Pussy

The power of pussy

Pussy. We all know it’s what makes the world go round, right?

That’s just the way it is. It’s the most valuable substance on earth because men want it so bad. Human men are gaga over the vagjna. It’s instinct. Spread your seed, sow your wild oats, bow and scrape for a bit of the ol’ beaver pelt. But is it really?

If it was instinct you’d think other male animals would be acting the same way. They’re not. Female chimps beg male chimps for sex. Antelopes of the fairer sex will scrap and cheat their way into scoring prime nooky from their male counterparts. Stallions, held up as the pinnacle of ever ready male sexuality, will often turn their nose up at a willing mare who isn’t the right color or breed or for some other horsey reason. So what’s really giving the va-jay-jay it’s star power in our society?

Let’s look at the average dating scenario.

A man is responsible for:

  • Asking the woman out
  • Choosing a venue for the date
  • Paying for the date
  • Escalating the physical intimacy

When physical intimacy does commence, he’s also responsible for:

  • Achieving and maintaining an erection
  • Getting her wet
  • Giving her pleasure
  • Most of the physical work of sex

And here’s the real kicker—the part of sex that a man is also responsible for that turns the whole thing into an exercise in absurdity—the man is also responsible for his own orgasm.

As a Chris Rock said, ‘it’s not you, it’s the filthy thoughts in our head.’

The value of female sexuality to men is its ability to give men orgasms right? That’s why men are walking hard-ons right? Because they only want one thing: shove it in and get it off.

But men have started to fess up to the fakery… women don’t give them orgasms, they give themselves orgasms. Let’s say that again. Women aren’t giving men orgasms; men are giving themselves orgasms in the presence of women.

Think about it. It is the one thing society says makes her sexuality so precious, so much more valuable than yours, and she’s not even giving it. You’re giving yourself the orgasm. She’s giving you the headache. At what point in this façade due men stop and realize that they’re engaged in a sexual relationship… with themselves?

Look at the average hook up in hook up culture. For a man it usually amounts to pretending to orgasm from sex with a less-attractive woman who may or may not have social and physical hygiene issues.

This is the precious resource that men are taught to center their lives around?

It’s the social expectation of the eternal hard-on that gives pussy its power. The expectation that men be ever ready, that they be machines, that they function like a piston. That they orgasm with women, and only with women and that pretend women are giving them orgasms that women aren’t actually giving them.

So what’s really giving the whispering eye its wallop?

It’s you. It’s every one of you who’s pretending it’s worth more than it is.

So here’s a thought. Recognize that once you’re asking the woman out, setting up the date, paying for the date, responsible for physical escalation, responsible for her physical response and responsible for your own orgasm, that you’re essentially having sex with yourself. The woman is just a formality.

Or simply demand that pussy do as advertised and actually give you an orgasm. And when it doesn’t work as advertised, don’t blame yourself, blame it. Blame the entire edifice of bullshit built up around it as this hole of wonders and ultimate bliss.

Pussy? It’s just another one of those crappy products on the shopping channel; it’s talked up a lot, works like a charm when it’s demonstrated on video but once you get it out of the box it fails to deliver. Big Time.

The funny thing about the human penis is that it’s not ever ready; muscular erections are ever ready. Vasocongestive erections are more like a formula one race car—a lot of technologically advanced systems in one extremely volatile state of synergy.

Thus if the penis can be likened to a machine, it’s less the ever-ready piston and more a finely tuned bullshit detector.

So perhaps the next time a guy finds himself limp when society says he should be hard, rather than thinking he’s failing to perform he should instead be alert to the presence of weapon grade bullshit in his vicinity. He might just find that all his parts are working just as they’re supposed to, thank you very much.

And maybe the penis-as-bullshit detector’s the real reason why our society is so heavily invested in medicating away the so-called nonfunctional phallus. Because it’s functioning too well and society isn’t liking what it’s saying.

So how do you end the power of pussy? Simple. Stop pretending. Stop perpetuating the hysteria, the bullshit and the balderdash surrounding the world’s most over-hyped organ. Bring out your bendy bullshit barometers, your flaccid phalluses, your limp dicks… cuz it’s time to flop their shit up.

About Alison Tieman (Typhonblue)

Alison Tieman (aka Typhonblue) is a Canadian writer and social observer. She is a Senior Contributor and Editor to A Voice for Men, penning superlative works that analyse gender-related behavior in men and women. She also writes for Genderratic, and is a founder and member of The Honeybadger Brigade.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

    Are you an MHRA? Can you write apps for iPhone and Android? Are you willing to do that for AVFM on a special project? Please contact us.

    A Voice for Men seeks a volunteer with solid app writing experience to help us develop an app that will be linked to the AVFM brand. If you have the qualifications and are serious about following through, we would love to hear from you. Your efforts could be of great assistance to this website and to our cause. Please contact Paul Elam at paul@avoiceformen.com for more details...

  • Wikimasters, Editors, Translators, and Writers Wanted *Apply Now*

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! A Voice for Men and WikiMANNia are working to increase knowledge of men's issues through two wikis: the AVfM Reference Wiki for scholarly references, and WikiMANNia for general-interest men's issues. Volunteers needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    Please write to editorial_team@wikimannia.org...

  • Demonspawn

    I’m going to need some citations for your proposed animal behaviors. Because when you look at Capuchin monkeys, they engage in prostitution once they learn the value of money.

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      As far as I know they saw one incident. Further if it was a female monkey ‘prostituting’ herself, what was the status of the female monkey versus the male monkey?

      Biologists have witnessed female chimps begging male chimps for sex. I don’t have a ready link for that one unfortunately. As for the observation on stallions, ask anyone who has ever worked with stallions for breeding. They all have stories about a stallion who disliked mares of different colours, or breeds, or some other obscure reason.

      The antelope one is here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071129100050.htm

      • Demonspawn

        So let me get this straight: You think this one species of antelopes, which compete for the limited supply of sperm due to one day of breeding, has anything to do with human reproductive behavior where the wombs are the limiting factor rather than the sperm?

        Yes, because in this one breed of antelope the reproductive time-frame is so short that sperm becomes more important than number of available wombs, we witness what happens when men become the limiting factor: women fight for men.

        Do you have any delusion that men are the limiting factor in human reproduction?

        Your example destroys the point you are attempting to make. I have little doubt the other sources will follow a similar pattern.

        • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

          Biologists are only just starting to look into female mate competition however here is the conclusion regarding the topi antelope and their applicability to other mammals:

          “Such role reversals may occur in species where females benefit from mating multiply, either because it increases their chances of conception with high-quality males or simply because it increases the probability that they conceive at all, Bro-Jørgensen added.”

          Scientists are finding out more and more that female animals benefit greatly from sperm competition. In fact in fruit flies(chosen for a short breeding cycle) it’s been proven that sperm competition prevents extinction. In fact most female mammals mate polyandrously.

          “He noted that this reversed sexual conflict might not be a rarity in the animal kingdom, as topi are “in many ways a very typical mammalian species characterized by male mate competition and female choice.”

          You’ve also misread the time-frame for reproduction. The breeding season lasts longer then a day it’s _individual females_ who are in heat for only a day.

          “Do you have any delusion that men are the limiting factor in human reproduction?”

          Resource production is the limiting factor in human reproduction.

          • Demonspawn

            >and their applicability to other mammals:

            I don’t give a shit about their applicability to other mammals. It only matters if their patterns are applicable to humans. And they are not.

            >Resource production is the limiting factor in human reproduction.

            And this is why an abundance of resources puts women above men so well.

            So the only solution is to remove government’s ability to take resources from unpaired men and give it to women who have children.

            In other words: Revolt, Expat, or Turtle.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            On reddit I asked you why you thought this couldn’t be applicable to humans and you responded that the animal in question had a short breeding season.

            Their rut is actually a month and a half long. It’s the females who go into season for one day.

            I’m not responding to anything else because I agree. The situation of artificial resource excess leads to female sexuality seeming more valuable then it is. The fact is in situations of scarcity, female sexuality isn’t as valuable because populations must be kept under control least resources be depleted. Thus female infanticide.

          • Demonspawn

            >Their rut is actually a month and a half long.

            Like I said on reddit: 6 weeks out of year, and all females at the same short time frame, is an inversion of the human sperm/womb availability dynamic and has little to nothing to do with human biological reality.

          • Codebuster

            I don’t give a shit about their applicability to other mammals. It only matters if their patterns are applicable to humans. And they are not.

            Methinks we have a genocentric interpretation here. I do give a shit about their applicability to other mammals. Are their patterns applicable to humans? Many of them are.

            My theory is that women from many cultures (particularly the Anglosphere), as creatures of hypergamy, are so pre-occupied with being provided-for that they prioritize security/financial issues and often become blind to their more primal motives (in accordance with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs). The simple truth is that the female sex drive is potentially every bit as strong as the male sex drive… I’d even suggest it might be stronger, but because “throwing it around” has serious repurcussions, very few women venture that far. Women’s obsession with materialism often blinds them to their primal motives, and in a sense this protects them from the hazards that come with flaunting it.

            A lot of biologists project their own assumptions onto the behaviour of different species. For example, seals/walruses. Are the males really randy hard-cocks competing for females? Or are they competing for territory, with the implication that the females come with the territory?

            I agree with TB. Sex is hugely over-rated, and men have themselves to blame… not to mention our culture’s immersion in porn, constantly reminding men that they have “needs” that must be met.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            “Human women are fertile for 3-5 days out of every month. Availability of alpha (desirable) sperm is in no way problem. Therefore wombs are the limiting factor.”

            It doesn’t matter if the females are receptive for one day or five. The males will act exactly the same on day one as day five because the exact same conditions exist each day, limited sperm, lots of fertile females (And, also, instincts don’t have a timer.)

            In fact the human female fertile cycle is even more likely to result in choosy males. Why? Because unlike female topi that can come into heat at any point in a one and a half month rut, human females synchronize their cycles very closely if they are living in proximity. (Any group of females a prehistoric male human would ever encounter would be living in close proximity because they did not have cars.)

            That is, all females in our prehistoric tribe would be ovulating simultaneously with a simultaneous window of prime fertility. That’s even more selective of choosy males.

            And all of this assumes humans breed promiscuously. Which they don’t. They’re pair bonders.

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

            How in the heck is synchronization of menstrual cycles accomplished?

          • Demonspawn

            >It doesn’t matter if the females are receptive for one day or five.

            Unless the male refractory period is several days, it does matter.

            >The males will act exactly the same on day one as day five because the exact same conditions exist each day, limited sperm, lots of fertile females

            No, sperm is virtually unlimited, the wombs are what’s limited. You are again inverting reality to fit your ideology.

            >human females synchronize their cycles very closely if they are living in proximity. And any group of females a prehistoric male human would ever encounter would be living in close proximity.

            So you think 3-5 days, 13 times a year is anything like once a year for one day? You are once again warping reality to fit your ideology.

            >And all of this assumes humans breed promiscuously. Which they don’t. They’re pair bonders.

            Penis shape and sexual dimorphism suggest otherwise. Reality, again.. but I’m sure you get the drift by now.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            @ Demonspawn

            “Unless the male refractory period is several days, it does matter.”

            It does matter. And the refractory period for replenishing sperm is 24 hours.

            Let’s imagine a herd of six hundred promiscuous animals that have a month long rut with each female going into heat for one day. During each day of that rut, you will have 10 females in heat compared to 300 males.

            Let’s assume now the same number of animals but that the sexual receptivity lasts 3 days. Now during any particular day you have 3 times more females in heat.

            That actually increases the demand on the males.

            Now let’s look at the situation with humans with exactly the same numbers. 600.

            Since human females synchronize their cycles, that means _all 300 of them_ are in ‘heat’ during any particular day of their fertile period.

            Even more demand on the males.

            “Penis shape and sexual dimorphism suggest otherwise.”

            Our sexual dimorphism is not pronounced. Gorilla males are twice the size of females; Chimp balls are proportionately twice the size of human.

            And penis shape does not suggest promiscuity. The ‘semen scooping’ experiments were done by using a dildo (without a functioning foreskin) and a glass of wet cornstarch. A man with an intact penis is more likely to scoop the other guy’s semen _into_ his foreskin and ‘carry’ it along with him to the next woman he has sex with.

            Chimps have particular anatomical features designed for promiscuous breeding–their penises are long and thin to puncture copulatory plugs and they have penis spines to induce quick ejaculation.

          • Demonspawn

            You’re doing a day by day comparison of a yearly cycle to attempt to make your point appear to be anything even close to valid. On top of that, you are engaging in the fantasy that all 300 women would perfectly synchronize, which is another fantasy with no basis in reality in order to attempt to have a point.

            When you’re ready to come back to reality and analysis, I’ll continue the discussion in a search for an answer. But as you continue to twist reality, make up horrible arguments, and use intentionally faulty logic in order to push your ideology, there is no continued value in attempting to discuss these issues with you.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            Yes, I’m using quantities that make the math easy and ignoring Dunbar’s number.

            How about I use 60.

            For the animal that goes into heat for one day out of a thirty day estrus, 1 female a day will be ready to mate for every 30 males.

            For the animal that goes into heat for three days out of a thirty day estrus, 3 females a day will be ready to mate for every 30 males.

            For humans, who synchronize their cycles, all thirty will be ready to mate each day during their receptive period for every 30 males.

          • Demonspawn

            Again, you are using misleading logic in order to attempt to make your point valid, and using the fantasy of perfect synchronization to try to strengthen your point. You are looking at a one time event when you should be looking at the dynamic over the course of the year (a 1 time per year sexual dynamic is not the same as a one time per 28 day sexual dynamic when looking at the context of a year). You are also using fantasies about the sperm refractory period. Were a man to get one ejaculation per 24 hours that had a chance of conception, then “wack it first” would be a 100% method of birth control.

            I know you’re not stupid, so the only other logical conclusion is that you are being manipulative and deceptive to push your ideology. And if you’re going to push an ideology rather than seek a solution, then there is no value in continuing conversation.

          • http://caveatandro.wordpress.com CCRoxtar

            “And all of this assumes humans breed promiscuously. Which they don’t. They’re pair bonders.”

            Well, in most environments they are. But in the inner-city ghettoes of the United States they exhibit tournament behavior. Males compete violently for drugs, women & who knows what else. Females become pregnant by alpha males who do not stick around to help raise the kids. The male children, lacking positive male role models, learn to steal & fight for their survival; once they come of age they repeat the cycle.

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

        This is one paper that points to what you’re talking about:

        http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002431

        As our closest biological relatives, Chimps are particularly interesting; females do in fact compete for males, and in surprisingly subtle ways. They use mating calls to attract male attention, although they alter those calls in various social situations in various forms of competition; they really do compete for higher-status males, and also try hard to mate with multiple males and not just one, as a protective measure since if multiple males think they are the father the more likely they are to protect their offspring (both male AND female chimps are known to kill infants not their own) and to raise the odds that multiple males will be willing to share resources with them. In chimps, packs of males typically stake out a territory, groom each other, and help dominate resources in an area; males typically stay put, holding onto resources cooperatively with other males while females are more apt to move around to find a group of friendly males to stay with.

        You are also correct that among horses, stallions refusing particular mares is a known problem; here’s a discussion of same on one horsebreeding site:

        http://www.equine-reproduction.com/board/messages/1915/33219.html?1247667288

        One reason that artificial insemination is often used among horse breeders is because of distance/travel logistics make it difficult, but another is that sometimes a stallion just isn’t interested in a mare and after showing initial curiosity/sniffing etc. will often refuse and walk away from that mare when he has not done so with other mares. There are many strategies including, you guessed it, pharmacological interventions that horsebreeders will use to get a reluctant stallion to mate with a mare he isn’t interested in.

        Codebusters has it right; genocentrism can fool us. We think “sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive,” and that’s true as far as it goes, but males often have more to offer than sperm and females have more to ask for than that; a male in many species often has far more to offer than just his sperm.

        I don’t think we’re ever going to completely stop government social programs to assist people, as much as some conserva-libertarian types are prone to argue we should. But what I think we can see is males resisting the siren song of fucking and the social message that they’re supposed to always auto-want sex, and have women placed in a position where if they want to reproduce with a man they respect with traits such as intelligence and protectiveness towards children and whatnot, they’re going to have to start realizing they have to compete for it, and one way to do that is to stop sending young males the silly messages we send them.

        Note: I’m a father of two and would have a third with the right female (although at my current age and status that is unlikely in the extreme to happen) but I have always been choosy about my sex partners, and not just on their looks but on how I perceive their character. For a long while I suspected I was a mutant freak in that regard, but after reading this and some other things I seriously began to wonder if I’m *that* unusual.

        The phrase “all you’re interested in is sex” used to offend me and for a while there I perceived that primarily as “demonizing male sexuality” (which it is) but I begin now to realize it also irritated me because it WAS NOT TRUE. While there has often been an undercurrent of light and fun flirtation with many of my female friends, most of it has always been nonserious playing; I really WILL NOT jump in the sack with just any female, even one who I might find physically attractive.

        Females really do compete with each other over desirable males. Recognizing this is one step towards reforming our often toxically anti-male culture.

    • JFinn

      I know you’re not stupid, so the only other logical conclusion is that you are being manipulative and deceptive to push your ideology. And if you’re going to push an ideology rather than seek a solution, then there is no value in continuing conversation.

      Your definition of a conversation involves you pretending your insults add to your argument and painting any opposing view as dogmatic simply because you disagree with its support. You’re right. There is no value in that conversation.

      • Demonspawn

        If I point out the logical mistakes, and she repeats the same argument with the same logical mistakes (rather than adjusting for them or explaining how they are not logical mistakes) then, yes, she’s either stupid or dogmatic.

        That you are eating up the bullshit and white knighting for her, rather than accepting that she’s being dogmatic or explaining how her logic is correct, you’re either another member of the same dogma or a white knight.

        • Sting Chameleon

          Or he’s simply pointing out the fact that you’re being an asshole about it. If you truly feel that the discussion has no value, you can simply disengage from it without resorting to name-calling.

          • Demonspawn

            Who’s the asshole, the person being disingenuous, manipulative, and borderline lying, or the one pointing it out so that the MRM won’t be based on bullshit and mistruths?

            If you want to be the male version of feminism, feel free. Waste your life trying to base a “solution” on what you’d like to be reality rather than reality. I’d rather be realistic, look for answers, search for the truth behind what’s going on, and then base a solution upon that.

            But there’s been a massive infestation in the MRM over the last few years that would rather have the pretty lies than the ugly truths.

          • Tawil

            He’s being an asshole alright… he isn’t attempting to disagree using logic alone but has to resort to hystrionics and needless insults – said of Typhonblue: “stupid” “dogmatic” “disingenuous” “manipulative” “borderline” “lying” “bullshit” “misleading” “deceptive” “twist reality” “make up horrible arguments and use intentionally faulty logic” “pushing ideology” (etc).

            And anyone who disagrees with him or who agrees with Typonblue’s perpective is “a white knight” and “a male version of a feminist”.

            Haters gonna hate.

          • Shrek6

            Tarwil, I couldn’t agree more. The antagonism from this person (male or female), I perceive as being deliberate to try and get a bite out of TyphonBlue. I am not commenting in anyway to save Ms. T. Blue, because she is able to do that herself. And it is obvious she couldn’t be bothered responding to these attacks.

