39 replies to this topic

[Delphi]

Okay last Friday's actions regarding Elliot Rodger seriously disturbed me on a level I didn't quite know was possible.

Even before this event I had taken an interest in discovering the mindset of the so called "Nice Guy" and ended up immersed in the sometimes terrifying rhetoric of the militant anti-feminist Mens' Rights Groups like Red Pill on reddit by following links from one page to another. Things like women deserve to be raped to keep them in line, that they are owed a subservient woman, that women are subhuman so it's okay to abuse them.

I knew that women's rights still had a long way to go but this just completely opened my eyes to the very small but incredibly vocal group of men who see women as nothing more than a glorified sex toy they are entitled to regardless of their behavior. I've never really felt so dehumanized for my gender until reading these rants. It's helped clear some things up and help me realize that if I were a man then some parts of my personality that are called aggressive and bossy wouldn't really turn heads like they do now as a woman. It also scares me how little meaning the word "no" has.

I honestly cannot put myself into that mindset it is so foreign to me. I don't see men as prizes I'm entitled to. When I had trouble dating I realized I was looking in the wrong places and began to look at myself to see how I could be a better person that someone would want to date and possibly marry.

I believe that men shouldn't have to bottle up their emotions like society says. I might pester my husband when he's showing a negative emotion to see how I can help or if I did something to elicit the emotion but I don't tell him he can't express his emotions because society says no or call him a pussy, bitch, fag, insert derogatory word meaning feminine or gay.

But I am also of the opinion that regardless of our divisions of phenotypes, sexuality, gender, biological sex, place of origin, etc that all human beings deserve rights that have so far been restricted to the Western white elite.

I understand there are incredibly toxic cultural "norms" for both sexes and for all varieties of gender. We all have a responsibility to work towards detoxing and dropping cultural baggage. I also understand that this is a very small fraction of the male population so I'm not blaming all men. This small fraction just terrifies me and they are the reason I am afraid to walk alone after dark without an escape or defense plan already formulated.

I guess I'm just curious about the reactions and opinions of other members of the forum to what's now been shoved to the forefront due to one guy who decided if he wasn't getting any then no one should.

Sorry that was a lot of rambling.


Disclaimer: I just feel I want to add this because this isn't meant to marginalize any other equally important difficulties for the rights of the LBGTQ and others. I don't mean as a cis-woman to in any way believe I have it harder than you. I really hope this doesn't come off as stupid white girl problems.

As I'm not a gay individual I have no accurate perspective on the torture, mental and physical, that has and is being endured by those fighting for their basic rights. I don't make any comments about or for your community on this topic as it would be coming from a place of ignorance and your place not mine to express your feelings.

[Selena]

This is mostly random thought-dump from the last few days:

 

 

 

This has been a fascinating social uproar -- exposing elements of goodness in people, but exposing some of the darker and outright sickening mentalities that exist within our society. 

 

Regarding that Elliot kid himself, I don't think it was any one thing that caused him to snap. Some blame mental illness (the full extent of his mental issues would be known only to his shrink due to confidentiality). Others blame lax gun laws. Others blame misogyny. I think it was probably a combination of all three. It's pretty clear that he had massive issues with toxic obsession -- which is still a mental ailment even if it's not linked to a clear disorder. The driving force behind this obsession was misogyny and a need to use women as sex objects. Lax gun laws then gave him an easy way to snap with violence.

 

 

 

The #yesallwomen hashtag has been painful to read. Girls on there are pouring their hearts out and sharing some of the horrific experiences they've endured. Sad to see that it happened at all. Moving to see how they pushed through it. And then "anti-feminists" showed up to twist it -- blaming the girls for not doing things differently, to tell them to stop complaining, to stop "making the issue about feminism and push their agenda," to becoming incredibly defensive about how men aren't all like that, or how men endure more violent crimes.

 

The defensive thing happens to every social cause. It's a natural reaction to feeling like "the bad guy," even if the cause isn't targeting individuals.

 

You see it in discussions on racism in society -- "Well, I'm not racist! Not all white people are like that!"

You see it in discussions on homophobia in society -- "Well, I'm not against gays! Not all cis-het people are douches! GOD!"

You see it in discussions on women in society -- "Well, I'm not a misogynist! Not all men are awful! Stop making me into the bad guy, Feminazis!"

And so on, for almost any issue under the sun.

 

No -- it's not about individuals. It's about social frameworks. Some people just happen to benefit from those social frameworks, and when you benefit from it, you don't readily acknowledge that there's something wrong with it. Because nobody likes acknowledging that they are privileged in some way (see: most rich people don't think they're rich). And nobody likes changing. Especially for other people.

 

It's a masterful and tricky thing to word social complaints in a way that garners the support of the privileged group. Because you need their support in order to change things. It's a community effort. Which means you need to empower them and encourage them to make change on their end, rather than make them into "the bad guys." Because this is so tricky, most fail at it. And make things incredibly divisive. Draw battle lines. Yelling and screaming from both sides. No progress. Just hate.

 

 

 

 

I think it's hard for some men to understand what goes through our heads when it comes to gender-based violence. Which is partly where the #yesallwomen thing came into play -- for girls to tell of their experiences with gender violence.

 

I've got a reputation (on LA and in real life) as someone who you don't really want to mess with. But the second I step outside, I'm doing constant threat assessments. I think every woman does. Sometimes we forget that we're actively doing it, because we're so used to it.

 

 

My morning commute: 

 

When I walk to work in the early morning, I judge every man on the street as a potential threat. Not because I hate men, but because I know they're a bazillion times more likely to assault me than another female. Man walks toward me on the sidewalk? I'm eyeing him up, judging his body weight, anticipating a grab for me, and planning out my own counter strikes. Group of men? I'm probably walking to the other side of the road. Or I'll have my hand in my pocket, holding my knife. Waiting to unfold it. Routinely checking my shadow or looking over my shoulder to make sure no one's following close behind me. 

 

Men have harassed me on my way to work. Usually just shouts. Some have tried to persuade me to get into their car with them. So on.

 

 

 

On a night out:

 

Always making sure my drink is always in my direct possession so no one can slip date-rape drugs into it. Think this is just paranoia? Several of my lady friends have had their drinks drugged. So it's not really all that uncommon. Always making sure I'm at least within eyesight of other people -- because witnesses discourage violence. Brushing off unwanted hands. Threatening to chop off said unwanted hands. Pushy dudes who don't take no for an answer. "Oh come ooooon, loosen up!" which soon progresses to "Stuck up bitch!"

 

Get in my car. Instantly lock the door and start the engine -- because I know there was another girl who was held at gunpoint in this exact same parking lot a few months ago, and was then raped and left for dead in the woods.

 

The same woods where another woman had her throat slit open by an angry ex-boyfriend and nearly died, had she not crawled her own way to a medical clinic.

 

There are countless stories, really. Enough to make every woman wary, no matter how tough she is.

 

 

 

 

 

Then on the lesbian side of things, I've had a lot of experiences where guys think I'm absolutely awesome -- but those same men can later become hostile and intolerant if they think I'm competition. I've seen the "corrective rape" threat often enough. The "lesbians would really love dick if they tried it, so they should just be held down and shown how great it is" thing.

 

Then, as most gamer girls can relate, online gaming communities can sometimes be ridiculously sexist. Any "male dominated" group can be that way. Join the army? A woman's more likely to be assaulted by her own countrymen than a hostile combatant. Making the US Army itself the biggest threat to female soldiers. Of course, college campuses are almost as dangerous. So you're not really safe no matter where you go.

 

 

Fortunately, I receive fewer threats than other women because I usually look like I'm ready to rip out your throat. I've gotten through life pretty well by acting like a lady version of Tywin Lannister. And people (unfortunately) respect power and threats of violence above someone's simple rights.

 

The core thing is -- almost all women are routinely running "anti-rape" protocols in their minds when they're out, even if we forget we're doing it due to routine.

 

 

 

 

Toxic hyper-masculinity is prevalent and encourages a lot of the violence. It's the notion that you're only a man if you're tough and aggressive and have sex with a ton of girls. And no open shows of emotion -- bottle it up, walk it off, be a "MAN."  Healthy masculinity is to protect and nurture and teach. Not to dominate. This is what should be encouraged. Because it's also dangerous for men. Not only does it promote stress in males -- since they're not encouraged to open up -- but it feeds into violent crime in general.

 

The desperate focus in media on "gettin' some" is a problem too, because both men and women freak out about "not being experienced enough" if they've never had much opportunity to have sex. This is also a problem. It causes unnecessary stress on everyone involved, because it's really not that big a deal. 

 

Better representation of women in media is also essential for balancing things out -- because a lot of female roles are still "the main character's love interest." Or in some secondary position. This is slowly changing, but women are often still the "prize" for the hero. Which builds upon already unhealthy representation of women, and on expectations of relationships. People still scoff at female main characters, and it shouldn't be a horrific experience to see a story told from a lady's perspective.

[wisp]

Very rambly and possibly tangential thoughts ahead without really any effort towards cohesiveness and transitions... I am too exhausted to do that much work right now. I really hope this thread doesn't end up turning into an argument or confrontation because I am so not up for that. I just want to share my experience.

 

 

 

Like Lena said, I am also constantly hyper-aware of potential threats around me when I am out of the house. Maybe not as much so if I'm with my husband, because the types of men who are likely to be a threat are much less likely to try to start something if they perceive that I "belong" to another dude already. I feel like I have also always gotten a lot less attention from men than other women because I guess I have a "bitch face" as they call it. I have been told that I come across as standoffish or stuck up when really I'm just introverted, and I'm told I tend to look angry unless I'm actually smiling or laughing about something. I guess in some cases this has saved me some grief, but it doesn't really make me feel any safer from potential threats.

