Apparently hoping to gin up another flood of hate-traffic to his blog, the attention-seeking human stain whose name rhymes with Batt Gorney has posted what is essentially a how-to guide for would-be abusive boyfriends under the charming title “How to Crush a Girl’s Self-Esteem.”
“Gorney” has conveniently arranged his suggestions into a numbered list, so let’s proceed through them one by one. (If you’re triggered by explicit discussions of psychological and physical abuse, please stop reading now.)
Step one, in “Gorney’s” not-so-unique 6-step-plan: “Constantly make her feel inadequate.”
And how do you do that? Easy as pie.
Every time she does something for you, find out what she did wrong and remind her of it. If you can’t find any problems, make some up.
And try some mild gaslighting while you’re at it.
[Y]ou should always sound calm and collected, like you’re talking about the weather. Denigrating her in a neutral-but-firm fashion will trip her submissiveness circuitry, making her think about how she can better serve you. And every time she reaches the goalposts, you move them, forcing her to play an eternal game of catch-up.
Like the salesmen in Glengarry Glen Ross, you should Always Be Criticizing:
The concept is that if you criticize girls for minor mistakes, they’ll be less likely to commit major ones, as their mental energy is expended on dealing with your every complaint. For example, if you constantly critique the way she dresses, you won’t be arguing with her over whether she should get a tattoo or nose piercing to express her “individuality.”
In step 2, “Dominate her physically and sexually,”“Gorney” encourages his readers to violate their girlfriend’s personal and sexual boundaries at every chance.
Repeatedly violate her boundaries in small, petty ways, small enough that she’ll feel petty for complaining to you.
That’s right: abuse her strategically, and in such a way that she feels crazy for complaining about your abuse. “Gorney” is thinking like a true abuser.
For example, if you’re into anal sex and she’s not thrilled about it, the next time you take her from behind, stick your finger into her asshole. If she doesn’t like facials, cum in her hair instead. Lightly clasp your hand around her throat during sex like you’re going to choke her. (Do not actually choke her. That is dangerous.) Smack her on the behind when you’re out in public. The possibilities are endless.
The message you want to send her is simple: it’s not her body anymore.
This is all textbook abusive behavior.
“Gorney” follows this with a lovely bit of rationalization:
Most girls want you to dominate them anyway, but the rationalization hamster and their conscious minds prevent them from articulating this desire.
And then it’s back to more strategic abuse:
[I]f she lets you get away with minor violations of her boundaries, she’ll accede to your bigger demands later on, letting you mold her into the perfect plaything. If she doesn’t violently resist getting her anus fingered, a little more pressure and you’ll be full-on sodomizing her, grinning as she whimpers between each thrust.
Apparently the only sexual pleasure “Gorney” can imagine from anal sex is the pleasure he evidently gets from forcing women into it against their will.
Oh, and make sure you never give her the chance to say “no.”
Never ask her for anything, because asking is begging, and begging is contemptible.
Yep. Avoid the thorny issue of consent by never asking, and assuming that anything other than violent resistance is a “yes.”
Step 3 in “Gorney’s” program takes the creepiness into overdrive: “Isolate her from her friends and family.”
I don’t have much to say about this one; there’s a reason this is a favorite technique of cults and domestic abusers alike. Here’s Gorney’s take on it:
You need to be the primary emotional influence in her life, and you can’t do that if she’s leaning on anyone else for support. Gradually wean her from contact with anyone other than you.
What’s in it for you?
Not only will this increase her emotional dependence on you, it will make her more willing to please you; she’ll be less likely to wreck the relationship if she knows she’ll be all alone if it goes south.
For step 4, “Gorney” puts away the stick for a moment and pulls out a carrot, urging his readers to “Reward her at random intervals.”
But his emphasis is as much on the random as on the rewards; this is yet another gaslighting trick.
If you reward her every time she does good, she’ll see the pattern and use it to manipulate you. But if you reward her at random, her little hamster brain will run itself ragged trying to figure out your endgame.