            I have read these comments and none of them make any sense. This gobble de gook is simply there to stir up some shit.

            Time to pull the plug on this stupid argument, especially because one of the MRM is being targeted and childish name calling is being used.

          • Demonspawn

            You all are more concerned about how I said what I said rather than what I said.

            What does that say about you?

        • Sting Chameleon

          Hey sport, drop the paranoia. No one here is a ‘male version of a feminist’ clutching to ‘pretty lies’. There’s no ‘infestation’ except in your head. You’re free to refute TB’s (or anyone’s) arguments, but attacking your opponent’s character (and repeating the same insults) won’t get you anywhere. Ironically, you’re acting as the same group you malign so much.

          • Demonspawn

            No, sir. I pointed out her logical failings and she ignored them. You may want to believe what she stated very badly, but that doesn’t make it true.

        • kiwihelen

          DS, I’ve tried to work out your counter arguments, but I am afraid to say I am not certain what you are getting at. Any chance you can summarise your position into one post so we can have a clear debate on the aspects?

          I’m in no way an expert on reproductive biology, but I know one thing, there is a whole lot of gynocentrism in academic research…it is rife in my field and I have no doubt this is a similar issue in many areas. I just spent the morning coffee with my (male) housemate deconstructing an article in the Times and pointing out the gynocentric flaws in it – the topic “20 questions about sex after mid-life”

          • Demonspawn

            My counter is that TB is attempting to make a point based on animal behavior, which of course is based on animal biology, which doesn’t match up to human biology, and therefore can’t be used as a basis for why human behavior is wrong.

            Typhon is just another person proposing the idea that men and women are equal and interchangeable, which is simply wrong, incorrect, and following said idea is self-destructive to a society. There’s a good reason why sexual access to women is valued, and there’s a good reason that society treats women as less disposable than it treats it’s men. If you doubt why, ask Yasser Arafat about his best weapon. And then do the research to find out he was right.

            Because of this, society will never treat women as equally disposable as men. Which means that society will never be as strict in enforcing responsibilities on women as they do on men. And what that also means is that anyone who advocates for exact equality between men and women is actually advocating for a state of female supremacy… whether they know it or not.

          • Shrek6

            Ds, then why the hell didn’t you come straight out and say this in the first instance, instead of submitting a whole pile of posts that were adorned with frills of personal insults?

            You could have come up with this very same and reasonable argument from the outset and you would have been respected for it.

            You have made a valid point and it is up to Typhonblue to answer, if she so chooses.

            Maybe next time you could submit your argument upfront first, instead of allowing yourself to degrade the debate into a childish discourse.

            Some of us actually like to engage in a healthy lively debate. Trying to get into a debate that is nonsensical and filled with personal attacks, is something most of us get easily annoyed and frustrated with.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            “My counter is that TB is attempting to make a point based on animal behavior, which of course is based on animal biology, which doesn’t match up to human biology, and therefore can’t be used as a basis for why human behavior is wrong.”

            The original assertion that men are promiscuous and women are choosy is based on (erroneous and in some cases completely disproven) observations of animal behaviour. The same criticisms of extending animal biology to human behaviour exist for both conclusions.

            “Typhon is just another person proposing the idea that men and women are equal and interchangeable.”

            I am not.

            “There’s a good reason why sexual access to women is valued.”

            It’s valued by men. Men are creating the value. Therefore they are also empowered to decide not to create that value.

            “Which means that society will never be as strict in enforcing responsibilities on women as they do on men.”

            Thus our society is never going to repeal woman’s suffrage nor any of the other boonies it’s given women. It doesn’t care that men suffer in the process because, as you say, men are disposable.

            Yours and Jeremiah’s proposal is to wait for the collapse of society so we can go back to a more manageable form of gynocentrism–one in which men still get the short end of the stick but women’s desires are kept in check by a lack of resources.

            Fair enough. Until that happens, let’s use some good ol’ human ingenuity and try for the brass ring.

          • kiwihelen

            DS, thanks for that.
            I’m a health professional but with an active and semi-academic interest in public health, most of which is based on epidemiology. The number one thing that epidemiologists teach is ‘correlation does not mean causality’, so whenever I read these kind of articles I’m always mindful that for every population the variance of behaviour can lead to different conclusions depending on the sample.
            I find TBs core argument of pairbonding compelling because of my observational experience of men, despite the fact that neither my father or my ex were monogamous. They are still in the population subset ‘male’ but vary off the mean for various reasons.
            My experience as a member of the population subset ‘female’ also makes me suspect women are more promiscuous than men, having had serious competition for several of the men in my life from women…yet within my family there are two women who fall into the ‘one partner for life’ model of behavior.
            It seems to me, all studies of behavior have strong observer bias, and we can make all kinds arguments based on our own psychosocial framework
            I don’t see TB as saying there is no difference between M&F, rather she is arguing an alternate interpretation of human sexuality, where the gender roles in the sexual game are the opposite to traditional interpretation, but given there are variations in a population there will always be exceptions.
            Having read/listened to a lot of TBs work, I don’t hear any ‘shaming’ of men who either fall on the average or are at variance with her model. Like me, she genuinely likes men and values masculinity, but she is offering observations that for some men clearly resonate to their experience.
            So whether you are on the mean or an outlier in whichever model you ascribe human sexual behavior to, you still have value. So much of the modern zeitgeist about sexuality is shaming (to both genders), it is good to find a place where there is acceptance of both the swinger and the celibate.

          • Demonspawn

            Shrek:

            Ds, then why the hell didn’t you come straight out and say this in the first instance,

            Will you read the thread again? I did. I asked her to apply it to human biology over and over and over again, and each time she used faulty logic, which I pointed out.

            instead of submitting a whole pile of posts that were adorned with frills of personal insults?

            Those came after she repeated the same argument, multiple times, ignoring the logic failings I demonstrated she was presenting. At that point, yes, she did deserve to be insulted for attempting to mislead harm the men’s movement.

            TB:

            You are attempting to equalize men and women, and treat them as interchangeable, because you are saying that it is men who have made women’s wombs valuable rather than nature itself.

            You also purposefully misrepresent my position. I have more than once stated solutions other than “wait for the collapse” and two of them are in the solution set I constantly repeat: Revolt, Expat, or
            Turtle. And I don’t propose gynocentrism being held in check by lack of resources, but rather by understanding that men and women are different and, because of those important differences, there are reasons we need to keep women from having direct influence over society (suffrage).

            So if you want ingenuity, start by understanding the underlying principles. Recognize what can and can’t be removed. Gynocentrism is one of those things which can’t be removed as long as the sex drive of the male is a more immediate need and as long as women are the reproductive units of the human species. It is an IS, a base condition. Saying that it can be removed at this point is nothing more than a red herring which prevents us from discussing real, tangible, and possible solutions to the issue.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            @ Demonspawn

            ” rather than nature itself.”

            How are we going to determine what ‘nature itself’ made valuable versus social conditioning without looking at the behaviour of actual animals?

            What you’re essentially arguing here is ‘human behaviour is natural just because and if it differs from animal behaviours in nature then those behaviours aren’t applicable.’

            “And I don’t propose gynocentrism being held in check by lack of resources, but rather by understanding that men and women are different and, because of those important differences, there are reasons we need to keep women from having direct influence over society (suffrage).”

            Again, society is not going to ‘give back’ boonies that it’s given to women(without challenging male disposability) because the only rationale, at this point, prior to society collapsing completely[1], is that these boonies hurt men. Further by granting women suffrage, the powers that be have effectively rolled back men’s hard won rights and they like that. As far as they’re concerned having a class of protected women and a class of male serfs _is_ their goal.

            How do you propose to convince the people in power that this kind of gynocentrism isn’t to their benefit? Male disposability and gynocentrism has always been perpetuated by alpha males who care a lot more about making someone like me comfortable then ensuring that someone like you has a say.

            It’s an unfortunate truth of the entire system. You have to worry more about keeping the alpha males running it from turning it into a harem–giving women cushy lives, cushy jobs and cushy powers without responsibilities and getting disposable men to foot the bill–because that’s what they want and will want in every society based on female gynocentrism and male disposability.

            It wasn’t that this society decided to turn gender roles on its head, it was that the alpha males decided they wanted a harem of women(even if it was in a psychological sense of ‘lookit all the damsels caressing me with their delicious, delicious voter-approval!’) and that you should pay for it. This is not a new system; this is a very old system.

            In that sense the only way to change the system is to challenge the underlying conceits of ‘male disposability and female gynocentrism.’

            And… it looks like it doesn’t really have a basis in animal behaviour in the wild. No, we can’t create an exact correlation between humans and promiscuous breeders that go into ruts and heats, humans are complex (and all the evidence points to pair bonders and if not pair bonders then some creature so psychologically complex that they can embrace any model of sexuality due to neuroplasticity), but most of the arguments about the ‘innate value of pussy’ are based on disproven or misleading observations of animal behaviour.

            And if we actually allow for the experiences of men who haven’t found pussy to be ‘all that’ … a completely different picture emerges.

            [1] Telling men to ‘revolt, expat or turtle’–which I never argued with–is not a solution to the problem, it’s a way that men protect themselves from the problem. The problem remains, they’ve just insulated themselves from it. It’s like saying the underground railroad is a solution to slavery. It’s a response but not a solution.

  • echofoxtrot

    Good article. The one thing the author left out might be the most significant aspect of the pussy problem: dealing with the pussy’s owner, who all too often thinks she has a gold mine between her legs.

    • napocapo69

      they have a gold mine….

      • echofoxtrot

        When you reach your late fifties, it’s less of a gold mine, and more of a coal mine.

        • Paul Elam

          :) Two of the more memorable moments in my life regarding sex. The first time I got laid, and 26 years later, the first time I told a woman I wasn’t interested in fucking her.

          • Kimski

            Agreed on both.
            The latter actually gave me a great deal more satisfaction than the first. The response was priceless, and I still wish I had a videocamera that day.
            ;)

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

            Paul: this discussion is giving me a very emotional reaction, though mostly a good one it’s mixed with some angst-release.

            The first time I turned down a female I was still in my 20s, the second I was around 30. I’m pretty selective about who I’ll hang out it, male or female. I have had exactly 9 sex partners in my life, which, according to what I’ve read, puts me right around the average for most men (I think the median is 7, plus or minute 2 or 3). And while I’ve had one or two times in my life where I was pretty desperate for sexual attention (I was psychically wounded and badly needed what is called “sexual healing”), for the most part I have just never, ever sought sex in the stereotypical way men are supposed to seek it.

            I have had female friends my whole life, I still do, but jumping into the sack with them has always been something I’ve been slow to do. For the longest time now I’ve thought that was because there was something wrong with me. I also attributed it to the fact that I was abused (sexually and emotionally and physically) as a child and pubescent boy, in ways that are still painful to think about and which I blotted out of my memories for a very long time. I always attributed my relative lack of interest in casual hookups as a fundamental defect in my character and makeup.

            I’m actually having an emotional reaction here because this entire discussion is making me realize: wait a minute, I’ve had a pretty average number of sex partners, I’ve had children that I love, and I’ve NEVER been pussy-obsessed.

            I’ve survived so much abuse in my life starting from early childhood, and I realize suddenly that I had internalized something: I assumed I hadn’t had all that many sex partners because there is something fundamentally damaged and defective about me. But wait a minute: 9 is not unusually low. It’s right within normal average–and in truth, if I could go back in time, I’d actually like to lower that number. I’ve had two kids. I’m still standing at 46, and I’m with a wonderful woman.

            Jesus Christ Typhon, you just made me realize I AM NOT SEXUALLY FUCKED UP, I’M PRETTY FUCKING NORMAL.

            I’m madder at our sick culture than ever now. It’s not just that we demonize young male sexuality. It’s that we send dual messages that are both wrong: we’re bad if we’re horny AND we’re inferior if we don’t insta-perform on demand. Society tells us that both of these conflicting things at once are true about us, and they’re both LIES.

            Typhon, I love you.

          • Tawil

            A candid post Dean…. there’s a lot of liberation going on around here and with that a lot of reasons to feel normal. Unreal stereotypes come crashing down with each thread.

            I used to question myself- why didn’t I have a cock made of granite everytime i laid eyes on a member of the female sex? That was the male stereotype after all. Not even with women I was attracted to was that necessarily a given.

            GWW, Dr. T, Typhon…. they all get this, and what an inspiration they are to put that into print for us. Much respect to them.

          • Paul Elam

            @ Dean

            A candid post indeed. Welcome to AVfM.

            What kept going through my head reading your story was, “So what if he had had fewer partners? Or more partners?”

            What number at what age is the magic one that saves us from one shaming message or another? And yes, I get that women experience some of this, too. They do have one thing going, though. Social disapproval for judging them based on it, at least in the “wrong” way.

            I even remember a time when a teenage girl could take pride in being a virgin, before women’s “sexual liberation” took that away.

            For men, though, it has always been the same. Have lots of partners, lots of sexual success, or be a loser on the sideline, even if your sexual experience was the average.

            That was honestly a force that drove me a lot in my youth. I can’t even tell you how many women I have had sex with. I even had sex with a lot of women that I did not really want to, as though I had programming to be a hard on machine, even when I wasn’t interested.

            The real problem, though, as TyphonBlue brilliantly talked about on the show and in this article, is that there was literally nothing in it that meant anything to me.

            I used to get my pleasure, for lack of a better word, simply out of the score. The sex was secondary and hollow in a lot of cases.

            And of course I got a rep as a dog who only cared about one thing. I got some slaps on the back from other men, but mostly I was like a robot.

            It was during this time that I figured out a couple of startling things. One, I was capable, more than capable, of having a real sense of intimacy and friendship with a woman. Meaningless, empty sex informs you of what is missing.

            And two, that not many women had that capabilty. Whether anyone likes it or not, that is my experience.

            And of course all that time I lived in a culture that was hammering the exact opposite message in my head about the nature of men and women.

            I was watching guys (and being one once) that were devastated by divorce, refusing for too long to give up when nothing worth salvaging was there, even as I heard the drone of gurus chanting about how men had problems with commitment.

            I don’t like this society, either. It’s one more reason on a growing list of reasons that we are building a community of men and women who are cognizant of this shit and are willing to accept that it isn’t us that’s fucked up. It’s them.

            I am in a much better place now. I refrain from discussing that because I don’t discuss current relationship matters online, but it took a lot to get here.

            Bottom line for men is that there is no such thing as normal. There is only the task of getting right in your own skin.

          • Kimski

            @Dean Esmay:

            After nearly 20 years of playing guitar in a semi-prof hard rock band, I’m not even going to tell you my numbers..

            Your post made me feel like a slut.
            I might have to take a walk.

          • Sting Chameleon

            Nowadays it isn’t just about the sheer number of sex partners, but the ‘quality’ of them: If you can’t pull the hottest, tightest girls you can afford you’re a loser.

            Settle too young and you’ll get socially shamed and risk locking yourself into a commited relationship with a harpy, settle too old (or don’t do it at all), and people will shame you by calling you ‘defective’ or ‘closeted gay’

          • keyster

            “Scoring” is like penis size.
            The vast majority of it is average, and those that claim more are often exaggerating.

            If you fall in with some guys that prioritize “scoring”, they’re only doing it because they think that’s what guys are supposed to do….go out, drink and score.

            If you don’t do this you must be a “fag”.

          • Kimski

            @Keyster:

            Scoring is just another one of those idiotic things you do when you’re young, and don’t know the first thing about intimacy and caring for others.

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

            Nobody should feel like a “slut.” It’s just fascinating to me to suddenly realize that all this time I thought there must be something defective about me for not trying harder to “score,” and now there are other guys who think they tried to score “too much,” and really what we’re talking about here is two equal, opposite, and polar ways of brainwashing men.

            It’s the same dichotomy playing out: see, if you like lots of sex with lots of different women, you’re a “womanizer” and a “pig” right? But if you don’t, you’re a “loser” or a “fag” or whatever. You can internalize the one poison, or the other, or maybe both. Either way it’s a trap. I suddenly realized I’d internalized a little of both.

            Just a sort of “wow” moment really.

          • echofoxtrot

            Dean,
            That is a very cogent observation you made. I will add that there are other aspects to this scenario, as well: such as the married man who is refused sex by his wife. (There is an old joke about the food that makes women no longer want sex: wedding cake).

            For what it’s worth, my own situation is that I have bedded about 35 women. I’m neither proud of it, nor ashamed of it – it just is. One lady that I picked up had a huge butt (I met her on the bus to work, and didn’t notice the size of the butt until the next day), and she insisted on putting her feet up on my shoulders when I was on top of her. The view (the huge butt, plus pimples all over the back of her legs) made me sick to my stomach; it was only through a great deal of willpower that I was able to prevent vomiting on her.

            The vast majority of the time, I was only too happy to go home to my own 4 walls and recover from the anxiety that was frequently equal to, or greater than, a few minutes of pleasure.

            I wish there was a moral to my story, but I think you said that moral better than I could – that men lose out any way you slice it.

            Henry Makow (savethemales.ca) says that a man needs to detach from women, to a large degree, in order to build his own world – I couldn’t agree more.

          • Tawil

            echofoxtrot @ “Henry Makow (savethemales.ca) says that a man needs to detach from women, to a large degree, in order to build his own world – I couldn’t agree more.”

            Absolutely. Interestingly one of the very first uses of ‘Gynocentric’ was by feminists who defined the word specifically as “a woman identified woman” (see The Second Wave: A Reader in Feminist Theory)- and these early feminists contrasted it to the ‘Phallocentric, or man oriented woman’.

            I can see a distinct man oriented man emerging on AVfM, a man not based on stereotypes of what a male “is” in relation to women, but a new image apart from all the normal stereotypes. Rather than merely a phallocentric/androcentric man (ie. strictly biological), the new image incorporates a focus on human dignity as well – a focus including but also transcending a strictly biological sex identification. I guess we could call it a “humano-andric identified man” (lol) or something along those lines. A human first, but also a male human.

          • Elegy63

            Paul, don’t try this at home, but when I was a boy I once stuck a paperclip in a wall socket. It blew the lights out in the entire building and nearly killed me as well. As I’m sure you’re aware, rejecting a woman’s sexual advances or worse, rejecting everything about her, has almost the same effect, without requiring actual penetration. Stand clear boys, I think she’s gonna blow! :D

    • scatmaster

      and that gold mine often smells rancid.

  • Iron John

    I don’t like cats, but I do like this article. Keep em coming Typhon, you have good ideas.

  • napocapo69

    that’s the foundation of my principle around sex
    “I take care of my pleasure, you take care of your own”

    • Kimski

      Exactly.
      Hell must be a muslim heaven, where you have to fuck 70 virgins, who doesn’t know the first thing about sex.

      • Kimski

        -And, no, I’m not trying to make a religious issue out of it, but if ONE woman can be hard to live with, then imagine having 70 of them in the house.

      • .ProleScum.

        Aye,

        70 virgins, for fuck’s sake. Give me 2 firebreathing hookers any day.