 

 

 

 

For some reason, people get really emotional when some of us point out how the thought process behind the "friend zone" is kind of related to this. I first heard of a concept like the friend zone through the explanation of the ladder theory, which is actually really offensive towards everyone, suggesting that not only are heterosexual, cisgender people the only people who exist, but also that a man can't possibly have platonic feelings for a woman without secretly wanting to fuck her and that women covertly assign men to either a "real" ladder (meaning that they get to fuck her) or a "friends" ladder and that if a woman displays behaviors of kindness towards a man or goes out on a single date with him but then states that she wants to remain just friends, then she has "misrepresented" which ladder he was on. Like he is entitled to have sex with her and now feels justified in being indignant that she will not fuck him.

 

I shared a couple of stories about this kind of stuff on Twitter with the #yesallwomen tag. I didn't go into details of some more sexual stuff that messed me up because it would be difficult for me to condense it into 140 characters. I felt a little bit embarrassed while sharing them because they aren't as dramatic as a lot of the other things people shared, and they are easier to blow off as no big deal. But honestly, while this stuff isn't as immediately horrifying as rape, it is still a big fucking deal. I shared these two stories from high school:

 

A "friend" of mine had a huge crush on me in high school. He asked me out repeatedly, and I kept trying to politely turn him down. "No, thank you." "I don't like you like that." "I only see you as a friend." etc. He persisted for years, until I finally started to say the same things in a harsher tone of voice. I don't remember ever actually getting rude about it. He didn't stop until after we graduated high school, whereupon he told me something like, "I still hope that some day before I die, you will go on at least ONE date with me" as if trying to guilt me into putting myself in an uncomfortable situation because he was a "nice guy" who deserved it. I ran into him a year or two later, after we'd gone our separate ways, and he aggressively told me that I was a cold bitch who was singlehandedly responsible for all the misery he felt in high school and that he had warned his younger brother about girls like me. Excuse me? Despite the fact that he actually dated this really super attractive, nice girl a couple of years behind us for most of our senior year.... I was the bane of his complete existence because I wasn't attracted to him.

 

The other story I shared was about one of the few guys I did go out with in high school. He did not respect women at all, but he said all the things that made a 16-year-old wisp melt into goop in his arms. I dated him for a few months, and then he decided having one girl wasn't enough and he wanted to date several at one time. He barely spoke to me or looked in my direction for months, so I assumed he wasn't interested any more. I got tired of waiting around for him, and shortly after that I started going out with another guy from our social group... and guy #1 was so angry that I had left his harem! Not only did he castigate me for hurting his poor feelings, he tried to get back at me by telling my new boyfriend that he was giving me to him as a Christmas present. Are you fucking kidding me?

 

 

 

 

 

People talk a lot these days about "rape culture," and that term instantly puts a lot of people on the defensive, and a lot of dudes assume that we're saying all of them are rapists... Which if they would stop #notallmen-ing for a second and listen to what we're actually saying, they would know that isn't the point we are making. Maybe it would be better if we chose a different word for it? In my experience, most people (men AND women) in our culture have a tendency towards some form of misogyny. Women as well as men make sweeping generalizations against "feminazis" and engage in gas-lighting tactics towards other ladies, telling them that they are "too sensitive" or "hysterical" (a word implying mental imbalance whose root means uterus, no less). I frequently see ladies on Facebook reposting memes that say things like, "Repost if you were the girl who hung out with the boys because they have less drama," and I even used to make such claims about myself. However, when I really sat down and looked at my social group, my friends were pretty equally split between males and females, and my female friends as a group were never any more dramatic than the males. 

 

The objectification of women is such a systematic, deeply rooted problem that even though I am a woman who knows better, I still have to watch the way I look at other women AND myself. By objectification, I don't just mean the idea that immediately comes to mind of putting "sexy" images up for people to gawk at - I mean the tendency for people to view women more as literal objects than as people... this includes fat-shaming as well as slut-shaming. It includes the way society tells women that we have to be thin and fit a certain ideal of sexiness... but not TOO sexy, because then we are trying too hard, asking to be raped, toying with men's emotions, etc. It includes focusing on a woman as a collection of body parts to be judged individually rather than as a whole person. I have to constantly be mindful of the subtle way I have been conditioned by society to judge myself as well as other women based on how well we fit the very narrow definition of socially acceptable attractiveness. It is hard to deprogram this toxic kind of thinking without vacillating back and forth between fat-shaming and skinny-shaming in some well-intentioned overcorrection maneuver. 

 

 

 

 

 

And also... I have been really disheartened to see really intelligent men that I know, even relatives that I deeply care about, post or say things like "Feminism isn't about equality; it's about making women better than men," because I don't honestly know ANY feminist who actually fits that description. Today's feminism is just as much about erasing toxic masculinity as it is about empowering women.

Edited by wisp, 31 May 2014 - 02:27 AM.

[Fin]

I've been retweeting a lot of stuff about this on twitter. It's fucking infuriating that we live in a world where this kind of thing can happen.

wisp, your comment about a lot of guys getting defensive when they hear about rape culture reminded me of this old article.

Edited by Fin, 31 May 2014 - 02:25 AM.

[wisp]

Fin, that article is great. I think it's very reasonable to ask anyone to follow those guidelines.

 

This made me think of a sort of disturbing item I saw in a thrift store a few months back. How does it not disturb some people that we live in a culture where an item like this is supposed to be viewed as amusing or cute?

 

 

I can't imagine anyone buying something like this for themself, so I'm thinking this is intended to be given as a gift? I can't even begin to know how I would respond if someone gave me something like this. *shakes head*

 

Society expects us to, if not enjoy "jokes" like these, at least brush it off and act as if it's not deeply disturbing. If we speak up to say there's something entirely wrong with thinking these stalkerrific, rapey jokes are funny.... we get gas-lighted.

 

 

 

I just realized, I totally forgot to mention this before. When I was in my first year of college, my roommate and I were walking to a friend's house together one evening. It was around 8 or 9 PM - not super late, but it was after dark. We were walking together for safety. The friend's house was only three or four blocks from the student housing where we lived. We were on the sidewalk, about a block from the house, when this nondescript white van came down the street, traveling in the same direction we were. There was no way to see who was inside, not that we really wanted to make eye contact. It slowed way down and started to drift in our direction. Luckily we saw a (male) friend of ours a few yards ahead of us and called out to him, and the van drove off. If he hadn't been there... or hadn't been male... I don't know if the people in the van would have tried to yank us inside the van, or catcalled us, or if they still would have simply driven away. Either way, it was terrifying, and I still get chills when I remember it.

Edited by wisp, 31 May 2014 - 03:17 AM.

[Fin]

Another article I saw earlier tonight. Should have included it in my first post.

Straight white men in the United States are facing an intimacy crisis. Theres a lot we dont know about Elliot Rodger but we do know that he craved intimacy. His voluminous and horrific manifesto chronicles his yearning for physical contact from his adolescence until his death. Elliot Rodger was a young man who wanted touch and closeness in his life.

But Rodger, like so many straight white men, could only tolerate one particularly narrow form of intimacy: sexual contact with conventionally attractive white women of a certain social status. The possibility of participating in forms of physical intimacy that are not tied to heterosexual intercourse does not occur to so many men in Rodgers position.

[...]

The cruel twist in the logic of Elliot Rodger and other Mens Rights Activists (MRAs) is that they blame their loneliness on women instead of themselves. Rodger famously claimed, All of my suffering on this world has been at the hands of humanity, particularly women. Women in close friendships with one another perfectly demonstrate one potential solution to Rodgers loneliness and yet they are also his first targets.

Like so many men in his position, Rodger blamed women for failing to comply with his single, narrowly-defined mode of companionship instead of expanding his emotional horizons to accept companionship from other men. His predicament is equivalent to claiming that you cant eat at a buffet because your favorite dish is not readily available.

[...]

Elliot Rodger was a lonely young man whose possibilities for affection and intimacy were severely restricted. But I have no sympathy for a man who chose to target women instead of dismantling the prejudices that narrowed his possibilities for happiness.

If men in Rodgers position want to work toward a world where men can express their feelings without using bullets, one of the best places to start might be cultivating meaningful homosocial friendships.

Men have to learn to take care of each other. We cant do it anymore.

[Egann]

Wow. I go to work for an evening and LOOK AT THIS SHIT.

 

 

After reading this thread and Red Pill, I really don't think most of these opinions are genuine so much as sexual frustration given a pseudo-rational voice.

 

Let's see if I can't list some causes:

• Women are having low libido problems for a lot of reasons. There's more birth control pills going around, sure, but also because the last ten years have seen a lot of diseases or medications which have low libido as a symptom or side-effect. Chronic pain, for example, is known to depress women's libido more than men's. Medications? Antidepressants and antihistamines both lower libido, and we've got more people on those than ever. EDIT: Oh, and cholesterol medications, too.
• People have less free time than normal. This is a downside of the economy, but people are either working more and harder or they're getting disheartened and depressed at not finding work. Depressed and exhausted people don't woo women well, especially when those women are having said low libido issues and need more talking into than normal. Oh, yeah, and depression or being overworked causes more chronic pain, which once again affects women's libido more than men's. 
• Men are cultured into thinking of sex as a victory and women into reserving it. Normally solid economic growth would override this, but when it's stagnating it actually reinforces it.
• Men are also cultured into having unrealistic expectations a la Hollywood and the internet. Photoshop and to a less extent makeup are doing our expectations no favors.
• Young men in particular also feel overshadowed by their more successful older counterparts. It's normal for older men to attract women more easily, but in this instance those older men have a double advantage of getting experience before the economic downturn. It is a dozen times harder to start the sex games these days than it was in the good ol' 90's.

