Another insight into women from a man with zero insight into women. According to one deeply unpleasant dude on the PurplePillDebate subreddit called Round-Relative-7859, “no woman has ever been manipulated into sex.” How does he know this? He redefines manipulation out of existence when it comes to sex. Hey presto, no manipulation.
Unless she is a child or mentally challeged, no woman has ever been manipulated into having sex, not even younger women if they know what sex is.
They know exactly what implies to open legs. They know nothing is forcing the guy to commit. They know that pregnancy is a risk and they need birth control, and they either take the risk or not.
No woman has ever been manipulated into sex if she knows what sex is. Sex itself is what she got, and it never guaranteed anything else. All “manipulation” is at best she lying to herself.
QED, I guess.
Even in the PurplePillDebate subreddit, where the absurd is debated daily, this didn’t go over very well.
“That’s some serious misogyny to claim that no man has ever lied his way into a woman’s pants,” wrote one commenter.
“In his defense, I don’t think he’s ever talked to a girl,” replied another.
But Round-Relative-7859 had his defenders as well. After one commenter compared sexual manipulation to financial fraud, someone called calfshrug called foul. With financial fraud , he suggested, “the stakes are higher,” but when it comes to sex,
a woman entering the dating and sex market … is foraying into an arena where the stakes are just her ending up with a dick in her, unless the guy willingly misleads her to think he is using a condom or something and spreads HIV to her, where her life is now being risked. When a person is financially defrauded, they risk losing assets which must literally provide sustenance and shelter for their self and their children, so the stakes are not just “had a dick in me”
Bodily integrity, no big deal. Losing money on a crypto scam, that’s what really matters.
Round-Relative-7859 responded testily to critics, telling one in a comment that.
If they know what sex is and they are opening legs, then there is no manipulation. Unless she is drunk or something, which is basically rape, they are totally aware of what sex is that is what they get.
If they open legs because they believe it is about commitment or whatever, then they are in fact the ones trying to manipulate the man into those things using sex.
One critic sarcastically suggested that if women can’t be manipulated, then neither can men, and that “no man has ever been divorce raped, baby trapped, [or] paternity frauded.”
Round-Relative-7859 was having none of it.
All of those things are risks the man took, but they are not what he asked or desired for, unlike sex, which is exactly what she/he get.
Meanwhile women open legs, and both get sex. That’s it. No manipulation, both are 100% aware of what they are doing.
However, sex itself can be used to manipulate men and women into stuff, but sex itself is not a result of manipulation.
So if a woman promises sex, she’s a manipulator. If a man promises love or marriage or commitment, or anything, really, he’s scot-free. Got it.
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.
Meanwhile their entire concept of game is how to deceive women into sex. All their arguments boil down to man good, woman bad.
*Puts hand up* I was manipulated into sex, he was pretending our relationship was still good while looking for his next girlfriend. It wasn’t until I challenged him that he admitted he didn’t love me any more, but hadn’t said anything because that way he still got sex.
I suppose RR does admit that having sex with someone when they are drunk is rape, it lifts him a rung off the worst, but that’s not saying much.
I agree with the reply that says he’s never talked to a female human being. He really wishes he could manipulate a woman into sex, but since he can’t talk to them, everyone’s safe.
In better news, Tater and bro have gotten another 30 day extension on their completely-deserved free housing from the Romanian government.
I know he tries but it would be impossible to argue anyone is ever manipulated into anything using this logic. “Well, the retired dad knew what was going to happen when he transferred money to that scammer pretending to be his kid. He opened the app and understood money was going to be transferred from his account into another one.”
Obviously with sex the OP doesn’t believe the outcome is sufficiently bad enough to count, but he clearly doesn’t accept the idea that fraud victims only lost money, and money isn’t everything if you really think about it, so manipulation void.
Imagine your bad take is SO bad even red/purple pillers see it as the nonsense it is, lmao. At least he gets that women can underd be raped I guess?
@GSS ex-noob
Excellent. Let’s hope it stays that way, even though I feel bad for the Romanian tax payers having to pay for the fucker.
I actually had to read that sentence three times in the original post, because I couldn’t possibly have read that right given the context.
@ Battering Lamb
I read it three times to be sure too, it seemed so out of place with what else he was saying.
For days the red pillers presented only a small segment of the released phone transcripts. Now that the full transcripts are being presented, they are very damning. These women had to plot and scheme just to be able to leave their housing. Waiting until the Tate bros were asleep and convincing them they loved them and would really return. She tells her parents women are being trafficked and brainwashed. There was one exceptionally young girl she was very worried about and staying back in order to get her out while her parents were telling her the situation was too dangerous and she should just leave now.
@KMB: I’m sure the Romanian coffers will be replenished when they sell off his cars, house, and other property. The women charged as accomplices are out on house arrest.