Step 5 carries the slightly misleading title “Give her an emotional release.” In fact, what he suggests is that you physically “discipline” your girlfriend when she does “wrong” in your eyes.
By spanking a girl until she starts crying and sobbing, you give her an emotional release, turning her into a soppy puddle of goo and making her more inclined to serve you. As a friend of mine put it, all girls crave spankings; it’s their way of making up for Eve’s sin.
“Gorney” seems to be confusing consensual BDSM — which can bring bottoms or submissives intensely emotional releases — with domestic violence.
In step 6, “Gorney” tries to convince his readers — and himself — that it’s an abuser’s incredible sexual prowess, and not his manipulative abuse, that allows him to keep control over an abusive relationship.
You absolutely must have good cocksmanship if you want to ruin a girl’s self-esteem. Girls are enslaved to their vaginas as much as men are to their penises … Girls will do anything for a man who can fuck them good … .
Your dick is heroin, she’s the junkie and you’re the dealer.
Yeah, keep telling yourself that.
If you can make her cum on a regular basis, she’ll side with you over her parents, her friends, everyone.
Really? I hate to break it to you, dude, but “[m]aking her cum on a regular basis” is not really an extraordinary achievement, dude. It’s not a sign that you’re some sort of exceptional “cocksman” with a dick of pure heroin. It’s actually kind of, you know, basic? Expected? Also, most women can give themselves orgasms on a regular basis.
Additionally, don’t make her cum every time you have sex. Think like a dealer: you give the customer the pure stuff when you want to get them hooked, and when they’re addicted, you sell them shit that’s been cut with rat poison to increase your bottom line.
Somehow I don’t doubt that sex with guys like this would be a lot like taking drugs laced with rat poison.
[R]ationing out her orgasms at random will keep her on her toes trying to satisfy you.
Or send her off in search of someone who’s not such a complete asshole in bed?
“Gorney’s” advice is so over-the-top awful — it sometimes reads like he’s literally copied it from some textbook on domestic abuse — that it’s hard not to wonder if he just trolling. And to some degree, I’m sure he is. But he also clearly believes a lot of the shit he posts, and so I can only assume he believes, and possibly follows, at least some of his “advice” here.
This is a guy, after all, who admitted plainly to hitting a previous girlfriend, in a post in which he also declared that
Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.
Actually, that’s not true. In fact, there’s some research that suggests male chimps terrorize female chimps — and beat them with branches — to punish them for mating with other males. So men who abuse women are in fact the ones behaving like chimps.
Every time I think that the manosphere can’t sink any lower, something comes along and proves me wrong.
NOTE: I don’t want to give “Gorney” any traffic for his terrible post. But I also feel obligated to link to my source. So I have. I’ve just hidden the link randomly in the middle of the post.
If the manosphere crowd is really laboring under the impression that the equivalent of penis is vagina, no wonder they have to run complicated “game” to persuade women to have sex with them more than twice. Sheesh. Good “cocksmanship” is well and good and can be really erotic but good, regular oral is where the bread and butter is. Read a book!
that pic of Forney with the huge pasty dome and oversized pants always cracks me up. Look, ladies; that sexytimes tableau could be YOUR reward for placating a massive ego which has put lots of effort into figuring out how to manipulate your psychology but none at all into figuring out your anatomy.
Don’t everyone rush all at once!
Really? Besides clarifying that you are both sexist and ableist, what exactly do you think it says?
And (sorry, Godwin), based on what you think it says, what does the fact that predominantly men followed Hitler say?
@Sam
You don’t know anything about Jonestown except for incorrect statistics, so you should probably stop using it as your main talking point.
You can lump us with anyone you want because your opinion doesn’t matter.
Paual? If anyone can figure out how to pronounce that I’ll be impressed.
@cassandrakitty, I imagine an angry cat yawl sandwiched between the P and the L.
