Over on Random Xpat Rantings the terrible excuse for a human being who calls himself Xplat sets forth an intriguing proposition: for men in search of sexy times, having money is the equivalent of a woman having tits.
In other words, it’s not absolutely necessary for a man to have big bucks to garner the attention of the opposite sex, just as it’s not absolutely necessary for a woman to have something in the tit department in order to garner the attention of men, but it helps. A lot.
Oh, by the way, the title of the post in which he sets forth this theory is “ALL women are inherently gold diggers down to their pussy juice.”
Let’s let him explain, in his own icky way:
Women know their value. They know they can trade their value for their benefit. In [South-East Asia] this is not a dirty little secret. It’s not even an open secret. It’s just a fact of life. Money is part of the equation, blatantly and openly. …
Money-and-power-and-social-status is exactly equal to breasts. It can be a cause of sexual attraction in and of itself, and can maintain a relationship when there is nothing else being offered.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure when someone is literally interested in nothing about you except your money, you’re not actually in a “relationship” with that person.
Women aren’t men with vaginas. Their sexual attraction triggers are different. It’s not just that they fuck for food. Not JUST a matter of pragmatic sales of a service. Actual attraction is ALSO involved.
I like big bucks and I cannot lie?
Now, of course Xsplat here is challenging the common PUA gospel that men shouldn’t rely on money to win over their “targets” but rather on being cool and caddish and, you know, going to places where there’s a good chance a lot of the women will be pretty drunk.
Manospherians hampsterbate about this with a zillion “ya buts”. Ya, but you don’t NEED money. Yup, and girls don’t NEED tits.
Having tits is better and more attractive anyway, and girls with tits can get more and better quality men.
Having money is better in exactly the same way. You don’t see many flat chested Penthouse centerfolds, nor are there many broke romance novel heros.
Well, I don’t know much about romance novels, but from what I hear there’s a shitload of slash fiction about two dudes named Sam and Dean who basically live out of their car.
It’s not the case that SOME girls are gold diggers.
It’s just a matter of all the gold diggers mining for gold in different ways.
And of course all of this turns out to be a justification for Xplat’s own use of his relative wealth, as a western expat living in Southeast Asia, to exploit impoverished women for sex.
For me sex is about ecstatic intimacy. Money helps to get more intimacy with a greater percentage of girls, and higher quality girls. I choose to allow egoic esteem to include finances. Money is not cheating. Money helps to skin the cat. Money is not separate from my fantastic ethereal self. Money is part of what I am; part and parcel of what I am to a woman.
That’s got to be one of the creepiest and most delusional excuses for sexual exploitation I think I’ve ever run across in the three years of doing this blog.
RE: CassandraSays
SNARK SNARK SNARK! >:D SHARE SHARE SHARE!
RE: Cliff
…ouch. Point made.
Yup. It gives me the very subtextual impression that communication is the SUB’S responsibility, and if something goes wrong, THEY’RE the problem. There isn’t even a WORD for a top screwing up communication!
Oh hi Cliff! I’m sorry about shitheads being shitheads.
Oh, I was going to ask: what pronouns do you prefer? I remember reading some posts of yours about gender stuff, and I’m not sure how that turned out (uh… sorry if that sounded awkward… >_> ).
Just scroll down. The top few posts are all about his attempts to reframe consent into something that he’s trying to sell as more progressive, but that actually has my abuser-dar screeching like a fire alarm.
http://maybemaimed.com/
You had to tell me, you swine, didn’t you? D:
I wonder how many (if any) of the “vanilla is so boooorrring and you’re not a sexay/liberated/sex positive person if you don’t submit to this/being expected to do that/just trying it” bullshit types have this same abusive mindset? It reads to me like a watered-down version of the same attitude, or one that could lead to it, at least.
I feel bad for Maggie. I know nothing about her, but what I saw of that conversation definitely made me D: It really felt like him trying to be clever and so smart, when it was clear as day what he was doing. CREEPER.
If anyone can find a thing that exists of which there is no porn on the internet I will come cook them dinner.
(Gotta say, I’m not exactly rushing off to Travelocity to book a ticket here.)
TW: rape
All I’m going to say is that my sole interaction with Kinky/BDSM people has been when I made a tumblr post about how I, as a survivor, am really upset by the idea of Rape Play and Fetish.
And I had Kinky people reblogging it to tell me, in great detail, about how much they liked Rape Play and how images of women crying and hurt after Rape Play turned them on.
And then I had one guy repeatedly reblogging my post when new Kinky people added commentary to it (graphically describing their Rape Play), after I had directly asked him to stay away from me.
So yeah…
Good to see you again, Cliff 🙂
That conversation with Maggie really illustrates what bullshit his belief that feminists should accept him as a valid leader despite their misgivings about letting a man lead just because he’s a sub is. The idea that sub = safe…lolno, as he demonstrates quite well.
Historophilia, ALL THE HUGS
(plus some capital letters, which I seem to be using a lot today)
Please tell me if it’s available on audiobook. 😀
I admit, this talk is making me glad I never got into the scene outside virtual role playing.
Deep sympathies to Cliff and Seranvall. Bullies are maddening, and bullies than pretend to be victims infuriate me to no end.
@ historaphilia
But we BDSM people are so good at negotiating boundaries! Which I will now illustrate by ignoring yours!
This is why I want nothing to do with most of the BSDM community.