        :)

  • echofoxtrot

    Age has a way of being the great equalizer in the power of the pussy vis a vis the power of the penis. A 25-year-old woman has something that commands the attention of many men; thirty years later, the balance of power has shifted dramatically.

    • Iron John

      Correct. However, there is something I have always wondered about this idea, not yet having reached the ripe old age of fifty-five. Does the 55 year old man, have the attention of 25 year old women? Or is it just of his female peers? If it’s the latter, is it really worth as much?

      • echofoxtrot

        In answer to your question: the 55-year-old man will ONLY have the attention of 25-year-old women if he is wealthy. The more mortal 55-year-old man will only have the attention of his female peers. That attention may, or may not be, worth just as much as that of the 25-year-old woman. The trick, IMHO, is for the man to NOT accept the “game” as a given, but to instead put himself in the director’s chair (or the driver’s seat) in the scenario. Yes, that will lessen the number of willing “takers”, but the important thing is for the man to play by his own rules, instead of male-diminishing rules. Typhon Blue’s approach is one good start, among many.

        • Tawil

          As an older male i agree with your summary. I’m astonished at the amount of choices I currently have in regards to different women…. I just wish it would have been the case when I was a younger man fishing for scraps! This becomes the common scenario for older males, and being in this position (of having many choices) is exactly where many young women find themselves – sitting in the director’s chair for a season. I’m saying “No” pretty often these days…. going to be very fussy about what I let into my life and it’s a joy, finally, to have that amount of agency.

          For the record I’d much rather enjoy the company a woman my age -a woman with experience and who is interesting, rather than a selfish naive 20yr old who would bore me to absolute death. And lets remember there are many physically beautiful older women… at least in the eyes of older men ;-)

          Life has a wonderful way of creating balance.

          • Shrek6

            Ha, it hasn’t created balance in my life.

            I still have the same situation I had when I was young. There are few women around and I have none to choose from. I only had the scraps when I was young and the scraps don’t even exist today.

            The main difference however, is that today, I don’t give a toss about women and am enjoying my life without having to put up with all the emotional garbage, and the fortnightly bitching from a hormonal cow who can’t control her nastiness, just because she is in the midst of her monthly cycle. And so many women in society are like this today.

            Yeah, life is sweet for me and my male and female children.

            In my home, peace and respect reigns supreme. In their mothers home, bitchiness, manipulation, control and domination reign supreme. It’s no wonder my kids prefer to live with me.

            Now all I have to do is teach my boys to not be sucked in by the power of the pussy. And teach my daughter to use critical thinking and right judgement, instead of using the power of the pussy to attract a decent mate.

            And yep, that’s a big ask!

      • jack

        A man of means will have the attention of 25 year olds (and younger) women in countries where the sexual trade-union (feminism) does not ruin it for him. Feminism can be understood as a sexual trade-union of ageing and/or less attractive females out to prevent men from following their instincts. The feministic sexual trade-union thwarts the free market in all sorts of ways, for instance by manipulating the age of consent and by putting obstacles to mixed marriages, male sex tourism and prostitution. So while men are expected to accept the the sexual free market and its consequences, women will only accept those aspects of it that benefit them. Women have solved the problem of female-female competition by setting up a trade-union.

    • scatmaster

      Yup: As I stated last night on the chat thread of AVFM radio, due to cardiac medication I am now impotent physically and see women in a whole different light. It is not pretty. Convince me as a female what you have to bring to the table besides your pussy because from what I am seeing, it is not much.

      • Samantha77

        How old are you Scatmaster, are you married, do you or your wife still have desire for sex? If not, than I suppose it doesn’t matter. But from my experience, men who are having problems usually have some depression that goes along with it. If you do feel like that, perhaps you should see if you can do something with different meds, and I know you can. Even if you have to resort to injections you can still maintain some sex life with your partner, that is if she wants too I mean. But even if she doesn’t, if not functioning causes you to feel bad about yourself maybe you should do something about it anyway. By the way, I don’t think there is really many men that are truly totally impotent. I used to play with a guy who had his prostate removed, and although I couldn’t get him to stay hard enough for a long fuck, I could work him up with my mouth and blow him until he had a dry orgasm.

        If I can do that, than there is really no such thing as a completely impotent man, only women who won’t put in the work or know nothing about penises or men. It’s not uncommon for guys to suffer anxiety when with a woman for the first time for example. Especially if they haven’t been sexually active for a while, like guys that have had bad marriages and got out after a long time without, and then took a long time to get into dating again. They often suffer confidence problems.

        Anyway, I hope you still have some loving in your life, everyone needs some loving. Even if you don’t fuck, physical intimacy is a great health tonic and anti depressant.

        • Gruelien

          There is a lot of truth in what you say. After I got out of a bad relationship with a gal, I have had issues the first time I’m with a new woman. When I feel more secure and comfortable I do okay but it takes some time.

          I’d say most of those women were patient and it paid off. There was one who had never had that happen to her before and she was not very nice about it. She expected me to be rock hard for her and it was just not happening.

          This has been going on for 13 years now. There have been one or two I should just have never even attempted. They were simple not my type but I was still in the mode of men are suppose to want it always and take anything that is offered.

          I do remember turning down women in my 20’s but that is another story.

  • Kukla

    I think vagina is over-glorified. I’ve never had sex but I think the “instinct’ argument is a little bit…silly in this case(though it is there). It is instinct to want to reproduce with many females, but most men I know don’t want to have children yet, especially not with many women(you may as well just throw all your money down the toilet).

    Most men I see just want a “quickie” and that’s it. No kids, no strings. I’m not sure if that’s instinctual.

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      “It is instinct to want to reproduce with many females”

      Not for a pair bonding species. It’s not even a given for a promiscuous breeding species.

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

        But aren’t we not explicitly a pair bonding species, but somewhere on the sliding spectrum of relations? What seems to make our sexuality so complex is its ‘omnivory’, no?

      • Kukla

        But we’re only a pair-bonding monogamous species because of women’s choices.

        http://healthland.time.com/?s=ancient+sexual+revolution&searchsubmit=Find

        Either way, it is still instinct to want to reproduce, but most men don’t want that at the time. They just want a quick session and that’s it.

        • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

          There’s evidence hominids evolved pair-bonding around the time of Australopithecus.

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3024680/?tool=pubmed

          • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

            http://sexatdawn.com/

            These guys argue to the contrary – have you heard of this tome?

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            Yes. It was intended to be controversial.

            1. It’s perpetuating misinformation about bonobos and chimps.

            2. There are socially monogamous mammals with genetic monogamy rates of 35%. That is 65% of the offspring are not fathered by the mother’s mate. They’re still socially monogamous mammals. Social monogamy is not incompatible with sperm competition.

            3. The book does not sound like it addresses the anatomical, genetic, hormonal and anthropological evidence of monogamy.

          • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

            The way that the book is being marketed, it seems as though they are interested more in the paradigm for the social reverberation that it is creating than the actual material itself. It is all very strange.

          • debaser71

            All that points to is large infants. The “pair-bonded” male is just speculation, one of several, on how a female Australopithecus could manage feeding herself, nurse, carry their infant around with them, and still survive.

            “The data presented in this study help reconstruct Australopithecus as a primarily ground-dwelling hominid whose strikingly small females carried proportionately large infants.”

            The OP is awesome, though.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            @ debaser71

            Since we hadn’t evolved extended lifespans at that point in time, the only other options were:

            The mother’s brothers or sisters. (Older children would still require a helper to become older children.) There’s no assurance that the mother had brothers or sisters or that they hadn’t dispersed elsewhere.

            But a child can be assured of the existence of a father at the moment of its conception. So, logically, the most viable alloparenting resource would be dad.

      • Agapao

        So much respect for you TB

  • Tawil

    “And maybe the penis-as-bullshit detector’s the real reason why our society is so heavily invested in medicating away the so-called nonfunctional phallus. Because it’s functioning too well and society isn’t liking what it’s saying.”

    Right on, a flacid penis is already a potent statement of male interest…. so lets do away with that overloaded and incorrect attribution of ‘im-potence’. There’s a quote from RD Laing that sums up the scenario well:

    “The attributes one ascribes to a person define him and put him in a particular position. By assigning him to a particular position, attributions ‘put him in his place’ and thus have in effect the force of injunctions. Attributions made by Peter about Paul may be conjunctive or disjunctive with attributions made by Paul about Paul.” [Laing 1961]

    With that in mind lets chuck the viagra pills in the bin too (not that i have any), and go back to trusting our finely tuned bullshit detectors.

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

    Pussy power ?

    It’s like watching a fan after you switch it off.

    • scatmaster

      Dr. F: Sorry I did not respond to your private whisper last night on AVFM radio. I missed it. I found out about it after reviewing the whole chat thread after the broadcast. Sorry mate!!!!

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

        Scatters,

        That’s ok mister. I thought maybe it was someone else who had swiped your name anyway.

        I only wanted to ask you not to ever ever ever ignore me and stuff.

  • Astrokid

    If it was instinct you’d think other male animals would be acting the same way. They’re not. Female chimps beg male chimps for sex. Antelopes of the fairer sex will scrap and cheat their way into scoring prime nooky from their male counterparts.

    Seems very counter to experience. we see time and again males of various species engage in fights for mating rights..only the winners seem to have unfettered access. Male birds go to great lengths..i.e effectively begging for sex. Re: chimps, you arent talking about bonobos right? they have evolved some rather unique sexual habits.

    Amongst humans, you are downplaying the significant impact of female secondary sexual characteristics that enhances our experience. Its not just in the mind.. its in the touch as well. I think its the fact that pussy is so withheld from males.. that it becomes unbearable and males are willing to go to such levels. For me personally, access to sex-workers is what changed the equation dramatically. That’s what made life significantly less restless.

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      “Seems very counter to experience. ”

      Biologists have a very unfortunate habit of only reporting on what they believe to be true.

      The field of female mate-competition is wide open and unexplored as of this point. There is one biologist who is studying it.

      His conclusions can be found here:

      http://www.pnas.org/content/99/14/9290.full.pdf

      It should be noted that the female topi antelope would also mate with non-optimal males as well.

      • Astrokid

        I will read the article soon, but one quick comment before I run..
        The animals at the center of the leks are the alpha males, which have won the hardfought battles. It is quite natural that they will reject many of the females, and pick the best. These rejected females have to go further out into the leks and mate with some of the betas etc. omega males lose out for sure. Iam pretty sure pussy will be highly-valued by the non-alpha.
        This pattern isnt restricted to just the topi-antelopes. Maybe level of promiscuity is. And there may be several reasons why some animals are promiscuous or mate with sub-optimals as well.

        Amongst bears, a female bear will mate with the strongest male bear that wins out the bear battles, and then afterwards mate again with some of the smaller bears. Turns out that its a clever strategy of the females.. to deal with future infanticide.. (male bears often kill children of female bears).. by tricking the smaller bears into thinking that they are the fathers.

        Re: Biologists have a very unfortunate habit of only reporting on what they believe to be true.
        Well..you are tarnishing science a bit here.. I have such high respect for people in the hard-sciences ..like Dawkins, Steven Pinker.. that I expect them to have overcome such biases. Sure.. there will be areas to explore.. such as female mate competition.. but the evidence for massive male competetion ACROSS SO MANY species is so well established.. that you will have a hard time convincing others that males arent instinct-driven to a significant extent in this matter.

        • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

          @ Astrokid

          “Iam pretty sure pussy will be highly-valued by the non-alpha.”

          I guess that begs the question… if pussy beggars are the losers who wants to be a pussy-begger? ;)

        • Raven01

          In male competing species with sexual dimorphism there is invariably a colourful male often with displays that serve little purpose other than warning other males or attracting females.
          It would be curious to apply this to humans. Female humans keep their breasts all the time unlike other great apes. This seems to be a display mimicking healthy buttocks and advertising sexual maturity.
          Yet, male humans grow beards, a sexual display of their own.
          We just do not fit nicely into the cookie-cutter ideas about sexuality. Sexuality is probably more complex than we understand in lower species so it is hardly surprising that we are so confused about our own. Animals at least do not impose arbitrary moral codes on their behaviour.

  • Shrek6

    Great article TPB.

    I guess that’s it then. If men could control their sexual desire for women, then that is last positive thing a woman has that will keep a man in her life, gone!

    Consider this. Men can do just about everything that they need to do, to supply themselves with a comfortable life, which includes housing, clothing and feeding themselves.

    So if we educate boys out of the age old ‘Chase of the Pussy’, then procreation will come to a stand still and there will be few humans created.

    To this very day, men have little need for a woman. Women have always had the greater need for men. If men could control their sexual urges, then women would be left out in the cold with no one.

    The only reason why women are cared for by men in this world today, outside of reasons of family for some men, is because of the power of the pussy.

    Once they lose this power, they will be on their own!

    • Arvy

      Good luck with that educational project. In the first place you’ll need to find a male juvenile educational environment not overrun with primary gatekeepers … er, excuse me, caregivers.

      Or perhaps you haven’t noticed the marked decline — almost to extinction — of the masculine role in ANY primary education whatsover.

      • Shrek6

        “Or perhaps you haven’t noticed the marked decline — almost to extinction — of the masculine role in ANY primary education whatsover.”

        Oh haven’t I!

        You are so damn right about that. Even in the school my teenage kids go to, the seething bitch brigade are the only teachers of children up till the 7th grade, bar one male teacher, who is a real man struggling to survive in a male hating environment.

        Yeah, my comment was tongue in cheek dreaming. Boys will only ever be taught how to be men, once there is a revolt against feminism and all things in society are put to equal standing.

        And that is not going to happen anytime this side of my death of old age. And I am hopefully assuming I will live to old age. Hehe!

  • knightrunner

    Typhon: Hell yes and amen a thousand times over.
    As far as women not being the cause of a man’s orgasm all I’ve got to say is thank God I married a red head. No problems in that department.

    I learned a long time ago that chasing pussy wasn’t worth the hassle. Way to much headache for very little reward. There are other easier and cheaper ways for a heterosexual man to satisfy his need for sex. Its called porn. Any wonder why most feminist want to ban it.
    Most women think that all they have to do is lay there and look good accompanied by the occasional moan. Then they bitch because he didn’t satisfy her. Its not his fault its yours. If you show him a good time he will return the favor. If all you do is lay there and breath hard he will quickly get board and finish because there is more interesting things to do. Like watch paint dry.

  • Zerbu

    Great post! Speaking of sex obsession, when I was still on the blue pill, and later the purple pill, I believed that men were the ones enforcing the obsession on each other and women were annoyed by it. That was the message I had been getting since more or less the time I received sex education. I was very annoyed when I found out that the shaming is done by both genders.

    So… men who don’t instantly commit to an individual woman are losers, but men who haven’t had sex with a large number of women are also losers.

    Makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?

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

      Precisely.

      Fuck all that noise.

  • Obaoill

    Some of this theory does resonate with me, the bar room one night stand has never been a comfortable thing for me.

    Even with a women that I find attractive, I need to have time connecting with her before I feel comfortable with sex.

    Once I am comfortable with her though, then want sex all of the time. This “condition” is a life long situation for me.

  • Christian “xXToYeDXx” Chiasson

    Did Chris Rock also say that?

    Jim Jefferies told that joke in his Alcoholocaust special as well as a few jokes about foreplay responsibilites. Great comedian by the way.

    You can view it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgQzRATYBjA

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

      Wow, that was supreme, Christian. That dude is a true blood MRA.

      MR rising.

      • Christian “xXToYeDXx” Chiasson

        He’s a personal favourite of mine, and I’ve followed as much of his material as I could find(including an episode of the Green Room he was on) and I don’t think he’s ever openly said he was an MRA. He definately sounds like MGTOW and MRA though. It wouldn’t surprise me if he is.

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

      Oh my fucking God. I’m probably more foreplay-oriented than a lot of guys are but Jesus that was funny. Especially the last line. “Maybe we take our relationship seriously.” LOLOLOLOLOLOL… can’t… breathe… can’t… help! 911….

      • Christian “xXToYeDXx” Chiasson

        It’s true. Very true. Even in cases where the man won’t say so. Men can’t take relationships seriously because the women around them don’t take men seriously. And I think this is true even for non-MRAs. They may not realise it, but once a man sees how little effort she’s actually putting into it, he can’t help not taking the relationship seriously. She doesn’t appear to be, why should he?

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

    I love you, Blue.

  • dejour

    I wonder if cognitive dissonance explains some of the overvalue of pussy.

    You write “A man is responsible for:

    Asking the woman out
    Choosing a venue for the date
    Paying for the date
    Escalating the physical intimacy
    Achieving and maintaining an erection
    Getting her wet
    Giving her pleasure
    Most of the physical work of sex”

    Suppose the sex was ok, but really not worth all the work. The man will resolve the cognitive dissonance by convincing himself that it really was worth it. The sex was great.

    Conversely, a woman will see the man go to such great lengths. She might initially think that they both enjoyed sex equally, but when she thinks about how much more effort the guy put into things she might conclude that the man must have got a better deal.

    • debaser71

      This is IMO a great comment. People certainly place higher value on things that are costly.

  • Rper1959

    Interesting and thought provoking as usual typhon blue!

    One issue poorly understood about male sexuality is that ejaculation/emission and orgasm although they usually occur together are not the same thing.

    Ejaculation is reflex mediated at the spinal level and whist it may involve pleasurable sensation is quite different from the intense mind and body (I might use the term spiritual) experience that is orgasm. The latter relies not just on a physically available partner but on an emotionally involved partner who wants to pleasure the other in both an emotional and physical sense.

    • kiwihelen

      I think spiritual is a good word for the experience of orgasm in a mutually satisfactory relationship.

      Both my beloved and I have been (understatement here) pleasantly surprised at the intensity of pleasure that has been given to us through this part of our relationship.

      Both of us have moderately high mileage in our sexual lives, so neither of us were ignorant how our bodies worked.

      We joke now that sex is wasted on the young, but I am not sure that youngsters would easily have the level of communication skill needed to develop trust.

    • Ivo Vos

      Intimacy and social conditioning. In my experience, there is a difference in performing sex and experiencing intimacy. Intimacy has to do with somebody else and not even have to think about control or expectations, performing sex has to do more with yourself and expectations, turning the whole thing into some kind of personal performance. Intimacy might lead to orgasms, performing sex leads to ejaculation. The difference is huge. If you have to pay for sex, you might expect ejaculation. Professional hookers probably know this and might add the illusion of intimacy as well as part of the deal.
      When everything goes right, I don’t have to rely on my penis-as-a-bullshit-detector although I like the point made by typhonblue. Penis-as-a-bullshit-detector should act as a big red flag to get the hell out immediately (and don’t forget to take your wallet with you) unless of course you made a deal with a hooker. Nothing wrong with that, the trouble starts when you conflate sex and intimacy.
      Detecting an unbreakable intimacy-barrier/full-control guardian before physical intimacy should be enough to avoid any further intimacy. Detectable by all the signs that say it’s about performances and social expectations. When this is the case and you still continue despite of the warning signs you probably won’t get intimacy, although you might have sex in the way typhonblue describes, sometimes as part of the social conditioning we call gaming.

    • keyster

      This is similar to an addict being “in love” with his drug of choice. I can say I’ve done some drugs I fell in love with, fantasized and dreamed about, carressed even.

