A young couple in bed with the woman looking anxious

You weren’t raped. Join the club.

You know what rape looks like? It looks like this. Or this. Or this.

You know what it doesn’t look like?



“Coyote ugly.” It’s a phrase men use to describe the experience of waking up, hungover as shit, in bed next to a girl so ugly you’d rather chew your arm off than have her stir. Yep, another night of too many shooters and very poor judgement. Well played, tequila.

I’m willing to bet that every single varsity athlete or high status (medicine, engineering, computer science) male on any given college campus has had the experience. Why? Because they get hunted. All the time. By women. You see these guys staggering bleary-eyed into the dorm rooms the next morning, bro-punching their friends and saying “Dude, how could you let me do that?”

The walk of shame: it’s almost a rite of passage. One that men seem to relish, enjoy and get over pretty damn quickly. Yeah, you fucked an ugly chick. Or a annoying chick. Whatever. You drank too much, lost all your reason and tumbled into bed with someone you wouldn’t normally touch with a ten yard pole. Ho hum. Where we going tonight, bros?

Many women, on the other hand, are completely fucked in the head in this exact same situation. They get dressed up in their best whore clothes, head out to a frat party, drink their faces off, end up in bed with some guy they wouldn’t normally touch with a ten yard pole, wake up the next morning feeling like a total slutbag and then, it happens:

Someone must be to blame for this! I can’t possibly have gotten shitfaced and exercised some really poor judgement. “Moi? Ce n’est pas possible! I am an innocent blushing virgin with impeccable moral standards. Why, only whores get smashed and fuck random guys in a frat house, and I am not a whore so JESUS MOTHER OF GOD I WAS RAPED!

Bitch, please. You weren’t raped. You were trashed.

Why is it that men are held responsible for their actions no matter what their state of inebriation, but women get a pass? It doesn’t matter if you were drunk, stripped naked, straddled the guy in your best cowgirl position and fucked like a banshee. You were drunk. You can’t consent. So you were raped. Right?

Dude might have been just as pissed up as you, but he can’t cry rape because: rationality. So only men are rational creatures? Really?

Bull. Shit.

There are women so delusional they actually think we live in a “rape culture.” What the fuck?


No, we don’t live in a rape culture. We live in a “Don’t You Bitches Have Any Friends?” culture. Me and The Princess have our fair share of experience dancing like madwomen in our lingerie in night clubs filled with horny men who were starting looking like the cast of Ocean’s Twelve after that last appletini. Many nights ended with crazy slobbery make-out sessions with “the dude who looks exactly like Brat Pitt” (except when we looked at him in daylight later).

Here’s the thing: we protected each other. Not from the guy who looked like Brad Pitt through our appletini-googles. We protected each other from our own bad judgement. “Rape culture” theory holds men, and only men, responsible for what women do. And thanks, but I prefer to be responsible for my own fucking behaviour. And when I’m about to do something really stupid, something I will probably regret the next morning, I rely on my friends to save me from myself.

So go ahead! Wear those fishnets and hoochie shorts. You look fucking hot! Play beer pong! Strip for that guy. Go ahead and fuck him. Make all those decisions but understand they are your decisions. You don’t get to wake up the next day feeling like a whore and ruin a man’s life because you were a slut. Women-–and men–-who really were violently brutalized by strangers totally against their will aren’t helped by your idea of a “rape culture.” In fact the rape culture you create makes it worse for them by equating a truly violent and awful crime with bad decisions made while drunk.

Women and men who really were brutalized aren’t helped by your phony version of a rape culture. In fact the rape culture you create with your lack of personal responsibility, your “I’m a pure snowflake and men are sex maniacs who oppress me” mentality makes it worse for people who were truly hurt and not just regretful.

So embrace your inner slut. Or trust your friends when they tell you it’s time to say nighty-night to appletini-Brad. Or you know, shut the fuck up. Take your pick.

Lots of love,


About Janet Bloomfield (aka JudgyBitch)

Janet Bloomfield has an undergraduate degree in Film Theory and she has read most historical and current feminist theory. No, she doesn't need a dictionary. She was banned from Twitter for creating the hashtag #WomenAgainstFeminism, which continues to flourish without her presence. She has an MBA and a rewarding career as a wife to her husband of 15 years and a mother to their three children. She uses her spare time to bake cookies, blog at www.judgybitch.com and she cares passionately about the well-being of women and girls and men and boys around the world.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

    Thanks mate for this piece.

    You offend the offenders with this shaving of utter truth and that makes you gold. Period.

    Bloody love it.

  • Steve_85

    The girl who cried rape. Sounds like a book I used to read when I was a child. It really has got to the point (with me) that when someone claims they were raped, I just don’t give a fuck.

    Sucks for people who were “actually really, violent-attacked and fucked against their will” raped… but there’s just too many girls trying to claim the “regretted it in the morning” rape, or the “I got caught and don’t want people to think I’m a slut” raped, or the “it’s convenient to my story now” raped.

    Someone claims rape? Ho-hum. DILLIGAF?

    • Kimski

      You forgot the “I’m not getting the attention I deserve”-raped. And the “all the other girls claim they’ve been raped, so I’ll just jump the bandwagon”-raped.

      I don’t even think I can manage a forced ho-hum anymore.

      • Sting Chameleon

        Or the ‘I-expected-a-relationship-to-come-out-of-this-but-it-didn’t-go-my-way’ rape.

    • BlueBlood

      As a Police Officer, I can assure you that the VAST majority of ‘rapes’ are of the “I got caught and I don’t want my boyfriend/husband to think I was cheating” kind.

      In 13 years on the job I’ve investigated precisely 2 “real” rapes. Both of them turned out to be revenge attacks related to organised crime.

      I’ve yet to investigate a DV incident that reflects feminist propoganda.

      • Stu

        What percentage of your fellow officers would you estimate actually think the feminist inspired laws are a crock of shit……just a rough ballpark figure.

  • Kimski

    /Fingers crossed behind back.

    Nope, never had a coyote ugly moment.
    I was raped, for sure…I think…Maybe…

    • Steve_85

      I hear if you tell the cops, you can ruin his life forever, as well as claiming cash and prizes and STATUS WHORING!

      I can’t wait to be raped!

      • Kimski

        Nope, not going to work for me..
        Want to know why?

        I’m a guy.

        ‘Nuff said.

  • Frimmel

    Slight nitpick, engineering is not a ‘high status’ profession.

    But otherwise spot on particularly, “Women-–and men–-who really were violently brutalized by strangers totally against their will aren’t helped by your idea of a “rape culture.” In fact the rape culture you create makes it worse for them by equating a truly violent and awful crime with bad decisions made while drunk.”

    • James C

      Depends really.
      In ChemEng we were beating them off with a stick.

      -“Ohh look over there, that’s so and so from ChemEng. Have you seen his latest reactor design?”

      -“Oh you mean the one that yielded a 98% conversion rate with no enantiomers?”

      -” Yeah. did you see the length of his catalyst rod?”


      • Frimmel

        One summer about four years ago, The Boss hired an intern for our engineering department from “Big State University.” Good looking kid, personable, and he told me one day about how he’d be at parties or a bar and chatting up some ladies and things would seem to be going nicely. Then the ‘what are you majoring in’ question would come up, “And everytime I said “engineering” it was a buzzkill.”

        “All the air just would just go out of the conversation?” I asked.

        “Exactly. We’re laughing and having a good time and suddenly… I don’t know.” he answered. Bafflement (or was it something worse?) plain on his face.

        So sure, it depends.

        But looking at TV engineers we have Trip on ST:Enterprise probably coming out ‘on top’ but the ‘hot girl’ busted up with him and he ended up dead.

        Chief Tyrol on the ‘new’ “Battlestar Galactica” who was with the ‘hot lieutenant’ until she was just using him and then he ended up in a loveless marriage.

        Wolowitz on “Big Bang Theory” ended up with the ‘hot girl’ but I think that is more about needing another ‘normal’ girl in the cast to play off Penny.

        Scotty got the girl in one episode, sort of.

        Geordi on Next Generation had one episode where he got the holographic girl and another where he got the girl after being zapped by an alien but his running story line was mostly about being bad with women.

        The only other engineery guys on TV are good family men.

        Mike Brady was an architect who got the girl… and her three children.

        Jim Belushi’s character was an architect/engineer on “According to Jim” but was the ‘bumbling dad.’ And if you need a show to mine for scenes of women hitting men that would be a great place to start.

        Engineering isn’t low status but it sure isn’t rock star.

    • Augen

      Agreed. Noticed that too and since it is so slight a matter almost overlooked saying anything.
      It’s OT for here, but its something I’d like to see someone explore sometime.
      Here is the puzzle in it for me: challenge and cowardice. How exactly does our culture navigate this one to land in the very strange place that it does?
      Not good at baseball? … work hard, work like a dog, show commitment, dedication, steadfastness, master baseball and HERO!
      Ditto hockey, basketball, … hell guitar, piano, dance and violiin.

      But, not good at math? Or algorithms or symbolic logic or programming (not that anyone would move beyond simple “math” to know the difference)?

      Oh, well, you’re just not a natural. That’s ok. Don’t feel bad. Don’t waste too much time working so hard at something you are just not naturally good at.

      And those fellows who stick it out in the math or engineering departments, trudging away to overcome personal deficiencies to become excellent mathematicians, analysts, engineers?

      Well, there’s nothing really to admire is there? Come-on, some people are naturals at cleaning toilets, others are naturals at math.

      And that makes my point, but I still don’t feel it is strong enough. I remember being in college, spending loads of time in the rec center with other testosterone-charged men, learning fighting arts.

      Admirable. Real facing your demons kind of high status. High status. This is a tough man. Get in the octagon? REALLY high status.

