Blog posts by the New Misogynists I write about here often seem to be little more than combinations and recombinations of a relatively small number of very bad ideas. Today, let’s look at a blog post from a “conservative libertarian” and creepy Nice Guy ™ who identifies himself only as TIC, which combines a bit of “consent is hard” and “women only like bad boys” with some muddled notions from Evo Psych to conclude that women are such mysterious creatures that no one could possibly know what they really want — and so therefore it’s women who are the ones who are really responsible when they get raped.
It’s an argument that bears a strong similarity to the stories rapists tell themselves to excuse their actions. When people describe so-called Nice Guys ™ as creepy, this is why: in a lot of ways, they think like predators. In the case of TIC here, exactly like predators.
TIC starts off by ridiculing the notion that “no means no.”
Women are notorious for always warning men that “no means no”. For us men who have dealt with enough women, we know this to be pure malarkey. If “no” always meant “no”, many men would die virgins. There would also be fewer rapes as a result, because for once women would mean what they said instead of talking in indirect code language.
And now the victim blaming begins in earnest:
Women, many times, bring rape upon themselves. They purposely reject men, even ones they are interested in, in order to get him to chase her. Since women love to be the prize and the center of attention, leading a man on a wild goose chase through all sorts of hoops and mind games is all too common in today’s society.
Now, if this were actually true it would be, well, sort of annoying for straight men who don’t like jumping through hoops. TIC, though, seems to have convinced himself that the fact that some women play coy in the dating world somehow makes it literally impossible for men to tell when and if they’re raping a woman.
What this does is blur the line between what is acceptable for a man to do to a woman and what is not…because once we can all agree that women want to be chased, we can understand what a predicament it puts men into. Since “no” does not always mean “no”, there is no real way for a man to know when to stop his advances upon a woman.
TIC now pulls out some half-baked Evo Psych to bolster his alleged argument:
My theory as to why women give such pieces of advice goes back to dark triad genes or the lack thereof. You see, when a woman tells a man that he should just be himself, or to respect women, or to give them compliments, or that “no means no”, what she is actually doing is bullshitting the male. This is a weeding out mechanism that women use in order to ensure that men who don’t get it never will.
He follows this up with a fairly standard Nice Guy ™ whine.
You see, women do not want nice guys to propagate their genes. They do not wish for them to be successful with women. This is why advice coming from women is never good; it has been sabotaged from the get-go.
Well, actually, If women are telling Nice Guys ™ that “no means no” because they don’t want to have sex with these Nice Guys ™ aren’t these women, however mean you think they are, communicating what they want pretty clearly?
TIC moves on to another standard Nice Guy ™ complaint: that women actually get to turn down men for sex. Never mind that men also have the right to refuse sex with anyone they want. To the dedicated Nice Guy ™, the fact that women can say “no” means that they’re the ones running the show. And doing a terrible job of it, to boot.
Women have the power and control in the dating scene. This is important to note because it means that any and every problem with society in the context of female-male relations falls on the shoulders of women themselves.
And we’re back in Evo Psych-land again:
If women decide to start dating men who are genuine, nice, and honest, then that is what most men will become. Since women, however, are only attracted to males with dark triad genes, that is what most men strive to be. The ones that do not either are alone or being used.
Therefore, women are responsible for getting raped:
[S]ince women have decided to make men chase and act in an overly-aggressive fashion in order to get sex, the rape culture pervades society. Make no mistake about it, women invariably cause most rapes.
Oh, but ladies, TIC isn’t necessarily blaming you personally for being raped. You may be a perfectly virtuous woman. It’s all those other ladies who created the rape culture that got you raped.
Now, this is not to say that specific individuals who are victims of raped caused it or even desired it. The point is that women overall have created an environment in which only sexually aggressive, narcissistic, abrasive men are seen as sexually attractive (these traits are what women interpret as being “confident”).
They have created an environment in which “no” doesn’t mean “no”, it actually means “try harder, keep going, I want to be chased, I want to feel wanted even though you’ve already made it clear that you want me. I want to play games and toy with you until I’m satisfied.”
Huh. I thought women were only interested in aloof dudes who insult them and refuse to buy them drinks, not with supplicating so-called betas falling over themselves to chase women. At least that’s what all the Pickup Artists keep telling me.
But no. In TIC’s world, women are mysterious creatures who delight in mystifying men, and men have no choice but to try, and try, and try again.
Men are constantly placed in awkward, unsure situations because what women want is always esoteric.
If women are so “esoteric” how is it that so many of them manage to end up in relationships with people they love? Surely at some point they must have managed to convey to their partners what they wanted.
Should he approach? If she rejects him, should he continue his advances because that’s what she may want deep down? Who knows?
Who knows? You should know, dude, and if you don’t, you should find out. Seriously, if you honestly can’t tell if a woman wants to make out with you, or have sex with you, or even just watch an episode of Mad Men with you, STOP WHAT YOU’RE DOING and USE WORDS to ASK HER what she wants.
