By David Futrelle
The misogynistic men I write about on this blog — whether they classify themselves as perpetually dateless incels or “slayer” PUAs — are forever claiming that dating in the Western world, and in the United States in particular, is worse than ever, by which they generally mean that the women they think they’re entitled to seem to want nothing to do with them.
Women, these men complain, are too picky, too feminist, too … fat.
Not that the women they want to date are fat, they’re quick to add; it’s just that, with the allegedly undateable fat women out there effectively off the market (for these guys), the number of acceptably hot women has shrunk.
In one post on the Red Pill subreddit from a few years back that I ran across recently. a fellow called One_friendship_plz offered MATHEMATICAL PROOF of this fat-lady effect. Well, sort of.
In a post titled “Why fat women are ruining the dating scene for men, and how you should prepare for the future,” he declared:
It is high obesity rates (undateable women) and average girls overvaluing their looks causing the dating problem in the USA.
Really. that’s what’s making dating suck? Not things like, oh, this?
did something happen to men where they forgot to talk like human beings pic.twitter.com/wgMkJlQaj3
— . (@swordsjew) April 14, 2018
Apparently not.
Average girls overvalue themselves because they aren’t fat so have more men after them than what they would in a healthy-body sized country. There is basically not enough healthy-sized women to fill the rounds, and 97% of men want a healthy-sized female.
Never mind that he pulled this stat out of his ass and that most people are likely to disagree with Red Pillers as to what counts as a “healthy-sized female.”
When the obesity is closing in on half the population it is INEVITABLE that close to an equal portion of males are going to lose out on the dating game unless they resort to asian countries or they get desperate and.. shivers
I’m assuming that last bit is a reference to homosexuality? Because in addition to being wildly homophobic that’s just … not how sexuality works.
But back to the main point:
So half of all American men won’t be able to date because American women are slightly more likely to be obese than they are?
Red Pillers like to talk about obesity in America as if only women have been gaining weight. In fact, the rates of obesity aren’t radically different between adult women (41.1 percent of whom were classified as obese as of 2016) and adult men (37.9% of whom were classified as obese).
Even if we were to assume that every obese American was in fact “undateable,” which is very definitely not true, men and women would “lose out on the dating game” in similar numbers.
As long as obesity stays, even if women became less promiscuous and more loyal, the competition would still be about being a HIGH SMV [Sexual Market Value] male when there’s a huge portion of women that are undateable solely because of their uncontrollable consumption of mcdonalds.
And now it’s time for MATH:
An average girl can go up 2-3 points on her sexual value based on the percentage of obese women, and if this number keeps increasing then what you’d define to be a 5 would soon become a 7 because of its scarcity.
I would ask One_friendship_plz to show his work here, but obviously he has done none.
Ugly will become average, and average will become hot. and anything that would be hot would become a unicorn (even if it has a shitload of flaws, betas would be in denial.)
Says a dude in desperate denial of his own manifold flaws, most prominent among them the fact that he posts crap like this on Reddit.
Do not ever stop improving your value men, the game will possibly get harder in the future based on how much feminism spreads to the point six figures might not be enough for a decent looking chick in America.
Well, no, not if you’re a Red Pill shithead that rejects close to half of all women as “undateable” based on their weight and calls the few that meet the standards of your boner “decent looking chicks.”
As for me, I will continue fatting, and dating, as usual.
*sigh* If only this mindset was limited to just a handful of internet douchebags. But I have to imagine that a lot of the cultural artifacts floating around out there of the schlubby blue-collar guy married to a conventionally attractive woman (see The Honeymooners and everything it influenced, from The Flintstones to The Simpsons) have made only cemented this entitlement in the Western* psyche as a whole. Ironically, The Simpsons, the show that was initially meant to parody that trope went on to inspire even more copycats like practically everything Kevin James has done.
But let us take a moment to honour this trope in the way that only MST3K can:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seJSVbE9cxc
*This entitlement exists everywhere, but I’m sure there are some parts of the world that didn’t consume The Honeymooners.
@Pie
“Cocksucking” is not pejorative. “Holy cocksucking Christ” is and deliberately so. The “holy” and the “Christ” might give away the context. My using the phrase was a deliberate attempt to emphasise the statement I was making, which was about Dahl being an awful misogynist as is clear from the most cursory examination of anything he ever said or did.
We might as well rule out “fucking” as an insult because quite a lot of people like to fuck.
You’re right that we have to be careful about how we use language. Let’s not be foolish, though. References to sex, oral or otherwise, are commonly used for the purposes I used it here without any intention to shame.
But fair enough, I’ll stick with Holy Cock-Cuddling Christ from now on. Thanks.
