NEWS FLASH: Women aren’t the mysterious creatures that Nice Guys ™ — and predators — like to pretend that they are

Consent: Not actually that hard to recognize.

Consent: Not actually that hard to recognize.

Blog posts by the New Misogynists I write about here often seem to be little more than combinations and recombinations of a relatively small number of very bad ideas. Today, let’s look at a blog post from a “conservative libertarian” and creepy Nice Guy ™ who identifies himself only as TIC, which combines a bit of “consent is hard” and “women only like bad boys” with some muddled notions from Evo Psych to conclude that women are such mysterious creatures that no one could possibly know what they really want — and so therefore it’s women who are the ones who are really responsible when they get raped.

It’s an argument that bears a strong similarity to the stories rapists tell themselves to excuse their actions. When people describe so-called Nice Guys ™ as creepy, this is why: in a lot of ways, they think like predators. In the case of TIC here, exactly like predators.

TIC starts off by ridiculing the notion that “no means no.”

Women are notorious for always warning men that “no means no”. For us men who have dealt with enough women, we know this to be pure malarkey. If “no” always meant “no”, many men would die virgins. There would also be fewer rapes as a result, because for once women would mean what they said instead of talking in indirect code language.

And now the victim blaming begins in earnest:

Women, many times, bring rape upon themselves. They purposely reject men, even ones they are interested in, in order to get him to chase her. Since women love to be the prize and the center of attention, leading a man on a wild goose chase through all sorts of hoops and mind games is all too common in today’s society.

Now, if this were actually true it would be, well, sort of annoying for straight men who don’t like jumping through hoops. TIC, though, seems to have convinced himself that the fact that some women play coy in the dating world somehow makes it literally impossible for men to tell when and if they’re raping a woman.

What this does is blur the line between what is acceptable for a man to do to a woman and what is not…because once we can all agree that women want to be chased, we can understand what a predicament it puts men into. Since “no” does not always mean “no”, there is no real way for a man to know when to stop his advances upon a woman.

TIC now pulls out some half-baked Evo Psych to bolster his alleged argument:

My theory as to why women give such pieces of advice goes back to dark triad genes or the lack thereof. You see, when a woman tells a man that he should just be himself, or to respect women, or to give them compliments, or that “no means no”, what she is actually doing is bullshitting the male. This is a weeding out mechanism that women use in order to ensure that men who don’t get it never will.

He follows this up with a fairly standard Nice Guy ™ whine.

You see, women do not want nice guys to propagate their genes. They do not wish for them to be successful with women. This is why advice coming from women is never good; it has been sabotaged from the get-go.

Well, actually, If women are telling Nice Guys ™ that “no means no” because they don’t want to have sex with these Nice Guys ™  aren’t these women, however mean you think they are, communicating what they want pretty clearly?

TIC moves on to another standard Nice Guy ™ complaint: that women actually get to turn down men for sex. Never mind that men also have the right to refuse sex with anyone they want. To the dedicated Nice Guy ™, the fact that women can say “no” means that they’re the ones running the show. And doing a terrible job of it, to boot.

Women have the power and control in the dating scene. This is important to note because it means that any and every problem with society in the context of female-male relations falls on the shoulders of women themselves.

And we’re back in Evo Psych-land again:

If women decide to start dating men who are genuine, nice, and honest, then that is what most men will become. Since women, however, are only attracted to males with dark triad genes, that is what most men strive to be. The ones that do not either are alone or being used.

Therefore, women are responsible for getting raped:

[S]ince women have decided to make men chase and act in an overly-aggressive fashion in order to get sex, the rape culture pervades society. Make no mistake about it, women invariably cause most rapes.

Oh, but ladies, TIC isn’t necessarily blaming you personally for being raped. You may be a perfectly virtuous woman. It’s all those other ladies who created the rape culture that got you raped.

Now, this is not to say that specific individuals who are victims of raped caused it or even desired it. The point is that women overall have created an environment in which only sexually aggressive, narcissistic, abrasive men are seen as sexually attractive (these traits are what women interpret as being “confident”).

They have created an environment in which “no” doesn’t mean “no”, it actually means “try harder, keep going, I want to be chased, I want to feel wanted even though you’ve already made it clear that you want me. I want to play games and toy with you until I’m satisfied.”

Huh. I thought women were only interested in aloof dudes who insult them and refuse to buy them drinks, not with supplicating so-called betas falling over themselves to chase women. At least that’s what all the Pickup Artists keep telling me.

But no. In TIC’s world, women are mysterious creatures who delight in mystifying men, and men have no choice but to try, and try, and try again.

Men are constantly placed in awkward, unsure situations because what women want is always esoteric.