 

And perhaps the most important one:

• Women these days are supposed to be sexually liberated, but younger men are actually getting less sex. Especially if there's any preexisting strike to their confidence. Every rejection becomes doubly hard because it feels like women are being hypocritical specifically to avoid them.

 

The mental and physical health benefits of sex have been listed elsewhere and a significant part of this generation's young men are chronically deprived. Chronic deprivation leads to mental health issues, which compounds other health issues until we get irrational and potentially violent behavior. Most, I'm sure, don't actually believe women should be possessions, but when they're this sexually frustrated it feels like it ought to be true.

 

The real danger is that if this goes on long enough, they could talk themselves into believing it for real.

Edited by Egann, 31 May 2014 - 11:03 AM.

[Doctor Pogo]

 

After reading this thread and Red Pill, I really don't think most of these opinions are genuine so much as sexual frustration given a pseudo-rational voice.

 

 

 

The statistics on physical and sexual violence against women suggest that many of those opinions are QUITE genuine.

[Egann]

 

 

After reading this thread and Red Pill, I really don't think most of these opinions are genuine so much as sexual frustration given a pseudo-rational voice.

 

 

 

The statistics on physical and sexual violence against women suggest that many of those opinions are QUITE genuine.

 

 

(*clears throat*) 

 

 Chronic deprivation leads to mental health issues, which compounds other health issues until we get irrational and potentially violent behavior.

 

And let me go out on a limb by throwing this in:

 

Elliot Rodger can loosely be described as a young man who was sexually rejected through high school and early 20's. How many people on this forum does that describe? It definitely describes me for one, and I know a dozen people IRL who fit that description, too.

 

This is an epidemic no one is talking about.

[Twinrova]

If you keep being "rejected" you should probably take a good, long look at yourself rather than crying about an "epidemic". Also uh maybe don't compare yourself to Elliot Rodger.

 

 

 

 

Egann, everyone. Our very own relic from the middle ages.

 

Edited by Twinrova, 31 May 2014 - 12:20 PM.

[Chukchi Husky]

And also... I have been really disheartened to see really intelligent men that I know, even relatives that I deeply care about, post or say things like "Feminism isn't about equality; it's about making women better than men," because I don't honestly know ANY feminist who actually fits that description. Today's feminism is just as much about erasing toxic masculinity as it is about empowering women.

 

 

This is something that I keep hearing frequently, whenever anyone I know brings up feminism or just women in general.  They also say a related line that goes something like "feminism is self-defeatist.  They admit that being male is better than being female" and bring up something like wearing trousers instead of skirts, and then say it's all nonsense as women "don't take on traditional male jobs".  It gets worse, as I heard one of them even say "men are designed for work, women are designed to stay at home, complain and have babies", and that the women deserve to be payed less at work is because "they always quit to have babies".

[Delphi]

This is going to be long and rambly as hell so I apologize in advance.

 

I'm really sorry Egann, I don't want to rip you apart piece by piece but these are stereotypes that are equally damaging to both sexes. And your post is extremely inaccurate and offensive. Let me explain:

 

Women are having low libido problems for a lot of reasons

 

Uh, no. Women are told from the day they hit puberty that men are sex machines and women just don't have that drive for sex, despite my mother definitely telling me otherwise about women and it's nothing to be ashamed of and that her side of the family has an extremely high sex drive once they actually have sex for both the men and women. Unfortunately, the "women just don't want sex" thing is something I believed until I started having sex. It was a very damaging actually. On top of that, society demonizes women who want more sex as immoral, potential cheaters, and just plain wrong. But you're still expected to put out. Just don't put out too much. But don't be a prude because-oh no I've gone cross eyed.

 

I am, like my mom said, one of those people that when I started having sex my libido went from zero to sixty like instantly.

 

He's why I disagree with your "scientific and medical" explanation:

 

I have been on birth control since I was fourteen to regular my periods and try to slow the progression of endometriosis. You really have no idea what it's like when everyone else at fourteen is trying to get laid and I'm over here deciding how badly I want kids when I reach my twenties because if I want them I might not have them. If I don't want them, I may want to consider what wisp did and get a hysterectomy. But that's another kettle of fish.

 

I really didn't have much of a sex drive at all through my entire post pubescent life. While I wanted companionship, I really was not interested in the sexual aspect. I found men attractive as companions but the physical aspect? Not real interest. I pretended to because that was what society expected. I still don't think I was very good at that.  Up until I met my husband in person I really was kind of afraid that no man would want to have a serious relationship with me because I just wasn't that interested in sex and it would be a chore if I even chose to participate. I at one point basically considered myself to be asexual, just not aromantic. So despite it not being the usual questioning period that we joke about with being gay or not, I had a very real questioning period of if I were actually asexual. But with all the talk of friend zones and icy bitches that won't put out along with what's the point of being with a woman if you can't have sex, why would I think any man would want me as a companion when I didn't want sex? Despite telling my husband that I had no sexual desires he still wanted to date. When I met him in person that was the first time I had ever experienced that kind of desire before. It was a completely paradigm shift.

 

To be honest I still don't look at other men, even very attractive celebrities and think "I want to fuck him so bad". I really only have sexual feelings for my husband and that's it. So I guess I'm less asexual and more "Joey Sexual" now as messed up as that sounds. XP

 

Now back to the main topic at hand. When I was first married I was on the anti-depressant zoloft, one of the more notorious anti-depressants for killing your sex drive. Yeaaaah about that. If zoloft was killing my sex drive, then I'm afraid if I went off it then I'd probably have constant friction burns down there. So no, no problems there. I only changed anti-depressants later in my marriage when it became clear zoloft wasn't controlling my social anxiety any longer. So I didn't change for the sexual side effects.

 

I'll spoiler this in case you don't want to hear about the nitty gritty of Delphi's sex life.

 

Spoiler

So when Spirit-Adept and I were first married and having sex it became very clear that what we'd been told about men and women's sex drives was complete bullshit.

 

Me? I could go all day and still go for more. Even I'm not aroused at that moment, it doesn't take much to get my motor running and I'll definitely try to get my husband aroused if I'm already there.

 

My husband on the other hand needs a bit of a break lasting from the rest of the day to a couple days depending on how much he's been working to really enjoy sex.

 

Everything we'd been told growing up, minus my mother's counsel, was a lie. And we felt like we had problems because of that.

 

There was a lot of hand wringing. I thought there was something wrong with me because society told me men always want sex. Was I not sexually attractive to him? Was I bad lay and he just didn't want to tell me?

 

On the other side, my husband was wondering if there was something physically wrong with him. Did he have some kind of physical or hormonal problem? If his roommates knew he'd never hear the end of it. Did I think of him as less of a man?

 

Fortunately for us we were open communicators and we laid bare all our issues pretty quickly. No I wasn't a bad lay. No I didn't think he was less of a man. We both were very sexually attracted to each other. We just had the opposite libidos of what society told us was the norm. We actually had a good laugh about it afterwards. Now we're fine. We're both sexually satisfied knowing that sometimes I need more than him and PiV sex, again what society considers the epitome of sex, is not the be all end all. He actually likes to get me off just as much as I like to get him off so when he's not in the mood, we still have fun. We both enjoy sex for the intimacy more than the purely physical aspects and that works for us. We keep lines of communication open and we're happy.

 

However, if we weren't such open communicators, this could have been emotionally devastating for both of us. Because society says a man is ever ready and a woman is not a sexual creature.

 

Society says a woman cannot be a sexual person. A woman cannot want or crave sex. A man must always be ready for sex and "at attention" at the drop of a hat. This is not how the real world works. A woman can be just as lustful as a man and a man doesn't have to want it all the time. And that is perfectly normal and okay! So let's stop these frankly damaging bullshit stereotypes and let each human being be comfortable with what their sex drive is.

 

People have less free time than normal

 

Going with what you said under this heading, you're not sexually active. Because honestly when life is just that shitty and nothing is going your way, married or just looking for casual sex, sometimes both the man and woman just need a good lay to put that crap on the back burner. I'm betting you'd be surprised how often when I was in the depths of depression with my body wracked with physical and emotional pain and my husband was completely exhausted from work we ended up having sex. Even if it was late at night and we both had to work and there for didn't have the "free time" we still did it. Because we both needed it. His stress levels were lower after and the tension in his body from a long day of work dissipated and my depression and pain were alleviated long enough for me to get a grip long enough to think straight and get to a doctor. Whether it's for the intimacy or release is up to the participants but sex is a great mood stabilizer when shit hits the fan.

 

 

Men are cultured into thinking of sex as a victory and women into reserving it

 

I don't see how the economy factors into this without implying a supply and demand structure where women are the supply which men demand. Which in that case, that's really fucked up.

 

I am not an object. I'm not something you pull off the shelf and own. I am a person with rights and independent thoughts the same as you.

 

You know what, I'll let Jasmine explain from one of Disney's more hilariously self aware moments.

 

 

I'm not something to be bartered with other men. My father didn't decide who I married. I'm not a bargaining chip. If women did this with men we'd be criminalized, saying that we're selling men into slavery. So why when it's a woman in this situation it's "arranging a good match"?

