Over on the Ask The Red Pill subreddit, one of the stranger outposts in Reddit’s Red Pill empire, one aspiring alpha has a rather plaintive question about the proper etiquette when one is, er, making love with a woman who hates you.
The obvious answer to this little conundrum is: don’t have sex with people who hate you, or that you hate. Alas, this is not the advice given to young redthrowawaypill.
No, the advice he’s given is a lot more rapey.
A fellow calling himself toolatebutnexttime fondly recalls the lovely times he used to have with his hated first wife. Well, they were lovely for him, in any case.
F**king someone you hate can be really fun. My first wife cheated one me while I was deployed. I grew to hate her, to this day I hate her with every ounce of my being.
When I would come back to the states for vacation, I would pick up the kids from her, go hang out with them, take them back to her house put them to bed and then f**k the hell out of her.
Everything I wanted to do during the marriage but was too beta to just go ahead and do, I did. The fact that I hated her made me not give a shit about if it caused I fight afterwords.
Huh. You’re doing things to her without her consent and that make her angry. That’s not sex any more; it’s rape.
The advice given by Truckyouinthebutt seems almost reasonable by comparison, at least at first.
So hate F**k isn’t f**king someone you hate. Its more of a feeling that you don’t see anything ever happening with this person and all you do is F**k. You don’t date, you don’t text, you don’t talk about the weather, you just F**k. It can be you both hate each others personality but are sexually,attracted to each other and both need a release.
Sort of a friends-with-benefits kind of deal but without the “friends” part. That can actually work if both people are ok with it.
But then Truckyouinthebutt starts sounding rapey as hell too:
I f**ked a girl who was friends with my friends gf but couldn’t stand to hang out with her.
He means that he couldn’t stand to hang out with her, not that the girl couldn’t stand to hang out with her own female friend.
We would all go out for drinks. Us guys would talk, the girls would talk, then at the end of the night we would go after party at my friends place. Him and his,gf would go in her room to F**k and I would keep bitch girl on the couch and F**k there.
Wait, you’d keep her there? How, exactly? This is starting to sound a bit rapey.
No kissing, no sex talk, just whip it out and put it in.
A lot rapey.
You get to pull the hair more, pinch the nipples, slap her ass harder because you,don’t give a F**k what she thinks.
Ok, here’s the thing: when you’re having sex with someone you have to give enough of “a F**k what she thinks” to ensure that she is actually, you know, consenting to sex. Rough sex is fine, if she’s into it too. But sex without consent, well, that isn’t actually sex any more.
Normally if they are hate fucking you they are freaks and totally get off to this so if you do,it right they come back every time.
And if it turns out that, you know, you actually raped her? To Truckyouinthebutt, evidently, it’s no harm, no foul because, hey, he didn’t even like her anyway.
The Ask the Red Pill subreddit is basically the world’s worst advice column.
I am really so very not surprised that TRPers advise each other to rape. That’s pretty much all they do. I’m starting to wonder if the day will come when they don’t even deny it.
Consensual hatef**king can be awesome.
Non-consensual f**cking of any kind is not.
It’s that damn simple.
(Is there any particular reason f**k is being censored? Erring on the side of caution for now)
I’m beginning to feel horrified that I’m no longer really that horrified about this sort of TRPer bullshit.
I mean, they do this all the time. I’m not surprised anymore, I’m just apathetic about the whole thing, and that low key terrifies me.
I can’t see any way of stopping them besides putting this shit on blast, which is what you’ve done, David. Thank you.
As for the whole “hatefucking” thing: I wouldn’t fuck someone who hates my guts either, hence why I don’t fuck Red Pillers.
TMI WARNING: However, I have had sex that some could describe as “hatefucking”, because it’s a lot rougher than vanilla sex. There’s slapping, biting, pinching, lots of name calling…the only difference is, there’s aftercare and snuggling afterwards, and no real hatred for my partner, and they (I hope) harbor none for me.
I like to keep the “hate” in the bedroom, as it were. I understand that it’s all in jest, and it’s not legitimately “They hate my guts and just want to see me suffer” kind of stuff. Again, I wouldn’t fuck someone who legitimately hated me. That’s just asking for trouble, and apparently for them to ignore my boundaries.
…I need brain bleach.
http://i.imgur.com/UH9vFwh.gif
When I was a youth there was an “Ask about sex from Dr. Suchandsuch” column in a magazine I used to get monthly. His advice was NEVER this. Well, to be honest, the questions the editor put through were never this.
Hey RedPill question guy, howabout you shatter your own ideas about women and assume they’re human beings. Like you they had a childhood, teenage years and growing up stuff that didn’t involve them looking at themselves as a hole to be fucked. Maybe they even dreamed, and have a self image and hopes and shit. Maybe some of those dreams and hopes involved a man loving them. Maybe that creates complex emotions towards men who show interest in them. Maybe that’s why they kiss and sex and shit. Plausible, no?
Dr. Leda
Need. MOAR. Bunnies. And kitties. And some puppies for extra brain bleach.
A red piller was saying he couldn’t fuck someone he hates? I guess he must be celibate then.
@mseckeptiontotherule
You didn’t ask for baby sloths, but I brought baby sloths
He believes that women who also enjoy the sexual acts he enjoys most are freaks. Who’s demonising male sexuality again?
