Monday, March 21, 2011

Educated women: Boner killers?

Guys never ever creepily obsess over women like this.
Dating guru RooshV -- whose name conveniently rhymes with "douchey" -- is convinced that, when it comes to women, smartness is inversely correlated with hotness. As he puts it in a post today, committing at least one logical fallacy in the process:

Femininity is a quality that pleases men. Therefore from the chart we can deduce that educated women decrease a man’s happiness. ... Anything beyond a bachelors at a public university is a near guarantee she’ll possess a large basket of masculine traits that will prevent boners.

The "chart" in question is one that RooshV made up himself, and which contrasts the purported sexiness of less-educated women with the purported unsexiness of more educated women. As he explains:

A good test to see if a girl is over-educated is to add the word “sexy” before her job title. If the resulting phrase ignites arousing images in your head, then she’ll most likely have what it takes to satisfy you.

Amongst RooshV's "boner inducing" job titles for women: Sexy waitress, sexy teacher, sexy librarian, sexy flight attendant. Amongst the "boner softening" job titles: Sexy IT specialist, sexy anesthesiologist, sexy tort attorney, sexy financial analyst.

There are more than a few problems with RooshV's little list, not the least of which is that plenty of dudes do in fact get boners thinking of "sexy" female IT specialists, lawyers, financial analysts and other smart women. (I'm kind of partial to sexy professors, myself.) And if you don't want to take my word for it -- and MRAs never do -- I invite you to investigate the vast amount of porn involving "nerdy girls" or simply girls with glasses (NSFW link). 

Also, if you're going to base your notions of male and female sexuality on which job titles sound like the best sexy Halloween costume, how can you leave out such classics as "sexy nurse" (a job that actually does require specialized education) or "sexy kitty" (which requires whiskers and little cat ears)? And should we conclude from the perpetual popularity of the latter as a Halloween costume that furry women with tails who shit in a box are sexier than the furless standard models?

Also, if you're a guy who fetishizes less-educated women, and refuses to date women as educated or as well-paid as you are, you pretty much lose the right to criticize women for wanting you to pick up the check for dinner.


--

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the "Share This" or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

109 comments:

  1. No way-the stupid woman should also be a trust fund baby so she can still support him while not being able to hold a coherent conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I wish one could be a librarian without a Master's degree. It would make my career path much cheaper.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It always baffles me why these guys would think that women would be interested in their boners. I'd get another PhD just to make sure that idiots like this one never approach me or show any interest in me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, good, sexy criminal investigator, sexy doctor, and sexy forensics technician aren't on there. I'm safe from this dude no matter where I go.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hide, yeah, his notions of jobs that don't require education are a little strange. Had he really considered jobs that don't require much formal education he should have included "sexy farm laborer" and "sexy fast-food worker."

    ReplyDelete
  6. I love how my relationship with my fiance flies in the face of everything that MRAs believe about how men and women relate to one another.


    Also, if you're a guy who fetishizes less-educated women, and refuses to date women as educated or as well-paid as you are, you pretty much lose the right to criticize women for wanting you to pick up the check for dinner.

    Excellent point.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If there was ever motivation for women to pursue post-graduate education, it is this.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @Elizabeth, that is not always true for people like RooshV (whose name sounds disturbingly like "roofie" to me). They often want to maximize control over their victim...er "girlfriend"... which is easier to do if she is completely financially dependent.

    Also, the heteronormativity of RooshV's statement is glaring. Men are only attracted to "feminine" people (whatever the hell that even means in this context), so what about gay men? Besides, as I am sure the butch ladies can tell you, being butch does not stop creepos either.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Man, for me, nothing kills my boner faster than an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So in addition to making me better educated and more employable, my PhD will act as a magical ward against PUAs and other sad, insecure men?

    I'm having trouble seeing the downside here.

    ReplyDelete
  11. does this mean that the creepy douches that I go to school with will suddenly realize that I'm too intelligent to mess with and therefore I will no longer be sexually harassed and stalked? There really is no downside here

    on another note my boyfriend just informed me after reading this article that he is completely turned on by the thought of sexy epidemiologist (since I'm going into venerable disease study I find this hilariously funny). Thank you boobz for providing entertainment for my evening

    ReplyDelete
  12. In the month of January I had non-platonic relations with a guy with an admitted fetish for nerdy redheads in glasses*, a guy who declared that he was so turned on when I recited Jabberwocky to him, and a guy who said that my most attractive feature was my brain.

    I am currently dating a guy who thinks my rants about feminism are interesting and attractive. We do homework together and explain the interesting bits to each other. And, yes, he has an admitted fetish for "smart chicks" too.

    I think Mr. Roofie is sufficiently disproved with the power of my vag. After all, the boner never lies, right?

    *He has dated a nerdy redhead and fucked a nerdy girl with glasses (hi!), but so far has not found his dream girl.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Wait... so teachers don't require higher education? The people who are in charge of education aren't educated? What a special little world Mr. Roofie lives in.

