When is a slut not a slut? When he’s a dude. So says the (He)artist(e) formerly known as Roissy, in yet another post of his trying to prove that his brand of Pick-Up Assholery is fully proven by SCIENCE!
His evidence in this case? A recent study of speed dating that showed that (straight) women, in addition to being attracted to attractive men (duh!), also seem to be attracted to men with high “sociosexuality” ratings. “Sociosexuality,” for those not fully immersed in the SCIENCE!! of dating, is basically someone’s propensity for casual sex.
In other words, the study found that guys who do a lot of casual dating tended to do better at casual dating.
Heartiste/Roissy puts it this way:
Men who have high sociosexuality (HSS) are more attractive to women because the suite of characteristics associated with HSS suggest prior experience bedding women and possession of mating skills that attract women.
It’s akin to a form of preselection for men, minus the actual women he’s banging being physically present at his side to aid in the alpha judging process that all women, consciously or not, impose on their suitors.
In a very loose sense, high male sociosexuality is male sluttiness.
If you strip out the PUA nonsense about the “alpha judging process,” all this seems fairly self-evident, if not simply tautological. Guys who’ve been with a lot of women will probably do better with women in the future than guys with no experience who view women as strange alien creatures. (Note: In all this, we’re only talking about straight people; PUAs don’t seem aware that gay people exist, outside of their own fantasies of hot bi girl threesomes.)
It’s at this point that Heartiste/Roissy amps up the assholery:
Male sluttiness is not equivalent to female sluttiness. It is more difficult for a man to be slutty that it is for a woman owing to the discrepancy in worth between sperm and egg, so people justifiably perceive male sluts to have higher quality mate value, and higher quality mating skills, than female sluts for whom the act of sexual conquest is merely synonym for being easy.
In other words, it’s bad to be a female slut, but great to be a male slut:
[T]he study results confirm the validity of game when its conclusions find that male sociosexuality is a relatively powerful predictor of attractiveness to women, even to women looking for long-term relationships.
Not only can this SCIENCE!! of game help to get dudes laid – it can basically save the world from evil fat chicks.
It’s vital to readers to get this scientific information validating game out there, because there are a lot of doubters and haters who are blinded by what they won’t see. Sometimes, men need to know that there is an experimental foundation supporting all these seduction techniques and peculiarities of female behavior. It’s not necessary to know this stuff to start gaming chicks out in the field right now, but for men with a cynical bent or shy disposition, it helps to know that there are rules that govern human interaction. It may be the boost they need.
Turning former nerds into wily lotharios will help to put those uppity female sluts in their place:
[A] moment of candor. This blog is first and foremost a source of self-amusement, but it is also a true and real desire to teach and to see men succeed sexually and emotionally with women. Men who become better at attracting women increase their options in the mating market. Men with increased options cause women to behave better. Women behaving better redounds to the benefit of families, and to society.
And by “behave better”, I mean the whole panoply of awful modern female behavior: cheating, cock carouseling, divorcing on a whim, eat pray loving, straycationing, spinstering, attention whoring, voting and fattening up into repulsive dirigibles.
Yep, he did slyly insert “voting” into all that. Sneaky!
So slut it up, fellas! It’s the only way to put those evil lady sluts in their place. And, thereby, save the world from sex-having, vote-casting slatterns.
Brandon, do you understand that the video ridicule the double standard and the way MRAs think ?
Ooh Austin meetup!
God, I couldn’t even make it through that video. But it did remind me of the conversation the other day about fat beardy poly guys. I know plenty of guys who get laid a lot who aren’t traditional studs, and I know women who would love to be having more casual sex who aren’t able to find partners. Why, it’s almost as if people aren’t monoliths acting in accordance with simple formulas!
Burgundy! Yes! email me!
Skyal – yay yay yay! How’d it go?
I’m still a week away from my due date…wish me luck…
Also Nephrite was pure comedy gold.
Congrats, Skyal and good luck in your birth, Kristin. It will be any day now. 🙂
I agree that Nephrite was comedy gold. I think he’s a keeper.
I don’t know. Nephrite responded to a Monty Python reference about The Judean People’s vs. The People’s Front of Judea by accusing us of anti-Semitism. That’s Poe territory. Of course maybe I just can’t conceive someone who knows about Judea, but it’s that ignorant in the ways of Monty Python.
Man, Swype auto-correct sucks.
CB: I’ve met people who’ve never heard of Life of Brian. Besides, a sufficiently entertaining Poe is worth keeping around. Better than His Snoozeliness Brandon, anyway.
Kristin and Skyal: Good luck! With your uteruses, the Feminist Army acquires new recruits! 🙂
@ozy- Wait wait wait, this can’t be right. According to our dear friends in the OP, given that sperm is just so much more valuable, it is the fathers of these new children who will influence the fighting ability of the new babies. And since only manginas would ever procreate with feminists, the babies will be weak and useless!
… that’s how that works, right? You guys?
It is my understanding that “spinsterism” is a euphemism for LESBIANS!!!!!
No, no, no. As Dearest Nephirite has told us, men and women have entirely separate genomes. Therefore, they will become true fymynysts if they are women, and mangina slaves if they are men. Thankfully, as feminists, Skyal and Kristin have both aborted all of their male children as part of our plan to eliminate the poisonous Y chromosome, so we don’t have to worry about manginas.
Ozy: It’s that womyn realise that the “Y” is inferior, since it’s merely a malformed “X” chromosomes, which means are imperfect, and so not worthy of life.
I know… I’m so misandristic, pillowinhell. D:
*sigh*
Brandon’s vid is just another example of the nearly-unconscious bias of sex: men are obtaining, women are giving. Women who have lots of sex give too freely, men who have lots of sex are obtaining very easily. All these arguments about locks and keys, innies and outies, etc… it’s all the same dang thing.
On spinsterism, from the wiki:
“A “spinster” is not simply a “single” woman, but a woman who has not formed a human pair bond by the time she is approaching or has reached menopause and the end of her reproductive lifespan.”
How did the age of a spinster go so low, from 50s down to 20s, in MRA land? If this keeps up, women will be dried up and useless to them by age 13.
Dried up and useless by 13? Sigh. I knew I was forgetting something important. Time to get my daughter hitched!
I think spinsterism is kinda mixed in with other traditions. In the dark ages, women who weren’t married by eighteen had to explain themselves to the local priest, who would then either find a man to fob them off on or send them to a nunnery where she would be adequately policed..er..protected. At this point in time, I guess what they thought of womens sexuality was more like what MRA proposes is male sexuality. Strange how things got reversed.
you know, I really fail to see the point in shaming women for having sex. Maybe if getting sex is so hard for dudes, they’d have a hell of an easier time getting it if they weren’t ranting about sluts all the time.
And I still disagree that its sooooo hard for guys to have lots of sex. They’re probably having sex with women who they probably consider sluts anyway, in the end the way to have lots of sex is to find other people who enjoy having lots of sex.
pillowinhell: Actually the “get married by 18” trope is that of the upper middle classes, and the more recent middle classes. In the middle ages it was more common for women to marry in their early to mid-twenties (among the peasantry) because the men needed to establish themselves.
Elizabethan England has averages for women around 23, and for men about 27.
The folks who had money, and wanted to keep it in the family/increase the familial wealth were engaged in systematic hypergamy, with fathers arranging “dynastic” matches, and the idea of getting a woman married off by about 21.
@Quackers:
“And I still disagree that its sooooo hard for guys to have lots of sex. They’re probably having sex with women who they probably consider sluts anyway, in the end the way to have lots of sex is to find other people who enjoy having lots of sex.”
That has to be the case, and why this whole thing is so annoying. If a man who has a lot of sex has sex with a woman who has a lot of sex, its the woman that is slapped with the “slut” label. It doesn’t say anything about the man because “she was easy.”
If a guy who has a lot of sex has sex with a woman who doesn’t have a lot of sex, he becomes a stud. Either way, men win.
@kirby
Exactly. Its downright depressing. Just think of how much happier everyone would be if this double standard didn’t exist…and how much more sex people would probably be having.
Pecunium
That’s interesting to know! Public edumacation has failed me again! Lol.
I find it strange though, that even the lower classes married in their twenties.. I would think that infant mortality and other pressures would have seen them marrying earlier. Unless nutritional factors delayed the onset of menstruation? Men marrying later has been a long standing tradition, given the pressure of supporting a potentially large family. What factors do you think contributed to marriages of women in their twenties?
Also, this winter has been extremely mild. I normally grow root veggies and spinach in a cold frame (one I’ve insulated) until February when its too cold. This year, those veggies are a bit stressed because the box is too warm! I just throw a blanket over top at night in case the temp drops, otherwise I have to prop open the top to cool it down! I could grow berries this winter, its been so warm in the cold frame.
First attempt at block quotes:
Damn, I knew I was doing something wrong to end up with all these boy children! It’s ok, though, I’m already indoctrinating the older 2. That will make up for it, right?
Kristin, labour was super easy, transition and pushing sucked enormously thanks to my newest love having a 15 inch head & weighing nearly 3lbs more than my last baby. Natural home waterbirth and he’s a healthy little guy, so that’s the important parts. Just need to get his tongue tie clipped.
In case anyone is still wondering, Neph-whatever wasn’t MRAL or Eoghan or Brandon.
Are you going to out Neph? or are you leaving it up to zir?
pillowinhell: Women married later because they didn’t need to marry sooner. It’s sort of the visible contradiction to the Brandon Rule of “Men always want younger women (because there were a number of younger men… in their early, as opposed to later, 20s who married women in their later 20s, early thirties, e.g. William Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway).
The thing to realise is that, prior to the 19th century, the ways in which sexuality (as opposed to chastity) was seen were very different. It had it’s own problems, but repressive sexual ideas weren’t really among them (though there was a lot of fulmination about it from religious figures, which tells you there was a lot of sex going on. No one rants about things which aren’t happening, and Paul’s comments about sexual behaviors were poorly translated, and lost almost all their context; but I digress).
So marriage was as much about establishing a stable family environment as it was one for getting sex (men could go to prostitutes [there is a really interesting study on village prostitution in 15th-17th century France, which I no longer have. Basically the village prostitutes were young women who chose to do it for money, and they’d quit in their mid, to late, 20s, and get married. In the viliage, and no one seems to have cared, but that was France, not England, and it was rural, not urban], and/or other men. What women did isn’t as obvious, but from plays, and poems, and songs it seems that non-PIV sex wasn’t uncommon. There were also abortifacients, and of course sometimes one had to get married; again, see William Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway).
Which means that marrying a child, who wasn’t going to be able to do the work needed to run the house/manage the shop was stupid. That, and they (as do we) didn’t think that children ought to be getting married.