 

 

Women these days are supposed to be sexually liberated, but younger men are actually getting less sex

 

So going with the above, you're saying that because women can now freely choose their sexual partners instead of being forced into a marriage and sexual relationship against their will (aka MARITAL RAPE), that this is a problem because supposedly younger men are getting less sex? Oh my heavens, I didn't realize how badly this was affect the MEN of this country! Here, let me lay down and spread my legs to you because you are man and I am woman to be subjugated! I'll try not to cry as you violate me so you don't feel bad.

 

You are not entitled to sex. I am not entitled to sex. NO ONE is entitled to sex! How hard of a concept is that to understand?! Every one, man, woman, middle/third sex, any term I left out has a right to decide who they DO NOT want to have sex with! Sex is not something where if you're not getting it you just take! Nobody has a right to anyone else's body and I don't understand how people saying "I am being discriminated against and this is why I harass/rape" don't get it! You're discriminated against? Boo-fucking-hoo.

 

I got sexually harassed when I was in SECOND GRADE by another kid my age. That is how early this can start.

 

I was on the play ground doing my thing when the next thing I know I'm grabbed from behind by one kid. I try to get away. I can't. I realize he's not playing. I'm not the princess to be rescued by the kids playing hero. I start to panic and yell. The other kid with him looks at me and then starts to punch me in the chest where my breasts would be if I were older and my groin. I'm crying and begging for them to stop. They don't stop until the bell rings. I didn't realize that I had been sexually harassed at eight years old. I told my parents when I got home. My mom was livid but my dad looked like he was going to go Krakatoa any second. The kid who did the punching was in my church congregation. My dad had a nice long talk with him with his parents present about how to treat people, especially women, as my dad cannot stand abuse of any kind.

 

So that was elementary school.

 

Here's a run down of what I went through in high school as that's the most relevant dating years.

 

I'm somewhere around the 5'7 1/2" height wise. I hit this height around the time I turned 14, just entering high school. At this time, I'm taller than almost all the guys in my friend circle. I don't get asked out because I'm a giant freak of nature with bad social skills. I'll freely admit the last point. Try to flirt with guys, no reciprocation. Do I cry that I've been friend zoned? No, I just enjoy their company while wondering why I'm not attractive. Cue introspective journey. Hey, I can be kind of a sullen bitch. Maybe I should get that depression thing checked out again.

 

Middle of freshman year I get boobs. I already had boobs but I really got boobs. Like borderline D cups. Unfortunately that means I tend to have cleavage even in a turtle neck. I'm sitting at the lunch table chatting away when one of the guys on the periphery of my circle of friends says in this husky creeper voice "Can you button up your shift? You're distracting me." This was not a risque shirt. This was a polo style shirt with all but two buttons undone. I felt majorly creeped on. I started wearing more conservative clothing as that wasn't the first time, at 14, that my breasts had been commented on. It was creepy.

 

Asked a guy out to the winter dance sophomore year because no one asked me. Guy said no, found it weird that I was the one doing the asking. Asked next choice out. He said yes. Still shocked I initiated. I begin to believe I'm being too forward if guys are reacting like this and dial it back. I don't ask another guy out for all of high school and follow "proper" protocol. I don't get asked out either.

 

I start to stand up for myself when I get harassed. I get called every name under the sun along with a few more along the lines of bossy, aggressive, too intense. I get spit on on the bus. I stop riding the bus. I get a pretty nasty attitude at this point and withdraw with a rather surly shell. Naturally I don't get asked out because I wouldn't ask me out either with that attitude. Guys start to make fun of me. I have my core group of about three girls and five guys I hang with (this was after Chik graduated) but we're all stuck in this weird limbo of not asking each other out. I listen to the guys complain about the girls that have used and abused them and give them a shoulder to cry on. Oh wait, this is sounding very familiar...Where have I heard this before...

 

So I have attitude problems for a few years until I start to reflect on myself again. I realize, yeah, I've got a nasty attitude and if I want people in general to like me I need to change. So I started that process. And holy crap guys start wanting to ask me out at conventions! I get invited to stuff! Oh my gosh, this is awesome!

 

I move to Utah. As a lot of you know I was very resentful towards the women here for a while falling into the "all women are bitches" trope. Time for introspection again! No, not all women are bitches. Some are but so are some men. They're people to be assessed on their own merits. The problem I had here was the culture was still very much about women in the house hold doing "delicate" things with men having jobs and fixing the big stuff. If that's what they want to do, okay. I don't agree but the best thing I can do is be an example. I can fix my own stuff. I don't have be to "NO! I AM WOMAN AND CAN FIX THINGS! GO AWAY MANZ!" if a guy offers to help because he could be asking because I'm a girl or he could be asking because he's just a nice guy that helps everyone. So instead I say, "Hey that's really nice of you to offer and I really appreciate it! I've actually got it covered but thank you again!" And what's this? Most of the time the guy smiles nicely and says "Cool, see you later!" and goes on his way. The ones that don't and insist I don't know how I just say "No, actually I do know how to do this. I'm sorry but could you go, you're messing with my concentration." If they persist then I get nasty "Seriously, dude, you need to leave because you're acting all sorts of creepy. I don't need your help and I've already ask you to leave. So go." At that point, I'm not being rude. I've given more than my fair share of "I don't want you here". But I'll still be called a bitch by this guy who's "Just trying to help". No, you're trying to pick me up. At my home. In my space. When I haven't invited you. Women who do this to guys get called desperate. But men who do this are helpy helpers omg why are you so mean?!

 

But I'm sure your discrimination is much worse than mine. Please, tell me again how hard life is for you because girls don't fall all over you.

 

Now, seriously dude? Didn't you just say that men shouldn't be seeing sex as a prize? That we shouldn't be counting notches and then you bring this shit up? If men were truly comfortable in their sexuality and not pressured into constantly "gettin' sum" then shouldn't they be more comfortable with themselves and not having an existential crisis that they're not knee deep in pussy?

 

 

 

 

You can't have it both ways. And before you say that women want it both ways then you're entirely missing the point. We just want to be treated like a human being. I don't want people to assume that because I have two X chromosomes that I'm an idiot with computer hardware. I'm actually quite good. I don't want people to say that I'm a bitch because I said no to someone. I don't want people to say if I get raped that I shouldn't have been walking home alone.

 

 

Men enjoy all these privileges and more. You say no, people don't continue to pester you into a yes. You look at a video card in a computer and people don't assume you're a "fake geek". You walk home alone and I'll put good money down saying your chance to get raped isn't even close to mine. You can do all these things and feel safe. Women can't.

 

That is the reason we still need feminism. I don't want to put men in cages for breeding stock. I just want to be able to walk home alone without scanning every potential hiding spot, watching every car, putting my keys between my fingers, remembering what my husband taught about disorienting a guy to run away when he taught women's self defense classes. To yell "Fire!" instead of "Rape!" because supposedly people are more likely to help someone yelling fire. To consider changing my gamertag to a less feminine one and just not talk so I don't get harassed.

 

On the flip side, we really need to get rid of this toxic hyper masculine culture. I don't care about "Alphas", I think PUA are strange human beings, I think the guy slinking 5 cm from my back is creepy as hell.

 

One of the biggest damages that I think this hypermasculine culture has done to men is tell them they cannot express any emotion other than turned on or angry. And we wonder why there's so many violent sex crimes. A man should be able to express sadness without being called names. To cry at their mother's funeral without losing their "man card". To cry in joy at the birth of their child. To be so ridiculously happy and show it that you think they're going to take off into space on pure happiness. To be contemplative and not called emo. To philosophize and not be called a fruit. To be friends with a woman and just talk because of stimulating conversation without sex being the goal because YOU don't want it to be the goal. This is something men ARE entitled to and it is something that really saddens me that men can't be allowed to feel emotions because society says so. Sometimes I wonder how many violent crimes we could prevent if men were allowed to vent their emotions in a healthy way.

 

 

Do you want to know what I find most attractive with a guy who approaches me for the first time? If he walks up confidently, introduces himself, and proves to be a good conversationalist. This is just me but I know other women enjoy that too. I don't want to hear about my tits for the 50th time that night. I want to know that you see me more than a walking vagina with a nice outer wrapping. I want to know what you think about the space program. Tell me about this project you're working on. Don't back-handed compliment or "neg" me because you think it'll work. I'll throw one back at you and find someone else to talk to. Treat me like a person! Talk to me like you talk to other people! I just want to be seen as someone you can be normal around, not a piece of meat! Is that so much to ask?

 

This is how my husband went from "guy I met on a gaming forum" to "until death do you part". He was fantastic conversation. Still is. Mind you though, if he believed in the friend zone we wouldn't be married. I wasn't in a great place when we first met and when he said "You know, I really don't want you to think I'm creepy saying this, but I bet you'd be a really fun girl to date." I said I wasn't interested in dating. He didn't know this but I'd basically termed myself a "flight risk" at that point because at that time the only guys getting close to me were guys I wasn't interested in who didn't take no as an answer so I'd run. But he said that was cool and dating should be done on your own terms but is it alright if we still talk? I still think you're really fun to talk to and I'd still like to be your friend, no strings attached. Four years later I'd come to terms with my insecurities and we both realized we didn't want to live our lives without each other. He never thought he'd actually get to date me and had put the thought out of his mind as soon as I said no way back when so he was a bit surprised along with the happiness. It just took me time to get my head out of my ass and realize, yes, this was the guy I wanted. But he never pressured me. Never tried to get me to agree to anything. He just wanted to talk and be a platonic friend. He didn't get bitter for being "friend zoned" because he still saw talking to me as a win because he had an awesome friend. The girlfriend then wife was something he never expected and it was like he was hit with a ton of bricks the first time I said I liked him more than a friend.