    Also: what does he mean by feminine? Because as long as we're at it I can disprove "men like feminine women" with the power of my vag too. My vag is winning all sorts of arguments these days. (I mean, seriously, my boyfriend told me to not wear makeup because he thinks I look weird in it. TRUE MOTHERFUCKING LOVE.)

    ReplyDelete
  14. I am so sorry I followed that link. Extra stupid, extra mean.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Had he really considered jobs that don't require much formal education he should have included "sexy farm laborer" and "sexy fast-food worker."

    Congratulations, you pulled out the block that toppled RooshV's Jenga tower of logic. Farming isn't a stereotypically feminine quality (although historically, women participated in farming almost as much as men, since at that income level you don't have a lot of choice). But wait, there are also men who fetishize farm girls. Just look at the Beverly Hillbillies. But more importantly, different men like different things, and for RooshV to make a blanket statement about what men like is idiotic.

    Professions I added "sexy" to off the top of my head and found appealing: sexy programmer, sexy philosopher, sexy Nobel-winning author, sexy astrophysicist, sexy prime minister...

    I could go on forever. But it doesn't even matter, because while dating a sexy prime minister would be kind of awesome, a woman's profession doesn't actually matter to me. And dating an astrophysicist would be awesome, but that's because I love astrophysics myself (as an amateur). I would be equally happy to date a woman who also loves astrophysics but isn't an astrophysicist.

    But all that's pretty irrelevant. Women aren't basing their life decisions on what I find attractive. That's something RooshV can't get through his head.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well, I clicked through to the post to look at the chart. And holy shit, is that the most inadvertently funny uses of Exel ever. You call that a chart? What are the units on the axes? Where did the data come from? What about jobs that aren't traditionally feminine but also require little to no formal education, like truck driver or WNBA player? Something tells me he just ignored the points that disturbed his perfect linear relationship, which is a big science no-no, and kind of pointless seeing as he was just making numbers up. Anyway, I was hoping for an infographic filled with slutty women, and he can't even give me that much.

    This chart tells me nothing, and sadly enough he put his name on it. This is something he's proud of.

    Also, non-profit work takes a shocking amount of education. I guarantee you'll find more non-profit workers with master's degrees than middle managers.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Gawd that girl has some tig ol' bitties.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Wow. Roosh is priceless. I can't stop reading. The comments are pretty good, too. This is my favorite quote so far:

    "The dick move can only be used after sex has occurred. While I suppose you could use it beforehand as part of a normal game repertoire on a game-playing chick, it won’t have the same punch. She could easily laugh it off since her vagina has no longing or memory for your penis. "

    ReplyDelete
  19. Man, this guy is terrified of women.

    ReplyDelete
  20. iodineshuffle said...
    "So in addition to making me better educated and more employable, my PhD will act as a magical ward against PUAs and other sad, insecure men?

    I'm having trouble seeing the downside here."


    Kinda like the way I'm having trouble seeing the downside to this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NmQhCWfXu2o

    ReplyDelete
  21. I've been attracted to various smart women who weren't overly aggressive or un-feminine. In fact I know a few female college professors who are fairly feminine and submissive. If the graph is true, the curve is much shallower than it's made out to be.

    Also, why is obsessing over nerdy chicks "creepy?" Would you put the female obsession over that Twilight guy in the same category?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kinda like the way I'm having trouble seeing the downside to this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NmQhCWfXu2o


    Okay, so it's agreed. We won't ask you to support reproductive healthcare, and in return you agree to stay away from women. I'm glad we've finally come to a compromise that makes both sides happy.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Would you put the female obsession over that Twilight guy in the same category?

    Yes. Hell yes.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Also, why is obsessing over nerdy chicks "creepy?" Would you put the female obsession over that Twilight guy in the same category?

    LOL. Yep.

    ReplyDelete
  25. the obsession from some women with edward cullen (the guy from twilight) is absolutely fucking creepy

    ReplyDelete
  26. "Also, why is obsessing over nerdy chicks "creepy?"

    I think when this picture -- or a similar picture of a nerdy girl, but I'm pretty sure it was this one -- was posted to Reddit one time, guys quickly figured out her name and home address. So that's sort of what I was thinking about.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Sexy clinical laboratory scientist? Yeah, I guess this guy won't be into me. *Oh, well.*

    What's funny is that I have been considering a career change into library science. That would actually require additional education, though. So, I would be in a "sexier" position, but with a decidedly "unsexy" total of seven years of education. I think I have found a paradox in this theory.

    ReplyDelete
  28. You should consider it, Emmy. Working in a library is super sexy. We spend our time in sexy meetings where we discuss whether our sexy meta-data is returning the proper super sexy search results. Now that I think about it, it's a lot like being a PUA.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Also, if you're a guy who fetishizes less-educated women, and refuses to date women as educated or as well-paid as you are, you pretty much lose the right to criticize women for wanting you to pick up the check for dinner.
    Where does he complain about that?
    Man, this guy is terrified of women.
    No assumptions there, nope. You feminists are so bright your assumptions automatically become facts, and anyone who disagrees can take a hearty "fuck you."
    Man, for me, nothing kills my boner faster than an idiot.
    Impotence must really suck then.

