MRAs, forever exploring new frontiers in victimology! The latest revelation: Apparently men are being intimidated into hitting on women in bars due to the mysterious, malevolent power of their femaleness.
Here’s Howsmydirktaste, putting this theory before the good folks in the Men’s Rights subreddit for some “peer review.”
[S]eduction aims to use a man’s desire against him by giving him the possibly false impression that he may have sexual relations with the seducer. By doing so he may make decisions that he might not otherwise make (buying a drink at a bar, paying for a purse, etc.)
So women are engaged in some vast conspiracy to extort drinks and purses from men they don’t want to have sex with?
I’m pretty sure that unless a woman is holding a sign that reads “I’ll have sex with you for a drink,” that you really shouldn’t assume that she’ll have sex with you for a drink.
Intimidation does the same; the prospect of physical, monetary or emotional pain subjects the subordinate into doing things they might not otherwise do. Both of these options result in the same consequence of the dominant one convincing the subordinate that it is in their best interest to do something that is not in their best interest.
So a woman sitting in a bar looking pretty is the equivalent of a mob enforcer.
Now morally: the main claim against male intimidation is that men, on average bigger and stronger, are being unjust by asserting a natural superiority. By doing so they have an unfair disadvantage.
Well, the claim is that when men act in an intimidating way towards women, they’re intimidating. Merely being larger than a woman isn’t a crime.
But sexually, don’t women have that same power? Men are genetically predisposed to look for mating opportunities in all women, and when a woman presents that opportunity, even the most iron-willed man could fall prey.
Apparently, we men are all at the mercy of our penises, and our penises are at the mercy of ladies looking sexy in our general vicinity.
Women don’t face that same situation; their requisite near-monogamy (because they can only have one child at a time, they are more selective in their sexual selections) means that male seduction does not hold the same sway.
Actually, the problem is that many traditional methods of “male seduction” actually involve real intimidation. And today there are a vast array of PUA sites out there offering updated versions of the old intimidating ways, teaching “pickup” techniques that are basically guides to date rape.
I think everyone here can identify a situation in which they or others have given undue attention or favor to a woman who seems a possible sexual partner. Doesn’t that result in the same affect as intimidation?
I’m going to step out on a limb here and say “no.”