Just a little heads up for any of you in the Chicago area: I’ll be speaking at Northwestern University on Monday, as part of its annual “Sex Week.”
My topic? “How to hate women and have terrible sex: Misogynistic sex myths, and how they ruin sex for everyone.” Nice Guys, Friend Zones, and the Alpha Asshole Cock Carousel will all make appearances.
The talk will be at 8 PM in Room G02 of Annenberg Hall on the Northwestern Campus in Evanston.
(Here’s a map.)
There will be free condoms and lube. (Apparently.)
For more about sex week, see the official website, or take a look at this piece in the Daily Northwestern.
Sex week is sponsored by the College Feminists; I’m talking at the invitation of Men Against Rape and Sexual Assault.
I’ll be writing the lecture over the weekend, so please feel free to offer suggestions as to which misogynistic sex myths I should talk about.
EDITED TO ADD: The Spearhead has discovered that I’m doing this talk. W. F. Price writes about it with his usual objectivity, by which I mean that his piece is filled with lies and weird projection.
Shorter Owly: All of society constantly glorifies women and trashes men! That’s why they make less than men even when they have the same or better education, position, and work the same hours as men: it’s just a small step towards giving men reparations for the constant damage they suffer at the hands of feminism. Arglebargleargle loyalty men are more logicalarglebargle.
@Jean Renee: OTOH, given how the white men in the Texas legislature treated Barbara Jordan, she probably had a lot of experience about their lack of empathy, understanding, and compassion.
I’ll give her more slack than I will white men who whine about how all the women hates them as shown by not sucking their dicks on command.
I would like it if you could address the myth that all women want is the “bad boy” who treats them mean in a relationship, so nice males who treat women considerately don’t get a look in. I would love to have it pointed out that people who are in a sick relationship have issues, possibly due to some type of mental or physical abuse in the past so they go for a relationship that they understand, and perhaps they think it is all they deserve.
At least part of the answer is having loving relationships, regardless of sexual orientation, and gently talking to any friends who appear to be in a abusive relationship, and – gasp – believing them, may help their friends get out. This is speaking from the experience of past abusive relationships, having come from a very dysfunctional family.
@Jean-Renee
” Ms. Jordan’s opinion is wrong. Men do not lack empathy, understanding, and compassion. Trolls like you, on the other hand…”
No woman, no womans organization, no woman reporter, no woman in any position of power made so much as a peep to stand up for men. In fact, just like every other vile thing that spews from the mouths of women, it was classified as funny. Lip service after the fact and no punishment.
Enlighten me with your wisdom. If a congressman had said the same about women, would he have been punished? That’s how you tell who the privileged class are and who the mooks are.
So here’s a question for you. If women are never willing to ever stand up for men, should any man give a flying damn about women?
Pujeemuhs: I think Roberta was busy stinking up Jezebel before she came here. Speaking of Jez, hey! I’ve seen your posts there, and you’ve made me laugh more than once.
@ithiliana
“I’ll give her more slack than I will white men who whine about how all the women hates them as shown by not sucking their dicks on command.”
How predictible that the self described man hater rolls in. Sucking their dicks on command? Sounds like a stereotype. But of course every stereotype about men is true, while stereotypes about women are always false. Except of course the superior empathy, sympathy, list all positive traits stereotypes. We get an earful of them from across the board everyday.
I guess I just don’t get in touch with my feminine side enough. That’s the side with all the positive traits. If it wasn’t, why would I need to get in touch with my feminine side? That’s where all the good is stored. Correct? If it isn’t correct, why would I need to get in touch with my feminine side?
@NWO- “Men, however, are forbidden to use their power over women, to the point that even using logic on a woman is considered DV.”
Unless you named your right fist “logic” and your left fist “reason,” it is not illegal to “use” logic and reason on women (or on anyone in general). Somehow, when you use this word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
Seriously, women are human beings. Some human beings are manipulative assholes who will use the extent of their behavioral and physical abilities to try and control other people. But this does not make all humans messed up pieces of shit. Imagine if you were judged by the worst person in the world at all times, and that someone would extrapolate everyone else like you to be EXACTLY THE SAME AS THAT OTHER PERSON because you randomly shared a few physical appearance attributes. You’d find it unfair and ridiculous, right?
Craziness is not a gendered thing. Neither is manipulation, sociopathic desire, or greed. Taking those who behave in this manner and extrapolating it to all members of a gender, race, religion, species, etc, is not logical unless you’re talking about a single-hive-minded species like the Borg or something.
Women as a group are not analogous to the Borg, ergo, they are not all “crazy bitches.”
Just as I would never dream to judge all men based on the shameful behavior of the misogynists in the MRA movement, I instead strive to create more in-depth testing regimens to properly identify people in my life (professional and personal) who are toxic in general and display characteristics that are problematic or unhealthy. In this way, I can mitigate the impact these people have on me, either by banishing them from my life, or by minimizing their impact to my life.
That’s really what being safe is for me as a woman- it’s identifying all the wolves in sheep’s clothing (male or female) and keeping myself emotionally, physically and psychologically safe, because I really don’t need to waste the limited time I have on this earth around toxic assholes.
