The daffy, excitable Man Going His Own Way who calls himself MarkyMark may be my favorite manosphere blogger of all. Not only does he bring the lulz himself – who can forget the time he wrote a completely unironic point by point rebuttal of an Onion article? – but he also helps to bring attention to the equally stupefying work of others.
In his latest post, he directs our attention to some observations made by fellow MGTOWer Spock’s Disciple on the Happy Bachelors forum on the subject of pussy and its discontents. “This is good stuff, stuff my boys need to read,” Mark writes. “[Spock’s Disciple], like his hero, applied cold hearted logic when analzying pussy. The Force is STRONG with that one!”
Yes, he actually wrote that. I don’t think it’s a joke. I think he honestly does not know that there is a difference between Star Trek and Star Wars. How that is possible, I do not know.
Anyway, on to the eminently rational Spock’s Disciple, reflecting on the irrational power of the ladybits:
Remember that pussy is a biochemical WMD; wherever it is used, there is mass chaos and destruction. How many wars and conflicts have been fought at the urging and behest of women? More than any honest man would admit to and would be proud of.
Young men are apparently helpless in the face of the punany:
The need for pussy is a very real and built in addiction for men. We are hardwired by nature for sex and procreation. … [T]he sight and sound of pussy blinds younger men and allows them to be controlled by women though their hormones.
The, uh, SOUND of pussy? If I had to pick just two (or three, or four) sensory experiences relating to the vagina that would be generally considered appealing to heterosexual males, I’m not sure “sound” would make the cut.
But eventually even the horniest dudes start to get less horny – and thus less hypnotized by the power of the pussy. The only trouble is that by the time they lose interest in sex most of them are married, and they’re now stuck with the woman whose vagina formerly had them in thrall. It’s a grave injustice.
[W]hen most men pass the age of 30-35, they begin to awaken from this biochemical “dream” and what do they awaken beside? What do married men look forward to the next 30-50 years of their lives? Sleeping with a living corpse, which continues to torture and destroy them day by day? Looking forward to the time when the woman undergoes the process of metamorphosis, into a completely insane mummy (menopause and post menopause)?
This seems a tad alarmist. I mean, if your wife turns into a monster zombie-mummy – as all women apparently do after they hit their mid-thirties – you could always get separate bedrooms.
But Obi-Wan’s Spock’s Disciple has a more radical solution: don’t get into bed with the ladies in the first place!
Pussy is indeed way overrated and if younger men could get a shot of “anti-testosterone” for a few weeks, they could see through the eyes of men who are 40+; without the haze of hormones, you cannot believe how much farther you can see! It’s the difference between seeing the horizon through LA style smog and seeing the horizon from a high mountain in the Rockies.
Pussy is a man’s Achilles heel; once that man realizes this and takes the appropriate steps, he’ll never lose his peace of mind again. To these skeptical young men I say, there is an infinitely vast arena where you can have anything you desire, and can succeed at anything you wish to try for; all you have to do is see women for what they truly are, and become a master of the beast within; once you do that women’s true face will be visible to you, and you’ll never again partake of that foul potion.
It is possible to tame that beast, and indeed it is a certainty that you will learn much from the process of taming it; all it takes is patience and time. Look at your fellow men, your brothers in arms, and look at their almost invisible chains, and wonder at why you would desire such an existence for yourself?
And, hey, if all else fails, MarkyMark adds some advice of his own: pay a visit to Pamela Handerson before going out on the town with one of those vagina-people.
[T]here is one thing that the younger men can do until their sex drives die down permanently: masturbate before going out with a woman. … To put it another way, since the little head had been, shall we say, quieted down, the bigger head could work properly; the bigger head will then allow you to see a woman for who she REALLY is.
If you’re a fan of Spock, and looking for appropriate masturbatory material, might I suggest this?
DYE: If all the first time daters this coming Friday were giving the option of just sex OR just a date 90% of men would pick A and <50% of women would. Do you finally get it?
Not in my experience.
The proof is that you won’t put your money where your mouth is. On your next several first dates why don’t you offer to skip the date and go right to sex and then report back the accept/reject results. We’ll be waiting.
Ah… the old, “tits or go home” ploy.
You don’t get to tell people how to live their lives in some attempt to prove your point. Not the least because that’s not what dates are about. In the second, three, non-random, encounters are nothing like a reliable sample.
I can say that, of the times in which I have had sex on the first “date” it was because the women involved told me that’s what they wanted. I won’t say I wasn’t interested. I won’t say there were never dates where I’d have liked sex and it didn’t happen. But of the actual occasions where first encounters led to sex it was because the women wanted it. The only times I have had a, “wanna fuck” moment, it’s been the women coming onto me.
Which probably says more about my comfort level at saying, “wanna fuck” than anything else, but does fly in the face of your theory.
Ummm, while the sentiment is way over the top there is no disconnect. It wasn’t a cheese steak that almost got Clinton impeached.