Sam wouldn’t make a very good cat, though. Maybe he can be an angry cockroach, the hissing kind.
http://media.tumblr.com/0d3407126cc43c56e44f97c81538868d/tumblr_inline_mikcxz2d841qz4rgp.jpg
I mean, you guys are really missing out here. His dick is heroin. Maybe also rat poison, but maybe not! You don’t know!
That is what makes it exciting.
I’d say a good portion of the men’s rights activists wouldn’t have much problem with what this guy wrote. It seems like the whole movement is about abusing women.
I was so sickened by this YouTube clip by the popular comedian Bill Burr titled “There’s no reason to hit a woman!” which was sarcastic. He says he’s against domestic violence toward women to get himself off the hook, then downplays it, and gets as much victim blaming going as possible….I looked into him further and he is becoming quite a favorite with the men’s righters. Big surprise..
@Sam;
You are the very model of a modern malicious contrarian
your snipes misinformed, malevolent and plebeian
You’re quite retrograde, and your opinion’s barbarian
From abuse to Jonestown, simply utterly terrein
You’re quite well acquainted with matters shuckster-ian
Pua and MRA and kool-aid, how about some varian?
I find your lack of appreciation for goals humanitarian
utterly at odds with any proper person, you’re a carrion
You’re very good at confusion and the rejected’ calculus
I know the friendzone not existing must cause some nonplus
In short, in matters interpersonal, sexual and egalitarian
You are the very model of a modern malicious contrarian
Na na na na naaananananaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa; and once more!
You know your mythic history, from mammoths down to caviar
You answer imaginary questions, and your fantasy is vulgar
You quote statistics that are all wrong, and women make you angrier
It is so sad they like the smack, if only they liked nice people you’d be happier
I can tell undoubted that you ideas are quite bizarre
I know the croaking chorus of the MRA have left you a scar
So I might protest and then suggest you make a cat your avatar
And rein in your fetid, foolish failed forgery of reason ‘afore you go to far
Then I can write a happy rhyme in aimbic pentameter
And you can stop pretending to be such a shit-eater
This would please me greatly, so cut the crap you mouth-bleater
I find your strange attempts at got’chas tend to teeter
In short, in matters interpersonal, sexual and egalitarian
You remain the very model of a modern malicious contrarian
————
Dun dun dun deee.
Seriously, dude. “Women follow a cult leader and so deserve to die” is right up there with “I once saw a bat, so WEREWOLVES EXIST!” by way of reason.
IT SAYS A LOT. How much more do you need when you a have a lot?
That he targeted women more? No wait… that can’t be right, abusers are mindless forces of nature that people bring on themselves by being so gosh darn abusable. This is perplexing my lady brain! Surely any moment Sam will fill everyone in on what “it says,” certainly he has no reason at all to be ashamed of his explanation and will be sharing it in detail! Hey wait, for that matter, Ted Bundy killed only women and girls. They shouldn’t have been so murderable and so female. Really says a lot!
Again with the “girl” thing. These guys and their obsession with harming underage girls…It’s just despicable.
Sam: Its interesting how you guys lump MRAs and PUAs together when Paual Elam is openly critical of PUAs. Can I lump you guys in with Radfems who claim all vaginal intercourse to automatically be non-consentual?
So you are defending Elam? Nice company you keep. He is fond of that line of “defense” too (and no, I don’t think that’s a “poisoning the well” response, you’ve done that to yourself already. I’m just noting one more trickle of fetid water filling it).
The thing is, your lot doesn’t make much in the way of distinctions (and nuanced ones seem to be completely beyond them). The reason people lump the PUA/MRA crowd is they share a view of women which sees them as defective, and in need of abuse to “make useful” to men.
If you can show that we hold views of so central an overlapping nature (given that the object of this blog is to mock misogynists) then you have a valid comparison.
Also, regarding Jonestown, the fact that predominantly women followed this maniac says a lot.
In more ways that you know.
It’s says a lot about how society acculturates women (the moreso in the late 1960s/early 1970s when Jones was building his church) to look outside themselves for validation.
