The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.) Thanks!
Attention ladies who have sex with men! The sex you are having now is a crime against the hypothetical man or men you will have sex with in the future. At least according to some Red Pill douchebags.
Yesterday, you may recall, we looked at a bizarre and nasty post by pickup guru Roosh Valizadeh that argued, among other things, that all women who aren’t virgins are essentially “soft cuckolding” their future husbands. Because, evidently, any man who marries a woman not only owns her in the present; he retroactively owns her past self as well.
Today, in Reddit’s Red Pill subreddit, we find a fellow called redpilltom making a very similar – if slightly less extreme – argument about women and their sexual pasts.
In a post titled “Never date a woman who won’t do sexual things with you that she did with her other partners,” redpilltom argues that if a woman ever agreed to any sexual act in the past she owes it to you as well.
[I]f you ever, and I mean ever, find out that she did something with an ex that she refuses to do with you, drop her. Drop her fast and drop her hard. This goes from giving it up on X number of dates, to certain sexual acts that you want to do, to threesomes, to the frequency of sex.
Yep. As redpilltom sees it, if a woman says yes to anal sex with one man, she’s obliged to say yes to every future partner who wants anal. To refuse would be a deep insult to whoever she’s dating – and evidence that she sees her current partner as the simpering “beta” in the Red Pill catchphrase “Alpha fucks, Beta bucks.”
It is not only the #1 sign of being on the losing end of the AF/BB relationship, but it screams “Oh, well I felt I needed to impress and be good to them, but you seem easy enough that I don’t need to put in effort.” Do yourself a favor and move on to a woman who sees you as equal or better to the men who used to fuck her. Don’t settle for being second best.
It’s not as if what she wants matters at all in this equation. As redpilltom and his fellow Red Piller see it, sex isn’t something that women desire or enjoy — except with hunky alphas. It’s something that women have in their possession – and which non-alpha men have to get from them, by hook or by crook.
And if for whatever reason, good or bad, a woman “gave” a man in her past a certain sex act, she can’t change her mind and refuse to “give” it to you.
For the women who may be getting furious reading this, just imagine what it was like if you knew your boyfriend was rich.
Oh dear. This can’t be going anywhere good. Red Pillers regularly denounce women as “whores” and “golddiggers” who trade (their) sex for (men’s) money – at least when it comes to betas with bucks. But Red Pill dudes themselves see sex as essentially an economic transaction.
Imagine that he always brought his ex’s out on really nice vacations, nice house, bought them really nice gifts, treated them like princesses, etc. But he refused to do any of that with you, he wanted to be frugal with you even though he has more than enough money to treat you. Wouldn’t you feel a little bit weird about it? Wouldn’t you question why you were different, why he didn’t care to treat you the same? Why the sudden change?
I don’t know, maybe he’s older and wiser and realized that he was spending too much money and driving himself into debt? Maybe he got tired of an ex who only “rewarded” him with sex when he spend a lot of money on her? Or maybe his ex got tired of him trying to buy sex with money.
Hell, maybe he realized that the whole “sex for money” equation is an unhealthy basis for a romantic relationship?
In a followup comment, redpilltom makes clear he has no interest in hearing what the woman has to say about any of this.
![ForbiddenFruit420 13 points 14 hours ago What if she doesn't want to do it with you because she didn't enjoy it with her ex? permalink save report give gold [–]redpilltom [S] 37 points 14 hours ago That's something that's a bit more delicate and requires a bit more context. "I tried anal with my ex but stopped him because I didn't like it" is different than "I used to do it all the time with my ex, but didn't really like it". The context in the first was "I didn't like how it felt so I stopped" and the second was "I didn't really care for it, but he loved it so I did it for him". Overall it doesn't carry the same weight as the "I'm not that kind of girl anymore" BS that the post is more about, but it is a huge red flag and you should keep your eye out for more signs you're getting strung along. And, of course, women lie up and down about their sexual history. If a woman tells you she only tried something once briefly but hated it, it's pretty likely that she did it multiple times and loved it in the context of an alpha guy who gave her more tingles than you.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/lying.png?ssl=1)
Red Pill dudes, if you’re so deathly afraid of becoming a beta shelling out bucks for sex that alphas get for free, maybe you should stop seeing sex as an essentially economic transaction in which the desires of women – or at least their desire for anything but money – counts for nothing.
