TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Are feminists saving or ruining sex?

Lilia42
January 11, 2016
5 upvotes
/r/PurplePillDebate

I want to discuss this video.

Watching it made me roll my eyes.

Feminists: women are exactly the same as men! Same sex drives and everything! To say otherwise is misogyny!

years pass

Feminists: It's unfair to think that women have the same sex drives as men! Our natural responses don't need to be fixed by pills! To think otherwise is misogyny!

Through my eyes, it's a clear indication that feminism just doesn't get sex and attraction. But I would love to see other points of view, so what are your thoughts, PPD?

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate.

/r/PurplePillDebate archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Are feminists saving or ruining sex?
Author Lilia42
Upvotes 5
Comments 82
Date January 11, 2016 6:38 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/are-feminists-saving-or-ruining-sex.277026
https://theredarchive.com/post/277026
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/40i560/are_feminists_saving_or_ruining_sex/
Red Pill terms in post
feministfeminism
Top posts by Lilia42

Showing appreciation to men in general :)

55 upvotes
September 2, 2015
/r/RedPillWomen

A personal trainer on how to get a "slender" look

37 upvotes
October 19, 2014
/r/RedPillWomen

Hilarious woman game example :D

29 upvotes
June 15, 2016
/r/RedPillWives

Amazing things can happen when you let your captain lead :)

13 upvotes
August 7, 2016
/r/RedPillWives

Urgent: Salary negotiations for women?

12 upvotes
July 7, 2016
/r/RedPillWomen

Suggested Reading: "Lucifer's Hammer"

9 upvotes
July 27, 2016
/r/RedPillWives

Urgent:Salary negotiations for women?

8 upvotes
July 7, 2016
/r/RedPillWives

Why an MRS degree is more valid than an English BA

6 upvotes
March 28, 2016
/r/RedPillWomen
Comments

[–]winndixie13 points14 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Of course they don't "get" sex. They don't want to admit to "get it", so they can play both the rulemaker and the victim. Here are their strategies:

Antislutshaming is used to rotate through alpha cocks without their future husbands having the political platform to cry, "I don't want a used woman." Otherwise they will be seen as a mysoginist, a bigot, a sexist, rather than a man who's honest with his preferences. This also removes their guilt and "liberates" them from consequences.

Equality leads to job preferences, that must is obvious.

"Women's sexual attraction is different" - is used to justify denial of sex from unwanted betas, despite them being husbands/boyfriends.

Every political movement is the impressionable being led. Feminism is a political movement. Though this affects sex in different ways. People who listen to a political movement of how to structure their social and sex life are impressionable, these people are the same people who can be convince to follow a certain religion, no sex before marriage, orgies in public are okay, etc. As long as it removes their guilt, who cares about repurcussions? As long as a German can blame someone else on their fucked up country, who cares? As long as cotton plantations get free labor, who cares?

Feminism provides a control panel of options any female can easily pick up and use against a man. It just so happens they often choose it to use against perceived weaker men and not so much alpha stronger men.

Little do they know there are also a control panel of strategies men can use on women to get sex.

There are always exceptions. If I could only answer by giving a number, I say feminism hasn't increased or decreased sex. But the road of marriage = sex is long closed.

[–]Yerwun-1 points0 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Antislutshaming is used to rotate through alpha cocks

Huh?

If I understand the TRP ideology, an 'alpha' is a term for a man that women would typically find desirable. Plenty of women do like to sleep around in their youth, but the men they sleep with and don't pursue relationships with are not the ones they consider most desirable. Many women, like men, simply like to kill time with flings until love comes along.

And the 'control strategy' stuff you talk about is extremely paranoid.

[–]winndixie5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't matter if they're in youth, it's who they interpret as desirable at the time. "Women make mistakes in choosing men and they turned out not so alpha = I am wrong on all counts" is not a good argument.

Except most women intuitively know that sleeping around makes them less desirable as long term partners and don't like to be reminded (slutshamed) for this. Again, she would want ideally society to accept this and she can still marry off as a virgin bride and have a healthy long term relationship raising healthy children after slaying 20 cocks in her mouth in a frat party orgy in college.

I dislike your quick diagnosis of paranoia. It's not crippling my life or dangerous or prevents me from living life which is what paranoia does. In fact, this has allowed me to steer clear of toxic women and live life clearer and with less hassle.