 

So after that long rant I guess what I'm trying to say is treat me like a person. Not this mysterious "other" part of your species. I'm not from Venus. I'm from the same planet as you. I have the same want for security and safety as you. I just want to know why a small but vocal group of men say I can't have that.

[Hana-Nezumi]

I don't know what to say, other than that I agree with Lena completely, and the things some people from those anti-feminist groups say disgusts me. To the point where I don't even want to talk about it because it just makes me furious... Egann... even IF your bizarre theory WERE true, it's still not ANY excuse for anyone to treat women in the way that we are all complaining about, so it's irrelevant.

[Selena]

Women are having low libido problems for a lot of reasons. There's more birth control pills going around, sure, but also because the last ten years have seen a lot of diseases or medications which have low libido as a symptom or side-effect.

Low libido is something you're pulling out of thin air unless you've got scientific proof that ladies were hornier back in the 1800's. 

 

Birth control pills only cause low libido if the dosage is off or if the woman's body doesn't jive well with the new hormones. Otherwise, birth control pills HELP sex drives. They regulate hormones like clockwork, and they help with things like endometriosis (which causes PAINFUL SEX) and ovarian cysts (which naturally disrupt your flow of hormones).

 

 

 

Sex and Economics:

 

I went to google and searched for "Sex and the Recession," and the top hits were all about how people were having MORE sex rather than LESS sex. There is no conclusive proof that people are less-horny during economic downturns. Manufacturers of sexual products (lubes, toys, condoms) reported sales growth during the downturn -- one of the few industries to benefit from it. 

 

 

 

 

Women these days are supposed to be sexually liberated, but younger men are actually getting less sex. Especially if there's any preexisting strike to their confidence. Every rejection becomes doubly hard because it feels like women are being hypocritical specifically to avoid them.

 
Sexual liberation DOES NOT mean: 
 
Having promiscuous sex all the time. It does not mean having a whole harem of romantic partners. It does not automatically mean turning into the horny-bisexual stereotype. It does not mean that girls are willing to have tons of sex with anyone. Sexual liberation was never about guaranteeing more sex for everyone.
 
 
Sexual liberation DOES mean:
 
Self-determination concerning sexual partners and practices. Choosing who you want to sleep with. When you want to sleep with someone. This can mean having open relationships and numerous sexual partners -- if that's your thing. But it can also mean not having sex. And only having sex when you want it. Some people just legitimately aren't ready to have sex until later in life. Some aren't interested at all. The key thing is -- not to feel pressured to do anything you don't actually want to do.
 

 

 

The cold, hard truth:

 

If women are avoiding particular men, it's because THEY ARE NOT ATTRACTED to that man. Same reason men don't sleep with certain women.

 

Maybe he's ugly. Maybe he's socially awkward. Maybe he's insecure and neurotic. Maybe he's an arrogant blowhard. Maybe he's obnoxious. Maybe he has no sense of humor. Maybe he's only a so-so guy focusing exclusively on model-hot women when there are plenty of nerdier girls around who want dates. Maybe all of the above. 

 

For that matter, how "young" should these men be when they have sex to vent their destructive man-rage? Because a lot of people aren't genuinely attractive until they hit at least their twenties. Before that, people are usually just awkward and socially inept and undeveloped.

 

 

 

A few hundred years ago, women had an obligation to marry. Meaning that every man with a career was more or less "entitled" to a wife -- because girls couldn't have careers for themselves. Women only had limited say in who they slept with. It was all about financial security. A good match. Even if you weren't all that physically attracted to someone, it was... your duty.

 

So, was female libido really reduced? Or did we just finally get the power to say "no" more freely?

 

Given that "feminine hysteria" is no longer a thing, I think it's safe to say that women are getting way more sexual release nowadays. Meaning more sex. Specifically, more sex that actually counts, since emphasis on the female orgasm is a newfangled thing.

[Doctor Pogo]

 

 

 

After reading this thread and Red Pill, I really don't think most of these opinions are genuine so much as sexual frustration given a pseudo-rational voice.

 

 

 

The statistics on physical and sexual violence against women suggest that many of those opinions are QUITE genuine.

 

 

(*clears throat*) 

 

 

 

 Chronic deprivation leads to mental health issues, which compounds other health issues until we get irrational and potentially violent behavior.

 

And let me go out on a limb by throwing this in:

 

Elliot Rodger can loosely be described as a young man who was sexually rejected through high school and early 20's. How many people on this forum does that describe? It definitely describes me for one, and I know a dozen people IRL who fit that description, too.

 

This is an epidemic no one is talking about.

 

 

 

*pretends to clear throat but clearly says 'ass'*

 

So let me get this straight.  You're saying that you, and by extension me, and every other guy that didn't get laid in high school and college is a terror threat?  Or that Rodger was somehow... justified, or that his actions are somehow understandable, because he was in some kind of deprivation-induced fugue state?  That you and I should relate to him on some level?

 

Dude.  Listen carefully, this is very important: there is never, ever any justification, medical, emotional, mental, anything, never any justification for going out and attacking another person.  Not with a weapon, or with your hands, or with your dick, or with degrading words.  Not with anything.

 

What Eliot Rodger was or was not deprived of sexually matters exactly fuck all.  What he was deprived of that set up this situation was the ability to consider other people as people and not vending machines or collections of parts.

 

And you know what?  What you have or haven't been deprived of sexually matters exactly the same - precisely the square root of dick.  Same goes for me, same goes for anybody.  Girl or guy, doesn't matter.  Sex is something that people can do, it's not something we have to do.  If we don't get sex, nothing happens, maybe we masturbate more.  Nobody is obligated to provide for that need.

 

If you're not getting laid and want to be, this is the thing: be a better person.  Keep being a better person every day, work on things, look for opportunities to do more interesting things and be more interesting.  And I don't mean setting yourself up as a provider, preparing yourself to take care of a person and serve all their interests and needs, to be their one and only.  I mean not worrying about that at all, and going and doing things that make you excited, you personally, and getting good at something you want to be good at, and trying to find a way for you to make the world more interesting for you, and for the people around you.  That increases your chances of meeting someone who is interested in you and your world way more than approaching someone you've carefully chosen and attempting to incorporate them into the world you've built for them.

 

And know this: I'm angry about the dumb shit that you have said in this thread, but I'm not trying to cut you down or score some kind of internet argument points on you.  And the reason it makes me as angry as it does is because I have been there in my head.  I've been there dozens of times.  I've been down this road, and it sucked, and it sucks to think about, and it sucks to see other people making the same twisted and dumb arguments I have struggled with, and it just gets under my skin.  I'm not sorry for being harsh, because this is something that merits harshness, and I wish more people had been harsh with me when I was saying similarly dumb things back when.

 

I used to be such a white knight.  A pent-up nice guy frustrated nerd who wondered why girls didn't seem to see the value of what I was offering.  I could offer them a shoulder to cry on, a romantic and sweet gesture at every available opportunity, help with anything in their daily life, complete and utter devotion.  Why, oh why would they waste their time with some fool they barely know?  I'm right here, for the love of cheese.  I went through years of this.  Most of my young adult life.  I was mystified.  And so, so frustrated.  And lonely, and risking becoming somewhat bitter.

 

It took time for me to finally come around, maybe because the truth was so much more complicated than the simple construct I had in my head.  It was a series of realizations I had at various points that ended up breaking me.  I was chasing after this girl, another musician I was working with, and I was doing my thing: I was there for her, I was helping her climb out of some bad times she was going through, I was talking to her at any and all hours, always first to leap to her side when some drama went down or something happened.  I wasn't shy about letting her know I had feelings for her, but she shrugged it off.  I brought it up again, and she said to back off.  In other situations in the past, that might have been the point when I walked away.  But she said something else - she said 'you've really been a good friend, but this makes me wonder if you mean it.  If I say no to you, are you going to actually be my friend, are you really okay with that?'

 

And that time, maybe I was finally growing up some, because I took the question seriously, and I thought about it, and I decided that yeah, I actually was okay with that, I really liked hanging out with her and and enjoyed her company, so I wanted to be her friend.  So I did it, I backed off - I kept being super-involved in her life, but the romantic angle was off the table.  One day a while later she said 'hey, when I said to back off, you actually did, and I really appreciate that, thank you.'  At the time, I thought it was nice that she had even noticed.  Now, looking back, I realize that it was probably actually a pretty big deal for her.

 

Some other stuff happened later.  I worked on myself, on being more interesting and taking more interest in others, getting better at being a person.  And she decided, independently of my earlier attempts, to see what would happen and we briefly dated.  But that led to me discovering how far I was off base in my mental construct of what we would be together, and realizing that dating somebody who isn't all that attracted to you is not great, even if that person individually is great.  So yeah, I did it, I broke the 'friendzone' barrier, and you know what?  It wasn't good!  It really sucked!  That got me thinking.

 

And then I came across this xkcd cartoon, and it must have been the right moment, because that cartoon totally blew my mind.  I got a little upset the first time I saw it.  It got under my skin.  And then I looked hard at it, and said 'motherfucker, that's me.'  And then, more importantly, I said 'I don't want to do that.'

 

It's been a learning process since then.  I'm very grateful for the woman I mentioned, and for finding that cartoon at that time, and for the other friends who came down on me pretty hard with shit I needed to know over the years, some of which didn't sink in until much, much later.  Without what I learned from all that, the goodness I have now with wisp would have been impossible for me.