But in the meantime if you do decide to break up with a woman because she won’t have anal sex with you like she did in her college days – or whatever – you’re actually doing her a giant favor. Because no one deserves to be stuck in a relationship with someone like you.
H/T — r/thebluepill
One of my favorite parts of Cabin In The Woods was that the bimbo was only a bimbo because they put some sort of chemical in her blonde hair dye. I also loved the running merman gag.
@jayemgriffin – That reminds me of high school health class. The teacher wanted a “volunteer” to help him demonstrate the proper way to wrap a sprained ankle, and chose me.
I told him, nope, bad idea. I’m reaaaalllly ticklish.
He said that I was going to do it and that was that.
I tried to comply. I really, really did. It’s not my fault that I started laughing hysterically, flailing around and kicked him in the face.
REALLY!
@wwth – my favorite part was the collapsible bong. I WANT one!
Not that I’d smoke it. I just think it’s too cool for words.
OOooh! And the part where the guy says, “Whatever we do, we stick together! Do NOT split up!” and the watchers all groan.
Oh, and the cute little Japanese girls.
dashapants ,
I agree, but I don’t think the outcome of that impulse is innate. Crushing cute little animals is a thing some people get off on. *barf* There are Ted Bundy’s among us. (bad example as he was likely groomed to hate and harm women by his maternal grandfather.) Still, I think it is less simple than people following an individual inclination toward how they use power. I think it has to do with how much power they think they deserve and how much abuse the target deserves.
I think alot of cruelty is taught. The the entitlement/ resentment/ cruelty / release cycle feeds itself and may randomly occur in people, but the targets are not accidents.
I brought up animal abuse. As horrible as abuse of pets is, there is far more abuse happening to non-pet animals. People keep animals in inhumane conditions and kill animals for food all the time because we justify that cruelty. It’s cultural that we don’t care about a chicken the way we care about a kitten or a puppy. Chop off some chickens’ heads in your back yard some time. Nobody will care. Then, try the same thing with dogs. You will get a different reaction. I think the same holds true with certain groups of people. We assign them more or less value. More or less humanity. Blending up a kitten is perverse. Tossing chicks into the hopper alive is just how we do things. No big deal. We have created a hierarchy that determines how much something can suffer without it pricking our consciences.
For some people, pets don’t rank any higher than flies on that scale and I believe it makes them feel superior somehow. A visit to an Amish puppy mill will make you boggle at the idea that the Amish are gentle people. They think they are because they would never treat a person the way they treat soulless animals.
Right now in the US white cops are gunning down black boys in the streets because those boys are a safe target and they can’t fight back. They’re future is fragile and in the cops’ hands. But, I think there is more than that to it. They are socialized to see black boys as older, bigger, tougher and let’s not forget, better in bed than white men are. According to toxic masculinity those are the only metrics that matter. Yet, they are also taught to see black men and boys as beneath them and less deserving than they are. That dissonance, entitlement and resentfulness feeds the violence. They don’t just want to hurt black people. They feel entirely justified in doing so.
The same is true of men raping, abusing and killing women. Sure the women are at a disadvantage. We tend to be smaller. The authorities don’t give two shits about us. We’re socialized to acquiesce to men and to be less violent than men are socialized to be, but that isn’t why they do it. They do it because they believe they are entitled to us, better than us and angry when they can’t control, conquer or compete with us. Rape is about power. It is about destroying a woman’s “value” and making something wonderful a weapon (again the theme of destroying something beautiful because you resent it). Maybe he can make her feel like less, because her existing outside of that man’s control makes him feel like less. The men who do those things also feel entirely justified in doing them.
In their minds, those people are striking back at perceived injustices. Women and minorities fail to be appropriately inferior and that hurts bigots’ feefees so…
TRIGGER WARNING: hate crime / murder
In the news today I saw an American serviceman drowned a Filipino transwoman in a toilet. Like all people who commit hate crimes, I think he did it because he thought he should be able to do it. I’m sure he enjoyed it more because she was so lovely (because how dare she be beautiful, proud, sexual and trans.), but mostly he thought he should get to punish her. In his mind, I have no doubt that she “deserved” it and he deserves to be able to do it.