CassandraSays – They have zero self-awareness about how things like “How dare she say I’m violating her boundaries! As you can clearly see from these private emails I’ve saved…” sound to other people.
The weird thing is I actually met them once, several years ago, and they were kind of odd (who in this neck of the woods isn’t), but not at all aggressive like this. I don’t know if they’ve changed or if they save the tough guy stuff for the Internet. I think a bit of both? They did say some stuff that in retrospect might have been dishonest, but there was none of this violent ranting about how everyone who didn’t worship them had no place on this Earth.
(Something else weird: it seems like they perpetually can’t decide whether they’re kinky or they’re virulently anti-kink. I can understand saying “I’m kinky, but I don’t like the BDSM scene,” but they’re more like “I’m kinky, but kinkiness is evil.” I don’t get it.)
Alice – I’m mostly using “he,” although other pronouns don’t super bother me so I still go by “she” and “they” sometimes. “He” would be good though.
Cliff – would the “kinkiness is evil” be them trying to boost their egos about what bad, dangerous, edgy, oh-so-sexy people they are?
@ Cliff
Possibly this person encountered an immovable object in the form of someone on whom the manipulation didn’t work and that started this whole ongoing giant internet tantrum?
The “I’m kinky, but kinkiness is evil” thing would explain a lot, actually. Problem is, just because you’re in the grip of an internal conflict doesn’t mean that your internal conflict is a universal thing that everyone else MUST STOP EVERYTHING THEY’RE DOING AND ATTEND TO NOW, IN A MANNER THAT FOLLOWS YOUR INSTRUCTIONS or else they’ll tell you to kill yourself.
Also also! In one post he says that dominants are rapists because they frame submission to mean getting subs to do stuff they don’t want to do (including stuff like household chores), but in another post he insists that when a dom forces a sub to do something they don’t want to do that’s a “positive violation” and part of what makes BSDM awesome. Confused much, dude?
LBT-
Oh LBT, in case you didn’t see it, I answered your question on the other page.
historophilia-
That’s horrible! *All the safe hugs*
CassandraSays-
Of course they don’t understand the concept of consent.
I swear, it’s gotten to the point that describing what one thinks consent means should be an instant litmus test for whether you get to interact with other humans in regular society or be taken to a Lego-strewn floor covered camp for remedial lessons on how not to be a rapist fuck.
Okay, snark commencing… (It’s really hard to concisely snark someone whose average post length is like 50,000 words. But I’m pissed-off enough to try.)
Here’s the thing: it is possible to consent to having some experience and then, sometime in the future, not consent to having had that experience. Put another way, you have “the right to retroactively withdraw consent” from any encounters you had, at any point in the past, that no longer feel good or safe to you.
It sounds all progressive and “I take consent soooo seriously, I’m willing to go farther than anyone else with when you can revoke it,” but I think this just works out to the old MRA standby of “so basically, feeling you were raped is the same as regretting sex.”
We also consider how our relationship to consent changes when we acknowledge that whether a person actually feels violated is more important than whether they expected to feel violated.
Ick ick ick. This sounds like a “no, you see, she just expected to feel violated,” about some particular event.
How does our relationship to consent change if we think of […] “violation” as more nuanced than simply committing an un-permitted action?
This sentence feels like it should end with “…Your Honor.”
Realistically, anybody who is having any kind of sex in the context of rape culture is likely to violate someone’s consent at some point.
I read a thing recently about “rapists think everyone is a rapist,” and apparently it’s true.
at some point you are probably going to violate someone’s consent—if you haven’t already. We need a process for dealing with that other than abject denial. We need to develop ways of regularly acknowledging, taking accountability for, and participating in healing work around the damage our coercive behavior causes.
So you see, they shouldn’t be punished! They should acknowledge and take accountability and participate in healing work, which I’m pretty sure translates to “make a blog post about how hard this has been for them, and then get furious if anyone ever brings the violation up again, because dammit, they already did their healing work.”
But a “sexual hunger strike to bring about the end of rape culture” is an unrealistically high ethical bar to set for most real people who are trying to survive in a world where intimacy is a human necessity.
“…Your Honor.”
Thanks Cliff!
Also, ewwwwwwwwwwwww, why are there dom assholes? Seriously, if you think that being a dom means “I have the right to treat you like shit and you will like it or else you’re not a good sub!”, you probably shouldn’t be in BDSM. Or in a relationship
… in a relationship with anyone, ever.
DAMN YOU KEYBOARD!!!!
BTW, Cliff, I hope the mocking isn’t coming across as a failure to take what this creeper is doing to you seriously. Dude is toxic. I mock because it seems like the best way to disempower people like that.
Community justice and not involving the cops is great for, like, trying to persuade teenagers to stop defacing buildings in their neighborhood. For rapists? No.
Also, honestly, for me? If someone had raped me I don’t think I’d want them to participate in “healing work around the damage our coercive behavior causes”. That just sounds like a great way for an abuser to justify having continued access to their victim so they can keep manipulating hir.
Cliff – Oh gods. That guy talking a judge.
No. No, no no no no nononononoooooo, don’t think about that, don’t think about that, don’t think about that, don’t think about that, don’t don’t don’t…
“Your Honor, it is my prerogative to say that because my partner never said anything when I was having sex with her, that my partner did not give anti-consent and ergo it was not rape.”
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!