      Exactly the same men: get Cs and Bs in math … take as few classes in it as possible to graduate, major in communications or marketing or some other low-rigor high generality field with few demands for demonstration of analytic aptitude and a tolerance for boredom. Nothing to look down on. Come-on, some people just aren’t good at math. Let’s be fair.

      I work among people who overcame their math woes. Strange thing about them:

      They are tough. Morally tough people. No surprise they are successful.

      The math-avoiding comm/marketing/humanities majors? There are lucrative jobs in insurance sales or full-time stay-at-home mommery.

      And I don’t even men to be particularly down on the latter, but what gets me is that while the economy cannot help itself but to rewards the former group economically, the CULTURE reckons the same moral and status character to both the former and latter groups, when the former deserve the status of UFC fighters for the gravity of the challenge they overcame.

      Just bizarre. Would love to see someone who has time and capability piece that apart.

      • Frimmel

        An answer is partially to be found in the Asimov quote, “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

        • Augen

          You know I never made that particular connection but that is a fascinating cross-hair. I never put the two phenoms together though have seen them both close up. Never thought of them as interrelated but I’m going to make it a point to pay attention now for that and see how the hypothesis plays out.

          • Frimmel

            Here’s another one for you, when did Adam & Eve get cast out of paradise? When Adam ate from the tree of knowledge. Isn’t Christianity teaching that knowledge is bad? That anti-intellectual current runs deep I’m thinking.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    Bad bed judgment. Her bad bed judgment warrants proxy kidnapping and caging of him. May be that is unreasonable, but “reason” is a patriarchal, and therefore oppressive, trait. We’re looking for redistributive justice nowadays aren’t we? Who needs reason, or habeas corpus, or rule of law? The gender experts will take care of things. After all they’re experts. And they’re busing cooking up new policies and laws. “Executive order.” Go back to your TV show; let the experts worry about it.


    Well Played. This message coming from a female MRA makes all of the difference. Thanks for calling it like it really is.

    • Steve_85

      This is the bit I hate the most. Women can say it, but Men can not.

      Check your privilege bitches!

  • James C

    Rape culture can be pretty tricky to pin down, apparently you don’t even need to have sex to contribute to it.
    When I was an undergraduate, a guy I was acquainted with rejected a girl after a party which caused her to start crying and phoning her friends. Of course the friends immediately assumed she was raped by the guy (Duh, rape culture didn’t you get the memo?) and in her drunken vulnerable state she went along with it (probably felt good getting all that support and attention).
    Luckily she retracted the claim 2 days later. 2 days is one hell of a bender, imagine being sober and going along with a rape allegation you know didn’t happen towards someone you actually fancied.
    I can tell you that guy took the red pill then and there, never looked back.

  • Zarathos022


    That’s it. No alcohol for me.

    Not now, not ever.

    • feeriker

      At least not in the company of women.

  • rake


    It’s rape, rape, rape today in the media. Woke up to it on the radio, and it’s splashed across the tabloid headlines:

    BBC News UK – Newspaper review: Papers focus on rape statistics

    Interestingly, the number of women [in Britain, under the age of 60] suffering rape or serious sexual assault is put at 1 in 20. Which I guess is an improvement on the usually quoted statistic of 1 in 4, or whatever it is this week.

    Unsurprisingly, this (and the usual clamour about conviction rates) was the top story on Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour this morning (hey, I have a bathroom radio, that was the station it was tuned to, and I was taking a dump, okay?) but what did surprise me, whilst looking for the above link, was finding an older episode, from 2006, discussing the same topic, and asking if redefining rape might improve matters. The twist being, they were questioning whether or not rape should be reclassified as a lesser crime. A novel approach, but I guess it didn’t gain traction, since it seems we’re going in the opposite direction.

    Full disclosure: I haven’t listened to the above segment because Jenni Murray’s voice makes my balls retract into my sternum (though she makes a terrific laxative). So if anyone other brave souls, in the name of research, want to hear what conclusions they reached, be my guest, but don’t say you weren’t warned…

    • Kimski

      Imagine if cancer research were given the same amount of attention.

      • feeriker

        Indeed. And speaking of disparity in disease research between diseases affecting males and females:

        I ALWAYS, when approached by women seeking donations for breast cancer research, reply with the following: “I will most certainly contribute to your cause – if you, right here and right now, match my contribution with a contribution to prostate cancer research.”

        Needless to say, I’ve never yet had to give a dime to breast cancer research.

    • rake

      ^Shit, forgot to put the link in for the 2006 radio segment: Woman’s Hour – Redefining rape

  • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

    This is happening in our town RIGHT NOW:

    A 19 year old guy had sex with his 16 (almost 17) year old girlfriend and they filmed themselves and posted it on a site they thought was private.

    Idiots? Yes.

    The young man is up on CHILD PORNOGRAPHY and RAPE charges. His girlfriend is completely and utterly aghast! She has been telling the media she consented, she loves him, she regrets posting the video, but she was a full and willing participant.

    Doesn’t matter.

    It’s so insane. The young man is lucky his girlfriend loves him. Had “slut-shaming” really worked on her, she could send him away for 10 years just by saying “yep, I was raped”!

    I wonder how this will play out. The girlfriend wants the charges dropped. The prosecutor is supposed to make some kind of statement today.

    It’s just so crazy. Jesus. The girl will be going to college next year. She is a high school senior. Not a child.

    • TheBiboSez

      If a drunk person and a sober person crash their cars, the drunk one is going to be blamed most of the time.

      If a drunk girl and a sober boy have sex…we blame the sober one? WTF?

    • greg

      The young man is going to jail for a long time, and will have to register for life.

      In California, a 14 year old girl must register as a sex offender for life, because she took pictures of herself topless and texted them to friends who were minors.
      Child pornography.


    • napocapo69

      In my Country, I believe in your country as well, consensual sex among young boys and girls is rape. It is since a long time, even before the rape hysteria of recent times…
      Let’s be less vague.
      Someone older than 18 years old cannot have sex with someone youger than 18; the law consider that sex a “rape”; since almost always the boy is older than the girl…it means that most of our boys are rapists, for the law.
      The only reason not all of our sons eneded in jail is that ususally our daughters used to keep their sexual life private.
      Now that we have the Stasi in place, there will be a flourish of new entries for the jail system…

  • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

    I think computer science majors and engineers generally don’t get women flocking to them much, most of them are too “nerdy,” although maybe that’s changing, I dunno. But otherwise, not much to disagree with in this piece.

    • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

      In this town, girls are well aware that comp sci and engineers make serious money (compared to other guys up here), so they are definitely on the radar screen.

      Medical students, dentistry students, MBAs – all prey because even their internships are well paid. Being a doctor’s wife is a Big Deal here.

      Could just be small town values though.

      • scatmaster

        Yup, trying living in Waterloo where RIM is located.
        No sausage fest there. Nerds getting laid aplenty.

    • TheBiboSez

      As a nerdy (chem/math) young man decades ago I had occasion to walk across the campus of Texas Women’s University (my girlfriend was a nursing student there). I was eye-raped by every girl who saw me.

      Nowadays thanks to feminism 2/3 of college students are female. The competition for men’s attention ought to be severe.

      • thefeministmra

        Nowadays thanks to feminism 2/3 of college students are female. The competition for men’s attention ought to be severe.

        I think that might just be adding to the problem. When a man gets rejected, they might say some off colored comment (“bitch doesn’t know what she’s missing”, etc), and then move on to the next girl. Just a matter of playing the odds.

        But when a woman gets rejected, they want revenge. Either against the skinny bitch who the guys is actually interested in (because if she’s not in the picture, he’ll fall in love with her), or against the guy who didn’t return her affections (because he deserves it for being a heartless ass).

        Perhaps coupled with the notion that most women don’t learn how to handle rejection and failure at a young age, it’s a bit more to swallow then they realize.

        And sadly, even when it happens to then, they don’t learn from the experience, and continue to call all men pervs for hitting on them. Unless he’s cute… then they want to rape him.

  • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

    And Dean, can I just add that while calling me a “former party girl” is technically accurate, it’s accurate in the sense of “liked to go dancing with her friends when she was young and single and hot”.

    I was never the “blow five guys out behind the bar” kind of party girl. Good god, no. When I was in college, being called a “slut” was NOT a good thing. It was rather something to be avoided at all costs.

    Maybe that’s why I always rolled with a crew of girls. There were consequences to bad behaviour, and we protected each other!

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      Fixed. 😉

  • Steveyp333

    To the author: your cockblocking ways with your friends fucking blow.

    Why would you swoop in and deny a man who’s about to get laid?

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      Thing is, Stevey, pussy make a man blind, even to his own stupid priorities.

      If your big concern here is someone interfering with your chance to score with some drunk chick, then maybe, just maybe, it is not the author that blows.

      Hang around, this is a good place for some men to sober up, but you have to wake up first.

    • http://beijaflorbeyondthesunset.wordpress.com Rick Westlake

      Stevey, you are on the wrong page here.

      The wrong website, for that matter.

      Go back to Roosh. Leave us alone.

      Or grow up.

  • http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/ Girl Writes What

    “Bitch, please.”

    OMG, Judgy, I think I adore you. Please write more articles for us. Bitch, *please*…

    • Stu

      I recommend she do some more research though. This time without the alcohol though. More research JB, get yourself back out there. :)

      There are refresher courses available you know GWW :)

      I know…..pffft back at you. :)

  • Reggie
    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam
      • gwallan
      • Steve_85

        You could add an extra column along the left side and call it ‘women’

        Also, what do you call statistics based on several different assumptions, where you “assume” the worst because it is dramatic?

        You call them bullshit. That’s the problem though, the casual internet browser (person) doesn’t stop to think about crap like that. They just look at it, accept it at face value and move on. Most people probably don’t know enough statistics to know that it’s rubbish even if they stop and think. Maybe we should consider some stupid over the top pictures as well? They appear to be working.

    • feeriker

      Consider the source.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      Old adage: you can prove anything you want if you make up your data.