END TRIGGER
Well, now I’m sad. I must go hug sweet and fluffy things and have a hot cocoa.
Someone else has seen Absentia!!!! *jumps up and down* I LOVE that movie. Stuck with me for a long time, and I am veddy veddy picky about horror flicks, esp. since so many of them are tired cliches. Haven’t seen Oculus yet.
Also thank you for letting me forget, for a minute, about how badly I want to punch something after reading that Reddit thread.
This really fucking got to me:
then after some comments from others…
So:
* would have MMF 3some with a friend and a woman he is not dating, but
* would dump a girlfriend who even asked him about a MMF 3some
* would only form relationship with a woman who had experienced a FFM 3some in the past IF she ‘gives him one’, because
* FFM 3some is tops on his bucket list and is non negotiable and
* he will go get one (from where, 3somes R Us?), otherwise presumably he dumps her.
* This is nothing against her, of course, it’s just that he’s jealous because HIS GIRL had a sex life before him, and he also hates being reminded that he’s never achieved this apparent apex of sexytimes, which is some sort of trophy in his mind (“You have unlocked the 3some achievement! Your Sexer Score is 1035! Here’s a badge for your profile!”).
Like… fuuuuuuuck. Some self-awareness flitted in there at the end, it really did. Maybe one day it will stick.
From my time as a phone sex operator, I gleaned that for some men certain sex acts were seen as… well, like game levels. Ok you’ve done PIV, gotten a BJ… now have to beat the ‘Facial’ and ‘Anal’ levels to get to the big ‘FFM Threesome’ boss.
Want to punch stuff, will cuddle a kitty instead.
@Lea, seconding everything you said. But that, above? That is what truly terrifies me about people like this. They think they’re not only right, but that they are somehow victims fighting back. People like this are true horror to me.
That’s the thing, you can’t reason with someone who thinks that by abusing other people they’re striking a blow for cosmic justice. Aggrieved entitlement is a very dangerous thing.
Cassandra: And yet MRAs are constantly complaining that women “play the victim card” if they are raped have sex they regret.
Dammit the strikethrough html didn’t work.
On the first day of Misandramas my true love gave to me…
I seriously hope that none of these men date any woman ever. Nobody deserves this crap.
Also, every man who has referred to having sex with a woman as “smashing her,” “wrecking that chick,” “destroying her vadge,” or any similarly violent phrase that involves them breaking women like overused toys, should wake up in a panic every 2 hours every night for the rest of his life worried that he left the stove on.
Misandramas! Love it! If only I had art skills, I’d make an advent calendar.
@Lea – I largely avoid the news, because I don’t want to see stories like that.
I have no words for that.
On the second day of Misdramas, my true love gave to me, Two Blue Balls, and a dildo in a little suit!
Also, I wouldn’t want to WATCH it, because horror movies are just not really my thing, but if someone were to write a script for a horror movie where the villain is an MRA, taking his beliefs to the extreme, I think it would good.
Shine a light on that stuff, you know?
I’m sorry for this…
5 anal beads
4 sparkly butt plugs
3 strap ons
2 pleather handcuffs
and a dildo in a little suit
I’ve learned many great curses from the commenters here. Now I’m trying to remember the one about the sock drawer. May a smelly yak inhabit your sock drawer?
2 blue balls, lol. Much more misandrous than handcuffs!
Oh, Emmy Rae, yours is better.
Let’s see, now, what can we have for six?
Six ex-boyfriends!
7 fake phone numbers!
8 scented candles?
9 wooden chairs
10 pairs of spanx!
@ Michelle – Hmm. That could be tricky. The problem would be differentiating the MRA villain from your standard-issue misogynist monster or serial killer.
In any case, it would be a dark, dark movie – enslavement, sexual assault, torture, humiliation – without even the psychological protection that you get in, say, a Saw movie, where the traps and torture devices are so ridiculously overbuilt and the plans so Byzantine that you know it would all fall apart immediately in the real world.
If you wanted to broaden the scope a bit, you could easily create a dystopic sci-fi world that would make Gilead from A Handmaid’s Tale look like Shangri-La. In fact, they’ve given a bit of a head start by writing some horrific, mind-scarring sci-fi of their own.
(Trigger warning. All the Trigger warnings.)