If women are so “esoteric” how is it that so many of them manage to end up in relationships with people they love? Surely at some point they must have managed to convey to their partners what they wanted.

Should he approach? If she rejects him, should he continue his advances because that’s what she may want deep down? Who knows?

Who knows? You should know, dude, and if you don’t, you should find out. Seriously, if you honestly can’t tell if a woman wants to make out with you, or have sex with you, or even just watch an episode of Mad Men with you, STOP WHAT YOU’RE DOING and USE WORDS to ASK HER what she wants.

If you ask if she wants to have sex and she says no, assume she means no, and don’t have sex with her. And don’t assume she said “no” because she thinks you’re a spineless beta for asking. Seriously. If a woman really wants to have sex with you, chances are infinitesimally slim that she’s going to change her mind and throw you out simply because you actually asked her if she wants to have sex. (And if she is that sort of person, count your blessings that you’re not dating her, and move on.)

If the woman you’re pursuing is such a flighty game player that for some perverse manipulative reason she won’t say “yes” when she means “yes,” DON’T HAVE SEX WITH HER. Assume that anything short of a clear “yes” is a “no.” And maybe think about dating someone who can communicate what she wants more clearly.

If you assume that ambiguity means no, the worst that can happen is that miss out on having sex with someone who’s up for having sex with you, but who for some reason can’t or won’t tell you what she really wants. A missed chance to have sex is not the end of the world. If, by contrast, you assume that ambiguity means yes, the worst that can happen is that you rape someone. Err on the side of caution. Don’t err on the side of rape.

Unfortunately, like most of those who pretend that consent is somehow more complicated than quantum physics, TIC doesn’t actually seem much interested in figuring out the alleged mysteries of consent. He seems more interested in providing an excuse for men who want to pretend that consent is so hard, and women such mysterious creatures, that they just can’t help raping women.

For many men, leaving things to chance is not an option. They will continue to press the issue in order to find out the woman’s true intentions.

“Press the issue.” That may be the creepiest euphemism for rape I’ve run across yet.

Thus is the nature of women: enablers of the very thing they claim to despise the most.

No, it’s the nature of sexual predators to pretend that a clear verbal “no” from the target of their sexual advances means “keep pushing,” and, indeed, that any response short of a punch in the nose is evidence that their victim “really wants it.”

Rapists like to pretend that they somehow “misunderstood” the signals their victims gave them. But there’s good research showing that this just isn’t true – and that the predators know it. As Thomas Macaulay Millar has pointed out in a much-cited post on the Yes Means Yes blog, predators can read the signals from their victims just fine. It’s just that they don’t like what their victims are trying to tell them – that is, no. “[T]he notion that rape results from miscommunication is just wrong,” Millar writes. “Rape results from a refusal to heed, rather than an inability to understand, a rejection.”

And this is where predators and Nice Guys ™ find common cause. Predators don’t really care what their victims want, and will keep going regardless of whether or not they get a clear message to stop; pretending that women are mysterious creatures unable to convey what they want gives them a perfect excuse for their predatory behavior.

Nice Guys, by contrast, may not actually be confident enough to believe that the women they fixate on will ever say yes to them. And so they’re drawn to the same specious arguments about the alleged “esoteric” nature of women that predators spout — because these half-believed arguments enable them to pretend that ambigious signals — or even flat-out no’s — are yeses in disguise.

TIC’s argument doesn’t explain rape culture. His argument is rape culture.

About David Futrelle

I run the blog We Hunted the Mammoth, which tracks (and mocks) online misogyny. My writing has appeared in a wide variety of places, including Salon,, the Washington Post, the New York Times Book Review and Money magazine. I like cats.

Posted on April 12, 2013, in a woman is always to blame, alpha males, bad boys, beta males, boner rage, creepy, evil sexy ladies, evo psych fairy tales, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, nice guys, oppressed men, playing the victim, PUA, rape, rape culture and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 871 Comments.

  1. RE: katz

    I think I may have attracted a pickup artist to my DA account.

    On DA? Why on earth would a PUA hang out on DA, it’s mostly made up of teenagers and–

    Oh. Goddammit.

    RE: Kittehs

    I made the mistake of using the usual Paypal option instead of the “money to a friend/relative” one when paying gf my half of our hotel money. Mongrels grabbed 20 bucks from it!

    Actually, you need not worry! An anonymous benefactor has swept out of the wings and volunteered to cover the cost of the portrait! You shan’t pay a cent.

    RE: Falconer

    @LBT: Re Smut Peddler — I like Amanda Lafrenais’ work a whole lot, but I’m not familiar with anyone else in the collection.