      Orgasm is a very powerfully pleasurable experience that our society has taken far too lightly. It’s meant to bond men and women as mates, but since the sexual revolution has become just another drug of choice…with a market and dealers.

      • Sting Chameleon

        And feminists have set up a racket to make sure you can’t get it unless it’s on their terms.

      • jack

        [orgasm is] meant to bond men and women as mates

        Are you sure? That’s what human Societies would want orgasms to be. But biology doesn’t give tuppence for what human Societies want it to be. (Especially human Societies that have little left in common with the Environement of Evolutionary Adaptedness (EEA)). I fear orgasms are rather a crude rewarding mechanism for behaviour that maximises reproductive success. As far as the male is concerned reproductive success is maximised by inseminating as many different females as he can.

        Besides, had orgasms evolved as a pair-bonding mechanism, they would keep getting better as the pair-bonding gets older. That would be great for monogamy if they did, but the fact is they don’t. Note that according to EP, pair-bonding in the EEA lasted for as long as it takes to raise an infant, ie about 5 to 7 years. Hence the “7-year itch”.

        • Sting Chameleon

          You miss out on an important factor: The dopamine rushes provided by an orgasm can only affect you for so long. Sooner or later your brain adapts to the stimulus, so you need higher doses or a novel source of stimulation to achieve the same effect. If you look at the orgasm as the only mechanism for pair-bonding it falls flat on its face, but there’s other mechanisms involved.

      • Agapao

        I agree that is what orgasms are for, namely bonding. I don’t however, enjoy the kind of mind and body and spiritual experience described above. Mine are shallow and I am often sore afterwards, even with my loved girlfriend, and I think it is caused in part by circumcision. She disagreed and it was a cause of some sexual and relationship tension. We are not together, for other reasons, and I am restoring. We always have to be mindful of the C factor to ensure accurate thinking imho

  • Kukla

    I think we should stop calling vaginas “pussies”. Pussies lick themselves!

    • kiwihelen

      Hahahaha…I agree. Cats are self-serving and self-determining.

      Anyone know anything about the sex life of the honey badger?

  • jms5762

    If you are handsome enough the pussy will chase you! Trust me. I have found the most aggressive women are the homely to average looking. The attractive ones don’t really know how to relate to men as well. I am lousy at striking up conversation with women I’m attracted to. Married now so it doesn’t matter anymore. Women I have just met speak to me as if we have been good friends for years. That’s when my bullshit meter kicks in. Sometimes I feel like a piece of meat.

  • http://www.lastlegionary.com Andy Man

    I’m attracted to the possibility that at least some of male behavior toward women is not genetic, but programmed as a result of cultural conditioning.

    If it is programmed, it can be unprogrammed. Like so…

    # rm -rf *

  • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

    Check out this dating site for dink-wads. You have to pay women to convince them to go out on a date with you.

    Better off getting a whore, I reckon. Better value for money.

    http://www.goomena.com/cmspage.aspx?pageid=185&title=HowItWorksman

    • Europa Phoenix

      That’s so funny!
      I wonder if the webmaster is aware that goomena.com looks like Manpower’s webiste :

      http://www.manpower.com/

      (the man is the “job seeker”, and the woman is “the client/boss”… everything is in order…)

      • goomena

        Hey, you’re actually right! Thanks for pointing that out. Cheers!

    • tallwheel

      Oh my God. Look at the “for women” page. It’s even more telling.
      http://www.goomena.com/cmspage.aspx?pageid=213&title=ForWomen
      “Where do I meet rich men?”
      “He’ll treat you as he should: Like a princess!”
      “…he’ll reward you the cash and time you’ve spent on him – in full!”
      Shameless. Just shameless.

      • goomena

        That’s just the way the world works, though. When was the last time you expected to go Dutch on your first date with a woman?

        • Paul Elam

          With the woman I am still with, 10 years later.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

          Goomena,

          You reasoning is flawed and here’s why.

          You make an observation and you then extrapolate this to be somehow adhering to what is right, or what should therefore be acceptable.

          How does this sound?:

          “We, as citizens of Germany in 1939 observe Jewish people being herded off to concentration camps for processing. They are rounded up, tattooed and sent away on cattle trains. Hey, c’mon now. This is the way the world works.”

          You would be right if you said that then. That was the way it was. That was the way it worked.

          It’s glaring how omitting you are of anything else. I mean, if it’s the way things are then you see, well, that’s kinda like sorta then the end of any discussion.

          You cannot extend your 2 line blurb into justification, reason or good conscious. There is none. This is why any forthcoming response from you, (into the areas I suggest here) will in fact be nothing but truncated phraseology gleaned from some hastily grabbed sound bite from an outdated flier or internet soft pillow for “Wimmin rock ‘n rule” web slight. I mean site.

          Push off nasty heart. You suck.

          • goomena

            Wow, did you just compare online dating to Nazi Germany? We’ll be sure to delete any members including burning synagogues and gas chambers in their “favorite places to go on a first date.”

            Also, the “nothing but truncated phraseology gleaned from some hastily grabbed sound bite from an outdated flier (sic)…” bit really does sound like phraseology gleaned from a hastily grabbed sound bite. Except not truncated.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Goomena.

            As expected you did not address this bit:

            ‘You make an observation and you then extrapolate this to be somehow adhering to what is right, or what should therefore be acceptable.’

            Like all intellectually dishonest people you take recluse in correcting another’s spelling and one upmanship. You will not address my statement honestly because it seems you are unable to. I could be wrong. Show me I am wrong.

            So, please address the statement of you can. Honestly this time. Thank you.

          • goomena

            You’re absolutely right. I am being totally dishonest, and evading your every question and analogy.

            And all this on a post titled, “The Power of Pussy.”

            Thank you for the laughs, gentlemen. Good night.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Goomena,

            Your sarcasm and sassy “Devil may care” ‘tude is another way of hiding from something you cannot answer.

            You will never address my point made before because you can’t. You don’t have the courage to save some grace by even admitting it.

            You are dishonest and a coward.

        • tallwheel

          Hahaha. Did someone from the site actually reply here or is this a hilarious troll? Either way, this is brilliant.

          Goomena, I have to respect your site for at least allowing gold diggers to be upfront and honest about what they want, and also providing a place for lonely rich men who are so desperate they don’t care that the young gold digger they’re with is little more than a glorified paid escort.

          (And also, is that avatar really you? If so, you are hot and I will gladly let you ride in my Porsche and live in my mansion with me. I will buy you whatever pleases you, my princess!!! ;) LOLZ)

          • goomena

            Thank you, tallwheel. We certainly don’t expect everyone to agree with what we offer. If you’re game for it, our doors are open, everyone comes out happy.

            Except for when we send people of different race or orientation than us to their deaths. Since, according to Dr. F, it seems to be the EXACT SAME THING. (It’s true that most blog flame wars just have to bring up Hitler, hm?)

            P.S. Thanks for the compliment and offer for a Porsche ride, much appreciated :-}

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Goomena.

            Again you have been dishonest.

            You know that I am not suggesting your dating site is wanting to send people to their deaths. You know that I was using an analogy to highlight your faulty reasoning.

            You used my wording to suggest my assertion was something it was not.

            Two posts in a row and two big swerves of truth.

            It’s not looking good, and I expect more dishonesty with every single reply you make from this point onwards as a pattern is now established.

          • Kimski

            You’re being way too nice.

            ‘Hookers’ are the word you’re looking for here.

            -Only completely dishonest ones.

        • Turbo

          “When was the last time you expected to go Dutch on your first date with a woman?”

          My very first date, and every date since. If she doesn’t like it, there are no more dates, period.

  • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

    I have also been asked to publicize the Vancouver MRA. We are rustling up funds right now to fight the fembots in the streets. You can donate at:

    http://www.vancouvermra.com/

    or at a Voice for Men.

    Also, check out Jack Day’s website at:

    http://masculism.ca/blog/

    Limeywestlake over and out.

    • externalangst

      Just tried to donate but your system told me you have a high security and that I could not proceed.

  • Codebuster

    TB: “Biologists have a very unfortunate habit of only reporting on what they believe to be true.”

    TB is raising important questions.

    Our “hard” sciences are not hard any more. Our “hard” sciences co-exist on exactly the same campuses as our women’s studies departments, and women’s studies academics sport exactly the same titles as our “hard” science academics… you will find Doctorates and Phds also in women’s studies departments.

    That a movement as comprehensively idiotic as feminism could make it into the mainstream after incubating in exactly the same campuses as our scientists graduate from suggests to me that something has gone seriously wrong. Where were our scientists to refute this garbage when it was first coming to light?

    I judge a culture by the company it keeps. The company that our science faculties are keeping does not, for me, inspire confidence in our sciences. Should we be surprised? We are the scientists now. We are the ones raising questions that should have been raised in our universities decades ago. It is we who are at the cutting edge. Thank you TB.

    • Zerbu

      This is why I worry about the future of the major industries.

  • Rper1959

    OT but perhaps readers could go to this page and answer the poll ( worm)

    Should circumcision be banned? currently 70% are saying NO

    http://ten.com.au/CanOfWorms-vote.htm

    • Tawil

      Just went and voted…. is now 68% against banning circumcision. We need to reduce that to zero and get 100% for banning it IMO.

      • Rper1959

        45% now for banning circumcision , keep the votes rolling please !

        • blueface

          46.3% and rising.

    • tallwheel

      Some of the other questions are worth answering too.
      Could use more yes votes on “Is sexual harassment just an ugly person hitting on you at work?” Basically, it is, though I might not have worded it exactly that way.

  • jack

    Many men need to look at porn for hours before they want sex with women. Porn has become the sexual crutches of the modern woman. Without porn to make men horny (and arouse them mentally during intercourse), most men would not even go after women. Not to mention that if you seek out a woman who is more than 3 years your junior you’re considered a peado. It would be different if drug-use were legal and widespread. Hard drugs turn women into sex fiends. That’s why drugs are so much against the law. Women who want sex as bad as men do can’t control men any more. People who’ve had sex while ravin’ and rollin’ know what I mean. IMHO men who speak out against drugs (& prostitution) are such masochistic losers. They man remain the majority though, even after we’re done with feminism.

    • Sting Chameleon

      >Not to mention that if you seek out a woman who is more than 3 years your junior you’re considered a peado.

      Only if she’s underage and you’re over 25. The rest of your comment is mindless trolling so I won’t bother addressing it.

      • jack

        …Only if she’s underage and you’re over 25

        Really? Feminism is not that bad then. I must be making it much worse than it is. I’ll apply for a fiance visa for my 19 y.o. mail-order fucklet tomorrow. Silly me thinking the bespectacled ladies at the consulate would block the deal.

        The rest of your comment is mindless trolling …

        Hopefully. Otherwise the MRA movement might encompass (former) drug-users, whore-mongers and who knows what other freaks?

        • Sting Chameleon

          If you need a ‘mail-order fucklet’, Feminism, as toxic and harmful as it is, is the least of your problems.

    • kiwihelen

      Jack, I had the counter experience when younger of being an older woman with a younger man…and I agree until you are 25, any age gap that is more than a couple of years is looked on with suspicion.
      But my last two partners have been 5-7 years older than me, and there is no comment or surprise. Only teasing comment I have had is from my brother 4 years older than me about providing him with excellent male company at family gatherings, because these men have similar musical tastes to him!

      • jack

        I was more thinking in terms of a difference of more than 10 years. I’m 53, the only girl I can call a “regular” as far as I’m concerned is 33, that’s exactly 20 years difference. Apart from that I patronise “working girls” who are usually between 21 and 30. In spite of P4P being legal over here, only girls older than 21 are now allowed to register as sex-workers. It’s not the men who are most pissed at this newly introduced exception to the minimal age for gainful employment. It’s the girls who lose what they see as a precious 3 years. The reason older feminists are agitating against wide age gaps has nothing to do with morals. If anything a 60 year old man taking a 20 y.o. bride is only imitating Abraham, Joshua and other Old Testament big shots. It’s because older men are a coveted prize. They have life savings, higher wages, and they’re nearer the heart attack that will give the young head of hair her inheritance + freedom.

        • John A

          Older women like burqas because they protect their husbands from the temptation of young attractive women. Feminists don’t or won’t understand that the group that is most threatened by young horny pretty girls is older women. Islamic laws protect women, they seem odd in the modern context, but at the time they were made they protected women.

      • Sting Chameleon

        In my country at least, if you’re over 25 and dating someone WAY younger (say, 17-18) you get labeled a ‘creep’. As a 27 year old who gets hit on by senior highschool/college freshman girls all the time I can attest for that. It subsides when you get older and the difference doesn’t seem to be so jarring (say 40-30), but still, at least that’s the score for men here.

  • http://none universe

    Had a good chuckle at the graphic centered above the headline, the picture representing the main thrust of the article. Not being a cat fancier I was struck by the immanently determined vacant look this creature possesses. But, since the animal is not extinct due to its seeming uselessness, it must serve some purpose.
    And then, chuckled somewhat more at the conflation of this animal to a piece of human anatomy that figuratively represents an attractive element of half the adult population. It’s possibly an apt description that is complementary to man’s thoughtless ‘little head’.

    This is the precious resource that men are taught to center their lives around?

    – Well, “this” is what it has seemingly become. The mad pursuit of that animal –
    one contributing factor to one of the banes of human activity, somewhat plauging continents since the dawn of dominant body consciousness.

    But, in keeping with the spirit of the author’s intent, it’s not so much a pursuit of pussy that can create so much heartache as it is quite possibly more about releasing the full extent of human potential. It’s not necessarily about chasing tail but more about the latent unrealized potent of the ‘Johnny Appleseed’-seeking-ground syndrome.
    Forward to the moment, social (de-)valuation has reversed the mating give-and-take more into “the power of pussy”. Men have lost the realization of their own power.
    All is not lost however, we’re on the verge of recovery.

    Anyway, some good thoughts from someone not under the spell of the main subject written about. And I wouldn’t give up the spell I am under anytime soon. Aside from kitty, many women are absolutely the most beautiful looking of all human creation.

  • DruidV

    I’m kind of embarrassed by the number of times I’ve had sex with myself and the female was just in the way. Some of the things I was forced to imagine in order to ‘finish’, were pretty sordid indeed.

    This article was a giant, bitter red pill for me, since I never thought about it like that before. Denial is a bitch…

    Thanks for some great insight T.B.!

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

    Typhon,
    I just gotta say I abso-fucken-lutely love this rant.
    Many thanks.

  • keyster

    It’s more complicated than just pussy and orgasm.

    It’s male pride (conquest), social pressure (to be coupled)…and most men genuinely enjoy a woman’s company.

    Being gifted with vaginal access represents validation that a woman has selected him to mate with – to himself and others in his social sphere.

    If you’re not a coupled male you’re viewed as undesirable for some unknown reason, if not a little creepy. This is EXTREME pressure for guys to be under.

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

      What he said.

    • Zerbu

      “…and most men genuinely enjoy a woman’s company.”

      The massive numbers of young men using PUA/game seems to show otherwise.

    • echofoxtrot

      I agree 100%.

      But the flip side of the “pride of conquest” is the generalized and specific anxiety that comes from knowing how fleeting and transitory the “conquest” is….in knowing that the man is always subservient to female-dictated (both that particular female, and females-in-general) standards of being acceptable; anxiety of dealing with an unintended pregnancy; anxiety of dealing with a potential argument which always has the man in the one-down position; etc.

    • Sting Chameleon

      >most men genuinely enjoy a woman’s company

      How can you enjoy that company when pride and social pressure coerce you into landing a mate, for whatever means necessary? A man who doesn’t get to mate at all is pretty much considered a social failure and thus plenty of men operate under a scarcity mentality regarding romantic and sexual partners.

      • Zerbu

        Exactly! Though speaking of being socially coerced into finding a mate, feminists deny it and say that it is actually women who are. I don’t believe that for a millisecond though.

        • Sting Chameleon

          The beautiful irony of all this is that the more time you spend unmated, the lesser chance of you to actually get a mate when you finally want one. Women operate on a peer-review basis and any man who’s not been previously approved by at least one of them is deemed ‘unfit’ since obviously something has to be wrong with him.

      • keyster

        Yeah I know, this must seem like a radical concept for an MRA to grasp; men who do not like being with a woman are quite atypical…as evidenced by the vast majority of men who are actually with women.

        Did you know there are men who don’t like being with other men, that don’t like doing male activities? This kind of man has become rather common. He’s conditioned to defer to his female half on how he chooses to use his time, and likes giving up that control to her. It seems to keep her happy, and the relationship intact.

        • jack

          He’s conditioned to defer to his female half on how he chooses to use his time

          Such conditioning may have sinister ulterior motives. I remember reading something to the effect that 3 years into marriages, husbands had lost touch with their chums while wives stayed in touch. Wives simply saw to it that some invitations were never renewed. Over time, contact was lost. Wives did this because when in town cheating on their husbands, they wouldn’t want any friend of their husband’s to spot them in the company of a stranger. Being seen by her own friends and allies was OK since those would not report the sighting to the cuckolded husband. No such luck for the cheating husband who ran the risk of being recognised by her wife’s acquaintances and consequently denounced.

        • Sting Chameleon

          I know plenty of those, and in my country we call them ‘macabeos’. (aka the ‘Yes Ma’am men’). They associate with men only out of necessity and refrain from expressing too much concern or affection for their friends since that would be obviously gay.

  • Hoz_Turner

    The idea of synchronized menstruation is a MYTH.

    “Nearly half of the papers published on the topic find no evidence that close co-habitation draws menstrual cycles closer together. What’s more, studies that do find an effect have been dogged by harsh criticisms of poor design and naive statistical analyses.”

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-women-who-live-together-menstruate-together

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      Looks like there’s some support for synchronized ovulation, however.

      Regardless, refuting the synchronized aspects of the human female fertile cycle doesn’t really refute the possible applicability of the topi antelope findings to humans and other mammals. Insofar as any promiscuous breeders with heats and ruts can be applicable to us at all.

      Neither does the fact that women are fertile 12 times a year. Unless someone wants to take up that argument and explain how.

  • Samantha77

    All these discussions I’ve read regarding different animals and why their sex lives are how they are. Even when it comes to chimps or whatever our closest relative is supposed to be I don’t think it is very relevant except to point out and understand what is at the root of our motivations.

    You know what I think. I think men are definitely not monogamous by nature. I don’t really care what any scientist says about this. I’ve done the greatest study of all, in person. Men want a monogamous partner because of wanting their children to be theirs. That was why having a monogamous woman was so important.

    And you know what I think about women. I think they are not naturally monogamous either. I think they wanted a man to stick around and provide and protect. He wanted a monogamous woman, she wanted a monogamous man, both for different reasons, both involving necessity. So it was a deal. That become the morally correct (MC) which was based on necessity too, but has been held onto long past it’s use by date.

    The hard wiring thingy might still be there, but the necessity is not, and so most monogamous relationships fail in the long term. Women can only remain monogamous if there are costs and consequences for not remaining monogamous.

    My ex husband cheated and cheated. He couldn’t help himself. I caught him many times. I didn’t understand it at first. I think I’m pretty good looking and pretty horny, and he could have any sort of sex with me every day, I hardly ever knocked him back even when I had my period. But still he’d be picking up a bit of stray here and there all the time. In the end he got another woman pregnant. She had an abortion, and shortly after that I got herpes. I hadn’t been with anybody else, so I was really pissed off.

