a myth. These guys are getting as much as they want, for the very simple reason that otherwise-intelligent liberal women apparently lose all faculties of reason when presented with the arrogance and self-assuredness of a super-religious wingnut. “Confidence” is what they mistake it for, and they operate under the delusion that all these guys need to lighten up about the whole abortion thing (etc) is a little pussy.

    Well, it doesn’t work that way. Feminist women need to start being a little less awful to feminist men and a lot more awful to anti-feminist men if they want to employ a scheme of sexual rewards to enact social change. Or I guess they can fuck who they like. Can we not pretend, though, like it’s liberal feminist men who need to be punished, please?

  2. Chet’s got it right. There are plenty of men that support women’s rights, problem is they’re not the hot muscular jock or the successful businessman that most women (including feminists) go for.

  3. I’ve always held the position that the most effective theatre for the feminist battle is the one bounded by the personal and the intimate.

    Go for it.

    However, be aware that the battle isn’t taking place in a closed system. The borders are porous, and the likely result will be an exodus of men to “foreign” women who aren’t the *&^%$ American Feminist Ballbreakers 🙂 and who embody more traditional gender roles.

    It would be very interesting to chart the progress of such a battle. Very interesting indeed.

  4. These guys are getting as much as they want, for the very simple reason that otherwise-intelligent liberal women apparently lose all faculties of reason when presented with the arrogance and self-assuredness of a super-religious wingnut.

    I can only speak for myself, but this has never happened to me.

    Are feminist women really awful to feminist men? I don’t know about that one. I spent four years dating a feminist man (who was also hot and smart and successful). They exist, and I’d rather spend my time with feminist men than with anti-feminist ones. I also think the argument that “most women like…” is kind of silly. According to popular belief, most men like submissive sweet pretty skinny girls who look like they’re 16 and who will let men feel manly and in control, and who won’t talk back or assert themselves (unless they’re being cute). That definitely isn’t me, or most women I know — and yet most of us manage to go on dates every once in a while. Popular belief would also state that I want to date someone more powerful than me, who makes more money than me and who can financially support my ass and whose personal successes top mine. That doesn’t describe the men I date. Yes, they’re successful, yes they’re smart, and yes they’re hard workers — but there isn’t ever a superiority issue. We’re usually pretty evenly matched. The statement that “men like x” or “women like x” fails, and it fails a lot.

    The point I’m trying to make, though, is that we typically know where the super anti-feminist men stand, and we’re easily able to ignore them. Some women might not ignore the anti-feminist men, and I guess I just feel bad for them because they’ll have a hell of a time reconciling their relationship and their partner’s hatred of women. It’s harder when you’re dealing with nice liberal guys, who believe in equality and human rights until we start talking about women.

    I agree that we shouldn’t punish feminist men; part of my point was that feminist men should be the only ones getting laid. We just shouldn’t reward the men who claim to be liberal and then ignore feminism and women’s rights.

  5. Oh, and TangoMan, any man who would purchase a woman from abroad is an anti-feminist asshole anyway. I don’t think that’s the route that most feminist men would take, and I suspect that any liberal or human-rights-respecting man wouldn’t take it, either. Ideally, the feminist movement can empower women abroad as well, so they don’t end up forced into relationships with the bottom-feeders who purchase women and/or who believe that women owe him servitude under the guise of “tradition.”

    Oh, and I think the idea that foreign women naturally or voluntarily encompass more traditional gender roles is bullshit. I think many women, foreign or not, emcompass traditional gener roles strategically or out of necessity. Too many of our ideas about “foreign” women are based on racist, orientalist stereotypes. Asian women are not all submissive. Black women are not all hyper-sexual (and, on the other hand, asexual mammies). Latina women are not all religious and family-oriented. Yes, there are cultural differences, but attributing personality characteristics to entire races and ethnic groups is pretty stupid. Just as stupid, in fact, as attributing personality characteristics to people based on their sex.

    I also think that many intelligent men genuinely want a companion who is their equal, not someone who’s a glorified slave. I cannot think of a single decent person I know who would say, “Well, smart, independent, interesting women won’t fuck me, and clearly this means there’s something wrong with all of them, so I’ll just head over to the Orient and get me a nice gal who will.” Anyone who says that is not decent; he’s a pig who sees women as less than human, and I hope his wife is able to get the help she will undoubtedly need.

  6. I think this should run in both directions. Feminist men should stay away from non-feminist women, regardless of how otherwise attractive they might be.

    I’m not going to go into the details, but there was a woman I was attracted to recently who basically volunteered to be a tool of the patriarchy. Not only was I stunned by what she was saying, but I suddenly found her a lot less attractive.

  7. Jill,

    Purchasing a foreign woman is only the extreme of “foreign.” I apologize for not being clearer by what I meant by “foreign.” For instance, the majority of women in the US don’t identify as feminists and would be outside of the feminist sex strike movement, hence “foreign” or there are a lot of women in the US who are raised in immigrant sub-cultures who have different views on male-female relationships that aren’t filtered through a feminist power lens. Just look at the religious sub-cultures and the gender relationships there.

    As I said, the boundaries are porous so a sex-strike would compell some men to re-focus their behavior/ideology to be more in tune with the feminist agenda. Others would go in the opposite direction to women from various sub-cultures and other countries.

    I don’t think that’s the route that most feminist men would take, and I suspect that any liberal or human-rights-respecting man wouldn’t take it, either.