    Though I don’t own this anthology myself, I want to, in part because I know of a lot of the artists involved with it, and feel pretty safe vouching for the work of Jess Fink, Carla Speed McNeil, Erika Moen, EK Weaver, and Blue Delliquanti. They’re great artists who do great work.

    …man, I’m just realizing how many kickass people I know of due to making comics, even though Jess Fink is the only one I’ve met in person. (She bought a thing from me!)

    Regarding Slipshine, yeah, it’s a grab-bag. Most porn things with a bunch of different creators are, in my opinion. Part of the reason I loved Queerotica so much was that there was only one story I felt any dislike towards; the others ranged from ‘meh’ to ‘OMG THIS IS AMAZING,’ and the latter was more common. (It helped that I personally knew a lot of the creators, so got to congratulate them personally!)

  2. Danielle Corsetto of “Girls with Slingshots” has a bit in Smut Peddler too. She was posting some previews a couple weeks back. GWS is one of the comics in my regular-read bookmarks.

  3. Yeah, basically, Smut Peddler is full of pretty cool people and I’m glad it exists and want to own it myself.

  4. cassandrakitty

    Hey, trolly dude. You’re too heavyset for me, and also too old, so I’d reject you even if you weren’t a creep. Sorry about that!

    Everyone else – damn, this one is dull. Can we return him to the troll store and ask for a refund?

  5. cassandrakitty

    Aw, he left before I could ask him if his farm was directly on the beach.

  6. Actually, you need not worry! An anonymous benefactor has swept out of the wings and volunteered to cover the cost of the portrait! You shan’t pay a cent.

    Wheeeee! Barrel o’ kitty* hugs to anonymous benefactor!

    *or Furrinati of your choice

  7. I kinda wonder if the “play” JS gets is from sex workers. I’m in my 20s and the easiest clients to get are those middle aged. And the whole “I’m a middle aged nice blah blah blah” occurs multiple times daily on my phone. It’s BS. I know it. But guess what? I’m super sweet & I’m super keen! Why? Cos I’m super attracted to the cash you pay to see & touch me. The end. Thanks for playing JS. I’ll see you next booking. Bring the $$$

  8. Contest: If the genitalia commonly associated with women can be called a “secret garden,” what shall we call the genitalia commonly associated with men.

    The one-tree forest that everyone knows about.

  9. Suddenly I’m hearing the Knights of Ni:

    “We want a SHRUBBERY!”

  10. Contest: If the genitalia commonly associated with women can be called a “secret garden,” what shall we call the genitalia commonly associated with men.

    The hanging gardens of babyloin?

  11. …Well played.

  12. The hanging gardens of babyloin?

    Or in the case of our PUA trolls, weeping willows all.

  13. Molly Moon wins the thread!

  14. Some thoughts inspired by J.S.’s meltdown:

    Actually, I’m 6 feet, 180lbs. of charming southern gentlemanly delight.”

    So is every other misogynist on the Internet. *Yawn*

    And a former U.S. Marine.

    So what? Is that supposed to be superior to [insert-any-other-trade-here].

    Okay, here is what “middle-aged former US Marine” makes me think of. You once pursued a physically demanding occupation, where you burned, like, a million calories per day. Then you retired and slowed down, as people tend to do, but your eating habits didn’t change. Given your toxic and obviously imperiled masculinity, I’d venture a guess you consider healthy eating and exercise woman shit and therefore beneath you. All of this has had predictable results for your physical appearance. Not that there is anything wrong with being overweight or out-of-shape (romance-wise). And perhaps I’m wrong about your particular case, for there are exceptions to everything. In any event, for most people whose level of physical activity nosedives, getting fat is just a fact of life, and not a cause for mockery or condemnation. But — and this is as big “but” — as long as you are here trying to prove to us how hot you are by telling us you were in the military back in the early fourteenth century, I have to call you on the BS.

    And I can guarantee you one thing. If any of you ladies ever saw me in person, you’d eat your words.

    Maybe so, but as soon as you opened you mouth, you’d ruin the impression.

    Go buy a Harlequin romance and read it or something.

    While you are reading some stupid shit about goblins on space motorcycles, I suppose. See, I can play this game too. Harlequin romances may be of dubious literary value, but they at least manage some connection with historical reality, unlike the genres more traditionally geared towards males. After all, I sincerely doubt you’ve read any serious books since leaving high school. And as a hardcore classics fan, I find books like LOTR or Dune just as ludicrous as anything Danielle Steel has ever penned. (No personal offense intended to any fan of either genre – seriously.)