 

There's an article I read recently that really stood out to me personally, moreso than a lot of the other things I've read on the subject.  The whole thing is worth reading, but I'm going to paste these paragraphs here, because they say what I want to say better than I could:

 

We are not the lovable nerdy protagonist who’s lovable because he’s the protagonist. We’re not guaranteed to get laid by the hot chick of our dreams as long as we work hard enough at it. There isn’t a team of writers or a studio audience pulling for us to triumph by “getting the girl” in the end. And when our clever ruses and schemes to “get girls” fail, it’s not because the girls are too stupid or too bitchy or too shallow to play by those unwritten rules we’ve absorbed.

 

It’s because other people’s bodies and other people’s love are not something that can be taken nor even something that can be earned—they can be given freely, by choice, or not.

 

We need to get that. Really, really grok that, if our half of the species ever going to be worth a damn. Not getting that means that there will always be some percent of us who will be rapists, and abusers, and killers. And it means that the rest of us will always, on some fundamental level, be stupid and wrong when it comes to trying to understand the women we claim to love.

 

What did Elliot Rodger need? He didn’t need to get laid. None of us nerdy frustrated guys need to get laid. When I was an asshole with rants full of self-pity and entitlement, getting laid would not have helped me.

 

He needed to grow up.

 

[deep]

• Men are cultured into thinking of sex as a victory and women into reserving it. Normally solid economic growth would override this, but when it's stagnating it actually reinforces it.

 

[Egann]Man. If only the economy was a well-oiled machine. Then I too would also be "well-oiled" and also a "machine." Because my dick would be the "piston," ladies.

 

Friendly reminder that homosexuality is also a fad brought on by our current economic downturn. Because everybody's poor, our aim is also poor, thus a couple dicks end up in butts. No worries. Once we right this ship we'll right those dicks![/Egann]

[deep]

Women these days are supposed to be sexually liberated, but younger men are actually getting less sex. Especially if there's any preexisting strike to their confidence. Every rejection becomes doubly hard because it feels like women are being hypocritical specifically to avoid them.

 

Real talk: Because women are sexually liberated, they are less required than ever to actually have sex. It's not like women were holding out on men and now it's free sex day for every frustrated male. Women no longer "owe" it to husbands just because they're married; to dates because the meal has been paid for and must be "repaid"; to strangers because they were bought a couple drinks at a bar.

 

Sexual liberation is not just taking a hammer to the sex piggy bank.

 

Beyond that, your post is quite frankly offensive to men. You're suggesting that we are weak creatures, that we are mentally damaged by a lack of sex. That we don't have the mental continence to not fuck somebody and still live a normal life. If you want to know why the basement-dwelling man-baby stereotype persists, arguments like yours are only perpetuating it.

[SteveT]

 Beyond that, your post is quite frankly offensive to men. You're suggesting that we are weak creatures, that we arementally damaged by a lack of sex. That we don't have the mental continence to not fuck somebody and still live a normal life. If you want to know why the basement-dwelling man-baby stereotype persists, arguments like yours are only perpetuating it.

 

This is also the same argument that leads to the "she was asking for it" defense of rape, or various cultures' propensity toward wrapping their women up like Halloween ghosts (see: burqas).  Men are so weak-willed, sexually frustrated, and impulsive that if you let them want to have sex with you but don't follow through right now, then, well, the man can't be held responsible for what happens next.  You should have done more to protect yourself, women.

 

People who use that defense tend not to think very hard about what that says about themselves.

[Delphi]

 Beyond that, your post is quite frankly offensive to men. You're suggesting that we are weak creatures, that we arementally damaged by a lack of sex. That we don't have the mental continence to not fuck somebody and still live a normal life. If you want to know why the basement-dwelling man-baby stereotype persists, arguments like yours are only perpetuating it.

 
This is also the same argument that leads to the "she was asking for it" defense of rape, or various cultures' propensity toward wrapping their women up like Halloween ghosts (see: burqas).  Men are so weak-willed, sexually frustrated, and impulsive that if you let them want to have sex with you but don't follow through right now, then, well, the man can't be held responsible for what happens next.  You should have done more to protect yourself, women.
 
People who use that defense tend not to think very hard about what that says about themselves.

This! So much this and what Pogo broke down piece by piece.

I mean really this shows that despite the fact that people like Elliot Rodger exist, we are starting to question and reject the status quo that has glorified this inequality for centuries and longer. That's an amazing thing if you ask me. I don't think the #yesallwomen thing would have taken off like it has even ten years ago if twitter existed then. We just can't let the momentum come to a halt.

You all (mostly) are awesome for coming in to explain your views and I thank you.

And Egann I just really hope what Pogo especially said shows you why this inequality is still a problem and not to be solved with women just giving it up to stop the "epidemic".

Edit: and really we as a society need to give men more credit when it comes to self control. I agree with deep and SteveT that saying men are slaves to their hormones is really insulting. Last I checked men were still part of this intelligent species called homo sapiens that could keep their base desires in check to put their energy towards creating the very thing allowing us to have this conversation.

Edited by Delphi, 01 June 2014 - 12:58 PM.

[Egann]

"This is also the same argument that leads to the "she was asking for it" defense of rape."

 

I'm now condoning rape. Fantastic. I see your faith in my humanity is about as strong as wet toilet paper.

 

At this point rational discussion is no longer possible. Insulted doesn't even begin to describe how I feel, and I'm being charitable in interpreting this as catharsis. There is one thing, however, I must point out.

 

So let me get this straight.  You're saying that you, and by extension me, and every other guy that didn't get laid in high school and college is a terror threat?  Or that Rodger was somehow... justified, or that his actions are somehow understandable, because he was in some kind of deprivation-induced fugue state?  That you and I should relate to him on some level?

 

Understandable and morally justified are two completely different things. Think Batman: The Dark Knight. We know more or less what Two-Face's motivations and frustrations are, at least within the bounds of a script. Does this mean he would be justified in flipping a coin to see who lives and who dies in real life? 

 

There's a lot more to be said here. If you need to talk, my PM box is open. This thread, however, is breeding crazy. Because apparently I'm now a rapist.

[SteveT]

I'm now condoning rape. Fantastic. I see your faith in my humanity is about as strong as wet toilet paper.

 

I was responding to an extrapolation of a perception of your opinion, or more accurately, a mentality that the discussion brought to mind.  I should have been more careful about quote boxes so as not to accidentally mis-attribute ideas to you.  I apologize for that.

[Oberon Storm]

Egann, in the past you have described "most" rapes as "preventable". You never really explained this and moderators told us we were not allowed to press the issue. Of course some of us took this to mean you believe women are partially to blame for there own rape. You have stated homosexuality has become more acceptable in society because the economy is bad and people recognize we need less children to burden us.

 

These examples make some of us really question what you are trying to say sometimes.

 

I was going to try to stay out of this thread. Before you posted there really wasn't anything to argue. All I had to share was my own observations and experiences. I didn't see how that benefits this particular conversation. I also remember the thread about sexism and how I wasn't clearly getting what I wanted to say out. I have been worried that some might believe that I actually think sexism does not exist.

 

I completely get that you are just trying argue the reasons behind the problem and not actually trying to justify anything. Even then I have to ask what does low libido problems in women have to do with anything? Are you suggesting that this is some sort of problem among women recently? Do you have anything to support this? If sales for sex toys is up as Selena suggests then you point is discredited. Also if libido is not a problem then the free time argument is gone, too.

 

I would agree that, particularly at the younger ages, some boys feel sex is some sort of ultimate conquest. I can also see how the media doesn't really help, but what does the economy have to do with this?

 

You lose me on the older guys overshadowing the younger. What? And then sexual liberation? Double what? And the number of sexually frustrated young males is an epidemic? Sure... If you consider growing up a disease.

[wisp]

And here we have exactly what I was talking about when I mentioned rape culture. People hear mention of how these "innocent" attitudes contribute to the prevalence and even brushing off of rape and violence against women, and they instantly shut off their ears in some adamant assumption that others are calling them rapists. I mentioned this exact problem. 

 

Egann, as hard as it may be for you to accept this fact, nobody in this thread is being remotely crazy, but you are missing the point. I really hope that you will take the time to read this, because discussing this problem is really not fun and is actually a little bit scary. Every time a woman opens up and starts talking seriously about women's issues, she risks being ostracized, jeered at, and dismissed (and at worst, she risks receiving death threats and violence, not that I think anyone here on LA would go that far).

 

To be fair to you, I think that maybe all of us took your post a little bit harshly. It seems like a lot of us here on LA often have problems effectively communicating to and with you, and I think that maybe you present your ideas in a manner that seems inoffensive and possibly academic to you but off-putting to everybody else. I'm sorry if that sounds bad, but I guess the point I'm trying to make is that I think you just communicate differently than the rest of us here on the forums, and there is a kind of a wall we collectively come up against when we try to talk about something like this together.

 

When I first read your post, it honestly pissed me off a lot. I could not respond immediately because anything I would have said would have only been inflammatory and not at all productive. But I gave it a while, calmed down, and read it again. I had to really read between the lines because the tone of your post really, seriously comes off in a very mansplaining, "men are victims, so why do we need to focus on women's issues when these poor men over here aren't getting laid" kind of way. I mean, come on. You came into a thread full mostly of women sharing their experiences of being on the receiving end of this severe cultural problem where they are constantly at risk of being violated, attacked, and then blown off when they try to talk about it and began your post with a statement that, paraphrased, sounds very similar to, "I turn my back for five minutes and those pesky women start gettin' ideas like this issue actually has a negative impact on them; how dumb are they?" I realize this is not literally what you said, and I am not trying to put words in your mouth so much as explain to you that the way you present your ideas sometimes comes off sounding similar. If I remember correctly, when you first made the post, didn't you use the phrase, "LOOK AT THIS BULLSHIT"? You're really not doing yourself any favors here, man. Your post came off rather arrogantly and dismissive of the very real experiences and concerns of women here on this forum and everywhere else in our society. 

