On body language and verbal language

Dr. Warren Farrell is accused of rape apology not least because he thinks that the interplay between verbal language and body language is complex and that, if any rule is possible at all, body language tends to be more important.

Prominent feminists repudiate that notion altogether (“No means No, no exceptions”), others are more or less confused.

Since I think that a slightly oversimplifying picture can help illustrate (ha) a point, I cobbled together this:


Ask yourself: would you say the girl on the left is really saying yes or no? She is in fact saying both. Which one should the boy believe and act on?

If your answer is “No”, you are not from this world.

If your answer is “Yes”, you just agreed that the topic is far more complicated than some want us to believe.

Especially since the behaviour in the flirt phase (or most any phase for that matter) is located in the white “don’t express anything” area in the middle. Every approving or disproving “statement” will likely be very subtle and prone to be misunderstood.


Edit: permutationofninjas further elaborates:

What it’s actually about is avoiding people being taught to listen to body language rather than speech in the first place. What this requires is people to generally synchronize their actions with their body language, most of the time.

When we stop people from being taught to privilege body language over speech through years of dealing with people who don’t say what they mean, the occasional bit of confusion between the two won’t matter because people will be used to listening to what people say in the first place. The issue isn’t necessarily “body language and speech being out of sync”, but rather “people getting used to other people purposely saying things different to what they mean.”

This is flying in the face of the female’s concept of “plausible deniability” that is – as far as I can make out – so deeply rooted, that for the next umpteen generations it does not matter if it is actually rooted in biology or sociology.

In other words: There are soooo many reasons underlying the “I mean yes, or probably I am as yet only open to be convinced, but will never ever ever say so.” attitude that at least 90% of women alive today will never be taught to bring verbal and subliminal messages in line.

In yet other words: I have the highest respect for the humans** at permutationofninjas, but having an ideology (in their case probably along the line “Truth and Honesty are more important than most anything”) blinds you.

It happens to the best of us.

*) xkcd art included under fair-use-rule.

**) Their admins don’t tire emphasizing that they are as mixed a bunch of het-gay-cis-noncis people that I know of no other fitting collective term


Satire or real? “feminismrising” leaves me speechless

Here’s a tumblr that has me stumped.

The content is of such cliché-like feminist stupidity without a single spark of individual thought or even a hint of acknowledgment of the real world, that I have a real hard time to accept the idea that someone might write this for real.

The writing style is reasonably adult, it is not as grammatically and orthographically challenged as you would expect from a mental subatomic particle.

The tone is consistent and the angles are so varied that I judge it to be a brilliant satire on feminist idiocy.

I hope.

A few gems off the first few pages:

Q: If a woman was beating me up, what would I be allowed to do in retaliation without abusing my male privilege?

A: That’s a hypothetical question to such a degree that it doesn’t need answering; it’s men who beat women up, not the other way around.

If you’re being beaten up by a woman seemingly unprovoked, albeit unlikely the case, then in a sense you’re lucky as you’re gaining experience that’s making you better suited to empathize with women as it’s something that afflicts mostly women.

Life is so simple in black and white.

Q: My boyfriend recently asked me if we could have sex. I tried to explain to him that asking me to have sex with him counts as sexual assault, but he couldn’t understand it that piv sex is ONLY okay if I am the one who asks for it. Can you help me try to explain why what he’s doing when he asks for sex is misogynistic?

A: It seems he doesn’t understand sexual harassment to such a degree for all intents and purposes is basically sexual assault.

This is normal; men in general don’t understand even the most basic tactful ways to approach women.

A rule of thumb is that if you can see him, hear him and feel him it’s most definitely sexual assault. Now does that mean that just because you can’t feel him it isn’t sexual assault? No. That’s just something rape culture says. Going by that line of reasoning it wouldn’t be sexual assault if you simply couldn’t feel him as you’d been administered some sort of anesthesia.

So through absurdity reduction we rule out that it’s necessary to feel him. If you can hear him, see him and you feel sexually assaulted then you have been sexually assaulted.

He’s being misogynistic for saying he doesn’t understand. Declarations of boundary are to be followed, not necessarily understood. What he’s saying by replying that he doesn’t understand is that he needs to understand why he shouldn’t violate your boundaries and that’s deeply misogynistic; he wouldn’t need that justification from another man.

I’d go even a step further: to demand that you are able to see him would mean that it would not be sexual assault, if he blindfolded you. In the same vain: If he didn’t say anything or held his hands over your ears, you wouldn’t hear anything, but it would still be sexual assault.

Thereby we can conclude: even if you neither see, hear nor feel him it is still sexual assault when you feel like it.

Q: If a married woman wants to conceive a child by a man who is not her husband, under feminism, is he, the man who is not her husband, under any obligation to impregnate her? Or is he free to choose whether or not he engages in intercourse with her?

A: He’s of course free to exercise what little control he has over himself as she offers herself to him or, as I say, she temporarily tolerates his intimate presence. Though this is in practice basically a hypothetical situation.

Amazing. I thought refusing her sexuality would be an awful case of harassment. Perhaps she relented because of its improbability…

Q: Sometimes when I hit my boyfriend, he hits me back. I’ve tried telling him to to be abusive and he claims he’s ‘defending himself’. What should I do?

A: He’s a man. Call the police immediately, press charges and file a restraining order. Really the only reason to wait a little is if you’re trying to get pregnant. What you’re doing is called empowering. What he’s doing is called domestic violence.

Domestic violence = power + violence

When he does it both elements, power and violence, are present. When you do it neither are really there. You don’t have power in the patriarchy and you can’t really be said to be doing any violence as you’re a member of the oppressed class. Us feminists call it kinetic frustration transfer and it’s not violence. It’s just not the same.

My heart goes out to you sweetheart.

This is the post where my interpretation started to lean towards “satire”.
‘kinetic frustration transfer’ indeed.
I’ll have to remember that 🙂

This is gold.

Arguments and examples against a police state

Whenever anyone argues for more controls and more laws and that state/police should take on responsibilities that are originally rested in the hands of the individual, they should be reminded of cases like this.

How the fruits of feminism ruin lives…

Why “stud shaming” is not the male equivalent of “slut shaming”

I recently thought aloud about the assumed (by feminists) double standard regarding “slut shaming”, reflecting about the lack of double standard due to the difference between “easily obtained sex” (for girls) and “friggin’ difficult to attain sex” (for men).

Today it occurred to me that “easy sex” is the crux of the matter. Are men shamed for having the sex that they can easily get?

You bet they are.
(The links are more or less random off google’s first two result-pages)

So, next time a woman complains about slut shaming ask her how she feels about men visiting prostitutes.

Want to bet what the answer will be?


It’s not. It’s just her double standard.

And if you need help in arguing the courtesan’s perspective I wholeheartedly recommend this blog.

Can evil be funny?

Yes, it can.

Speaking about a very fat person:

What’s the point of being so mean to someone who is probably nice to puppies when she isn’t eating them?

off this post

Of the Importance of being bell-curved

I am not a statistics expert. I have a layman’s understanding what a Normal Distribution is an of the meanings of “mean” and “standard deviation”.

Even if you do not understand the finer statistical details, a general knowledge of the curve is quite helpful in any gender related discussion.

A quote by Larry Summers:

It does appear that on many many different human attributes – height, weight, propensity for criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability – there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in means – which can be debated – there is a difference in the standard deviation, and variability of a male and a female population

To put this in graphical terms*:

Men are on aveerage taller than woman, the tallest man is taller than the tallest woman, the smallest man is hardly any taller than the smallest woman.
This looks like so:

The mathematical abilities are perhaps distributed like so:

Physical strength this way:

The important point about this is: Not every man is stronger than any women. They are only on average.

Isn’t this obvious? Why do I write a post about some yadayada-we-all-know-that stuff?

