Like a lot of people in the US of A, I am taking a long weekend. Posting may be a little light for a bit. So here’s an open thread for everyone else taking a long weekend. Or not. Use this thread for anything that’s not personal. Like misogyny, politics, kitties, you know the drill. (Though kitties are welcome in all threads, of course.)
I am hoping my long weekend turns out a bit better than that of the people in the Australian movie of that name from 1978, which I keep meaning to see. Apparently their little beach vacation doesn’t go so well, and they are attacked by … nature? At one point, I believe, they face off against an enraged dugong. (No, really.) The movie was recently remade, but apparently the remake wasn’t as good.
Stay tuned for more reviews of movies I haven’t seen and that I’m just giving vague impressions of based on things I’ve heard somewhere.
My older sister didn’t even try to look around in such places before PUA-like folks started approaching her. And she’s had at least two boyfriends who not only act a lot like typical PUAs, but also treated her like garbage during those relationships she had with them. In fact, the last boyfriend she had pretty much negged her throughout the relationship and threatened to break up with her every other day.
So yeah, they don’t stick to themselves in my family’s experience.
@Fibinachi:
“Someone once told me something I like to imagine I have taken to heart.
This person, fictional though it was, said this:
“You know? The best way to fake being popular and likable… is to be popular and likable”
What do people do… who want to be… with beautiful women?
Well.”
O: Again, actually Game circles teach exactly the same thing. Who knew?
“First of all, they define “be with”. Merely be in the same room as? Talk to? Possess as a trophy? Have as a friend? Tenderly hold beneath moonlight shining on from above as waves lap against an enternal shore? When you say “Be with” do you mean “be in”, but you’re trying to be polite?
That kind of thing.”
O: I’ve never hidden my sexual attraction triggers; that was the whole point of telling that young lady years ago that I wasn’t sexually attracted to her, in plain and blunt language, so she couldn’t misunderstand me.
“Then they take a breath and think about their motivations. Why do they want to be “be with” beautiful women? Is it to brag about it? Is it because it’s fun? Is it because you can have more good times with someone who is beautiful? Is it because they’re trying to prove themselves virile and powerfully male by subduing specially worthy prey in accordance to an ideal of beauty as a female ressource to be fought over by men? Is it because they want to dazzle “HB10″ with their peacocky sparkles?”
O: Maybe it’s simply because that’s what they want? *shrugs*
By the way, I’ve never made much of the whole “HB10” thing. My take is that Dimes are exceedingly rare to find and not practical for Men to spend much time looking for. Better to focus on the 6s-9s.
“Because in our world, it stops there. It’s… it’s the end at that point. Beauty is a good, wonderful thing that can add spark and charm to many a fantastic endeavor (And without a mug as devilishly handsome as mine, no one would appreciate my internet wit). That may have been a coy joke.”
O: Point taken…
“In your world, though, and this is why we consistently disparage you, you make beauty into some kind of resource. It sounds as if you speak of farming and raising beautiful people to be enjoyed like a fine vintage of wine. You speak of encounters with women as if they’re nary but flighty interchangeable things you pluck from and sip, then let go, based on some sense of their fleeting blush youth and grace.
That isn’t, really, as such, totally and completely bad.”
O: You and the rest of the moralistic notions are noted, but have no place insofar as human mating is concerned. Beauty (and its male equivalent) is a resource indeed, often a fungible one, in part because it is so limited in supply. Hollywood and the various glamor industries wouldn’t make billions of dollars a year if this wasn’t true.
It just makes everything else you say seem so… hollow. You don’t give a shit about anything else, man, and it shows. It’s fine if you don’t – go ahead – but don’t pretend that you do.
“And, maybe, stop… Going at this entire thing as if beautiful people where a scarce resource a man must cleverly trick into bed by wit and charm and mental tricks. They’re not special prizes to be hunted down by the man with the bigger so and so and longer list of negs.”
O: I don’t have to trick anyone into bed. Negs are a very specialized method that is greatly misunderstood. And yes, desirable, attractive people of either sex, are in short supply.
