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:
Already done. If you are attempting to physically force somebody into a sex act, and they’re resisting, you are sexually assaulting that person.
Do you disagree with that statement?
Also, YOU’RE the one who claimed that Matlock telepathically knew that this woman was consented despite no external communication. That’s an extraordinary claim, and requires extraordinary proof.
Or, holy fuck, she knows exactly what’s about to happen — saying no won’t make him stop, so she should let him “bust his nut” since she’ll get less injured that way. Like, does it seriously take a rocket scientist to figure out that she may well know that he’s going to have sex with her (rape her) either way, and antagonizing him might make him violent, so best to give up fighting when “positioning herself to make sex impossible” doesn’t stop him from trying?
Marie is calling me a rape apologist. Never mind the fact that im not.
She knows me. She can’t prove I’m approving of rape, but damn it, she jusf knows I am.
I am not a rape apologist because the guy in the post didn’t rape the girl.
A decent human being takes expression of non-consent at face value even when they don’t reflect the person’s true intentions.
All it would take to prove this are one of two citations:
1. Matlock has psychic powers beyond the ken of humankind.
2. The woman gave consent.
If you have these citations, let’s see them. If not, then yest, he did rape her, because sex without consent is the definition of rape.
BigDaddy has almost as bad reading comprehension as the Black Fedora from the other day.
He did rape her, you stupid shitstain. Multiple people have pointed out (multiple times!) that she did not consent and that she pushed him away. You’re only defense is that she must have just been playing ‘hard to get’. You are a rape apologist. Own it.
“Just because I support men who have sex with women who aren’t consenting to sex, doesn’t mean I support rapists.”
Srsly dude, the fuck is wrong with you.
I just love, I mean fucking love, how you guys read into this allegorical story to try and prove the girl was raped. This was just a story. The point to be conveyed was her “token resistance.”
Look it up.
Go ahead I’ll wait.
You reading more detail into an allegory is downright retarded.
Marie, if you can demonstrate that the original author on Return Of Kings was advocating rape, then let’s hear it. As it stands all you got is “but but but she gave token resistance and nobody ever does that during consensual sex lolz assfucker butthead insert namd here because name callingz is kewllllzzz”
Comment got stuck in moderation.
The point of the allegorical story, Marie, is that the girl is attempting to act like a virgin with her token resistance. Only a fool would believe he was advocating rape, or a politically minded individual with an axe to grind and an author to slander.
If her gently pushing him away is resistance, then a girl gently slapping me on the arm for a raunchy joke constitutes assualt.
Don’t be so dense.
“I’m not a person who always denies that a crime happens because a crime didn’t happen!”
You get that the important word here is “resistance,” right?
Also, again with the telepathy. How the fuck would Matlock know why a woman was refusing to have sex with him?
Also, the question you’re still dodging: why the fuck would you have sex with someone who expresses that she doesn’t want to have sex with you?
Man, I HATE the idea that virgins are all blushing and nervous and shit. My first time, I got my ass on birth control, read a bunch of books on the subject, and enthusiastically attacked the guy I was seeing at the time, whilst communicating about what I wanted to try. It was really good!
ALSO, people really shouldn’t hit each other, regardless of gender and etc.
ALSO, if the girl in question was “playing a game,” this is really the ONLY appropriate response:
All other responses are creepy and bad.
How incredibly fucked up does your worldview have to be to think that it’s normal for virgins to resist having sex the first time?
Ugh, if you’ve ever had sex with a woman…they make their acceptance or denial of the acting preceding forward pretty well known.
A gentle push on the arm and acting timid and then proceding to finish the act with no further resistance is not what someone would do if they were attempting to protest. If you look at the beginning statement of the post, he makes it known she is pretending to mimic (albeit poorly) the coy demure timidness of a virgin. Any further reading into is an attempt to extract juice from a rock. It isn’t there.
@BigDaddy
You dumb asshole, nowhere in the story up there does it say she actually wanted sex. It was not token resistance. Go fuck a cactus, you stupid sack of shit.
Only a rape apologist would think what happened was not rape.
Yes. The gently pushing him away. And the fear in her eyes. And the whole ‘sitting in positions so he can’t have sex with her very well’. The never having consented to sex to begin with, the showing no signs of being interested in it, only signs of resistance. How many ‘nos’ do you have to receive to believe it’s rape.
Since pua’s see women as conquests and not people, it’s not surprising that their focus isn’t “does this person really want to have sex with me?” but “how much can I legally get away with?”
Reading that seriously made me feel ill.
and the only thing the girl in the story was doing was denying. Don’t get cutsie, pretending the author must have left out the secret consent that happened earlier, so you can think of more excuses why it’s not rape.
…Pretty sure he just confessed to himself being a rapist.
As well as a white supremacist.
Anyone else in favor of ignoring BigDaddy til he explains where the magic consent came from? Cuz I’m getting tired of this shit. He’s got to own up to his shit or go home.
Weird, when someone comes in going, “No, they aren’t saying [horrible thing]- they’re actually saying this [horrible thing].”
Only an MRA could garble a simple sentence that badly.
In other news, the way that virgins are being depicted here makes it obvious that creepy dude has never encountered one.
No fucking kidding. A major way women might make denial known is “attempting to physically stop you.”
However, seconding Marie.
Give a citation that Matlock is psychic, that this woman did consent, or just own your idiotic political views and/or fuck off.
Yeah, non-rapists don’t describe their sexual encounters in terms of the AMOUNT OF RESISTANCE involved.