    I’m not sure about the logic of this. Usually, the mail order bride practice is derided because it is the attitudes of the men and what they expect of the women that is frowned upon. If you take an “enlightened” man then those concerns evaporate. That “enlightened” man would be treating the women in a respectfull, and equal, manner. He wouldn’t be viewing the arrangement as one where he is buying her, but rather one where he is using the service for matchmaking or introduction. You get the idea – such an “enlightened” guy would still be true to his feminist or human rights core beliefs and be improving the life of the woman he loved. So, feminist guys won’t think they are “buying” a woman, they’ll think they’re just using an introduction service to find a woman that they’ll love, . .

    Yes, there are cultural differences, but attributing personality characteristics to entire races and ethnic groups is pretty stupid.

    Yes, this is a common fallacy. One can certainly describe group characteristics in a statistical fashion but one can’t infer any particular individual’s behavior from their group’s characteristics.

    BTW, have you seen this student film from UCSD – Yellow Fever is a film about some Asian guy who is on a quest to understand why Asian women date White guys more frequently than White women date Asian guys, and so on, and so on. Quite funny.

    I also think that many intelligent men genuinely want a companion who is their equal, not someone who’s a glorified slave.

    I generally agree, especially when you paint the situation is such stark terms – equal vs.slave. What’s equal though? A woman who is ever on the alert for signs of “patriarchy” in her personal relationship and analyzes the interactions within her personal relationship through a power lens is likely to be a turn-off to most guys who are fully into an equal partnership but don’t want everything filtered through a power lens. For example, take some radical feminist who objects to the tendency of women being the cuddled and the men being the cuddlers and wants to switch off on the cuddling/cuddler on a 50/50 basis. To me, such a feminist is off the deep end with her social construction of gender fantasy. So, what is equal? Or take a case that from my past – I used to be a competive ballroom dancer, and as a young man, I once partnered with a woman who was just starting and was on a personal crusade to overturn gender roles and she wanted to switch the lead and follow roles. Needless to say I let continue her crusade for gender equity without my involvement.

    I cannot think of a single decent person I know who would say, “Well, smart, independent, interesting women won’t fuck me, and clearly this means there’s something wrong with all of them, so I’ll just head over to the Orient and get me a nice gal who will.” Anyone who says that is not decent; he’s a pig who sees women as less than human, and I hope his wife is able to get the help she will undoubtedly need.

    If you restrict the analysis to simply fucking, then I too don’t know anyone who can’t get any. Open the analysis to getting married, and then I dispute your charge. I know a guy who was a loser in the game of love – he dated women but the women always bailed. I knew one of those women – she said he wasn’t masculine enough and too timid and reserved and though she found his mind attractive and found his personality to be quite generous, he just didn’t light her fire. Lack of chemistry, despite his solid feminist sympathies. Finally, he’d had enough of the rejection and found a woman in Russia, lived over there with her and her son for nearly a year, married her, and came back with a family. His wife got recredentialed as a physician here and is practicing, so she is fully capable of divorcing him and being self-supporting, but they seem like a happy couple.

    So, if you’re prepared to extend you analysis to all situations and call all such men pigs, then you’re simply arguing against a stereotype, just like the racists and sexists you deride.

  8. Going on what Matthew stated, I have found some men attracted to more assertive, intelligent women.

    But that is where it ends. They still seem attracted on the whole, to women who live up to the ideal of the ‘attractive’ woman first and then seek out her other traits later.

    I have long abandoned any effort to fit into the mold of the idealized woman I am supposed to emulate; attractive, wearing markers of compliance to femininity such as high heels or skirts, or make-up, etc. That is my refusal to live to the whims of the patriarchy.

    I have been openly criticized for this and yet also in my profession I find that by dressing in such a way (outside of my hating it) I would be judged unfit to compete in a typically male dominated industry and thus not gain financially.

    Gloria Steinem does me no justice when she would appear at speaking engagements decked out in leather miniskirts and the rest, as an expression of her liberated existance. It makes me gag. A woman who dresses to exploit her sexuality does nothing but make hay for the patriarchy and makes a cartoon of the feminist.

    Women should stop being accessories of the patriarchy by stop dressing themselves in ways that exaggerate their sexuality. As long as women continue to wear clothes that do such, they continue to fit into the mold of the patriarchy which sees women as merely objects of sexual gratification.

    I find this and this alone to be the most compelling statement a woman can make on a daily basis regarding her willingness to fit into a mold.

    Godbags and assholes stay away, once of course they realize that they cannot ‘conform’ her to change her ways and dress for their entertainment.

    I have been overweight for some ten years now and it has been a mixed blessing as men generally ignore me. But unfortunately, when a woman is ignored or dismissed, often her ideas, thoughts and value are also routinely dismissed as well. This is not to say i have been devoid of companionship that I enjoy, it is just that I don’t enjoy the priviledge of automated attention from men, that might I add, I took for granted when not finding it annoying.

    I intend to get fit again, but now that I have matured, I won’t be inclined to dress the way I once did. It will be interesting to see how many men will be attracted to a fit, naturally attractive and intelligent female without all the trappings of attention getting, competitve, sexualized dress.

    And as for the godbags who scorn women who dress overtly sexual as ‘hussies’ and the like, they wish the same compliance, only toned down a bit so as to not trigger their sexual guilt monitor, so the difference in my mind, is insignificant, it all has the same end.

    So the solution: Women need to stop focusing on their sexuality as their predominant feature of worth. Then they may work on building their identities, seperate from their fitness as caretakers and breeders. Then see who wants to be with them for their more human traits.