“Women aren’t grapes. It’s fine to have standards, but do you see where those very standards turn into weird, confusing labyrinthine justifications? Women can do so and so! She can get laid on a one night stand! A man will never have valid enthusiastic consent unless he’s hot! Without blasting someone with negs, I don’t stand a chance! Online dating doesn’t work for men because they don’t get unsolicited messages (!) ! Feminists won’t tell me how to bang beautiful people!
Well… No. Beautiful people are *people*. You sleep with them the same way you sleep with everyone.”
O: Dvar was the one who mentioned one night stands, not me. Jon Millward and OKC have nothing to gain by putting out the studies they did. Indeed, if anything, they stand to lose a lot, because guys will see that and rightly think, what the heck am I doing this for if it doesn’t even work most of the time?
My personal standards don’t have anything to do with any of this, and it is erroneous for you to attempt to make a linkage in an effort to personalize the discussion. I have a very good way of remaining objective about things, which can and does, yes, come off as “cold” to others (I was “Iceman” when I was a kid).
“If you have standards – fine. That’s why you said to that girl “Hey, I’m not interested in sleeping with you”. Or, well, you said a hurtful variation thereof in a room full of people to showcase your dominance and put your friends (the fuckers!) in their place for daring to set you up with someone who didn’t tickle your fancy.”
O: This, after several months of taking low and hoping she (and they) would get the point…but no. I learned from that experience (and others!) that a closed mouth don’t get fed. Speak up, Black Man.
Speak. Up.
“But don’t waste anyone’s type by pretending it’s anything more or less than it is:
You’re upset and angry that sometimes, people make choices that don’t involve you.
Come on.
Get over it.”
O: Again – I couldn’t care less what others do. Make of that what you will, but I have nothing to gain from lying to you or anyone else here.
O.
@ hellkell
My favorite response was “I don’t mind”. Thanks for the info, dude, but do I look like I care?
“Beauty (and its male equivalent)”
AS: Clearly the word “beautiful” can never apply to any man. More wise sentiments from O.
AS.
Cassandra: I’ve heard that one too. Clearly the Game Masters are not teaching originality in the face of a no. It won’t change my answer, but it would amuse me.
Although I have to admit that it’s less ridiculous than “I don’t mind” in response to “I’m a lesbian”, which also happens.
Pecunium: the blockquote monsters, they are hungry tonight.
And hell YES to what you said about why PUA is repulsive.
RE: thebionicmommy
Aw. That’s the sweetest thing I’ve heard in quite a while. Thank you!
RE: Argenti
Thanks much! And I actually plan to use the travels for story research… not for M.D. (Silver Fern is pretty much other-dimensional New Zealand, so I use my travels THERE for that), but for Reverend Alpert. (Also, I need to see Georgia for Biff’s childhood stories.)
RE: Ally S
When I was 11, I remember using copious amounts of that because I felt that liquid soap wasn’t as effective because it was liquidy and not creamy like the other body wash I had been used to using. I was very, very wrong.
I just winced and went, “Ohhhhh!” you know, like guys watching crotch shots in America’s Funniest Home Videos. You poor dumbass!
RE: Obsidian Files
O: Yes, but Feminists are the main ones complaining. In light of that, and since they are Women themselves, it would be really nice if they could offer solutions for guys in this regard. I’m not even talking about everything from A to Z; just something.
*looks back at the pages and pages of thread* We have been. You just don’t like the answers you’re getting, or insist they’re not workable. I don’t honestly feel you’re looking for advice; you’re looking for validation of your worldview, which you’re not going to get here.
O: Indeed – and none of them dealing with the question of sociosexual relationship concerns and issues of straight Men – which was what I was talking about, and I think you knew that…
*sigh* You asked for a movement’s focus on MEN, not the sociosexual relationship of straight men, which is a much, much narrower focus, but fine, whatever. I can’t think of a rights movement devoted to that, because frankly, I can’t think of ANY movement focused on the sociosexual relationship of ANYONE. Sexual RIGHTS, yes, repealing sodomy laws and tightening up rape laws and such, but not the sociosexual relationship. Can you?
Cassandra: you’re right, they don’t consider lesbianism an impediment. They really must think their penis is magic.
We are so going out to practice misandry when I manage to get to the Bay Area.
