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:
Nor its tasty cousin, raita. Not to mention sunomono salad.
EuroCreep has no wish to terrorize, just to ignore boundaries and be a giant creepy pest.
Eurosabra: No, I’m saying most people whose physical or social reading precludes their being perceived as a threat are also not predators, and there exist hypothetical and real utterers of that threat who would not be credible as a threat, should one’s overeaction become a penal matter. That said, I would never say that IRL because I have no wish to terrorize.
And I said there is no one who is not a threat; because this is the real world, and weapons and confederates mean that no one is never a threat. Reacting to a threat is not an overreaction.
To which you replied: Again, whether it is reasonable to discount it based on the utterer does not change the fact that from some people it is going to be discounted. Most of those people will also not be predators.
So again, it is not reasonable to assume one is, “never a threat”. Esp. with the weasel, “most of them won’t be predators.
So some are predators; even if they are, “never perceived as a threat.
No.
And don’t try to continue gaslighting me on what you said: it’s all there in black and white.
I’ll repeat myself, using small words, in case your English is failing you.
There is no one who is “not a threat” when they issue threats.
And you know it. You admit it when you say you won’t do it because you don’t want to “terrorise”.
You are a dishonest creep (which is news the way the Dead Sea is salty is news).
@Argenti Aertheri
Quite an achievement. Normally fish freak me out, but when you talk about them they sound cute 😉 Probably cuz I like hearing people talk about their pets.
QFT.
Speaking up for cucumber here, I like it! Not pickles, though.
Melody – for uber-menstrual cramps (they don’t cause nausea but they do go all the way from waist to ankles) I take Ponstan, an anti-inflammatory specifically for period pain. It’s mefenamic acid. Only thing with it is that one can’t take ibuprofen as well.
I’ve never found heat pads very helpful; I use a hot water bottle. The heat doesn’t last as long but it’s sharper and more direct, which helps me more.
Maybe, but there are reasonable and unreasonable reactions to the mere utterance in a jury’s eyes. Some reactions would be excessive in a jury’s eyes because of rhe utterer.
And I think I can finally post as Zombie Marie now! Which I tried earlier, but had to wait to get out of moderation.
I am officially a zombie, and can continue my hunger for braaaaiiiiinnnnssss!
(This is going to be really embarrassing if it doesn’t work. )
Eurosabra: So now it’s not about the effect on the listener (i.e. the person you are threatening), but how it will play to the jury.
And you wonder why we say you are a racing stripe on the shorts of the world.
I have no fucking clue what you’re trying to say, Eurosabra. Troll to english translation, anyone?
Is it really, really so difficult to refrain from saying threatening things? Really?
You get to call names but David will ban me if I reply. Must be nice to win by default.
Or if you’re a vegetarian zombie, graaaaiiiiinnnnssss!
@Eurosabra
dude, I’m pretty sure David will ban you for being a fucking rape apologist creepy way before he bans you for calling people names. Just a hint, not the words, it’s the pathetic personality you have.
Which is to say, you are (again) admitting it’s a threat, but it would be safe to utter it, because the jury will discount the reaction.
Way to set the example for the “good side” of PUA.
@kittehs
Om nom nom!
You still haven’t figured out what’s acceptable here and what isn’t?
The problem with abusers, and the abuser lobby, is not their lack of social skills. It is their world view.
Eurosob, What do you think people are winning when they tell you that you are a rape apologist and you go on at length with your rape apology?
I was thinking more in terms of most juries seeing a violent response as justified if the utterer is a man, unjustified if a woman.
Eurosabra: Nice try with the, “victim card”. It’s not bad names, or foul language which gets people banned (and you know it, you aren’t someone who’s just shown up). It’s being rape advocate (like Brandon). A person who threatens violence, or a sock-puppet master.
Saying someone is “A fuckdoll with a pulse” wasn’t enough to get NWO banned. Saying prisoners deserved to be raped wasn’t enough to get Ruby banned.
It’s work to get banned.
So yeah, I called you a shitstain. It’s because you went from, “it’s not a threat if an obvious weakling says it, because no one could feel threatened” to, “if someone is threatened by an obvious weakling, the jury won’t believe them.”
That’s not something a decent person says.
The satisfaction of slander delivered with impunity. If anything I am a Grumpy Thoughts About Rejection apologist.
And in news about men (well, one man) who isn’t
1) a PUA
2) an MRA
3) any sort of misogynist
4) therefore, not blamed by anyone for the behaviour of the first three categories
I can say that in a completely unsurprising development, Mr K has *cough* borrowed *cough* my new cable-knit cap, and looks better in it than I do.
I’m not sure whether to go for “colour me surprised” or “bloody typical” here. 🙂
20 years for firing a warning shot to escape her abuser vs 6 years for man who killed a woman.
Tell me again about juries, Eurosob.
No one owes you the effing time of day Eurosob and that is what you will no longer be getting from me.
Don’t pay attention to Eurosabra! Instead read Polliwog’s awesome guide, So You Want to Compare Something to Slavery.
It’s just one in a series of helpful guides written by manboobzers.