Register Now!

Media

  • scannerscanner
  • scannerscreengrab
  • modern materialistthe modern
    materialist
  • video61 frames
    per second
  • videothe remote
    island
  • date machinedate
    machine

Photo

  • paper airplane crushpaper
    airplane crush
  • autumn blogautumn
  • brandonlandbrandonland
  • chasechase
  • rose & oliverose & olive
Scanner
Your daily cup of WTF?
ScreenGrab
The Hooksexup Film Blog
Autumn
A fashionable L.A. photo editor exploring all manner of hyper-sexual girls down south.
The Modern Materialist
Almost everything you want.
Paper Airplane Crush
A San Francisco photographer on the eternal search for the girls of summer.
Rose & Olive
Houston neighbors pull back the curtains and expose each other's lives.
chase
The creator of Supercult.com poses his pretty posse.
The Remote Island
Hooksexup's TV blog.
Brandonland
A California boy capturing beach parties, sunsets and plenty of skin.
61 Frames Per Second
Smarter gaming.
Date Machine
Putting your baggage to good use.

Date Machine

Supaho, Inc.

Posted by fishnetsandlight

My soapbox moment...
There is a subset of men out there who are angry about their sexual oppression. And by "oppression," I mean "total inability to get laid and/or connect meaningfully with a member of the opposite sex."

A favorite topic of discussion among such men is "All women are whores!" This statement is, of course, patently untrue: all women do not receive financial compensation for their time and access to their genitals. I know plenty of ladies who pay for dinner/their children's expenses/etc because they choose to fuck the unemployed, the underemployed, or the cheap.

Actual whores-- and by "whores," they tend to mean all sex workers in general -- are seen as even more infuriating blows to their egos. Here are women who might actually agree to help them act out their sexual fantasies, but the bitch will have the Hooksexup to charge. Who would've thought? A sex worker who requires money? Why, she should be happy to be paid in sex!

The idea that a sex worker gets paid for an adult interaction enrages them. They get everything, those whores. Yet, whores who don't charge-- ho's, I suppose -- are equally as disgusting to them.

It never seems to occur to them that part of the problem, outside of their own personal misogyny, is the way that society looks at female sexuality. Do you know why there are whores? Because sex still comes at a cost for women. Y'know why it costs women? Because jealous douchebag dudes will call you a ho if you fuck whoever you want, whenever you want. Or if you have the temerity to talk about your sexual desires. (As if you were.... a person!)

Guess what, moron? If you tell women that sex is bad, and that enjoying it makes you a bad person, it becomes a lot harder to get them to fuck you.

So every time you call someone a ho; every time you complain about whores; every time you judge a woman for what she's wearing or not wearing, you are helping to build an empire. You are driving up the cost of sex by the hour.

My lovely rates, set by you. My life, sponsored by you.
I'll be thanking you for the next two weeks, while I sip margaritas on the beach.


+ DIGG + DEL.ICIO.US + REDDIT

Comments

zeitgeisty said:

yes, but are you a supa dupa ho?

December 9, 2008 1:46 PM

loobetchka said:

So sayeth the ho..

December 9, 2008 2:54 PM

extraneux said:

Maybe women should try reaching for their purses more often after dinner.

I have no problem with honest sex-work; trading value for value. I do have a problem with a date, which is ostensibly mutually beneficial, ending in one party paying merely because he has a penis.

December 9, 2008 3:10 PM

fishnetsandlight said:

extraneux:

I think that forcing women to pay for dates would be an attempt to treat a disease simply by getting rid of one of its symptoms. Sexism won't die because you go dutch.

Most women today don't look to men for financial support. They generally have an education, access to birth control, and a job. The tradition of men paying a lady's way is held over because women are still not socially allowed to fuck around without being branded a slut. A man has to prove he's worth upping her "number" for, and/or that he's not going to just run off.

As long as women aren't sexually free, men are going to be frenzied about the comparatively low supply of willing partners at any given moment.

If you removed money as the barometer, there would have to be something else to take its place. And we'd be right back to men complaining about how women want them to do work/give something valuable up while dating.

