Post: #26

(12-28-2015 09:05 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  One of the very worst affectations of YZ (Year Zero) SJW freaks is their use of what can be called baby talk. A video like this is a perfect example of this nasty linguistic mode.

YZ baby talk is a type of cutesy, faux-naive, faux-charming chatter that seeks to express various concepts (simple enough to begin with) in what is supposed be a particularly accessible form. In reality, it is an attempt to mask the harsh, didactic, hectoring, and utterly joyless nature of the discourse that underlies it. It is also used to try to not-so-subtly infantilize the audience and make it receptive to being lectured in this manner. And for those who are in on the joke, the hardened Year Zero cadres, it provides a kind of dry Jesuitical merriment which is these folks' version of light-hearted humor.

You should learn to recognize baby talk wherever you see it, and call out the SJWs who use it. Employ the actual term, which they will hate.

This is a really good point. The manosphere should expand on it.

The question is *why* are so many videos like this done in baby-talk voices? The answer is that they're trying to find a way to make men appear stupid and clueless.

In short, they're now doing to younger guys what those "doofus dad" commercials did for older men.

So the larger issue here isn't really consent at all, but the degradation of men as being "immature" or "infantile." All of which suits the female imperative. In order to make them not throw tantrums and strangle themselves with their Penis Envy, we have to pretend men in their are immature losers.

The guy who narrated this is one of those guilty apologists, ashamed of his manhood and attempting to appease women and desexualize himself by talking like a child.

Meanwhile, what did men -- especially younger men -- really do? Built Apple and Microsoft, started the Beatles and rap music, built and designed man-made wonders like the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.

I guess a lot of women can't handle walking around in a world entirely built by man and seek to take revenge by making "consent" seem like it a Big Issue and there aren't an infinite amount of suburban households where couples did just fine not knowing any of this. Somehow, our grandparents managed to survive and reproduce without the Cup of Tea video.

Freud saw the resentment I mention and coined the term "Penis Envy," so all of this is no surprise. What is shameful, though, are the castrated cucks who help them in their misguided causes. Like this narrator.

Post: #27

Exactly what I was thinking. Its never a straight.. Would like to have TEA / SEX?

Its a subtle push pull and girls doing their i want but i dont want to but I want to.. drama..

(12-28-2015 10:36 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  Tl;dr: Liberals don't understand human nature. Especially when it comes to sex. The rest of this post will expand on that basic maxim.

When it comes to sex, the cup of tea analogy -- or any analogy -- is completely off-base. Sex is its own thing.

Very few men "offer" sex to women like tea. So there's strike one. If you offered sex to women like that, they'd laugh you out of the room, even your wife.

But the video completely strikes out because it fails to take into account the elaborate mating dance between the sexes, where there's lots of push-pull and yes-no-maybe, especially on the women's side.

How many times have you encountered this scenario months or years after you went out with a woman:

Woman: "You never even put the moves on me when you took me out!"

Man: "Wait, I did try and you backed away, so I gave up."

Woman: "I had to do that. I didn't want you to think I was easy!"

So, it's an not "ask-accept" situation as if you're selling someone soap. All sorts of emotions are involved: Pride, shame, lust, infatuation, religion-related worries.

There's also teasing, the thrill of the chase, the thrill of being chased, and (as I learned from women the hard way) the female need to be "taken." If you make women seem like they're calling the shots, a lot of them start "feeling like a slut" or "feeling like your mother" and will dump you for a guy who takes charge a bit more.

Only a would-be criminal would think it's OK to screw a woman who is passed out (beyond the obvious rape if she chokes on vomit you're up on a murder charge) or jump on a strange female, or physically force a woman into sex. Despite the left's bizarre insistence that men don't know this stuff, it was considered wrong -- and illegal -- as far back as I can remember.

But outside of that, most other scenarios involve grey areas. You could never cover these in any video because there are hundreds of variations on the mating dance.

Heck, that's why rom-coms, romance novels, and love songs never go out of style. If all sex were reduced to an "ask-accept" business transaction, there would be no need for any of that.

Post: #28

(12-28-2015 11:48 AM)Tigre Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 10:36 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  But the video completely strikes out because it fails to take into account the elaborate mating dance between the sexes, where there's lots of push-pull and yes-no-maybe, especially on the women's side.

(snip)

There's also teasing, the thrill of the chase, the thrill of being chased, and (as I learned from women the hard way) the female need to be "taken." If you make women seem like they're calling the shots, a lot of them start "feeling like a slut" or "feeling like your mother" and will dump you for a guy who takes charge a bit more.

Definitely. These gray areas and ambiguities all exist because that's how women prefer to do it.

When two gay men hook up, it's straight to the point and happens rapidly.

I'm surprised Roosh doesn't make this point more often in response to media questions about consent. They attack him for articles like how many no's does it take, as if he's to blame for every "no". As if he should have packed up and gone home after hearing one smiling "no" from a chick.

Maybe Rooshv members and RoK should make a more realistic SCENARIOS.. of what/ where responsibilities and force play out.

Something that is GENDER NEUTRAL and protects both sides and also IMPLICATES both sides saying.. IF YOU DID ..X.. then you should not be Blaming the other party..

A very diplomatic but balanced view that saves women from genuine rape and saves Manosphere from false accusations.

Post: #29

(12-29-2015 04:55 AM)Switch Wrote:  Obviously in a sane society this video is unnecessary and patronising. But that is not the society we live in. We live in a society where a college girl simply accusing a college male of some low-level sexual assault (perhaps an unwanted kiss) can get him suspended from his school. Universities can potentially lose millions of dollars with each of these cases, and when 1 in 4 women is supposedly subjected to these heinous crimes, you can be damn sure the university is going to do their best to be able tobl say "we did everything we could to prevent this".

Now with that context laid out, this video is hardly patronising at all. It doesn't place the blame solely on men. It doesn't absolve women of all responsibility. It simply lays out the law in an incredibly obvious way. No = no. This is still the reality in most places (some are moving towards yes means yes which is in actuality a pretty simple step added into the process).

Obviously the smart folk at the RVF understand that no doesn't necessarily mean stop and get out, it usually means not yet but keep trying and get me to say yes. However, the virgin engineering student who accidentally stumbles into a passed out woman on his bed after a party could be helped by this simple video.

Now, fully considering the climate on college campuses ag the moment, i didn't feel patronized by this video. The video could've just blamed men, absolved women of all responsibility and left it at that and no one would've been surprised. But instead this video literally just says what the fucking law is and somehow some of you guys are so far deep into weird bullshit that this video offends your sensibilities. If you have a problem with the policies that are clearly laid out in this video, you probably have some soul-searching to do because nothing in there is unreasonable.

And yes i decided to enter college despite the current climate and yes i fully understand the potential dangers. But not allowing myself to graduate from school and enjoy the benefits of a degree because i'm offended by and object to a video analogy involving tea and assault is completely laughable. If you're offended that this video is being shown to college students you need to get over yourself.

And i realize this post is going to come off as defensive and harsh, but y'all need to understand that showing this video is a step in the right direction towards sanity, not a step backward into further degeneracy.