      I don’t have the energy to take this apart, but others have done so in the past. Anyone feel up to the challenge of digging into it? I’m way more plugged into the domestic violence issue than the rape issue.

  • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

    First, let me offer a word of thanks to JB for this article, said thanks being delayed till after I was over the shock of of its complete and devastating epicness.

    Truth FTW!

    Also, I am aware that some users are seeing code errors in the comments. Please know we are aware of them and working to solve the problem.

    • Reggie

      I don’t know if you got my previous comment abut the code errors but it only happens to me when I am logged in.

      BTW, I concur on the good job JB.

      • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

        Yeah, the reason we did not catch it is that admins are not getting the errors, lol. At any rate, the problem has been identified and should be fixed shortly. Thanks.

        • Loy Finly

          To Mr. J.B.

          I cannot believe you are woman. A woman.

          Woman does not defile her very golden name with such a vile slathering of vomit as this. Woman does not open her arms and tell the world of such things.

          I ask you come from your mossy crevice and display your real name to match your repulsive diatribe here, but that is neither here nor there as my message is to a Mr. Elam.

          Mr. Elam, I have been told by a fellow Wrongarian who knows someone who knows someone who tells me he has spoken to you recently and you are quite puffed (up as all pigeons tend to be) with some new word you have supposedly made up.

          Oh do tell us this new word. The Wrongarians with me are all a quiver with their notebooks at the ready in order to write this new word or phraseology so they can keep track of your MRA propaganda.

          Your attempts at tweaking with paltry flagellation of the Queens English will be the ship wreck of you.

          You disgust.

          Loy Finly
          Sr. Wrongarian
          World Chapter.

          • Lester Scruggs

            Dere Loy,

            Lester here. Lester Scruggs. And man, you are one micks stup crazy sonsabitch talkin that shit. I just seen yer pixture too. Looks lahk yer about a coons age overdue for a walk to tha creek an a warsh up.

            An what tha fuck is a wrongarian? That is tha stoopidestest motherfukarian thang I evar herd of. Ha! Ha! Ha!

            Ever won always tellz me that I am funny, but thay dont meen funny like what some dem boys do out behind tha barn. Thay just mean Ha Ha funny, so dont get no idears.

            Anyway, I wood say somptin more bout what you sayed heer but I did not even unnerstand some of them big words you was usin so aint really nothin a say about that.

            I jus figgered you needed somewon ta tell you that yer fase is dirty and that wrongarian is a stoopid word.

            I am lester, by the way, pleezed to meet you, you dirty fased basturd what wears funny ear rangs.

    • scatmaster

      MOAR from JB please!!!!!!


  • keyster

    What’s the obvious common denominator of “Rape Culture” on college campuses? BOOZE.

    Binge drinking, body shots, beer bongs, etc. And Rape Culture theorists dare not mention the fact that just maybe women shouldn’t be trying to keep up with the boys in the alcohol consumption department, because that would be admitting they’re not equal and therefore oppressive. Not to mention women who drink a lot tend to get fat and age rather ungracefully. It’s biology.

    Feminists should be denouncing alcohol consumption of young women on college campuses because it’s BAD FOR WOMEN’S HEALTH! Almost as bad as contracting an STD or getting pregnant or OMG! having sex when you didn’t really feel like it or were too drunk to give tacit verbal and/or written consent…otherwise known as rape.

    It’s intellectual dishonesty to ignore the correlation between alcohol and libertine sexuality among young people. This is because it would be telling young women that behaving like young frat house guys is not acceptable behavior, that male behavior is beneath them. Sub-conscious Patriarchy.

    • feeriker

      I would argue that the prevalence of binge drinking on college campuses (or other haunts popular with the “young adult” set), by both men and women, is a direct result of that idiotic, barbaric, and absolutely untenable concept called “minimum the drinking age.” Since for some bizarre reason, America has, for much of the last century, become fixated on alcohol as some sort of demonic living instrument of death and destruction (the same mental illness that causes much of the population to view guns in the same way), it should logically follow that when something is treated as “forbidden fruit,” the desire for it increases manifold to the point that consumption of it, once it is obtained, becomes excessive.

      Having lived in other countries and among other cultures where regular consumption of alcohol starts at a relatively young age (early teens) and is always in moderation, the “binge drinking” factor is notably absent. There is simply no driving need for it. In all of my years abroad living among such cultures, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I saw teenagers engaged in what Americans call “binge drinking,” and in at least half of those cases it was American expat teenagers who were the most noticeable drunks present.

      So maybe, rather than blaming “the demon rum” as the root cause of the problem, a societal re-evaluation of its attitude toward a 10,000-plus-year-old component of the human food chain, one that has arguably been a relatively benign part of the human culture when not demonized by certain societal powers, is in order.

      I realize that any one of us stands a better chance of being elected U.N. Secretary General or completing a solo voyage to Jupiter than seeing such a change ever happen in our lifetime. Still, it’s a worthy goal for the restoration of some degree of sanity and proportion that we should aspire to nonetheless – not to mention that it would represent the removal of an aggravating factor in the prevalence of “slutdom.”

      • keyster

        My point was that women feel they have a right to behave as debaucherous as men are typically characterized as behaving – – devoid of modesty and unashamed. Alcohol gives them the sexual confidence to release their inner-slut. When you combine female sexual power and alcohol, you have women who have lost control of their inhibitions.

        They’re not victims of young men taking advantage of their inebriated state. They’re victims of social pressure to behave like Grrls Gone Wild…because if the boys can do it so can they. Young women don’t have a rape culture problem, they have a drinking problem. Yep, they can’t handle booze. It makes them drunkerer.

        Now they can have sex just like they think men do, without regret or feelings, because if they’re unconscious enough that’s how it “seems”. It “empowers” them to be tough and manly women.

  • http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

    Great article and exactly right.


  • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suz

    I love this post! If my son ever decides to marry, I want you to “interview” all of his prospective mates.

    • feeriker

      I love this post! If my son ever decides to marry, I want you to “interview” all of his prospective mates.

      “Slut-filtering.” God, would I LOVE to be a fly on the wall for those interviews!

    • Stu

      No, you need me to do that. No, no, no, no…..wait Stu, that last one was a female MRA……mmmmmm…..well….maybe……I’ll consider it……next……..no, no, no, no.

  • Hf

    Good article. Funny how something can be so obvious to some yet completely alien to others.

    “I didn’t call you a slut. I would never call you a slut, I like sluts.”

  • donzaloog

    Excellent article and spot on.

  • napocapo69

    Brilliant, honest article Judgy!
    And the nice thing is that this message is basically what a man use to teach other men (and boys): “you are accountable of your actions”….
    The prove that the only ones still believing in equality are us …

  • http://vilo13.blogspot.com/ Lucian Vâlsan

    This is good.
    Not only it is a „spot on!” article – but it is so politically incorrect that I shall enthusiastically share it to all the feminist morons in my contact list :))).

    Keep up the good work JB!

  • VictorGarcia

    i also heard girls don’t poop, and have magical intuition that boys don’t. holy shit! i hope nobody fucks my shit up and tells me the truth!

  • YoungZer0

    God damn it. I have to say the story of James A. Landrith, Jr., you linked in the beginning of your article really turned my stomach.

    It is simply unbelievable. I don’t know about you guys, but for me, everything hints that this wasn’t the first time she raped a man. I mean he woke up during the rape and she was threatening to tell people that HE raped her, if he didn’t hold still and that he should be careful, because she was pregnant. She must have literally raped him for hours.

    Fucking stomach-turning.

    That woman is evil, pure and simple, she was using everything she had against this man and she got away with it.

    I woke up in the middle of the night and can’t get that story out of my head.

    It’s 6 am right now in germany and i really need to get this off my chest.

    First of all, thank you for the article JB, it really does seem that modern feminism thinks women shouldn’t be held responsible for anything, but especially in cases of alocohol. I’m getting so tired of how irresponsible behaviour is being rewarded, how any person raising a hand and asking “Why did Person A get so drunk?” is a victim blamer and should be ashamed.

    There seems to be this believe that as a man, you can do anything, that you’re fucking invincible, they can walk around 3 am in any dark alley they want and not fear for their life. How about no? Doesn’t matter the time, as soon as it turns dark and I walk outside, I turn the music off and turn on the Bourne-Mode. Get as fast as possible from A to B, without any drama in between. I have a goal and that’s it.

    If i ever went outside drinking, I went with friends and still I didn’t drink as much. I was and I still am a responsible drinker. There it is again, the R-Word so many feminists despise.

    I can totally understand that there are some people out there who want to have irresponsible fun, but they should be aware of the fact that this might lead to unwanted results. Waking up next to Mr. Fugly is not Mr. Fugly’s fault, it’s yours and you know what? It’s fine, you fucked up, don’t do it again or maybe do, but deal with the consequences.

    Second: Thank you for pointing to the story of James A. Landrith. As said, it really is an unsettling story, but i couldn’t help but see a great positive thing in it: The way James deals with people.

    He isn’t lying in his bed, rolling around all day. No, he uses the power of the internet and approaches people, not just the people who believe him, but those who make fun of him. The results were evident by one woman on facebook making fun of him, until he told her, directly, on her status feed, that it was not fun, that it did happen, that he did not regret not-hitting a pregnant woman. Suddenly she was sorry, wrote completely different and apologized twice.

    Not many people would’ve done what he did. He’s in the military for christs sake. He’s ready to risk it all. He doesn’t give a fuck if people question his manhood or what kind of person he is, because HE KNOWS he’s right.

    If that isn’t empowering, i don’t know what is.

    He’s a fucking hero in my book.

    But it’s the injustice that pisses me off and what keeps me awake. The people who make fun of him, who ask “What kind of marine would let a woman do this?”. Oh yeah, what a weak guy he is for trusting the friend of a friend not to rape him, while she drugged him. What a weak person he is for not punching a pregnant woman. Yeah, I bet if the police arrived at the scene, they would totally not arrest him. No, that would be irrational and the police wouldn’t do that to a man. Right.