@GRB:
“I missed this at the time because I was, at best, skimming those tedious walls of text before I started skipping past them altogether. I had decided that I wasn’t gonna feed the troll anymore, but this one is pretty revealing, actually.”
O: Thank you.
“OF objects to the scandal of ugly women daring to talk to him as if he could possibly be even slightly interested in them. Not the behavior itself, it seems, as he thinks that it’s just a “mating strategy” so long as they haven’t committed the sin of being “God-awful ugly or old”.”
O: It certainly wouldn’t hurt…
“Correspondingly, women should be totes delighted if an “attractive” man catcalls them, though it doesn’t seem that they should be permitted to establish what is “attractive” for the purposes of this discussion, nor should they be permitted to find catcalling offensive or disturbing just on its face.”
O: I have never said anything such thing.
“The key is that because he doesn’t mind when women talk to him (so long as they are not “God-awful ugly or old” mind you) he finds it incomprehensible that women could find it bothersome when some entitled asshole forces his way into their day, no matter what said asshole looks like.”
O: Actually, I support the criminalization of street harassment, and have said so several times throughout this thread.
Perhaps you missed it?
O.
Given their association with SATC I guess cosmos are the drink of choice for misandrists, huh? The bar at the W does a good one.
More and more, as I read this, I am immensely relieved that I seem to have dropped off most mens’ radar once I hacked off our tits and hair. I haven’t had to deal with PUA since.
Also, random and off-topic, but I has a slight sad, guys. After being off hormones for months, my body’s really reverting now. Bye bye, body hair. 🙁 I will miss you terribly.
Hey, I missed a soap discussion! I love the Pre de Provence soaps, when I’m feeling indulgent.
I think we should start a funny, mocking but educational campaign for young women to inoculate them against the more insidious aspects of “Game.” Not to stop these guys from getting lucky, just so that women know exactly what is going on and are less likely to be manipulated by the BS. They may still choose to sleep with them; FSM knows I have overlooked some pretty inept pickup attempts in my day just because I wanted to have some fun with a guy who I thought was cute.
Like maybe a series of cartoons.
We could have installments on gaslighting, negging, peacocking, interminably trolling feminist websites that don’t want them there to complain about their/other dudes’ sad boners, etc.
Okay, more fun wedding events for me; back to LA tomorrow evening.
Oooo Alpert! Loved the protective spirit under the bed (I refuse to call it a monster when there are human monsters)
People are not fungible.
Beauty in the discussion of people is a reference to the beauty of those people.
Beautiful people are not fungible.
How would you even arrive at that conclusion?
In what hellhole of a rationalistic, mechanistic is that a state of affairs that even approaches reality? You have got to be kidding. You are making a joke. You are taking the piss. There is a monk out back with a ladder. There is no way this is possibly something you say and mean and think.
Add if it was limited in supply how could it be fungible? Fungibility inherently improves supply because any unit can be exchanged for another unit! Beautiful people become fill in the blank blind spot in some auctioneer block if they’re fungible.
The very idea that sexually desirably people are in short supply means they cannot be merely fungible and simply interchangeable. You cannot tell me you would sleep with a mass murderer as easily as you would a saint if they looked the same. This is not… How… What?
Bees. Bees, my god.
Also, stop lying.
That study was a study of unsolicited messages received by 10 identical profiles with 10 different pictures.
No more, no less
And, in that, it even conforms to what you’d think – women receive more unsolicited attention.
That’s all.
In fact, the one message he sent to a beautiful woman that was the most attractive one he could find within three minutes was replied to, because it was thoughtful, fun and interesting. Holy shit, showcasing personality over an online dating service is possible! Unlike what you said earlier!
My god man. I know 6 pairs of people who hooked up through the internet. Okay, I admit, none of them are models, but they’re not ugly molochs.
I’m out. I can’t.. I can’t deal with this.
I know. Fictional character.
I know what negs are.
And if desirable, attractive people of either sex are in short supply, why are they fungible? It’s not actually about the beauty at all? It’s the orgasms?
Is it the notch count? this fucking fascinates me. Is there bonus points for orgasms arrived inside beautiful people? Are they worth more than others?
This makes no sense!