1: He was impeached; he wasn’t convicted. 2: It wasn’t the sex that caused that. It was an orchestrated campaign meant to find something, anything, to charge him with. 3: The charge was “perjury, and obstruction of justice” and it was, actually, unfounded because perjury requires a knowing falsehood about a material matter of the case. The civil suit he as responding to was about acts which his behavior with Lewinsky were not relevant to (as the judge in that case later admitted) and so were not perjurious.
Again, it’s not the almighty power of the pussy that caused Clinton’s problems, but the people who had it in for him, and were willing to spend lots of money to get him.
Quakers: 18 is the age of consent in North America anyway.
No, it’s not. In the majority of the US the age of consent is 16. In Canada it’s 16. In Mexico it’s 12, though if “deceit” is used to gain consent a complaint can be registered. That has a much lesser sentence.
Because of child pornography laws making it a federal offense to photograph, or film, someone who is less than 18 having sex, and the Mann Act, which makes it a crime to take a minor across a state line for the purpose of having sex, it often seems the US has an age of consent of 18, but it’s not so.
Ray Percival:
Yes, it is. The trick is to collect meaningful/relevant anecdotes. But when a study asks 100 people questions, the answers are anectdotal. It’s collation that makes the difference, and filtering that makes for relevance.
Ok…my bad haha. Shoulda looked it up >.>
Yoren: You’re hanging out in the dark, dank, bat-infested cave, dude.
I’m on Sappho’s island.
;>
Oh lord… Palot’s “Ideal forms” and all that.
So not useful. Presumes Ultimate Truths.
A Fragment by Sappho
9
I love the sensual.
For me this
and love for the sun
has a share in brilliance and beauty
http://www.uh.edu/~cldue/texts/sappho.html
The worst part about the Pinker Article is the comment that takes you to a MRA dude in Norway who believes that because of Affirmative Action for women, rape should be legalized so that dudes can take sex like women take jobs. Or something. Terrible, which has made me want to take my brain out and scrub it with bleach.
I’m not gonna link it but it’s in the Pinker article.
@ Joanna
So when you don’t want “just sex”, you fuck first and then go on the date right???
Nah. I didn’t think so.
Pecunium,
Actually. Anybody who has been through a graduate level research or survey design course will happily tell you that if your survey questions can be answered with anecdotes that you’re doing it wrong.
@Quackers
“Makes sense to make it all 18 years old then, reduces confusion”
Personally I’m not much into criminalizing sex just to avoid “confusion”…at top universities a big percentage of the incoming undergrads are younger than 18. Just sayin.
RE: sluttiness
A woman for whom stigma really matters will not be having sex on the 1st date… with anybody…ever. But for those women who don’t adhere to such conventions the affect is way overstated and an excuse. Females just aren’t nearly as horny, indiscriminate, nor sexually consistent as males… and there’s nothing wrong with that.
DYE,
Care to back up ANY of these assertions?
“Females just aren’t nearly as horny, indiscriminate, nor sexually consistent as males… and there’s nothing wrong with that.”
Even if this were statistically true when adjusted for all kinds of cultural factors(which I’m not sure it is), this sentence is always uttered by people who mean to imply “so that’s why it’s okay to slut shame!” While completely erasing women like me who have a very robust sex drive, thank you very much.
>>If all the first time daters this coming Friday were giving the option of just sex OR just a date 90% of men would pick A
Citation needed.
>>and <50% of women would.
That number would be a lot closer to the men's if it wasnt for the fact that the worst case scenario for a man who has a one-night stand is that he'll have a so-so orgasm, where the worst case for a woman is that she'll be raped (and the average case is that the guy will be a lousy lay and she'd had had more fun at home with a vibrator).
The low rate of first-date sex for heterosexual women has more to do with the men in the equation than the women.
BlackBloc, agreed.
Cassandra:
The only Real Knowledge is stuff you make up.
Quackers:
Other people have gotten this, but I looked it up and typed it out and don’t want the effort wasted
16 in most of the Caribbean, 12 by Federal law in Mexico (though all but nine states have it at 18), 16 in 31 American states, 17 in 9 American states, 12 under the UCMJ, 16 in Canada, 15 in Greenland.
I think 12 is too young. 15 is probably too young, though Romeo and Juliet laws should probably reach that far down.
There are a disturbing number of Web sites devoted to apprising people of the age of consent.
BlackBloc,
Two things.
1. Thanks for noticing the truth as many others here are in denial.
2. It would be closer, but not a lot. Remember the conversation is about the choice between just sex or just dating…
“The low rate of first-date sex for heterosexual women has more to do with the men in the equation than the women.”
Like I’ve said all along women use dating to evaluate, men use dating to “convince”. However, don’t forget there are as many women who are difficult to convince as there are men who are poor convincers.
An “excuse” for what, exactly?