    I really can’t help but shake the feeling that this sick woman did it more than once. She must have been running around for years doing that to other men (or even woman) and she could get away with it. Because of our social double standards. It’s complete and utter injustice and it makes me sick.

    Anyway, i think I’ll go back to my bed, trying to catch some sleep.

    Love & Peace

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      I was honored to be on a panel discussion of this and related issues with James a couple months ago:


      I keep worrying Huffington Post is going to take that down, because I’m pretty convinced the FeministsStalinists probably went apeshit when they got wind of it, and are probably furious we were even allowed to speak.

  • Gamer

    This article contributes to the problem of FRAs (false rape accusations) by glorifying the concept of “slut shaming.” By using words like “slut” and “whore,” as well shaming these women for their sexual activities in a misguided attempt to get them to take responsibility, you are actually increasing the probability of FRAs.

    The only way to prevent FRAs is to precisely end the slut shaming that this bad article revels in. Women would have no need to falsely accuse men if it weren’t for judgmental slut shamers. Some would still falsely accuse men for other reasons, such as power, but if you could just stop your slut shaming and make women feel like there’s nothing to be ashamed of for being sexually liberated, I bet you’d see FRAs cut in half. Just my $0.02 as a pick up artist.

    • rake

      And the award for Most Transparent Feminist Troll goes to…

      • Gamer

        LOL! I’m the most sex-positive man in the world. A Feminist, on the other hand, makes a Puritan look like a sex-addict. It’s a sex-negative social circle that leads to FRAs (false rape accusations). And this article was very sex-negative. Keep calling women whores and sluts and watch as the jails fill with men due to women wanting to protect their reputations from slut shamers.

    • Stu

      The problem of how the majority view sluts is that, most sluts are actually not sluts, they have more in common with whores then sluts. In fact, you could say, that the typical woman who dresses like “a slut” or acts like one, gives sluts a bad name. They are typically looking for attention not sex. And they use sex appeal to obtain that attention and benefits. A perfect example of this is the dressed to kill, dancing provocatively women at a nightclub flirting with guys. She doesn’t want to fuck them usually, she wants them to desire her, and she wants them to treat her like she’s special and desirable. Maybe she wants guys to buy her drinks, etc etc.

      She dangles her sexuality in front of the donkeys face (men) and uses it to lure them to plough her field, not her pussy. Buy her stuff, do her work for her, etc.

      When she fucks guys, it’s either Brad Pitt, or someone who provides particularly well that she wants to keep around. Sex with these women actually has a price tag, but they don’t show it too you.

      I agree, nothing wrong with a women banging all the guys and sucking all the cocks in the world, as long as she’s doing it because she likes it, you can’t really knock her, she’s not hurting anybody, and she’s not being dishonest.

      So many MRAs just don’t get this. They want to say, relationships with women just suck now days and aren’t worth it. True, the legal landscape has made it to dangerous to marry or live together, or even to remain in an exclusive relationship for too long a period, they can become legally binding to you know.

      The answer is not in the past. We are not going back to marriage version 1. We are at marriage version 2 and version 3 will be even worse. Any effort to put that toothpaste back in the tube is a waste of time. If all the moralistic preaching and shaming of people because of their sex lives or preferences worked, we wouldn’t be here now…….it does not work, and never will. And further more, the dislike of women who sleep around is based solely on jealously, and possessiveness. It’s a biological hardwired response, to keep your offspring bearers to yourself. But it remains even with guys that are not going to, and do not want to have children. This is just as much a hardwired obsolete primate urge, just the same as the hypergamous woman who no longer needs to make decisions on who to mate with based on ability to protect and provide……but still does that anyway.

      At the end of the day, there are good sluts, and bad sluts. But really this is….sluts…and fake sluts.

      • Gamer

        I couldn’t agree with you more! Well said!

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      “Slut shaming” if it’s real at all anymore is taking a girl who hasn’t done anything and calling her one to ruin her reputation. This is almost always done primarily by women to women, in my experience.

      In this culture. Women who dress like sluts call themselves sluts and revel in being sluts, laughing and having a good time with it. It appears to my eye to be terminology women almost entirely invented for themselves. JB was using it herself with her own “join the club” thing.

      Dressing “like a slut” has become a power thing that women enjoy, by and large, at least to my observation. Just watch reruns of “Sex and the City.”

      • GurrenLagannX

        Still, the double standard is still present:
        When a man has sex with lots of women, he’s a champion, an honourable man.
        When a woman has sex with lots of men, she’s filthy, a slut, a whore, ‘not pure’, damaged goods.
        I myself don’t mind if a man or a woman wants to fuck a lot or a few people. Who am I to judge them on their sex lives. I don’t see anything wrong neither do I see anything empowering about it.

      • Gamer

        Slut – a woman who trades sex for sex and admits to heterosexuality, thus taking away all her leverage and leading to equality.

        Non-Slut – a woman who acts like a “generous lesbian,” and therefore, expects compensation for sexual acts in the form of non-sexual gifts and services. Otherwise known as a “matriarch,” a “Feminist,” “golddigger,” “female supremacist,” or my personal favorite, “bitch.”

        Yes, women slut shame other women because it’s the only way of maintaining the matriarchy. Which is why I was surprised to find it here. All you male slut shamers are matriarchal puppets. A real MRA would see the slut as our most precious political ally.

        • Alek

          Yes, women slut shame other women because it’s the only way of maintaining the matriarchy.


        • Stu

          Yes, agreed. If we are going to hang shit on the woman that gives it away freely, and praise the woman who demands compensation, what we are doing is claiming it is immoral to enjoy giving and receiving sexual pleasure, and the height of morality is to be a manipulating gold digger and a phoney who just whores it out for the best deal.

          Yes, a lot of women hate sluts, and I mean real sluts who are loose, and easy, because they actually like men, and like sex enough to just do it without the price tag, hidden or otherwise. The game, for most, is to immitate the slut and send out the signals so men will want her, and then use that to take advantage. How do you tell the difference. First rule, a real slut usually doesn’t look like a slut, or act like a slut. It’s so easy for a woman to get sex, that all the sluty attire and posing and attention seeking is not really required, so what are most of the women who are doing that really after? Most of the time the answer is…..something other then sex.

          A blind man could literally tell you that. The problem is men’s eyes lie to him.

          • GurrenLagannX

            I don’t care whether a woman is promiscuous or not. Same goes to men as well. Why should I judge how people live out their sexual lives.
            Personally, I just go after women who I share a genuine connection with. Whether they have fucked some frat boys or are still virgins, it wouldn’t bother me.

          • Stu

            To me, it’s all in what the motivation is. A woman that is having sex with lots of guys because she is using it to extract something else is a turn off. A woman that has lots of sex with lots of guys because she has desire is a turn on.

            Desire is pure and innocent. Manipulation is not.

    • keyster

      You’re spot on!
      There is no shame in fucking the entire varsity football team if that’s what a young woman wants to do. Her body, her choice. She might even want to post a video of it on the internet. Why not?

      There’s also no shame in contracting a nasty STD and using abortion as a contraception method…none whatsoever. You go Grrl!

      • Gamer

        LOL! Having lots of sex with lots of men and being reckless and irresponsible are two different topics. No one is promoting recklessness or unsafe sex. Did you know that swingers parties have condoms in every room? But I digress.

        A woman who has sex with 10 men in 10 days in a responsible manner, who has known all 10 for a while, gets regular STD screenings every 6 months, and is a generally responsible and safe woman is infinitely superior to a woman who gets herpes after fucking her boyfriend one time only after he promised monogamy.

        We need more sexual liberation. Slut shaming strengthens the matriarchy and is responsible for many innocent men imprisoned for bogus rape charges. If you value men’s rights, reexamine your old-fashioned beliefs. Innocent virgin damsels being admired is the beginning of chivalry, and therefore, the beginning of misandry.

        • Bombay

          Being slutty or not is unrelated to believing in human rights.

          • Gamer

            I strongly disagree. The slutty vagina is the only gateway to male equality, and the only solid guarantee against men passing anti-male laws so that they can obtain sex from golddigging matriarchs who act like generous lesbians in bed.

            The only other path to male equality is celibacy, but, in my humble opinion, that is a fool’s errand, and an ideology of surrender.

          • Bombay


            A man can be happily sexually engaged with women/woman who are not sluts and who also believe that men have human rights. Are the women here all sluts? I doubt it. JB made that quite clear and she also made clear that she does have sex with men.

          • Stu


            You are correct, you are thinking with your frontal brain instead of listening to your primitive programing.

            It’s possible now to have intact families, with biological parents who have chosen to produce their offspring together and get rid of the biggest obstacle to them staying together that exists now…..the demand, obsession, and total insistence on monogamy.

            That only worked when we applied both social, and legal requirements, and had consequences for both sexes for breaching. If you take away the social and legal requirements, and the consequences, it’s gone. Women can’t stick to it anymore then men can, not past the first few years anyway. And it becomes one of the main reasons they want to get out….and they don’t even know it.

            Men’s need to have exclusive access makes them a slave. And women’s need to have exclusive access compels them to make the man a slave. This whole thing, while once necessary, now has nothing but negative effects. The competition it creates to acquire that is at the root of why men screw each other over and compete against each other for everything. We don’t need it anymore, and from my experience, and that is vast in this area, non-monogamous couples split up less then monogamous ones, and, when they do split up, it tends to be much less hostile, in fact, they often stay friends and even still get together now and then between the sheets.

            This monogamy is required for love is just total bullshit. The longest enduring relationships with women that I’ve had in my life are with non-monogamous women….and some of them go back 12 or 13 years. I’ve even got female friends that I had sexual relationships with many many years ago who now live interstate and overseas and still stay in touch with me now and then. The only relationships I’ve had that turned nasty…ever….were monogamous ones, or with woman that wanted monogamy. Never had a sexual relationship with a swinging slut that ended badly…not once.