  9. The easiest way to not hurt the liberal, feminist men is just to get to know the person you’re about to fuck. It’s easy for me, I’m married to him 🙂 My husband is not highly political (I had to shake my head and sigh when he could name only one Supreme Court Justice the night of the State of the Union, and that was Roberts) but he respects me, treats me as an equal, defers to me on topics where I know more than he does and does his fair and equal share of housework and childcare. He doesn’t expect me to be his maid, his mother, his servant or his own personal sex object, he takes me pretty much as I am and he deals with a lot of bullshit along the way. That to me, means he is definately fuckable. See, when you treat women like actual human beings, we’re more inclined to have sex with you, I think it’s fairly easy.
    I remember when our son had been diagnosed with a fatal conditon while in utero. We both had said going in that if that’s what they discovered, we weren’t terminating. And then the doctor laid out the risks to me, and they were fairly serious… and my thoughtful, loving husband looked at me and said “it’s your body, your risks and your choice… I respect whatever you decide”. I did gently correct him and tell him that while I appreciated it, this was his child as well and I wanted him to be part of the decision making process, but my husband earned my utmost respect that day. He showed me that he loved me and respected me enough as a person to put aside his personal discomforts (I was fairly far along at this point, around 22 weeks) and respect and support whatever decision I made, even knowing I could choose something he would personally never choose, because it was my body and my life at risk and not his.

  10. Well, it doesn’t work that way. Feminist women need to start being a little less awful to feminist men and a lot more awful to anti-feminist men if they want to employ a scheme of sexual rewards to enact social change. Or I guess they can fuck who they like. Can we not pretend, though, like it’s liberal feminist men who need to be punished, please?

    I agree! Jill, go have sex with a feminist man! Right this instant! And don’t you dare demand that he go down on you! I’m gonna go find a trannychaser who at least tries not to use misogynist slurs, and offer him a blowjob!

    Did you read her post? This is her description of the kind of guy feminist women should stop getting off with:

    It’s those fair-weather liberal men we need to concentrate on. You know the type: The ones who will swear their allegiance to women’s rights, until it comes to actually doing something about it, or until someone suggests that that perhaps supporting equal rights means losing a few votes in the heartland. Then they’ll argue that, really, it wouldn’t be so bad if Roe were overturned — it would leave our basic bodily autonomy and fundamental human rights in the hands of a majority vote, sure, but it would probably win the Dems a few elections. Or maybe they’re all about other liberal causes — anti-war, anti-racist, environmentally conscious — but when women’s rights come up, they just kind of shrug their shoulders, say it’s not really an issue, and go back to talking about sluts and bitches.

    That’s not feminist in any sense but the self-identified one, okay? Those men are feminist like Joseph Lieberman is a left-winger, and they deserve exactly as much gratitude. They don’t give a fuck about women, and they should be given neither cookies nor sex for their marginally-less-sexist stance.

  11. Don’t worry, there will be “comfort” in the trenches. Lemme see…my choices are wild crazy unrestrined liberated feminists or repressed, issue-ridden, passive-aggresive BushGals. My choice would be…lemme think now….

  12. Will the Lysistrata campaign ever work? If not, it’ll mostly be because we just like sex too much.

    Nah. Everybody (well, mostly everybody) likes sex; it will fail because constraint theory favors men.

    Background: All systems contain constraints. The constraint is the chokepoint or the bottleneck in the system. In (say) a factory, the constraint is often the least efficient workstation on the assembly line – if the painter can only paint 100 cars a day, then the output of the plant is 100 cars a day, even if the welders can do 1000 a day. If you modify the constraint – add another painter – then the constraint may move (now it’s the seat assemblers, who can only do 170 a day). But there will always be a constraint, no matter what. Businesses use this knowledge to focus improvements on constraint areas rather than non-constrait areas; it wouldn’t make any sense to train your welders to be more efficient if they aren’t what’s holding back your production.

    For quite some time (say, up until 1960), the dominant sexual paradigm in Western reproductive culture was based on everyone agreeing to pretend that the constraint was women’s desire for sex. Women pretended to be not interested in sex, and to participate reluctantly as part of marital duty or to perpetuate the species – certainly not because they enjoyed it! Men pretended to have infinite lust, forever suppressed because those darn women just don’t want it as much as we do, shucks. Most people – certainly most sexually active people – knew that this was a crock, but played along. The reasons for this pretense can be characterized as being a patriarchal plot to control women’s behavior, or as a paternalistic plot to make people’s lives as good as they can be under difficult circumstances. In any event, that system is largely broken down.

    In reality, as everyone knows, the real constraint on sex (i.e., how much sex does society have, collectively) is male desire and ability to perform. The horniest man in the world, the Priapus of the age, stoked on Viagra, could – maybe – keep up with a sexually average woman who was “liberated” (i.e. – ignoring or ignorant of the old pretense about her disinterest in sex) – for a couple of weeks. Until her cycle kicked into high gear and his heart gave out. Men who want sex once a day are above average in terms of their desire. The average man, paired with the average woman, is not nearly as interested in sex as she is.

    A large part of the continuing, pervasive power of the patriarchy, is the fact that men hold most of the cards in the sexual game. The limited supply of hard cock is the constraint on human sexuality, and men control 100% of the hard cock. (Things like dildoes and such are like nicotine patches; useful but ultimately insufficient substitutes for the real thing. It isn’t a phallus that straight women desire, it’s a MAN – and vice versa, of course. There’s a reason that sex toys haven’t replaced sex.)

