>
 |
| Pablo Picasso had a way with the ladies. |
“Well some people try to pick up girls, and get called assholes,” the song goes. “This never happened to Pablo Picasso. He could walk down your street, and girls could not resist his stare. … Pablo Picasso was never called an asshole.” This is more or less true, even though, by almost every account, Picasso was pretty much a complete douchebag.
Life is unfair. Famous men can behave like utter boors and predators towards the opposite sex and get away with it, even win reputations as charming ladykillers. The rest of us, well, we make awkward passes and often get rejected; sometimes we even get called creeps. This makes some men bitter; a few even become Men’s Rights Activists.
In a recent article on AlterNet, feminist sex blogger Clarisse Thorn offers a defense, of sorts, of men unfairly labelled “creeps.” “Why Do We Demonize Men Who Are Honest About Their Sexual Needs?” the article’s title asks, and it’s not a bad question. Women are naturally, and quite justifiably, wary of the attention of strange men, who could easily turn out to be predators. “So it’s completely understandable that we’re all on high alert for predatory expressions of male sexuality,” she writes. What this means is that perfectly decent guys are sometimes seen as creeps until proven innocent.
Her solution? We need to “accept male desire” as natural and legitimate — not something “toxic,” or some kind of macho accomplishment:
It’s hard to disagree with that. I worry, though, that many of the guys in Thorn’s intended audience will only notice the bit about male sexuality being “hot, awesome, delicious and valuable,” and miss her careful caveats about consent — which she repeats three times in two sentences in an attempt to drive home the point. Unfortunately, as Amanda Marcotte puts it in a response to Thorn’s piece:
Looking through the comments Thorn’s article got on AlterNet, Marcotte finds ample evidence of this kind of creepiness — men with both a sense of entitlement and a massive amount of self-pity. That toxic attitude shows up as well in a comment from the perhaps aptly named “jackwripper” in a discussion of Thorn’s piece in the Men’s Rights subreddit on Reddit:
It’s a bizarre and insidious sort of argument: Women need to start having sex with men they don’t want to have sex with, because otherwise some men will have to go through life alone — or, I guess, with “2s” who aren’t too stuck up to go out with them. Why exactly is it women’s job to “fix this?” Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.
Jackwripper’s argument eerily echoes the logic of George Sodini, the bitter, dateless antifeminist asshole who shot 12 women in a health club last year because he felt young women had unfairly rejected him. And so it’s perhaps not surprising that Sodini had his defenders in the MRA/pickup artist crowd. As one fan of Sodini put it in a comment at the time on a PUA blog popular with MRAs:
So, women, the message is clear: Date some losers, or someone is going to get shot.
No one “deserves” to get laid. If you’re a creepy asshole who doesn’t understand that any woman is allowed to turn you down for sex, for whatever reason she wants, however stupid it might seem to you, then you don’t deserve shit.
>No one "deserves" to get laid. If you're a creepy asshole who doesn't understand that any woman is allowed to turn you down for sex, for whatever reason she wants, however stupid it might seem to you, then you don't deserve shit.Just because it needed to be said again.
>You are right manboobz. Instead of challenging the stereotypes about male sexuality, like Clarisse suggested, we just continue to render it as predatory and toxic. Because so far that worked out so well. Oh wait…
>"Women are naturally, and quite justifiably, wary of the attention of strange men, who could easily turn out to be predators."Easily turn out to be predators?Crap.The majority of men are NOT any of the following:rapistspedophilesstalkersAgain, you are playing on a latent fear the feminism has installed on people – by constantly focusing only on the "bad" men in society – and never the good.The good that men do greatly outweighs the bad that men do.The number of bad men is minuscule compared to the number of good men."No one "deserves" to get laid. If you're a creepy asshole who doesn't understand that any woman is allowed to turn you down for sex, for whatever reason she wants, however stupid it might seem to you, then you don't deserve shit. ""No one 'deserves' to get married. If you're a psychotic bitch or entitlement princess who doesn't understand that any man is allowed to 'be afraid of commitment' for whatever reason he wants, however stupid it might seem to you, then you don't deserve shit."
>ScareCrow,Let's say I meet a man. A random man. And he invites me up to his apartment for a drink. And I go – because I want a drink, and to get to know him better, and hey, most guys are good guys, right?And he beats me and rapes me. And what I will probably hear from everyone – the papers, the police, the attorneys (if it ever goes to trial) is that it was my fault for going up to his apartment. So. I HAVE to treat every guy as if he were a potential rapist, not accept his offers, test him carefully…otherwise, when and if something happens, I will get blamed – not him.Women have no way of knowing which guys are rapists – unfortunately, rapists don't go around with identifying tattoos. So we have to treat all strange men cautiously – or suffer the consequences.And no – it's not fun. And we don't enjoy it. And believe you me I'd be a much bigger slut than I am today (and I am a slut, and proud of it), if I didn't have to be so careful around strange men. But we still have to do it, 'cause The Patriarchy sucks ass. Does that make it clearer?
>It isn't about majority. It is about a small minority and a calculated risk. The number of bad men is minuscule compared to the number of good men. The number of bad people is minuscule compared to the number of good people.This does not remove the risk of the bad, or make caution unnecessary.
>I actually felt really frustrated by Amanda Marcotte's article, mostly because of this:Clarisse is critical of the word “creep”, and she compares it to “slut”, which is to say a term used to police sexuality. Her evidence for this is that she got an email from a dude offering to fuck her in specific kinky ways after she wrote an article about her struggles to come to terms with desires she was deliberately vague about. The guy correctly guessed what those were and offered to fuck her, sight unseen, and she blew him off and determined he was creepy. Then millennia of patriarchal training kicked in, and she started to feel guilty about getting a weird feeling from it.Firstly, my "evidence" had nothing to do with that anecdote, which was intended to be an illustration rather than evidence. My evidence was the many actual men who I've talked to about this, and I clearly linked to those discussions.But worse, I'm really mad that Marcotte decided to dismiss my argument because of — wait for it — "millennia of patriarchal training". Apparently, if I reconsider my stance on any topic, it's only okay if I do so in line with popular feminism. If I'm not in line with popular feminism, then I've got Patriarchy Stockholm Syndrome. Where have I heard this argument before? Oh, right … EVERY FEMINIST CONVERSATION ABOUT S&M, EVER.That having been said, I did agree with Marcotte about a lot of the AlterNet comments, and I do agree with your basic argument: that women aren't required to be having sex with men if they don't want to. In fact, NO ONE is required to be having sex with ANYONE ELSE if they don't want to do it.Obviously, I do think that we should be having open, friendly, reasonable conversations about male sexuality. Everything I said in my article still applies. And I don't actually think that most disenchanted men truly want to be having sex with women who aren't interested. But there are clearly some outliers, like George Sodini and his fans, who are too busy blaming women for their own romantic losses to understand that pressuring women into having unwanted sex isn't the solution either. And the threat of violence on top of that is truly scary.
>@Gillian.A friend of mine recently became a police officer. They told him that only 3% of the population engages in criminal behavior.This means (that if the entire 3% are men), a woman has a way less than 3% chance of that happening to her (since not all 3% include crimes against women).That being said, here is a quote from you:"And he beats me and rapes me. And what I will probably hear from everyone – the papers, the police, the attorneys (if it ever goes to trial) is that it was my fault for going up to his apartment."What effing planet are you from?Ever heard of the Duke Lacrosse players?All it takes is an accusation from a woman to start a downward spiral of male-bashing in the media against any man that has an accusation against him.Do yourself a favor:Get out of your house or apartment once in a while – meet a guy – and get laid.No, seriously – get laid.Actually have a penis inserted in you.Trust me – you'll like it – and – it will make you happier – refer to this link:http://manboobz.blogspot.com/2010/09/no-sperm-no-peace-crazy-mra-quote-of.html
>"Marcotte finds ample evidence of this kind of creepiness — men with both a sense of entitlement and a massive amount of self-pity."Here's one of her examples, quoted more fullyLNot all guys are just looking for someone to share their bed with. I have been married for 28 years, obviously, no lack of a source to get off with sexually, but I have been almost to the point of suicide because of lonliness in the marriage.The problem lies in the fact that we no longer have anything in common. We have grown in different directions. As we are no longer friends, the desire to have sexual relations has disappeared at the same time.I really think that older guys would and do enjoy women of the same age. Older, more mature women seem to understand and appreciate a deeper relationship that involves sharing lives rather than just genitals. At least for me, the next lady I find myself will not only be a partner for sex, but my very best friend that I enjoy spending my every minute with. *That*, IMHO, is a solid and enjoyable relationship.What's creepy about that? He seems like a genuinely nice person, respectful of women, not treating them only as sex-objects. It's a shame about the marriage, but that's how they go sometimes. Notice that he does not blame his wife for the failure. I have no doubt that had a woman written that in a feminist space, she would get nothing but sympathy.Marcotte however see's a problem with this part specifically:The problem lies in the fact that we no longer have anything in common. We have grown in different directions. As we are no longer friends, the desire to have sexual relations has disappeared at the same time.According to Marcotte, this is "a line to be rolled out to women he’s hitting on who notice his wedding ring tan line". Why does she think that? Because even when a guy come across as genuinely nice, he's still a creep.Marcotte epitomises the very attitude that Clarisse is critiquing.
>"This means (that if the entire 3% are men), a woman has a way less than 3% chance of that happening to her (since not all 3% include crimes against women)."No, because a single perp can have many victims."No, seriously – get laid.Actually have a penis inserted in you."That's a vile comment. Disgraceful.
>Daran, you're right; that quote was totally taken out of context and misrepresented. You should post something about it on the comments to Marcotte's piece. If not, I will. Scarecrow, you can say whatever the fuck you want to me, but don't make obnoxious and, yes, creepy sexual comments towards other commenters here. That's crossing the line. Also, women are entitled to be as suspicious as they want of anyone who approaches them; they have ample reasons to be wary. And even if they didn't, they're still allowed to be wary. And yes, everything I've written here applies to men as well as women. Men are entitled to be suspicious of women, even for reasons I find idiotic. They're allowed to turn down sex for whatever reason they want. And, yes, no one, male or female is entitled to marriage either. Clarisse: I agree with you that Marcotte's line about "patriarchal training" was pretty condescending. I guess I was drawn to her line about creepy men only hearing what they want to hear because I see that so often among MRAs. Indeed, when one MRA quoted your comments about ""hot, awesome, delicious, valuable," male sexuality on Reddit, heliterally edited out that last bit about consent. I don't think he did it because he really thinks consent doesn't matter, but it still is telling. But, yeah, I agree with you 100% that most men aren't like that. It's just that in researching stuff for this blog I come into contact with a lot of outliers.
>Clarisse:"I did agree with Marcotte about a lot of the AlterNet comments,"Which ones, specifically?"and I do agree with your basic argument: that women aren't required to be having sex with men if they don't want to. In fact, NO ONE is required to be having sex with ANYONE ELSE if they don't want to do it."His argument isn't specifically that. His argument, or more precisely his "worry" is that "many" of your "intended audience" will miss the requirement for consentI've read about half the comments in the Alternet thread, and quite honestly I'm not seeing this at all.
>"You should post something about it on the comments to Marcotte's piece."Pandagon is not a safe place for me to post."And yes, everything I've written here applies to men as well as women. Men are entitled to be suspicious of women, even for reasons I find idiotic. They're allowed to turn down sex for whatever reason they want. And, yes, no one, male or female is entitled to marriage either."With that in mind, let's look at the first of Amanda's "quotes".Men spend their lives being expected to make the first move but risking rejection and, in today’s politically correct world, risking vile accusations however timid or gentle their approach might be……Being fat, short, and prematurely balding, I’ve just accepted that the creep label is going to be affixed to me, no matter what I do…….There is a double standard. For example…ever hear anyone referred to as “a dirty old woman?” No…….This kinda, sorta, hangs together in the semi-incoherent way that MRA utterances — at least the less articulate ones — often do. Except that it isn't. It's extracts from three separate comments, by different commenters. Here's the first in full:Thank you so much for that. Only a woman could have said these things. Men spend their lives being expected to make the first move but risking rejection and, in today's politically correct world, risking vile accusations however timid or gentle their approach might be. Thank you for saying these things."Only a woman could have said these things" — He obviously means that only a woman could say this and be taken seriously. In fact her whole post is a synthesis of things that men have said many times, and been dismissed."Men spend their lives being expected to make the first move but risking rejection…" — This is just a restatement of what Clarisse said."…and, in today's politically correct world, risking vile accusations however timid or gentle their approach might be." This is him being "suspicious of women" probably "for reasons I find idiotic".According to you, he really is entitled to that. So where's the expression of unjust entitlement here?And where's the self-pity? He mentions rejection, which he probably finds painful. Ain't he entitled to his pain?"I guess I was drawn to her line about creepy men only hearing what they want to hear because I see that so often among MRAs."I think Amanda only hears what she wants to hear.
>Here's the full comment from which the second of Amanda's quotes came:Well, all this is well and good, if you're at least moderately good looking as a guy. Being fat, short, and prematurely balding, I've just accepted that the creep label is going to be affixed to me, no matter what I do.I do club photography, and it takes a huge amount of work to not weird out the performers or club goers while taking pictures – people look at me and make certain assumptions about how pathetic / gross I am. Happens all the time, from what friends of mine have told me. Once people get to know me, it isn't an issue anymore, but appearances matter.Those points the author talk about are not bad ideas, but the raw facts are that someone who looks like me is so far from most peoples' realm of sexual attractiveness that the "creep" label will be around for a long, long time. No one wants to know that the fat guy's horny.What exactly is the problem with this?
>And here's the third:Okay, so what about older guys? When does an older guy turn into a "dirty old man?" Ten, fifteen years older?There is a double standard. For example…ever hear anyone referred to as "a dirty old woman?" No.Where's the entitlement? Where's the self-pity?This, incidentally, is the "wedding ring tan line" guy. Do you think any the less of him, now that you've seen this too?
>The fat guy? Self pity, check. Entitlement, check. Here's the thing. According to the govt., about a third of American adults are "overweight," and another third are "obese." In other words, two thirds of us are fat. Hell, I'm fat. And yes, fat people do have to put up with shit from other people, of both sexes. But pretty much every fat woman I've ever known has had to put up with way more shit about it than men. And yes, there are people who aren't attracted to fat people, of either sex. Again, this is a much bigger problem for women than for men. For this guy to assume that his fatness means that every woman sees him as a creep is, well, at the very least, self defeating. If some women do, well, no one has control over whether other people find them attractive. Also, he's choosing to hang around club kids, who tend to be, if you forgive a gross generalization, some of the shallowest, appearance-obsessed people in the world. Yeah, they may look down their noses at him. They look down their noses at everyone. The other guy seems, in this latter comment, more clueless than anything. Old women if anything have to put up with more shit than men if they're interested in younger men. Skinny, "hot" "cougar" types can get away with it; other women get all called all sorts of things if they express interest in younger men.
>Marco: Your post was caught, thankfully, by the spam filter, and I'm not going to post it. That was way, way over the line and you know it. Yours is the first non-spam post I've deleted.
>As much as your average MRA or PUA complains about men being expected to take all the initiative, I'll guarantee any woman who asked him out or put the moves on him would be ground up in his slut-shaming gossip mill as desperate and hot to trot the instant she turned her back. And that's if he's interested. A fat, average-looking, age-appropriate woman would just be openly ridiculed to her face.