        • Alek

          We need more sexual liberation. Slut shaming strengthens the matriarchy and is responsible for many innocent men imprisoned for bogus rape charges. If you value men’s rights, reexamine your old-fashioned beliefs. Innocent virgin damsels being admired is the beginning of chivalry, and therefore, the beginning of misandry.


    • Alek

      Gamer you made a great point in the second part of your comment.

      Though you made a mistake with the first part of your comment where you accused the article of “slut-shaming”. That’s a feminist tactic, so I can see why people downrated you. You ACTUALLY used the feminist interpretation in order to decide what’s “slut-shaming”.

      I agree with the second part of your comment fully though. I think sexually liberated and sexually enthusiastic women are MRA’s greatest allies. We want more of them. We also want to no longer fear promiscuity and enthusiastically initiating and desiring sex with men.

      However, it’s a feminist mindset to say this is MEN’S responsibility. I.E if women won’t woman up and start initiating sex, it’s somehow 100% the “fault” of men who aren’t cheering women for having sex every step of the way. That is infantalizing women and a very feminist thing to do.

      • GurrenLagannX

        I totally agree that women should initiate sex as well, but however… the whole rules of attraction come in play. I mean, aren’t men and women hardwired to follow a certain ‘system of attraction’?

        • Alek

          and women hardwired to follow a certain ‘system of attraction’?

          Women are only lazy when they can afford it. Ever notice how ugly women, fat women and otherwise unattractive women seem to have no problem pursuing men, hitting on men hardcore and begging men for sex?

          Yeah. Ever notice how when women pass a certain age (start losing looks) they start acting like men? Yeah…

          Women are only lazy when they can afford it (I.e. they still get plenty of offers from men, so they can fake disinterest and hide desire).

          Also, look how to how women get pretty grabby and direct around celebrities and popular men. Where did your cute little “biology” disappear in that case?

          Does that “biology shutdown” when a woman sees men don’t pursue her, so she has to start asking men out herself?

          Or when a female 6 gets constantly asked out by male 6s, she WILL herself ask out male 8s.

          That all points out to the biology excuse being a convenient bullshit excuse. Trust me, if all men tommorow made a pact to not ask women out, not initiate sex or kissing, women would be grabbing men’s asses on the street within a month.

          • GurrenLagannX

            Just wondering bro, I was just wondering. Having read a lot about PUA stuff and seeing those things in real life, it seems that relationships follow a certain ‘system’, but feel free to disprove.

            I think that’s a trick a lot of PUA use: ‘Make the girl go after you by showing disinterest (playing hard to get)’.

            If it were simply possible, I would be just honest to a woman by saying that I’m interested in her and I’d like to date with her. However, in real life that may be a turn-off for many women. It may trigger certain reactions or feelings that can be either appalled or interested.
            Can’t blame them totally on that. I wouldn’t be amused if some woman came all desperate towards me asking for sex or dating. I like my women confident.

          • Alek

            Just wondering bro, I was just wondering. Having read a lot about PUA stuff and seeing those things in real life, it seems that relationships follow a certain ‘system’, but feel free to disprove.

            PUA is a marketing ploy invented by marketers who want to rob you of your money so they have to convince you that there is a “secret SYSTEM”.

            There are some generalities in how relationships develop (for example in most cases women are lazy as fuck and wait for men to do all the work) but there’s no biological reason for them to do that. They only do that coz we men as a group allow them to get away with it.

  • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

    @ Gamer

    I do not agree with you at all that we need more sexual liberation, because you are denying a reality rooted in centuries of biology. YOU may not mind if Mrs. Gamer (assuming you’re male) fucked the entire football team just for the hell of it, but most OTHER men will mind very much, and telling women who are ultimately interested in a loving, long-term, meaningful relationship with a man that it’s OKAY for them to be complete whores is destroying their chances of ever achieving that relationship.

    Very few men want to stick their dick in a vag still wet with another man’s cum.

    I think you are confusing sexual liberation with sexual experience. I’ve had lots of sex. Tons of it. Probably more than your Gold Star Slut, but the difference is that the total number of men I have been with is very low.

    My first date was at 14, and I continued to date that boy for three years. No sex, as we were too young. My second boyfriend, I dated for over a year and it ended with a marriage proposal, and yes, we had sex. I bought hook line and sinker the idea that I could NEVER be happy married at 19, so I said no to a wonderful guy and went off to get my degree in completely useless.

    I dated a few boys in college (didn’t fuck any of them) until I met my third boyfriend, and we dated for just over three years, and yes, we had a ton of sex. That relationship also ended in a proposal, but when I figured out that B3 was planning on just stepping into a job his Daddy created for him, I passed on him too.

    I dated a few more guys, and didn’t fuck any of them. Then I met boyfriend 4 and he was a magnificent man, just an absolute god. His wife had died of ovarian cancer quite young, leaving him to raise their children and he did not want another family and when he proposed, I very reluctantly declined, because having children was just too important to me.

    I went off to grad school and met Mr. JB almost immediately. I knew I was going to marry him long before we had sex.

    There is nothing “liberated” about my attitude towards sex. It occurs in the context of a long-standing, loving relationship with a man I genuinely like and care about. And I don’t think any of those men minded in the least that I had previous experience, because of the context.

    Telling women that it’s perfectly fine and dandy to fuck anyone they like outside a relationship seriously damages their ability to form the very relationships they desire. For women who don’t give a shit about men and who are not interested in a long term relationship, fine. Go ahead and cram all the cock you want in your body.

    But for ladies who yearn for love, that is exactly the wrong thing to do. No way. Sex is an expression of love. If love is what you are after, then express yourself carefully. A little goes a long way.

    • GurrenLagannX

      I hope this also applies to men as well or you just went double standards.
      You know, even if biology justifies the promiscuity of men and thus implies why women mustn’t, we’re all individuals. We have no right to judge people on their sex life and what they do, as long as it’s consensual.

      I do (perhaps partially) agree with you about the yearn for love thing. Even I, a man, have become quite picky when it comes to even date women. I just want to meet a woman that can spark my interest or/and I can have a strong connection with.
      However, I don’t think that a man or woman is ruined or is no relationship-material after having multiple sex partners in his/her (past) life. They can always decide to walk the path of monogamous love anytime.
      Sex is an expression of multiple things: desire, lust, passion, love, sadness, et cetera.

      • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

        Biology doesn’t justify male promiscuity.

        In fact the fruit fly studies that “supported” male promiscuity have since been disproven.

        And more and more info on the benefits of sperm competition to fertility and superior conceptions for female animals come out every day.

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        There is an enormous amount of scientific data to support the notion that male promiscuity is not, repeat, *not*, the norm and never has been. There has always been a subset of humans of both sexes inclined toward it (cuckolding, rakes, etc.) but most humans of both sexes incline very strongly toward pair bonding. Even those who do cheat still tend to, in most cases, sooner or later seek out a long term partner.

        The notion popular even in some men’s advocacy circles that men are creatures that automatically want to screw any nubile female they come across is just plain wrong. Young people in particular do all go through a phase where they’re obsessed with the opposite sex and obsessed with sex in general, and yes men do tend to be a little more easily moved by certain visual cues (but more and more evidence mounts that so do women, the visual cues they’re looking for are just different) but… an enormous amount of evidence, including the anthropological and archaeological record going back hundreds of thousands of years, long before the dawn of recorded civilization, shows pair-bonding to be the norm for our species.

        That means for males as well as females.

        Are men more promiscuous that women? If you think very hard about it, that’s very nearly mathematically impossible. Women typically report having fewer sex partners than men do, but are the men overreporting or the women underreporting? They would almost have to be; the only way that could otherwise be true is that there are a small percentage of women who are super-duper-promiscuous who are making up the difference.

        Men want intimacy, emotional connection, and yes, bonding out of sex. Most of them. But this is a DESCRIPTION, not a PRESCRIPTION. If you aren’t one of those, then you aren’t. But most men that’s exactly what they want: intimacy and a trusting, loving relationship. Even surveys that just ask men what they want, that’s what the overwhelming majority say they want.

        Is this view supported by religious views? What I’d suggest asking is -why- most religions take the view that people should pair up; they appear to be teaching that people should do what we’re naturally inclined to do anyway. In doing so some religious are obviously much more draconian and brutal and swing too hard toward intolerance of people who are different, or misjudge, or are confused, or whatever, but if you think about it, any religion that taught that the vast majority of its adherents should do things completely different from all their natural inclinations wouldn’t last more than a generation or so. The successful religions have room in them for outlier behavior and oddballs and whatnot, but they all seem to pretty much teach that people do things they’re already inclined to want to do.

        • GurrenLagannX

          I see, thank you very much. Still, enforcing certain codes or whatnot is yeah, just wrong.
          I do believe that there are men who want intimacy and emotional connection, but as a young adult, I’m pretty much surrounded by guys who are condescending towards promiscuous women and like to ‘bang as much as possible’.
          I don’t mind the bang part, but the condescending part.

    • Gamer

      Wow! Holy shit! My head is still spinning! Last time I received a speech even similar to this, it was from my Catholic grandmother (no offense).

      Thanks for your long reply. I had no idea you were this conservative, but it really explains a lot about your article.

      Before I respond to some of your points, let me just tell you the source of my criticism: If you want to prevent false rape accusations, the LAST THING you want to do is what you did: Shame women by calling them sluts and whores. Before I sleep with a new woman, I always have to first make sure that she is a slut AND that she does NOT have a slut shaming social circle led by women like you. Otherwise, I’m liable to go to jail the second she starts feeling guilty because you called her a whore!

      Don’t you get it? Preventing false rape accusations can only be done by DECREASING women’s shame for having casual sex. By trying to get women to feel their guilt, you are just making them more desperate to restore their reputations by putting the man in jail for rape, thus exchanging her shame for sainthood and worship, which is the reaction to women who say they were raped.

