Is She a Sexually Entitled Nice Girl ™

So this vid is going around the manosphere….

Well, personally, I’m generally not attracted to larger women. I know some who study eve-psych will say that it is nature’s way of guiding me to a fertile mate. Others will say it is cultural conditioning and a lifetime of “fat shaming.” Sure, there are some attractive larger women out there but that’s neither here nor there…

The bigger (hehe sorry, couldn’t help throwing that pun in) point is…. Who is this lady to tell me whom I should be attracted to? Also, why am I potentially a superficial asshole for not approaching someone I’m not attracted to. I don’t owe a woman an approach whether or not I find her attractive. I may find that I’d rather spare my precious feewings than risk a rejection or even public humiliation. Maybe I don’t want to be seen as Schrodinger’s Rapist…

Seems to me someone who thinks they are owed an approach or thinks that someone who doesn’t approach them regardless of the potential approacher’s feelings is showing a huge sense of entitlement. What was that cutesy wootesy condescending phrase bigots like Amanda Marcotte and David Futrelle called socially awkward guys? Well, maybe we’re dealing with a Nice Girl ™ here…

33 thoughts on “Is She a Sexually Entitled Nice Girl ™

  1. Well, personally, I *am* attracted to larger women, and was with a few of them. I really do appreciate most of that vlogger’s video after the 2 minute mark, because she really does talk about what my partners struggled with: Thinking of themselves as sexually or aesthetically attractive. I’ve also seen quite a few larger women who apparently do consider themselves hot, sexy stuff, often with good reason – good for them! The point of this vlogger’s video, as I understand it, is to help women like my (former) partners to get to that attitude of those other larger women – good for her, and if she thinks she needs to make a throwaway line about the shallowness of men who are repulsed by a woman’s fatness and how one shouldn’t want a partner with such an attitude, that’s fine by me.

    Of course, that’s not what she actually said. IMO, she conflated “being repulsed by fat women” with “not approaching fat women because of their fat”, which rather ties in with the overall hetero female expectation that men should do the approaching. She would have a better leg to stand on had she replaced “there are some men who won’t approach a fat woman, and that’s because they’re shallow as heck” with “there are men who won’t date a fat woman, and that’s because they’re shallow as heck”. I still wouldn’t agree 100% with that statement, but it would be far more defensible than what she said. While everyone has a right to have trivial dealbreakers when it comes to dating, I think it’s healthier for the other person to view the person with the trivial dealbreaker as shallow than view his/herself as intrinsically flawed for having that dealbreaking trait. (Especially since attraction *is* shallow in and of itself, and shallow is such a kinder word than “privileged” or “entitled” …)

    So, for me, the main problematic part of the video is her conflating “men willing to date fat women” with “men willing to approach fat women”, which has not that much to do with Nice Guy/Girl -isness, and more with traditional, probably unexamined dating scripts.

    Also, the vlogger gets bonus points from me for including, occasionally, fat men when talking about fat women’s dating problems 🙂

    1. If she edited about 20 seconds of video or changed slightly some of the wording I would not have found issue with anything she said….

      To me, what she did say strikes of “entitlement” in expecting men to change their preferences and also approach. Maybe she meant something different but I am not a mind reader….

  2. I found this blog via an old QRG post and want you to know that it is fantastic. After finally waking up from my feminist induced coma, sites like this are helping me come to terms with the lies that were sold to me regarding the genders and helping me see things a bit more clearly.

    This article perfectly illustrates the maniacal Nice Guy ™ hypocrisy. I tried having a conversation about this with a feminist the other day but she was only interested in ad hominem and passive aggressive snide innuendo. It’s fucking nuts.

  3. This’ what I can’t stand about the Manosphere:99% of its members shame fatties all day.

    Yet,99% of them don’t fucking get laid!!

    This is a wild guess,but with research,it’s safe to say that 85% of the Manosphere bloggers are grossly overweight,fat men with man boobs,and they’re physically hideous(thus the reason they never show their faces on their blogs nor avatars).

    It’d look really friggin’ hypocritical that guys can shame fat girls when they themselves are extremely fat.So they’re forced to be or remain anonymous(which is a Beta-male attitude and very insecure).

    Saying all that to say,the Manosphere needs to stop fatty shaming,when fat women are their only hope of getting laid.But they put up a massive front(Manosphere bloggers)as if they are physically able to get girls who aren’t fat.