If you ask if she wants to have sex and she says no, assume she means no, and don’t have sex with her. And don’t assume she said “no” because she thinks you’re a spineless beta for asking. Seriously. If a woman really wants to have sex with you, chances are infinitesimally slim that she’s going to change her mind and throw you out simply because you actually asked her if she wants to have sex. (And if she is that sort of person, count your blessings that you’re not dating her, and move on.)
If the woman you’re pursuing is such a flighty game player that for some perverse manipulative reason she won’t say “yes” when she means “yes,” DON’T HAVE SEX WITH HER. Assume that anything short of a clear “yes” is a “no.” And maybe think about dating someone who can communicate what she wants more clearly.
If you assume that ambiguity means no, the worst that can happen is that miss out on having sex with someone who’s up for having sex with you, but who for some reason can’t or won’t tell you what she really wants. A missed chance to have sex is not the end of the world. If, by contrast, you assume that ambiguity means yes, the worst that can happen is that you rape someone. Err on the side of caution. Don’t err on the side of rape.
Unfortunately, like most of those who pretend that consent is somehow more complicated than quantum physics, TIC doesn’t actually seem much interested in figuring out the alleged mysteries of consent. He seems more interested in providing an excuse for men who want to pretend that consent is so hard, and women such mysterious creatures, that they just can’t help raping women.
For many men, leaving things to chance is not an option. They will continue to press the issue in order to find out the woman’s true intentions.
“Press the issue.” That may be the creepiest euphemism for rape I’ve run across yet.
Thus is the nature of women: enablers of the very thing they claim to despise the most.
No, it’s the nature of sexual predators to pretend that a clear verbal “no” from the target of their sexual advances means “keep pushing,” and, indeed, that any response short of a punch in the nose is evidence that their victim “really wants it.”
Rapists like to pretend that they somehow “misunderstood” the signals their victims gave them. But there’s good research showing that this just isn’t true – and that the predators know it. As Thomas Macaulay Millar has pointed out in a much-cited post on the Yes Means Yes blog, predators can read the signals from their victims just fine. It’s just that they don’t like what their victims are trying to tell them – that is, no. “[T]he notion that rape results from miscommunication is just wrong,” Millar writes. “Rape results from a refusal to heed, rather than an inability to understand, a rejection.”
And this is where predators and Nice Guys ™ find common cause. Predators don’t really care what their victims want, and will keep going regardless of whether or not they get a clear message to stop; pretending that women are mysterious creatures unable to convey what they want gives them a perfect excuse for their predatory behavior.
Nice Guys, by contrast, may not actually be confident enough to believe that the women they fixate on will ever say yes to them. And so they’re drawn to the same specious arguments about the alleged “esoteric” nature of women that predators spout — because these half-believed arguments enable them to pretend that ambigious signals — or even flat-out no’s — are yeses in disguise.
TIC’s argument doesn’t explain rape culture. His argument is rape culture.
Yeah, I might just do that. Leave the fancy stuff to people who know what they’re doing. Haha, I’m actually scared of attempting to blockquote – but at least people will be nice, right?
We’ll be nice. But we make no promises about the Blockquote Monster.
RAWR BLOCKQUOTE MONSTER!!
It’s always good to find nice people on the internet!
Pff, nice people? Everyone knows that we’re the meanest people on the internet. Especially to new people. We hate new people.
What is it that women most desire?
Forget Freud, wasn’t that figured out in like, the 14th or 15th century? Sir Gawain and the Loathly Lady ring any bells? Weird, how the ‘chivalry for the feminine women’ crowd overlooks that little tale.
wewereemergencies – hi and welcome!
D’you use Firefox? They’ve a toolbar add-on with html buttons. Saves mucking around trying to write it out and tempting the blockquote monster. Search for “text formatting toolbar” on their add-ons page and you’ll find it. It’s saved me from about 99.9% of my usual blockquote disasters. 😛
zippydoo – darn right they overlook that!
You notice how it’s framed in that tale (at least the version I read in Roger Lancelyn Green’s book) – that women want “their own way” like men don’t. If it was framed as “freedom to choose” it’d be rather different.
At least Gawain does the right thing. It’s far worse for Ragnell than for him.
Translation: “I didn’t mow the lawn all last summer. Next year I’ll stick some tomato seedlings into a tub, water them every third weekend, and toss them on the dung heap as soon as they’ve produced that first tomato. They’re worthless after that.”
If he’s as good at farming as he is with human interaction, that’s about what I’d expect. Cucumbers need to be DOMINATED!
Also, those slutty snap peas won’t stop throwing themselves at him.
@sippydoo:
@kittehs:
WARNING COERCION, RAPE, THREAT OF VIOLENCE
When men ask That Question, their answers always say more about them than about women. Not to mention that the question itself is flawed.
The earliest English story that I know of that asks That Question is the Wife of Bath’s tale, which is, yeah, 14th Century.
Basically, women are very ugly and demanding until you give them all the power, at which point they turn into stunning beauties and promise that they’ll do everything you say even though they have all the power … huh.
Yeah, it’s waaaaaaaay problematic even before you consider the rape bits.