    ReplyDelete
  30. "If this graph is true"?! I think my head just exploded. I was going to say you can make that graph by listing your professions in column A and counting backwards from 10 in column B, but this douche didn't even do that much. It looks like he just made a straight line using two points and added everything else later. I assume he's fucking with his own audience, and that pretend math and smarty-pants tables and equations are part of his shtick.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "Douche." Isn't that a gender-specific insult like "bitch" or "whore?" Aren't you feminists always complaining about double-standards? How is using a word like "creepy guy" or "douchy" which is a label used by women or the feminine-minded any different from a man using "gold-digging slut" or "mouthy bitch?"
    Wait, feminists are hypocritical little wretches who think their political views make them demigods. Is it any wonder that men who have not reduced themselves to apologetic, sobbing imbeciles tend to be more productive than effeminate honorary women?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that I should be basing my educational goals on the effect that they'll have on some random guy's erection. Pardon me.

    Also, glasses fetishists are super creepy. Yes, I've had a lot of ... uh ... fans. If it were even people worshiping an actual part of my body, I might think it was an iota less creeptastic. But as-is it reminds me of the guys who fetishize amputees. "Mmm, myopia gets me HOT." One guy asked me to make a video detailing my prescription. I find that way more disturbing than tweens fantasizing about vampire stalkers.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I should add that no, I didn't do it.

    Another guy asked to buy my glasses. Yeah, that's not weird or anything.

    (And no, the myopia thing isn't a quote. It's the quote I'm imagining.)

    ReplyDelete
  34. @lip - Thanks for sharing! The funny thing is, the post was not addressed to women or even feminists, so it's odd you think he was giving you orders.
    I'm starting to see how feeble-minded women think jokes in the workplace or men glancing at their cleavage (he totally luked, 4 realz) jeopardize their productivity. If you think a site designed to help men date is addressed to you, then you've definitely got some ego issues.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Roosh is ugly, has no job and when he's in the US, he lives in the basement with his father. He praise women that live in Third World countries because it's the only place where he can get laid - these women are poor and desperate. That's probably why he despise American women, specially those that have high paying jobs or are highly educated like lawyers or civil engineer - he just can't get these women.

    And yet the guy is seen as role-model and a hero in the manosphere.

    ReplyDelete
  36. chocolatelipwax-- I dunno. Some of them carry it too far, but as fetishes go "glasses fetish" is one of the easiest and simplest to fulfill, requiring only that I be able to see during sex. The only more convenient one, as far as I can see, is "cunnilingus fetish" or "backrub fetish." And the glasses fetishist I know is a very cool and non-objectifying person who just happens to really, really like glasses.

    Mr. String-- a lot of the manosphere bitches about paying for women's dinners. Roissy, one of Roosh's friends, has several posts on the subject. It's reasonable to assume he agrees.

    This will amaze you, but feminists are allowed to critique works that are not actually aimed at us. You are sitting here complaining at us even though you clearly do not fit in wiht this site's mission of "making fun of misogynists." Similarly, non-gamester feminists can complain about Roosh V. Free speech for everyone!

    I'll answer the rest of your points as soon as you come up with a point.

    adpd0nmmng-- Also, he's an admitted rapist (check out the When No Means Yes and 16 Types of Game subtype Rape Game post for the skin-turning details). Truly Hero of the Revolution material here.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'm thinking (after having a quick look at Avpd's links) that Roosh's pickup expertise is all in his head. A rather vivid fantasy.

    On the topic of hot women with education - Natalie Portman comes to mind. Somehow, I just don't see her as a boner killer.

    ReplyDelete
  38. What douchemerchantvessels like Roosh MEAN to say is that femininity is inversely correlated with having a choice.

    ReplyDelete
  39. @e-string, even though the site is not addressed to women, they are the intended targets of the advised behaviors. People are concerned about the beliefs of others because humans generally live around other people and people have a tendency to act on their beliefs. These attitudes do affect how women are treated in educational and social situations, so obviously women are concerned about them. It is not that difficult of a concept.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I just went to the dark side and perused David's link and Roosh's brainchild of a graph.

    Sad to say, I'm in the upper percentile of his targets since I'm an artist.

    Perhaps he doesn't realize that many graphic artists and designers (including me) have plenty of post secondary education - stupid does not an effective artist make. Even if he's picturing the bohemian artist type - I've yet to meet one of those that doesn't have a good dose of education as well.

    ReplyDelete
  41. estring, I use douche against both men and women. Since a douchebag is an actual tangible object it has no gender and is therefore a gender neutral term.

    ReplyDelete
  42. String: Wait, feminists are hypocritical little wretches who think their political views make them demigods. Is it any wonder that men who have not reduced themselves to apologetic, sobbing imbeciles tend to be more productive than effeminate honorary women?

