So “dating” guru Roosh has a post up on his Return of Kings blog by another self-professed dating guru, Alex Matlock, who rates various types of “bad sex” according to the type of female partner who’s involved in them, including such charmingly named types as “The one that tries too much (aka The Disaster)” and “The one that doesn’t move (aka The Starfish or The Doll).”
I expected a good deal of standard-issue manosphere misogyny in Matlock’s list, but I honestly couldn’t make it past his description of what he regards as the second-worst type of female sex partner: “The one that’s scared (aka The Virgin).” Because what he’s describing doesn’t sound so much like “bad sex” as “date rape.”
[TRIGGER WARNING for what follows; emphasis mine.]
.
.
.
.
This girl doesn’t necessarily have to be a virgin because she can still act the part many years after she’s popped that priceless cherry. She will usually look at you with fear in her eyes as if she has no idea about what’s going to happen. She gently pushes you away as if she’s not ready for the event and when it does happen she continues to act like it’s the first time. She usually sits in some extremely awkward positions that make you give up and just go missionary. This girl will eventually bust your nut but she’ll surely leave you with a sense of disappointment and/or guilt.
Uh, Mr. Matlock, I’m hoping for everyone’s sake that this is a hypothetical “humorous” scenario you’ve come up with for the sake of this article and not something you’ve been a part of in the actual real world on a regular basis, because, unless you’ve left out that portion of the hypothetical events in which the woman in question clearly and unequivocally consents to having sex with your hypothetical protagonist here, what you’ve just described as “bad sex” (for the hypothetical dude) is actually a description of, well, rape from the point of view of the rapist.
In which case that twinge of guilt your hypothetical protagonist hypothetically feels is probably just the tiny part of his hypothetical self that’s still human reacting to the fact that he JUST (hypothetically) FUCKING RAPED SOMEONE.
MRAs and PUAs and manospherean assholes generally like to pretend that consent is some weird and mysterious thing, but it’s really not. Here’s a hint: if a women looks at you with fear in her eyes and pushes you away all while sitting in a position that makes sex difficult …. all that means NO.
The fact that Matlock — despite those twinges of guilt — still doesn’t regard this as the worst kind of “bad sex” (for the guy) but merely the second-worst adds a certain level of absurdity to the horror.
Given Roosh’s publication of this piece by Matlock, and the fact that he himself has already confessed to committing what would be considered date rape by American standards by having sex with at woman too inebriated to give consent, perhaps it’s time to stop referring to Roosh as a dating guru and to start referring to him as a date rape guru.
I don’t really have anything else to say.
Here, as brain bleach, are some cats with smaller versions of themselves:
@cloudiah
Whatever kind of biology will prove fedora’s point 😉 duh.
DO MALE BANANA SLUGS ONLY GO FOR FEMALE BANANA SLUGS WITH BIG BREASTS? Seems like that would be an evolutionary advantage, is all I’m saying.
Cloud
Male human biology. Why do you need to ask?
@black fedora
…What? You can’t be arsed to acknowledge that gay men exist? Because it is something you have no experience in (meeting gay men? Orly? Or being a gay man? But you are convinced women can ‘lead men’ in relationships by using ‘subtle signs’. Do you talk about things you don’t have experience in, or don’t you?
I would rather be trying to converse with a banana slug.
Fedora, I thought you were Going Your Own Way. Shouldn’t you not have any direct experience with most of this stuff?
Please call me clo.
augo
Actually a take down of bad evo psi would be a service to humanity. I think some scientifically trained person should do it. It would be far more useful than some of the tired old man bashing here.
Sorry, my last comment was directed at Fedora dude. The rest of you can continue calling me cloudiah.
clo
Be my guest.
@Pecunium:
I think I have a new favorite qoutation. Ah, thank you for making me giggle like a ditzy butterfly.
@The Black Fedora:
Thank you, yeah. We sort of understand each other. English isn’t my first language, so I understand that there might be some difficulties in expressing myself.
There’s some meaning loss and we didn’t quite get each other, but I feel we’re making progress. Come back next week, and we’ll really get started. My hourly rate is five quid.
Wire it to me over paypal, we’ll work it out. Same account we do Minter’s work over 🙂
@Thread:
This is amazing. Literally awe inspiring.
augo
Men going their own way can have friendships with women and even the occasional sexual encounter. The difference is that his worth as a human being is not determined by his popularity with the fair sex. He may therefore be fully authentic and devote himself to some higher purpose that serves humanity as a whole.
In fact, I rather think we ARE conversing with a banana slug wearing a little black hat.
This makes the conversation charming.
Not looking at breasts is as simple as…not looking at them.
Also, you have no understanding of objectification whatsoever. Whether looking at someone’s breasts is objectifying depends on the context and the behavior of the viewer. For instance, I happen to notice people’s breasts from time to time, but I don’t fucking stare at them or objectify the people who have them.
A banana slug with a “fully authentic” special pen that he goes peacocking with.
Adorable.
@Black fedora
All it requires is not having your worth determined by
womenthe “Fair” sex? DAng, who knew my dad was going his own way? My brother too.Yes! QFT. There is a big difference between thinking someone has nice breasts and objectifying them. Trollboy should learn this.
Fedora
I’m not throwing out “subtle signals” to most of the men that hit on me.
BSBSBSBSBSBSBS
Please don’t tell me what I do or don’t do. You are not me. You are not any of the ladies on this thread. You say you can’t speak for gay men because you don’t know. Then you shouldn’t be speaking for me or any of the other ladies on this thread because you don’t know.
Aai
I try to avoid being ‘caught’ too. Why can people not simply be honest and admit the eye goes where it goes? There is nothing disrespectful about admiring a good pair of breasts.
I assume that I’m “Nep”. Sparky, that’s waaaay too familiar a form of address from you.
Yeah, see there are plenty of cultures in which large breasts are not considered particularly attractive. In the 1920s, American women used flatteners to be more attractive. The nape of the neck is or was considered particularly sexual in Japan.
If staring at large breasts were biologically encoded, we would expect large breasts to be considered attractive in nearly every culture in nearly every time period. And then there’s the real world. But I’m sure, since you’re not very familiar with it, that you don’t often talk about the real world.
I have not had much contact with gay men. Plenty with women.
Dude, just look, move on with your life. You’re probably only going to get ‘caught’ if you’re staring, which is disrespectful.
Indeed, I believe most men I know are Going Their Own Way by this definition. This realization is so staggering that my brains would explode if Zombie Marie had not already eaten them.
Like making a fool of himself in some website comments section.
You call that a nickname? =S
Umm, you can still be an objectifying asshole even if you don’t get caught objectifying someone. And YET AGAIN you fail at reading comprehension.
However, you (I’m assuming) have not had any experience being a woman, muchless all women, so I’m going to give a big fucking bullshit that we lead men with our sUpEr sEcReT sIgNaLs. Also, you probably have had a good amount of contact with gay men. You just wouldn’t have know they are gay. Not all gay people are out to everyone they know.