[–]Yerwun-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Paranoia is not always crippling, and it can be used as a word without being a 'diagnosis', rather like the word anxiety.

Except most women intuitively know that sleeping around makes them less desirable as long term partners and don't like to be reminded (slutshamed) for this. Again, she would want ideally society to accept this and she can still marry off as a virgin bride and have a healthy long term relationship raising healthy children after slaying 20 cocks in her mouth in a frat party orgy in college

How do you know what most women 'intuitively know'? That is entirely speculative. Most women I know hope for a man who is not hypocritical about sex, ie one that doesn't think it's okay for him to have had his fun and a past, but it's not okay for a woman. Also, what culture do you come from where brides are expected to be virgins?

And though the scenario you've outlined is extremely outlandish, what about partaking in an orgy in the past would prevent a woman from being a good mother?

Finally, you misinterpreted what I said. When any of the woman I know have flings, it's normally not because they 'picked wrong'. It's because they decided beforehand that, in spite of the guy's flaws, they felt like having sex.

[–]winndixie7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

No, actually, using a strong word like that is disingenuous and diminishes people with real paranoia. Like anxiety. Stop trying to give me a mental disorder I don't have. The word you're looking for is "careful".

It seems like you ignore my past statements and just question everything I say. Like an annoying kid that asks why at every step of the question. So let me explain it to you in clear terms.

So no I'm not a psychic or a mind reader, but when I say "I know" it means I can take it to believe as such women dislike being well known as the girl who sleeps around because they make bad long term relationships, because they know men dislike that for long term relationships, especially beta men. As far as i am concerned for the entire time I remain a man, I can take this truth and act accordingly. I have had women tell me this unprompted when I talk about a girl and they go, "she's a slut", I asked, "for sake of fun, what's wrong with a slut?" And she replies, "well would you marry her if she slept with 100 men?" I have had the same conclusion drawn to me by multiple women in varying degrees of friendship/relationship. So deny all you want, Internet stranger, you have multiple women testimonies to fight against.

What culture do you come from where you do not understand hyperbole to make a point? If I argued like women, right now I'd say I'd be offended you question my culture. Why do you think it's culture and not universal men preference that transcends culture? You sure like to put my opinions in one single basket.

I totally agree with you that most women you know like to sleep around. ;) I would not be surprised.

Frat party orgies are not outlandish at all. What's with all this judgment?

In spite of that guys flaw, she felt like having sex. therefore, she slept with a flawed man. Unless you admit women like sleeping with flawed men, she made a mistake. Either way she makes a bad long term relationship partner.

Do you understand now? It is intuitive and obvious men don't like slutty women for relationships, women know this, yet cannot rationalize their will to fuck many alpha men. Though for a fling, men don't care. Yet women try to make this gray area between relationship and fling to try to get a relationship out of it. They also like to make gray areas for other slutty women to make themselves feel less alone in guilt, which is what I posit you're trying to do now. Sometimes it's really that simple.

Nobody is oppressing women, they're already strong. Wait lemme clarify, the strong women are strong, the weak women complain. And they also like to play the victim to get special treatment and never provide responsibility.

[–]Yerwun1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I work in psychology. Paranoia is not a disorder. It is a symptom, along with others that have to be met for a disorder to be diagnosed. It is perfectly fine to use the word paranoid in relation to theories that seem...paranoid.

I am going to ignore the immature personal insults or insults to women; call me a poopyhead all you like. However you seemingly cannot grasp the concept that a woman certainly will willingly sleep with a flawed man if his penis is in working order. Sometimes people are just looking for pleasure.

You did not address the point about hypocrisy. Do you think it's fine for men to sleep around? And what exactly about having multiple partners makes a woman less capable as a mother? Do you have any actual reasoning to back up the things you say?

And finally, if you hang out with shitty girls who like to call other girls sluts, that's your issue. Perhaps this is a cultural thing. I'm from a city in Europe, and I've never even heard the issue of partner counts come up here. It would be seen as very petty and insecure for a man to care, unless she had a history of cheating or something.

[–]winndixie1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

wow, omg! You work in psychology. Since you work in psychology, I have a question, how effective is diagnosing over text on the Internet and where the patient is perfectly fine and is concious enough to say his life is not adversely affected? I doubt you are in psychology, you a good doctor is never Too quick to give diagnosis.

So women willingly sleep with flawed men. Alright. Back to what I said, this behavior is a part of women's tendencies to sleep around with many men, the ones they find attractive which happen to behave and look like alphas. Men who behave and look like the stereotypical, as much as I hate labels, alphas tend to get laid more. Then the women gets pissy when she finds out the beta (I dislike labels) dislikes her for sleeping around.

I am saying we can agree to disagree, I am observing something something while you are looking at the same thing but observing something else. I look at women and go "oh shit I better be careful, I don't care about calling them names as long as I don't get screwed over by women". You are looking at my comment and going "you are wrong not all women are like that! See the ones that exhibit the behavior you describe? They're exceptions! Exceptions!" Meanwhile, what observation have you came up on your own had I not made mine?

Hypocrisy exists in this world. Me saying it and pointing it out might make me an asshole but doesn't make me wrong.

Do I think it's fine for men to sleep around? Again, let's define "fine" before I assume your context and then you go off in saying "it's not true in this OTHER context, you're wrong! nu uh!" Context: do they make good long term partners for women. Answer: in my experiences and anecdotes I've heard, and from personal thought, yes. Though, I'd also be concerned about STDs if the rate is too high.

In my personal opinion which many men also happen to universally share, a woman who sleeps around is not okay in my eyes. But it could be okay to her. Usually not though because they cry when men don't want them used. I would dislike being in a relationship with her, and hearing form other people, they make terrible mothers and wives. Exceptions exist. I actually know quite a few good girls. They are exceptions.

Yes as a matter of fact I gave you plenty reasoning already. You saying "actual reasoning" doesn't mean it's not true if you can't find a way to convince me with better reasoning.

Woah and you call me rude? How is hanging out with my good long time friends who happen to have views you strongly disagree with an issue? This is why i doubt you are a psychologist. Ooh wait you argument like a woman, so lemme try to do one better. Ahem. Here I go. "And finally, if women behave like shitty whores who can't stand it when men don't want them anymore, it is their issue."

See that? I just argued with attitude like you did! How did I do?!?

Yeah I also see it as petty and immature for a woman to be insulted when the truth is told, no matter how bad it is to hear.

[–]Yerwun0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll admit that I didn't read any of that past the first paragraph, as there is only so much fun to be had out of arguing with ranting terpers. But I would just like to clarify that I quite explicitly did not try to diagnose you with anything, and if you can't understand that then there isn't much hope of you understanding any of my other points. I'm out.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They are flooding the market with sex for alphas. It has never been a greater time to be alive for your average Chad Thundercock. However, betas have never been more disenchanted save for maybe the era of agrarian kings where royalty kept thousands of virgins in their harems and left none for the peasants.

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man17 points18 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

My view is they haven't just saved, but instead created debaucherous sex demons like me. Some of the shit I've gotten away with over the years with Western women (not the bred South Americans) is kinda appalling now thinking about it.

However, while it hasn't 'ruined', it has succeeded in severely wounding the prospective mother pool in the West.

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Would you support a movement that said "Fuck it! Do what you want! No more social consequences!".

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man13 points14 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Feminism? No, I don't support it.

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I mean completely aside from feminism, "Do whatever you want" how does that sound?

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sounds like how babies live. I'm assuming we would be taken over by wild animals eventually.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

my advice to people almost always ends with "do what thou wilt"

[–]Leinadro8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I think they are turning it into a minefield.

In one breath people should be able to have sex however they want as long as its consensual. But in the next the understanding the concept of consent is about as easy nailing jello to a wall.

You see inconsistent standards like if both parties are drunk the guy and only the guys is still a rapist.

A woman that doesnt want to go down on a guy is exercising her choice but a guy that doesnt want to go down on a woman is a misogynist.

Its okay for a woman to turn a guy donw for any reason she wants and no one can judge meanwhile a guy who turns down a woman may is judged depending on his reasoning (which is odd given feminism's history of correcrly pointing how how woman would be insultes when turning down a guy).

I wouldnt say ruin so much as being okay with making things worse in some areas (that mostly affect men) while fixing other areas (that mostly affect women).

[–]mrcs84usnFatty Fat Neck Beard1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

people should be able to have sex however they want as long as its consensual on the woman's terms.

FTFY

[–]Leinadro1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

While you are correct about what they mean I was trying to convey what they say.

