Misogynist meetings to be held across the world

[Narz]

This is obviously a very generalized assertion to illustrate a point, but it's also not particularly good in that it reinforces the (bad) notion that women are always looking to trade up in the world and will drop your ass the instant something better comes along. Which is not how things generally work in the real world. Relationships are about finding that special snowflake whom you click with, both on an emotional/maturity/shared interest level, as well as on a timing/circumstances level.

I know you're just a kid but that's still super naive. Special snowflake, omg. People aren't snowflakes, they change massively over time and you don't really know someone for at least a few years.

Women and men nowadays have little loyalty and most of them will drop your ass to level up (look at marriage stats and those are just the ones who bother getting divorced. Sure there are successful marriages but for every successful one there's a bitter, loveless, sexless one. Snowflakes melt, look their shape, turn into ice or evaporate. Reply back when you've had multiple 5+ year relationships and friends with similar.

PUA presupposes that all women can be reduced to a handful of habits and pavlovian responses, which, while also morally repugnant and...wrong, is also not really a relationship qua relationship.

It's just marketing dude, don't take it personal. Marketing works. The hard part as a man is getting in the door, obviously once you're in you start to notice the uniqueness and can cultivate a relationship (tho if you were a girl as a snowflake instead of an evoluting, changing human being you're in for trouble).

Also, decent dating advice teacher will teach you to be a better man to attract a better woman, pure attraction tactics is very old school.

I don t know what roosh teaches because when I stumbled on his page a couple years ago it was easy to tell a couple paragraphs in that he's a massive attention whore with a barrel of issues.

 

[Arwon]

Second post because I also wanted to cover this. I dunno about 50 times, that sounds like hyperbole to me, but it IS a fact that no doesn't always mean no. Communication is more than just verbal, especially with women, who tend to rely on nonverbal communication more than men do. A "no" while she retreats from you to the other end of the couch is not the same as a "no" while she continues passionately snogging you. Depending on the circumstances, depending on the individual woman, depending on other cues, "no" can mean "no", or "no" can mean "not right this minute, but let's keep doing what we're doing and see where I am in 15 minutes" or it can mean "no, but maybe if you try a little harder" or it can mean any number of other things. Every woman is different, and it's just a fact that many do feel pressured to "play hard to get" due to social conditioning, they don't want to be thought of as promiscuous so they put up token resistance even when they fully intend for it to happen.

This is the hill you want to die on?

 

[Arwon]

"as a byproduct of the dating game" - as in "caused by misreading signals".

The attitude that a bit of sexual assault is a "byproduct of the dating game" reveals a rather horrifying sense of entitlement to sex.

 

[Farm Boy]

The dating game is a byproduct of human sexuality. Sexual assault is a byproduct of human sexuality. Getting wasted and having sex is a byproduct of human sexuality. Entitlement? I think that's a simplistic answer. This is unusually prudish of you, isn't it? Shouldn't that be my line or something?

 

[useless]

How is it prudish to say that women don't owe men sex?

 

[Ryika]

The attitude that a bit of sexual assault is a "byproduct of the dating game" reveals a rather horrifying sense of entitlement to sex.

Honestly, I don't even know what to say to that. There's so much empty space between the dots that you're connecting here, whole universes would fit between them.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

This is the hill you want to die on?

This is an RD thread, if anything I said is incorrect explain how. Rhetorical questions are not valid arguments.

 

[Farm Boy]

How is it prudish to say that women don't owe men sex?

That is what you got out of that? Interesting.

To answer your question: It isn't.

 

[Arwon]

Unwanted sexual contact is sexual assault. The thing is that a lot of the badgering and persuasion tactics used to "turn a no into yes" are basically assault. The typical heterosexual "dating game" of escalating male contact and pressure pushing against female reluctance (with the backdrop of fear colouring every reaction - fear that maybe this guy will be one who won't ultimately respect a no, or will even react violently) is demeaning to everyone involved, a horrible and assault-riddled model of interaction, and really needs to be changed. And the attitude that all this is the necessary price of men getting to have sex? Well.

 

[Senethro]

"as a byproduct of the dating game" - as in "caused by misreading signals".

What misreading of signals? Its more like deliberately running a red light when they feel entitled to.

 

[Arwon]

What misreading of signals? Its more like deliberately running a red light when they feel entitled to.

That idea that signals are complex and women are just confusing is a cultural trope which *specifically exploited* by many rapists in order to get away with rape, of course. Another fairly major problem with the default stereotypical modes of heterosexual courtship.

 

[Ryika]

Unwanted sexual contact is sexual assault.

However, sexual contact with somebody who is only playing hard to get may result in extremely kinky sex. I am not sure if you really don't understand that but... some women actually like that. I know, I know... blows your mind, doesn't it? I will repeat this: Some women like it when a man they like pushes the limits aggressively. The fact that pushing ahead can hold a reward and that it's not always easy to differentiate between a women who is playing hard to get and a woman who is not aggressively turning down a man who she thinks is going to far does of course lead to situations where the man goes to far because he thought she would react positively.

I'm looking forward for the hate I'll get for this. Some women like insistent men. What a preposterous thing to say!

What misreading of signals? Its more like deliberately running a red light when they feel entitled to.

Oh, in many cases it certainly is. From what I know about Roosh V - and that's not much tbh - he seems like the guy who would totally push as far as he can, even if it's clear to him that the woman feels uncomfortable. But at the same time less experienced men - and probably more so men with false information provided by people like Roosh V - will certainly not push "too far" out of entitlement, but rather because of a misunderstanding of signals.