    For starters, I'm amused by your classist assumption that "making more money" automatically means "being more productive." This is a common notion that the upper class wants you to believe, but the farmers and coal miners of the world who are barely scraping by (if they even are) are pretty essential to our survival as a civilization, too.

    Now, obviously WaPo has a demonstrated vested interest in advancing upper-class norms. But the fact that upper-class people are likelier to have traditional, patriarchal values is actually pretty well-understood. Those values work very well for the upper-class, and naturally the people who benefit from the status quo are going to support the status quo. WaPo wants to imply that the causation works in the other direction - that holding progressive values makes you a useless leech on society - but that's WaPo for you.

    ReplyDelete
  43. MRAs and PUAs are separate entities and often come into conflict. Stop conflating them.

    ReplyDelete
  44. forweg, this blog, as I have explained a zillion times, is not exclusively about MRAs. And I didn't refer to Roosh as one. I called him a "dating guru," which is probably way to charitable.

    That said, there is a lot of overlap between MRAs and PUAs. Roosh is one of a small number of PUAs (Roissy would be another) who is especially popular amongst MRAs and MGTOWs; indeed, I was pointed to this post of his by reading an MGTOW message board. His books are advertised on The Spearhead next to The Myth of Male Power.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Wait, they'r not? Sexism; I've been doing it wrong all these years.

    @ Syldoran, wait Pauley Perrette isn't sexy?

    Not that it should matter what men's penis think, but I'm pretty sure Chanpoins Costumes does quite a bit of sales with their Sexy Teacher, Sexy Doctor, Sexy Executive lines.
    That being said, as a guy I've worked on haloween costumes such as the Sexy Hubble Telescope, Sexy Hadron Collider, and the Sexy Polio Vaccine.

    ReplyDelete
  46. @forweg

    MRAs are enablers of PUAs, they blindly believe the worst things that PUAs says about women and they use the same terminology (alpha, beta, evo-psych, ... ) to justify their failure with women. Furthermore every time there is a guy from the PUA community that go berserk ( George Sodini, for example ), MRAs excuse him. The reason that Roosh and Roissy are popular with MRAs is that they openly target them in their blogs. Many MRAs want to become PUAs to have success with women and they blindly believe everything that Roissy says.

    I've made a posting about this stuff : http://avpd0nmmng.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/mras-are-enablers-of-puas/

    ReplyDelete
  47. Douche is a gender-specific insult… sort of. It can be applied to both men and women. But I think it’s especially applicable to assholish men who harass women, because of the history of the douche itself, to wit: once thought essential to proper feminine hygiene and genital health, now known to promote infections, generally deleterious to women’s health. And it’s a nice turnaround of the word itself, too, because it was once used as an insult in the time-honored tradition of insulting people by associating them with the lowest of the low, female genitalia; now it’s an insult because it’s associated with that which harms female genitalia!

    In short, “douche” may be the platonic ideal of insults.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Douche

    Douchebag

    Douchebaggery

    Douchecanoe

    Douchenozzle

    Yep, "douche" is awesome.

    Also, sexy environmental scientist anybody? Sexy transportation planner? Which do you think is more of a boner-killer? I need to know because I'm at a turning point in my career right now.

    ReplyDelete
  49. David -- You might want to blur out her name badge in this picture if you don't want creepy people instantly knowing her name again this time...

    ReplyDelete
  50. I always thought of a douchebag as being the jerk-opposite of a dirtbag. Like, a dirtbag is scum; a douchebag is someone who treats YOU like scum. Never thought of gender entering into it.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Don't forget sexy 1920's steel conglomerate tycoon. And frog!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4rUiV_Hh74&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    ReplyDelete
  52. Does that chick do boob sex?

    And how exactly would you expect anyone on this blog to be able to answer that question?

    Boob sex is awesome, of course, and I heartily approve of it. But I simply have no way of knowing what that woman's opinion of it is.

    ReplyDelete
  53. triplanetary: Because women are connected to the Universal Female Hivemind, of course.

    Sally: You can be my sexy environmental scientist any time you like, baby.

    ReplyDelete
  54. @Clarissa - Don't worry, with a face like that no guy is going to approach you PHD or not

    ReplyDelete
  55. @Clarissa - Don't worry, with a face like that no guy is going to approach you PHD or not

    And yet another misogynist falls back on the "yeah well ur ugly" argument. Tell me, are you unaware of how trite that is, or are you just comfortable with it?

    ReplyDelete
  56. I love smart women if they're also good looking and feminine. All of my long-term relationships have been with intelligent women (one went to USC med school).

    Roosh isn't making a categorical knowledge claim, but rather he is talking about the general trend of education and career-obsessed women to be unfeminine, competitive, and abrasive. I find this uncontroversial; obvious even.