December 9, 2008 4:23 PM

dripnote said:

Well, I think there are still whores because there are women (and gigalo men) who realize that they can capitalize upon a person's desire to have meaningless, discardable sex.

But I also think that whores who don't get paid monitarily are probably just communists.

Viva la Revolucion!

December 9, 2008 4:37 PM

Toluca_86 said:

extraneux,

For me it's usually the opposite.  I don't make money, but when I'm not totally broke I always want to go dutch.  Yet I have had guys fight me to be the one to get to pay for everything.

Presumably, they're just more comfortable with that role or something...

Of course, I think there are also some guys (hopefully not too many) who WANT to pay because they're expecting that if they do you'll want to pay them back in other ways.

December 9, 2008 9:29 PM

Toluca_86 said:

I meant to say "I don't make much money" FYI

December 9, 2008 9:41 PM

Leon said:

I think it's jealousy. Women *do* get to fuck whomever they want, while (most) guys don't. Women reject, men are rejected, and the women who take what they want have it far better than any guy.

December 9, 2008 10:50 PM

Toluca_86 said:

"Women *do* get to fuck whomever they want"

That's a myth if I ever heard one.  There's a reason that belief comes mostly from men, especially those who aren't at the top of the food chain.  

Plenty of men know it's a myth because they reject women, and most women know it's a myth, well, because we get rejected sometimes.

December 9, 2008 11:33 PM

extraneux said:

I wrote a well worded, pithy response, but it wasn't published...

December 10, 2008 12:09 AM

Leon said:

Ah, so it only seems like men get rejected more often than men because I'm a loser. Er, I mean, uh, "not at the top of the food chain." Thanks for clearing that up.

December 10, 2008 1:41 AM

Leon said:

Can I change that to, "men get rejected more often than *women*"?

December 10, 2008 2:24 AM

LydiaSarah said:

"That's a myth if I ever heard one.  There's a reason that belief comes mostly from men, especially those who aren't at the top of the food chain.  

Plenty of men know it's a myth because they reject women, and most women know it's a myth, well, because we get rejected sometimes."

Ay-men, Toluca! Yes, it is the shocking truth. Women are also subject to the risks and disappointments inherent in romantic and sexual endeavours because that's, you know, human experience. Hope that won't fry anybody's brain too much.

December 10, 2008 5:52 AM

airheadgenius said:

If a woman is even barely decent looking, she can go out and get laid if she chooses to. A barely decent looking man does not have the same ability. That's the bit that pisses men off.

In relationships, as opposed to hook ups, I"d say the risk of rejection is spread pretty evenly, albeit possibly for different reasons.

December 10, 2008 7:02 AM

dripnote said:

I think airhead cleared that one up nicely. Unfortunately, she left a little bit off. Barely decent men CAN go out and get laid, but not if they're unwilling to put some training into being a manipulative person. Those of us who HAVE put said training in (even if we have chosen to set aside some of the darker knowledge we have acquired) find it a great deal easier.

December 10, 2008 9:47 AM

extraneux said:

Fishnets,

I haven't noticed either problem: women being branded "sluts" for their sexual experience or men complaining of a lack of "willing partners." I live in NYC where the ratio of men to women is in my favor (I am a man) and attitudes are fairly progressive yet, men still pay for dates. I only occasionally pay for dates, but I'm also a poor graduate student so girls that date me know upfront that I won't be a free meal-ticket.

There is also a contradiction in your argument when you say that men pay because women need to see that the man is serious, "worth upping her number" and not going to run-off. This implies that men are doing the ultimate rejecting which contradicts your earlier statement that men complain about a lack of willing partners. One can not simultaneously have a dearth of willing partners and reject willing partners.

Toluca, Unfortunately the culture has deemed a male-female interaction a date only when the man pays. This is, however, not universal.

Leon, I've rejected more than I've been rejected so there is at least one data point which contradicts you!

December 10, 2008 9:51 AM

Toluca_86 said:

"If a woman is even barely decent looking, she can go out and get laid if she chooses to."

Sure.  Myself, a somewhat above-average looking woman according to most people, can go out and get laid.  But not by /anyone/, which was a key part of the OP's complaint.

December 10, 2008 12:49 PM

Toluca_86 said:

Actually I'm betting the vast majority of men could get laid (other than by sex workers) if they wanted to as well.  It's all about standards and preferences.  I think media creates this false expectation in a lot of men that they should be able to get babes.  THe standard for mainstream beauty in women has become so narrow, I think that causes a lot of problems...

December 10, 2008 3:01 PM

LydiaSarah said:

Toluca--I agree.

Extraneux--I don't know where you're getting the idea that it's only accepted as a date if the man pays. I know there are some people, male and female, who still feel quite strongly about that and I've even dated a couple but my impression has always been that that notion is seen as quaint at best and certainly not the unquestioned norm. Certainly in New York, at least. Also, where are you hanging out that you've never noticed a stigma attached to women who are unabashedly sexual? Even I haven't always escaped that one, and I wouldn't even say I'm particularly experienced for my age--about average. I'm just not particularly shy or coy about my sexuality. And I live in Boston, also a comparatively progressive-minded major city. Trust me, these attitudes are alive and well.

Fishnets--Well, I personally like your argument. Very clever, and some good points. This society definitely sends women really mixed messages about how we're supposed to feel about sex. Don't even get me started.

December 10, 2008 7:19 PM

ART said:

The fact that this girl is speaking about relationships and sex as a sort of advice column is comical. It represents what is truly wrong with everything, (including her argument, which has some merit) everyone is taught or pushed to act as they do by someone else. If you would like to solve the problem then you have to start at the source. Maybe it is unfair to judge her as well, but then again she seems to have no problem judging the rest of the world. Take it from me, (personal experience) this girl will fuck, anyone over for a dollar. If anyone takes anything this person says to heart then I feel sorry for you. The funny thing is, she will read these comments feel bad for herself, ("why is everyone so mean to me?") stress herself out, cry, drink, maybe even break out, (she knows what this means). Mostly because she still feels sorry for her self and her "struggles". This person is not unique in any way. She rides a wave as long as she can until another, better, (in her mind) one comes along. So I say to you Mistress E., good luck with your tangled web, which I have no dought will come crashing down upon you when you least expect. Ladies and gentlemen I give you the real Fishnet blogger...does anyone have a dictionary handy? I need to look up that word..."whore"

December 12, 2008 5:06 PM

Leave a Comment

(required)  
(optional)
(required)  

Add

CONFESSION OF THE DAY

CONFESS HERE!

ABOUT THE BLOG

DATE MACHINE explores the triumphs and tragedies of your dating confessions. Look here for commentary, dating advice, and our own salacious (or ridiculous) dating stories.

OUR BLOGGERS

FishnetsAndLight

Professional Dominatrix, lapsed English major and token black chick extraordinaire. I'm also a great big perv. Bend over.

Location:New York, New York
Looking for: Those who aren't too afraid.

Zeitgeisty

I'm an existentialist trapped in the body of a rational humanist. I've got a penchant for misanthropy and a flair for the obvious. I'm quick with a joke or a light up your smoke, but there's someplace that I'd rather be. I'm Zeitgeisty, pleased to meet me I'm sure.

Location: Somewhere on the isle of Manhattan...
Looking for: A shining good deed in a weary world...

Airheadgenius

I am a fish out of water - an opinionated cheeky smiling English chick in a land of larger than life Americans. I don't understand the culture. I don't understand asking if we're exclusive. I don't understand this weird practice of decapitating penises. Some days I am definitely MILF material. Other days I feel more like the material on the inside of yer grannys' handbag.

Location: Brooklyn
Looking for: A stunning socialist with a propensity to pick winning lottery numbers

amboabe

I'm a smart ass writer who'll argue your ear off, hold your hand close, and tell you the truth whenever. I'm a fool and a hero, a confessional soul, and lover of life in every conceivably absurd way that it can come. I also paint my toenails.

Location: San Francisco
Looking for: A sail, not an anchor.

spjv840

Slightly neurotic, over-analyzing girl..err, woman, with too much charm for the average person to handle. Has a fondness for red wine, cheap beer and a good time.

Location: The Igloo, Canada
Looking for: Nothing mediocre

Hooksexup Pesronals

in