Your average decent Romanian (particularly women) likely don’t mind paying for whatever Romanian jails cost. I’m thinking most of the real-deal prisons of his future home date back to Soviet days, and this gives me schadenfreude. Which I am not ashamed of at all.
Bet his receding hairline is showing up something fierce now. Wonder if he’s got a bald spot too, and whether they’ll touch before he goes to trial.
FAFO, Tater. You were so excited about other countries’ legal systems being different from the UK; you got what you wanted.
(Nelson HA-HA! gif)
Doubly topical here:
https://truthout.org/articles/right-wing-attacks-on-trans-health-care-rely-on-ableist-logic/
“At least he gets that women can underd be raped I guess”
I wouldn’t be so sure he does believe that. He probably believes women can be raped in the abstract, but in any rape case that comes up, he’s probably the guy saying she wanted it or she should know what happens when she drinks in front of men.
Manosphere has long had a policy that if any of them get called to jury duty in a rape case, no matter the evidence and no matter if they thought the rapist was guilty they were going to vote him as innocent.
@Surplus Thank you, that’s a really good article. I’m glad to see people pointing this out.
@Do I have a name:
You’re welcome.
@LIAWN:
Which presumably means that they’ll never get past voir dire, since one class of prospective jurors they eliminate at that stage are “ones whose mind is already made up so they won’t be swayed, either way, by the evidence and testimony presented during the trial”.
@ surplus & liawn
A US attorney friend was recently called for jury service. As he was a lawyer, one of the questions he was asked was “Would you follow the judge’s directions on the law?”
His response: “That depends on whether he gets it right or not.”
(He didn’t get picked)
@Surplus to Requirements
They thought of that. Their plan is to lie and look super-undecided and sympathetic to the rape victim up to the moment they get picked and only then ignore all the evidence and vote for acquittal.
@Love is All We Need:
Manosphere has long had a policy that if any of them get called to jury duty in a rape case, no matter the evidence and no matter if they thought the rapist was guilty they were going to vote him as innocent.
@Surplus to Requirements:
Which presumably means that they’ll never get past voir dire, since one class of prospective jurors they eliminate at that stage are “ones whose mind is already made up so they won’t be swayed, either way, by the evidence and testimony presented during the trial”.
@Alan Robertshaw:
A US attorney friend was recently called for jury service. As he was a lawyer, one of the questions he was asked was “Would you follow the judge’s directions on the law?”
His response: “That depends on whether he gets it right or not.”
(He didn’t get picked)
@Dave:
They thought of that. Their plan is to lie and look super-undecided and sympathetic to the rape victim up to the moment they get picked and only then ignore all the evidence and vote for acquittal.
But what if the victim is male? Particularly if the defendant is female? Or do they only care about male rape victims as rhetorical debate points?
I’m pretty sure the voir dire guys have long since gotten pretty good at sussing out people who have an axe to grind, even if they lie. If the justice system was easily defeated by merely lying to it, no-one would ever get convicted of anything without CSI-level airtight forensic proof.
As a general rule, there are three main groups of people who lie under oath: fools, cops, and Republican politicians.
All this jury selection and voir dires is really weird from a Brit perspective. One on my friends designs the questionnaires and advises on jury selection for attorneys. That’s just a job that doesn’t exist here; it’s just first 12 out of the hat.
Or indeed just rounding people up off the street.
…and these are the same losers who collapse into hysterics when the term “male privilege” is mentioned. As the “manosphere” so helpfully demonstrates on the daily, men are so monstrously privileged that they can comfortably get through life while being utterly ignorant and lacking in the most basic curiosity when it comes to gender, sexuality, and most of human history.
You can tell simply by taking a quick run through of main incel talking points that they have never given serious thought to any gender-related issues, they have never read any serious gender/women’s/men’s studies or feminist literature, and they have appallingly little understanding of human history. The reason for this ignorance is that men aren’t A gender, rather they have convinced themselves that they are THE gender. Even more than that, they see themselves as the only true human beings on the planet; women are the Other, the “infrahuman,” to borrow Kate Millett’s term.
Their complaints about the supposed tsunami of injustices men face regarding child custody and family court decisions, for example, are conveniently constructed to gloss over the fact that saddling women with all the responsibilities of childcare has been a fundamental tactic of patriarchal oppression. It ignores the fact that, up until the advent of feminism, it was men who got unconditional, unquestionable custody of children in cases of divorce, and that generations of women had to fight to have any parental rights at all.
Men don’t know shit about gender because they don’t care, and they don’t care because they don’t have to.
Geez. Do they at least get to have a coffee and say goodbye to their loved ones before being hustled off into sequester for God knows how many weeks or even months?
What happens if they have important deadlines or appointments pending?
Whatever its quirks, at least the American system gives some sort of advance notice …
See: the ‘libert’arian claim that the Free Market maximises freedom—even in a company town—because the only form of ‘real’ coërcion is direct, physical, coërcion or the threat thereof.