 

However, when I read it again and managed to dig through that layer of offensiveness, underneath it all some of your points are actually a lot like some of our points. If we correct these issues that are plaguing women, then one of the byproducts of that is most likely going to be that men will benefit as well. Shocking, I know!

 

"Women are having low libido problems for a lot of reasons." Lena's rebuttal of this point is accurate for many women; however, there are still a lot of women out there who do suffer from low libido. I'm not referring to women who are asexual or who are happy with only occasionally having sex, but those who have little to no sex drive but wish to change this. It can be an especially large problem for women who are undergoing or recovering from chemotherapy, according to some articles I've read and wish I could locate. However, there is often a lack of concern or willingness to help them out on the part of the medical community. My Google-fu is off today, so I'm having trouble locating any of the articles I've read about this. However, there is a serious difference in how practitioners approach sexual dysfunction in men versus women. If a man tells his doctor he's having sexual problems, they will happily throw Viagra or Cialis at him, and his insurance will likely gladly cover it. However, if a woman goes in with a similar concern, she's more likely to receive unhelpful and hand-wavey tips such as "Oh, you just need to de-stress, do some meditation, take your vitamins, and drink some tea." At best they might offer her some type of androgen therapy that could come with a slew of side effects and is not actually FDA-approved to treat sexual dysfunction in women, so her insurance may refuse to cover it. 

 

The reason behind this? Well, as I'm not that deeply involved in the medical community and can only piece together my opinions from articles and books that I have read, but I would venture a guess that it has a lot (even if not everything) to do with how society encourages men to be virile sex-magnets and shuns sexually active women as "slutty." Men have a way easier time getting doctors to perform vasectomies on them than women have getting a doctor to do a tubal ligation. I had a horribly debilitating and painful condition that would have been (and eventually was) easily remedied by performing a hysterectomy, but I had to fight really hard to find a doctor who was willing to allow me to make my own choice for my health and reproductive future, because I was a woman who was of childbearing age and had not yet popped out my requisite 2.5 crotch fruits. A man of 25 who wishes to, for whatever reason, get sterilized is likely to have a much easier time being allowed to make that decision. Society wants men to be virile and sow wild oats, while women are encouraged to pick one man, have his babies, and stay in her place. If women were afforded more control over the treatment of their sexual health, there's this societal fear that they'd have too much sex. From there we could discuss conservatives' fears that women would start having more abortions and/or use up more taxpayer money on welfare for their kids, but that's kind of a tangent and quite honestly not something that I find myself interested in discussing right now.

 

But anyway, my point that exists somewhere in there is that yes, many women do suffer from low libido and oftentimes would like to do something to change that, but they run into road blocks. 

 

"Men are cultured into thinking of sex as a victory and women into reserving it." Yes, and this is one of the examples of toxic masculinity that feminists are always touching on! I just mentioned it above, in fact. Our culture posits that masculinity is something to aspire to, something to be proud of, whereas femininity is portrayed as weak, and men who are "effeminate" are mocked, beaten, and ostracized (in other words, treated as if he is a woman). If a man isn't having all the sex, then culture states that he is weak. If a man displays emotional sensitivity, especially towards a woman, or any kind of desire to "wait until he is ready" to have sex, then culture at large, if not his personal buddies, will probably make him feel like he's being derided or mocked - they might even try to insult him by comparing him to a woman.

 

Of course, if women reserve sex too much, then men can't fuck them... so then we get this fine line that we have to try to walk, where we have to decide how much sex we are willing to have, who is allowed to know about it, which potential partners are safe to engage with and which are going to hurt us physically and/or emotionally, and how much physical and/or emotional pain we are willing to potentially endure for the sake of attempting a relationship. If we take too much time in trying to get to know a man and finish our risk assessment, the consequences can be severe.

 

"Men are also cultured into having unrealistic expectations a la Hollywood and the internet." Surely you must know that this has a massive effect on women. We are largely expected, like I mentioned in my original post, to conform to a fairly narrow vision of beauty, and we are constantly told by TV, movies, magazines, beauty and clothing companies, whatever, that we are not and never can be good enough or beautiful enough (but if you buy all of these products we're hawking, maybe you could come a little closer to an acceptable level of imperfection). I assume this is probably the same for some or many other women: this problem right here often plays a large part in my sex drive or lack thereof. If I'm feeling unattractive and inadequate, worrying that the man I'm with is going to judge me and potentially mock and reject me because I don't fit the "ideal" standard of beauty, then my sex drive suffers. Pogo and I have been married for three years now, but I still have this fear that one day he's going to see me in harsher lighting or bending at a bad angle and then he suddenly will realize that he's married to Jabba the Hutt and then everything will fall apart. I feel bad that I can't completely trust what he says about how he views my body (bless him, it is always wonderful and loving and positive), but the reason I still stress about it is because everywhere I turn I am bombarded with the repeated message that I. am. not. good enough.

 

How do we get this problem to stop? By standing up for women and standing up for a standard of beauty that includes seeing the beauty in everyone. We get rid of the heavily photoshopped magazine covers. We stop trying to police women's bodies under the very thin veil of "concern for their health." We learn to be body-positive and uplift each other. For what it's worth, happy people who love themselves and love their bodies are a lot more likely to make healthy choices and take good care of themselves than people who are discontent with the way they look and are discouraged from even trying because they know that they will never reach that socially prescribed level of "perfection" in a million years. Show support for companies, TV shows, and movies that embrace larger women without automatically pigeonholing the fat girl into a comedic or bitchy role. If you can actually find any, then support those that actually show fat women just as regular leading-lady characters, rather than using their weight as the entire inspiration for their character and story. If we pressure these companies to display a more realistic beauty standard, then voila! Women no longer feel pressured to conform to an impossible ideal, and men no longer feel disappointed when the real women they meet look different from what they see in the media.

 

I am not going to address your final "most important" point other than to say that you are completely misguided as to what sexual liberation means. I do not need to say more on this point as everyone else has already pretty well covered it. You would do well to really soak in what deep said here:

 

 

 

Real talk: Because women are sexually liberated, they are less required than ever to actually have sex. It's not like women were holding out on men and now it's free sex day for every frustrated male. Women no longer "owe" it to husbands just because they're married; to dates because the meal has been paid for and must be "repaid"; to strangers because they were bought a couple drinks at a bar.

 

Sexual liberation is not just taking a hammer to the sex piggy bank.

 

I have spent the last two hours writing this post because it is really important to me that there not be a breakdown and termination of dialogue on really important issues like this. It is so incredibly frustrating when we see man after man after man complaining about all of the very real problems you listed above and then turning around and refusing to admit that those problems exist because of misogyny (and its bedmate, toxic masculinity) and can be alleviated or cured by an earnest adjustment in the way we as individuals and as a society view and treat women.

[Selena]

You're not a rapist, nor do you condone rape, but your thought process is effectively the same one held by the hardliners who try to justify their violent hatred for the female gender.

 

The very first thing you did was blame this "masculine hysteria crisis" on women. The blame is one step removed because you technically blame medications that supposedly cause low libido (even though most women on those medications still have routine sex). But the basic argument is that women are not meeting the sexual needs of young men, which is causing them to become so sexually frustrated that they snap and become mentally unstable. Which, yes, is the exact argument these individuals make to justify their violence. They just go one step farther and state that women should be obligated to perform sexual duties. But it's the same base argument.

 

Thus the alarm and outcry.

 

If your argument elicited this kind of response from this many people (especially since most of these people aren't even Contro regulars), then perhaps this highlights how off-base and offensive your "rational" argument is. And perhaps you may wish to reanalyze and unravel the hidden dangers of that thought process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are a ton of reasons why dating is hard.

 

 

Like the decline in face-to-face interaction, resulting in increased shyness and anxiety when people actually have to go and interact with others. 

 

Or the decline in public social functions, resulting in greater difficulty meeting people outside of your existing social circles. Towns used to have public dances, as one example of "things we don't do any more." And visiting your neighbor was often the biggest form of entertainment available less than 100 years ago. Now we don't even know our neighbors' names and are often too shy to ask.

 

 

Direct social interaction is becoming a lost art, leaving people isolated, shy, lonely, and anxious. Because humans are social creatures, and social interaction is necessary to maintain proper mental health. Most of these troubled kids are shut-ins.

 

 

I should think these would be bigger causes than "the economy is bad" and "women aren't horny enough." Neither of which have much logical weight behind them.

[SteveT]

Egann, I suspect that this is the line that really got peoples' hackles up:
 

 

• Women these days are supposed to be sexually liberated, but younger men are actually getting less sex. Especially if there's any preexisting strike to their confidence. Every rejection becomes doubly hard because it feels like women are being hypocritical specifically to avoid them.

 
Up until that point, you were trying to make the case that sexual frustration can eventually lead to a break in sanity and violent actions.  It's an interesting point and worth exploring.  You did not offer a solution in your post.
 
However, but setting that bullet off by itself, making it your last point, and calling it the most important factor, you kind of imply what you think a solution is.  Let me rephrase that bolded sentence to demonstrate how it came off.  I emphasize here that what follows may not be what you said or what you meant, but it's how your words were perceived.
 
I thought we fixed the prude problem already, but boys still aren't getting laid. 
 
It shifts the blame onto women.  Instead of focusing on addressing the mental health of young men, it implies that you think teenage girls should just take one for the team and give it away for their own safety.  This ignores the historical problem that throughout history, a major facet of many cultures (including our own) is treating sex with women as a resource and determining how best to manage it.  For a long time, rape was treated more like theft than an act of violence.  The best strategy for a long time was to latch on to one man in the hopes that he'll defend you from others.  
 
Feminism is calling bullshit on that whole idea.  Feminism does not believe that sex is a tradeable resource.  Feminism does not believe that it's the onus of men to manage the sexuality of women like it's a lake or a coal mine.  Sex is a choice that women make freely for their own reasons and men are responsible for controlling their own urges.  That's sexual liberation.
 
So, no.  The solution to the problem is not for women to help a boy out and relieve the pressure.  The solution is to hold men 100% responsible for their own actions and to address all mental health concerns in a healthy and production fashion before violent outbursts occcur.

Edited by SteveT, 02 June 2014 - 03:21 PM.

[Green Goblin]

I feel this is a good place to lay my hand out. 

I'm not a feminist.  Not because I don't agree with what you all are saying here.  I agree with pretty much everything here.  Just because I don't feel that it's a necessarily good notion to label the equality of both genders solely on one of them.  I understand the need for the label throughout history and I know that the fight isn't over.  But there's a lot of baggage that comes with the name.  And I'd be lying if I didn't also say that there are some feminists out there that annoy the ever loving piss out of me.  But that's a song and dance we've already done on Facebook.  I explain how crazy ass #1 or crazy ass #2 said something and act as if they're representing the entire movement while doing it, the "no true Scottsman" card gets played, the question of whether or not it's up to the movement itself to distant itself from its own brand of crazy typically gets left unanswered.  Blah, blah, blah. 

And there are (from what I've seen) movements that are male-centered that have a proper discussion about the right's of men that are being mishandled as well (child support cases and custody, victims of male rape, etc.).  And I know that these are also topics and discussions that are brought about by feminist groups as well, but I feel like these sane men's activists (I honestly haven't look into it deeply enough to tell if they're the majority or the minority in the MRAs;  I know that there's a lot of crazy there too though) seem to be thinking a little bit of what I am:  That's it's odd for men's issues to mainly be discussed under a monicker that is inherently feminine. 

Does that mean that I'm a MRA?  Nope.  Regardless of the percentage, I can clearly feel the crazy eminating from some of them and it's enough that I don't want my name associated with it. 

The only thing I am is exhausted.  From the divide I've seen on the internet.  I'm tired of the bullshit dichotomy.  I'm tired of the rallying cronyism.  I'm tired of the fear of getting labelled as one side or the other rather than just an independent thinking human fucking being.  A good idea is a good idea, regardless of where it came from.  And a bad idea needs to be criticized by all, regardless of where it came from.  Yes, we need to reinforce how to recognize an inebriated woman who is not within her power to consent being manipulated in a public setting by some fraction of a man trying to get his dick wet.  But we also need to reinforce how to drink responsibly, because no matter how much we try and stop bad situations from happening, bad people will always exist and applying personal responsibility is not the same as victim-blaming.  The concept of a global conspiracy (literally dubbed "the Patriarchy") that controls any and all forms of media, business and social relations to make men's lives inherently superior is fucking stupid.  And so is the concept of all women being attracted to nothing but power and willing to trade up on a significant other like they're a fucking car. 

I don't know if I'm speaking out of my ass at this point, or what.  I mean, I'm all for equality.  I don't blame women for my lack of a sex life until I got to college.  I try to do right by everyone.  I'm just not a fan of all these fucking labels.  Because all they really seem to do is complicate the issues.

EDIT:  When I say that I agree with you all for the most part, I'm talking about all but Egann, basically.  No offense to you, Egann.

Edited by Green Goblin, 03 June 2014 - 11:10 PM.

[Delphi]

I get what you're saying and you do make a lot of sense with certain words conjuring up certain stereotypes.

I also think you're right that the divide doesnt really help when it's the more rational meeting of minds, not the put men/women/Bob down because I don't feel big enough.

Honestly taking a bit to cool down, men and women need each other if we ever want that elusive equality we're searching for.

Men don't need to be belittled for showing emotions other than angry or horney by anyone. Women dont have a monopoly on the emotional spectrum. There are cases, and unfortunately I've seen a lot in my family and close family friends, where a father lost a large part of the custody of their children despite the mother being a complete dirt bag. In fact one of these women went to another state that favors women almost exclusively and established residence before the custody battle just to screw over the dad. She didn't really want the kids, she just didn't want him to have them. And I honestly fear for the kids being in her custody.

So I guess the point comes down to entitlement again. No one is entitled to anyone else's body. Abusive parents aren't entitled to get sole custody of their kids by manipulating the system just to show the other parent they can. Men shouldn't be afraid to come forward if they've been sexually harassed or assaulted for fear if being made fun of.

In the end, the goal at the end of the day by most women is just to be treated as equals, with all partners, with everything that comes with that. Meaning a woman who abuses a man can't hide behind the men can't hit girls excuse if he's fighting for his life for example.

So you're right. We need each other for true equality to happen because we are partners, regardless of what we're calling ourselves.

[Selena]

I think a lot of social activism has taken this darker turn in recent years -- from feminism to "ableism" to race issues and so on. Maybe as a result of the internet reaching maturity.

 

Back in the day, movements were spurred on by charismatic, well-spoken leaders who inspired others to join in. Now there aren't really any big leaders. The big leaders are usually a bunch of popular bloggers who pass things around within their own circles. Anyone with a blog can sit there and rage. All the social justice movements became decentralized. And when that happens, there's not much you can really do -- because you can argue with the hardliners all you want, but 1) you feed the trolls, and 2) they usually just block you or delete your comments if they get pissy enough. 

 

There's not a lot of room for genuine debate on most blogging sites (which is why I like LA, because only I have the power to erase dissenting opinions mwahahahahaha jk maybe). I mean, on tumblr people freak the fuck out if you post a dissenting opinion in a relevant tag. And it's a sentiment that's found on a lot of sites nowadays. So it's bred this hostile environment where you can argue until you're blue in the face, but both sides just walk away in a huff.

 

I've seen a lot of back-and-forth amongst different breeds of feminists (same for other groups) about what's proper and what is batshit unacceptable, but there never seems to be any progress either way. The one called out usually just sulks, then goes back to doing their thing.

 

Anything vaguely political has become so polarized in the last ten years -- maybe because of that decreasing tolerance for a healthy debate. The sensible middle ground is shrinking every day. Or at least it feels like that. There is less emphasis on rationality and more emphasis on CAPSLOCK RAGE VENTING.

 

 

 

 

My tactic -- be it with gay rights or women's rights or whatever -- is to just speak calmly and rationally and try to understand the other side's line of thinking so I can better explain my views within their realm of understanding. And for the most part, this has worked infinitely better than just sitting there and going "RAAAAHHHH THINgS suCK YOU GUYS ARE SCUM." Part of my issue with modern feminism is it's become a big circle-jerk where most people just sit there and complain about things to each other, or talk about how they'd like things to be, but then never actually do anything to foster change or interact with people other than those who automatically agree.

 

I honestly have no fucking idea how to keep fringe elements in line -- I don't think any mainstream group is genuinely good at keeping their fringe elements in line, because the hardliners usually either feed off negative attention or don't give two shits.

 

 

But it is hard. I'm obviously pro-gay rights, but I've also never felt very at home within "the gay community," and the same is true for a lot of modern new wave feminism (hell, the same is true for political party affiliation too). So it's awkward. You want to support a thing, but you don't associate too close with the most powerful movers and shakers because..... ehhhhhhhh.

[Spikey]

Wowie, the first thread I open in controversial after all these years, makes me remember why I always felt right at home here. I really want to compliment you all for the way you express your opinions. 

 

First off, I want to say something about the sexdrive thing... aside from possible minor variables, I think western culture still teaches women to be ashamed of their sexuality, which is a shame. The words alone! We call it "impotent" when a guy can't have sex, but "frigid" when a girl can't. These deep seated tendencies have an effect on men and their (very) fragile image of masculinity, too, or really, more on the romantic relationships between men and women. On the one hand, both want a protective family home life, on the other hand, both want to fuck each other against a wall. It is hard to cross these things. We've become more aware of the issues though, and some things have definately improved if you compare it with the victorian age or the fabulous, gay and roaring 20s, 

 

No, I do not think young men are getting less and less sex. The victorian age is long gone and sex is everywhere. Yes, aforementioned cultural differences result in a lot of crying girls and a lot of masturbating boys, but them is the breaks. It is a loop that needs to be broken, and that happens everyday, too. I realised this when I saw the lead (female) role of "My mad fat diary" masturbating on screen. Another taboo about to disappear, yay.

 

No, nobody can truly relate to the term feminism anymore these days, because it is hard to understand the baggage and history that comes with it. 

It is like climbing up on a stage and saying "vomen...and men! vomen....and men!" in a silly voice all night long, or actually doing exactly the thing that you condemn; stressing differences between men and women. 

 

Yes, daterape is a very real issue, and yes, it happens a lot more then you would think. Please girls, keep your eye on your glass. If you need to go to the toilet to vomit and whatnot, ask a friend to guard your drink. Myself, I had my drink spiked twice in random bars, and never noticed a thing. Made me really ill both times.  

[Mark]

Yaaayyyy, what a topic to spice up contro!

 

 

First off, I kinda want to say that I am a little red-pill-ish myself.

And I know that there is a lot of really offensive, unjustified, crazy hate language out there -I know that.

 

I would encourage people to hold back on the criticism a little.

 

I would like to share a video (but I dont know how to embed it).

the women who speaks is Dr Wendy Walsh, it is a lecture. and it is certainly very feminist-friendly (and I hope palatable):

enjoy:

 

---------------------------------