It says a lot about Jones that he chose them as his targets.
It says a lot about you that your reaction to those is, “look at how weak and pathetic women are”.
In a time of great social upheavals (from the Depression to WW2, to the Post-War movement to a large middle class, to the 60s and people who were taking advantage of that rising middle class to upend a large chunk of the previous paradigms of conformity) with a background fear that someone was going to be stupid enough to start a nuclear war and wipe out civilisation (if not all of humanity, in one orgasmic spasm of jingoisitic fear and folly.
Against that background, in a nation of almost 200 million, Jim Jones finding 1,200 or so who were so worried about it they were willing to hie themselves to a place that might outlast an apocalypse, isn’t all that surprising. But from his going on to use concentration camp techniques to bring them to cultic suicide* (against that sort of social backdrop), your takeaway is, “women like to be abused and manipulated.”
Nuance, you don’t understand it. Context, you don’t understand it. History, you don’t understand it. Facts, you don’t understand them. People, you don’t understand them.
In short, I don’t see much of anything in this discussion you do understand.
You don’t like women, and we understand that.
*and cultic suicides aren’t that strange. Jonestown is more reminiscent of Masada than Heaven’s Gate, but neither is so abberant an event to merit the sort of outlier, “it can’t happen to sane people” applied to those who become members of such groups.
I can do without comments on Matt F’s unimpressive looks, but his sex advice is more hilariously fanciful every time I read it.
1) Additionally, don’t make her cum every time you have sex.
2) [R]ationing out her orgasms at random will keep her on her toes trying to satisfy you.
This is full proof because women who orgasm regularly have no idea how they come about and play no part in making them occur. Orgasms are mysterious treats to be doled out at will by a male partner with good cocksmanship as an incentive program.
As a side note, I remember my Granny telling me how during WW2 the US Government rationed sugar, meat, gasoline and orgasms. Tough times indeed.
I wonder if his next step will be a campaign to get Hitachi to stop making the Magic Wand.
Oh, and Sam, if you try to tell us you do like women (as so many obvious misogynists do) realise that we also understand you lust for them: as some people crave pizza, or ice cream,or the endorphin rush from rock-climbing, or fast motorcycles, or sky-diving.
But that’s not what we mean. We mean to like them in the way one likes a parent, or a sibling, or a friend. To treat them with respect and agency. To see them as individuals, with flaws, failings, feelings, strengths and depths. Capable of mistake and triumph.
As people, not things. Your rhetoric objectifies them, “women like”, “women respond favorably”, etc. It’s too large a grouping to be functional, which makes it plain you aren’t treating women as people. Which is what makes you a misogynist; no matter what you try to say when you conflate your lust with respecting them as human beings.
Part of why Jonestown had so many people who were, in some way, oppressed by society is because of how Jones sold himself and Jonestown — it was, in theory, supposed to be a sort of hippie everyone is equal and there’s no racism here place. So of course those trying is escape racism, or otherwise wanting to be viewed simply as people, were more likely to embrace that.
And that doesn’t sound much like a suicide cult at all. We’re going to build our own community and be self sufficient and everyone will be equal to each other, particularly in the era of actual bona fide hippies, sounds rather lovely. Of course, it failed miserably and Jones got all paranoid (and was a drug addict, on the sort of drugs that did NOT help how nuclear war fears) and conditions at Jonestown were horrid and thus people wanted to leave and he couldn’t have the horrid conditions getting out so he decided to go all KILL THE CONGRESSMAN! At which point he was sure there’d be an investigation (perhaps the only rational logic by that stage), and did, well, pretty much what the Japanese did in WWII — they’re torture you (and your kids) when they come, better to die for the cause!
Also, there’s a fair amount of proof that they didn’t all kill themselves, and certainly the children were forced to, uh, drink the kool aid.
If you google “Jonestown death tape” you can be horrified by the final minutes at Jonestown, he was “preaching” and recording it while people were lining up to die.