Then there’s the song King Henry, which is pretty much the same tale except the woman is an ogre who demands Henry give up all his fun stuff and then sex her, and then she turns into a stunning beauty when he meets all her demands. It’s either kill all his hunting animals and feed them to her, or she will eat him.
I dunno how old the song is. Steeleye Span has a version from the 1970s.
@LBT: Re Smut Peddler — I like Amanda Lafrenais’ work a whole lot, but I’m not familiar with anyone else in the collection. I haven’t worked up the nerve to get it yet, so I just see Lafrenais on Slipshine and on her comics. I think some things Slipshine publishes are great, and others are meh.
To crush their enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their men?
@Falconer-
Well, I don’t find the tale exactly the epitome of feminist empowerment, or anything close, and I think there’s older tales than the Wife of Bath that have the same archetype. It does kind of end with ‘And he wins a sexy, obedient fuck-buddy to show off to his bros!’ I love old mythology and legends, but they tend to be depressingly heavy on the rape. For intense, I love the story of Psyche and Cupid because she’s all gutsy going into the Underworld and completing some other tasks, but it does have a lot of extremely negative elements.
But when someone is using the BS benevolent sexism bingo card lines, asking ‘what women want’, and pretending it’s to have someone else decide everything for them, it’s fairly amusing. One of the most successful Arthurian-legend marriages is the one where some knight gets stuck with a rude, ugly, old woman of noble birth, and he only ‘wins’ when instead of chopping off heads, he just lets her decide what she wants to do with her own body. Being authored by men, the outcome is to be expected, but the acknowledgement that women actually want sovereignty, even if they’re not given it, is still there, centuries earlier than Freud’s sexist assumptions.
Okay, this was bad enough
I mean, I giggled and all, but this was just too much
So, Buttercup, where do I send the bill for cleaning the coffee out of the laptop keyboard and my nose?
And by the way, thank you. I needed that today.
Or as I like to call it Tuesday 🙂
Time for another Olga of Kiev reference? Or Jeanne de Clisson, the Lioness of Brittany, who always left just one victim alive to tell that she had struck again?
Funny things I thought of while reading this that no one has yet said:
J.S.: “I’m one in a million”
…so there are at least 300 more of you in the US? And a coupla thousand worldwide? Bummer, now my chances of running into a You are that much higher. Do us all a favor and kill down some of your clones, huh?
J.S.: “Go read a Harlequin romance”
Okay, now I’m beginning to think you really are in your fifties, cause who else calls them that?
RE: katz
I think I may have attracted a pickup artist to my DA account.
On DA? Why on earth would a PUA hang out on DA, it’s mostly made up of teenagers and–
Oh. Goddammit.
RE: Kittehs
I made the mistake of using the usual Paypal option instead of the “money to a friend/relative” one when paying gf my half of our hotel money. Mongrels grabbed 20 bucks from it!
Actually, you need not worry! An anonymous benefactor has swept out of the wings and volunteered to cover the cost of the portrait! You shan’t pay a cent.
RE: Falconer
@LBT: Re Smut Peddler — I like Amanda Lafrenais’ work a whole lot, but I’m not familiar with anyone else in the collection.
Though I don’t own this anthology myself, I want to, in part because I know of a lot of the artists involved with it, and feel pretty safe vouching for the work of Jess Fink, Carla Speed McNeil, Erika Moen, EK Weaver, and Blue Delliquanti. They’re great artists who do great work.
…man, I’m just realizing how many kickass people I know of due to making comics, even though Jess Fink is the only one I’ve met in person. (She bought a thing from me!)
Regarding Slipshine, yeah, it’s a grab-bag. Most porn things with a bunch of different creators are, in my opinion. Part of the reason I loved Queerotica so much was that there was only one story I felt any dislike towards; the others ranged from ‘meh’ to ‘OMG THIS IS AMAZING,’ and the latter was more common. (It helped that I personally knew a lot of the creators, so got to congratulate them personally!)
Danielle Corsetto of “Girls with Slingshots” has a bit in Smut Peddler too. She was posting some previews a couple weeks back. GWS is one of the comics in my regular-read bookmarks.
Yeah, basically, Smut Peddler is full of pretty cool people and I’m glad it exists and want to own it myself.
Hey, trolly dude. You’re too heavyset for me, and also too old, so I’d reject you even if you weren’t a creep. Sorry about that!
Everyone else – damn, this one is dull. Can we return him to the troll store and ask for a refund?
Aw, he left before I could ask him if his farm was directly on the beach.
Wheeeee! Barrel o’ kitty* hugs to anonymous benefactor!
*or Furrinati of your choice
I kinda wonder if the “play” JS gets is from sex workers. I’m in my 20s and the easiest clients to get are those middle aged. And the whole “I’m a middle aged nice blah blah blah” occurs multiple times daily on my phone. It’s BS. I know it. But guess what? I’m super sweet & I’m super keen! Why? Cos I’m super attracted to the cash you pay to see & touch me. The end. Thanks for playing JS. I’ll see you next booking. Bring the $$$
The one-tree forest that everyone knows about.
Suddenly I’m hearing the Knights of Ni:
“We want a SHRUBBERY!”
The hanging gardens of babyloin?