On a somewhat lighter note than my last post, here is a lesson in, er, economics from the Red Pill subreddit.
Yeah, I’m not sure that “logical” is the word you’re looking for there, champ.
If this screenshot is blurry — someone told me they were having problems with this — here’s the text:
thebears1986 67 points 1 year ago
Women used to maintain a pussy cartel. To get any pussy you had to get married. Men want pussy so they got married. The cartel broke down a bit and women started giving access to pussy after engagement. Then the effort was lowered some more and the couple only had to be “going steady”. Next was “in a committed relationship” and eventually the “3 date rule”. Today you just swipe right on a smartphone.
Women currently sell into a hyper-competitive sex market where once they were buyers with a huge upper hand. The market is flooded and prices have dropped to $0.00. Gone are the days where they could demand any sort of commitment in exchange for access. Women still want men so they provide extra services to the men to compete for attention. Naked pics are extra services they use to keep up with the many women competing for the man they want. Either they send the pics or the guy moves on to the women who will.
I think the next major innovation will be women grouping together to offer threesomes to men in exchange for attention. Once naked pics become normalized they will have to do something. This is the next logical step.
H/T — I think someone on the Blue Pill subreddit linked to this recently; I can’t find the post
Alan:
Fat cats.
When was this? And who were the heads of it? Because cartels need someone in charge to run things, y’know.
Nope, and nope. If you want cats, you go to the Humane Society and adopt one, assuming that no strays have come to your door meowing for food. I’ve always been adopted by pussies, rather than having to look for one to adopt, myself.
When did this happen? I wonder if this dingdong is aware that people have had to get married, without engagement, because women got pregnant first. And that this has happened throughout history and long BEFORE history, too.
Uh, jackass? You ARE aware, I hope, that at whatever stage a relationship goes sexual, it has to be BY CONSENT, right? Because the mere act of swiping right doesn’t get you laid, you know. (Just look at all the Tumblrs dedicated to Morons On Tinder, for fucksakes.)
Oh yay, more of this tired old bogus Sexual Market shit. ZZZZZZZZZ.
And, BTW, lots of women are now refusing to send nudes because (a) they need to actually know (IRL!), like and TRUST the guy first, and (b) they know damn well that even if he passes the first wash, he could still use those photos to blackmail or otherwise invade their privacy. So, no dice. So, Market Analogy FAIL.
(There’s also the salient fact that if any man DEMANDS nudes, he’s just automatically not worth “competing” for. Plus, there are plenty of others out there who won’t make that demand because they’re just plain better people. But trust this bozo not to grasp that.)
In your DREAMS, bozo.
@ moggie
Are you in town all week; I’d like to try the veal. 😉
(Obviously not really veal; it’s cruel)
“Spinster”, in fact, derives from when the spinning wheel was invented, enabling a single woman to supply four or five (usually male) weavers with yarn, eliminating the need to marry in order to live above starvation level. Given the option, most of these women chose *not* to marry, which at that time deprived the wife of every possible right over her person and property, and even, under commonlaw jurisprudence, of her legal existence. Thus, “spinster” became a term of opprobrium meaning “uppity woman”, and the whole propaganda program about “spinsters” being ugly and unhappy was brought to bear to dissuade women from this way of life.
@Alan:
I wasn’t until you said that, but now I totally am.
On topic:
I actually once dated a woman who had internalised exactly this line of thinking. I didn’t have enough feminist knowledge at the time to understand that, so it just came across as massive insecurity bordering on complete distrust of other women, and an insistence upon performing any sex act that any other woman happened to mention. The atmosphere was toxic and I’m glad it ended.
I can’t imagine being a woman with a male partner who believed this nonsense. It must be awful. My full hugs and support to anyone who’s gone through it.
crazy_liebling wrote:
That doesn’t sound picky. More like “not picky” or “having basic requirements of decency.”
A random thought: Of all of the times I’ve been accused of “White Knighting” on the internet (for suggesting that men are capable of not being assholes), I’ve never really stopped to consider how illogical this theory of manospherians is in the context of posting anonymously on the internet.
If my real goal was to maximize my chances of getting teh sex, and the idea is that women don’t like men who “know the truth” about feminism, then wouldn’t the best strategy be to be a feminist in person but an anti-feminist on the internet?
If, on the other hand, the idea is that women do like men who “know the truth” (and despise “white knights”), then why try to convert me? Why not count me in the win column for increasing their chances at getting teh sex?
Am I being too logical?
@Bina:
Yeah, I think his “the next logical step” is really just that women are soon going to be harassed by MRA-types who have progressed from assuming that demanding nudes is okay, to now assuming that demanding threesomes is okay.