 

[BvBPL]

Oh, in many cases it certainly is. From what I know about Roosh V - and that's not much tbh - he seems like the guy who would totally push as far as he can, even if it's clear to him that the woman feels uncomfortable. But at the same time less experienced men - and probably more so men with false information provided by people like Roosh V - will certainly not push "too far" out of entitlement, but rather because of a misunderstanding of signals.

However, where the inexperienced guy recognizes his inexperience and attempts to salve it by reading up on Roosh, Roosh's attitudes towards entitlement may be adopted by the reader. The idea that one is entitled to something is emotionally compelling and easy to fall into.

However, sexual contact with somebody who is only playing hard to get may result in extremely kinky sex. I am not sure if you really don't understand that but... some women actually like that. I know, I know... blows your mind, doesn't it? I will repeat this: Some women like it when a man they like pushes the limits aggressively. The fact that pushing ahead can hold a reward and that it's not always easy to differentiate between a women who is playing hard to get and a woman who is not aggressively turning down a man who she thinks is going to far does of course lead to situations where the man goes to far because he thought she would react positively.

Yes, but healthy relationships with those dynamics establish the scope agreed to by both parties prior to the act. Prior consent to that sort of behavior removes it from being wrong.

Plenty of couples have a whole lot of fun with rape play. It isn't an unusual fantasy for men or women. However, it is only acceptable where the couple has previously discussed and both parties have given their consent to acting out the fantasy.

 

[Farm Boy]

What misreading of signals? Its more like deliberately running a red light when they feel entitled to.

Which seems to correlate, not weakly, with decreased mental capacity and loss of control caused by intoxication. Right?

Unwanted sexual contact is sexual assault. The thing is that a lot of the badgering and persuasion tactics used to "turn a no into yes" are basically assault. The typical heterosexual "dating game" of escalating male contact and pressure pushing against female reluctance (with the backdrop of fear colouring every reaction - fear that maybe this guy will be one who won't ultimately respect a no, or will even react violently) is demeaning to everyone involved, a horrible and assault-riddled model of interaction, and really needs to be changed. And the attitude that all this is the necessary price of men getting to have sex? Well.

Yes it is. Are you referring to "dating game" as limited to foreplay and attempted foreplay? As "act of mating" rather than courtship and relationship building in the broader and not necessarily involving intercourse?

 

[Ryika]

However, where the inexperienced guy recognizes his inexperience and attempts to salve it by reading up on Roosh, Roosh's attitudes towards entitlement may be adopted by the reader. The idea that one is entitled to something is emotionally compelling and easy to fall into.

Probably true, yes, and one of the reasons why topics like this should be talked about honestly and openly. One will not get rid of Roush V as the "messenger of a phenomenon" simply by banning the individual, obviously if people fall for him then there is a strong need for something that is not fulfilled by other means.

 

[Senethro]

Which seems to correlate, not weakly, with decreased mental capacity and loss of control caused by intoxication. Right?

On whos part and with what consequence?

 

[Farm Boy]

On whos part and with what consequence?

Initiator and initiated. If I get to narrow, then specifically to acts of coitus defined as rape by inability to grant meaningful consent. Pending possible meaningful grant of ad hoc consent as a future question.

 

[Nexlev]

That idea that signals are complex and women are just confusing is a cultural trope which *specifically exploited* by many rapists in order to get away with rape, of course. Another fairly major problem with the default stereotypical modes of heterosexual courtship.

Like I was saying, people love to be outraged.

http://nevertoolate.biz/2013/03/18/7628-understand-men-mixed-signals/

^ Quick Arwon, somewhere on the internet a woman is advancing the rape narrative trope that men are confusing and send mixed signals.

I. am. literally. shaking. with. fear. My emotional safety is at risk. It is 2016! and people still think ___ are confusing.

Both men and women are confusing to anyone who is trying to date them, to figure out their "signals" without risking rejection. Hetero men find women confusing, hetero women find men confusing, gay men might even find some men confusing.... I don't know.

Signals are confusing because there are literally no fail-safe signals. The only way to know if someone likes you is to first let them know that you are interested, and then ask if they are interested (or something along those lines). But when someone asks about signals they are looking to reduce their odds for rejection... to figure out who is "safe" to approach. Both genders have this difficulty but we all know that men are expected to make the first moves and the ones who don't fall in line will generally not have a satisfying love life. Rejection is not only awkward for the person being rejected, but the person doing the rejection. So fear of rejection is not going anywhere no matter how many "cultural tropes" you change, and talk of mixed signals will remain. Enjoy the angst and outrage.

 

[BvBPL]

Initiator and initiated. If I get to narrow, then specifically to acts of coitus defined as rape by inability to grant meaningful consent. Pending possible meaningful grant of ad hoc consent as a future question.

An interesting question at that.

Girl goes out to a bar and gets plastered. Guy picks her up and they had back to her place for some hanky panky. They stumble past her roommate to whom Girl had previously admitted that she had regretted past drunken rolls in the hay and asked her roommate for help preventing them in the future. Guy and Girl go up to her room. Roommate calls the police. They bust in and arrest Guy for sexual assault. The next day, Girl heads down to the court and claims that she would have consented to sex with Guy even if she was sober and does not want him prosecuted.

What should be the result?

 

[Ryika]

I'd argue that she should instead claim that she gave consent before she got drunk and forgot to text her friend. That should work, right? Agreeing that a person is allowed to have sex with them once they're drunk?