    ReplyDelete
  57. @lifeisugly, you illustrate an overlooked point here too well. "unfeminine, competitive, and abrasive" In what way are any of these (except to some degree perhaps abrasive) inherently bad? Why the double standard as well? Educated and career-obsessed men are often "unfeminine, competitive, and abrasive", yet I fail to see your complaints that one should not date intelligent or educated men. You start with an expectation that women should be "feminine" (again, this term is a vague one-if it means social standards, some things coded as feminine are good, some bad, some neutral) and that there is some sort of right to push whatever standard of gender or sexual attractiveness you want onto others. Frankly, that is bullshit.

    Let me give an example of how silly these notions look when applied to less heavily culturally imposed standards of attractiveness. I find it attractive when other people wear heavy eyeliner. There is a trend against this amoung professionals, but a trend for it amoung goths. Now, imagine how silly I would look if I said things similar to RooshV about this taste. "Eyeliner is a quality that pleases people. Therefore from the chart we can deduce that educated people decrease happiness of people ... Anything beyond a bachelors at a public university is a near guarantee they’ll possess an unlined eye that will prevent my sexual arousal." Imagine I give this as my justification for why no one should date professionals and for why professionals were unsexy. Would you stop dating professionals? Would you think professionals were less desirable mates than goths?

    No one has the right to enforce their tastes in terms of attractiveness onto others. Other people do not necessarily have the same tastes. They may not care about your tastes, as they do not exist for the purpose of being sexually pleasing for you to observe. Women do not exist to be cumbuckets for RooshV, that is the concept he seems to be having difficulty with.

    ReplyDelete
  58. To Darksidecat:

    Attraction isn't radically subjective. Men tend to agree on what is attractive based on primitive feelings and with little variation.

    Gender is not an entirely social construct and is not nearly as flimsy as you make it out to be. There is such thing as a more feminine women, and it turns out she's pretty hot.

    Enforce their tastes? All I see is observation, not enforcement. Women don't exist to be roosh's (or my) semen receptacle. There is this thing called attractiveness though and his blog involves observations on it.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Oh, and men and women are different. This is why one standard doesn't necessarily apply to the other.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Attraction isn't radically subjective. Men tend to agree on what is attractive based on primitive feelings and with little variation.

    Completely, 100% bullshit. Attraction is radically subjective. Do you find 300+-pound women attractive? Based on your comments thus far, probably not. So why are there entire websites devoted to them?

    Some men like pale skin, some men like dark skin. Some men like big boobs, some men like small boobs. Some men like short hair, some men like long hair. And these variations apply equally to personality.

    Your claim that men by and large agree on what's attractive in a woman is, to put it simply, complete bullshit.

    But, y'know, it sure is convenient as an attempt at enforcing patriarchal norms. "Stick to your assigned gender role or no man will ever love you!"

    ReplyDelete
  61. That's subjectivity, not radical subjectivity. Radical means there are no patterns. It's not the norm to like obese women, it is the norm to like a healthy, thin body.

    Once again enforce? Patriarchy? Nonsense.

    More like "somewhat resemble the form of woman or it will be exceedingly more difficult to be loved by a man of quality." Less sexy, I know, but more precise.

    ReplyDelete
  62. The number of bullshit assumptions you're able to pack into a limited number of statements is honestly pretty impressive.

    Your subjective desires do not constitute a norm, "healthy" and "thin" do not necessarily correlate, "radical" does not mean what you think it means, "the form of woman" is not something you're in any position to dictate, and "a man of quality" is not some objective standard that anyone has a right to judge besides the individual seeking it.

    As far as "nonsense" goes, I think you're the master of it here, not me.

    ReplyDelete
  63. "And yet another misogynist falls back on the 'yeah well ur ugly' argument. Tell me, are you unaware of how trite that is, or are you just comfortable with it?"

    "avpd0nmmng said...
    Roosh is ugly, has no job and when he's in the US,"

    But the feminist can do it a few comments above you and not get criticized? lol hypocrites. This is why only beta, weak men listen to anything your kind has to say.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Oh! triplanetary,

    Of course there are healthy endomorphs, I'm speaking in general. Inductive logic, you know?

    You can go on believing there are no regularities in what is and isn't considered a quality mate, as counterintuitive as that position is.

    My advice to you is to sync up with reality. Swimming upstream is hard for a reason. I can tell from the little bit you've written that you're an angry left-wing type who is constantly fighting the world around her. Relax and repeat after me; "nobody likes a fatty."

    ReplyDelete
  65. How lifeisugly is wrong, a handy list:

    --Healthy and thin are not the same thing. When I played sports, I knew lots of girls who worked out three hours a day in season and regarded a square of dark chocolate as "cheating", but were chubby, or (most often) built like rectangles. And they were healthy as fuck.
    --Radical means "going to the root" or "extreme" (especially for political ideologies); it can also mean "inherent", which is actually the opposite of what you're areguing radical means. Lern 2 English plz.
    --I am regularly mistaken for a guy by waitresses. I am assured, however, than I am quite boneriffic. Actually, when I cut my hair and cleaned out my wardrobe and went soft-butch, I started getting laid six ways from Sunday, because I am a lot hotter as an honest androgyne than I am as a failed imitation of feminine.
    --WTF does "a man of quality" mean? Women have different standards for men. I am reminded of this every time I locate a long-haired, hopelessly romantic, nerdy-ass gamer GEM (that I can't fuck because I'm monogamous now! le sigh) who is entirely girlfriendless.
    --Seriously, if my androgyny means Roosh doesn't want to bang me, good fucking riddance.
    --Do you even watch porn? There is every fucking kind of body type on YouPorn, from pale skinny chicks with no tits to black BBW with triple E's to (yes) butch women. (Look up Jiz Lee sometime. It's not all lesbians watching her porn.) Sure some of them are more popular, but that is like saying The Dark Knight is a more popular movie. Sure thing, but that doesn't mean there's no room for (500) Days of Summer.