    I predict that “penis power” will become more, not less, dominant as time passes. The reasons for this are the Pill, the availability of safe, legal surgical abortion, and antibiotics/antivirals. Before these technological advances, fear kept the local systems in line – fear of disease and pregnancy. Fear is a desire-killer. But the reasons for fear are somewhat dissipated. A woman can be as sexually free as her ability to find partners permits, and current generations of women have never lived without abortion, never lived without birth control, never lived in a world where having non-monogamous sex was a guaranteed ticket to syphilis and other horrors.

    This is the underlying reason for nice, liberal men who you’d think would be supportive of women’s rights, but who aren’t. The reason is that they don’t have to be. They can still get some of the effectively infinite quantity of pussy that’s out there without going to all the trouble of having to listen to feminist wah-wah-wah. They have the power, and they know it isn’t going anywhere.

    This is the underlying reason that we’ve developed drugs to increase male sexual desire and ability to perform, while largely ignoring the same for women. An increase in the supply of hard cock has real value in the system; an increase in the supply of wet pussy is of zero value.

    This is one underlying reason for housework and childcare workload discrepancies between the genders. Sexually speaking, the man in the partnership is bringing something to the table. The woman isn’t. In order to make the transaction valuable to the man, she has to give something up – and that something is the privilege of holding the higher-status jobs and doing the more enjoyable parts of the work.

    So the bottom line, Jill, is that you can take yourself out of the sexual marketplace anytime you want, as can all the feminists on earth – but it’s unlikely to do any good. The quantity of sexual access provided by the sisters who won’t join the boycott will still swamp the quantity of sexual access demanded by men.

  13. kate,

    I was recently talking one of my housemates and she said something to the effect of “I probably wouldn’t date a guy who wears birkenstocks.” At first I thought this was a sortof shallow thing to say, but then I realised I have the same problem: I said to her “I guess that’s understandable, since I’m really put-off by women who wear high heels.” Then she says “Wait a minute, I wear high heels! You’re judging me!” and started telling me why high heels are necessary (um, ok). I tried to explain that I don’t have anything against women who wear high heels, I just tend to find that I’m less attracted to the personalities of the makeup/skirt/heels type.

    Anyway, this all made me wonder how many of us realise that makeup/heels for women — or giant muscles for men — might actually limit the type of people who find us attractive.

  14. If radical feminists boycott sex, the only thing you will accomplish is the extinction of your bloodlines, which is probably a good thing.

  15. Yay to kate! I agree tremendously. Stop saying that you don’t define yourself by your sexuality and continue to dress and present yourself like you do. Problems, problems.

  16. Dear My Fellow Male People:

    STOP IT. Who the fuck do you think you’re doing favours to here?

    This fucking “women choose the arrogant confident men over the shy quiet ones” crap just ain’t gonna fly any more, guys. I mean, seriously, You’re making us all look like idiots here. Which would be alright, except you’re making me look like an idiot.

    Onnaccounna, see, I happen to be a guy who (I strongly suspect) is not an asshole. And so when you say, “i am a guy who is not an asshole but we nice guys just cant keep up with u women who like teh strong assholes it’s a biological imperative i guess i’ll hafta become an asshole i love women SO MUCH WHY DO THEY MAKE ME HATE THEM”…
    Well, it reflects badly, guys. It reflects badly on those of us who not only aren’t assholes, but also, we’re not psychopaths.

    What you’re basically saying, don’t you see, is you’re basically saying that not only are most men assholes, but that they are so because women with the fickle and wanton manipulation of innocent bright-eyed menfolk by divilish chicanery and the withholding of their sex make them that way.
    Guys. Really. I’ll say it again. It ain’t feminist pro-sisterhood thinking to complain that you’d be a nice guy but that the ladies can’t save themselves from choosing the wrong man. No. Actually, that’s moronic, counter-productive, insulting to everyone included in your statement (that’d be men and women, then), and, this is the part that makes the indefensibility of your position truly accessible, it’s just bullshit.

    I don’t want to hear your reasons for holding this ridiculous view, and in return, I have no inclination to provide you with demonstrable proof that it is crap. It’s common fucking sense, and it’s the sort of thing that, honestly, guys, if you’re reading a blog called Feministe in the first damn place, folks really oughtn’t to have to spell it out to you.

    There endeth the sermon. I don’t want to have to say this again, fellas.

  17. Of course, the bad thing about this war is that it hits us where it hurts, too.

    So wank. ‘Swhat the rest of us do when we’re not getting any. On the other hand, you may discover that more men support you than you think – but perhaps we’ve been overlooked in favor of ripped muscles and overflowing wallets like another poster suggested. After all, if we support the idea that women shouldn’t have to be always on parade, it’s not a huge stretch to believing that men shouldn’t either.

  18. In response to the comment that witholding sex “…hits us where it hurts, too,” I would only say that there is always the option of sex with another woman.

    In that case, not only do you get the pleasure of enjoying your sexuality, but you can do it without the risk of pregnancy and having to worry about the womb police!

  19. Robert, your argument makes no sense. If, as you say, what heterosexual women want is not just a phallus but a man, then they don’t need the man’s erection in order to have sex. If, on the other hand, what they want is sex with a hard penis (which is what you imply when you name male erectile capability, not any other aspect of male sexuality, as the bottleneck), a dildo works just fine. In other words, a woman who wants the combination of man to have sex with and hard, penis-shaped object in the vagina can manage that without the man in question having an erection. Your entire definition of sex is penis-in-orifice, which implies a lack of imagination on the part of the men involved.

  20. The limited supply of hard cock is the constraint on human sexuality, and men control 100% of the hard cock.

    But only 50% of the tongues and 50% of the fingers. And none of the shower massages.