I think you’re wrong about horny, right about indiscriminate though not for the reasons you presume, and I have no idea what you mean by “sexually consistent”. I have no idea what those two terms mean -when put together- in this context.
I also think that you need to date a woman with a higher sex drive.
“Like I’ve said all along women use dating to evaluate, men use dating to “convince”. However, don’t forget there are as many women who are difficult to convince as there are men who are poor convincers.” What does this mean…to convince? Convince how? About the sexual ability or safety or what?
“While completely erasing women like me who have a very robust sex drive, thank you very much”
Lots of women with a strong sex drive have ridiculous amounts of great sex with the same partner(s). If variety/thrill seeking is your then thing own it, but don’t conflate notch count with “robust”
“What does this mean…to convince? Convince how? About the sexual ability or safety or what?”
“Convince how” depends on the woman. Women who are truly looking for chemistry are the most fun, but I’ve been screened for everything from income to size of my penis.
The point is that before a guy goes out with the a woman on a 1st date he is nearly 100% sure he would fuck her. A woman is not nearly as sure and so she screens him during the date.
In my experience most women know before a date whether or not they would fuck a guy. They just don’t know whether or not they will.
So all men, prior to a first date, are 100 percent ready to fuck that woman. Nearly. Why? Just to get off? And possibly not well? And is he ever the one to turn down the sex if offered? Why or why not?
I keep trying to find the equal in, say, meals. He’s hungry so he’ll eat anything? Even if it doesn’t really taste good?
This makes men, in general, sound…..bad. If that’s the case, that men just really don’t discriminate much, would fuck anything, anytime…well I can’t blame women for not wanting to fuck them. Why would we? Why lay down and get pronged badly when you could be doing so many other more fulfilling things (or masturbating skillfully and well)?
“The point is that before a guy goes out with the a woman on a 1st date he is nearly 100% sure he would fuck her.”
Damn… why I have I ended first dates with neither of us fucking, then? If only I’d known!
(Psst! Dude, I think you are confusing “date” with “having casual sex”.)
Also, this cracked me up: “Lots of women with a strong sex drive have ridiculous amounts of great sex with the same partner(s). If variety/thrill seeking is your then thing own it, but don’t conflate notch count with ‘robust’”.
Apparently if I have sex for years with the same three people, I am still not slutty enough!
Something tells me that your sex drive only counts if you’re willing to have sex with DYE.
I think all the women reading this blog should ask themselves a question: why is it that hundreds of millions of men, today, will choose to masturbate while looking at mere images of women, rather than try to be in a relationship with women.
Could it possibly be because a lot of women use sex as a way to manipulate and control men. Hence all men who approach women they find attractive, have to take the risk to ask a girl out and, it is unnerving especially for shy men. These days men are opting out of sex, and Men Going Their OWN Way epitomizes This based on the above article.This is a good piece on it http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/10/10/on-the-road-again-free-range-men/
So it all comes down to: why don’t women ask men out? After all, isn’t one of the principles of feminism to transcend gender roles? MRA’s complain that while feminists call for eliminating traditional gender roles, they still want to retain the role of men having to take the risk of asking the woman out? http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/02/28/why-are-men-angry-manning-up-author-kay-hymowitz-explains.html?cid=hp:mainpromo6
Why do women spend most of their lives obsessing about their weight, their hair, their butt, their breasts, their clothes, anything but actually finding out exactly what it feels like to go up to somebody who you really like (looks wise) but have no idea if they like you or not, and then get told to ‘Get Lost’ or whatever.
In other words – 99% of women don’t have a clue what it feels like to be a man, and more importantly, THEY DON’T WANT TO, and they don’t care. They would rather date the most abusive Alpha male scumbag on the planet (and many do) than be rejected by a man.
So will the next article be about why women are too terrified to approach men? How about making a TV programme about it – that would be hilarious.
Even the most attractive women on Earth don’t ask men out more than unattractive women, despite the constant feedback they get from men, all the time, every day.
So what does that tell us? That men are expected to approach women, with zero signs of interest from any of them, and then lambasted when they do it, so they don’t do it very often, yet women, who can approach men without any fear of being accused of being a ‘creep’ or ‘rapist’, virtually never do.
Hence, men look at pornography and masturbate rather than being with a woman. Yes and as was mentioned here a person can achieve pleasure solo.Whether you agree with this or not, this is the anger and mindset of quite a few MRA’s who have “gone their own way”.
To answer Cassandra’s inquiry she asked” That is kind of a key difference – the Women Going Their Own Way didn’t just talk about it, they actually went. Why can’t these guys do the same?”
They guys have left. Their not posting on the internet or on blogs such as this.Their silent and “ghosting”. Their not here. What you witness on blogs such as Happy Bachelors is a small percentage of men who choose to blog for whatever reason. The guys have left the battlefield in the so called battle of the sexes. Years past this was impossible, with the proliferation of online porn it has changed things for men indeed Feminism wins. You got what what you want. It is the end of men indeed.