Then why do you keep bringing up what others do? Why do you keep talking about what you should do when others do bad things? Why do you constantly talk about how feminists should do so and so?
Stop lying.
I seriously sometimes feel like I’m coming from the wrong planet in discussions like this. Apparently I’m not from Manland, I’m from Neptune or something, because I read shit like this, about PUAs are apparently filling some deep aching need, and I just can’t connect with it at all.
My sexual concerns, in order of importance:
1. Don’t get raped.
2. If raped, try and minimize suffering as much as possible.
Everything else just seemed like gravy, as far as I was concerned. Is this not a thing other men have to constantly take into account?
I’m trying to imagine my life where rape wasn’t a constant specter. My god, it sounds like a fucking paradise! Who cares if I get laid, guys, I don’t have to run my life around RAPE!
RE: Argenti
I plan to have as a running theme of that series that the supernatural “monsters” just reflect the people around them. Some of them are nastier than others.
Also, the male equivalent of beauty is beauty. Those that believe otherwise, I invite to take a good hard look at the man I’m married to.
RE: auggziliary
I also have, like, two and a half bottles of testosterone left, if I want to go back on. I admit, not that my body’s mega-reverting, it is tempting. I liked the shape it gave my body, and the body hair. The effects on my sex life weren’t half bad either.
But I also wasn’t a big fan of the acne on my back, the facial hair, or the awful, AWFUL emotional effects if I wasn’t careful about my dose. (Depending on dose, I’d lose the physical ability to cry, go into a rage, or just feel plain awful.) Ach, that’s what you get when you want the in-between, I suppose… it’s always a constant juggling.
@SittieKitty”
“What do they do? Be disappointed. They aren’t entitled to sleep with beautiful women and the fact that these beautiful women don’t want to sleep with them is just life. Not giving them ideas that try to trick these women into thinking the guys are better for them/more attractive to them than they actually are is respecting women’s agency to have sex with whomever they choose.”
O: So these guys shouldn’t try to do *anything* to improve themselves? Dress better? Workout? Lose weight? Etc, et al? Am I reading that right? Or do you consider these simple things “tricks” too?
“Yes, you never said explicitly “These men are entitled to being with beautiful women.” But you did say it, that’s what that sentence above implies. It implies that these men should be able to get beautiful women if they want to.”
O: What I am saying is that they have a shot at them, IF they improve themselves and make themselves into interesting people. And since you all are deadset against Game, fine – what other method do you recommend? This far, I haven’t gotten any answers. Perhaps you’ll offer one?
“So the answer is, literally, too fucking bad for those guys. Same with anyone else who wants to “get” people who aren’t attracted to them. Too fucking bad. You aren’t entitled to sex, to being with someone, and certainly aren’t entitled to being with a particular “type” of person. If you don’t get sex and you want it – that’s too bad for you. Deal with it. Don’t try to trick people into thinking you are what they want when you’re not. It’s incredibly manipulative and dishonest. And it’s where the idea of tricking women into sleeping with someone comes it. It’s literally the same as telling someone that you’re a wealthy millionaire who will marry someone if they sleep with you. It’s a lie. It’s a trick. It’s a shitty thing to do even if it’s not illegal. It makes you a shitty person.”
O: So, you are in support of my telling a young lady who my friends and whatnot kept trying to “set me up with” that I was NOT sexually attracted with her – right? Because that would be consistent with what you jus said above – right?
Also -would you agree, that a Woman who wears all manner of appliances and makeup, wigs/weaves, heels, pushup bras, etc et al, is also “tricking” Men into thinking she’s something she’s not, and that it’s a “shitty thing to do” – even if it isn’t illegal?
Yes?
O.
Yet another of your many laughable ideas, up there with why crime rates are falling. Have you ever read a feminist in favor of this?
I think it’s fucking stupid, you can’t legislate human decency, much as we may wish to. How would this be enforced? So many questions.
Yet another false equivalence. Do you never tire of them?
Oh look, it’s the same old “Making your appearance look good is deception” shit again. How fucking predictable can you be?
SPEAKING OF STATISTICS!
Anyone got any they want to see?
There’s a vast difference between makeup, heels, and weaves and “lie about who you are fundamentally,” which seems to be what game teaches.