[–]UyhAEqbnpCyanide Pill2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

vid was such cringe I actually had to shut it off 5 seconds in

Feminists represent a female reproductive viewpoint, which has never truly wanted to have sex with every man and has always been selective. The talk of female sex drives being active is just a way to frame their more active gouging of the sexual market as it skews in their favor.

Every petty disagreement becomes a way of spinning a new controversy to keep the machine going. Blaming birth control is just another faucet of a very tired routine

[–]OfSpock6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why does an active sex drive mean wanting to have sex with every man? I'd consider my sex drive active, as in every day. But when I was single, masturbation was more attractive than sex with someone I didn't care about.

[–]Lilia42[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This "pills" referenced aren't BC. It's the "female viagra" which (ever so slightly, like super slightly) increases the number of "spontaneous" (rather than "responsive", aka the kind of sexual feelings most common in women) sexual feelings.

[–]dota2nubOrgasm is the devil1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Neither. People didn't have a clue about how to have sex properly and they still don't.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

"So I'm having the kaboom and so I was wondering if you would be interested in maybe like, cuddling in bed, and kissing a little bit and seeing if that feels good, and if that does feel good and leads to other stuff then great, and if it feels good and doesn't lead to other stuff then also great, and there's no lose lose here because no matter what happens we both did something we really enjoyed."

Well, I can't think of any sexier way to seduce your partner.

[–]winndixie1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Bet you can.

[–]3dbattleship0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Is it weird that I unironically think that sounds great?

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. More power to you, but it is bizarre.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

Femisist are saying that who you sleep with and how much you sleep around is nobodies business except your own, as long as it's consensual. That's pretty much it.

There are tumblr crazies who would rather police all men, but who takes them serious outside of their echo chambers?

[–]TheSandbergPrincipleMuh Soggy Knees14 points15 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

but who takes them serious outside of their echo chambers?

Government and Universities

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

That's one thing that constantly echoes in TRP's echo chambers. No university takes the tumblr crazies serious. Just because there's poster with "check your male privilege" hanging around doesn't make universities sexist. We call that free speech.

[–]TheSandbergPrincipleMuh Soggy Knees14 points15 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The idea of 'due process' has been destroyed at the university level thanks to "Tumblr Feminists". It has gotten so bad, that you see shit like 28 Harvard Law professors, HARDLY a conservative group, decrying biased collegiate judicial that harm men:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/14/rethink-harvard-sexual-harassment-policy/HFDDiZN7nU2UwuUuWMnqbM/story.html

It's not about 'free speech', it's about not being fucked over by batshit crazy cunts like mattress girl and 'jackie' from UVA over false rape allegations, thanks to pressure 'tumblr feminists' put on Obama.

[–]TheSandbergPrincipleMuh Soggy Knees9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Speaking of UVA, do you think people throwing rocks through the windows of the frat house, spray painting that they were rapists on their house, and going on their property to protest them, calling for them to be castrated is 'free speech'? This is how feminists operate.

[–]bsieversPurple Pill Man0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

There were plenty of self identified feminists in my fraternity. They weren't just this crazy new-wave feminist type you're talking about. Saying "all feminists operate this way" is just as wrong as "all frat boys are rapists".

[–]TheSandbergPrincipleMuh Soggy Knees9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Those feminist have the political power. "Moderate" feminists might as well not exist.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

No, that is how the craziest feminists operate. And I strongly disagree with that, let's throw 'em to court. But really, it's silly to pretend that happens all the time in colleges.

[–]TheSandbergPrincipleMuh Soggy Knees7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Duke Lacrosse

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

No university takes the tumblr crazies serious.

That's proven to be completely and utterly wrong, and you still thinking this shows me that you still didn't read the article I gave you.

"A victims’ industry made up of female activists, lawyers and therapists," [Nungesser's lawyer] said. "The government has surrendered to interest groups who attack anyone who calls for fair proceedings." Such as a Yale professor, who warned against the removal of the presumption of innocence, or the magazine writer Emily Yoffe, who castigated the new rules as just an overreaction. Furious activists said both of them were defending rapists.

Paul’s complaint also mentions these interest groups. In December, 2014, Columbia student activists from No Red Tape and Carry That Weight, Becca Breslaw and Zoe Ridolfi-Starr, read a letter at President Bollinger’s office containing the following passage: "(Emma’s) serial rapist still remains on campus today."

[...] Becca is 20, an anthropology student who wears a ring with a heart on it. She finds it hard to reconcile herself with the stories of Andreas Probosch and Andrew Miltenberg. It is even harder for her to realize that a governor is talking with her about draft laws.

But that is the case. It is a law that is to end sexual assault at universities in New York. One of the people working for the governor’s office called Becca, asking "if we couldn’t get two ‘survivors’ to stand beside him for the announcement. But the law was terrible." The police were to teach campus security about dealing with sexual misdemeanors. But "survivors" as the activists call the victims of sexual violence, are usually minorities, and the police are racist, Becca says.

The law was adjusted. The activists are few in number but they have strong networks and highly professional. They use social media; they hand out guidelines for journalists, partly to ensure that the victims are presented in a credible way. And they support students with complaints about breaches of the Title IX law. With success: in 2009, just 9 breaches were registered, compared to 102 in 2014 and 51 up to April 2015.

The activists make use of the fact that in the United States, universities have become brands. Like an Apple product, a Yale diploma is also a sign of distinction. The difference is the price and that would fall if the brand is damaged. That is why the universities work with the activists, like Columbia, which changed its policy against sexual assault: obligatory training sessions, more personnel, new delegates.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

But how much influence do these groups really have outside a select few very liberal universities? I really don't think much. Doesn't mean it's okay on these universities, but really this isn't an epidemic or something.

[–]MrPoochPants2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, this is due to Title XI, mostly, and that's nation wide. Furthermore, the issue that's probably most alarming is not that its happening at universities, but the prestigious universities its happening at. We're talking about universities that are legitimately looking at adopting tumblrina ideology as policy. Trigger warnings in a college class? The fuck? Its college, where you're supposed to be a god damned adult, and be exposed to shit that's meant to shake you up, to make you question things - where the truth is more important than how someone feels about that truth.

I could go on, but honestly, its starting to look like a much larger problem, due to a limited few.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Becca is 20, an anthropology student who wears a ring with a heart on it. She finds it hard to reconcile herself with the stories of Andreas Probosch and Andrew Miltenberg. It is even harder for her to realize that a governor is talking with her about draft laws.

Barely legal SJW noobs being included in the legislation process? Doesn't sound too good to me.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have a professor who thinks males shouldn't be allowed in law school.

[–]belletaco-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This. And of course consent which if you think that is wrong then there's nothing worth discussing here [i didn't watch the video so not sure if that's relevant I was just throwing it in there]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

I didn't watch the video.

I guess everyone is different. Sex drives depend on so many things it can't simply be pinpointed down to being a man or a woman.

Stress, hormones, predisposition, room cleanliness, feeling sexy and many other factors can impact this. I'm not a guy so I can only speak for myself, but I think there are too many factors involved in this.

So those feminist quotes or sayings are creating a gender based issue where there is none.

To the core, most men are meant to reproduce and most women to bear their child. In nature, females are picky and males will fight to get the chance to reproduce. In society, it's a bit more complicated but still has it to the core. I don't think sex drive has anything to do with gender.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

It can't be pinpointed, but nothing about humanity can. You know what you can do? You can make generalizations.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

That leads to stereotypes like the dreaded "all man are rapists", for example?

[–]kick6Red Pill Man7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

No, insanity leads there. You can generalize that, say 65% of men are going to do things one way, and another 20% similar but slightly different.

.1% of men are rapists. To generalize from this statistic that all men are rapists is literal insanity.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

It's still a generalization that leads to an ignorant stereotype. So most generalizations are based on public opinion, not facts.

Even with facts, you can't generalize because those 20% who do different will be taken out of the equation, making then "not men". If all men do this, then those who don't are not men. Correct?

[–]kick6Red Pill Man2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Your understanding of statistical distributions is so poor, I actually have no idea how to respond to this. I'll do what I can and say this: you're wrong. generalizations don't make for ignorant stereotypes. That kind of statement is typical blue pill/political lefty poopytalk because these types want to "feel" like they're a superuniquespecialsnowflake when, clearly, they act mostly similar to everyone else.

[–]winndixie1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It is to my disappointment and fear that this is often used.

[–]ThorLivesSkeptical Purple Pill Man2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

To the core, most men are meant to reproduce and most women to bear their child. In nature, females are picky and males will fight to get the chance to reproduce. In society, it's a bit more complicated but still has it to the core. I don't think sex drive has anything to do with gender.

I guess I'm having a hard time following. You are saying that males and females have different sexual strategies (males to reproduce as often as possible; women want high-quality partners), but then you deny that this can lead to sex drive differences? If seems like your first three sentences undermine your fourth sentence.

To use an example from nature: there are species where the males don't get involved in raising babies. In those situations, males are just sperm-donors. Females choose the "best" male (presumably for his genes), and since a male can produce lots of sperm, he can mate with lots of females in a single season. The Grouse is a type of bird who mates this way. The females pick the "best" male, and he can impregnate upto 20 different females in a single mating season. Most of the males don't get to mate at all.

"Sage grouse are polygynous, meaning males mate with more than one female. From years of observing sage grouse on leks, biologists find that most of the females mate with the one dominant male on the lek." http://www.sagegrouseinitiative.com/sagebrush-community/the-bird/

What's the outcome of this? It means the dominant male must have the sex drive to have sex with upto 20 different females. (If you're a lesser male, your sex drive will be an unfulfilled frustration.) But, the female birds only need to have sex once. In other words: the mating structure requires that males have a high sex drive, much higher than females.

I realize that the Grouse is an extreme example because humans don't mate the same way, but I can see the human mating dynamics also playing out in a way that gives males higher sex drives. We are a sexually dimorphic species (e.g. males are naturally taller than females), so why is there this desire to deny sex-drive dimorphism? Is it just the fact that different sex drives complicates our ideas about the world and plans for the world? For example, some feminists seem to think that admitting that males, on average, have a higher sex drive might mean that males be given more freedom in groping women or something, and they don't want that, so they deny that sex-drive differences exist. Personally, I think that sex-drive differences do exist, but that doesn't mean that we should just go, "well, boys will be boys!" and give males a free pass for bad behavior.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I say this because I know girls who want to have sex everyday and others who get satisfied with once a month. Men, the same (I think).

Some girls are wild on vacation and monks during regular life.

A lot of it seems to depend on the overall mood.

Also, animals have mating seasons, so I guess the males are pumped up during that specific time. Humans are always in mating season although girls can be hornier before and during ovulation while I never heard of that pattern in men.

[–]ThorLivesSkeptical Purple Pill Man2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't see how you're disputing my comment. If you're looking for empirical data, I could also point out that the sexual partner counts of gay men tends to be very high. And the partner counts of lesbians tends to be low (both in terms of number of partners and in terms of sexual acts per week). This is why HIV spread through the gay male community like wildfire - because gay men were having lots of sex with lots of different people. Kinsey Institute surveys have shown that gay men have very high partner counts. One survey in the early 1970s indicated that 75% of gay men in San Francisco had a partner count of 100+. Here's a quote about Gaëtan Dugas, a gay man who was one of the earliest people infected with HIV in the US:

"Dugas is described as being a charming, handsome sexual athlete who, according to his own estimation, averaged hundreds of sex partners a year. He claimed to have had over 2,500 sexual partners across North America since becoming sexually active in 1972." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga%C3%ABtan_Dugas

In contrast, I've mentioned the lesbian bed death on quite a few occasions:

"Emphasizing "had sex" in their sample, only about one-third of lesbians in relationships of 2 years or longer had sex once a week or more; 47% of lesbians in long-term relationships had sex once a month or less, and among heterosexual married couples, only 15% had sex once a week or less. They also reported that lesbians seemed to be more limited in the range of their sexual techniques than did other couples, and that lesbian couples are less sexual as couples and as individuals than anyone else." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbian_bed_death

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Diseases spread more easily between males and from males to females because of penetration and friction, while lesbian don't have the same type of sexual activity which also explains why diseases don't spread so quickly in the lesbian community.

So perfect then. If you're right, it means it's perfectly normal for woman to not want to have sex often and they don't need treatments to have a higher appetite because they are perfectly normal, so option 2 from OP is correct. But still, gay/lesbian circumstances are different from heterosexuals, so if you can state those same statistics for heterosexual couples, then I might agree with you. If not, the stats provided just prove your point amongst same sex partners.