    [blah blah blah women are emotional men are logical blah blah blah

    It’s always astounded me how anyone can have the chutzpah to say things like that given how often men stalk, assault and even kill women for rejecting them. The traditional “wisdom” that women are the emotional sex is a prime example of the sexist double-standard. It’s not that men are any less emotional than women, it’s that society permits men to express — sometimes violently — emotions that are typically considered masculine, such as rage, pride, or lust for power. It tolerates “male” emotions by simply not recognizing them as such. A man invades a bunch of countries and kills what, like a hundred million people because of wounded ethnic pride? Nope, not emotional, men still considered the “rational” gender. A woman makes a nasty phone call because she’s upset about a breakup? Proof positive that women are incapable of rational thought.

    Also, J.S. has made some extremely dreary revelations about his marriage. Cliche’d as it may be to say it, I really pity his wife.

  15. Hi, Amused, how’ve you been? Great to see you on site again.

    as long as you are here trying to prove to us how hot you are by telling us you were in the military back in the early fourteenth century, I have to call you on the BS.

    ::snicker:: I’d love to see him trying to get into his armour these days.

  16. If someone could show me where to find a book with goblins riding space motorcycles, I’d be all over that!

  17. Harlequin romances may be of dubious literary value, but they at least manage some connection with historical reality, unlike the genres more traditionally geared towards males.

    One point on this, er, point. Technically, all genres except romances have been geared towards men.

  18. Kittehserf, thanks! Been crazy busy, but I’m still lurking.

  19. Men are logical and women are emotional. Except when men are raging rapemonkeys and women are supposed to rein them in with their vaginas.

  20. Suddenly I’m hearing the Knights of Ni:

    “We want a SHRUBBERY!”

    Or Agathean Bush-I-Do warriors:


  21. Am I the only one who sees most replies here are off topic?

    You may speak for American women who are exceptionally strong and boldly expressive in situations where other females would rather be shy and reserved, But not all societies of the world are like America.

    Relationship between male and female (whether a mere conversation or sexual intercourse) is the natural compatibility between logical thinking (masculine instincts) and emotional reasoning (feminine spirituality). This in all cases is too complicated to be brought into legal context.

    In my experience, most women (including Americans) do not know what they really want. They just go along with things according to how it feels. If it feels right, they continue, if it doesn’t, they back down. So let’s deal with some real natural facts here…

  22. That’s nice, dear. Now go away, you need to be a lot sharper to play here.

  23. Instincts are so logical.

    Thanks, troll! I would be lost without that bit of crucial information about reasoning. The next proof I submit to my mathmatics prof can now officially be:

    The given logically leads to the statement’s truthiness, because my gut instinct says so.



  24. Buttercup Q. Skullpants

    In my experience, most women (including Americans) do not know what they really want. They just go along with things according to how it feels. If it feels right, they continue, if it doesn’t, they back down. So let’s deal with some real natural facts here…

    It’s called “agency”. It’s a basic feature of being a human being. Did you wear the blue shirt instead of the green shirt today? Ordered steak instead of shrimp at the restaurant? Went inside when it started to rain? Congratulations, you’re doing things according to “how it feels”.

    I don’t know why this is such a shock when women do it. We’re not pieces of machinery that suddenly went berserk, slipped off our “natural” programming, and decided we wanted to be toasters instead of tractors. We’re human beings. We have preferences and aversions just like you do. We act on them. Insisting that women when women do this, they are being “emotional” (read: inferior) is a misuse of that logic you so pride yourself on.

    If women everywhere (not just Americans) are failing to conform to the idealized version you have of them inside your head, perhaps it’s time to apply Occam’s Razor and ask yourself which is more likely: that millions and millions of women are subverting nature and acting against their own best interests, or your fantasy of how Women Should Be is inaccurate.

  25. John: And, of course, you have evidence and research to back up your assfax….

  26. John,
    Go whine to people who care about your vapid opinions.

  27. Feminine spirituality? I guess as an atheist monist materialist I’m doing womaning wrong!? It’s so nice to be able to come here every day and learn from our very logical and not at all biased trolls all the ways I’m not doing this woman thing properly. Thank you trolls for imparting your manly wisdom!

  28. John, no one curr about your “experience.” Truly.

  29. If women were really all like this, and men really all like that, we wouldn’t need social expectations, restrictions and stereotypes, because then such a “division” would occur naturally. The fact that we do have these at times tightly enforced social restrictions shows that this is not the case, that these “divisions” have to be artificially created.

  30. In my experience, most women (including Americans) do not know what they really want. They just go along with things according to how it feels. If it feels right, they continue, if it doesn’t, they back down

    Yeah… so true. That’s exactly why I decided to get my PhD because rejection and criticism feel so good, it keeps me getting up in the morning.

    If you’re just talking about relationships, wouldn’t following your feelings make a certain LOGICAL sense, anyway. If you look at relationships as logical transactions that must be a deeply passionate connection, kudos.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 16,504 other followers

%d bloggers like this: