Men are selfish pricks; women are manipulative cunts  

rm_connor696 62M
944 posts
7/11/2006 12:17 pm

Last Read:
8/29/2010 12:59 pm

Men are selfish pricks; women are manipulative cunts

Please note: The obviously provocative title expresses stereotypes. I do not endorse these stereotypes. What follows is a one thread in a critical discussion of them.

I see a lot of blog posts by women who are tired of and even enraged by inappropriate e-mails from men. The last one I saw was in I'm Not Dominos I Don't Deliver, but I doubt that even the inestimable and capitvating Miss Ann gets any more than do other women with a similary visible profile at this site. And that, apparently, is a whole shitload.

Men don't get these nearly as much. Yes, occasionally an e-mail will leave me thinking, "Huh? Did she read my profile? My blog? Can she even read at all?" But even in those cases the e-mailer has never been patently offensive. (Yeah, I'm probably jinxing myself by saying that, but I'll take my chances.) As a result, I doubt that we men can truly appreciate how much crap gets dumped on the women here, especially in larger cities. After all, it's one thing to know that it happens and a far different thing to experience it en masse day after day.

The situation leaves me sad for all involved: for the women, because they must face this dreck, and for the men, because that combination or loneliness and anger, of desire and contempt, must leave them in knots of frustration and inner conflict, trying to control their lives and failing miserably.

What I find truly odd, however, is the way this phenomenon provides a counterargument to classical economics. Here's why. The men on this site outnumber the women by something like twenty to one; women are, in a word, relatively scarce here. (No, I refuse to speak of commodities, though that's the language of economics.) Now if men are the rational, self-interested actors that classical economics says they are, the competition for women should prompt them to increasingly refine their approach, just as, say, a scarcity of oil will lead to more efficient methods of extraction. (Sheesh. Again, I apologize for the implicit metaphors.) You would thus expect to see men become all that women want them to be and more besides.

But no. There is no quid pro quo. They refuse to understand reciprocity. Instead they adopt a sour-grapes attitude: She won't let me treat her like a meat puppet, so she's a cunt, and I wouldn't cross the street to piss on her if she were on fire.

What's the source of this obstinacy? What gives rise to this plainly irrational behavior? You can't really write it off to simple stupidity. That may well be a factor, but the classical econonmics approach doesn't require much intelligence. The mechanism requires merely that the actor think, "This is what I want, but my approach isn't working; I should try something different." And usually, the dumber ones look to the brighter, more successful agents to see how they do it.

Something is getting in the way, and I'm afraid I have to finger the usual suspect: social convention. Better to lose out on what you want than to be unmanly. And we all know what that means. A man takes what he wants. He stays free of ties. Emotionally he limits himself to pride, arrogance, lust, and anger. Don't worry about getting inside a woman's head and heart; that's sissy stuff. Just get inside her pussy. But even then, being a man--avoiding, that is, the effeminacy of respect and tender emotion--is more important than having sex. And so these e-mails. And so these bitter but arrogant replies dripping with contempt yet saturated with thwarted desire. And so, I believe, .

I'm stressing the rational bit. The moral issue is something else again. But here I'm assuming that these men don't have much by the way of morality--that is, respect for others, another unmanly trait. What they clearly have, though, is desire, the motor in classical economics. So an even mariginally objective consideration should, according to the classical theory, lead to behavioral changes where the object of desire is scare or otherwise difficult to obtain. I conclude, therefore, that this is one more place where economics cannot explain what might otherwise seem to be a straightforward case of supply and demand. Of course, the evil here goes far beyond any threat to a theoretical model of economic life. As the bumper sticker says, mean people suck--and so do thoughtlessly selfish ones.

These freakin stereotypes. We think we've surpassed them, but they remain as pervasive as ever. Men approach sex as a simple pleasure guaranteed them in virtue of their status as male. Women use sex to trap a provider and, once they have done so, will start to feminize their men straightaway. I had hoped that this site would be largely free from all that. In blogland I think it is--at least there are many, many boggers, both men and women, who seem quite free of these poisonous stereotypes. Yet they persist in the larger site.

And it breaks my heart.

florallei 100F

7/11/2006 2:12 pm


An exceptional posts...I feel offended when a man emails me what he will do to me in morbid detail...just because it is a sex site...diplomacy and tact must still be taken unless both are familiar with one another and consenting to correspond in such a manner.
On the other hand and thankfully for the most part there have been countless emails where the men are very respectful. Which of the emails do you think I personally responded rather than ignored or sent a quick reply?

rm_connor696 replies on 7/12/2006 5:25 am:
"Morbid detail"--sounds like the right adjective. It shouldn't be a matter of dead things, of the inert, of physics.

Once, at the drunken end of a drunken night, I found myself in an Indian restaurant with some recent acquaintances who turned out to be a bit stupid and a bit racist. Worse, they somehow couldn't keep their racism to themselves. I got out as quickly as I could, apologized for the behavior of the others, and left a huge tip. What more could I have done? And it's pretty much the same here. I'm sorry that so many of my fellow penis bearers are such, um, dicks. I'm grateful that women don't reject us all out of hand!

MissAnnThrope 57F
11488 posts
7/12/2006 12:14 pm

OK, let's separate the men, there are very few men here, from the guys. Guys are in abundance. They haven't outgrown their frat days and still think they're teenagers. They suffer Peter Pan syndrome in a big way and they are the majority here.

So what causes guys to act that way? Because of how they found this site and what was promised to them in the ads. Most of us old timers either joined when it separated from Friendfinder and became it's own site. Others did a search for free personals. But where do the new crew come from? They're surfing porn and an ad pops up, with a porn model in the ad. The ad says get laid tonight, with no strings, within hours of posting your profile. By hot chicks, no matter how much you make Wilfred Brimley look sexy and Pig-Pen from "Peanuts" look sanitary.

They sign up. Their profile is approved. Many will hit the chat rooms and start with "35/m/NYC wife out of town, need dick sucked now." Or, "I'm horny. Who's close and wants to come over?" "Hey, what do you mean, you don't want to fuck me? If you don't want to fuck, what are you doing here? Go to e Harmony!" In other words, they are promised free call girls by the ads and they expect free call girls.

This puts us ladies in a tight spot. If we were to service everyone who asked, we'd never be off our backs and we'd have bed sores. The men come in, cock first and think they get to pick a woman out of a catalogue. They get pissed off when the real women here don't look like porn sluts. We hear how old we are, how fat we are, how ugly we are, etc. We are abused by men when we say no.

I decided to do a little social experiment the other week and it felt damned good. Some asshole in the Philly room would NOT let one of the women alone. For one, she lived a good 150 miles away from him. He was furious she didn't want to drive from Upstate NY to bumfuck PA to service him at 2 AM. So I started in on him. How he should get in his car and come service me. "But you're old and fat." "So? If women aren't allowed to have types, as you've announced, you're not allowed to have a type either. Now remember, my orgasm is yours, so once you're done servicing me, you are dismissed." Needless to say, he was furious that an old, fat broad would talk to him that way.

The ads cater to the male porn fantasy. Women who don't like facials or anal sex are ridiculed in chat here anymore. Hell, if semen was so good for your skin, it would be in every damned mistering cream on the market. But it's not! It's drying and who the hell wants some guy shooting up her nose or in her eyes? And ever try to get that out of your hair? It turns to glue as soon as the shampoo hits it!

But what is this site really? There are over a dozen web portals that lead right here. AdultFriendFinder says find sex and swinging partners. says passionate personals for sexy singles. Urban Cougars says older women for younger men. HotMatch says make friends and meet lovers and sex partners. LesbianLoveAtFirstClick says meet the woman of your dreams. And yes, even you as a man can use your handle and password and sign in through LesbianLoveAtFirstClick. Try it.

This site promises everything from true love to anonymous sex through the various portals. But the assholes all come in through ads in porn sites and think we're all free hookers working for the site. I think membership would be a hell of a lot more expensive if that was the case. And until they start paying me to fuck men I find grotesque, I shall stick to what few morals and principles I have.

Sorry to leave you a novel. But you know how I get.

rm_connor696 replies on 7/12/2006 5:32 pm:
No worries about lomg responses; as you may have noticed, I myself can get a bit long-winded.

You sure got it right about the advertising. It reminds me of the ads for 900 numbers that spring up on TV around midnight. You know, "Girls are ready for some hot talk NOW." Not the kind of message that will attract respectful or even thoughtful e-mailers.

I have to admit, though, that I joined the site under the AdultFriendFinder rubric. A few weeks before I re-upped, I tried two "straight" dating services, e-harmony and match. E-harmony had me take a "personality test": when I finished, they declined to sign me up, saying that my responses fell outside their parameters and they couldn't make accurate predictions. I took that as a compliment! Match had no such mechanism, but all the people there were so . . . straight. And I mean not so much sexually as socially and culturally. It was either NASCAR or La Scalla, fishing or antiquing. So I came back here, because it has more interesting people by far--you, for example. And then, too, I really don't want to get into a relationship, develop mutual feelings, and then find out that my lover is creeped out by my sexuality. That just sucks. So at least here I can get that out of the way right up front. I just wish the site had a few nonsexual categories for its matching function (education, maybe, or political orientation). How difficult would that be?

I guess what I'm saying is that there is probably enough blame to go around. The marketing, sure--but also stupid gender stereotypes and stupidity in general (not to mention a questionabe grasp of basic respect for others). Anyway, I'm really glad that you and so many other fundamentally cool bloggers continue to hang hear despite all the flak.

rm_sj365 57F
2414 posts
7/12/2006 11:16 pm


bad news just gets more ink.
bunnies & kittens, & happily ever after just dont sell as well.

i choose to believe there are far fewer cunts & pricks than genuine & nice people...

of course the rose coloured glasses help.

rm_connor696 replies on 7/14/2006 7:00 am:
The glasses and a bottle of good Bordeau . . .

free2chose2 67F

7/13/2006 3:17 am

Your post and MissAnn's response are thought provoking. This however isn't the "real world" where women do outnumber men, and one must give pause to the fact that the men are searching in both "realms".

Don't worry, be Happy

rm_connor696 replies on 7/14/2006 7:01 am:
Yeah, maybe more men are too embarassed to be such jerk in the "real world" (more, but unfortunately not all)

Become a member to create a blog