      You are hurting men with your slut shaming. A lot of men will be thrown in jail for a crime which they didn’t commit if people like you don’t stop. Slut shaming is misandry much more than it is misogyny.

      This is another reason sluts are the only safe women to have sex with. The more squeamish women will act like wounded animals the day after and accuse you of rape if they feel “used” because you didn’t cuddle with them enough. Sluts are also immune to slut shaming, unlike the non-sluts who respond to your verbal poison by putting men in prison where they (the men) are raped for real. Again, on behalf of those innocent men, please stop this.

      Now, on to some of your points (in no particular order):

      1. There will never be a “Mrs. Gamer” for the same reason that I wouldn’t go to City Hall with a friend in order to get a “friendship license.” Marriage is the silliest, most pointless, and most redundant piece of paper that could possibly have been conceived. And that’s not even mentioning the fact that marriage today is a matriarchal concentration camp. I think I’ll keep my human rights. I get the impression that you’re either new to the MRM or have been living under a conservative Biblical rock (again, no offense).

      2. I am morally opposed to monogamy, as I recognize it to be a matriarchal tool for male castration, financial exploitation, and the forcing of men to pass anti-male laws in order for them to obtain access to sex. When a man is dependent on only one woman for sex, it’s game over, he is a slave, and so are all other men whom he has any control or influence over.

      3. Now, you gave me the usual slut shaming female “long term relationship” speech, which I have always interpreted as female golddigging code for financial exploitation. Why did you dump your third boyfriend again?

      4. Lest you think I’m against loving long term relationships, I currently have a girlfriend whom I’m very much in love with. Her and I are in an open relationship. And no, I don’t mind her fucking the entire football team. In fact, when her and I go to swingers parties (on a semi-regular basis), I rather enjoy watching her do two or three guys at a time, and she enjoys watching me do the same with a couple of (usually) married women.

      5. So why am I sharing this? My point is, even if you’re not as hardcore as my girlfriend and I, there is no contradiction between being a slut and finding a fulfilling and genuinely loving long-term relationship, in which you can have children someday. No contradiction at all.

      But your excuse is: “Most male sheep who are puppets of the matriarchy don’t like it, so women shouldn’t do it.”

      See, this is why, in a previous response, I suggested that us men cheer the sluts on. Most women, especially feminine women, will take their cues from men. And if we continue thinking that sluts are disgusting, extremely conservative women like you will never change, thus leading to a cycle of slut shaming reinforcement for the profit of matriarchal golddiggers who act like generous lesbians in bed, and want to continue to control men with their penises so that they can pass their anti-male laws.

      You’re either one of them, or you’re an innocent victim of their brainwashing, but either way, the primary beneficiaries of your article will be the matriarchs who slut shame women into a hatred of men, and the primary victims will be men who end up raped in prison just because you had to scream “whore.”

      Your solution isn’t to become a slave to male slut shamers by becoming a slut shamer yourself, thus helping the matriarchal slut shamers who are ultimately pulling the strings, “so you can get into a long term relationship.” Trust me (especially with the younger generation), sluts are more in demand for long term relationships than you think. Times are changing, but as it stands now, your irrational conservatism and insecurity due to male sheep judgment makes you part of the problem.

      Please think about this.

      P.S. It’s funny how you said you were too young to have sex at 14. I was 13 when I lost my virginity and my current girlfriend told me she was 12. What’s more is that my girlfriend’s daughter just recently lost her virginity last month at age 13, whom my girlfriend gave birth to at 15 (my girlfriend is 28 now). We both thought it was so cute when the daughter gave us the news. She certainly won’t turn out to be a golddigging anti-slut matriarch who insists on compensation for sex and controls men with their dicks. Welcome to the 21st century!

      • Alek

        “Don’t you get it? Preventing false rape accusations can only be done by DECREASING women’s shame for having casual sex. By trying to get women to feel their guilt, you are just making them more desperate to restore their reputations by putting the man in jail for rape, thus exchanging her shame for sainthood and worship, which is the reaction to women who say they were raped.”

        You are either one of the most naive men on the planet, or a very clever feminist troll (congratulations on fooling me for a second if you are).

        IF you ARE a super-duper-naive men. Let me explain what specifically was naive in your claim. You seem to believe that women are GODDESSES who NEVER have evil or defrauding intent.

        Your claim: Women who false-sex-accuse ALL do it for ONE REASON ONLY, and that’s to avoid being labeled too sexual.

        Reality: The women who have done false-rape accusations have done so for dozens (perhaps hundreds) of nefarious reasons. Wanting to appear less promiscious is one out of many possible reasons a woman could have done such a thing. There’s monetary gain, seeking attention, seeking revenge on a guy daring to dump her (etc etc etc.)

        ALSO by saying that “100% of false rape accusations” are due to women fearing promiscuity reputations you are ALSO indirectly saying that THIS IS A LEGITIMATE TECHNIQUE or way to “clear one’s reputation”.

        That’s like you saying “Murderers only kill coz they don’t earn enough money, therefore it’s 100% the fault of the government that murder exists and if we eliminated unemployment, murder would cease to exist”. You gullible gullible little brainwashed minion you.

        • Gamer

          I believe I stated in my very first comment on this topic that even without slut shaming, there would still be women who falsely accuse men due to wanting some kind of power over them. Women are certainly not goddesses. But I also stated that the FRAs would be cut in half (at least) if we got rid of slut shaming.

          I believe there should be a line of demarcation between slut shaming and every other motivation a woman has for giving FRAs. The women who do it for every other motivation are genuinely evil.

          The women who did it because they’ve been slut shamed are stupid, low self esteem, and moronic imbeciles who are panicking precisely due to their need for peer approval and matrix morality, but those are the only ones I can think of who didn’t do it from a position of evil strength, but weakness and stupidity.

          Of course, I’m not excusing their stupidity. No man deserves a false rape charge (unless he is the slut shamer in question, in which case, I think an FRA after sleeping with her is poetic justice because then he’d have to fight the ideology that he believes in – that women are virgin angels and not sluts).

          Still, as a practical man, I think we can solve at least this problem with FRAs by stopping the slut shaming once and for all. I don’t think that is unreasonable, especially if you’re a guy like me who believes that sluts are the only female anti-matriarchs out there, that they are the only women who aren’t seeking leverage, thus making them conducive to spiritual intimacy, and that both men and women deserve as much sex as they want without matriarchal/golddigging power plays.

          Feminists are against slut shaming because they want to redirect the hatred towards men and make all men rapists. This is identical to the conservative ideology of chivalry which states that innocent virgin damsels are bing dirtied by male scoundrels (those two political groups should get together, by the way). I, on the other hand, am against slut shaming because I believe it is hatred of men.

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        I think the two of you are probably closer on this than it appears at first glance, since I got a very clear “embrace your inner slut if that’s what you want, just own it and take responsibility for it like an adult” message out of JB’s statement, myself.

        I don’t condemn or hate you for your enjoying casual sex and having a partner who does the same. Yet I would have to say that doesn’t, at first glance anyway, look like a smart arrangement for having children. In the current legal climate, men who have children are taking an enormous, horrible risk, but even if you take those legal risks away, there’s a risk to casual promiscuity; I have known at least two couples who had open relationships like you describe, and both wound up ending in divorce and shattered lives for the children when one of the partners eventually decided they liked one of their casual hookups better than their current “main steady.”

        If sex weren’t tied in to babymaking much of this conversation would be irrelevant, but the fact is that children have a need for fathers and mothers. Fathers are every bit as important as mothers, in some areas they’re more important than mothers, and they are generally not really replaceable–or let’s say, replacement fathers are usually (usually, not always) not as good. It’s a traumatic thing for a child to lose daily contact with either of their parents, both of whom they are naturally inclined to bond to.

        The evidence that the casual removal of fathers from children’s lives is devastating is everywhere you look.

        Humans are pair bonders. You describe your own relationship as a strong pair bond relationship, just one in which you both enjoy casual hookups with others. OK, that’s you. I don’t think that makes you evil. I don’t think you should be shamed out of polite society. But I do think that, like being gay, you’re into something that most people aren’t. That doesn’t make you bad or wicked, but I think it probably makes you a statistical outlier, like people who naturally prefer masturbation over sex or people who prefer same-sex couplings or whatever.

        JB is a bit of a traditionalist methinks, but I don’t see the “slut-shaming” you’re seeing here.

        • Gamer

          Actually, I believe an open relationship is the best environment in which to raise children. Parental fighting (especially in front of the child) is considerably reduced. The parents are happier, they don’t co-own anything (which means, they don’t fight about money), and sexual competition creates incentive for them to always be sweet and loving to one another precisely due to the lack of safety nets that taking each other for granted (thanks to monogamy) would facilitate.

          Monogamous relationships are vulnerable to betrayal and cheating. A broken home like this hurts the child tremendously. The only other monogamous environment is one in which the parents are frustrated, miserable, and caged, usually with the woman controlling the man due to an inferior sex drive, and thus, a stronger position to use sex as a misandric bargaining chip against him. This is what monogamy is to women – power!

          In the 1950s, a woman had to have sex with her husband to avoid criminal sanctions. In the 1970s, the sex positive feminists (which don’t exist anymore) said that no woman owes a man sex, but they compensated for this by suggesting swingers parties and open marriages.

          Today, women like JB have mixed the forced monogamy of the 50s with the “don’t you dare tell me what to do with my body” of the 70s to create the modern woman – a creature who says that the man isn’t allowed to sleep with anyone but her, and is also not allowed to sleep with her, except on very specific occasions in which the woman’s inferior sex drive permits. And this is what you call a happy family? No, this is matriarchal domination, which JB is promoting (whether consciously or not).

