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:
@the black fedora
What are we misinterpreting? And (from the damn article at the top of the page):
Yes, I do think it makes you a shitty person that you’re defending a rapist.
@CassandraSays, Eurosabra
Consider yourselves enlightened.
French silk pie is probably one of the greatest pies I have ever tasted. Pistachio pudding pie is also fabulous, but I think that most people are disgusted by it.
The Traditional Medicinals tea a regular supermarket might have! The cramp bark is stronger, though, I use the raspberry leaf tea more as a preventative/regular thing to stop the cramps from arriving at all.
And Eurosabra is back to being awful. I knew the moment of clarity was too good to last. Dude, there’s nothing wrong with feeling disappointed if a potential dating scenario doesn’t work out how you’d hoped, it’s the point at which you start thinking that your disappointment imposes any obligation on other people to mitigate it, or justifies your disregarding someone else’s no, where your behavior crosses over from “reasonable” to “totally unreasonable and also creepy”.
So the pie is a chocolate mousse of sorts topped with…whipped cream?
“So the pie is a chocolate mousse of sorts topped with…whipped cream?”
Pretty much.
Wow. Delicious.
BTW just as a general information blast, raspberry leaf tea is supposed to help with acne and other skin irritation issues too.
Do you have Nations (small burger joint chain) in the South Bay? I’m not a big pie person but Mr C is and he likes their pies a lot.
South Bay? As far as I can tell, it’s all over the Bay Area. There’s even one close to where I live.
Shrug. So I can feel horrible about being rejected, and hold my tongue. My thoughts and feelings are my own affair. Actually voicing the sentiment of “You don’t actually get to say no” is either A)Part of an explicitly-negotiated kink scenario B)Boorish, if you don’t present a threat or C)Terrifying, if you do. And I have no interest in introducing boorishness or terror to a situation in which I am simply the not-quite-getting-it guy who seems to be biting his tongue.
Um, eurosabra, it is a threat.
You could also drop the martyr act about how horrible it is to be asked to hold your tongue in order to avoid discomfiting or scaring other people.
Okay, so hold your tongue. *shrug*. But you WEREN’T in this case. You were talking to us (not holding your tongue) about how you wanted to say that. So… you were still spewing your creepy attitudes at us, which we’re allowed to judge you for.
Nope. Violating someone’s boundaries is inherently threatening.
I think there are some people whose bodies are read such that they could not make that statement sound threatening. I think somebody exceptionally attractive might be excused for it, especially if female-bodied or if it could be passed off as a joke, or somebody whose body could be read as non-threatening for cultural reasons related to disability, stature, or other status. That quibble aside, I agree that it is threatening from a “reasonable person” standard but I think there are some contexts in which and people for whom which it would not be instantly *terrifying*. It’s still boorish and ridiculous, unless delivered as part of a scene.
Whether it’s frightening to the rejector is entirely dependent on that person’s level of comfort.
Shut up, Eurosabra. You can even make French Silk pie creepy as fuck. Buzz off.
I see Pell got a day pass for the computer.
Again, never having said that to anyone, I don’t have any way to judge. I would offer to attempt to gather survey data, but my bones would take too long to knit.
No one cares about your bones or boners EuroCreep. Shoo.
I should be allowed to be boorish, dammit! On this strategically important hill I shall die.
Sure, if you want to, but everyone else will make their judgements about you accordingly.
Does anyone else get the feeling that Eurosabra’s recent fondness for the phrase “explicitly-negotiated” is a thinly-veiled attempt to make us forget all the times he talked about PUA as non-negotiated and non-consensual “kink?” Because that’s definitely the vibe I’m getting.
@Gametime
I missed those times, so I can’t comment, but in that context you supplied, it is definitely skeeving me out.
/shrug
Sure, it’s possible there could be contingent tangents that make the situation, at the time, less threatening or even not threatening at all.
It’s not a grand statement, and yes, you are right there!
It just doesn’t, well, matter much. Violating boundaries is still threatening, you just lucked out that other circumstances made it less so.
q:
@eurosabra
Nope. It is a threat. Bodies don’t change that.
Wow. Okay lets see:
1) still a threat if you’re attractive
2)still a threat if a girl says it
3) still a threat if someone with a disability says it
wow. What do you know, it doesn’t matter who says it its still a threat. Looks like you are full of shit ::drumroll:: Again!