Over on Reddit, an MRA named AryoBarzan sets the feminist slut ladies straight on the BIOTRUTH about their ever-growing and FAR less pleasurable vaginas. (Ignore the rude person replying to his message; clearly Aryo is the real penis and vagina expert here.)
Wait, you say to yourself, how is it that this bold truth-teller is being downvoted, on Reddit? He posted in the antimensrights subreddit, that’s why. In the Men’s Rights subreddit he normally gets the upvotes he so richly deserves.
—
Note: Post contains, like, a lot of
@Morkais, obviously it breaks down at the extreme of zero sex; the inverse correlation holds through most of the range of people who have at least some sex. Oddly, there’s not much sign of it breaking down at the other extreme; for example, research on prostitutes in developed countries regularly finds them to have substantially lower STD rates than the general population, and so not to be a significant factor in STD transmission in those countries, contrary to their reputation. That pattern seems especially likely to be different in third world countries, though I haven’t actually encountered much solid research on prostitutes and STDs in the third world so I can’t say for sure about that.
@Protagoras, I will love you for all time in return for a link or two to those studies. I know should really just google them myself but I’ve spent all day locating and then unpicking the legalese of Scottish law on human trafficking, and I might expire if faced with navigating another unfamiliar discipline …
It varies, and there are degrees, but yes, if a vagina is tight and dry enough, it can be seriously uncomfortable to try and insert a penis into it.
Which may be irrelevant. MRA’s seem to measure sexual success in terms of conquest, not pleasure.
@ Viscaria – Yeah, sounds like an all-around asshole. Well rid of him.
I do not know about rate of STDs, but the studies have shown a clear correlation between teenage pregnancy stats and whether or not states are abstinence only education:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/04/10/461402/teen-pregnancy-sex-education/
By not teaching teenagers about safe sex, birth control, etc., that means that the pregnancy rates increase.
Texas is not only third in teen pregnancies, but FIRST in repeat teen pregnancies (teens having a second child): http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/mar/07/gail-collins/new-york-times-columnist-gail-collins-say-texas-ra/
Yup, that abstinence only method really really works……………………NOT.
My abstinence teacher came into class on the first day and told us a heartwarming tale about the power of True Love and Not Doing The Icky Bad Thing until you were married, and how glad she was that her choice to remain abstinent gave her lots of options in life until she got married. Her husband gave her HPV or something, but that was besides the point.
Wheee for delayed catching up! /sarcasm
Crumbelievable — I imagine “he`s being being subjected to “mad shaming” by the feminists” means “shaming like mad” but I read that as “shaming of the mad” (mad meaning mentally ill here) and wanted to note that feminists are generally pretty good about not being ableist, or at least knowing when to STFU&L (& listen).
Cliff // re: evo-psych — “It’s kind of sadly hilarious in terms of humans’ no-medical-care-no-sanitation life expectancies.” — I don’t recall now if it was a philosopher professor, or book for class, but I took a philosophy course that sort of touched on the BS of ev-psych (more just how most people fuck up survival of the fittest). But if you have two islands with hippos, and one gets completely killed by a volcano or something, the other will be the genes that survive, not because they’re more fit, but because evolution is not that simple. They don’t listen though, last time I tried telling an ev-psych fan that ability to successfully defend against sabre-tooth tigers would also make a difference, I got told to read some ev-psych book >.< (I think that was Vindicare, though I'm not sure).
I'm also amused ev-psych is so obsessed with sex, when things like language might actually be worth their time (and the cost of the degree!)
To whomever suggested these men can't label female anatomy — the guys in my HS health class couldn't label their own anatomy. So yeah, wouldn’t surprise me any if female anatomy is a mystery to them. (Plenty of the girls couldn’t label all their anatomy either, but they did better overall, or so it seemed at least.) — That is anecdotal data about 16 year olds though, so apply salt to it.
Protagoras: I was being silly. 😉 Interesting stuff about it not falling down at the other end, though.
I suppose he JOs all the time with a deathgrip, then gets pissed because when he has sex with a woman, she’s got a vagina between her legs instead of a greased-up fist, and he’s possibly got a desensitized wang.
Evo-psych theories are also so incredibly culturally specific. Not only do they assume the views and habits of a few specific cultures are universal to all cultures, they assume the views and habits of a specific class within that narrow group of cultures applies to everyone.
I can’t even make evopsych notions look sensible as applied to the culture I grew up in, rural Appalachian US. Let alone trying to actually apply it to non-European dominated cultures, migratory cultures, etc.