TL;DR — people signed up for a commune touting social equality, not mass suicide.
Forney is fucking gross. I guess he really misses the attention he got from writing as Bardamu.
So what’d I miss? I see Buttboy’s still JAQing off and Sam is being his repugnant self.
Mmm…rock climbing…almost as good as a zipline. Yeah I definitely do not love women (nor men, nor anyone else) like I love the thrill of potentially smashing into a cliff face, Thank You Very Much.
Hellkell — only thing of note is that Ally is safely at Katz’s [imsert giant grin here]
Jim Jones was an active supporter of racial integration starting in the late 1950s and when he moved his church to San Francisco in the 1970s he was involved in radical politics, with a focus on racial and gender oppression mixed with an anti-capitalism and anti-poverty socialist message. So his congregation mainly drew from the poor, was predominately black and had many seniors. The white member minority joined because they were attracted to the leftist politics Jones espoused.
Keep in mind, historically the congregations of African American churches are predominantly women. All this contributed to the demographics of Jonestown.
Here’s a quote from the article I linked to earlier in the thread.
Ninja’d a bit by Argenti, who makes many excellent points about Jonestown that Sam will likely ignore.
..and all the excuses they find for being horrible in bed are so transparent. Instead of admitting that he just cannot consistently please a woman in bed, he makes up some shit about “rationing” her orgasms. Not buying it. Sex is too much fun when everyone is getting off and having fun. This petty, grasping, needy, guy never denied himself anything if he could get it. If he had that kind of impulse control, he wouldn’t publish poorly thought out masturbatory fantasies like these for his lonely, misogynist, male readership. Anyone capable of a second thought would realize what that says about them. He’s not just stroking his own ego and his readers aren’t just stroking theirs.
I just want to sit him down and explain that not all people are good at all things. He’s a selfish bore in bed and the only way he can get a “girl’s” (Because no experienced woman is going to put up with this chump) attention is by acting like an abusive brat. Ok. He has a choice to make. He doesn’t have to choose to be an abusive loser nobody wants to fuck. I can’t play piano or speak more than one language. We all have our short comings. The difference between this douchbro and other people is that we don’t deny our lack of skills or personality flaws and construct some fantasy world in which our weaknesses are strengths and anyone who doesn’t agree is just evil and deserving of abusive emotional punishment and sexual assault. He sees asking as begging because his ego is so wee and low that he can’t hu-man up and approach any situation with basic humility or mutual respect. This man-boy is nothing but insecure and angry. All his chest beating and assurances of what an “alpha” dude he is…who does he think he’s trying to convince?
Gah….It’s just so gross when people make their issues into weapons to aim at others.
Bratt Borenoy…or whatever,
Deal with your own problems. Stop being a shitcake with shit sprinkles and a shitty filling. Maybe people don’t like you because you’re awful and you need to put some actual effort into fixing yourself before it’s too late and your legacy is nothing but damage done to others and making your name synonymous with being a horrible person. You’ll never tear someone else down enough to build yourself up. You won’t make them so miserable that you stop feeling bad about yourself. That only comes with actually making yourself a better person.
..or don’t and we’ll continue to mock you and you’ll continue to be pathetic. Whatever.
if the guy weren’t so colossally fastidious about how he expects women to look (he once wrote off the entire female population of Portland, OR as physically subpar, a tragic loss to them, I am sure,) then I would not comment on how he looks. There is only so much most of us humans can do to attain the prevailing standard of hottness when it wasn’t bestowed by nature, after all.
Manosphere dudes in general, though, and Forney in particular, are pretty demanding about women’s looks, while excusing their own flaws with “Well, women aren’t visual.”
Ha! Keep tellin’ yourself that, Jack!
“Its interesting how you guys lump MRAs and PUAs together when Paual Elam is openly critical of PUAs. ”
They have the exact same fetid beliefs, only the attitude is slightly different. MRAs want to fight to keep their privileges, PUAs want to take advantage of them. Tomayto, tomahto.