I have for a long time been considering the concept of a sort of inverted sexual harassment campaign. A lot of the time when you turn feminist ideas in on themselves they explode. For instance if patriarchy were true & absolute, then feminism would neither be possible, or so successful. There would likely be casualties literal, other than the dead men who were fighting foreign wars during various suffrage campaigns.
There were bodies as concerned the black civil rights movement of the 60s, quite obviously. I’d say that is pretty good evidence of the “push back” & the stakes which were involved in the black struggle for civil rights. Has there been this push back at all toward women from the so called patriarchy. The “patriarchy” has given women everything they have ever wanted or asked for. And the more readily society and the state have given it to them, the more they have become convinced of both the existence of the patriarchy, & the seemingly ever increasing difficulties of women, to navigate life in this society where they insist that all forces are aggressive, indifferent, & hostile to them.
Behaving dominantly to illustrate what it would be like if men did it, would be an obvious example of allowing a feminist to experience what it might look like if her arguments were true. Think of a feminist getting in someones face & bullying them with slurs & all sorts of contempt & verbal assaults. Why does this always turn out ok for her if the patriarchy is in effect? Or if he was really a rapist. If a woman thinks a man is a rapist is she really going to attempt to bait his anger & hostility in this way; I doubt it. She may think he is a subconscious rapist or something of this sort, but obviously the antidote to this would be to put her into the room with a real rapist & tell her to do her worst. This obviously isn’t what she wants. She wants to yell & scream & bully passive men who would never harm her. And she knows they would never harm her. Solution; stop being passive (I am trying to navigate a strategy for this so bear with me)
When feminists have called me a misogynist I have tended to confirm this. Saying that all the greatest men were at least half misogynist & that most women with half a brain were misogynists too.” If they called me a rape apologist I’d say “considering that being male is the equivalent of being a rapist & that feminist theory has at times speculated that heterosexual intercourse itself was equivalent to rape, then yes I am a rape apologist; I am male, I am heterosexual” It gives them nowhere to go.
as concerns matters of sexual consent, harassment or any other situation where it is a man & a woman who are involved, the law gives the woman complete & utter control over herself, & at least 50 percent of control over the man (usually more considering how far she decides to push things). And women have been given carte blanche in describing & ascribing motives & motivations to men which frankly are somewhat diabolical & generally unrealistic considering that even with their inflated statistics, the odds are still against the likelihood of the average woman being raped.
I have been thinking & seeing the consternation with concepts such as continually having to ask women to reaffirm they are willing throughout a sex act, that almost any “unwanted” attention even if it is merely friendly is called rape culture; saying “good morning” or “hello” counts because the assumption is that all men are merely a nod away from jumping into the sack with any woman they are friendly to. Or raping her if the opportunity arises. Where does a regular person who says hello to everyone, go with this if he is male. Well here’s my admittedly slightly sarcastic idea:
What if we were to preemptively tell women we saw in all walks of life “I don’t want to have sex with you.” What if men were to go on this campaign & every time we felt we were being sized up, & viewed as aggressive, we termed this in a sort of preemptive rejection fashion & merely told the woman point blank “just wanted to make sure you were aware that I don’t want to have sex with you.” And that would possibly be the one point of contact between ourselves & many women – just the preemptive rejection as a sarcastic reassurance.
Another thing which could happen would be that we could get into the habit of being critical of women’s appearance on a regular basis, rather than complimenting them. For instance leaving comments on facebook where we point out flaws in the girl’s appearance – not having anything to do with her sexuality, just not playing into the attention cycle which gets these women hundreds of worshiping accolades & likes a day. It would be the equivalent of “good morning I don’t like your hair” something along those lines. And again as constant reference for their benefit that our thoughts are not on having sex with them, but instead on criticizing & rejecting them. Most men, as are most women, are not interested in people whom we are not attracted to in some way, if we don’t know them. This is how the double standard of unwanted sexual attention is enacted. Women are offended by having to acknowledge that guys they would not have sex with, exist. And if they are attractive, they generally will be reminded of them & this, they claim as their curse (prior to hitting the wall)Therefore What I think guys should do instead of ignoring women who they don’t like & are not attracted to, is just taking a moment to criticize her, or just remind her that they are not interested in having sex with her. It would still work out, in fact if we did want to have sex with one of her friends. We could be comepletely honest by walking across the room to the ugly friend & telling her “I just wanted to let you know that I don’t want to have sex with you. Take care.”
If asked about why we would tell random women we do not want to have sex with them, we could explain it was our empathetic response to having heard that women were concerned that they were being ogled & given unwanted sexual attention. In a construction workers cat calling situation, any man on the block will be assumed by feminsts & the rape culture construct, to be a ready participant. Therefore our only option if we want to possess & define our own sexuality, even our own sexual & visual aesthetics, would be by adding our own voice to the din & proclaiming “I for one do NOT want to have sex with you.” If we say this possibly some other guys might be there who don’t want to have sex with her either. This mkight bring attention to us, since the presumption would be that if we were merely turning our heads to see what the noise was, that we were ogling her, otherwise.
In literal male harem sausage fest situations I have seen this work inadvertently as a pick up technique. If a girl has a hive of guys around her clamoring to buy her drinks & attend to her, she will be interested in the guy who is least or not at all interested in her. I realized this inadvertently because I find these situations repugnant & have reacted to the woman or women in the centers of them with disgust when I have seen it. And on more than one occasion one of the women who I have been reacting to in this way has actually, despite having four to eaight guys already attending to her at the pool table or bar, come over & talked to me.
I wonder, do these tactics sound consistent with the passive aggressive, reactive stance of MGTOW. Do you think these would be good social habits to adopt? At the very least I think they are enjoyable &* fun to think about, as a way to reassert that “No, I do not want to have sex because you say I want to have sex. My libido is at least as sovereign as yours, & therefore I only want to have sex when I say I want to have sex, thank you very much.”
Smitty the Great One 4 years, 11 months ago.