It's still not a feminist/misogyny issue then, it would be a fact. Unless someone is putting hormone treatments down women throats/veins, then it's a problem.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

For me feminism is doing neither. It's saying you want to have sex? Great. You don't? That's fine too.

[–]Bekazzled0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think sex feels good. I don't think about gender politics when it comes to it.

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Wait, it wasn't common knowledge that there are different sex drives?

I explain pretty much all social character traits on a spectrum from spontaneous to responsive.

How she explains spontaneous sex drive sounds like she never experienced it, or understands it, rather she just read spontaneous sex drive and thought it goes like this.

Her solution: Promote pleasure is the measure

My solution: Educate more people on spontaneous vs responsive sex drive.

I think her solution will make people feel broken and less female if they don't enjoy sex... It's the same fucking problem again.

Then we have to educate people on how to communicate in bed about what you want and someone will create a new thing for people to feel better without doing anything.

[–]jkonradRP is for beginners1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Could you flesh out the spontaneous/responsive dynamic a little?

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

She explains it, there are several post on reddit that explain it and tons of articles in the internet.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Wait, it wasn't common knowledge that there are different sex drives?

Schroedinger's gender differences. Men and women are equal unless a lack of equality makes women look better. It always depends on the context.

So for example if there's an opportunity to shame men for thinking with their dicks and only wanting sex instead of deep and sublime love, you can bet that everyone arguing for that position is on board with women being modest and in control of themselves while men are insatiable sex fiends.

On the other hand, if something about slut-shaming comes up, you'll find people (usually from the same demographics as the assholes above) who will tell you with complete and utter convition that women and men basically have the same sex drive and that women don't act it out because our nasty sexist society doesn't let them.

As I said, context.

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I always say that women just think with their uteri and stuff like that.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

While their intent has nothing to do with sex, the social engineering feminists engage in leads to a far more promiscuous society. It really depends on what you think of that. Does a society that places more value on your ability to fuck multiple different partners "ruin" sex? Does a society that places more value on your ability to maintain a quality relationship with another person, "save" sex? I don't know. Interesting to think about though.

[–]prodigy2throw#Transracial0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

I thinks it's been very well documented that feminists are a bunch of mindless women full of walking contradictions.

[–]belletaco1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Has it?

[–]prodigy2throw#Transracial1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yes. This is straight up fact.

[–]belletaco1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Where's your source?

[–]prodigy2throw#Transracial2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

R/twoxchromosomes

[–]yGTWgtNrco0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Our natural responses don't need to be fixed by pills

So, the 40% of women who experience sexual disfunction don't want it to be fixed?

[–]despisedlove2Reality Pill Tradcon RP0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

They may be making sex more easily available.

They are ruining stable relationships (including marriages).

[–]dallasdarling0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marriages are, overall, bad for women's health. So I guess it's only men in those marriages who are suffering by not having someone to clean up after them and cook for them and take care of them like overgrown man-children, they way they did for your fathers and grandfathers.

[–]mrcs84usnFatty Fat Neck Beard0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If you're a non-Chad male, they're ruining it. The end goal is for them to maximize women's sexual freedom while constricting men's as much as possible.

[–]dallasdarling0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Feminists: women are exactly the same as men!

Nope. This is not a claim of feminism. Feminism states that sex is real and gender is a social construct.

[–]Lilia42[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

So say you. I'm friends with a feminist who also doesn't think biological sex isn't real. I cab screenshot her comments if you want proof.

[–]dallasdarling0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Then she's is a third wave lib fem who doesn't understand the theoretical framework and foundational claims of her own theory.

[–]QraQen0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It blows me away how little information these liberal scholars are able to convey in a 10+ minute conversation.

I watched this until the end and here's a summary

1) have sex that you enjoy

That's it.

There was absolutely no substance to this talk.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Give me my PhD now pls

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Lilia42[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The thing that amuses me about tattoos is that my friend with the most tattoos/piercings is just turned 30 and is still a virgin. She's a wonderful person, too.

But she's also had a pretty traumatic life so :(

[–]ozymandias271That's not how evolution works.0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

In a shocking turn of events, feminists disagree with each other.

I like Emily Nagoski. She's one of the few cis feminists who gets that you can be a feminist and not deny biological reality.

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Emily Nagoski

details

[–]ozymandias271That's not how evolution works.0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

The lady in the video in OP.

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

oh, she seems kind of on point

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter