Just your typical discussion of sex on the Men Going Their Own Way subreddit, and a reminder that women won’t be missing out much if these guys really do go their own way.
![plz_say_sike 37 points 2 days ago
Man I’m only in my early 20s and the thought of eating these females out absolutely disgusts me. So many of them have taken so much raw dick, their vaginas are basically patri-dishes full of semen and precum. Don’t get me wrong, if I’m offered a blowjob I’ll take it but not if she expects I eat her out in return.
permalinkunsavereportreply
[–]anongogogo 19 points 2 days ago
You're taking dicks indirectly which is fucking sick and disgusting.
permalinksaveparentreportreply
[–]d1678480 9 points 2 days ago
True, and that goes for everything you do with a woman. For example, have fun kissing that mouth of hers after you know where its been.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/2021-05-22_17-44-38.jpg?resize=580%2C769&ssl=1)
I apologize for ruining your lunch with thoughts of MGTOWs actually trying to have sex.
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
Having only watched the first couple of seasons, I’m slightly confused. The way the article is written, it sounds like they, the writers and producers, were making up both the idea of the rape scene and the waterboarding scene. Didn’t they have the book to go by or were they adding in this stuff?
My understanding of GoT (based on various friends accounts) is the the books contain a fair bit of sexual assault; but don’t really stand out in a genre where that is sadly not so unusual. And that the show managed to be considerably worse than the books on this. Also, the last two or three seasons of the show got ahead of the books, so the showrunners were just working off of notes of how the original author was planning to have things go.
@.45: Have not watched the show (wanted to read the books first), have read the books (and now don’t want to watch the show). I know for a fact that the show added a lot of rape, one of the most important being the wedding night of Daneiris. In the book it is also weird (young girl getting married off etc) but one of the things that is stressed is that despite their language barrier Kal-Drogo goes out of his way to not force himself upon her. I’ve been told it has something to do with the rating system.
I’ve been told that a rape scene can be portrayed more explicitly than a consensual sex scene (especially if the woman is enjoying herself). I can’t find confirmation of this and am not from the states, so if someone can rectify or enlighten me on this I’d appreciate it.
@.45:
They apparently decided that rape was one of the important parts of the story, and to cram in more rape the way you’d cram more bacon into a garbageburger.
Sansa has never been raped in the novels (although she’s had some close calls) and Septa Unella’s fate has yet to be revealed.
So basically the books had some rape and somewhere along the line someone said “Hey guys, let’s lean into this.” Sounds fantastic.
@cyborgette : I agree with the “what is wrong with theses people” part. I don’t quite agree with your reasonment, who go to right conclusions by wrong paths in my opinon.
See, the thing is, what the anecdote show is that the directors have no empathy with their coworkers (since, you know, you have to be a monstruous asshole to actually waterboard a coworker). So, that they would play fast and loose with consent in other context is a good conclusion.
The part where you say that “authors talking about X want to do X” is where this seem particulary wrong, on both hand. The first one is that you *can* talk about a negative thing without wanting it ; there’s plenty example of that. Typically Tolkien lavishly describe all kind of battles, as well as a particulary creepy encounter with a giant spider, and he was neither particulary warlike nor a spiderophile.
The second one is that a lot of abusers don’t actually show it in a neat, easy way like that. If you take a well-known producers, there’s like a 50/50 odds of him being an abuser and a creep, even if he was the face of wholesomeness. We should not expect someone to not be an abuser because he don’t look like one.
The part against separating artists and their arts is pretty true tho in my opinion. While flaws in the products don’t necessarily show flaws in the artists, flaws in the artists are quite more likely to filter down to the product. (it’s the long form for “I don’t think Céline books should be celebrated”)
Cyborgette, absolutely! That’s horrifying. Ugh, I haven’t watched the show and now I don’t want to.
I think this is something a lot of defenders-of-scummy-artists refuse to acknowledge. Take historical fiction, for example. I hear a lot of “oh but that time period really was that rapey/misogynistic/bigoted, so the author had to write his characters with those attitudes!” Which…well…there are a great many things wrong with that, but one is that while you may need to write a scummy character in your book or movie, you don’t need to make them the sympathetic good guys!
Ohlmann, I should have hit refresh before posting! Loved your response.
Does it count as being ninja’d if I forgot to refresh the page? ?
OT, but it’s the Glorious 25th of May, and if you know what that means, you know what this means.
Can’t see the image (still getting black boxes, have undoubtedly mucked up some setting somewhere) but I do know about the Glorious 25th of May. Alas no lilac available right here, so I shall content myself with remembering the lilac that grew where I used to live. GNU Terry Pratchett.
I’m always wearing a lilac, I have Reg’s gravestone tattooed on my chest.
@opposablethumbs
It’s a video of a rather good arrangement of “All the Little Angels.”
@opposablethumbs:
Take your pick:
http://icolorpalette.com/download/imagepost/lilac-3386911_1280.jpg
http://hyperactivefarms.com/resources/shop/syringa/Syringa_Michel-Buchner_lavender-blue-violet_03.jpg
http://www.purdue.edu/hla/sites/yardandgarden/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/08/Photo2SensationLilacReversionPurdue-768×576.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_zHXRRC7NQTs/TALYwaK1qHI/AAAAAAAAAec/MGvrmON4DmU/s1600/lilac+flower2.jpg
@ Dali
In my roadie days we did the Lipizzaner Horses. On one occasion we walked into the venue to set up. The lighting designer suddenly exclaimed “We should deck this entire arena in lilac. These horses deserve it!!!”
(That became a bit of a stock phrase for us for every gig thereafter: “We should deck this venue in lilac; this band deserves it.”)
@Ohlmann
Yeah I’m not going to even attempt to rebut this. I think you understand very well what I meant, and it wasn’t this.
Fair point. OTOH signs have often been plentiful with beloved “wholesome” directors. Joss Whedon anyone? Feminists outside the white cishet pop-culture mainstream were criticizing him plentifully from early on.
Thank you Victorious Parasol, and thank you for the links Full Metal Ox!
(I don’t suppose anyone happens to know what I might likely have messed up such that I get black boxes instead of embedded videos, and only here at WHTM? Any suggestions gratefully received. I don’t even care that much for Newton Pulsifer, dammit :-s)
@ Bookworm in hijab
“one is that while you may need to write a scummy character in your book or movie, you don’t need to make them the sympathetic good guys!”
I was going to say something about people feeling all clever and deep by showing things aren’t all black and white with nuances everywhere, but honestly am not sure where I was going with it or what point I was going to make. Can’t speak to other countries, but here in the US we really are fascinated with how killers and such think, what their motivations are, etc. Just an observation I guess.
@ Cyborgette
Yes, I think we were all thinking about Joss. Never meet your heroes.
Edit: Also, not that I have significant doubt about the idea that guys who like to write about scummy things are frequently scummy themselves, I wonder what the actual stats are.
@ .45
Orwell had some thoughts on this. In his parochial British way he mourned the change in public interest, from those very British ‘genteel’ murders (think Miss Marple and subsequent success in the genre), to the more lurid American versions.
You may have read his essay…
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/decline-of-the-english-murder/
@ Alan Robertshaw
I have not, but it occurs to me that essay could practically be summed up with the advice for guys on Tinder: Don’t be boring.
Reminds me of the Star Trek Voyager episode where Tuvok catches a murderer on board in the first ten minutes of the episode, but spends the rest of the episode obsessed with the guy’s motivation, unable to accept that he killed essentially because the victim was there and why not?
Lol. I hate it when I think of a clever comment and my imagination deletes it before I can type it.
@.45
Probably impossible to obtain, but I can say that the fannish grapevine strongly indicates a near 1:1 correspondence. (I.e., I’ve known a lot of femmes who’ve spent time on the con circuit and met a lot of the guys in question, and have things to say about their behavior, oh yes.)
It is also, I remind fen of humorous British SFF, Towel Day, in honor of Douglas Adams.
Carry a towel everywhere and answer all questions with “42”. Awful poetry optional.
@GSS ex-noob:
One of my fannish goals is to own a lilac-printed towel— the better to conflate both allusions. (I did manage hard-boiled egg consumption in observance today.)
@FMOx: Obviously, you deserve it!
Yeah I guess he doesn’t mind that his dick touches other ducks and, since he is inserting that into that woman… where other men have been..,according to his weird logic of course.