But Dahl really was horribly misogynistic. Just about every episode of his Tales of the Expected was about how awful women are and his personal introductions to those episodes display nothing short of glee in that misogyny. In person, he delighted in humiliating his wife in public and in front of his lovers. I’m not sure how a girl as a protagonist in one of his books mitigates this shitty behaviour in the slightest.
Matilda is my hero, especially as Tim Minchin has helped render her, but Dahl is still an absolutely deplorable character.
In other news, hey whatddya know… gamification of mass murder statistics seem to have influenced a mass murderer!
http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebec-mosque-shooter-alexandre-bissonnette-trawled-trumps-twitter-feed
Oh, and look, all of the anti-Muslim flotsam caking up the US media apparatus influenced him too:
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/ywxeyg/here-are-the-far-right-conspiracists-the-quebec-city-mosque-shooter-followed
I’m probably more nationalistic than most of my brethren on the left side of the equation, because this is the kind of thing that gets my hackles up. It’s bad enough that Americans are killing each other in the way they are, but I pretty much wrote off American citizenship meaning anything to Americans in terms of unity or brotherhood once I saw the naked social Darwinism on display during the health care debate. “Would you just let that person die?” “YEAH!” (To say nothing of Jim Crow, the plight of the indigenous etc, but the unity sheen of 9/11 evaporated mighty quick, didn’t it?). But when somebody I must call a countryman kills my other countrymen based on the hate bubbling up from south of the border… that I can’t abide. Canada’s got her own fair share of hateful assholes, but it doesn’t have a fraction of the media apparatus available to their American counterparts. Ezra Levant was languishing in obscurity when he was on SunTV. It wasn’t until Rebel Media took to the States than people kinda sorta almost knew who he was, and you can be sure that Levant’s xenophobic proteges wouldn’t have gained the traction they did without a handful of crackpot right-wing American billionaires.
In short, Canada’s got plenty of work to do RE: hate and intolerance, but American media complex… not helping!
@ latsot;
Context is important in another sense, though. This is a socially conscious web site, and we try to treat each other with respect. It is also a very feminist and intersectional group, and the tolerance level for arbitrary dismissal of other members’ concerns is low.
I once posted about a weight loss goal I was hoping to meet, and I was asked by another member to please not post of weight loss as an arbitrary “good thing”, as they were struggling with body image issues. I replies with an apology and agreed to keep that to myself.
There are an infinite number of perjoratives which can be used in lieu of one mocking a sexual preference.
@Weird Eddie
Thank you. You word good.
Using sex acts/preferences as an insult pisses me off an inordinate amount.
@latsot
The polite response is “sorry I upset you” (without any qualifications or doubling down).
There are some words I think are absolutely fine to use, but I know people who are offended by those words. So I still use the words, but not in front of them.
It’s not up to you to decide what someone else should think is offensive.
Thank you Weird Eddie.
Also, the “holy” and the “Christ” juxtaposed with the “cocksucking” is kind of contrary to the spirit of not disparaging other peoples religious beliefs. If you want to critique a whole religion, maybe just do that – though that’s not really in the spirit of this place either.
Otherwise, maybe find some other way to add emphasis, if that’s all you meant to do?
latslot, you’ve been commenting here longer than I have, kinda surprised you reacted so defensively to fair comment about your choice of words there, and the implications they carry.
I wasn’t mocking a sexual preference. Is using the word “fuck” mocking a sexual preference? It gets used fairly often around here.
I won’t say the word again here. Fair enough, I get that it hurts people and I don’t want to do that. But honestly, there’s a difference between using and mentioning a word. I was talking about a horrible person behaving horribly and it turns out that my use of a particular word was the most harmful thing?
For goodness’ sake.
Tangentially related (to blog, not this particular thread) and since there’s a lot of A Handmaids Tale fans here: Handmaid’s Tale inspired lingerie.
Not sure if this is foolish, insulting, stupid, or brilliant. Tending to the first three – but I’m neither a designer nor a millionaire.
@Croquembouche
Fair enough, I was totally disparaging other people’s religious beliefs. AND I’D DO IT AGIAIN!!!!
But not here.
@Violet
I haven’t doubled down. I’ve said that I won’t use that particular word again here and that I’ll be more careful without caveat. I get to defend myself though, until it becomes tiresome, which is right about now.
I think I’ve been polite, which is why I’m going to sto
@latsot:
The societal context behind why “cocksucker” is an insult is pretty much the same as the context for why people use “gay” as an insult. Because “cocksucking” is generally viewed as something that only hetero women and gay men do, and would be “gay” for a hetero man to do, the term carries a lot of homophobic (because homophobic insults carry the implication that being homosexual is bad), transphobic (because it erases the existence of many trans women and the men who date them), and misogynistic (because it’s not “masculine”, and things which aren’t “masculine” are bad) baggage that isn’t present with the more generic “fucker”.
