Dating coach banned from several countries after internet feminist outrage over misogynist vid

[parocks]

I'm quite certain that isn't true.

Overstated a bit, but it's still true. The women will have more costs.

What we're talking about is something unchangeable - women get pregnant, have babies, men do not.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Seriously? 12 pages of this shit?

Welcome to the wild, wooly land of RPFs.

 

[parocks]

https://www.facebook.com/amandapalmer/posts/10152619259723375

Here's Amanda Palmer on facebook about this.

 

[Antischism]

I wasn't arguing any sort of commodity model whatever that is.

Women get pregnant. Men don't.

This basic fact that can't be wished away or ignored has huge consequences.

Maybe you don't know what the word "pregnant" means. Or what a "baby" is?

And that women get "pregnant" and have "babies".

And that men don't.

This is the baseline here, everything follows from that.

And 1000s of people can write 1000s of words, to which you can tack on "because women have babies and men don't"

The specifics of culture can change, and people can pretend that those specifics really matter, but the bottom line
is pregnancy and babies - women have that, men no.

Sex has consequences for women, it does not for men.

That's where "gatekeeper" comes from.

"Hey, let's have sex. It's fun for both of us."
"Yes, it's fun for both of us - but I'm the one who gets pregnant, and you're not. It has consequences for me, and not for you."
"You're right. Let's have sex. It's fun for both of us."

This is so extraordinarily simple that it does require more than that.

Discussions of alphas and betas and PUAs and studies and questionaires - it's all something that might be interesting (yeah it is)
but it's all overlaid on the basic, impossible to change fact

Women get pregnant and have babies - a huge burden and responsibility which every woman knows - and men don't.

Whoawhoawhoa, first of all, can you tell me what you define "gatekeeper" to be? It's such a loaded term and I've read various interpretations of it for starters. For the sake of clarity, I want to understand what would make a woman the "gatekeeper" of sex, in your view. You're suggesting that women fear the repercussions of pregnancy, men have no responsibility/concern (child support, moral dilemma?), and that this is what, overwhelmingly, keeps women from engaging in casual sex (even though they do engage as often as men). You're stating that it's a biological issue primarily, solely or overwhelmingly, that causes women to be "pickier" or more likely to turn down sex, and not the myriad of social issues they face. Is that correct?

 

[dannno]

Thanks everybody who has participated in this thread and Julien Blanc.

 

[pessimist]

Thanks everybody who has participated in this thread and Julien Blanc.

*virtual fist bump*

so was she hawt?

 

[dannno]

*virtual fist bump*

so was she hawt?

Pretty hot ya, also very young and I'm laying the groundwork for a 3some as she is into chicks

Major score.

 

[parocks]

Whoawhoawhoa, first of all, can you tell me what you define "gatekeeper" to be? It's such a loaded term and I've read various interpretations of it for starters. For the sake of clarity, I want to understand what would make a woman the "gatekeeper" of sex, in your view. You're suggesting that women fear the repercussions of pregnancy, men have no responsibility/concern (child support, moral dilemma?), and that this is what, overwhelmingly, keeps women from engaging in casual sex (even though they do engage as often as men). You're stating that it's a biological issue primarily, solely or overwhelmingly, that causes women to be "pickier" or more likely to turn down sex, and not the myriad of social issues they face. Is that correct?

Yeah, maybe this whole argument is based on a slightly different reading of the word gatekeeper.

Women and men of course engage in the same amount of casual sex. There's much less casual sex than men would want. Women say "no" to sex with men more than men say "no" to sex with women. That's what I guess I mean by "gatekeeper" - the sayer of no, the not haver of the sex.

At the bottom of it - it's the women get preganant, men don't - that's why the women are the gatekeepers, the not havers of the sex. You're not going to find a culture where men get pregnant, only cultures where women get pregnant. So, in all cultures, always and forever, women not men get pregnant.

It's biological determinism I guess similar to Marx's determinism. In Marx, it's base determines superstructure. With this it's biology determines gatekeepers or whatnot.
I don't have those hundreds of thousands of words to go from "men don't get pregnant" to things like "fear the repercussions" and "child support". There are a lot of things between "men don't get pregnant" and "fear the repercussions" and "child support". I'm just saying "men don't get pregnant" - anywhere, ever - is what causes the "women are gatekeepers" phenominon.

But, again, I don't have the 100s of thousands of words. Men don't get pregnant, women do - which causes this, which causes that, which causes that. I just don't have those thousands of words.

 

[parocks]

Welcome to the wild, wooly land of RPFs.

I'd like to add, too, that we're talking 12 pages, 12 really really long pages - most message boards do not have something like 30 or whatever it is posts on a page. 12 on rpf is like 36 or some higher number somewhere else.