          I dream of a world in which monogamous relationships will one day be thought of as child abuse. But remember, the alternative isn’t casual sex. The alternative is serious relationships in which both partners – whether polyamorous or hypergamous by nature – are allowed to do something that monogamy never allowed them to do – breathe!

  • http://mrathunderinthehammer.blogspot.com/ Dannyboy

    Your words be as sweet as a shot of JD to my ears.
    You can aurally rape me anytime. 😉

  • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

    “Don’t you get it? Preventing false rape accusations can only be done by DECREASING women’s shame for having casual sex. By trying to get women to feel their guilt, you are just making them more desperate to restore their reputations by putting the man in jail for rape, thus exchanging her shame for sainthood and worship, which is the reaction to women who say they were raped.”

    The alternative of course, would be to encourage women to take pride in their instinct to keep sex inside a relationship (most women would NOT enjoy going down on two guys while her boyfriend watched – yours does, and good for you. Sounds like you deserve each other – but you are outliers).

    Promoting promiscuity as some kind of moral achievement flies in the face of what evolution has designed us to do, and feeling guilty and ashamed and disappointed and regretful and oh so lonely the next morning is a pretty natural reaction.

    You’re saying “get women to deny their natural reactions”, and I’m saying “respect your natural feelings”.

    And as for Bible thumping conservative – hahahaha! I gave up my imaginary friend a long time ago. Indeed, I don’t think I EVER believed he existed. Even as a child, I knew that was a giant crock of shit.

    What isn’t a crock of shit is evolution and biology. Sex produces a rush of oxytocin – a bonding hormone and when women have sex with someone they don’t love, they generally respond quite poorly to that. Their bodies are designed to feel a connection.

    Promoting casual sex won’t DECREASE false rape charges. Nonsense. It will make women even more regretful and angry, and it is men who will pay for that.

    Enjoy your own personal slut. Be one yourself. But don’t promote being a slut to women biologically programmed to desire a relationship along with sex.

    That won’t end well. Look around you. It’s a fucking disaster.

    *and for the record, I think plenty of men enjoy sex much more in the context of a loving relationship too

    • Stu

      What you’re failing to consider JB, is that we evolved this hard wiring to be uncomfortable with certain things, like for example being afraid of heights. But now we fly, and live in skyscrapers. We don’t live in the environments our ancestors did, and just as cars, planes, electronics, etc have changed the way we live, and our needs, and freed us from our biological realities, like being limited to the speed we could run, and not being able to fly, and just about everything else we do, so to has technology freed us from the necessity to live sexually as we did.

      By the way, if you want to talk about evolution and nature, it is not nature that women are monogamous, that was a social contract that was enacted to control their non-monogamous behavior, namely, hypergamy.

      Ask a Saudi Arabian guy if women are naturally monogamous….and I bet he says yes….of course they are. Then ask him why it is necessary to have such sever punishments and deterrents to prevent activity for which women are naturally not inclined to do anyway…..and still do…even with those deterrents. If women were naturally monogamous, there would have been no need to have had the shaming, the laws, religious indoctrination etc that we had, to make them monogamous.

      I differ in the belief that the driving force behind hypergamy is to acquire, or upgrade, to a better provider. I think it has much more to do with genetic diversity, the urge to mate with others, built in. It will kick in usually after a woman has been with one guy for a few years, precisely because that’s about the time it would have taken in nature, to produce offspring, and ween. That is nature. Monogamous life long marriage is an innovation. Without the pill, condoms, modern medicine, it was the only way to build a cohesive society using the one common building block of all successful civilizations…..the nuclear family. But it was an innovation that went against natural inclinations of both men and women. It was a case of forcing unnatural behavior in order to get the benefits, which was the only way to get those benefits at that time.

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        Stu: there’s a lot of evidence in the evolutionary record that you and JB are both correct. Humans have been pair-bonding for hundreds of thousands of years–long before we had any elaborate civilizations. They just have been. In the overwhelming majority of hunter/gatherer societies, people still marry; primitive cultures in which there is no marriage are very rare, although I read about one–and even in that one, the norm was a type of serial monogamy very much like what you describe. People generally lived in close tight-knit communities and while the women and men would seek different partners they would usually be together for a few years at a stretch, right around the amount of time it took to go from pregnancy to weening with a child, then they might move on… but they were all still living near each other in close-knit community where the children were still looked after and had close relationships with both parents.

        The only area where I think we thus disagree is the notion that marriage is imposed. No, people really do naturally tend to couple and pair up. The idea that we’re a pair-bonding species is not even controversial in biology and evolutionary psychology circles; it’s so well-established that we pair-bond as a species the assertion doesn’t even require citation in academic papers, it’s been so thoroughly documented in not just every culture ever found but all throughout the archaeological record of groups of humans going back hundreds of thousands of years.

        My own view is that civilization (and this includes religions) started imposing strong rules toward monogamy because when civilization caused the number of humans to explode, it also caused chaos in human relationships, as the opportunities to “cheat” increased immeasurably, and this caused a rise in disease and in fatherless children and fighting over mates, which caused various civilizations to start imposing crude rules about the whole thing.

        You may be right that we’ve reached a point where casual sex with multiple partners is not a big deal–but I’d say that unless hookup culture is thinking very hard about what the results will be for any children produced out of it, it’s still playing with fire.

        • Stu

          The main point though Dean, is that with the pill, and condoms, and vaccinations, and modern meds that can cure all the little common infections, and massive dense populations, and the internet, and no social or legal consequences for women, there is nothing to keep them monogamous, so they wont be, or least most of them, beyond the time it takes to have gotten bored with the same guy. Even the ones that remain monogamous won’t stay hot for you. You’ll get told night after night about the headache, and she’ll use her vibe more then your cock. And it’s not your cock she’s thinking about when she uses her vibe.

          The only way the toothpaste is going back in the tube is if our modern civilization collapses, and since I don’t think anybody wants that, what is the solution. Believe me, becoming perfectly comfortable with non-monogamy is just like becoming comfortable with flying. It causes alarm bells to ring at first, then you just settle down, and it doesn’t worry you anymore.

          Anyway, this is the other really hard red pill for men to swallow. It goes down really hard. Wishing that women were the way you want them to be doesn’t make it so.

          • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

            You may be right, although, my suspicion is that most people do prefer some sort of monogamy, although in biological terms “monogamy” isn’t a strict absolute but rather a preferential tendency; “cheating” will still happen, as will serial monogamy (moving from one partner to another to another), and so on.

            Personally I have zero interest in casual hookups. I never had any that I can recall in my entire life, and I don’t think that was because it was beaten into me–although I was raised somewhat religious, I was very rebellious against that by the time I was a teen. I don’t think my inclinations toward being highly selective and not wanting a lot of sex partners makes me weird, or that I should be seen as weird for it.

            I think we are in a sort of double bind, as I do not wish to condemn and hate and shame people such as yourself who choose a life of casual hookups so long as they’re responsible and honest adults who own their own behavior, but I also dislike a culture that says we all *should* be that way and that tells us there’s something *wrong* with us if we don’t want to be that way.

            *I* don’t want to be that way, but I also have zero interest in persecuting you or anyone else if you’re different from me. Now maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m an unusual outlier and your way is the way of the future. But obviously I don’t think so or we wouldn’t be arguing about it. 😉

          • Stu

            What most people prefer Dean, is that their partner be monogamous lol.

          • http://pinterest.com/zetapersei/male-privilege/ Perseus

            “Anyway, this is the other really hard red pill for men to swallow. It goes down really hard. Wishing that women were the way you want them to be doesn’t make it so.”

    • Stu

      You say when women have sex with somebody they don’t love they generally respond quite poorly.

      How many women have you you fucked that don’t love you JB, and how many have you seen have sex with others that they didn’t love lol.

      I call bullshit on this. But I accept it is true for you. But I find it is common for women to insist and assume that their sexual preferences are held by all women or at least most women. Women who don’t like anal will say that no women do, when in fact many women love it, and wouldn’t be with a guy who wont give it to them, regularly.

      Women who hate cum in their mouth say that all women hate it, but many find it very erotic. Women that don’t like threesomes with two guys say that no woman would like that, but there is no shortage of women who love it…and seek it out.

      You can’t impose your sexual likes and dislikes on all women, or most women JB, that is what the feminists do.

      • GurrenLagannX

        Really, a lot of women like anal? Damn, I guess my ‘female audience’ has become smaller, haha.

    • Gamer

      You are stuck in an “either/or” false dilemma. You seem to think that polyamorous/open relationships aren’t loving, and that monogamy is your only alternative to “casually sleeping around.” Nonsense. Ever been in a triad? Or a quartet? There are many different combinations of emotionally loving relationships and spiritually bonded “sexual friendships” that do not subsrcibe to the non-emotional “hump and dump” culture. Open your mind.

      As for it being a “disaster,” that is only because no one is teaching children coherent poly values because they’re too busy fighting with each other over what to teach them. So, just to avoid pissing people off, the children are taught nothing, thus resulting in reckless sexual disasters destroying our society. The solution isn’t monogamy, marriage, or any other restrictive sexual code, or a code that narrowly defines spiritual intimacy with just one monogamous lifestyle. The solution is the exploration of multi-sexual lifestyles, while teaching the next generation about each one and allowing them to come to their own conclusions.

      But there are certain things that have to be done to make that possible. Step I: End the slut shaming, or referring to women as “whores” for enjoying themselves with multiple men, thus falsely claiming that monogamy holds some type of morally superior position, which causes certain weak women who are vulnerable to peer pressure to falsely accuse their lovers of rape in order to avoid getting spit on by the “Judgybitches” of the world..

  • GurrenLagannX

    I think we shouldn’t promote promiscuity. Neither do I think we should promote chastity. We should respect the choices of people and their sex lives. Having lots of sex, limited or have no sex at all doesn’t make you less worth than others.
    As a man, I have faced the whole double standard. I had the feeling I had to validate my worth as man by fucking as much women as possible.
    So, no, promoting promiscuity is not the answer – but neither should we enforce or preach to our fellow men and women to keep their legs crossed.
    If they want to follow certain desires or relationships… as long as it’s consensual, what’s the problem then?