    In the end I said ok, you obviously aren’t going to stop screwing around so how about we screw around together, and since I have to share the risks, I’ll have some fun too. No, he didn’t want that. He kept screwing around so I ended up leaving him. I got a unit, and our son and I moved out. He was pissed off for a while and things were not good for a while but we are friends now and we share our son one week at my place and one week at his.

    Monogamy was always as hard for me as it was for him. I’ve always been a bit of a slut at heart and it wasn’t easy for me to knock back all the offers over the years. Now, I have three regular guys. All of them know about each other and have become mates actually. I sometimes have two of them, and once in a while all three of them over. One is interstate and only get over here every couple of months or so. The other two live not far from me in opposite directions and can pretty much come over whenever. They often just roll up at different times. When my son isn’t here they can just come and go as they please.

    My ex is with another women and miserable. She isn’t like me. She’s a bit of a prude in a sack, and a few years in she’s getting a lot of headaches. I told him this is just code for piss off. I’ve seen this with lots of women. They don’t go off sex, they go off their husbands. You guys call it hypergamy. I think it’s just a case of being bored with the same dick for too long. Women don’t realize this, they always think the guy has changed and turned into an annoying pest.

    I’ve found something with women that are cheating, which is a lot more then people think. Because of my wild sex life, which includes taking my men to swingers parties etc, women seem to think they can tell me anything, and I will approve, and heaps tell me about their affairs. And there is something different about men cheating and women cheating. Men just cheat, and still keep loving their wives. Women cheat and seem to turn off their husbands and want them out of the way. Swinging couples don’t seem to suffer from this by the way.

    So, I’m footloose and fancy free and have been for years. I pay my own way through life, and that is what makes me free. I feel no desire to rope a man into a marriage to provide for me and have rejected many proposals of “getting serious” Most of the long term married couples I know are not monogamous. I know lots of couples into the swingers scene, and I think the reason they are still happy and hot for each other is because female hypergamy is rendered null and void by being able to have some variety, and also men don’t have to sneak around behind their wives backs to satisfy their nature.

    My ex has told me a while back, that he wishes he had accepted my solution and he wishes his current wife was half as sexual as I am. I only ever had the one flair up of herpes, and although I’ll carry it for the rest of my life it hasn’t caused me any trouble and I suppose it’s a very minor thing. He was such a dickhead being married and screwing around without condoms, but no use crying over spilt milk and he’s not a bad man and if it wasn’t for his carelessness, I probably wouldn’t have left him even with all the cheating.

    So that is me. I suppose if I were a man, you would call me a mgtow. I don’t think you have a term for women like me though, probably slut lol. But at least I’m a good slut I think, and believe me, most women, especially women that have been in long term relationships for a long time are absolutely envious of my sex life. And a hell of a lot of them are grabbing a bit on the side themselves, which I think they should just come out and talk to their partners about altering the relationship, but that would take courage, and most women are lacking badly in that dept. So the monogamous charade continues.

    • jack

      Swinging couples don’t seem to suffer from this by the way.

      Unfortunately, the swinging lifestyle is dying out. Swingers clubs in countries previously renowned for that lifestyle are now shutting down or reconverting into “gang-bang clubs” and other kinds of glorified brothels. Hard-line monogamy again reigns supreme, alleviated only by cheating.

      • Samantha77

        Not from where I’m looking Jack. But I wouldn’t call gangbang parties glorified brothels anyway. All the women I’ve known who have been to them are going for the same reason the guys go, a wild good time. They aren’t getting paid so it has nothing to do with prostitution.

        Maybe in your country things are different, but there are plenty of swingers clubs, and plenty of house parties, and plenty of swingers in the online swinging sites.

        • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

          Yep, same experience on this end, in Canada, Samantha. Swinging is on the uptick. Because of third-wave feminism and tantra, it is morphing into a different beast, however. There are up-scale sex clubs springing up now – a friend of the missus helps run this joint, for example:

          http://oasisaqualounge.com/

          It is very busy and getting a whole load of media coverage.

          I love your honesty, BTW, Samantha – it really challenges the madonna/whore dichotomy that I and other MRA’s can suffer from. I have become aware that it is something in my psyche I need to confront. It is tough but an important move for me to make. A vigorous MRM should be inclusive of all women – excepting those feministy individuals, of course (who, as we all know, are effectively against self determining women who do not self identify with their hate ideology.)

          But I digress. My main bone with female agency is that often, when watching a female assert her sexual power, it makes a lot of non-alpha men, like myself, feel like they are outsiders, that they are tacitly disenfranchised and not invited to the proverbial orgy. Some of my female friends talk about their first, second and third threesomes and ‘moresomes,’ etc with a fluid ease – while a good number of my male friends would dearly love someone just to hold their hand and give them a kiss and be told that they are a worthwhile human being. Some of them spend a goodly part of their life on the ‘second ladder.’

          http://www.laddertheory.com/

          While I do not subscribe to ladder theory in its entirety, it should be included in any frame of reference, methinks. And I admit, there are women I know who find getting a date difficult, but this is often for different reasons – often because of their hypergamous expectations. Sometimes it can be: I am not going to fuck ‘x man’ because he does not have a job. (Really, I am not making this shit up, I see it happening in my social circle.)

          Ultimately, I would like there to be a more inclusive sexuality to all people – especially men. Pansexuality is an ideal that should be brought firmly into the light of day; transsexuals, for example, can sometimes be marginalized, lonely and bereft of human touch.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexuality

          The swinging community can be quite misandric. Single men are often barred from participation. In the Oasis Aqualounge, for example, unattached men have to pay double for entrance. Once in, they may not go up to the second ‘party’ floor unless they have been ‘groomed’ and consequently chaperoned. There is a definite apartheid within the ‘lifestyle’ – and within sexual relations as a whole, that I find extremely troubling. As an MRA who is focusing on sexuality, this is something that I am working towards ameliorating.

          Nooky should be for all, regardless of whether you are XX or XY – or something in between

          ** I have read this and I clicked the edit to add the following disclaimer:

          Indeed, there are some really lovely women I know who are single, lonely and who do not have lofty expectations regarding a potential partner. IN MY EXPERIENCE, they are in the minority of the single women I know, however. Also, I do not discount that there are women, for whatever reason, who have found ‘hooking-up’ to be difficult because of a myriad of emotional / self-esteem difficulties. Again, I have met such individuals.

          OK, I think I have covered most bases now…

          • jack

            Single men are often barred from participation … unattached men have to pay double for entrance. Once in, they may not go up to the second ‘party’ floor unless … chaperoned

            This is indeed a scam but it has little to do with misandry. Put yourself in the shoes of man A who has brought in a female life companion he went out of his way to select precisely because she agreed to a swinging lifestyle. Male club patrons turn up in drove and want a part of A’s hottie. This is predictable male sexual behaviour, all the more so since those unfortunate guys paid double or triple to get in and want something in return for their money. But man A knows most of those “unattached” men are anything but unattached: somewhere in front of the TV are girlfriends or wives who would not be caught dead in a swinging club. Man A has a message to those unaccompanied men: do your homework first, get rid of the nay-sayer in your life (divorce her, shoot her, sell her to the Arabs). Replace her with a woman who agrees to the lifestyle and we’ll have a party.

            This was the idea in the heydays of swinging when swinging meant couples-only parties. Note that club owners are happy with the present charade. There’s more money in preying on the sexual misery of unaccompanied men than there ever was in couples-only parties.

        • jack

          Over here clubs have gang-bangs where the girls get paid. Men pay to attend. The higher the men to women ratio, the lower the fee. The new trend now is for gang-bang parties to be advertised as “without” (AIDS test with home kit). It’s a way for some women to sell sex without having to register (and pay taxes) as a sex worker. The loophole in the law is that for prostitution to occur the sexual activity has to be repetitive. A gang-bang twice a month is insufficient frequency so the fee is regarded as “a bit of money on the side”, like you would cook at a wedding ceremony and get paid for your cooking. In Holland and Germany swinging (real swinging with swapping) has dwindled to 15% of what it was in the nineties. P.S. I’m very skeptical of women getting gang-banged for free. What you have is men with a cukold fetish “offering” their girl free of charge to selected men. But in this case the payment is between the man and his girl. I don’t believe in pussy ever becoming free, especially not if the sex involves higher order promiscuity. Someone, somewhere, will always be footing a bill. I’m comfortable with that. Many radical MRAs may not like it, but you can’t prevent a commodity from having value and fetching a price. It should be paid on the spot though, not years later and hundredfold through the family courts.

          • Samantha77

            Of course if someone is going to run a club they are going to charge a fee. But you pay to go to movies, nightclubs, and every other kind of club. I don’t know who you know Jack, but I can tell you for a fact that women are going to gangbangs and do not get paid. I know for a fact because I know several women who go to them often, and I’ve been myself. The people running the venue get paid if it’s like a proper club thing, but I know of several little private groups that just get together for fun, and it’s possible to get invited if you know someone. But why would you expect someone to pay for premises, and all the other expenses to run a party, and all the work it takes, and just do it for free?

            I agree that the swingers scene, especially the couples scene has plenty of misandry with single men being cut out of the deal. But this is mostly because of insecure men, who are obsessed with bi-sexual women and seeking to obtain mostly just a women to join them and their wife. The scene is full of them and to me, they are not real swingers. I got fed up taking my men to swingers parties and so many of the couples had men like this. The first thing they say to you when you meet is, are you bi. Then they start trying to seduce just the woman to play with them alone.

            I’m not bi-sexual. But I have nothing against playing with a woman in a group thing. But it shits me off that so many of these men try to marginalize the other guy. They put restrictions on their women when it comes to other men, and only really tolerate them playing with other men in order to get the other women for themselves. Not all the couples are like that but there is way to many of them.

            So one of my guys got invited to a gangbang gathering one night. Of course they let plenty of single guys in, so i didn’t have to go with him and I was chicken, so he went and came back and told me all about it. There was six or seven women there, lots of guys. And he didn’t even have to try at all. Just roll up and join in the fun and he played with all the women there like a kid in a lolly shop. Some of the women were there single, some were with their partners. Their partners just played with whoever they felt like. I just had to see this for myself. So we arranged to go to one of their nights and I took both my local guys. The women there are a different breed all together. So are the guys. I didn’t see the women there knock anybody back. It’s like a social thing where they have sex instead of dancing. When a woman takes to the play area guys just front up to play with them, and the guys just move from one women to another. It wasn’t like I thought it would be. The women just walked around the place and socialized like they were at a normal party and when they wanted to play they just took to the mattresses and seemed to be totally unconcerned with what guys joined them. So after a while observing and watching my guys like kids in an amusement park, I just thought, oh well, just like skydiving, shitting myself but just jump.

            Had the time of my life actually. Nobody was rough with me. In fact I was asked every minute or so if I was ok with what they were doing lol. I felt like telling them to shut up and get on with it because I was having a ball by then. I have no idea how many guys had me. lol. Pretty much got had every which way you can think of, every sex act you can name over the night. After about an hour I got up and went and had a shower and jumped in the spa for a while. The socializing surprised me. Everyone is talking about politics, sports, religion. I didn’t see the slightest bit of disrespect in the place. I got on well with all the women I met. Some of them are bi, but not one of them even tried to get me into sex with them. In fact, I’ve been a few times now and have hardly ever seen any bi action. And the guys don’t seem to care either. The women are all so normal too. I mean at most swingers parties there seems to be a lot of women who are really show offy, and usually that’s all they have. The women in this scene are so casual and laid back it’s hard to believe. They are so much more raunchy and full on, but to meet and talk they just seem like the woman down at the bakery. I don’t know why that surprises me because that’s what I’m like too.

            As for those bareback gangbangs Jack, crazy. Condoms are sitting in big bowls with lube bottles and mop up towels and bins near every mattress where I have been, and any guy that tries to penetrate a woman without using them is kicked out and banned. Oral of course is done without, but vaginal or anal you have to wear.

            The guys that seem to be the majority at these parties are not super hunky porn stars either. Most of them you would regard as just pretty ordinary run of the mill guys, with a few hunks and few fairly unattractive guys thrown in. I just treated them all the same, and so do all the other women. Hell, if guys had to be pin up boys to be in this, neither of my guys would make the grade, so I’m really happy it’s like it is.

            Anyway Jack, the thing is that a man doesn’t have to be an alpha male or a hunk to be involved with women like me. Guys that are open minded enough are a minority, and that makes them special and desirable, regardless of the physical traits, to a point of course. I long ago made peace with the fact that men are not monogamous creatures and decided to love em the way they are. What I think men have to do is make peace with the fact that women are not monogamous creatures either. Anyway, that’s just my opinion, and I just live my life the way I like and don’t concern myself much with how others live.

        • jack

          The first thing they say to you [in swinger's clubs] when you meet is, are you bi. Then they start trying to seduce just the woman to play with them alone.

          That’s one of the things that put me off those clubs. But it was not the men who became jealous and possessive. The men were eager to swap. It was their women who vetoed. At some point at the end of the nineties, women hijacked the swinging lifestyle for their lesbian agenda. I say “lesbian” but the PC word is “bisexual” (women-on-women of course, male-on-male = no-no). Women it was who cut off their husbands from the fun and turned the swinging clubs into lesbian fetish venues where husbands masturbated and watched. Henceforth men would only needed at couples parties to pay for the food and drink.

          • Samantha77

            There are those couples too Jack, but they are not the majority. Remember, I’m a woman, and women tell me things. I can tell you that a lot of these women aren’t even bi. And why is it that these couples always list in their profiles that they are seeking a woman, or a couple. In other words, they have no problem with singles, as long as they are female. I’ve known women that have been in the swinging scene for years and have never had an mfm threesome and they would love too, but their husbands aren’t interested. And when they play with couples, they are not to kiss or be sensual with the other man, but when it comes to a women, be as hot as they can. Tell me, have you ever had sex in your life with a woman that wanted to have sex with you but did not want you being passionate or sensual with her. I mean apart from a prostitute, and you know already they are only having sex with you for the money. So why are these women behaving this way in the swinging scene? That’s easy, their partners get jealous, and they have told me so themselves, heaps of them. Their partners love seeing them with other women, because that doesn’t make them feel insecure. These guys shouldn’t even be in the scene at all because they haven’t got what it takes to deal with it.

            The problem that happened in the 90s was the internet. Older swingers I know have told me this. Before the internet, swinging wasn’t visible to the average person. Contacting other swingers was done through magazines. It was slow, having to send stamp self addressed envelopes to the magazine, and they would forward them to the advertising couple. You had to put in effort, and wait over a week for a response. Because of this, there were no phonies and fakers in the scene. Parties were known of by word of mouth. Because people had to put in a lot of effort to get in touch with other swingers, the vast majority of people only done it if they were dead serious and up for it. Now, it’s become a spectator sport, with half the people at couples parties just their to watch. The really hardcore scene, and the fetish scene are different though. They are too scarey and full on for time wasters and the people that go generally snob people that aren’t the real thing just like nudists at a nude club do to people that don’t undress.

            I’ve done a lot of dating, and I’m pretty up front with guys that I’m a swinger. And I get this shit all the time. They want to know if I’m bi. It’s always the first question they ask. Sometimes I don’t say I’m not, I just say that I can play with women in group situations, which is true. If another women starts doing something to me at a party, i just roll with it. I have to have men there to be horny and a woman by herself has no interest for me. Straight away they will be sizing me up for fmf threesomes. And I’ll play along, and then say, and what about mfm, are you into that too lol. They don’t want to know about it, and when I say, well, I can play for you, if you can play for me. They lose interest. And I’m not even talking about them being bi, even with no bi between the guys, they aren’t interested. And these are the guys that seek out bi women, and than turn up at swingers parties and expect other couples to lend them their woman, while they try to minimize her contact with other men.

            I’ve known women that are the same. They try and turn their swinging relationship into a cuckold thing where only they get all the action and their partners miss out. I’ve known bi women and straight women like this. All up I’d say that at any given couples party, only about 30% of the couples are the real deal. The others are either just watchers and time wasters, or one or both of them have power play, jealousy/insecurity problems and shouldn’t be there at all.

            I’ve got a really good test for swinging couples to see how compatible they might be. I ask them if they have had many mfm threesomes. If not, the reason has got to be that either she really is that bi that she is not that into men, or he has her on a leash. Either way I’m not interested because my guys deserve to play with a hot blooded woman that will give as good as she gets, and that is not them.

    • Gruelien

      Maybe you just got HSV1. An ex gave it to me and I’ve only had one outbreak in 13 years. Of course according to her I had cheated and gave it to her. UG!

      I have having that conversation with my potential partners though.

  • gthnk

    I always find your articles to be interesting.

    Support for your idea, and something I have always wondered about.

    Women go out of their way to compete for males. They fight over the same male as if there is a shortage of males.

    Women are also preoccupied with their looks. They are colourful and do everything they can to advertise they are sexually mature, young and available for sex.

    Women are also predatory sexually as evidenced by 2 different statistics.

    1) 80 percent of women have sex with 20 percent of men. How this can’t lead to competition for men evades me. It is clear a large portion of women compete for a small pool of men.

    2) 33 percent of paternity tests show the male taking care of the female, who is the assumed father, is not the real father. So women are settling down with a specific set of males while competing for males of another kind.

    Oh, and I’d like to add that married females experiencing a fertility cycle still compete with single women, and actually signal males more strongly that they are fertile.

    • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

      It is the other 80% of men that I truly feel sorry for. Some of my associates are in this group. Most, if not all, are smart, ‘reconstructed men. However, they are probably the ‘creeps’ we hear so much about.
      **Sigh.**

  • Blinky13

    I agree with this article. As a 40 yr old woman I have dated and slept with lots of men over 25 years. It’s something I’ve observed many times that some men appear to be having sex with themselves and I’m not really part of the proceeedings. I watch guys going through the motions and its painful to watch. I’ve also had lots of great “connected” sex where guys have been more relaxed, upfront, have fun and because we have agreed sex is happening – we are both going to do the work to make ourselves/them happy and leave each other sexually satisfied.

    I’m not a “pussy” to be had – nor is the guy a “cock” to be had. I’m a woman and he’s a guy i.e. people who can say what they want and not play each other. Sex is about having sex with “that person” not their genitals.

    I’ve alway wondered why men don’t come right out and say “do you wanna have sex – I’m gagging for it” instead of going through the motions as stated in the article – guys get their answer yes or no and then they can relax. I’ve been with guys who I don’t want to have sex with but I’ve enjoyed hanging out with them. I’ve had to tell these kinda guys straight up from the outset (after seeing their discomfort at being turned on) that “I’m not going to have sex with you – just relax and let’s have a laugh”. One guy said “but I fancy you” and I said “so what”. Others have said that’s fine I’m enjoying hanging out with you.

    Men have offered to pay most times for dinner in my life – I just say “Why should you – I have money too?” and pay my half always unless the guy really insists e.g. well you picked me u from the airport let me pay for dinner. Picking the place – well most times I can recall, we have agreed where we are going rather than “being taken” somewhere.