Because I got into a discussion over here about the tale of a woman complaining that a man present at the site of a car accident did not pull a person out of the burning car.
I would claim that the ability to pull a person from a burning car is distributed like this:

I would even concur with this graph:

YOHAMI on the other hand seems to claim that this is a more adequate representation:

The man whom the woman had to berate to pull the guy out of the car was the driver and thus in complete shock, only able to mumble “He won’t get out, he won’t get out.”

The driver is an athlete. So, while his ability to drag a person out of a car under normal circumstances would be about where the green dotted line is, under shock it gets shifted probably to where the red dotted line is.


That of course is a guess, but I think it is valid.

What does that mean? If the woman was of average built she might well have been more able to do the job than the mentally incapacitated man.
The gist of the story to me is that it never even entered her mind that she might be called upon to physically help a fellow man.
I am not sure what the gist is to yohami, since I don’t understand most of his answer.

I am not at war with anyone. I am always willing to let the most capable do the job, not if it is a he or a she. I don’t assume capability according to possession of a penis.


*As you can see there are no absolute numbers on the axes. That is because I want to illustrate a concept, not make definite numerical statements. So please don’t tell me that one of the curves should be 5 pixels more to the left…

On slut shaming

There have been a few articles recently that looked into the alleged double standard of slut shaming vs stud admiration.
The gist of the argument against the notion of a double standard is that it is a lot harder, more of an achievement for a man to have sex with several women than it is for a girl to have sex with plenty of men.

I find this pretty obvious. I don’t think that men enjoy sex more than women. But I do think that their urge to have sex is greater. They are more willing than women to overcome obstacles*, invest resources**, risk dangers*** and make compromises**** to get some sex.

* Google “approach anxiety” for a simple but very common example of “obstacle”.
** Do you have another explanation why there are zillions of female prostitutes and only a few handful of male?
*** So many… How about: “Quick, hide in the closet or my husband will kill you”?
**** What Heartiste in his charming way calls “to dump a fuck” or what Donlak argues in his post on the topic.

Donlak argues simply with supply and demand, regarding the number of theoretically available partners.

I think that is only half the picture.

Consider this sentence: “I only want to have sex with someone I love”.

Did you have a gender in mind?

Female, right?

There are of course also some men who think like that. If I read him correctly, M3 tends in that direction. Most MGTOW probably are, with the twist that they no longer find any woman to be lovable.
But for women this is quite common. I’d wager that most of them find sex without a relationship hardly acceptable, while most men are more along the lines of “Yes, I’d love a relationship, but I’d take sex anytime, even without it.”

There is one missing piece in what I want to point out that I am least certain of, although I find it plausible enough: Women understand – at least subconsciously – that sex is an important strategical item in their efforts to bind a man in a relationship.
My uncertainty comes from the fact that I have met many girls and women in my life who felt entitled to great boyfriends and showed no endeavour to be sexy. That might be explained by feminist brainwashing but it may also be that the point itself is wrong.

But lets assume for the moment that it is so:

  • Men want sex urgently
  • Men are willing to seriously invest to get it
  • It is not easy for the average man to get sex
  • Women like sex but seriously prefer it inside a relationship
  • It is comparatively easy for women to get sex outside of relationships
  • Women understand that offering (regular) sex is an enticement to men to enter a relationship
  • At this point we have a simple market situation that is common to the explanation of most posts regarding slut shaming: If sluts give away sex for free, the enticement for men to enter relationships to get it sinks.

    The plausibility of this is underlined by the observation that slut shaming is mostly done by women. (There are studies into this)
    Men are less likely to scorn someone who gives what they like.

    The entire situation gets slightly more complicated though when you consider who is sleeping with who.

    Are all men getting the free sex? No, of course not. Only the most attractive men are the benefactors. Any number must be a wild guess but I’d reckon that perhaps 20% of men constitute the slut-target-group.
    If you had a fling, just for the physical lark, who would you do it with: the Maths-teacher or the Football-coach?

    Right. No discussion there.

    So: Women shame sluts. Men don’t (or do so far less). Women don’t shame studs. Men don’t either.