  21. zuzu:

    There you go picking on poor Johnson again! 🙂

    As you pointed out in another place he may not always be sufficient or necessary; still the poor boy is not without some utility at least that’s what g/f says. Still, like all the good “girl parts” what matters is who they are attached to. I suspect, if you cut off the controllers and misogynists that there will plenty of tongue/finger/Johnson owners to…ummm…suffice and act as willing allies.

  22. These guys are getting as much as they want, for the very simple reason that otherwise-intelligent liberal women apparently lose all faculties of reason when presented with the arrogance and self-assuredness of a super-religious wingnut.

    If it’s not too late to backpedal, I realized that I overgeneralized, here. I was wrong to imply this was a universal phenomenon; I’ve just been dicked over by far too many intelligent, progressive women who used my respect for their personal space and my desire not to be a controlling invasive boyfriend as a cover to betray me for some mouth-breathing idiot godbag.

    What you’re basically saying, don’t you see, is you’re basically saying that not only are most men assholes, but that they are so because women with the fickle and wanton manipulation of innocent bright-eyed menfolk by divilish chicanery and the withholding of their sex make them that way.

    You see to be under the mistaken impression that I’m going to change who I am to get laid. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The problem isn’t that I’m not an asshole; the problem is otherwise-intelligent women who refuse to act like adults instead of indulging their obsession with the “guy you don’t bring home to mom.” They don’t create assholes that way, I don’t think. If I became an asshole that would be my fault. (Maybe it’s too late?) But if we’re going to talk about using sex to reward behavior let’s talk about what behavior is more often than not already being rewarded.

    The average man, paired with the average woman, is not nearly as interested in sex as she is.

    Cite, Robert? Or is this just another one of your Robert-brand made-up statistics?

  23. The fact that any guy is capable of asserting that women en masse are into guys “with ripped muscles” confirms what I’ve suspected for years: that men have NO FUCKING CLUE what most women find attractive. If they did, why is virtually every media image of “hot, sexy” males supposedly directed at women basically a gay male stereotype?

    And as for the “overflowing wallet” thing?: oh gawd, please. That’s YOUR fantasy as well, boys, okay?

    Maybe you losers could get laid if you actually, y’know, *listened* to real, live women for a change instead of basing all your opinions on characters in bad American television programmes and porn rags.

  24. You see to be under the mistaken impression that I’m going to change who I am to get laid. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The problem isn’t that I’m not an asshole; the problem is otherwise-intelligent women who refuse to act like adults instead of indulging their obsession with the “guy you don’t bring home to mom.” They don’t create assholes that way, I don’t think. If I became an asshole that would be my fault. (Maybe it’s too late?) But if we’re going to talk about using sex to reward behavior let’s talk about what behavior is more often than not already being rewarded.

    In other words, let’s talk about women changing who they are so that you can get laid.

  25. You see to be under the mistaken impression that I’m going to change who I am to get laid. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The problem isn’t that I’m not an asshole; the problem is otherwise-intelligent women who refuse to act like adults instead of indulging their obsession with the “guy you don’t bring home to mom.” They don’t create assholes that way, I don’t think. If I became an asshole that would be my fault. (Maybe it’s too late?) But if we’re going to talk about using sex to reward behavior let’s talk about what behavior is more often than not already being rewarded.

    Oh, such a classic “nice guy” whine.

    Listen, Chet: you’re not entitled to pussy. That’s the beginning and end of it, there. There is nothing you can say or do that will change that. The most you’re entitled to is a chance to persuade a pussy-American to allow you access to her pussy.

    Acting like an asshole isn’t going to make you entitled to pussy, nor is acting like a clingy dork who thinks that all women just want jerks.

    You’ll get laid when you stop acting like you’re entitled to pussy, and when you stop thinking that being an asshole is the key (because guess what? By dismissing all women as feckless wretches whose heads are turned by maltreatment because you can’t get laid, you’re acting like an asshole who feels entitled to pussy). Start by individuating. You know that you don’t want the same things as your guy friends. Hey — women work the same way! They’re individuals! They don’t necessarily want the same things that other women do!

    In other words, Chet: no, you shouldn’t change who you are to get laid, but you should change how you think about the people you’re trying to get laid with.

  26. It’s been my experince that a good attitude is the most attractive feature for a person to cultivate, though of course looks help. I’ve got a slim, athletic build with nice abs and calves the size of footballs and I spent years not getting laid. It was my attitude and self-perception. Once I improved those, more women found me worth dating.

  27. I have to admit that the muscles would not exactly be a downside – husband and I were watching “Murderball” last night, and I confess I had to fan myself a few times – but, heck, one can always fantasize about the muscles; it’s harder to fantasize about the absence of jerkiness.

  28. Hey, my husband is a shy, quiet man who manages to get laid on a fairly regular basis and did even before we got married. Again, it’s not assholes vs. nice guys, it’s men who think women are actual human beings vs. something we like to have sex with and pretend like we care about.

  29. What the fuck?

    Listen, Chet: you’re not entitled to pussy.

    Who said I thought I was? Oh, right. I get it. I’m a man, so I must be nothing more to you than a penis with a guidance system, locked on to the nearest vagina.

    Just put me in your little mental box, if it makes you feel better. For the record this isn’t about sex, it’s about the right to be treated like a decent human being.

    Acting like an asshole isn’t going to make you entitled to pussy, nor is acting like a clingy dork who thinks that all women just want jerks.