    Re: asking out – I admit somewhere along the way men and women seem to have agreed that the norm is for men to do the asking. I really want to see this change – I want to see girls asking guys out more – I have done it many times – I like dating a guy I fancy so I decided I’ve got to start asking guys I fancy out!!

    We have to get past the fact that women are mysteries – we are not – just ask us directly and don’t play the set formula to get a woman in bed – playing that formula makes the woman feel she’s not quite part of the proceedings and leaves some men feeling dissatsified with the whole shananigans.

    I love guys that are straight up, tell me what they want and really it all comes down to whether I like them as a person, fancy them as a person, find them sexually attractive and am wanting to have sex. If these 4 boxes are ticked and the guys feels that way too – then we are in for a very “mutually” good time.

    One note – orgasm is a 50:50 game for both parties – I am also responsible for my orgasm – for me its about being relaxed, being turned on by the guys body and then I have to get “in the zone” and I’ll achieve it. I never want the guy to feel he’s 100% responsible for me having an orgasm – it’s an impossible feat for him. With guys – over time I’ve learned what they like personally through testing – it’s easy to know what individual guys like after a few sessions. If I don’t know and it’s the first tme – I ask. But at the end of the day I know the guy is part responsible for his own pleasure and I can only do so much. Good sex is a mutual matter.

    Maybe guys are afraid to ask “Do you fancy me?” Do you want sex” or say “I am really horny” etc etc but really it’s by saying and asking that you know where you stand and can relax and stop hoping/wondering which then potentially leads to a dissatisfied encounter or poor one-way sex.

    I’ve also been in the reverse – met a guy – he was still living with an ex and had said he didn’t want to start a sexual relationship until she moved out. I told him I wanted sex one night (5th date) after taking him to a gig that I chose and paid for, cooking 3 course dinner with champers, kissing him seductively to get him excited and having a giggle to good music – after saying I wanted to go to bed – he said no and slept on the couch. I respected that and never thought – damn I paid for everthing, planned everything, worked hard to get him excited etc I just took his no answer and respected it. I waited for him, he eventually split with the ex and we now have a happy (sexual) relationship.

    I think guys have to start thinking differently about women and just think – this is a person I fancy and I’m gonna find out straight up if she fancies me too and if she’s up for having sex tonight. If yes great, if no – at least u know where you stand and can just have fun being with her. Really there’s no satisfying way around this – unless u want to have sex with someone who doesn’t really want to have sex with you. I could maybe convince a guy by playing games to have sex with me (who doesn’t want to) but that’s going to leave me feeling shit about myself. I want a guy to want me too – mentally AND sexually – not just sexually when I show him my punani and he thinks bugger it I don’t really like her/fancy her but I’ll do it anyway. Maybe this is where alot of dissatisfied guys make the error. Just ask the dreaded questions up front ;-))

    • Jay

      I agree with your sentiments, unfortunately asking someone straightout seldoms works – the gamers call it anti-slut defense. Then the girl will tell all her friends that you “propositioned her”, and you will be viewed as an uncouth male desperate for sex.

      • Blinky13

        Well I guess it depends on the girl and circumstances – as an older girl – most guys I’ve dated/slept with haven’t known my friends/my circle so has nothing to lose. Guess in colleges, at uni and at work it is more high risk. I wouldn’t sleep with a guy if he was that pathetic anyway and I thought he’d tell his mates about me. There’s enough mature great guys out there to be able to ignore the childish idiots. I like a smart guy not an immature one.

        Have you tried asking a girl if she wants to get it on? If so what was the outcome?

        • Shrek6

          Blinky, sounds like good advice when you say this:

          “I love guys that are straight up, tell me what they want”

          The problem men suffer that you have truly not understood, is that there are 10,000,000 (ridiculous exaggeration) different female personality types out there and in that 10,000,000 each individual personality changes itself each and every day, but more so when their period is imminent and during that time. And for those who are older and past their reproductive stage, they still play out the game of changing like a Chameleon each and every day.

          I believe your type of personality is as rare as Hen’s teeth. In many cases if you ask straight out, you are going to get a huge negative response, possibly even a slap in the face, because the over entitled cow is angry you didn’t follow protocol by spending lots of money, energy and attention on her. And this woman represents the absolute vast majority of women in the western world. That we know of!

          Unfortunately, what you say ‘may’ only work with a select few. And even with them, you can never know from one day to the next if she is going to be the same or has turned herself into a downright bitch. This happens with the vast majority of women who walk this earth.
          I have never yet, in my 55 years, heard any man tell me tales of meeting women who are not like the women I have described above.

          So, although I like what you have written and agree 100% that this is how it should be, I can tell you without any concern of being wrong, that this will never happen, because women are too unstable and to unpredictable, which is the main thing that pisses most men off and why a lot of good men simply won’t play the game anymore. MGTOW!

          • John A

            Shrek6,
            I understand what you are saying and I know that a lot of guys want to opt out and that’s fine. If you want a woman all you need is one good one, and we all know they are out there. What men need is an efficient and effective way of sorting through the bad ones. It comes down to believing in your own worth. The lie we were told is that men aren’t attractive and aren’t intrinsically desirable. The truth is that men are attractive (don’t need make up etc) and are intrinsically desirable (don’t need to be rich)

            I know enough single women to know it’s about time they realized what they should expect from men and what they have to do to get it. Men are prepared to give so much for women, their wealth, their happiness and even their lives. They need to sacrifice less and demand more in return – I think that is what this site is about.

          • Blinky13

            I agree with alot of what you say and do empathise with men and I think women miss out on alot of sexual fun due to thinking they’ll be “sluts” if they are too forward – also some women do seem to equate “spending” as to how much the man values her. I’m not sure I agree with the “personality change” concept of women – but I do think there are alot of confused women out there who really can’t just be themselves for various reasons and this may make them appear schizos when it comes to sex.

            I think there is something very complicated going on with the sexes in our time. It helps to look at the whole history of sexual relations between the sexes. I’m no expert on it but I’m trying to study it as much as I can. This is the potted version.

            In caves (I have no actual life accounts to work from ;-) ) I imagine it was fairly simple – the sexes didn’t “couple up”, they just had lots of sex, produced as many children as possible within the clan and mixed the eggs/seed as much as possible. This helped strengthen the clan in numbers. Coupling may have destroyed their growth. Maybe there were alpha males though at this time who got a main slice of the punani cake.

            It’s then interesting to look at what instigated “coupling” and the current norms of dating protocol. From what I have studied it seems that a combo of religion and elite social moral makers (particulary in reaction to STDs) forced “coupling”, marriage and encouraged no sex before marriage as the only “acceptable” form for M & F sexual relations.

            The Victorian era in the UK was particularly strict on coupling – heavily religious and highly judgmental. We still see some societies function like this today.

            I have read most of the big 4 religious texts (Bible, Qu’ran,Torah and Vedas) which date back many 100s of years and they certainly speak in terms of “coupling” between males and females and that this should be a virtuous state of affairs. And God himself is judging!! A great threat for thoughts/acts of non-compliance is hell. Hell or something akin to it was believed to exist almost universally.

            The main issues that seemed to “demonise” free natural sex are:

            1) sacred position of a woman’s virginity
            2) unholy position of a prostitute
            3) burden on a male to be a provider for females
            4) holy status of a religious union between a M & F
            5) unholy position of a child born outside of a religious marital union
            6) homosexuality demonised
            7) burden of women to have children

            I’m sure there are more but these jumped out at me as the social norms of current times. The shocking but unsurprising issue is how well these religious views came to control the behaviour of the sexes and bled into daily society, behaviour and punishment for lapses.

            Virginity for many years became seen as sacred amongst most cultures and is still viewed as sacred in many cultures today, particularly in religious cultures. In more secular cultures the taboo and restriction of maintaining ones virginity for “the one” is dying and luckily in my culture is dead. it’s shocking to think that not so long ago unwed pregnant women were placed in asylums. I thankfully have never been asked if I am a virgin by any man – not even at age 15. I feel so lucky toady not to be judged on my non-virginal unmarried status.

            Prostitution has been scathed by most cultures for a long time and and is still illegal in most parts of the world. In cave times I imagine there was no need for prostitutes at all!! Men today are still demonised for visiting them.

            Men as providers – well sadly that idea still subsists today. I have always thought how stressful it must be for men to have this huge expectation placed upon them to provide for women and kids. I have spoken to friends who became fathers and asked how it felt – some said they felt fear at the pressure of knowing they had to maintain a job, make x amount of cash and keep a roof over his family’s head. This expectation/burden on men I think explains why women subconsciouly test the “spending power” of men – even when the women earn well themselves and have steady good jobs. It is also affected by our heavily capitalist society which requires plenty of cash to just get a home and basics to live. Cavemen had no worry except to go catch the food – home and everything was free. Women didn’t care for material things and maybe just worried about birthing healthy offspring. The famous marketeers who convinced humans to buy what they want rather than just what they need didn’t realise the monster they would create – concern must have been only for filling rich people’s pockets. This is a hard nut to crack in society – it’s made a society of people who want more shit – that’s why women value male earning power – they want to “keep up with the Jones’s”.

            Sex before marriage is something that is relatively new. My parents didn’t have sex before marriage – I’ve never been married and have had lots of sex with lots of men without criticism from anyone. This is a huge change within a generation. Also sex as “enjoyment” is a fairly new phenomenon as is the concept of a female orgasm. Sex was for the practical purposes of having kids – don’t enjoy it!! This freedom of sex is something we are dealing with now in society and we don’t quite know what to do with it. We have no historical guidance on how to make this work – we are writing the rules (or lack therefof) today.

            Women not having children either at all or until very late is very new. My mother had two kids by 21 and this was the norm. This “new” section of life given to men and women in their 20’s/30’s – free from the pressure to marry/breed is an amazing thing. My sister who is only 4 years older – most of her friends were married up fast and breeding fast. My friends didn’t as we felt the lure of exploration and the beauty of not being tied down to young – in fact girls who had kids young in my teens were called stupid/sluts – what a turnaround in a space of a few years. This extra length of time being single is new and again we don’t quite know how to manage that huge amount of freedom – we have no mentors to show us how to.

            So – my main point is (at last u’ll think) is that men and women today are a new crop – there are still lingerings of old ideas in women and men i.e women shouldn’t be sluts, girls shouldn’t be too “easy”, men don’t be too forward, women don’t be too sexually open, don’t sleep around, men should provide, women are temptresses, men are players etc etc

            On the other hand we no longer have to be married to be normal, we no longer have to be virgins until marriage, we can sleep with lots of men/women, we can all admit we watch porn, we know we can enjoy sex alot and most of us have financial independence and can house & feed ourselves.

            This is all new – I think women today don’t know how to behave due to the fear that men will think they are easy – even though they may want to be more forward with sex. Women like sex alot and we like men we fancy. We are just stuck with some old ideas like “he won’t see me again if I sleep with him too quickly and I want to see him again”, “men don’t stay with sluts”, “if a man likes you he will want to spoil you”. Men I think are also worried what to do and how they should behave. PUA website shows this brilliantly.

            I’m doing my best to explain the pickle we are in. I am also doing my best to encourage women to be more sexually forward and enjoy men sexually more – rather than view men as “providers”, “life long partners” and “sexual predators” who just want sex from women. I say – a man doesn’t have to be a provider – I have a job – he just has to be able to contribute (i.e. have some sort of job too) if things get serious and we decide to have a family, I say “not all men will be long term – so enjoy the jounrney along the way!”, I say “men will stay with a girl even if she sleeps with him straight away – if he likes her and has a good time with her”, I say men aren’t the only gender who want sex all the time and think of it all the time – so do we – we just don’t admit it so society thinks we don’t!”.

            Women haven’t grasped their own sexuality – it’s boxed and packaged by someone elses norms. I want to see women really letting go and enjoying sexual life for what it is, enjoying men just for being men.

            I am trying to get funding at the moment to open a strip club for women – in an attempt to open women’s minds to themslves. I would then like to start making porn for women that’s free and start a site that encourages women to be proud of their sexuality and enjoy it while they have it and ot use it against men. One that encourages women to stop playing men – but stand up and join them – pay their way, ask men out and stop playing games. I think it’s a good time to do this as women do have much more sexual freedom than say my mum had. My mum will be the first one I take to the strip club – esp now she is divorced from a marriage that was governed by bibilical/heavy role laden/morally strict rules. I also want to see my dad having more fun and not feel embarrassed to go and enjoy himself in his 60’s.

            I hope you get where I’m coming from and I do understand why men stay single today – I would not want to be with alot of women I’ve met – although I’ve found some gems lately who think similarly to me – but they have taken a bumpy road to get there ;-)

          • Shrek6

            I agree John A.

            The problem is you may spent decades sifting through the single women in your social sphere, trying to find one that is acceptable. Probably today, more than 90% are unacceptable, purely because of their attitude toward men and their expectations of men. These are negatives that have been drummed into females from the day they were born.

            For the Blue Pill men (like I use to be), the majority of women are okay. That is until the women have had enough of the man and the marriage, then set about their dastardly plan of destroying said husband, kidnapping and alienating his children, then stealing all his money/wealth.

            I agree with you that there are some good women out there. How to find them, is the 64 Billion Dollar question!

          • Shrek6

            @ Blinky13,

            I must say that I agree with a lot of what you say. And I do have to say to you that I am one of those religious types who holds onto older orthodox beliefs.

            I would like to comment on a point you made, but to also agree with you in part:
            “From what I have studied it seems that a combo of religion and elite social moral makers (particulary in reaction to STDs) forced “coupling”, marriage and encouraged no sex before marriage as the only “acceptable” form for M & F sexual relations.”

            If you go back to the Old Testament, you will see that certain men had many wives. If this didn’t happen, then population growth would not have occurred in the desired manner. Why was it necessary for certain men to have many wives?
            Because even back then men were disposable and were being slaughtered in battles, while protecting their turf and their women and children.

            Once the numbers were at a level that looked like they were not so threatened, then we see the introduction of what we call the ‘nuclear family’. This was cemented as the norm, with the introduction of Christianity.

            I believe that this occurred for the same reasons why the peoples of the Old Testament days were banned from eating Pork. This was a 100% religious “Hygiene” law and had nothing to do with that animal being a bad animal to eat.

            This law was put in place to stop people dying from Trichinosis, which is a parasitic disease that occurred in pigs, especially pigs kept in filthy conditions or from some that roamed in the wild. Pigs are a naturally, very clean animal. But like humans, they get quite ill if allowed to or forced to live in filthy conditions.

            For the same reasons people were banned under religious law, from the practice of drinking blood. It use to kill people.

            I believe there will come a day when there will or may be, a need for men to have many wives. The necessity for breeding will demand this.

            I’m, as you would imagine, not comfortable with living an open sexually active lifestyle. But I respect your decision to live this way and would never condemn you for it. There are many arguments against each form of lifestyle and many positives too.

            I do however, agree with you 100% about the fact that women today need to wise up and grow the hell up. They are so immature with the way they demand everything from and by men, otherwise they will stamp their little feet in anger and threaten to withdraw sex or from the relationship.

            Plus, men need to be debriefed and re-educated on how to live and behave properly in today’s world. To not be used as a disposable human and to demand that this occur, otherwise those who try to abuse men in this manner will pay dearly. This will also demand that men grow up and swallow a red pill, then treat women in the correct manner, not as goddesses.

            One day men will have to fight for change. And yes, they will lose their lives for it. Women are never going to change what they have today, because today they have the best they will ever have. Even the women of the distant future will not have what women today have.

            Men will eventually lose patience and tolerance with the women of today and the system that abuses them mercilessly, and they will revolt and there will be bloodshed.
            This may only happen in small skirmishes, but those incidences will be felt around the world and men will unite and demand change.

            Well, that is if we don’t all suffer under the dictatorship of a one world govt, which will oppress both men and women. If that happens, then we are all in the same boat and this topic will become null and void.

          • Blinky13

            Thank you for your response Shrek6 – you raised some points that interest me deeply.

            I agree that religious texts were certainly set in their time. Polygamy was necessary for survival and needs were accepted readily by societies. I think the idea that this need may arise again is very possible. My wonder on this issue will be how women today in certain cultures who are so opposed to polygamy (looking at the criticisms I’ve seen of polygamy today towards certain Islamic cultures) will react to that need. I would like to be around to witness it (as an observer not a partaker hehe). I think Western society today is far more concerned with the individual and less on the community in general. Humans seem to be constantly overriding their animal bases in search of a non-animalistic self. Individuality is an obsession – Ayn Rand’s views on this seem to have materialised ;-)) Not that I disagree in whole to this concept.

            I do sometimes think I’d like several men in my life (a little fantasy) but I know this could never materialise for many reasons and I’m not sure in reality I could handle it. I am however very happy in a monogamous relationship and have no complaints. At least men/women can draw on current polygamists who live fairly happily/successfully.

            I am extremely cautious of generalising the sexes. I’ve seen so much hate come of it. I feel this is why many relationships fail. I think we have a view of how men and women should be. People sometimes meet a partner and fall for the idea we had (based on many things) while ignoring all the signs that the person we want fails/does not fit that idea we want. Purely going on physical attraction and the fact they’re the opposite sex can be a fatal misrable game. I have experienced this myself with my loves – I had to force myself to break down my “ideals” and see the person for who they actually are – only then could I see if they were compatible for me and me for them. I think this explains alot of the groanings men and women have about each other. This is also evidenced by the way men and women generalise each other – Woman A has learned that men should be A, B, C and men similarly about women. The truth is gender is a complex thing with no fixed criteria. There may be similarities at certain stages of life – but self identity develops over time with knowledge/experience and we all change and grow. I know I am not the same women I was when I was 18, 25, 30. One hopes experience with the individuals confirms some generalisations but also that it will blow some wide open. I think the fact my partner and I met in out mid 30’s helped us alot – we were semi established people – but still changing/growing somewhat.

            A personal example for me is that as a youngster – my male role models weren’t that positive – violent/cheating father, cheating uncles, peodophile great grandad, boyfriends who didn’t want me to be a lawyer, sister raped by a BF at 16 etc etc my female adult role models were a bit better but my contemporary experience of women was negative – I found many girls at school to be bitchy, uninteresting, unambitious etc. However, somehow I knew this was not representive of all men/women. These experiences were just my childhood pool of people. I decided to travel and get educated and move around as much as I could to explore. I used education/work as a vehicle for this. I happily dated/made new friends, was never paranoid that men would beat me, rape me, cheat on me etc or that girls would always be bitchy and dull to me. I loved the men I dated and trusted them and made friends with women openly. I applied this logic to all generalisations I have ever met – race, culture, professions, gender etc etc – in fact this just meant I took each person I met one at a time. I must say it’s not been easy – as I think humans are designed to generalise/box to cope the complexity of life.

            One other thing I do is always be open to walk away from friends or partners or jobs if things aren’t right for me. By this method – at 40, I am happy to say I have a great guy and so many great male and female friends who I love. This activity of people/place sifting has led me to a good place. If I’d stopped at any repeated bad experiences of groups and generalised negatively – I’m sure I’d be full of hate and generalisations.

            However, I do try help on things I see as important and negatively impacting “groups” whe they are subject to a generalisation.

            I am worried about issues that some groups of men have (hence why I am here) – I know we have alot of work to do to keep stamping out unfairness – e.g. the norms of society have to change to give more fathers a chance to be the choice for home. Women are just people and can easily be bad mothers and I’m surprised the courts don’t see this. I understand why this is in the UK and its a tough thing to change. My concern is always for kids to have the best circumstances they can around them. I know this as a child of divorce. Women are not oppressed as a whole and men are not oppressed as a whole there are just societal generalisations that work against them in certain situations. The norm that women are the priority child carers is a old moronic norm that has been around for so long – it has to change as it is not in the best interests of children. I also think alot of issues are class issues (so much for the classless society) – I know in the UK the elite still hold so much power – I tried to infiltrate it to no avail. Interestingly my partner is from the aristocracy but is a rebel – he is dating a working class low life and lives a working class life. The ruling classes ideologies care little for the masses (as they never have) and in fact encourage hatred and chaos amongst us. I see it working everywhere. We are so confused now and fearful that we are paraylsed to foster real change.

            Re: an openly sexual lifestyle – I agree with your perspective and commen your openmindess. I have zero problem with traditional values (I like them too now in my relationship), as long as they are not pushed as societal norms, If 2 people want a traditional family – then great. I have no issue with religions if it’s chosen. If people want one night stands or serial monogamy then that’s great too. I think it’s people’s problems with knowing clearly what they want and then ensuring the people they want want that too. It’s why I said guys have to ask more and girls need to ask more – some just want a relationship, not just sex, some the opposite. It’s why this concept of “pussy power” shocks me – as each pussy is attached to a person, an individual – as is a cock – that cock has a guy attached and I do my best to find out as much about the guy as possible and tell him what I am wanting.

            I know “communication” is a commonly banded around concept – but sexually active girls and boys / men and women have to start using it – fast. Only way we discover another person and their intentions otherwise we use our pre-conceptions/assumptions/generalisations and then get angry/distressed when people don’t fit the mould.

            I live in hope things get better for all ;-))

      • John A

        Jay,
        I too have had bad experiences with women and sex, at least some of them were just in my mind. Fear is as big enemy as the system. I would put it;

        Then the girl will might tell all her friends that you “propositioned her”, and you will might be viewed as an uncouth male desperate for sex. (maybe when you are dating one of her friends she’ll regret being a bitch)

        Men need to pull together more on this one. If you are desperate for sex, game is the logical solution to that. However, if you are desperate for an honest equal relationship, part of that is women taking responsibility for some of the vulnerability. When I was in my twenties female friends would say “you have to make yourself vulnerable”, how can you if you don’t trust the person you are being vulnerable to? How can you trust her if she is playing games with your head?

        It’s better to do it in an honest, respectful manner and stick to your guns. If she says no be graceful. if she is a bitch say some thing like ‘you attracted me as a special person who I would have like to spend a lot of time with and I didn’t want to regret for the rest of my life not asking you. I have nothing to regret now.’

        Just my thoughts (I’m not an expert).

        • Sting Chameleon

          If she’s a bitch, you don’t waste your breath on her, you simply kick her to the curb and move on. Giving her a long-winded rebuttal makes you look like a pansy.

    • Sting Chameleon

      Do you seriously expect some guy to ask you upfront “Hey baby, do you wanna have sex”? You’ve gotta be kidding: It’s not just bad form, it leaves a man open to ridicule and shaming. It’s bad enough that men must shoulder the burden to initiate and absorb the cost of failure, don’t add insult to the injury. Seduction exists for a goddamn reason.

      • Blinky13

        Well I did not say the chat up line should be hey baby, do u wanna have sex lol – I assumed the seduction had long well happened and the guy is left “where do I stand now?” which is the position the article refers to.

        I can see zero problem with getting past seduction stage then asking the woman/girl what she wants to do next. You feel u wanna have sex but not sure she does – this is a huge issue that I’ve seen guys complain about on PUA – they suggest lots of things that make me shudder – I just say ask – she’s a person, you must like her and know her a bit by now – if you can’t talk to her about basics then maybe you shouldn’t be bedding her – if she ridicules you at that stage then you know u pulled a bitch and to get the hell away from her. It’s better you know than ending up in bed with a bitch and having a shit time. I’ve been rejected by guys when I’ve asked – I learned not to take it personally – some people will want to get it on with me others won’t for whatever reason – c’est la vie.

        Seriously if I had had a good night with a guy and it gets to that stage and he said – do u wanna go to bed – I’d respect him for that – it’s no shock to hear it and it’s not insulting – it’s normal – better than another hour or so of him squirming doing things to try and get me there. I actually say pretty early on what I want (to ease the pressure on the men) – if I’m not wanting sex and it’s clear he does then I say I’m not interested in sex just wanna hang out I like you alot but don’t want sex yet or whatever – If I want sex I suggest it.

        I’m just saying men and women need to speak up more – remove the stupid awkwardness that spoils everything and leaves stacks of question marks and self doubt. Basically it’s about being mature about it. Sex is for adults – we should act like it is.

        • Sting Chameleon

          Asking upfront for sex, even when ‘you see the right signals’ is a recipe for failure and undoubtely triggers buyer’s remorse. And guess who’ll be made into a villiain?.

          You have a rather idealistic view on how the Sexual Game (TM) works, it’s a whole lot of ‘shouldas’ and ‘haftas’ with no grounding in reality.

    • Agapao

      Your post is giving me ideas. I am a single guy just out of a relationship. It is interesting, I got into this relationship by accident. I was intending to wait until marriage. I will now. When in the relationship I was often trying to get out of it. Anyway I want to say that my problem was not getting a girl but realizing I only wanted one under certain conditions-i.e. take the pressure off myself, pressure that culture created. I remember as a younger man deciding to wait until marriage for sex butmy brother’s friend made a comment not to wait, and I kind of bought it, and regret it, seven women later, who didn’t really blow my mind. I do believing that waiting will mean that attachment formed will be much stronger and secure, especially also if man has foreskin, which increases sex value.So for me the key is making peace with myself that I want sex and especially the emotional needs that it provides in full force-acceptance, admiration, approval, respect that women have always given me in sex. It’s that that does it for me, not the vagina itself and I could have gotten it other ways but it was about “scoring” I realize now. Personally I didn’t fail with women at first in my life because I didn’t know how to talk to them or lacked confidence. I think I failed because I lacked desire, for these particular women, in these particular circumstances. I did have some heartbreaks but that’s another story. But that’s not what I wanted to post about. It seems to me by consensus that many men here are feeling the same as I am, we could give up sex if necessary, although that may not be ideal. We can’t maybe give up respect and acceptance by a woman but we can get that platonically. So a theory popped into my mind in keeping with the EP theme. Since perhaps men in many species are either winners or losers, they are adapted to be able to be celibate and psychologically fine, whereas a woman wiht that ability would be maladaptive, so women are more sexual than men of necessity. It’s just an idea, and I agree overall with TBs post. At least it got me thinking deeply and changing some things. It is a complex multi-faceted topic for sure. Maybe we can compromise. Women don’t chase or need every man equally so the penis is not worth the same, but then men don’t need the pussy either because getting with the right women (monogamous or with few partners) increases their chancesof reproduction (that whole 1/10th versus 1/2 thing). So in a nutshell, even if women don’t respect the man’s penis, it doesn’t mean he has to respect her vagina equally either. stalemate. Besides, let us not forget, it’s far more than just about genitals. It is about the whole person, and the resources and care one can provide, but as long as we are playing the game of reductionism..
      I am just glad we are thinking about this. I definitely think we ahave succeeded in busting stereotypes about men thinking only about sex and the pussy having power over the mind of man. Maybe it’s projection? Lastly I think regarding sex, it’s not about the physical but is one of the main delivery mechanisms for the greastest things like trust and acceptance (opening your legs for him, approval (orgasm and pleasure), submission and caring, etc. So this means men don’t think with their cock and their heart opens up, but they think with their heart and their cock gets hard. I find this whole subject here highly HUMANIZING for men. I found that I busted a myth that has haunted me since I checked out PUA years ago and read David Deangelo. Now I feel I am free again aand on a theoretical level. I was into raw foods and it didn’t work for me, and it wasn’t until I read Richard Wrangham that gave me the theoretical foundation to make sense of why cooked food was natural and I relaxed more. I’m a funny guy but it’s nice to have theoretical support for your experiences to not feel crazy. This article is like a bombshell to me that went off just today and is going off gradually. I find it humanizing and allows me to bring back forgotten experiences and see them in a new light and in fullness, like how I don’t particularily like feeling drained and empty after sex – in my penis I mean- unless I felt the woman was worth it, in her character and that I loved her. Ideally I would love to have a marriage relationship like TB has here. Something sweet and classic. But yeah I am able to validate my feelings and now a lot of shifts are happening in my mind and it is psychological and even sexual healing. sometimes the key to mental healing is just information. This all just happened today. In fact it’s been a really interesting few months, but that’s a long story.

      • Bombay

        This reminds me of a situation my friend (John) was in. Two of his friends were dating (Jack and Jill). Jill was most interested in marrying Jack, but Jack did not want sex before marriage. So, Jill became John’s fuck buddy until she married Jack. Jack got what he wanted and Jill was satisfied until she got married. Neither John or Jill told Jack and he is most happy having saved himself for marriage. Something to think about……….

      • Kimski

        “Maybe it’s projection?”

        Let me put it this way:
        I would take that bet, even if I were starving and down to the last dollar I’d ever have in my hand.

  • echofoxtrot

    Dear Typhon Blue:

    You make many excellent points, but the point captioned below – about men giving themselves the orgasm – has been made to look bad by the feminists: their accusation is that men are using a vagina to masturbate. How would you rebut that accusation? Thanks very much.

    <>

    • John A

      If a woman thinks she is being treated like a blow up doll, maybe she is behaving like one…

      • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

        This. Men do not want to have sex with a masturbatory aid. They want to have sex with a human.

        The only real answer to these kinds of accusations is to point out that men are human beings too.

        • John A

          I would say that if men wanted to have sex with a masturbatory aid they would, if they have sex with a human it is probably because they want to have sex with a human. There is nothing better than giving and receiving pleasure.

          From my experience if the woman isn’t interested then you may as well focus on yourself and get it over with. If she is interested then things are a whole lot better… I’d add if a woman repeatedly has this experience then the first place to look is in the mirror. The less a woman does the more the man has to do. (and visa versa)

          Intimacy requires trust and playing games with someone’s head doesn’t engender trust.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            The problem is that the accusation presumes a lack of humanity on the part of men.

            In some cases I think men are better off saying ‘I’m not going to discuss this topic with someone who is unconvinced of my humanity’ then even giving the argument legitimacy by engaging with it on a rational level.

        • jack

          Men do not want to have sex with a masturbatory aid.

          I wouldn’t mind switching to sexbots once the technology is mature. For example:

          http://www.ultimatdoll.com/

          Sexbots are the next big thing. Feminists are already seeking a ban on them. In a not too distant future men will travel to countries where the ban doesn’t obtain.

          A pity they will be banned in the West. Fancy swingers’ parties where men bring along their own personalised sexbot!

          • Sting Chameleon

            Personally I look forward to biologically augmented sex-workers with perfectly sculpted bodies and a ‘memory-filter’ rig so they wouldn’t remember any details of the encounter after the fact, or your face. But then again, this is me reading too much sci-fi and watching too much GiTs .

      • JFinn

        If men really objectified women during sex, they wouldn’t want women to make any sounds. In fact, men are turned on by women who wildly express pleasure.

        • John A

          There’s nothing better, but realism is required.

          • jack

            Speaking for myself nothing turns me on like a fake orgasm. I mean a real faker that all the solo wankers in the motel dismiss as definitely not real. You should be grateful to any woman who fakes. Think about it: “she’s putting on all that show, just for you”. What better proof she really cares? And it’s not like a fake orgasm would be something a woman reproduced from X-rated movies she saw. No, each faking woman has her own personal way of faking it. I would even say a woman’s faking pattern is her true self, if there can be such a thing in a woman that is.

  • Malestrom

    I’m not sold, the market price is the market price there is no way around it.

    I agree with Demonspawn, the fact that abundant resources pushes up the value of females is irrelavent because the fact is we have abundant resources. Droughts push up the price of grain, so what? You want grain you pay the market price or you don’t get your grain.

    • John A

      To use the economic term, women have formed a cartel. Men need to demand an open market. Feminism claims to be braking the Patriarchy cartel, however the reality is they are just trying to make the women’s cartel more agreeable for them.

      It’s not just market forces, it’s market manipulation.

      • Malestrom

        Cartels only function if you have complete control of a rare resource (which women do not) or special protections from the state (which they have to only a minor degree in this regard).

        There is something to be said for the government support of single mothers and their children distorting the market in favour of promiscuous mating with alpha males (of whom there are few) who don’t even bother with the pretense that they’ll stick around, but honestly I don’t think this makes that much difference. The fact is that today survival is very easy, it would remain so even if we did away with all forms of welfare. That is the real reason for the surge in female power relative to men; there aren’t any threats or shortages.

  • John A

    Great post Typhonblue, as usual you turn conventional thinking on its head.

  • externalangst

    In the nineties, there was a feminist campaign from the main stream media (Oz ABC radio) of how sexist it was that women traditionally weren’t suppose to approach the man. Women were being encouraged to ask and approach men. Besides, they reasoned, it will be so much nicer when women do it.

    It subsequently occurred that a couple of women did make an approach to me. Being a red pill MGHOW, I declined as nicely and politely as I could. I tried to be empathetic knowing how difficult approaching women can be for many men. On both occasions, the response was a torrent of abuse. You know the routine – gay, fag etc. – then storming off in a huff.

    This particular media campaign only lasted briefly – about 6 months. The revised feminist Radio National spiel was that men should do the approaching; because men were predatory whereas women weren’t.

    Women can be nice on the approach – but if refused – look out! TB’s OP is excellent but we might need some more re-education before this superior feminist-proclaimed niceness is realized. I agree with the OP that reform is possible & desirable. This anger and gracelessness, likely born of a superiority complex, may be quite culturally promoted. An MRA once pointed out the superior negotiating position that being the one who is approached provides.

    • Sting Chameleon

      They react that way because they truly believe they’re better than us and that we’re mindless sex-crazed beasts who won’t turn down such a generous offer. Hell, our own male peers encourage us to cultivate that mentality (pussy is pussy bro, don’t be so picky!!!111)

  • MrStodern

    I especially enjoy the articles here written by women who have compassion for men. There are truly too few of you. Thank you.

    I came to a realization recently, one that has gone a long way towards healing much of my pain, and releasing an incredible amount of pressure. And that is that a pussy is just a hole. It may be a soft, warm, velvety hole, designed specifically to be very enticing to a man’s penis, but it is a hole nonetheless. It may be able to hold objects, but power is not an object, nor is it something a pussy can hold.

    An individual can have power, though, and this realization, this new-found attitude, this perspective, has helped me take back the power I gave away long ago when I decided to act like all other the guys around me and become so depressed when I’m not getting laid. I’ve realized that I was not being true to myself when, while looking at porn, and/or pleasuring myself, I would think about the fact that I’ve never known what it’s like to be pleasured by a woman, and want to cry. The fact of the matter is that I felt like that not because I honestly held the act of getting sex from a woman in such high regard, but because 99% of the men I’ve been surrounded by have tried their best to pressure all the other men around them to get laid if they want to be looked at as anything other than a loser.

    I am not a loser for being a virgin pushing 30. I WAS a loser for putting so much focus on achieving orgasm through use of a woman’s body. Funny thing is, I don’t think I would’ve ever seen just how unnecessary women are to achieving sexual gratification, just how inconsequential the road to climax really is were I to be remotely experienced in sex, were I to know what I was missing.

    This is not something I tell myself so that I won’t feel lonely or depressed. This is not denial of any pain, this is release from it. I’m not making excuses for my failure at getting laid, I’m putting an end to my failure at self-ownership. Being the kind of man who can score pussy any time he wants is not a worthwhile endeavor. Being the kind of man who can enjoy an orgasm, regardless of the circumstances in which it is reached, is.

    That is my focus now. Orgasm. Not orgasm with a woman. Just orgasm. It is the ultimate form of self-ownership, of empowerment, of freedom. I reject society’s assessment of me as a lonely, bitter, incompetent little boy jacking off in a puddle of his own tears. I reject pressure to fall in line, to “be a man” and impress the ladies so they’ll spread their legs for me. I don’t need them to bust a nut, I never have, and I never will. I can have fun on my own, and I will, not because no one wants to play with me, but because I simply am able to have fun by myself, and simply don’t need them.

    It doesn’t matter if I go my whole life being alone. It doesn’t matter what other men call me, how hard they try to make me feel like shit for not being like them. They can put as much reverence in pussy as they like. It’s just a hole. My Fleshlights are holes too, and they work just fine. Who cares if they’re not a part of someone else’s body? All the better, since now I don’t have to pretend that I don’t want to fuck the shit out of it in order to do so. I just soak the thing in warm water, put on a porno, and I’m off to the races.

    Forget chasing pussy. Cherish your friends. When’s the last time pussy had your back in a fight? I thought so.

    • Shrek6

      MrStodern, there isn’t any shame in being a virgin at any age. Don’t believe the crap that others may say about those who are virgins. And believe it or not, in religious circles, a male virgin is revered and respected as much as a female virgin. It is in the Christian circle I move within.

      Even if we forget about the religious point of view. Just because you have chosen to remain a virgin, simply because you have not yet found anyone worthy of you, is nothing to be scoffed at.

      Yeah, I guess you could be a bit too picky, but maybe you just haven’t been looking hard enough. Only you know this.

      Or, more to the truth, you have met a lot of women, but because women today are so full of crap, it is so damn hard to find one that is not an abusive parasite of some sort. Once you meet one of those and put your penis in them, you are gone. So keeping your penis locked up for that reason, is not only bloody smart, it is indeed admirable.

      And you don’t need to be lonely, just because you live alone. If your life is filled with family and Mates, then why would you want to change it. You would only regret having a woman if you are happy with the current situation.

      I don’t want to put a downer on anyone who wants a relationship, but it is bloody hard work. Women demand more than double out of the relationship than what men do and more than double of what they put into the relationship. Hence the reason I call them parasites.

      Stand proud Brother. You won’t be mocked here!

      • kiwihelen

        Many but not all women demand double out of a relationship.

        Maybe this is my problem, but I get loads of flack from other women that I won’t give up my well-paid and enjoyable job to shift continents to be with my beloved.

        Uhhhh…I value my economic independence. He’s plenty busy being a 50:50 father and fending off his CBex who needs a mood stabiliser. We might be making the telecoms shares increase but we have a good relationship despite considerable challenges.
        You ask where/how to find good women. Here’s the rub – if I ever were single again, I would not be out looking, my church/band/sport/craft/cats fill my life outside work nicely. I can look after my own orgasms and I’ve got several friends who I can hug on a regular basis. I’ve even got 2 I can bed share with if that need arose.
        Finding the good uns is difficult because they are WGTOWs.