The only way a person could see evopsych as making sense is if they have no grasp on anthropology, biology, or history as well as being class privileged cis hetero westerners.
I’m having WAY too much fun with this.
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3piixr/
I’ll stay on topic here.
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3pij2d/
GSW, here’s a news story about a typical Dutch study:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/24/us-diseases-swingers-idUSTRE65N51U20100624
It focuses on the high rate among swingers, but the mentioned low rate among prostitutes is typical of all the studies I’ve encountered. I know there have been a lot of pretty thorough Australian studies, and some in Canada, but I’m afraid I don’t have links handy. The legal situation in the U.S. is different from that in the Netherlands, and also different from that in Canada or Australia, but the various studies I’ve seen have never shown that to make much difference (the legal situation is different in different parts of Australia, but the Australian studies which compared regions haven’t found the legal differences to have noticable effects).
RE: STDs conversation-
I think it has a LOT more to do with how many partners you actually trust and who have a history of using protection than the sheer number of partners you’ve had sex with.
For example, a person has 10 sex partners who all use condoms responsibly and who get STD testing on a regular basis, is far less likely to get infected with an STD.
On the other hand, a person who has 1 sex partner who has had a history of having tons of sex without using condoms and not knowing their partners very well is probably REALLY LIKELY to get infected with an STD (especially if said 1 sex partner puts the pressure on them to not use protection of any kind).
Obviously, these are the extremes here, but the bottom line (at least for me) is that I personally would like to not engage in any one-night stand sorts of casual sex, or indeed, any sex that involves genitals that involves not really knowing my sex partner’s history at all.
Completely forgetting the whole “my sexual organs do not like to orgasm in the presence of strangers” thing, the health risks are far more concerning to me than the possibility of feeling good in sexual play with someone I don’t know is even good at reciprocation.
No, I think he`s literally saying that he`s being shamed for being angry. He goes on to say that his anger is proof of his oppression because oppressed people are always mad (I guess that means white people are oppressed because white supremacists are pretty angry people)
That spearhead article is so silly. It’s as if the author believes that marriage means you miraculously stop aging or something.
If you get married between 18-25, your partner is still going to get older, meaning at 30-35 you’re gonna be with an older person anyways, only it’s likely that the person you married really young has changed so drastically that you are now stuck in a relationship with someone who you no longer love. I am all for waiting for marriage until you’re at least in you mid-20s just because of all the change you go through as a teen and young adult. The ideas I had about life even just two years ago were so different than the ones I have now. Had I married the first guy I thought I loved it would’ve probably happened that we became completely different people and would have grown apart. Plus I would’ve had no contrasting experiences to determine what I actually wanted in a partner.
It just sounds like that author is saying, “Settle young because nobody is gonna want you when you’re 30.” So then how is that marriage gonna be at 30? Two people not wanting each other but being together because they have a legal document binding them?
BTW, 30 IS NOT THAT OLD! It’s as if a 10 year old wrote that article. I know I thought 30 year olds looked crazy old as a kid, but now that I’m in the latter half of my 20’s, 30 still looks pretty good.
Assuming for the sake of argument that the absurd vagina theory is true and they really get loosened up by lots of sex, and assuming too for the sake of argument that het guys only want a vagina as tight as possible when looking for a partner, they should obviously try to find a virgin first. If they don’t find one, the second best choice would be to hit on girls who have been single for most of their adult life – EVEN if they’re promiscuous sluts. Because, seriously, a single slut probably have sex like once a month or so on average. That’s only twelve intercourses a year. The worst choice would be to hit on women who have been in long-term relationships – that’s when you really get your level of intercourse up! If a girl lives close to her boyfriend or even lives with him, they’re probably gonna have sex somewhere between once a day and once a week – that’s FAR more often than the single slut.
That guy probably just has a little dick.
Thank you, Protagoras! x
And Ruby inflicts her wisdom on us yet again. Thanks Ruby! I’m sure that’s the reason!
*facepalm*
Ruby, are done pretending you’re not trolling no?
What do you want to bet Ruby comes back with some “science” proving that the guy has a small dick?
Ruby seems to have an ongoing problem with saying “no, silly MRAs, a different sexist stereotype is true!”
@lauralot
nah, it’s gonna be more whining about how ‘extremists’ cant handle how totally original and not pc she is
ruby is just maggie without the prentiousness
*pretentiousness