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      Long term, the only problem I see is where it comes to childbearing and rearing. That should be carefully thought through. Hookup culture shouldn’t be casual; if you’re going to indulge in it you probably really ought to be thinking damn hard about the possible consequences as regards to disease and especially children. But if you’ve got those thoroughly covered, then what the fuck, you’re an adult and free to make your choices. Just whoever you are, male or female, own it, take responsibility for it.

      What disgusts me is likely the thing that disgusts you: the double standards that make men responsible for women’s choices.

      • GurrenLagannX

        We aren’t responsible for a woman’s choices. If she wants to have sex, it’s her choice. I mean, it’s pretty much insulting towards women to think they aren’t capable of making their own choices and acting on their own desires.
        Of course, safe sex is something that definitely should be encouraged, but encouraging, forcing or dictating people how to live their sex life is not.

  • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

    I’m not promoting chastity, I don’t see it as an either/or proposition. What I’m saying is that MOST women don’t want to just fuck men, they want to love them.

    Women who genuinely enjoy sex with men they don’t care about should be free to indulge their desires without shame or social stigma. Sure. Go right ahead.

    My problem is with telling women that there is something empowering and progressive about sex without emotional attachment, and encouraging them to go AGAINST a very natural desire to feel connected to the man they are having sex with. For women who don’t care about connection, fine. No problem. But the majority of women want and need to feel love (definitely linked to the possibility of having children, as Dean points out).

    As a matter of fact, I DON’T know what it is like to fuck someone I don’t care about. To me that is just “ick!”, but I also don’t really care if other women want to do that and enjoy it. Have at it.

    I am claiming, based on the many women I know, that the vast majority of women want sex in the context of a relationship. Telling them that they are wrong to have this desire, that they should be willing and eager to have sex just for the hell of it, that casual sex and promiscuity is a path to enlightenment is a LIE.

    That’s the whole point of my article. Women go out, get boozed up, have this narrative running in their minds that fucking random dudes is a cool, empowering thing to do and then they wake up the next morning stone cold sober and they feel AWFUL about it. The guy might not even know her name.

    And since the women can’t quite believe they just gave up their body to someone who doesn’t care if they live or die, they look around for someone to blame.

    Guess who that is? They OUGHT to be blaming a culture that tells them such a pernicious lie about sexuality, but instead they blame the individual man. “You should know I’m not a whore!” (No sweetie, that’s not on him!)

    Women are far better off to be told “most of you will feel really horrible about random casual hookups with men you don’t know and don’t care about, so it’s a good idea to avoid putting yourself in situations where that might happen. If you LOVE sex with random strangers, great. But most of you won’t like it”.

    Part of giving young women the tools they need to navigate modern relationships and sexuality is encourage them to be honest about what they truly want. And if a meaningful relationship is what a woman is after, fucking a guy’s best friend out behind the bar after too much tequila is not the way to go about it.

    Remember that “female Tucker Max” chick who wrote down her experience having sex with a whole bunch of guys at Duke?


    Which encounter did she enjoy the most? The one with the guy who LOOKED AT HER. He gazed into her eyes. Acted like she was a real person. He made her feel, for one second, like they might have a connection that went deeper than sex.

    Karen Owens is like most women. She responded most powerfully to an emotional connection with the man she was having sex with.

    We need to tell young women that it’s OK to feel that way. That it’s natural. And that achieving a real connection isn’t likely to happen after one night of sex with someone you barely know.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      I would say we need to be telling young men the same thing.

      My anecdotal experience that despite all the cultural bluster about how “manly” it is to have sex with lots of women, most guys spend most of their time thinking they’d really like to have a girlfriend, a mate. I don’t think I’ve ever met a man who, when I asked him about it, did not admit that he’d gotten his heart broken at least once by a girl when he was young–and you can’t get your heart broken if all you want is sex.

      The notion that most men are anxious to stick it into any pretty pussy that’s nearby strikes me as one of our culture’s deepest misandrous beliefs. No, really, ask young men privately if that’s what they really want. Looking at the pretty girls, sure. Maybe even thinking there’s more than one they’re attracted to, sure. But what do they really want? Trust, affection, bonding. This is not what the culture tells them they want, the culture tells them they just want to get laid with any female who’s attractive, and I don’t think it’s true.

      If that *is* what you want–casual sex I mean–then as long as you’re an adult who is honest about it and owns it, I’m fine with it. But I don’t think we serve young men (or women) well to tell them that’s what they *should* want if it’s not their natural inclination to feel that way. And I think for most, it’s not.

      • http://www.judgybitch.com JudgyBitch

        Well said. I think it’s human desire to want to love and be loved, and I have no doubt that men are every bit as romantic and emotional as women when it comes to sex.

        Portraying men as just wanting to fuck anything that moves is definitely a cruel stereotype that denies men a very basic part of their humanity.

      • GurrenLagannX

        I think most of us, if not all humans want to have love and such. However, even if monogamous love is the biological or truthful way, I think we should let people decide for themselves. Just like with vegetarians and meat-eaters, let them decide how they choose their diet. Same goes with sex life.

  • Stu

    The way I see it, Dean and JB are both peddling the wagan that says, only committed monogamous relationships are loving, or caring, this is just not true. The other thing is, JB has said straight up, that she has no experience with alternative arrangements…….Dean has pretty much said the same thing….but both seem to have the view that sex outside of their personal preference, and experience…..can only be without caring, or loving. How do you know that?

    Me, I’ve had two monogamous marriages/defacto relationships….and witnessed how many….who knows….along with their demises. I’ve also had several monogamous girlfriend boyfriend relationships. I’ve also had a ridiculous amount of group sex with people at sex parties, some I got to know well, some I only see there….and some I only seen once. I’ve also had intimate relationships with couples, some lasting many years…and the friendship continuing beyond the sex. I’ve also lived with two women at once. I’ve also been in non-monogamous committed relationships….and maintained intimate friendships with other people at the same time. Some of these people I love like they were my family, and they have outlived any monogamous relationship I’ve ever had.

    It is just simply not true that caring, or love, requires monogamy, or the financial, emotional and live each others pocket type of arrangement that is the norm.

    Apart from all that, I don’t care even if the majority of women hate anything but total committement and marriage….tough…..it has become a one way committment…..the man is committed……the woman is not. It is too dangerous for men, and it is going to get worse. I don’t think we should be recommending any arrangement to men, that mean’s giving up all control of your assets, income, future income, and rendering them totally at the mercy and whim of a woman, that can simply decide she is bored with you and dispose of you like yesterdays newspaper.

    I don’t think we should be encouraging men to enter relationships where it is a crime for them to argue with their partner, or look at her funny, or be sarcastic, or spend his own money without her permission. And the list of double standards and legal discrimination against him is too long to list in this post.

    Adherence to this, committed relationship model is nothing but slavery for men. There is not one thing anymore that a man can demand from his wife…..not one thing…..she remains legally……as free to do as she wishes in any area of her life…..with her money, with her time, with jobs…..she can sit on her fat lazy arse all day while you work two jobs and come home to messy house….nothing you can do about it. He must now walk on eggshells and give into her way everytime a disagreement becomes an argument……he simply can not afford to oppose her on anything once she becomes displeased and pissed off.

    We should be telling men to avoid any and all relationships that carry legal weight….and strip them of rights, or control in their own homes or lives…….period. And if women don’t like it….they can go and overturn all these laws that have made this situation what it is. And if they don’t want to do that…..they can STFU and turn lesbo or something…..since other women will not be subject to these draconian rules in a relationship with them……let them fill each others needs for commitment.

    Women have made it so that the only relationships that are equal now, are casual, non-committed, non-monogamous……so that is what men should stick too. I’m in the MRM to look out for men, and I will give them advice that protects them……I couldn’t care less that there is millions of women out there that will not get what they want if men follow my advice…….good……maybe they will stop supporting governments that pass these laws, and start telling feminists to eat shit. In fact, I think that is the only way women are going to turn on feminists…….when they no longer get what they want from men……because of feminists.

    • http://pinterest.com/zetapersei/male-privilege/ Perseus

      An oracle, Stu

      Crackling discussion, so good.

      JB: Relying on the etherial ‘connection’ and ‘love’ angle. Define ‘connection’ and ‘love’, please. I love people in general, and feel connected to them. How connected does one need to feel. Isn’t sexual attraction and desire a connection? Why are others necessary? What is their nature? And aren’t these also nepotistic and elitist? Must you have hobbies in common, or shared interests, or have swapped stupid stories or noted each others quirks, or soaked up a museum together? How are these necessarily relevant to sex? I fear ‘love’ and ‘connection’ are so easily sugared up code for ‘protection and provision’. That is to say, provision of something of value in addition to the sex- i.e. johning.

      Dr. Esmay: I appreciate your well articulate and recurring reference to the concept of pair-bonding. However, I fear that you may oversell it. With so much evolutionary time and speciation behind us, and a complex history, it would seem apparent that we possess within us the combined spectrum of drives and impulses, ranging from tournament (applause to GWW) on the one end to pair-bonding on the other. Granting that, it becomes a question of where we ‘generally’ fall on the spectrum. Frankly, I suspect that we’re all the fuck over the place, being the diverse, complex and liberated creature that we are. So therein lies the potential failure of a prescriptive course of relationship, conforming to one inherently means denying an absolutely real part of yourself, if we are honest about it. As the great Chris Rock enlightens us- ‘married and bored, or single and lonely, ain’t no happiness nowhere’.

      Remember, people are as loyal as their options. And don’t you forget it.

      Stu: Affirmative. Ya big stud.

      Thank you each for an incredibly enlightening discussion.