>"The fat guy? Self pity, check. Entitlement, check."How would you feel about this, then:Well, all this is well and good, if you're at least moderately good looking as a woman. Being fat, short, and hairy, I've just accepted that the dog label is going to be affixed to me, no matter what I do.I do club photography, and it takes a huge amount of work to not weird out the performers or club goers while taking pictures – people look at me and make certain assumptions about how pathetic / gross I am. Happens all the time, from what friends of mine have told me. Once people get to know me, it isn't an issue anymore, but appearances matter.Those points the author talk about are not bad ideas, but the raw facts are that someone who looks like me is so far from most peoples' realm of sexual attractiveness that the "dog" label will be around for a long, long time. No one wants to know that the fat gal's horny.I see fat women complaining about how they're treated all the time. Feminists do not accuse them of self pity or entitlement. Rather their feelings are validated. So why the double standard?"Here's the thing. According to the govt., about a third of American adults are "overweight," and another third are "obese." In other words, two thirds of us are fat. Hell, I'm fat."Me too. So what?"And yes, fat people do have to put up with shit from other people, of both sexes. But pretty much every fat woman I've ever known has had to put up with way more shit about it than men."Here we go with the oppression olymics. Is there a set threshold above which the shit you have to put up with has to be, before your complaints are valid? Do you test women's complaints against such a threshold? I'm pretty certain white university educated women don't have to put up with half the shit that poor young black urban-ghetto highschool-droppouts do, so let's dismiss all the complaints of the former, shall we?"And yes, there are people who aren't attracted to fat people, of either sex. Again, this is a much bigger problem for women than for men."I beg to differ. A youthful appearance is a huge advantage for women in the dating market, certainly enough to offset the disadvantage of being fat to a considerable degree. And every woman* gets a few years of it at least. Lots of women find themselves struggling to get dates as they get older. Very few, as far as I can tell, far fewer than men are shut out during their teens, twenties or a lifetime.*except for a few aging disorders."For this guy to assume that his fatness means that every woman sees him as a creep is, well, at the very least, self defeating."Oh he "assumes" it does he? And you know this how?This is one of the things that really pisses me off about feminists. They think they know another person's life-experiences better that the person whose life it is."If some women do, well, no one has control over whether other people find them attractive."That's also true for all the "dogs" out there, but unattractive women's complaints about how their sexuality is constructed don't get dismissed by feminists."Also, he's choosing to hang around club kids, who tend to be, if you forgive a gross generalization, some of the shallowest, appearance-obsessed people in the world. Yeah, they may look down their noses at him. They look down their noses at everyone."Way to blame the victim.
>That woman isn't trying to have sex with the club kids she's photographing is the difference. She's just doing her job.
>Daran, now you're making assumptions. I would say more or less the same thing to the woman you describe that I would say to the guy, which is basically: Don't assume that because you're fat that no one will find you attractive. That's completely self-defeating and will make you feel bitter towards men (and/or women)who may actually not find you "gross" at all. Accept the fact that SOME people will find you unattractive, and move on. Don't let the judgment of shallow club kids affect you; they look down their nose at everyone. I'd probably also suggest that she do something about her hairiness. Is that blaming the victim? Maybe, but it's also good advice.
>"Marco: Your post was caught, thankfully, by the spam filter, and I'm not going to post it. That was way, way over the line and you know it. Yours is the first non-spam post I've deleted."A pity you 'liberals' are so tolerant of unpopular speech.
>LOL, in the other thread I gave you that amptoons link about Sodini as an example of how feminists feel the need to mine the comment sections on MRA sites for quotes to use against us (which could very well be quoted from comments that they wrote themselves), since they have trouble finding anything useful in the actual articles.Instead of showing any indication that you learned something from that, you are instead engaging in that very behavior using the fruit of my own research to help you. Well, that's the last time I do any work for you; you're on your own now, douchebag.
>evil: I've banned one non-spam comment. It was nothing but obscene abuse.
>"Scarecrow, you can say whatever the fuck you want to me, but don't make obnoxious and, yes, creepy sexual comments towards other commenters here. That's crossing the line."Awww, David wants to white knight; that's so cute.
>You get bonus douchebag points if you use the white knight link in the above comment as a resource in a future post.