    And I love that the feminist response to female infidelity is the same as society as a whole – it’s the man’s fault. He must have been “clingy” or inadequate in some way. I would have thought that feminists, at least, would have locked onto the sexist double standard there but apparently that one sailed right past you.

    By dismissing all women as feckless wretches whose heads are turned by maltreatment because you can’t get laid, you’re acting like an asshole who feels entitled to pussy

    It wasn’t my intent to dismiss all women this way. But it needs to be understood that this behavior is far too common, and far too commonly given tacit approval by persons exactly like yourself.

  30. Just put me in your little mental box, if it makes you feel better. For the record this isn’t about sex, it’s about the right to be treated like a decent human being.

    Then why are you commenting on a thread about sex, objecting to the withholding of sex, and complaining about how women aren’t sexually or romantically attracted to you?

    And I love that the feminist response to female infidelity is the same as society as a whole – it’s the man’s fault. He must have been “clingy” or inadequate in some way. I would have thought that feminists, at least, would have locked onto the sexist double standard there but apparently that one sailed right past you.

    You’re going to define a woman’s disinterest in you from the get-go as “infidelity” and you wonder why people might attribute a teensy little sense of entitlement to you? Um, okay. Zuzu wasn’t talking about all men. She was talking about your attitude, how it must never be confused with actually being a “nice guy,” and how it might well be affecting your ability to get laid.

    It wasn’t my intent to dismiss all women this way. But it needs to be understood that this behavior is far too common, and far too commonly given tacit approval by persons exactly like yourself.

    Why does it “need to be understood” that far too many women are superficial golddiggers who only want to sleep with assholes? Because you say so?

  31. Just put me in your little mental box, if it makes you feel better. For the record this isn’t about sex, it’s about the right to be treated like a decent human being.

    Right. And being treated like a decent human being means not being subjected to some guy’s “bitches ain’t nothin’ but cheatin’ hos” attitude because he’s been romantically disappointed.

    Want to be treated decently? Treat decently. Which means that if one woman cheats on you, don’t draw a conclusion about all women.

    It wasn’t my intent to dismiss all women this way. But it needs to be understood that this behavior is far too common, and far too commonly given tacit approval by persons exactly like yourself.

    But you did dismiss all women this way, and the sooner you realize that, the sooner you’ll be on your way to treating women like individual human beings, and the sooner you’ll start getting lucky.

    By the way, what exactly are “persons exactly like” myself?

  32. I find the new direction of this thread very interesting. Chet makes an empirical observation of what is transpiring in the mating game and is rebutted by ideologically pleasing feminist dogma that is totally devoid of reference to biology.

    This is the cads v. dads mating strategy playing out. We know that higher doses of testosterone affects male personality, fitness, and facial features. Further, there have been a number of studies which correlate female attraction against testosterone levels. Also, there have been attempts to track the cads v dads issue into the realm of cuckolded relationships but as you can imagine getting reliable data in that sensitive situation is difficult. The sociological data (with no reference to testosterone levels) indicates that the flings were usually with men who were Cad types, rather than Dad types.

    Here is a layman’s report from the BBC on how women react to faces that have been feminized and masculinized through digitial manipulation. More femininized faces have a greater Dad appeal compared to the more masculinized Cads:

    “A masculine face is linked to high testosterone levels, which demonstrates good genetic qualities.

    “Those women who prefer masculine men are selecting genetic benefits for their children, despite the fact that high testosterone levels can also increase the likelihood that the male will have an affair.

    “Those men with a feminine face tend to be associated with stability and caring,” he added.

    Women who considered themselves highly attractive were more willing to take a risk with a highly testosterone-charged male, and were less likely to fear such a man straying.

  33. “Oh, and TangoMan, any man who would purchase a woman from abroad is an anti-feminist asshole anyway”

    But is he buying her from a broad? I had the idea that mostly men brokered those arrangements. 🙂

    I have to agree that the Lysistrata idea won’t be a whole lot of use. I’m pro-life, and even if I were unmarried, I wouldn’t want to have sex with a woman who considered it none of my business what happened to my offspring. If I’m going to have sex, it will be with someone who regards my rights as equal to hers. (Not that anybody here is feeling a great sense of loss at not being able to sleep with me anyway.)

  34. I have to agree that the Lysistrata idea won’t be a whole lot of use. I’m pro-life, and even if I were unmarried, I wouldn’t want to have sex with a woman who considered it none of my business what happened to my offspring. If I’m going to have sex, it will be with someone who regards my rights as equal to hers. (Not that anybody here is feeling a great sense of loss at not being able to sleep with me anyway.)

    No, not with puns like that.

    And I hate to keep harping on the whole RTP thing, but Jill’s argument was about men who say they’re pro-choice but are actually perfectly willing to throw women’s rights under the train for the sake of electing Democrats. Rejecting you was never a point of contention in the first place.

  35. By the way, what exactly are “persons exactly like” myself?

    You know, skirts. Chicks. She-beings. The vulvularly blessed.

    GIRLS, is what I’m trying to get across, here.

  36. A minor point, if I may:

    The argument here about marginally less sexist men is well-taken, but I hope we can distinguish between those men, and pro-feminist/feminist men who are generally on the right side of things, but who sometimes make mistakes.

    Yes, I’ve got someone like *ahem* myself in mind. As feminist as I try to be, the fact that I am 1) a man and 2) in a sexist culture means that I won’t be perfectly immune to picking up sexist messages and that I will occasionally transmit them. This doesn’t mean, of course, that I shouldn’t be held responsible for what I say or do, but rather that I don’t want to be written off as an irredeemably sexist jerk if I stumble from time to time.

  37. Will the Lysistrata campaign ever work?

    Anyone who has not actually READ Lysistrata should really refrain from pontificating about it. The damn play is a comedy, and the striking women suffer just as much as the men.

    As for a ‘campaign’, sorry, I can’t see any kind of pussy strike as feminist. Whoopie, we’re playing the “no sex until I get that ring” game, we’re just making something other than a wedding ring the prize.

    Staying away from misogynists, anti-feminists, and anyone who sees you as breeding stock is good policy under any circumstances. Trying to turn it into a pressure tactic is ludicrous.

    As for TangoMan, the bawling that men are going to take their penises and go home is a favorite theme of men’s-rights extremists: you know, because American women are all bitches, right-thinking men will go marry compliant Filipinas and then those Ameriskanks will be sorry, blah blah blah. I’ve never understood why this is supposed to be a threat–I might end up on my own instead of with an asshole? This is scary, why?

  38. But you did dismiss all women this way, and the sooner you realize that, the sooner you’ll be on your way to treating women like individual human beings, and the sooner you’ll start getting lucky.

    I think I’ve made it absolutely that I do realize that I did this, apologized for it, and have stated repeatedly that it has not ever been my intention to assert that this is true of all women. I don’t know how to be clearer about it.

    By the way, what exactly are “persons exactly like” myself?

    People that assume that, any time there’s a conflict between a man and a woman, it’s the man’s fault. I’m highly sensitive to the idea that men have structured society in was advantageous to themselves and disadvantageous to women; but when you perpetuate the concept that a woman’s mistakes are always the fault of the nearest man, you perpetuate the social control that dehumanizes women. I’m sure that’s something you’re not inclined to hear from a man, but try to see past my penis for a moment, ok?

  39. People that assume that, any time there’s a conflict between a man and a woman, it’s the man’s fault.

    As long as we’re hand-waving, many “people” assume just the opposite. Women being unreasonable, PMS-prone, bitchy and manipulative and all that.

  40. Undoubtedly too much time has passed for me to add a followup to my original comment, but I’m going to anyway.

    When I said I was attracted to the woman in question, I didn’t mean that I thought she was good looking and that’s why I was attracted to her. She is good looking, but I had spent enough time around her to conclude that she is an interesting person. At the moment that I lost interest, it’s because she became less interesting than I had previously thought.

    After rereading my first comment and kate’s response, I feel like I should clarify what I meant.

  41. Women being unreasonable, PMS-prone, bitchy and manipulative and all that.

    How about this – people are responsible for their own mistakes. Or am I just out in crazy-land or something?

    I mean, yeah. There’s people that blame women for everything, too. Granted, absolutely. How about we stick people with no more or less blame than they deserve?

  42. People that assume that, any time there’s a conflict between a man and a woman, it’s the man’s fault. I’m highly sensitive to the idea that men have structured society in was advantageous to themselves and disadvantageous to women; but when you perpetuate the concept that a woman’s mistakes are always the fault of the nearest man, you perpetuate the social control that dehumanizes women. I’m sure that’s something you’re not inclined to hear from a man, but try to see past my penis for a moment, ok?

    Quotes, please. Because I don’t know where you’re getting this from.

  43. Quotes, please. Because I don’t know where you’re getting this from.

    Your own posts. I related my tale of female inconstancy, and you turned it around and blamed me.

    But, you know, whatever. Just dismiss me. I have a penis; what could I possibly add to the discussion?

  44. Robert,

    For quite some time (say, up until 1960), the dominant sexual paradigm in Western reproductive culture was based on everyone agreeing to pretend that the constraint was women’s desire for sex. Women pretended to be not interested in sex, and to participate reluctantly as part of marital duty or to perpetuate the species – certainly not because they enjoyed it!

    That is the most ahistorical thing I’ve ever read. You might want to acknowlege that for most of Western history the dominant sexual paradigm was male ownership of women as chattel property (either private, as in marriage, or public, as in prostitution) for the purposes of sexual gratification and the social reproduction of patriachy. Women didn’t agree to anything, they were compelled by legal, extra-legal and economic force.

  45. That’s the dominant reproductive paradigm, surely, Lorenzo. I meant the dominant sexual paradigm, in terms of sexual desire and experience.

    As for the notion that women have had no agency in human history, I politely demur, but we aren’t going to settle that one here, so let’s not start it.

  46. the dominant sexual paradigm in Western reproductive culture was based on everyone agreeing to pretend that the constraint was women’s desire for sex

    After the Enlightenment, yes. All of Western culture before centered around the idea of Woman as sexually ravenous, lust-added creature, with Man as the rational, calm half of humanity. “All witchcraft springs from carnal lust, which in women is insatiable” didn’t spring out of anyone agreeing to pretend that women didn’t want sex all that much.

  47. I believe Mythago nailed it in #40.

    Also, considering the fact that the Religious Right appears to be more worried about “irresponsibility”, as in premarital sex with contraceptives, than feti (this is evidenced by the fact that they oppose comprehensive sex ed, availability to contaceptives etc., as all these tend to reduce the number of abortions. Again, kudos to pro-lifers who advocate for policies that reduce the need for abortions), I think this Lysistrata campaign plays directly in the hands of the fundamentalists: The goal appears to be stopping people (=women, men usually are not considered guilty. Boys will be boys and all that.) from having (non-impregnating) sex.

    It doesn’t make sense, but that really appears to be the intention.

  48. Your own posts. I related my tale of female inconstancy, and you turned it around and blamed me.

    But, you know, whatever. Just dismiss me. I have a penis; what could I possibly add to the discussion?