      • MrStodern

        Well, I will tell you that from puberty on up to this year, I did not understand what it took to gain access to the kind of pussy I wanted. That is, pussy belonging to at least decent-looking women who don’t smoke, or have kids, or have a background I should be alarmed about. I didn’t know that being rich, or famous, or powerful was the ultimate turn-on. Or rather, I didn’t WANT to believe that. But it’s true. I’ve seen it for myself.

        Previously, when it came to just getting laid, because I succumbed so deeply to the “Get pussy or die!” attitude, I didn’t put much thought into any other aspects of typical American women. I just wanted the pussy, you see, because that’s what every man told me to want. Well, not entirely because they told me to want it. I obviously had hormones motivating me to an extent, but really, hormones can tell me to get laid all they want to, if I stay at home and jerk off, the hormones shut up for awhile just the same as they would if I actually went out and got laid. The only difference is that if I stay at home and jerk off, I save money, time, and frustration. Don’t see how that could possibly be a bad trade off unless you’re a complete and utter slave to the pussy.

        To make this clear, I’m not necessarily saying I’ll never have sex. It’s just that when and if I do, it will be on my terms, and it won’t be brought about because 99% of other men can’t stand the thought of having an orgasm without using a woman. It’ll be because the circumstances were ideal. I’m not talking planet alignment type shit, but I don’t subscribe to the “Pussy is pussy” school of thought, so I’m going to require more than just a pussy being within reach.

        I’m not really saving myself either, though these days, for men, that’s not a bad idea in the least.

        I recognize now that a good 90% of my genuine, non-conditioned interest in sex is steeped in the fact that it would be so new to me, that I’m so unfamiliar with the sensations. Once that’s gone, because I already know that a pussy is just a hole, I’ll probably lose much of my interest. I’d prefer that, really, because even though I’m pretty free from the so-called “power” of the pussy, my hormones prevent me from cutting the cord completely. Meaning, pussy can’t make me do anything but, for example, check out some hot girl’s ass as she walks by, and I’d like to excise that kind of thing from my behavior as well. I miss the days before my hormones starting making me act like an asshole and distracting me from my hobbies.

        • Sting Chameleon

          It’s less about the pussy and more about of the validation and sense of accomplishment. Which is a rather toxic and malevolent mindset that was foisted upon us so we’d perform like good little drones. Any man can go visit a prostitute to get sexual release, but it will not get him the much-needed validation as a man (Hey, I managed to bed a hot woman for free because I’m awesome like that!), or the sense of accomplishment (Hey guys, check this out: I bagged this hottie everyone was gunning for and beat them all to the punch lol)

        • Sting Chameleon

          The urge will subside once you actually do it. Trust me, been there, done that, bought the T-shirt.

  • tallwheel

    I’ve been taught to believe my penis has no worth unless it is loved by at least one pussy.

    • Shrek6

      Who cares what others think about our penises.

      Even if it isn’t being used by some female, you can still use it for its other MOST important use, which is as a siphon hose.
      It’s good fun being able to stand up and try to shoot the fly on the urinal in a public toilet. I’d like to see pussy achieve that!

      • kiwihelen

        My only reason for penis envy is trying to have a piss on the top of a mountain in a howling gale… a peewee is a poor substitute for proper natural siphon plumbing ;)

  • Stu

    Well it looks like this thread opened a can of worms. :)

    I suppose many regular readers have probably suspected that I’m a pretty open minded guy. That’s pretty much an understatement. Been there, done that, in fact I pretty much lead a double life and have been so immersed in the social sex scene for so long that it all seems so normal to me that it’s almost unremarkable.

    I pretty much ditched the couples party scene many years ago for the reasons samantha77 was talking about. Not that I ever had any shortage of women to partner me, I actually had so many that I was doing little else except playing whenever I wasn’t working. The couples party scene has a lot of women in it that are a bit like slutwalkers. Look at me and desire me, but then they be really cold and bitchy towards all but the very few guys they like.

    I know a lot of women like samantha77. And frankly I’d say they are among the nicest and safest women I’ve ever known. I can’t think of one that I’ve known that I would say would be dangerous to men. In fact they seem to be the women that are the most comfortable with men and have the least fear of bad feelings towards men of any of the women I’ve ever known.

    My wife was one of my many friends with benefits for years before she finally got me to let her move in with me. She wasn’t a big player when she met me, but she knew I was and she seemed drawn to me anyway. We had a pretty wild sex life, still have, although a lot less frequent activity now partly due to age, but mostly because of the fact that two of her teenage kids live with us now. So no fooling around at home unless they are away for a weekend.

    We still get out to a hardcore sex party now and then, and we have our friends. And there is a lot more to this then sex, in fact, one of the big drivers for me, was the intimacy I found in the scene. I had many female friends that I could just put my arm around, cuddle up to, take a shower with. I don’t know how many men have noticed this, but men only have affection with women they have sex with. If you aren’t having sex with a women, the chances are you aren’t allowed to touch her. I don’t mean like a quick hug and peck on the cheek on birthdays. How many women that you aren’t fucking, will just lay on the couch and use your lap like a pillow and watch a movie. How many women have you not been fucking will give you a massage if you back is hurting.

    If you are like most men, pretty much the only real affection and intimacy you have in your life is from a woman you are having sex with and to the exclusion of everyone else. I have friends with benefits that I’ve seen for up to 12 years, and still see. And you can bet your arse they are intimate, not just sexual.

    So how did I end up with Kaz. Well she just hang around and hang around so much that it was like she was living with me half the time anyway. And of course she pushed and pestered after a couple of years. My fear was that she would want everything to change if we got together, even though she was enjoying our lifestyle as much as I, I was really apprehensive about ever letting a woman live with me again. Oh well, so here I am, another fine mess she’s got me into. But she’s been the best wife or girlfriend I’ve had, and the only problems we’ve had have been to do with her teenage kids. She has a tendency to mother them too much and spoil them. Always trying to mother me too. But I guess you can’t have any relationship without a few grips about things and basically I’m a pretty happy guy.

    Not happy about the nightmare marriage has become for most men though, and not happy about all the laws being made.

    • MrStodern

      Your comment on women who are not fucking you not wanting to touch you at all is something I can vouch for.

      Of course, I have intimacy issues to begin with, so I’m not any better than those women who are pretty reluctant to go massaging the back of a man they’re not having sex with, or at least interested in having sex with.

    • Sting Chameleon

      Well I guess it’s a cultural and generational thing, younger women in my country aren’t too upset about touching/hugging them even if you aren’t fucking them.

  • Carlos

    Flop their shit up… LMAO.

    Another fine article.

    The performance expectations placed upon men that you have been so insightfully writing about have given me much to reflect upon recently.

    I also appreciate the injection of humor and imagery into the delivery through the use of phrases like “performing monkey.”

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      The irony being that even male monkeys don’t ‘preform’. They’re picky too! ;)

      • yurlungur

        Female Chimpanzees are very horny.
        What ever has causes this is turned off by large in female women ,but sometimes for some unknown reason it gets turned on. If it where turned on I don’t think men would bother getting married.

        • Stu

          It was turned off by necessity. In days without the pill or condoms, and life threatening illness could be passed on by mere contact, the results of allowing people to act on their sexual urges would be, no families, and no civilization. If women were naturally monogamous, why was in necessary to construct all these moral and legal codes. Why do some cultures just flat out kill those that don’t adhere to the monogamous model. The only reason I can think of is because monogamy was essential in order to get men to pair up, and commit to protecting and providing for families. But if women were naturally monogamous, then why did we need such harsh penalties for non-conformity.

          Obviously they were needed because without them, women would not be monogamous. These moral and legal codes were constructed to curb natural behavior. If the behavior they were trying to construct was natural, they wouldn’t need all these sanctions. And lets face it, even with all that, there are swinging couples and single sluts in Saudi Arabia and Iran. I used to chat a bit to some Iranian women and they had attended sex parties in Iran. I have also chatted to a Saudi couple that live in Saudi Arabia who are swingers.

          The pill I believe, although making it possible for women to have unrestrained sex lives without pregnancy, also seems to lower a woman’s libido and sexual responsiveness. I’ve known quite a few women who’s libido went up, after menopause, and after they stopped taking the pill. I think this is actually because estrogen opposes some of the actions of testosterone, which is the driver of female libido. So lower estrogen levels allow the testosterone to exert more influence.

          I’ve noticed the same thing with women over thirty. Their libido my not actually be higher overall, but their inhibitions seems to be less. I’ve seldom seen totally hardcore fuck bunnies under 30yo at swingers parties. The younger women mostly seem to be stuck in slutwalker mode, big on advertising, lite on delivery. Women seem to become much more sexually laid back and a lot more adventurous as they get older

          Sure there are young women there, but they are the least active and make up the majority of the spectators, along with their partners of course.

          I think you are right, that if all women were hardcore amateur porn stars, most men would not get married, with marriage as it is now that is. There is no doubt about it, the instinctive urge in men to acquire exclusive use of a a vagina is driving men to keep entering into these relationships even though they spell little more then doom for them. Short of the collapse of civilization or at least massive economic depression, things are not going back to the way they were though. This is probably a very hard and bitter additional red pill for men to swallow, but women are not what you have been taught they are. And the way forward I believe is to not only demand that women accept men as we are, and stop trying to mold us into utilities. We must also accept women’s true and natural sexual tendencies and find a way to live with each other. Your pig headed determination to acquire monogamy from a woman actually gives them ultimate power over you. They use it like a carrot to lure you into commitment. Men will commit to total bitches just for exclusive use of that pussy. It’s an obsession that has to end before men can be free.

          • John A

            Marriage is like committing to a single supplier who then charges what she wants and delivers when she pleases.

  • yurlungur

    Just found out there is actually a vagina day.
    It was Started by UNICEF and Eve Esler.

    We need a boycott section where we can list all these companies and charity’s that support that kind of crap.

  • JingoStar

    This article is one those articles that hits you like a ton of bricks.

    Sex is where men are fooled into handing over their self-respect and self-determination. Take it back and they have nothing… not a damn thing.

  • Brooke

    No man, I suspect, truly enjoys it when the girl just starfishes it. Certainly, I know that my husband enjoys things a lot more when I’m as active in lovemaking as he is. And when he enjoys himself, it only heightens my enjoyment. And, for both of us, the moments when his cock is moving inside my cunt, although indescribably amazing, are just a part of the whole. An awesome part of the whole, no question, but still only part. He also loves it when I touch, fondle, caress, lick, kiss, suck, his organ. And more than that: if any woman tells me that a man’s erogenous zones are limited to his penis, I assume that they’ve never actually been with a man. There are a lot of other places that my husband loves me to touch him.

    So, yeah, no question. I have as much responsibility to ensure he enjoys our intimacy as much as he has responsibility to ensure that I enjoy myself. And I also have to let him know if I’m not enjoying myself, and he needs to do the same. And that’s part of why, incidentally, long-term committed relationships make a great deal of sense to me. It gives two people an extended period of time, spread over numerous encounters, to learn what makes the other tick sexually. Although, sure, nowadays it’s harder, with a child in the house, to find time to be sexual with each other, the time that we do find is frequently far better in quality than it was when we first got together eight years ago, because we now have eight years of learning about each other sexually under our belts (no pun intended on “under our belts”).

  • Englishwoman

    Well, that’s a new one on me. So it’s unfair that to get access to pussy you have to get the woman whose pussy it is to agree, Typhonblue? You poor sorry baby. The bitches expect to be taken out, treated kindly and with respect. How totally unreasonable is that? How unfair!

    You seem to be saying that your failure – or any man’s failure – to get laid is nothing to do with social skills, no, it’s down to being oppressed by women. My teenage sons wouldn’t be so daft as to blame the women if *they* fail to hook up. Making relationships is a lot like making friends. With your attitude to women you’re bound to be both mad and lonely. Unlike my sons, who both have lovely girlfriends.

    This piece is so weak it barely stands up on its own. Citing a few irrelevant examples of animal behaviour doesn’t make it more credible. In fact quite the opposite is true, in that their inclusion draws attention to the author’s blind spot when it comes to observing human behaviour. Men place far more importance on physical attractiveness than women do, and across history and cultures men have always been highly aroused by women’s bodies. It’s not just sexual contact: men will pay just to *see* a woman’s naked body. This feature of male psychology has effects on women, some good, some bad, but it is not generated by women. Women don’t even need to be present to generate this interest. Men react to images of women’s bodies, or will draw one on a wall. Blaming women for male response is sex offender thinking.

    Came across this site doing that old-fashioned fun thang — web surfing. Got here via atheism. Who knows? This site is insane: about as appealing and rational as the Ku Klux Klan. Women make up half the world, you dingbats. Hating them all as a matter of principle is just pathetic. Initially I was tempted to say “only in America” because your description of dating is totally American, but I see links to other nations too. There are loonies everywhere.

    I explored the blog. Very amused by the piece under Mission. It’s entitled Facts, and indeed it is full of what I’m assuming are facts, but the conclusion is a total nonsense.

    Yes, it’s true that men make up the great majority of military casualties and industrial accidents. It’s also true that men are more likely to be the victims of violent crime than women. But you fail to draw the inevitable conclusion, which is that those one might hold responsible for these deaths are not women, but *men*. Your claim that “Men are the overwhelming majority of rape victims” is moot. Mainstream thinking is that men make up apx 11% of rape victims. The killer point which you ignore) is that regardless of the percentages, the assailants are not women, but men. So where does blaming women fit? Seems that what’s harming men is a largely patriarchal society in which women still don’t have full equality.

    The bottom line on your argument appears to be that men do bad stuff to men. And a small proportion of women do bad stuff to men and boys. This isn’t what anyone could call a coherent, let alone convincing, argument against feminism. It might work if you could claim that all this bad stuff was down to women. But it isn’t. Did you not notice this?

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

      I am afraid you are going to need a lot of help unlearning falsehoods. This site does not “hate women,” although women as a group sometimes are criticized.

      Your argument that men commit most violence and therefore we should not care that men are the majority of victims of violence is nonsenical; this is like saying that because most Canadian victims of violence are assaulted by their fellow Canadians. So what? This means the victims don’t matter? Moreover, it denies the reality of female hypoagency, and the reality that women are routinely excused from their own violence, receiving a discount when it comes to arrest, prosecution, and sentencing when they are violent, or the reality that males are often blamed for the violence of female perpetrators.

      You simply don’t know enough about these issues. If you stick around, however, you just might learn a few things you did not know.

      • kiwihelen

        Do you think we should tell Englishwoman that Typhon is female or let her work it out for herself?

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

          If she sticks around, leaves her prejudices at the door, and has an open mind, maybe she’ll learn a thing or two, Helen.

    • kiwihelen

      Can you point me to whichever page you have read that made you conclude that the guys here hate women?

      There are lots of angry men here. I have no problem with their anger. Hell, I came here because I am angry about how the family courts have treated my beloved. So I guess I count amongst the angry folk who post on AVfM.

      But anger does not equal and has never equaled hate.

    • Sasha

      Hi Englishwoman,

      Firstly, TyphonBlue is a woman (but she can look after herself), secondly; “men do bad stuff to men. And a small proportion of women do bad stuff to men and boys.”

      What proportion? I mean within a reasonable margin of error, can you tell me what proportion of feminists:

      1. Campaign to frustrate efforts to gain for children the legal right to see their father?

      2. Lobby politicians to reverse the presumption of innocence in rape cases?

      3. Work and promote a climate of fear in which men are presumed to be violent rapists?

      4. Actively campaign to deny that domestic abuse and violence against men exists?

      5. Lobby (in the UK) FOR equal pay, but AGAINST an equal state retirement age?

      6. Campaign (in the UK) against government proposals that maternity leave be shared?

      7. Refuse to share a platform (in the UK) with one of the few charities which helps male victims of domestic and sexual abuse, unless it agreed to cease providing services to “lying men who claim a woman is the perpetrator”?

      8. Campaign against the establishment of independent Mens Centres on university campuses?

      9. Campaign on behalf of women who have killed men, who claim to have been victims of domestic abuse, even where the woman’s claims are the only evidence for this?

      10. Produce reports describing fathers as having ‘no special role’, and claiming that ‘many’ are ‘abusive, controlling, and physically violent’?

      There you go, that’s ten. Trust me, I could have gone on.

      So Englishwoman, tell me: what proportion of feminists do any of those ten things?

      20% is it? 50? 100%?

      Right. Well then.

      They’re the bitches we’re talking about, right there.

    • Shrek6

      Hahahahhaha!

      And you a radical feminist thought you’d come here and have a bit of fun, by stirring up all those woman hating men. You even lack the integrity of a feminist who has the backbone and knowledge (not that there are any) to put some convincing argument forward to back up your claims.

      You are the epitome of a radical feminist, you lack substance. And as the others here have already put you squarely in your place, I shall not waste anymore words, except to continue to laugh at your idiocy!

      Hahahhahahahaha!

    • John A

      Well, that’s a new one on me. So it’s unfair that to get access to company directorships you have to get the shareholders it is to agree, Englishwoman?

      So it’s unfair that to get elected to public office you have to get the voters to agree, Englishwoman?

      So it’s unfair that to get access to front line military positions you have to pass the physical, Englishwoman?

      So it’s unfair that to get equal pay for equal work you have to do equal work, Englishwoman?

      And so on…

      Both men and women face structural inequities in their daily lives, however, women get close to 100% of the attention for their problems while the problems men face are ignored or trivialized.

      You just assumed that men here hate women to relieve yourself of the need to examine the issues in depth. Men and women here are simply asking to be treated fairly and the the reason they yell sometimes is because so few will listen.

      The idea that a person of a class is responsible for the actions of others of that class lies at the heart of bigotry and the simple fact that a person is of one gender or another does not entitle them to more or less sympathy for an unprovoked violent attack. Equality – be careful what you wish for.

  • Agapao

    This only confirms what I have sort of known all along deep down, that I am a sexual Stallion!

  • Andromeda09

    Female orgasm or even willing participation in the sexual act is absolutely irrelevant to reproduction. It’s just a bonus perhaps to facilitate the act but it’s not essential. Male orgasm however is essential for reproduction. Truth is men are the ones who perform the sexual act because they have the tool that makes it possible. To rage about why is that is to rage against Nature (God or whatever).

    And still from a biological point of view females give a lot more energy and resources for reproduction with carrying the fetus inside their bodies, later feeding it etc.

  • Andromeda09

    Who got the idea that human males aren’t choosing? LOL then what is this whole female beauty industry for? Seriously i’m very surprised at some of the comments I read, they don’t make much common sense.

  • Tim Taylor

    HAHAHAHAHA! I enjoyed the comments as much as the article. I don’t condone or condemn any point of view on here. I just found all of this amusing. One thing is certain. That is, It has always been a man’s world and it always will be. Camille Paglia, a true feminist, understands this. That doesn’t mean women shouldn’t have equal rights. That doesn’t mean a woman shouldn’t be afforded complete and unconditional respect. What is means is the dumbed-down feminist movement is exactly that. The world needs men to build the bridges, defend women’s honor, protect women and children from harm and when necessary, lead us in battle against the forces of evil. Of course, there is the failure of men to be men which is rampant amongst the ruling class of pussies. Maybe it’s time for real men to lead us into battle to save us all once again.

  • deputy Malachi McCoy

    I had/ have always wondered what a girl’s pussyvagina tasted like???!!!