Actually, I think it is more like this:
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eeQSI-jo0E&w=420&h=315%5D
BINGO!
See, this is where logic rests: on looking at patterns of things that actually happened, as opposed to things that only happened in the person’s fervid (and ideologically blinkered) imagination. It’s logical to extrapolate, based on prior (bad) behavior, that MRAs, PUAs, etc. will escalate from one unreasonable demand to another even more unreasonable demand. And since Red Pillocks tend to subscribe to an extremist, simple-minded brand of sexual capitalist ideology, it seems reasonable to assume that their next ridiculous and unrealistic expectation of women will outdo their last.
Meanwhile, the women will all be over in the other corner, laughing and pointing.
The “MRA” isn’t a real movement because they never go out and protest. It’s like, ‘Go. Go to the white house and demand our men and boys have more rights.’
They ignore real men’s issues like equal child custody and more support groups and focus on bashing women and feminists instead.
It’s not surprising whatsoever that every time these MRWimps discuss a “sexual market” with a pseudo-Darwinistic undertone that they *never* bring up a man’s market/biological worth. Specifically, if a woman has lots of casual sex, she’s cheap/free/worthless. So, what does that make men who have lots of casual sex? By that logic, *definitely* worthless.
My* parents and grandparents had several choice words for such highly promiscuous, sexist men, believe it or not. Many of them are too crass for the purpose of this discussion, but they do involve curse words and the word “cad.
*I don’t know about any one else, but mine were extremely consistent in moral/ethical standards for everyone. It’s actually a bit shocking, considering how they were raised.
Yes, swiping right will guarantee you sex and your sexist comments will never, ever backfire.
Bye Felipe!
One minute it isn’t fair that we ride the cock carosel and even uggos get love and now this?
This is like the mysterious prude/slut phenomenon, isnt it?
Why can’t these Redpill guys just be satisfied with porn? Why do they have to go after women in the real world? I thought porn did it better according to these douchebags…
Saffron:
Surely you must be aware that all that Alpha Gold Sperm must be worth something. (Or nothing at all, I could be wrong about that.?)
I just want to sit this dude down and blow his mind.
Men post their cocks online all the time. They’re topless all over town in the summer. Thier eagerness combined with lack of manners when showing off their junk is actually annoying to many women and can be pretty creepy.
Ya know what? Good for the guys who post nudes and send appropriate dick pics. They get to do what they want to with their bodies.
Guess what?
Woman get to feel that in control of their bodies while naked too. We get to show whoever we want, whatever we want.
If public nudity and eagerness to have threesomes = selling out, then men seem to be selling out too.
Thank goodness people aren’t things and they don’t lose value ever.
Here’s a news flash: Some of those threesomes have more than one man in them and some have none at all.
tl;dr “I could totally have sex if I wanted to, I just don’t wanna!”
@Lea:
Women are the Quantum Slut; simultaneously in the position of having sex way too much and being way too stingey with their sex-bestowing.
Big difference is that, while in Quantum Mechanics you make a measurement in order to collapse the wave function, in Quantum Sexchanics the wave function collapses perpetually based on what annoy the angry misogynist most at the given moment.
Kirbywarp,
*nods*
It is known.
@ Kirby
Well that’s IKEA beds for you.
Blockquotes are good, y’all.
@Lea:
It’s kind of incredible, isn’t it? These guys *want* to live in a world where they compete with each other over obtaining the objects called women, and yet they rage against women for apparently setting up such a system where they have to work so hard. They want to be the actors in life, but they get angry at the notion of having to do the acting.
@Lea “Here’s a news flash: Some of those threesomes have more than one man in them and some have none at all.”
That’s a problem because if lesbians aren’t having sex just so a straight guy can wank off to it or if they aren’t super-feminine attractive-type lesbians then these guys have no interest.
Actually, surely the easiest way to get male attention out of these guys would be to say something like:
“As a woman I have no country. As a woman my country is the whole world.”
Or possibly quote from Manfeels Park.
You’d get a tonne of attention. And it’s about the same type of attention you’d get from these specific guys as any other performance would generate.
@ Kirbywarp
Yep, women can’t ever “win” with MRWimps. Despite their insistence that they revere virgins and “humble married women”, they will either call all women who claim to be in such situations liars or prudes.
You have one kid? You’re a prude, ’cause clearly you’ve said “no” to your man way too many times, and you need at least three kids to be considered a woman. Infertile? You’re a defect; inferior. Adopted kids no matter the reason? Still inferior, and you need to give your man more sex. You have five kids? You’re super selfish for overburdening Your Providing Superior. What about having the “perfect number” of kids? Get back to the kitchen and stop complaining; you should be grateful for being in Your Providing Superior’s prescence.
Buddy, using two hands, does not a threesome make.