    ReplyDelete
  66. "avpd0nmmng said...
    Roosh is ugly, has no job and when he's in the US,"

    But the feminist can do it a few comments above you and not get criticized? lol hypocrites. This is why only beta, weak men listen to anything your kind has to say.


    I don't know, I think it's pretty fair to point out that you, someone who rates the value of women on all sorts of superficial qualities including appearance, don't seem to think that women should hold you to the same standard of fuckability.

    For myself I don't think your outward appearance is relevant to anything. But that's okay, there's enough to criticize just from your writing.

    ReplyDelete
  67. yes, radical does mean extreme.

    8============D

    ReplyDelete
  68. Addendum to the "lifeisugly is wrong" list:

    --Fatty fuckers are not even an obscure fetish, fuckass. When you add in the people like me who like an overweight chick with some curves and some heft to her, they're a sizeable plurality.
    --Oh, I've found some regularities! Social, confident, happy people of whatever gender, who are actively looking for non-platonic relationships, get laid more. I'm just arguing with YOUR regularities.

    Roosh: I'm not going to shame you for being ugly. I'm going to shame you for being a rapey rapey rapist who rapes and can't get laid except through rape, for he is a rapist. :)

    ReplyDelete
  69. Relax and repeat after me; "nobody likes a fatty."

    I don't view my reasoning as "upstream" when I deny a statement like this. I actually like heavy women myself. Not BBW territory, but certainly heavier than what the media portrays as typically beautiful. One of the most beautiful women I've seen weighed about 200 pounds. That's my taste.

    But go on pretending that your taste is right/normal and anyone who doesn't share it is wrong/abnormal. You're right, your line of reasoning is easier. But it's weird that you've gotten it in your head that "intellectually lazy" correlates with "correct."

    ReplyDelete
  70. And another addendum! I'm going to be doing this all night at this rate.
    --lifeisugly thinks ascii penises are a counterargument. Lifeisugly is possibly eleven years old? That would explain a lot actually.

    ReplyDelete
  71. that I can't fuck because I'm monogamous now! le sigh

    Ha, I'll never make that mistake again. Polyamory all the way, whoo!

    ReplyDelete
  72. Lifeisugly: While your acknowledgment that intelligence doesn't automatically render women unfuckable is heartening, I have to take issue with the tired "education makes women uppity" argument.

    And please don't give me that bullshit about men and women being different -- because the reality is that men and women are far more the same than they are different. For example, men and women are the same in that acquiring an education and building a career takes talent, dedication and hard work regardless of one's gender. It is quite offensive, therefore, that the term "career-obsessed" when applied to women is just code for "reluctant to flush her talents and two decades of work and sacrifice down the toilet in order to have more time to cook me dinner, keep the baby from being an inconvenience to me and wipe my ass." If men and women similarly put effort into a career, why is it that men like you consider WOMEN's achievements, aspirations and labor disposable and secondary to men's mere domestic convenience (while MEN's careers must be cherished, promoted and sacrificed for)? Please don't insult us by saying this is so simply because men and women are different, because that would be saying that women have inherently less worth than men and should expect far less consideration. If that's what you actually believe, then we simply have a fundamental disagreement on values, and let's leave it at that.

    This is the problem with gender essentialists who claim to be moderate: they would "allow" women to have careers as long as women never actually have the temerity to value their own minds, achievements and academic and professional work; as long as they are ready to drop everything and let a chunk of their lives to have been for nothing in order to become full-time maids. And we are allowed to be intelligent as long as we behave as quiescent, simpering globs of protoplasm, and never use that intelligence to disagree with a man or make him think he knows less than we do about something other than childcare and household work.

    As for differences, note that "sacrificing for the family" by advancing in one's career and increasing one's income is NOT the flip side of "sacrificing for the family" by throwing one's career and achievements away.

    ReplyDelete
  73. triplanetary: I would if I could, but my boyfriend is monogamous! And I would rather have him than a harem's worth of nummy geekboy cock. :(

    Amused: WORD. What zie said.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Sexy environmental scientist, eh? Sweet? Now I can collect sexy water samples and do sexy analyses of them. And create sexy maps of super sexy water quality indices.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Now I can collect sexy water samples and do sexy analyses of them. And create sexy maps of super sexy water quality indices.

    Presumably this is what happens with Zapp Brannigan is assigned to chart a planet.

    ReplyDelete
  76. @Ozymandias

    "Lifeisugly is possibly eleven years old? That would explain a lot actually."

    You'd think David was running an MRA daycare, judging by the maturity level of some of these commenters.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Presumably this is what happens with Zapp Brannigan is assigned to chart a planet.

    Yes. Also, like Zapp Brannigan, sexy environmental scientists never wear pants.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Pointing out that doodz who hate on women for being ugly are ugly is a bit like pointing out that Congressmen who vote against gay rights are gay. It's not relevant, and it's not really good form--except there's the whole hypocrisy thing.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Feminism only happened because men let it

    ReplyDelete
  80. Decolonization only happened because the British let it. Doesn't make it less of a moral imperative.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Some men let it, other men have been crying about uppity women since, well, at least since things started being written down and most likely since long before that.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Look up the definition of 'educated' and then do the same for 'smart'. Note the difference.

    Needless to say, if you were a woman you'd probably be extremely wealthy. (Because a successful older man would've married you when you were young and sexy... obviously.)

    ReplyDelete
  83. Feminism only happened because men let it

    And integration in the US only happened because the group of old white men on the Supreme Court let it. What's your point, beyond an admittedly correct acknowledgment that patriarchy is still alive and well in our culture?

    Is your point that women should bow down and be grateful to men for treating them slightly less like subhumans? Because fuck that.

    ReplyDelete
  84. ""Douche." Isn't that a gender-specific insult like "bitch" or "whore?" Aren't you feminists always complaining about double-standards? How is using a word like "creepy guy" or "douchy" which is a label used by women or the feminine-minded any different from a man using "gold-digging slut" or "mouthy bitch?""

    Not all feminists think douche is a good word to use as an insult, especially since it started out as a gendered insult against men, like pussy or cunt.

    No amount of "useless and unhealthy to women lol" can erase the history of the word. I'm always frustrated when I see that "explanation" because it's frankly retcon bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Oh, and "creepy" is used on both sexes, at least in my world.

    ReplyDelete
  86. i used to love smart women. still do. but the problem is that the smarter the woman, and the more accomplished she is, often that means that she is more demanding and more of a pain in the ass. harder to please, harder to keep happy.

    ReplyDelete
  87. i used to love smart women. still do. but the problem is that the smarter the woman, and the more accomplished she is, often that means that she is more demanding and more of a pain in the ass. harder to please, harder to keep happy.

    I know, right! You give these women an education and suddenly they're demanding the same consideration as men. It's awful. Next thing you know they'll get it in their heads that they're full human beings.

    Educating women was a mistake in the first place, I say.

    ReplyDelete
  88. I know I am wrong to expect the guy I date to be able to hold a decent conversation on anything, to bathe daily, to brush his teeth and hair, to make some kind of effort to support himself after turning 25...must be that uppity edumucation I got.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Saying creepy is an insult to men is just being silly, women get called creepy too...in fact if you are constantly being called creepy, then maybe you are!


    Trip and Elizabeth....don't you know that women are just so gosh darn mean now in days! I mean, if a guy is nice and shows the girl attention she needs to just give him a chance! How dare women have expectations and standards! And educated women just have too many of those things!

    ReplyDelete
  90. @jupiter, "douche" it is not comparable to the other terms you discuss. "Pussy" and "cunt" are explicit references to genitals. "Bitch" and "whore" apply to behaviors that are only punished in women or viewed as feminizing, whereas the behaviors addressed by "douche" are not ones exclusively punished in men or ones that are seen as automatically masculinized. When a woman is called a "douche", there is no suggestion that her behavior is masculine, whereas when a man is called a "bitch" it is pretty explicit that his act and the term are seen as feminizing. The same applies to the term "creepy". Neither "creepy" nor "douche" is actually a gender specific insult. Even if it is an insult that is applied at higher rates to men, it is not gendered per se, unlike the terms you cite. The term "dick" or "cock" as an insult is a specifically gendered one, however, this still does not get it to the level of being comparable. Social power of the respective groups matters in the level of hurt inflicted by an specified insult. Cracker and the n-word are not equivalent. Breeder and fag are not equivalent. Walkie-talkie and cripple are not equivalent.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Social power of the respective groups matters in the level of hurt inflicted by an specified insult.

    This is something the MRAs really need to start understanding.

    ReplyDelete
  92. No, DarkSideCat, the original insult within "douche" was that it was water made dirty by contact with *female* genitals. It's an insult based on contamination with femaleness.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Hold on guys, GET REAL.

    Roosh is right, albeit incidentally.

    Often very attractive women do not need to rely on an education to get ahead; their looks provide. As such, less attractive females are required to 'get smart' to compete, at least in terms of value. It's how natural selection works. Beauty and brains are rare indeed.

    I'm generalizing of course, but this unfortunate correlation provides a rational justification for such a chart.

    ReplyDelete
  94. It's how natural selection works.

    Conveniently, when somebody uses the phrase "natural selection" while describing human behavior, I take that as a sign that I don't have to bother paying attention to them anymore.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  95. "i used to love smart women. still do. but the problem is that the smarter the woman, and the more accomplished she is, often that means that she is more demanding and more of a pain in the ass. harder to please, harder to keep happy."

    Yes, I see what you mean. As an evil mastermind, I used to prefer the smart minions myself, but it's such a pain in the ass to get them to do what I say, they're always demanding their fair share of the spoils once I take over the world-

    Oh, you were talking about relationships not based on misguided assumptions of authority? My mistake. Just ignore me, I'm not a suspicious character at all.

    ReplyDelete
  96. @Naughty Nomad:

    Your argument is assuming that women are all scheming from an early age and making a decision about how best "to get ahead." When in reality, women (and men, I assume) spend a lot of time trying to figure out what *we* like.

    What people look like is related to the things we like, and how other people who like those things generally look, it's not a genetic reflection. That's why men and women who like to get dressed up and go to clubs look one way, while men and women who like to hang out in libraries and drink coffee look another.

    If you take a person out of the library and dress them like a club kid, they will be as pretty as a club kid. And if you take a person out of the club and dress them like a library-goer, they will look like the other people in the library. See? None of these choices involve natural selection.

    ReplyDelete
  97. I know I am wrong to expect the guy I date to be able to hold a decent conversation on anything, to bathe daily, to brush his teeth and hair, to make some kind of effort to support himself after turning 25...
    Most guys do that, more so than women in fact. Oftentimes women are so used to men leading the conversation and entertaining them like children that they would be autistic if judged by the male end of the double-standard. Additionally, many women will leech off of wealthier men to help pay their bills.

    I guess men are just more tolerant then women of social and economic ineptitude. You're welcome.

    ReplyDelete
  98. No, many guys do not have that ability I find. After the initial hi, how are you, the male just goes blank. Even trying to bring up movies, sports, computers, video games, fiction, nonfiction, television shows, the justice system, politics, religion, geography, travel, weather, and what they did that day at work does nothing to have an actual conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  99. No, many guys do not have that ability I find. After the initial hi, how are you, the male just goes blank. Even trying to bring up movies, sports, computers, video games, fiction, nonfiction, television shows, the justice system, politics, religion, geography, travel, weather, and what they did that day at work does nothing to have an actual conversation.


    1) Meet woman
    2) ???
    3) Get laid!

    ReplyDelete
  100. Most guys do that, more so than women in fact. Oftentimes women are so used to men leading the conversation and entertaining them like children that they would be autistic if judged by the male end of the double-standard. Additionally, many women will leech off of wealthier men to help pay their bills.

    People keep telling me that but quite frankly I have never seen any of these women who are interested in any kind of money that I have.

    The gold digger is incredibly rare and quite frankly? We would probably do the same if offered a sufficiently large amount of money. I cannot say that I would not be tempted (primarily because no woman is offering me large sums of money to sleep with them. I am not that attractive and women of the world aren't that desperate... yet!)

    Hands up men, who here thinks that women who expect you to pay their bills are attractive? I am betting not many of us. It's brains and personality that always win, dating attractive supermodels with the brains of blancmange and the personality of a dead fish would be a terrible terrible thing.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Actually, e-string, I would argue that women are more used to men not listening to them. In group conversations, men often dominate the discussion, and pay little mind to what women contribute. Except, of course, when a man decides to repeat what another woman just said and everybody attributes the idea to him. The idea is brilliant just as long as it's phrased in the form of a man.

    In one-on-one conversations, many men have a habit of assuming they must know better than women about any given topic, even if the subject is menstrual cramps or changing names after marriage. We call this mansplaining.

    Oh, and if men were judged by the female end of the double-standard, the majority would be derided as whiny, ball-busting, feminazi bitches. Because the double standard sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  102. I had a rough last couple of years in graduate school, to the point where I'm considering leaving the field in which I (finally) earned my doctorate. I've been feeling really down about that, wondering if all the blood, sweat, and tears were really worth it.

    Then I read this post, and learned that my degree is repulsive to "dating gurus" and "pick up artists."

    And you know what? It really was all worth it.

    Thanks, He-Man Woman-Haters Club!

    ReplyDelete
  103. @bottle - That was bitter and uninformative, but you did your best so thanks for sharing!

    ReplyDelete
  104. Mr. E-numbers:

    Please know that I am deeply, deeply sorry for using a tone that PUAs like you don't like, and for failing to be "informative" enough for you. See this face? This is my sincerely-sorry face.

    What? I often laugh uproariously when I'm being sincere.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Wicked Witch of the West laugh?

    Sexy anaesthetist? They are doctors you know and as sexy a stereotype as it goes. Sadly not true (Most of us medics are hit by the ugly stick. Too much work not enough time for exercise. I have bags under my eyes and put on weight. Also women are surprisingly not so interested in our money since we often lack it.)

    ReplyDelete
  106. No, we just want your brains....brains...brains...so we are like zombies or something.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Sociable

ShareThis