    Oh, Jesus. Get over yourself. Here’s how you started this:

    You know what? This is a myth. These guys are getting as much as they want, for the very simple reason that otherwise-intelligent liberal women apparently lose all faculties of reason when presented with the arrogance and self-assuredness of a super-religious wingnut. “Confidence” is what they mistake it for, and they operate under the delusion that all these guys need to lighten up about the whole abortion thing (etc) is a little pussy.

    Well, it doesn’t work that way. Feminist women need to start being a little less awful to feminist men and a lot more awful to anti-feminist men if they want to employ a scheme of sexual rewards to enact social change. Or I guess they can fuck who they like. Can we not pretend, though, like it’s liberal feminist men who need to be punished, please?

    Your problems do not stem from you having a penis — though given how you lump all women (or at least liberal women) into a group, I can see where you get the idea that others also do this. Your problems stem from your own issues. That you have a penis is incidental; that you cannot individuate is central.

  49. zuzu:

    Been reading Chet’s stuff and I just gotta ask…

    When was the last time your heart went all atwitter over an arrogant and self-assured “super religious wingnut?” Inquiring minds want to know!!!

    Chet, would you rather be dismissed by a penis owner than a vagina owner? I’ll volunteer.

    And, dear boy, perhaps you should listen to these women. It’s not that often they publicly give out the secrets of how to get laid. There are none so deaf as those who will not hear.

  50. I want to know where this “withholding sex” thing comes from.

    I don’t “Withhold’ sex from conservative guys, or otherwise conservative-lite guys who call themselves Democrats. I’m disinclined to sleep with them because anybody who argues that my life is less valuable then a potential life is not my type of thing. I’m not really into the humiliation kink.

    The guys who are willing to sleep WITH me are either actively pro-choice, or respectfully non-involved. Because anyone who says otherwise in the pre-sex talk (imagine that, having actual conversations about the consequences of sex before engaging in the act…how wanton harlet of me) turns me off.

  51. I was briefly dating a liberal Catholic guy in college. But I broke up with him the minute I found out he was not pro-choice.

    I have never, ever, ever, ever been attracted to a conservative christian man.

    I would think that it would be horrible to date a man who was not actively pro-choice.

  52. On history and agency:

    Of course everyone has agency: See, for example, all the books on slave resistance.

    But equality between humans is quite rare. There are many different levels of legal, social and political rights and status.

  53. And, dear boy, perhaps you should listen to these women. It’s not that often they publicly give out the secrets of how to get laid.

    Can we dismiss the fiction that this is about my non-existent sexual frustration? I’ve been specifically refusing to make statements like “oh, I get all the pussy I want” because they’re irrelevant, trivializing, and rude. I was sort of hoping that my discussion partners could do the same.

    The problem is not now, and has never been, getting women to be attracted to me or have sex with me. The problem is intelligent liberal women betraying me in extremely hurtful ways simply because these ridiculous douchebags asked them to. And don’t think I didn’t think long and hard if it was all my fault. The women themselves assured me that it was not. I came to the conclusion that it was not something I was doing.

    But, predictably, you’d rather make disparaging comments about a man you don’t even know than recognize the possibility that a woman has done something wrong. You know, whatever. Just as long as our biases are out front, I guess.

    Relaying my own personal narrative was a mistake. I had presumed that this website was a place where an individual’s unique perspective would be appreciated. Apparently that’s only true for people who at one point in time have had a vagina. Would you have treated a rape victim this way? Only if it was a man, I guess.

  54. Chet:

    Your perspective is hardly unique. The whinny ‘nice guy’ is a dime a dozen. Yes it was your fault, for what reason I know not. I seriously doubt it was liberality. You must consider that whatever they told you was the reason may have a civilized attempt at sparing your feelings. Some of the women here have given you some advice; I’d heed it.

    Women, at the risk of generalizing, don’t like whinny. They don’t like mui macho but they do like self-confidence and a sense of direction. The sexiest thing you can do (out of bed) for a woman is to listen to her and act like what she says matters; i.e. to engage her honestly in adult conversation thereby finding mutual interests.

    If “intelligent liberal” women are betraying you for wingnuts I suspect they aren’t very dedicated to their own liberality. I think you may be confusing a glamour of liberality for a commitment to a cause. But, Chet, listen to women when they tell you what attracts them and what doesn’t. No matter how hard you try to be ‘nice’ you either attract them or you don’t. There isn’t a formula. There are successful personal interactions.

  55. Okay, I’m going to take some flak soon:

    Magis, do you realize that you cannot have it both ways: You cannot say that there’s no formula in making woman attracted to you (here I tend to agree) and at the same time put the fault to Chet for his failure on not being more attractive than the guys his GF(s) betrayed him with? IMHO there is no fault when attraction, or non-attraction. That’s just how we all are. But on actions, fault can be found. On the one doing the action, as long as we’re not victim-blaming.

    That said, I don’t think it’s fair for Chet to compare himself to rape victim (as in #57).

    Magis wrote:

    Yes it was your fault, for what reason I know not.


    If a man betrays a woman, it’s his fault for being a jerk, if a woman betrays a man, it’s his fault for not being good enough partner. Uh oh. It wouldn’t be good vice versa either.

    If the betrayed man dares to speak up, he’s a the Classic Whiny Nice Guy Loser. And women don’t like that, therefore these guys must shut up immediately.

    You know, I just hate when people so blatantly act in sociobiology-affirming manner (bitterness=whiner, whiner=loser, loser=to be mocked). :(.

Comments are currently closed.