Categories
advocacy of violence bad anatomy bad science chad thundercock creepy Dunning–Kruger effect empathy deficit entitled babies evo psych fairy tales incels men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny

“Does female pleasure matter?” incels wonder, also possibly answering the question as to why they’re incels

Fellas! If this is the look you get when you’re sexing your lady up, you might be doing it wrong

By David Futrelle

The “involuntarily” celibate fellows who’ve branded themselves incels may not be getting any sex, but that doesn’t stop them from thinking, and theorizing, about sex, much in the way someone blind from birth might theorize about what it’s like to see.

Over on the Incels.co forums, the regulars recently found themselves in a debate on the apparently controversial (amongst incels) proposition “Does Female pleasure matter?”

The fellow asking the question, an Incels.co regular with more than 400 comments to his name, feels that the only correct answer is “no.”

“I’ve been thinking, objectively the purpose for sex is to reproduce,”  Salutextm began.

Men essentially enjoy this since they need to climax for reproduction to happen in light of the fact that the nerves that make sex feel pleasurable are in the head of the Penis. So a male’s pleasure is truly essential and will happen more often than not.

Ok, so far so good. We need to reproduce to keep our species going, so evolution has evidently designed sex to be fun so we’ll do it.

But I couldn’t think of any natural reason for the female orgasm or female pleasure.

Wait, what? Putting aside the fact that women do tend to enjoy sex at least as much as men, rendering the entire debate moot, why wouldn’t it be evolutionarily important for women to enjoy sex just like men? After all, don’t they have to agree to sex for sex to occur?

Oh, wait, I think I know where he’s going here.

That is to say, women don’t need to experience any pleasure for reproduction to occur. They simply must be there and take the man’s seed.

That … only makes sense if you assume that evolution has designed men to be rapists and women to be rape victims.

Female pleasure is as of now, harder to accomplish than male due to placement of nerve endings (clitoris) and hormonal differences (testosterone)

Well, I’m no expert on hormones or nerve endings but my informal studies and, er, fieldwork, have suggested to me that female sexual pleasure isn’t some weird unattainable thing seen rarely in nature, like the snow leopard or a Trump supporter who isn’t a racist.

So for what reason do people feel like its the man’s fault for a woman not getting off when their pleasure isn’t to be prioritized to begin with? Naturally, their pleasure doesn’t even matter. Or at least I couldn’t find any reason as to why it would

And with that attitude, you’re probably never going to see female sexual pleasure in the wild.

In another thread, Salutextm cited the results of a weird and tiny study of literally only 15 college couples — which found levels of the so-called “love hormone” oxytocin decreasing in the women after kissing — as proof that women really don’t enjoy this rather common sexual activity that women, on average, definitely do enjoy, in many cases, like, a lot.

“Do women subject themselves to things they don’t want to do for some ulterior motive?” he asked, baffled.

Why else would women engage with men if they do not find most men physically sexually attractive … or barely receive any physical sexual pleasure in most acts involving their man?

Not all the commenters on Incels.co agreed with Salutextm’s hypotheses.

“All a Woman wants is to be fucked hard by Chad and then ignored,” declared IAmJAcksBrokenHeart.

A commenter called Huntedbyhate went even further, suggesting that the fact that women do feel sexual pleasure was really the heart of the problem. His proposed “solution” to this alleged problem was rather gruesome.

“I wish that all females had their clits cut off so they couldn’t experience pleasure,” he wrote. “More foids for us and fewer for Chad.”

It’s not altogether clear why he thinks the “foids” — that is, women — who’ve had their genitals forcibly mutilated would flock to the men who had actually called for this horrific practice. But that’s incel logic for you.

Despite these critics, a significant portion of the commenters seemed to agree that female pleasure doesn’t matter, or at the very least it shouldn’t.

“Their pleasure doesn’t matter,” asserted Danzai. “Foids were made to make babies, not enjoy themselves in it.”

“Why would the pleasure of a toilet matter?” added Insomniac.

Once again, the regulars on Incels.co have made it clear why the women who are refusing to have sex with them — which would be all women, everywhere, on planet earth — are making the right decision.

We Hunted the Mammoth is independent and ad-free, and relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

136 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
contrapangloss
3 years ago

Surplus:

Sleep. Finals week. Stupid heat exchanger design project. Stinking senior design project. Stinking shaft design project. No sleep, sleep is for the weak, project, Presentation, sleeeeeeep.

Sometimes the comment section gets quiet. It’s a thing that happens.

I’m in Alaska, so usually by the time I’m posting most of the commentariat is either at work or sleeping. 🙂

Cyborgette
Cyborgette
3 years ago

@Surplus

Oh, I’ve been waiting for the other shoe to drop since before Trump won the election. Growing up visibly queer and Jewish in a town packed with straight white Christians teaches you things.

But bug-out plans, no, don’t have. I have too much chosen family here, too much dependency on the medical system, no passport. But I do have money, connections, and useful skills. I’m going to stay here for now, and keep supporting those at higher risk than me.

Lainy
Lainy
3 years ago

@contrapangloss

I feel that. I’m just an undergrad right now but two research papers about to be due. Two small mini papers. 2 exams. One 10 minute presentation about my findings (I’m gonna throw up) and I have to finish putting all of my findings of projectile points into spread sheets. I hate spread sheets and if I have to look at another piece of Florence chert I’m gonna scream.

Anyone else know that the water from the Nile river is transported into the Faiyum Via the Vahr Yusef water that passes through the Lahun-Hawara Channel. And because of this it’s one of the very few in the Western Desert of Egypt to Survive the middle Holocene Drought. Because I due now and I have no idea how to bring that into my presentation in an interesting way. I can’t say about 6 of those words.

Also our Spring recital is about to come up and I have to get about 15 little girls ready to do a variation of swan lake and I might be taking on 15 more because the other dance teacher is sick. But hey I’m not stressed at all.

And then there is a funeral…..

Lainy
Lainy
3 years ago

@Cyborgette

Oh, I’ve been waiting for the other shoe to drop since before Trump won the election. Growing up visibly queer and Jewish in a town packed with straight white Christians teaches you things.

I feel that as well.

I’m not Jewish though and I am a Christian. I’m really sorry you have to live with that stress and fear. The things you’ve mentioned use to make me question my faith a lot because I use to not think God could love me if I was queer because people told me he couldn’t. I don’t believe that now but I know how that can way on you and get annoying as well. I really hope your safe and I’m glad you have a support network.

Cyborgette
Cyborgette
3 years ago

@Lainy

Thanks, and likewise. You’ve been through a lot, and your strength shows.

And kind of similar with me and religion TBH. I was an atheist for many years because I couldn’t stomach the idea of an all-powerful male god (and anything less awful felt like turning my back on reality). Reconnecting with my spirituality involved abandoning a lot of core tenets of Judaism, though I still identify very strongly with Jewish culture.

Ingmar
Ingmar
3 years ago

@Surplus to Requirements
I’m part of that sensation, I always comment too late :).
I address this comment @John, but other people’s considerations are welcome.
Ok it’s pacific incels want women dependent, Peterson pander to them with the “enforced monogamy” and the esoterism of traditional gender roles and he says “chaos is feminine”, which is debated and mocked in a funny thread on Chapo’s subreddit, btw. You say
Attempt to blockquote (never tried) 🙂

Keep in mind, just about every dude on an incel board buys the logic of Alpha Fucks/Beta Bux. The problem (for them) is that Beta Bux are no longer so required. It’s really just more Chad worship.

in case it doesn’t work Keep in mind, just about every dude on an incel board buys the logic of Alpha Fucks/Beta Bux. The problem (for them) is that Beta Bux are no longer so required. It’s really just more Chad worship
I’d assume you don’t buy in that logic as well, but if you say beta bux is no longer required but “it’s really just more Chad worship” you don’t mean that the idea that women only ride the dick carousel of top 10% Chads “Alpha fucks” if they don’t have to rely in beta bucks, don’t you?
As it would mean that you buy into that bunk just as much as them, but they are “aware” as much as you that beta bucks doesn’t work as much and it’s a problem for them.
Unless you meant to say that of course, they think they are weeded out by this implied pareto rule and severe selection.
You wrote ” If women were still dependent on men, at least these guys could be “Beta Bux” rather than shut out of the “Sexual Marketplace” altogether. ” so I mean, it’s that what they think, or do you think it’s true that they are actually weeded out of this “marketplace” and JP solution is actually the only way to address it and they should just know their place, not that it would make it right, but you know, suggesting there is more scarcity than there is, is a way to create unnecessary panic and negativity?
Do you agree they would maybe find a woman by improving themselves or, like them, that enforced monogamy, unbreakable marriges were the only thing that assured the “hard working nice guys” to get their wives?
Or just that now women are free to choose whoever they want, as long as it’s reciprocal, just like men i mean, which doesn’t mean chads, alpha fucks, carousels top 20% and the like.
If you believe this, do you think yourself as Chad, top 20% and above?
It seems like you believe in the Soyboys meme, but from what I got phitoestrogens are not normal estrogens and don’t work like that. It’s a bit like the spinach iron myth, there are lots of food with more of these phitoestrogens than soy.
You mention you were doughy, what does it have to do with soy, you used to eat it then you stop and now you’re Chad? 🙂

Crip Dyke
3 years ago

It’s also not broadly true that a nation has the right to detain asylum seekers – certainly not Germany or the USA who have signed & ratified the UN CSR and the 1967 Protocol.

The details are complex, but refugees and asylum seekers have the right to NOT be detained, though the CSR also permits that right to be abridged in “exceptional circumstances” as necessary (not as politically desirable, but as necessary) for national security and a couple other purposes.

The circumstances must be exceptional. The detention must be extremely short term unless individualized grounds are found that a specific refugee should be treated very differently from the norm.

Further, the possession and use of false travel documents is excluded from the grounds of “exceptional circumstances” that could justify detention longer than necessary to accurately identify the person (though obviously if you’re traveling with false documents it will take a bit longer to positively identify you). Illegal crossing of one or more borders is ALSO excluded from the grounds of “exceptional circumstances”.

In short, the treaty generally requires that a nation detain refugees and asylum seekers no longer than necessary to ID them, and once positively ID’d they must be released unless there is specific evidence that that specific refugee who has been positively ID is a specific threat to national security or public safety. Examples could include someone who escaped from prison and then fled. While they could have been falsely imprisoned by an unjust regime, if they had been accused of violence they might still be guilty and a receiving nation might be justified (depending on details) in detaining that single person longer.

Of course, there are nations – like the USA – who violate provisions of the treaty. Some people – like a certain person in this thread – argue that these violations mean that detention isn’t against the law. But this isn’t true at all. The existence of murderers doesn’t mean that murder is really totally legal. The existence of heroin smugglers doesn’t mean that selling heroin is really totally legal. And the existence of other nations violating the rights of refugees doesn’t mean that Trump’s behavior is really totally legal.

BTW: the treaties also ban “punishment” of refugees and asylum seekers. When Trump states that he wants to make conditions in the US so hostile to refugees that it dissuades other people from trying to come and claim asylum? That is very specifically against the law. It’s amazing how blatantly against the law that is. If congress wanted to do so, they could (and IMO they should) impeach him for that alone. That’s the kind of thing that can earn you a date at the ICC.

Ichthyic
Ichthyic
3 years ago

sez John:

I’ll tell you what, when that thin skinned orange haired piece of shit wins reelection, this will be part of why. I mean, this small corner of the Internet won’t move the needle, but Trump got elected throwing red meat to hungry dogs. Right or wrong, men aren’t feeling particularly dominant these days.

now THERE is some fucking thin-skinned projection.

you are one creepy motherfucker, John.

I know you can’t see it, past your manly manliness from manly workouts or whatever… but you have missed something somewhere that makes a real person… real.

Ichthyic
Ichthyic
3 years ago

In any case the vast majority of illegal immigrants are not by any stretch of the imagination refugees.

post hoc, ergo propter hoc

your logic is horribly, horribly flawed.

why try to convince you of anything? your conclusions are all predetermined, false or not.

pathetic.

Moggie
Moggie
3 years ago

@Crip Dyke:

That’s the kind of thing that can earn you a date at the ICC.

Probably not in America’s case, though. It’s so hostile to the ICC that it enacted the “American Service-Members’ Protection Act”, which authorises the use of “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court”. So it’s commonly referred to as the “Hague Invasion Act”.

America really doesn’t like its actions (particularly military) being subject to international law.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

I’ll take “imperialism” for $400, Alex!

1 4 5 6
%d bloggers like this: