MGTOWers, mostly straight and mostly narrow, don’t really spend a lot of time discussing lesbians. Lesbians, after all, are not only women, but women who like other women — you know, like like. But recently one of the regulars on MGTOWforums.com discovered the concept of “lesbian bed death” – the mythological notion that lesbians in long term relationships barely ever have sex – and, well, a very strange conversation ensued. Shade47 started off the discussion with these, er, observations:
Looks like the super hip lesbos forgot the small fact that in lesbian relations no one ends up paying for sex so it doesn’t happen…
The, “we don’t need men not even for sex.” club isn’t a banging scene these days.
I guess this outcome should have been obvious since you can’t put a hole inside of a hole. I keep trying to picture that and it sends me in a logic loop like a computer tasked with calculating infinity. I just can’t grasp how nothing going into nothing can create the best thing since sliced bread. …
Shade47 is so baffled by lesbians that he refuses to believe that they actually exist:
Do you guys think women are really lesbians or is it just another form of “look at me” attention whoring? I mean they don’t have sex, they don’t reproduce, they don’t achieve financial success like the gay male community does. In fact I’m not sure exactly what lesbians are doing in their relationships. I still don’t believe they are real. In order for two people to come together there must be a very specific purpose and attention whoring is shallow even for women. They usually only shack up for babies and money.
Drauger seconded the notion that lesbians are imaginary:
What do you think would happy [if] you put [two] hateful women in a home together? Bliss? Bitches go fucking shit nuts if some man isn’t giving them attention.
Repeat after me: there is no such thing as a Lesbian, only really confused women. Women are by nature whores that will change their whims depending on the whim, depending on what they perceive society rewarding them for, i.e. whores.
However there are such things as gay men, they are men who have made a defining choice.
Goldenfetus added some conspiracy theory to the mix:
Honestly, I think the entire homosexual scene is about attention – for both men and women. I’m not denying that there are men who are attracted to men and women who are attracted to women, but I do believe the entire ‘gay culture’ was intentionally manufactured to further destroy the birthrate, with the reward for participation being attention and the approval of their elite masters.
Avoidwomen, for his part, not only accepted the existence of lesbianism; he also predicted a big lesbian upswing in the future after more and more men Go Their Own Way:
I expect to see a big increase in lesbianism as more and more men avoid women. We know that women are far more social than men and they really hate being alone, even having cats is considered companionship. As for sex, it’s possible one lesbian couple is a dyke with high T(for a woman) so she pressures the more feminine lesbian for sex and the dyke may actually be paying for sex.
Then he returned to his favorite hobbyhorses: sexbots and “virtual reality” girls:
It will be very interesting to see how much sex men have vs. how much sex women have with their virtual reality computer generated men and women in the year 2020. I bet most men get laid everyday while women try it a few times and not bother with sex anymore when she realizes there’s no money in it. Women will use VR men for his virtual money while men will be with virtual women for virtual sex.
The Great One imagined a slightly different result:
I think that instead of a rise in lesbianism we will see a rise in bisexuality among females.
When females can’t find a man, they will settle for another female (or several pets). .. These female on female relationships will fall to the side when an available man offers a long term relationship.
Several pets? Hmm. If this guy is right, the future may bring severe cat shortages, sending the price of cats through the roof!
I’m putting all my money in cat futures right now.
Stay tuned for more on MGTOWers and lesbians. It gets even weirder.
There’s nothing wrong with seeking casual sex as long as everyone involved is honest and everyone is clear on what the expectations are. It’s true that many people will say no, but some people will say yes. The trick is in the social skills that go into figuring out which people to approach in the first place, as much as what to say to them when you do.
It’s not my cup of tea, but I know people for whom it is theirs. It can be done in a competely ethical and non-assholish way.
Also, I’m rarely offended by anyone approaching me that way unless they’re a. impolite about it or b. excessively pushy. There’s nothing wrong with making the offer, as long as you back of immediately if it’s declined.
Attempting to hurt or humiliate a woman by using words (like “slut”) is damned ineffective, so men who want to deal with rejection that way have to contemplate healthier forms of handling rejection. For the rest, Game is a variable response to a particular venue, the nightclub, which has its own rules and rigidities and problems and is characterized mainly by women using their body language to discourage approaches and breaking rapport deliberately by “looking for friends” or other lame excuses. Male sexuality is simply in such a surplus in that situation that any man who approaches is often going to experience a rejection. “Slut” is just a confession of the impotence caused by male superfluousness in that situation, to _really_ hurt a woman, a man has to put her in a place where…her screams cannot be heard. And to do that requires a conscious decision to do evil, or a certain type of sociopathy. Unfortunately I don’t have more flexible responses to rejection than to shut down, but that’s already progress over anger and insult. They don’t mean me harm, they just don’t want me in particular and apparently they need sex less than men.
@HollyPervocracy
“Seriously, it’s kind of sad hearing these guys talk about how no one actually wants to have sex, it’s just part of the cold transactions that drive our society.”
Of course people want sex. But they’re more likely to have it and enjoy it if the cold transactions are completed.
It’s sad sometimes, but one signifier of a healthy, fully realized human being is how involved they are with our post-industrial, market-driven bullshit factory of a society.
Thanks for the answers, I was mostly asking because I’m a situation like this right now, recently met a girl that I immediately felt intensely attracted to, but after an honest self-assessment I realized it was mostly because of how she looked. I like her as a person too but it’s mainly a sexual attraction. It’s frustrating because I don’t want to deceive her and be all mr-soulful-looking-for-his-soulmate guy, but I can’t see a way to tell the truth without sounding like a jerk, even though for all I know she might be into casual sex as well. Meh, I just wish we lived in a culture where this kind of thing was more socially acceptable. Sorry for the derail, didn’t mean to make this about me.
You know, EuroSabra, you really need to stop trying to shoehorn your little PUA sales pitches into other people’s conversations. Not only is it irritating, it’s starting to make me wonder if you would be better off just finding yourself a nice dominatrix, since you seem to enjoy having women mock and berate you. If you’re going to be self loathing you may as well at least get some orgasms out of it.
@ Broseidon – This is where phrases that are vague enough to get the point across without being rude come in handy. “I’m not looking for anything serious”, etc. Just don’t add in modifiers like “right now”, because then you may be giving the other party false hope.
@Simon: Your feelings are yours — there’s no right or wrong about them as such (unless you begin to act on them in illegal ways). But I second the comments above that you need to distinguish between your feelings and other people’s: when I was five, I thought that when it rained at my house, it was raining all over the world. I grew out of it, and the accompanying idea that everybody was just like me. You also need to understand the difference between expressing your feelings (though, just like giving us details about your sister’s life is not a good idea), splashing your feelings all over a blog full of strangers (to you) is not particularly a good idea either. Then if you make ‘factual’ claims that generalize from YOUR feelings to claims about what is “natural” or “historical” or even worse “universal,” you can only expect mocking from people who have different lives, experiences, knowledges, sexualities, beliefs, and values than you do–and also who know something more about the history of sexuality (say!) or are experts in the related topics.
Plus, I would bet real money that the shellacking you’ve taken here makes you feel worse rather than better. If that’s true, do you really need to court that kind of response?
If you can tell me that this whole exchange makes you feel good, well, then, that’s different.
But I doubt it does.
And again, you are so completely wrong about how the past was “simple”: that’s ONE current and very ideologically driven oppressive ideology that exists today (NOT subscribed to by historians–I live with a medievalist, by the way!) that pretty much comes to: “wow, life was so simple before the uppity women and the uppity people of color and the poor and working class white men demanded human rights that elite white men thought were only granted to them.”
What actual place and time do you see as the SIMPLE utopia of human life, btw? You’ve been very vague about that.
My grandfather went from ploughing with horses to seeing the moon landing.
And he lost his farm during the Depression.
Nothing was “simple” in his life, trust me
@Broseidon, you’re right, there shouldn’t be a stigma to casual sex or (politely, non-threateningly) asking to have it with someone. I was referring to when I’ve been on a bus, or in the grocery store, or walking down the street, and had someone announce their attraction to me. Most of them aren’t even after sex, from what I can tell, they just blithely assume they can comment on how my looks turn them on without even introducing themselves first.
That’s very different from meeting a woman and realizing you would like to have sex with her, and then finding an appropriate situation to bring it up :). I’m pretty super shy and very much not into casual sex, so I probably can’t help you there, but CassandraSays seems to have given you some good advice. Best of luck!
Fortunately, people who think like slavey are increasingly in the minority. The younger generation is more accepting of gay people than any before it. People like Slavey will be regarded in the same way segregationists are regarded today–on the wrong side of history.
I agree that Simon should seek help, but nothing about his actual sexual desires are at all frightening, and pathologizing them can only make it worse. I think learning to accept and work with his sexual desires is way healthier than just outright killing them.
Broseidon;
When you approach this girl (at an appropriate time and place!), also make it clear that you respect her as a person. I’m big in favor of casual sex, but I’m not going to sleep with someone if I have the feeling they just want to use my body for their needs. If she agrees (SUCCESS!), continuing to treat her with respect and being attentive and aware of her own needs and wants is the very best way to get more sex out of the deal. And maybe make a friend.
One more thing; always make it explicitly clear that you want nothing more serious than a casual sexual relationship. If you get the feeling that she isn’t approaching sex with you casually, break it off. It’s no good to lead someone on, even if you don’t mean to.
Owly obviously feels threatend by gay men. Why… I have no idea and I am no his shrink or his friend to actually care and to want to help him. My issue with him is that he projects his fears onto other people tries to make them feel bad. Which is not cool, because I don’t think that any gay people would want to communicate with him if he does not want to, and he can easily avoid them. Being negative towards the sole existence of someone he dislikes… that’s fobia pure and simple and that needs either treatment or growing out of it. Because we can change our opinions but we can’t make ourselves be something else, whoever dislikes us. It’s not like any person has a moment of “yeah, let me be of a small minority, so people can treat me badly, because they feel uncomfortable” or “oh, yeah, let me be born white, able person in USA in a wealthy family, who does not deviate from the current understanding of the “norm”.
“I agree that Simon should seek help, but nothing about his actual sexual desires are at all frightening, and pathologizing them can only make it worse. I think learning to accept and work with his sexual desires is way healthier than just outright killing them.”
Fair enough, Shora.
Once again, Raoul makes the common mistake that *all* women are sex workers.
Somehow I had sex just this week and it -never even occured- to me to ask him to buy me shit later… I guess I was distracted by the nekkidness?
“pre-feminism suicide practically didn’t exist”
now that is bullshit. Keep in mind that even now families will often try to not say it when someone committed suicide so I can only imagine the social stigma was more so then. Also less access to guns and prescription pills and vehicles, not the only ways to commit suicide but popular ones.
…and a whole lot of other reasons i can think of to why one might believe that suicide didn’t exist before a certain time. critical thinking skills there. also the whole “this didn’t exist before feminism (true or not) so it’s feminism’s fault and needs to be eradicated” logic is so faulty cause there are a million other things that changed around the time feminism came along too.
Sorry,.. what? Someone actually argues that re-feminism male suicide didn’t exist?
Pff… dude, go hit your history books, because you are embarrassing yourself.
@Eneya: yeah NWO wrote it back to me a lil while back i don’t have the quotes thing down yet ha. I said that I would venture to guess that pre-feminism males still had higher suicide rates but I don’t know for sure and he said suicide was practically non existent pre-feminism and that if anyone who really cared would therefore want to eradicate feminism
Eneya, yes, that would be NWO. Good luck trying to get him to read a history book, one written after 1950 anyway.
I think at this point he likes embarrassing himself, because otherwise I don’t know why he’d keep coming back. Getting your ass handed to you daily would get old for most people.
Ethics does not equal aesthetics (unless one is trying to make a case for ethical expressionism, not actually an overly common ethical theory in practice). “X is disgusting to me” does not tell you much about the ethics of X. For example, I find eating mayonaise disgusting, and do not particularly like watching people eat it or thinking about eating it. However, I do not think other people are doing something ethically wrong when they enjoy their mayo. That is because I do not confuse aesthetic judgements with ethical ones.
Ethics is not an opinion, it is a fact. There isn’t a heckler’s veto on whether something is ethical or not. As a rule utilitarian, yes, I most certainly do think you can collect empirical data to guide you in your determinations on ethical questions. You actually need to show that a thing causes harm to prove it is bad. Good things are things which, as a general rule, bring pleasure. Bad things are things which, as a general rule, bring suffering. You weigh the pleasure against the suffering and pick the best results. Asinine sex/gender/sexuality binaries cause massive harm, and minimal at best good. The ways these systems are enforced also encourages massive harms and not much good in general.
I can’t think of a single theory of moral realism that fits your statements, Simon. Natural law (often bundled up with a Divine Command Theory)? Nope. Kantian ethics? Nope. Platonic ethics? Nope. Egoism? Nope.
Your statements also make no sense from most moral antirealism positions.
Are you then a subjectivist about ethics? Do you think right and wrong is determined by majority vote? If so, is it the global majority? Local majority? Majority of stake holders? If we can get half the population to say something is okay, then does it suddenly become okay? How permissible is moving for any social or cultural change?
Sidenote on simplicity, occam’s razor only applies to the simplest theory which adequately and fully explains all available data (and is a position on rational belief more than on “truth” per se, but I don’t think you are up to more epistomology at the moment). Mere simplicity is not a sign of correctness. Plato’s physics are simpler in many ways than Newtons, and Newtons are simpler than Eisteins. Yet Einstein was more correct than Newton, who was more correct than Plato.
@darksidecat: *applauds*
Bets on Simon’s only response being “it’s ONLY my OPINION” (with subtext of “why are you so mean to me”)
@CassandraSays
It’s more a case of working myself up into being a dom, because apparently that’s the only game in town. Of course, Hollywood club kids are Hollywood club kids, but the infiltration that’s taking place here is of club culture into preppy culture, not the other way around.
@Viscaria:
ok, yes.
No, I’ve never done such a thing. It’s nice that you think it’s normal, though when I read Broseidon’s comment “but after an honest self-assessment I realized it was mostly because of how she looked.” I instantly think “ah, there you have it again: sexual desire is essentially manipulative and so insistent that it clouds your reasoning!” and though it sounds very offensive there may be even a feeling like “well… another not-yet-a-rapist” somewhere in my mind.
If you look how manipulation permeates the whole search for sex and sometimes the whole arsenal of tactics is used to get it, I can’t help but think that this “consent – no consent” distinction is just wishful thinking (also perfectly fits in my “desire for simplicity” theory).
I’m really, really happy that I never felt such a strong attraction over a longer period of time, that I started to actively pursue it, my sexual attraction is luckily more like short spikes. I’m also very happy, that I don’t have fantasies where violence plays a role (sorry, Shora, I don’t want to judge you).
@Shora:
It’s nice that you say that I already felt bad about the “frightening” word.
@ithiliana:
No, I’m not going to reply to that at all! But I read it carefully. 😉 As you said it’s probably better not to write here anymore, and this is one of my last posts.
Simon, having an attraction to someone that is primarily sexual and pursuing casual sex in a respectful, non manipulative and consenting way are not mutually exclusive. I see nothing wrong with broseidon wanting to have sex with that girl, as long as he always keeps in mind that she is a human being deserving of respect and acts accordingly.
For example, there is a guy who I am attracted to, but am not interested in anything more than a sexual relationship, and I suspect the feeling is mutual. We get along well and enjoy each others company when we get together (both sexually and non sexually) but we don’t really have enough in common to truly be friends, let along be involved romantically. No one is getting manipulated, though, and everyone involved is happy.
I sense sarcasm, but I don’t really know what you are getting at? I didn’t say you felt bad about anything. I said that your desires are not frightening (they’re not), and I urged Raincitygirl not to treat them as such (“pathologizing”) for fear of feeding into an already unhealthy view of your own sexuality, which you have already expressed quite emphatically.
“No, I’m not going to reply to that at all! But I read it carefully. 😉 As you said it’s probably better not to write here anymore, and this is one of my last posts.”
Bet 5 monopoly dollars he’s not going to stick it.
I said this is one of my last posts, not my last post, redlocker, and this is not a flounce out of anger, I just prepare you that I’m leaving. 😉
@Shora:
No, that was totally honest, I really thought, that the way I described it was frightening for her, there was no sarcasm here. And yes it was nice that you did explain it.