What do women want? Freud never found a definitive answer to his famous question, but the blogger who calls himself Delusion Damage thinks he’s got it figured out: women want men who can kill people with their bare hands.
DD is a sort of compound MRA-PUA who argues for “Men’s Liberation Through ‘Game,’” as he put it in a Spearhead post some months ago. Apparently, if dudes learn how to get the hot babes to give them strings-free sexy times, through the magic of “game,” this will help to “reduce the unilateral enslavement of men through marriage.”
And what attracts the ladies more than the ability to kill? Not much, apparently. If you’ve got that magic killing touch, everyone around you will sense your manly power:
You are a man. A man is a survivor, a hunter, a protector of loved ones. The essence of manliness is controlled power. … That is what women love and what other men respect. Women, most of them anyway, are unable to use force and must rely on men where force is required. … If you lack the ability to kill other people with your bare hands, you will be perceived as if something is missing from your manliness. …
If you can kill, the ladies will pick up on this instantly:
[H]aving the ability substantially raises the value she instinctively perceives you to have. Which, as we know, leads to all manner of good things.
I believe he’s referring to blowjobs.
Oh, and other dudes will be impressed, too:
The respect of other men is also greatly influenced by your killing ability. Up until graduation from high school, the male social hierarchy has a great deal to do with “who can beat up whom”, and although the hierarchy among adult men is more dependent on social and professional status signals, men never stop instinctively evaluating you by what they perceive your killing ability to be, and respecting or disrespecting you accordingly.
And this will set you apart from all the wimpy emo hipsters of the world, who couldn’t even fight a girl:
If there is a “defining” degree of killing ability that makes you “manly”, it is defined by comparison with the female of the species. …
In these dismal times, men who fall short of this line are not terribly rare. Many of the emaciated hipsters and cubicle-dwellers of our generation would have trouble against a Juanita from a rougher neighborhood. These men, due to their lack of killing ability, are seen as unmanly by both men and women.
Meanwhile, your ability to kill will make others sit up and take notice:
The ability to kill makes your feelings relevant. If you lose your temper, someone dies.
This of course implies good things about you – the fact that you aren’t in jail right now means that you are a man in control of his emotions. A man who never loses his temper. Everyone around you subconsciously understands this and respects you for it. It lets people know they can trust you.
Yeah, nothing screams “trustworthy” more than a guy going on and on about how he could kill you with his bare hands.
Also, the ability to kill can help to prevent the ladies from blabbing endlessly about their stupid lady crap to you:
A woman who knows, without a shadow of a doubt, that she will have less than three seconds to live from the second she makes you lose your temper is not going to set out to intentionally poke and prod you past your breaking point.
Aw, yeah, it’s good to be a potential bare-hands killer:
[Y]ou will be afforded a completely unprecedented kind of respect. …
When you are The Man, everyone around takes note. It is a form of celebrity. Women gravitate to you, pulled by the invisible streams of attention, respect and deference which we all subconsciously sense in any social situation.
Given the sort of adoring attention DD must get from the ladies, it’s sort of amazing that he finds time to even keep up a blog at all.
Do these idiots ever talk to women? Because I *PROMISE* you, kids who can pull off emo style well and look deep have gotten more panties wet than every Arnold Scwharzennager and Sylvester Stallone flick put together. Jesus tapdancing christ, I don’t even think this guy believes it. What’s the betting he’s said “Brad Pitt” not “Manny Pacquiao” (I had to look up his name) for the ’eminent Alpha’ or whatever these fucks call the few male sex symbols. Simple fact of the matter is that women aren’t a hive mind. We don’t all respect the same thing, but the evidence strongly indicates that the most popular shit? It’s *Not* killing ability. By a long shot.
And if a woman really thinks you’ll kill her when you lose her temper, it’s more likely she’s not going to hang out with you at all.
“The ability to kill makes your feelings relevant. If you lose your temper, someone dies.”
That has got to be the creepiest, most messed-up thing we’ve ever heard.
DD is racist, sexist and violent. He’s the MRA total package.
I bet this fool couldn’t even open a pickle jar without help.
Is this the A Real Man Is A Killer trope I see here?
I didn’t know that apparently, murderers wih a bad temper are some of the most respected people in society today, and that chicks totally dig them. After all, it seems a bit difficult to pick up women when you’re in prison, for instance.
And I really, really fail to see what is supposed to be attractive or worthy of respect about seeming like you’d kill people if they say something you don’t like.
Unless DD mistakes fear for admiration.
You know what we call it when you force someone to have sex with you via threat of physical violence? Rape.
Have these guys ever talked to any actual ladies? Or any actual men, for that matter? Outside of MRA echo chambers, I mean.
Because, as a lady who enjoys sexy time with dudes, I can assure you that the last thing I want from my interaction with a man is the constant threat of death if I displease him in any way. Perhaps I am alone in this and the MRAs have their fingers on the pulse of the collective ladybrain in a way that is beyond my modest womanly capability.
Is this idiot really suggesting that we are automatically and irresistibly attracted to men who could and presumably would kill us in a matter of seconds if he lost his temper?
One wonders if he has ever actually spoken to a woman.
“Many of the emaciated hipsters and cubicle-dwellers of our generation would have trouble against a Juanita from a rougher neighborhood.”
I don’t care how tough you are; “juanitas” are no joke.
Damn, my comment went into moderation ):
Shouldn’t have linked to TVTropes.
But yeah, DD’s “advice” seems really out there. I mean, do they think action movies or video games are supposed to depict reality? Sure, there are some…special people who draw fanart or write self-insert fanfics featuring Jeffrey Dahmer or Ted Bundy (DeviantArt is a curious place), but they are not the majority by far.
Seriously, as it has been mentioned. fear or stockholm syndrome do not equal admiration and attraction.
I shudder at the thought that some guys actually take DD’s advice to heart…
Because I am a Linkara fangirl…
I AM A MAN!
Well, if nothing else, he’s chosen an appropriate moniker, as his delusions are damaging.
But… but… but…
I like emo hipsters. 🙁
Although I have dated a couple of martial artists, none of them appear particularly likely to kill me.
Well if there were any doubt that MRA frequently equals abuser, this effectively erases that doubt.
Why does it have to be bare-handed? Couldn’t you just carry a gun or a syringe full of poison around with you all the time? Or a katana? I bet NOBODY gets more action that a man who owns a katana.
*than
Also, the spellchecker doesn’t know the word “katana”, what the heck?
In his essay, he also wrote, “You will not be someone a woman can feel safe with. You will be as useless in an emergency as the woman herself.”
I would NOT want a violent hot head on my side during an emergency situation. I want to be with someone who can remain as calm as possible and make rational decisions. I am impressed when anyone walks away from a potentially violent situation at the expense of foolish pride. If someone cares more about their pride than the consequences of their actions, then he or she is a hindrance rather than a help. I think the lesson about fighting is best said by James Earl Jones.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6EpQP7tRjo&w=420&h=315%5D
Or sais! This guy could kill someone in 3 seconds and is probably up to his neck in sexy ladies! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZl1QBOW5X0
(And seriously, he could have sexy time with more women than any MRA or PUA if he wanted…)
When I was a kid, I used to burn ants with a magnifying glass. Does that count?
And here I spent all my time learning (to look up) poetry.
/emo
To think I’m happiest when around my laid-back, quirky friends, with who I can LAN and go on 1 a.m. convenience store-runs with, when what I REALLY need is a potential murderer.
If you look at the output of the American movie industry you’d think that the whole country is totally in love with violent imagery.
Yes erotic scenes are considered evil and disgusting.
Maybe that is how these PUA types get their ideas for the wacked out theories.
I’ll admit that armor looks incredibly hot on some guys. As do 1337 fighting skills. But that’s in the SCA, where a ‘good’ hit is one that would have caused damage had the sword been real. A guy who not only made a big deal of the fact that he can kill with his bare hands, but who also made it clear that I would be one temper loss from losing my own life would be a guy I ran from, as far and as fast as possible.
Under whatever colour of sky it is in his world, not only are emergency situations cause for having to kill someone with your bare hands, but women are incapable of doing anything, other than giving men sex and having men’s babies. Not only are women useless in an emergency, but are also incapable of providing food and shelter for themselves, as he points out in the first paragraph of his Spearhead post:
“The fundamental contract between the sexes, put down in law as the institution of marriage, unchanged for countless generations, was essentially this: the man provides the woman with food and shelter which she is unable to acquire on her own, and the woman in exchange provides the man with sex and children which he is unable to acquire on his own.”
He then further regales us with his brilliant knowledge of historical marriage laws (remember, it was like this for countless generations, before the “women’s liberation” movement):
It was understood in what’s called “the spirit of the law” that the wife was entitled to access to the husband’s income and whatever material wealth came thereof,…
Pam: I’m firmly convinced that pulling that much history out of one’s ass much hurt.