    Why don’t men look down on sluts?
    It is obvious why the 20% don’t: they directly benefit from their behavior.
    But what about the 80%? Shouldn’t the be pissed off? After all, they get it rubbed into their faces continuously that they are no appropriate partners for sex.

    I am quite sure that part of them is. But as long as blue pill magic gives them hope of the kind “Someone as loose as that might give me a chance if I convince her that I am worth it.”
    And you don’t kill a horse that you have hopes for.

    And why are studs not shamed by women the way that sluts are? What’s the psychology there?
    I don’t know, but I can guess.
    Most importantly: Those men are the attractive ones. There is a lot written about the effects of preselection.
    It is not easy to put shaming language on someone who gives you the tingles.

    Add to this the common belief of women, sold in a multitude of books and films, that the right woman will tame the stud. So the rationalisation is something like: “Yes, he is showing deplorable behavior, but wait when understands that I am the one, he will be different.”
    And if the woman in question does not believe that the stud in question would be a good mate, she looses nothing. There is no need to diminish him. On the contrary, let him get other women out of the market for the really good men.

    And why don’t men of the 80% group shame studs?
    If 20% of men didn’t sleep with 80% of women, surely there would be more sex for everyone, wouldn’t there?
    The usual explanation is ‘respect’ but that is far too noble for my taste to be the single reason.
    I consider a mixture of reasons:

    • The hope to get a woman as soon as she understands that a stud is not a good partner for her (also known as blue pill idiocy)
    • The fact that the 20% men are quite probably physically stronger and thus present a real danger if shamed
    • My impression that ‘shaming’ is a social tactic primarily employed by women. Men jsut aren’t as into it.
    • Respect, after all. Most men are able in all their envy to realize, that here is someone who is able to accomplish something they are not.
    • And, if you are into that, the possibly natural submissiveness of the Beta in front of an Alpha-male. At least in that one respect the stud is the 80percenter’s superiour.
    • Another kind of hope, spawned by the studs who do not look like Brad Pitt: “It can be done!”

    But the more I think about it the more I find that there is no double standard for a different reason: Both sluts and studs create ambivalent reactions.

    Stud about slut: “I like sex with her but I would never commit to her”
    Trad.woman abobut slut: “I respect that she is living the feminist dream, but I hate that slut”
    80%er about slut: “She is sooo unfair not to give sex to the deserving man”

    Slut about stud: “mmmh, hot, good for sex, but that’s it”
    Trad.woman about stud: “Deplorable, but what would I give to be the one.” or “Douchebag, but at least I don’t have to see that nerd behind him.”
    80%er about stud: “I would like to be like him. No, I wouldn’t. Yes, I would. No, I wouldn’t. Arrgh I don’t know what to believe anymore…”

    No one really likes them, at least not for their actions being discussed here. The dislike just takes different forms.

    About men in prison and why there aren’t as many women

    Basically I am posting this link so I know where to find it again…

    They really do have a catapult where I only start toying with a slingshot. Amazing Site.

    Best post about the nonexistence of the pay gap so far

    Concise, well argued, and lots of links/citations.

    Well worth anyone’s time.


    Can they do nothing right?

    This post is not to be taken entirely seriously. Im am not “just joking” either. “Thinking aloud” more hits the mark.

    Did you know that roughly three times more males commit suicide than females? Did you also know that roughly three times more females commit suicide attempts than males?

    I can’t believe the maths.

    Assuming every male attempt is ‘successful’ (meaning: the bloke is actually dead afterwards) that would indicate that only one in nine female attempts results in the assumedly intended outcome.

    That would make females far more incompetent than even the most misogynistic people dare to claim.

    Unless there is another explanation.

    My recommendation if you should ever be in the position that someone threatens you to take her life: take her word for it. Call in the medics, or the police if you don’t have the number.
    Making the threat or an half-arsed attempt is – even for all the possibly true desperation behind it – also an act of aggression and selfishness and deserves to be treated as such.
    Take the threat seriously by not handling it yourself. You can’t. It takes special knowledge and experience to help a suicidal person.