So this is why I pay attention to what people like yourself say- I find many of these concepts to be untenable beliefs in regards to how I will be treated based on my own born gender. Therefore, it is imperative that I figure out how to sniff out people like this in the real world once they’ve put on their “nice guy/girl” skins and gone out to pretend to be decent individuals because honestly, I don’t want to waste my time on someone who thinks that I’m insane, money-grubbing, greedy and basically only worthwhile for access to my vagina as long as I shut up and make sandwiches and do what they say like some kind of child.
That person can have their beliefs, but I want my life to be free of that person.
@David Futrelle
“Also, you have literally posted 2900 + comments here, moderated man.”
Which doesn’t come close to the rest of the gang. Golly, was I specifically mean to individuals? If you go by either of those criteria, Dave, you’d have to ban everyone of your regulars.
In the spirit of equality, I demand you ban everyone here who has over 2900 posts, or has called me a pedophile, rapist or some such insult. There wouldn’t be anyone left to comment if you did that. Apparently, you aren’t as equality minded as you claim. Goes well with the unbiased conference you’ll be attending. I suppose.
@Shaenon-(RE: LIST OF CRAZY)
I’m not sure to laugh or cry-maybe I’ll laugh and then go cry in the street for awhile and see if people will give me free money and stuff. XD
I was reading these aloud to my husband, both of us were laughing so hard at the ludicrous nature of the statements, we both almost couldn’t breathe.
Someone needs to read these in a deadpan voice or something and upload it to Youtube-except for the fact that there would be a bunch of crazies who actually believed it, the Swift-ian nature of the content is simply breathtaking!
Next: let’s talk about the economic benefits of using babies as a food source!
@Nanasha
“Unless you named your right fist “logic” and your left fist “reason,” it is not illegal to “use” logic and reason on women (or on anyone in general).”
I’ve given you the State link showing that it is. It’s womens law. Plain and simple, woman will always be the victim.
—————
“Imagine if you were judged by the worst person in the world at all times, and that someone would extrapolate everyone else like you to be EXACTLY THE SAME AS THAT OTHER PERSON because you randomly shared a few physical appearance attributes. You’d find it unfair and ridiculous, right?”
The duluth wheel IS based on the worst man who committed DV.
http://www.theduluthmodel.org/training/wheels.html
The duluth wheel is the basis, the bible of predominant aggressor theory, which is used in training police officers. I, as a man, AM judged by the worst man ever. Visit the site, see the pretty rainbow colors, read about womens solidarity.
Here’s a quote.
“When women use violence in an intimate relationship, the context of that violence tends to differ from men. First, men’s use of violence against women is learned and reinforced through many social, cultural and institutional avenues, while women’s use of violence does not have the same kind of societal support. Secondly, many women who do use violence against their male partners are being battered. Their violence is primarily used to respond to and resist the controlling violence being used against them. On the societal level, women’s violence against men has a trivial effect on men compared to the devastating effect of men’s violence against women.”
Just heart warming, isn’t it? Womens violence is always justified, mens violence is evil. This is womens law. Take every single gender specific law, VAWA, Title IX, ect, ect, ect. Replace the word woman with white people and the word man with black people and you’d have the most horrifyingly racist hate laws ever concieved. Well guess what they are as they now stand. Hate laws of course. Womens law is hate law. It’s all it could ever be.
——————–
“That’s really what being safe is for me as a woman- it’s identifying all the wolves in sheep’s clothing (male or female) and keeping myself emotionally, physically and psychologically safe, because I really don’t need to waste the limited time I have on this earth around toxic assholes.”
If that’s the case there should be thousands of womens sites denouncing all those women who are toxic assholes. After all women get all the State funding. Yet the only place that does point out those toxic women are MRM sites, and YOU either defend those toxic women or remain silent. In fact, this entire blog is all about hating men who call out those toxic women.
——————–
Why should men as a whole do anything at all to assist women as a whole in any way, when in return women always only stick up for women? If you’re not willing to name the massive number of false acusers, liars and manipulative women. You deny women use sex as a weapon and manipulation. Women don’t cry and use weakness as a strength, more manipulation. You seem to have the vision of women as some superspecies of angelic beings.
Still not willing to shed or spill a little blood for men, after all that’s been spilled for women? Hell, women won’t even put forth the slightest effort of talking in favor of men. Oh, I forgot, women are more than happy to stand up for men being able to cry like infants, wear dresses and snuggle dollies, along with a little boy on boy action.
Here’s what I’d like to see covered:
1) Sex, even hetero sex, does not require an erection. If your erection isn’t working the way you want it to, or if you come but you and your partner aren’t ready to be done yet, there are all kinds of things you can do that are still fun and still “count” as sex. If you cover little else, please, please, please cover this.
2) Women don’t like being discussed with other men when you’ve had sex with them. Who are you more interested in cultivating favor with: the person you’re sexing, or the dudes you’re hanging out with? Gentlemen limit their comments to things like “yeah, we’re together. She’s really, really great.” and a smug look.
3) If you don’t like hanging out with women, you may want to work on that rather than working on having sex with them. Having sex with people you don’t like is really not that fun for anyone.
4) Along the lines of the other comments on consent and negotiation: Talking and negotiating is hot. If you can’t use your mouth to talk to the person to say “is this fun for you? Does this feel good? Would you ____ me?”, then don’t use your mouth to kiss them or go down on them or whatever. Just don’t.
Good luck. You should give some advice on guys how to avoid accusations of rape. I hope you don’t slip up and say something ableist or any other -ist and get run out for being a guy.
“You should give some advice on guys how to avoid accusations of rape. ”
I got one! don’t try to rape someone! and if you do get that rare asshole who decides to accuse you of rape, you could always talk to the police, or get legal aid.
“get run out for being a guy.”
Doesn’t happen.
Yeah, “dudes having normal, consensual sex then get accused of rape” is a good one.
@NWO
I don’t vote for Obama because I don’t live in the US dumbass
“Futrelle’s talk went great until he talked about avoiding rape accusations by taking a hidden camera to all of one’s sexual encounters, and then made a crass joke about retards and quadriplegics not needing to worry about that. That was when we ran him out of the room for being a man.”
I think one really important idea to convey to the college set is that being in a relationship with someone (or perceiving yourself as being in a relationship with someone) does not entitle you to that person’s body.
Also the idea that just because your partner is up for something (sexually) doesn’t mean you have to want to try it. And if they’re going to end the relationship over it, you’re probably better off without them.
@NWO
also stop lying. Nowhere does that article state he’s giving “freebies”
also show me how the republicans are creating jobs and helping the economy? but you wont say anything negative about them. Afterall they fit with your agenda. Women preggers in the kitchen and the gays out of site. That benefits the economy so much.
@elusis
“1) Sex, even hetero sex, does not require an erection.”
An erection = sexual excitement. No erection, no excitment = no sex. I suggest you keep within reality.
————————
“2) Women don’t like being discussed with other men when you’ve had sex with them.”
You’ve got to be kidding me? Women are the masters of this very action. It’s just casually a part of womens repertoire. I mean c’mon, it’s not even a stereotype. There isn’t a media outlet where women don’t write countless articles along with legions of comments by women.
————————
“3) If you don’t like hanging out with women, you may want to work on that rather than working on having sex with them.”
So what you’re saying is, men need to change to accomodate women while women are perfect and don’t need to change. Why shouldn’t women change so they’re more pleasant to hang out with?
————————
“4) Along the lines of the other comments on consent and negotiation: Talking and negotiating is hot.”
If a man want’s that he can just call some phone sex number to talk and negotiate.
Wish I could join, I especially like discussing the whole Nice Guy ™ phenomena. Also, I feel much better about not having my lecture for next month done yet, considering you are only writing yours for next weekend now.
@Quackers
“also stop lying. Nowhere does that article state he’s giving “freebies”
also show me how the republicans are creating jobs and helping the economy? but you wont say anything negative about them.”
If you’re getting something for doing nothing except existing as a woman, that’s a freebie. Creating jobs and helping the economy? You’re kidding, right? The only income the State posesses is by borrowing and passing that interest laden debt off to the public.
When a politician, “promises” to create jobs, all he/she has done, is promised to steal your wealth. The State only produces debt. The State does not produce wealth, ever.
Between your banker federal reserve tax, your State tax, your city tax, your sales tax, your property tax, your gas tax, and on and on it goes. You spend well over 50% of your income on taxes. Now if everyone had that 50% more each year, they’d spend it. Which would mean that many more jobs would be needed to accomodate the goods people would buy. Unless of course you don’t think everyones income doubling would spur the economy.
The State, however, will never do that because all their power is based upon stealing the wealth of the serfs. Which is why I’ve never voted because all politicians seek to enhance the power of the State.
Wanna hear something so strange you won’t believe I said it? The worst thing that could possibly happen in politics would be for the MRM to become an entrenched entity in the State like feminism is. Ya know why? Because the only way for men to achieve financial parity with women in State affairs would be to double the tax rate so we all enjoy the same entitlements.
…in all of human history? Citation needed.
I’d point out that Melissa Harris Perry has been advocating for Trayvon Martin for several weeks on her show, but I suspect that wouldn’t count for you for some mysterious reason.
Also Obama’s polling lead over Romney is 51% to 37% among women across 12 states. I wasn’t a big math fan but I’m pretty sure 51% /= all.
@NWO
If men are never willing to ever stand up for women in the face of discrimination, sexual assault, domestic violence, pay inequity, etc., should any woman give a flying damn about men? It works both ways. Why should we care about you when it’s obvious you don’t care about us?
Yes, there are men who stand up for women. (Thanks, Dave!) But you are not one of them. You are a hateful little troll.
I wasn’t a big math fan but I’m pretty sure 51% /= all.
In NWO-math the only numbers are 0%, 99%, and 100%. 51% rounds to 99%.
Those poll numbers are just approximations, anyway.