And yes, this is a website where people expect you to be careful with your language. There are a great many other websites out there where you’re free to throw around whatever pejoratives you wish. Using a defense that’s very similar to the one people use when asked to stop using ableist language probably won’t get you very far.
EDIT: Moreover, you don’t really see any widespread, common societal use of an equivalent term which would also describe men who perform oral sex on women. Curious, that.
@dslucia
You do, however, find widespread, disparaging terms for women who perform oral sex on women.
What dslucia said ^^
Also, I internalised the idea that fellatio was bad before I had even tried it based on the liberal use of that (and similar) as an insult.
<== is now rather frantically trying to recall an insult based on heterosexual, PiV activity that does not involve money changing hands.
I’m listening and learning even while people are telling me to go away. I understand the need to be careful about language and I understand what I did wrong.
But honestly “there are a great many sites where your ilk can go”? Are you serious? My intention was not pejorative. I’ve considered what I said and explained that and why I won’t say it again. If you feel that my choice of language is worse than the acts of someone who seemed to devote himself to horrible, harmful behaviour then knock yourself out.
I tend to think that the proof of a person is in their deeds. I read, I listen and I learn. I don’t threaten people or tell them which sites they’re allowed to visit.
I’m genuinely sorry, without the slightest caveat, that I was offensive. I will try not to do it again. I suppose this will be especially easy since according to you I’m no longer welcome around here.
It wasn’t my intent to offend anyone, I just wanted to highlight the fact that holy goodness RD was a horrible, horrible man. I thought that was what mattered.
“Fuck” is a pretty generic term. It can refer to any number of sex acts, and is not specific to any particular orientation (aside from non-asexual folks, I guess, but some aces do choose to have sex, so not really even that). It’s more difficult to argue that a phrase is pejorative of a particular group when it’s something that people from multiple and various demographics are all known to do. Not so with “cocksucking”. (Although technically people of all manner of orientations and genders can engage in that, it’s certainly not the conventional understanding of the phrase.)
From my own perspective – stick around. You apologised, know what were wrong and accept it – done. End of story.
I think it helps to remember that, for a lot of people, Mammoth is a bit of an oasis.
The site does operate a bit on a ‘black ball veto’ principle. Generally speaking, even if something is only bothering one person, everyone else respects that and adapts accordingly. I really like that.
There’s loads of other spaces where you can be more frank or robust or whatever you want to call it. But there’s one place where people can feel moderately comfortable. In the grand scheme of things I don’t think that’s a great sacrifice.
You know, I’ve always had a policy of not giving oral sex to a man unless I feel like I can trust him. That is, guys I’ve had an actual relationship with. Although I am perfectly willing to have casual PIV sex.
The reason for this is is that although I don’t personally believe giving oral sex is degrading, a whole lot of men do and will happily mock and denigrate women who give them blow jobs. The way many men talk about women who give them oral is way above and beyond the misogyny you even hear about women who have PIV with them.
I wonder if men (not so much feminist/feminist friendly men, but regular men) realize just how much sex they lose out on because of their insistence on performing toxic masculinity with each other by degregrading women who are willing to have sex. It just makes other women not want to do it, or not want to particular sex acts.
@wwth
Swap the sexes out and same here for both giving and recieving. Don’t know, oral just seems more intimate somehow.
@latsot:
That was a corollary with “this is a website where people expect you to be careful with your language”. Not telling you that you need to leave, but suggesting that getting defensive with people when they ask you to not use a certain term is perhaps not the best course of action to take, and that you’re very likely free to use it almost anywhere else you go; people come here in part understanding that they generally won’t need to see that from regular commenters.
Also, intentions aren’t magic. Sorry if I was just jumping on the dogpile, but I thought it worth explaining further precisely why some people might object to the term you chose to use (and, in fact, the one you settled on after). You may not mean a term in a pejorative manner, but that doesn’t automatically remove the pejorative associations it has due to its widespread use in society.
EDIT: In fact, I’m glad that you’re willing to take the criticisms in stride. By all means, I’m not suggesting that you shouldn’t continue visiting and commenting here.
Whatever ye Holy Christ rides is only worth mentioning if it’s a unicycle. I doubt any one of us is going to be banging him anytime soon.
To follow up on what Alan said, here’s my personal observation : it is by no means a safe space, because of the subject matter and because of the trolls. But it is the safest space, thanks to its regulars. I feel keeping it that way should be a priority, for all our sakes.
@shadowplay
Thanks, I appreciate that, but nah. It’s hard to see a point in being part of a community that cares more about scoring points than accepting that someone is very much on their side having understood and accepted what they did wrong.
I’ll keep reading the blog because it is brilliant but I won’t comment again. Nobody’s loss.
@ latsot:
Since I stew the first throne, I feel I should advise, please stop digging. That’s all anyone is asking.