It’s kinda horrifying how they don’t see any responsibility to not traumatize their sex partners. One of the guys David quotes pretty much says that the only thing that keeps him from completely ignoring the boundaries of his sex partner is if he likes her. The worst part is that he gives an example of a situation in which he had sex with someone he disliked, so he obviously doesn’t have sex exclusively with people he likes. Wonder if she knew how much he hated her?
This is weird, but sometimes you go back to that situation to prove it didn’t happen like that. You pretend it’s ok. The lack of consent was subtle- despite what MRA’s think women are not likely to believe they have been raped when they have been.
Yep, I, too, am no longer horrified by what the poor excuses for human beings vomit on to the internet. Anymore, I just hope they’re too busy bitching about women online to actually go out and harm one.
I hope this redpillock gets thrown away by every woman he ever tries to have sex with. Because honestly, that’s what he (and everyone who responded to him with this sickening “advice”) deserves.
A desert island with an active volcano would be too good for all of them, methinks.
@ kupo
Wow, that panda is *tiny*!!!!
Maybe this is rather subtle, but something else that bothers me is when people talk about sex like something a man does TO a woman, instead of WITH her (I’m limiting my example to language referring to cis straight couples, because that’s mostly where I see this kind of thing).
Does that bother anyone else? It’s not the crude language that bugs me, it’s the fact that words like “fuck” are used as transitive verbs (e.g. “he fucked her”). “Fucked with” would be better, except THAT’S an expression for upsetting/fighting with someone, because English is weird.
Same thing with “make love”: if there’s a grammatical subject/object construction, I prefer “make love with” to “make love to” (David, thanks for using the right preposition in the post above!) because the “to” makes it seem like the subject (usually a man) has all the agency and the object (usually a women) is treated like, well, an object.
/grammar rant
@epitome of incomprehensibility
That’s more than a grammar rant. That’s an “I’m not here to have things done to me — I like to participate” rant. Well done!
In college, a male friend of a friend once “explained” to me that a woman couldn’t be a “f*cker,” only a “f*ckee.” This same guy liked to call female serving staff “wenches” within their hearing. What a wit! What a guy!
@Dr. Leda
Thanks, Dr. Leda, for adding some humanity — not to mention common sense — to this discussion.
This advice column: Was it “Dear Dr. HipPocrates”? Inquiring minds need to know.
Just learned that New Hampshire’s male Republican legislators are more breast-obsessed than any Star Wars fan.
@Kat
I emphatically disagree with your college guy friend – yes, it does involve an “optional extra equipment upgrade” for those whose OEM is a vagina, but once the supplementary equipment is on hand, vagina-havers are quite able to be the “fuck-er” if they so choose, and they can even be the “fuck-er” who does the fucking to someone whose OEM = penis.
Your college guy friend might not like being the “fuck-ee”. Sad, so many like him just don’t know what they’re missing. I shall cry all of 0 tears for them. 😉
@Rosadelava
Sloths are good too. Baby animals are the best brain bleach. 🙂
@RosaDeLava, this longtime lurker is delurking for baby sloths, because – Ennhhh! Brain bleach is always welcome.
I’m also a big fan of grammar rants, and I favor participation-implying prepositions. Bravo, @epitome of incomprehensibility!
And @David, thank you for your dedication to curating the putrid cesspools of the Manosphere. Your ability to consistently find some degree of humor there is a skill I envy. Kudos.
Bunnies, baby sloths, yeah, this is why I hang out here. Upside down. Like a sloth.
The cutest of all baby animals is the loxodonta africana. It is known, khaleesi.
http://www.acuteaday.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/mother-elephant-baby-elephant-calf.jpg
@epitome of incomprehensibility:
That really bothers me too. Thanks for calling it out.
On topic: Ugh. Ugh ugh uggghhhhh.
Off topic (I apologise, just wanted to vent): So, I recently wrote a review of the Sherlock Christmas special at the request of a friend of mine. I previously wrote him some reviews on series 2&3 episodes, because he’s not as familiar with the source material and I have fun looking up references (and doing other analysis), but those were for his TV-themed blog, where comment discussions tend to be pretty great, while this review went on a major-ish local web portal. And I knew, I knew that the fact I hated the special, and especially that one of the things that I pointed out was [what I see as] sexist aspects, would bring along the “you have no idea what you’re talking about, you only hate it because you’re a feminazi” style comments, but they still bug me. Not gonna answer them because it’s an awful platform for it, but AAARRGH.
Okay, I’m done. Carry on.
Would anyone bet against me when I’d put money on every MRA and Redpiller that I show that link to would say the following defenses in roughly this order:
1) They’d read it in the most innocent light possible and refuse to countenance the possibility that the redpillers are advising someone to commit rape”
2) You only think that they want to rape women because you’re a bad person.
3) There are only two of them so it isn’t representative of all redpillers. The only way that theredpill is bad is if every post advocated for rape.
4) Some feminist said something bad 40 years ago so you must hate feminism too right?
5) Everythings about rape with you people. What’s wrong with you?
6) It’s only bad if you’re a feminazi.
@Penny Psmith:
Lewis’s Law states that “the comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.” It’s horrific when we see it happening ahead of time.
I admire you tremendously for fighting the good fight. Remember that one can be judged on the quality of one’s enemies, and by those standards you score very highly indeed.