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:
You can keep calling me “a rape apologist”, but since I am not advocating rape, you can stop.
Reread the part again where it says she precedes “as if she doesnt know what is about to happen.” She’s playing a game. It’s a subtle text, I’ll give you that the meaning is difficult, but saying this guy is advocating rape is incorrect. There are other instances in the manosphere where rape is encouraged for real. It would be more intellectually honest to pull examples from there.
Have you considered just not advocating rape? It might be easier.
You get that the subtext there is in Matlock’s head, as he actually isn’t a telepath, right?
Um no shit, it’s the only consistent feature of your movement.
Nope. Sorry.
Believing that men are not telepaths: is it misandry?
@kittehs
Thank you! 😀 *bows deeply*
@Bigdaddy
“You can keep calling me a rape apologist, oh wait, actually stop”. Also, once more again, just because you say something does not make it true. You are being a rape apologist. You are excusing rape. Stop, and people will stop calling you one.
So subtle, there was no damn consent involved, only clear signs she didn’t want it. You want to know who’s great at convincing themselves it wasn’t rape, the other person was secretly into, even if they didn’t express so in any way, shape or form?
Rapists.
Well…you’re not wrong.
David has. It’s a big blog, this is just one article.
No Marie,
Rape apologist is not my foray.
Xenophobia? Cultural supremacy?
Guilt as charged. But not rape apologist.
So you can either tell me coherently where my reading is wrong
Or you can keep name calling and being patronizing. Im sure the other readers here really think you’re cool. Really.
It’s just hit me, trollboy just did the ‘why aren’t you writing about what I want on your blog?’ didn’t he? At least he didn’t direct the whole spiel at David…
We have several times, but here it is again: Matlock is not a telepath. He has no way of distinguishing what a person thinks and what she is expressing.
If you have sex with someone who is expressing in every way that they don’t want to have sex with you, you’re a rapist.
If a woman ever has to physically prevent you from doing a sexual position that she doesn’t want, you’re a rapist.
This is basic life education.
@bigdaddy
Nice to know* you’re an asshole in other parts of your life too. However, I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, just because you say something doesn’t make it true. You act like a rape apologist. You are excusing rape. Deal with it.
*not actually nice.
Also, is trolly here trying to pit us against each other here? XD
Unless you have any citations to prove:
1. Matlock is, in fact, a telepath.
2. This woman did express clear consent.
Then you are suporting a rapist, so fuck you.
A decent human being takes expression of non-consent at face value even when they don’t reflect the person’s true intentions.
So let me get this straight?
You know my position better than I do?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I’m sitting here telling you I’m not a rape apologist,
Yet you’re basically saying “yes you are, you just dont know it.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You have some sort of sick need to see persecution where there is none.
That, in a nutshell is the issue here. Nevermind anyones intentions,
YOU’VE GOT A POINT TO PROVE AND YOU’LL BE DAMNED IF ANY FACTS GET IN THE WAY.
…Did we just get a second troll in a row confessing to supporting neo-Nazis?
You’re defending a rapist. Unless you can prove that this woman did consent, that Matlock is telepathic, or that you’re not defending Matlock, then you are defending a rapist.
If you feel bad about that maybe you should try not defending rapists.
@bigdaddy
*sigh* dude, you’re words spell loud and clear that you’re a rape apologist. If I say I love ducks, and spend every day kicking ducks, or telling people they shouldn’t have pet ducks, my actions speak way louder than my thrown in disclaimer.
Aaaallllll the projection.
FORTUNATELY WE DO HAVE FACTS ON OUR SIDE HERE. YOU JUST DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THEM.
ALSO LET’S SCREAM IN CAPS BECAUSE THAT’S TOTALLY NOT OBNOXIOUS
Hey, ill own the name where it fits, racist supremacist etc.
But not this time.
Call me an asshole. Oh well.
Marie, stick to the topic. No evasions.
@katz
I think we did. :/ Couldn’t the trolls try to limit their ‘shitty human being-ness’?
Intentions, are they fucking magic?
@bigdaddy
How did I evade, besides pointing out your words contradicted your disclaimer. You said you weren’t a rape apologist, but then immediately started saying it wasn’t rape because she must have magically wanted it, and been playing some game.
Own your damn shit.
Says the guy who has refused for a half an hour to provide citations that this woman did consent.
The burden of proof is on gou to prove it was a rape, slick.
No where in the article was rape advocated for or claimed. In the story the girl did have sex with him, and it was not stated it was non consensual.
Try again.
@ugh
It’s been half an hour? time flies when you’re poking trolls…
At least I got icing on my dad’s cake, but I can’t think of anything nice to put on it. He may just have to eat it non-decorated, though at least it will still be tasty.
Let us all pause for a minute and savor the delicious irony of this statement coming from a man convinced that he can tell, for sure, no doubt, that a woman who appears to be frightened and is trying to push the man in bed with her away is just faking and actually totes wants to have sex.
@bigdaddy
And it is your burden to actually read the damn proof. She never consented. She clearly resisted. That is rape.