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.
Every time I see him my vagina attempts to padlock itself.
So I was all like “I haven’t heard much about Gene Simmons – I wonder why people hate him so much.” And then I did some Googling and found this:
No, no, no, just no. What a fucking creep.
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m641p2JoAH1qbl202.gif
He’s so repulsive that he should be considered a walking contraceptive device.
Ewww, I didn’t know that about him either! I was just thinking of the face, with or without the makeup.
And that … adultist … so m**m** is saying he wants children in the BDSM scene, now? Could this guy get any worse?
I’m guessing he thinks it’s unfair that teens are excluded? This does not reassure me as to his good intentions at all.
The thing that really irks me is that yes, the scene is a mess and it needs a serious overhaul. But handing control from one set of abusive personalities to another one isn’t going to help.
BSDM folks deserve a better advocate than this guy.
This guy isn’t an advocate for anyone but himself.
I wonder what the reaction would be if a lot of people knew about his “adultist” complaint? Talk about sifting who’s a wannabe paedo/complete idiot and who isn’t (or at least has the sense not to identify themselves).
BDSM…for kids…?
ohgodsno.jpg
Ok, as someone who was a masochist and not of legal age last decade, I gotta say a safe space for teens to meet other kinky teens isn’t such a bad idea.
Keywords: safe, other teens.
What about just people at the age of consent? The US is weird; there’s states where AoC is 16, 17, and even 18 in some states.
Although I honestly would not have any problem with kinky teens having a safe space to meet other kinky teens.
I think the kneejerk was me imagining twelve year olds. >_>
Keywords for what BSDM clubs tend to actually look like – lots of men over 40, most of whom are actively looking for young female subs.
Also, some kink events are booze free, but not all. An event held in a club where booze is available that let teens in…say bye bye to your liquor license.
Alice — yeah, I was thinking that weird gap between legal where you are and 18 — legal here is 16, with Romeo and Juliet laws, MA is strict 18 (awkward as I’m 3 months older than my ex-fiancé and that difference was relevant)
But 16 year old me was legal able to sex with the elderly, if so inclined, but an adult play space wouldn’t have been remotely safe and teen ones don’t seem to exist.
So I’m thinking under 18 but legally old enough in the location in question (which would mean noptopus in MA, but a couple of years here) — idk that there’d be enough teens to bother though.
Btw, your kitty favicon is up 🙂
Shit, that was Serrana, not you, don’t mind me!
Cassandra — yeah, exactly. Which is why I’m thinking that, say, the local GLBT center or whatever should maybe do a kink friendly teens night or such.
Cuz I’m pushing 30 and still wouldn’t feel safe at a play party (well, ok, pecunium said he’d hosted some? Then maybe, but only because I know that one look would be enough for him to bounce someone, literally if needed)
Part of the issue is that it seems like a lot of play parties aren’t really safe for anyone, except perhaps really assertive white male doms. But yeah, I have nothing against teens sexing each other, but the idea of exposing them to horny, potentially power-tripping adults in an environment where they feel out of place and the adults feel right at home gives me hives.
Seconding CassandraSays.
Thirding.
Oh my word, I really should stop looking at the trainwreck that is MM’s blog, but it’s too morbidly fascinating.
Post on 11/21:
“You cannot deny that building sexual assault prevention tools into every social network on the Internet, and doing it in a way that puts as much power as possible into the hands of rape survivors, FUCKING MATTERS. It changes things.”
Post on 11/23:
“The success of PAT-FB is not contingent on the development of a wide base of users who are willing to report predators. The success of PAT-FB is contingent on having these conversations, which, I don’t know if you’ve noticed, I’ve been having very loudly. I don’t expect to change the world by having people mindlessly accuse people of being predators. I expect to change the world by making everyone understand that we are all complicit in abusive systems, that we are all a predator to somebody, that no one is innocent of this, and that the only way to meaningfully address it is to actually face our own abusiveness.”
Only two days apart! That is some olympic-level goalpost moving.
And that second quote is some seriously creepy-ass “everyone’s abusive and nobody’s abusive and we’re all predators” water-muddying, of the type that many of you already identified in the “redefining consent” posts. Yeeeaaah. Definitely having an icky feeling about this.
Let’s see, how many people have accused me of anything abusive?
One, my narcissist gaslighting ex, while trying to pre-empt getting my best friend to take sides by saying I shoved him and thus started it. In a way, I did. See, he’s twice my size and was standing in a doorway refusing to let me out. After repeated attempts at “oh just move damnit” I went for “fine, I’m going under your arm then”…which he got cranky about necessitating a shove to get out of the room…which nearly got me locked out in my underwear and then he threatened my life.
So, you know, I’m not inclined to think his claim was anything more than yet more attempted gaslighting.
Oh, and my brother, went I was like 7 and pulled a rather mean prank…split his lip. He’d laugh his ass off if I said that makes me a predator to him though. And possibly then carry me around the room just to make a point!
NoYouMayNot needs a predatory fish, he has no idea how different predators are from average. (Portion control puff, it’s called portion control! Just because it’ sphere doesn’t mean you must go after it! [yes that’s a poor analogy to human predators and how they just can’t resist…except puff is a fish, I don’t expect morals from fish])
Okay youse lot, just ‘cos I’ve got of Mass Killer Katie in my gravatar doesn’t make me a predator!
Seriously, I can’t actually think of a time I’ve been a predator, or seen as one. Does giving Maddie a gratuitous cuddle count?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
True … OT, is it just me who read that and thought, “You’d know about projection, Siggy boy!”
Just for context – that epic goalpost move was in response to people suggesting that, “tone argument” or not, perhaps MM should cut back on all that ordering people to kill themselves stuff in order to help the cause. Because if this was all for the glorious cause of abuse prevention, shouldn’t they do their best to avoid alienating people so that these useful tools got distributed as widely as possible?
– hence the dizzying jump from “distributing these tools as widely as possible is sooo important that any means is justified” to “distributing these tools as widely as possible was never the point, the point was to get people talking, and alienating tons of people is great for that”.
But the part it expands to “…specifically, we need to get people talking about how everyone is a predator” seems to be a total bonus, not just a tactic to sidestep criticism. A creepy, creepy, revealing, projection-tastic bonus.
The kids thing isn’t theoretical with M*yM*y. They used to (maybe still do?) run a series of “unconferences” called KinkForAll that made a point of having no age limit. Apparently they were actually pretty good sometimes, as far as the discussions that went on, but the “no age limit” thing also meant that they got a lot of side-eye.