    I can afford to fatty shame since I’m a slim guy.But any fat dude who shame fatties(85% of Manosphere) needs to look at himself in the mirror first.

    1. Wow, Kenny, you have quite some numbers in your comment.
      Care to back up your claims with respresentative polls or studies?
      I mean you didn’t pull numbers like 99% and 85% straight out of your arse, did you?

      1. @Tim-I’d considered myself Manosphere for the past 5 months.I was totally deep in there.

        I realized the hypocrisy and pulled out few weeks ago.

        I’m not encouraging anyone to rid themself of the Manosphere.But too much hypocrisy for me.Dudes who hide their faces(95% of them),never post field reports(as we say in the PUA community),don’t have a social life,write about feminists 24/7(although I’m anti-feminism too)…

    2. SocialKenny wrote:
      This’ what I can’t stand about the Manosphere:99% of its members shame fatties all day.

      Speaking as a manosphere denizen, I’d say fatty-shaming is maybe .1% of my total volume of postings. Most of the shaming comes from PUA-oriented guys which are only part of the manosphere. Yeah, sometimes they’re over the top. I have no problem with someone like Chloe Marshall A 250 lb. butterball is going to be a boner-killer for almost all men no matter what though. Don’t blame men though, blame it on evolution.

      Yet,99% of them don’t fucking get laid!!

      And how did you arrive at this figure? If it’s true, would improving their attitude get them laid more?

      This is a wild guess,

      IOW, you don’t really know; you’re just talking out of your ass.

      but with research,

      You just said you didn’t do any research.

      it’s safe to say that 85% of the Manosphere bloggers are grossly overweight,fat men with man boobs,and they’re physically hideous(thus the reason they never show their faces on their blogs nor avatars).

      A lot of them may prefer to keep their identities private so they can give vent to politically unpopular ideas without compromising their education/employment prospects or in some cases, get in trouble with the law. So there are other reasons why men may not reveal their appearance that you aren’t mentioning.

      t’d look really friggin’ hypocritical that guys can shame fat girls when they themselves are extremely fat.So they’re forced to be or remain anonymous(which is a Beta-male attitude and very insecure).

      Again, you really don’t know how they look; that’s just your pet theory.

      Saying all that to say,the Manosphere needs to stop fatty shaming,when fat women are their only hope of getting laid.But they put up a massive front(Manosphere bloggers)as if they are physically able to get girls who aren’t fat.

      At some point on the fattie scale, it may simply become more satisfying to jerk off to porn.

      I can afford to fatty shame since I’m a slim guy. But any fat dude who shame fatties(85% of Manosphere) needs to look at himself in the mirror first.

      So, do you bag lots of hot chicks? And how much of it is due to your enlightened attitude toward fatties? Just wondering.

      1. Well I disagree with the point about the PUA-leaning Manosphere bloggers being the fatty-shamers.

        I’m a PUA(strictly PUA).I’ve been all over the Manosphere since January,and I find that most fatty shaming comes from the men’s rights bloggers(or whatever they’re called).

        Yes,we PUA’s do idolize thin women,but at the same time,we don’t bash fat ones.

        As to identity,I think it’s hogwash.Months ago,I got into a huge verbal brawl with Ferdinand Bardamu,Heartist and others over concealing identity.

        They claimed that they do it for safety reasons and to protect their jobs.

        Bullshit!!

        Come on,you telling me that your employer will somehow stumble upon your seduction blog,then fire you based on your writings?Or that some guy will see you on the streets and shoot you in the face for picking up his wife!!?BS!!

        Those guys are anonymous(faces)because of insecurities.

        As far as me banging chics.I’m a PUA instructor and also a PUA who actively games.Of course I get laid lol!

        Lastly,other thing pisses me off about Manosphere is that they bash the pick-up community(on the downlow),yet we virtually started the Manosphere.Our lingo(PUA)is what the Manosphere uses.

        Gmac(a Manosphere gamer/blogger)told me he’s anti-PUA,yet Roissy/Heartiste who he praises is full-blooded PUA lol!Roosh,although he pretends,he’s full-blooded PUA.

        Pure hypocrisy.

      2. SocialKenny wrote:
        Well I disagree with the point about the PUA-leaning Manosphere bloggers being the fatty-shamers.

        Disagree all you want, it doesn’t make your point valid.

        Yes,we PUA’s do idolize thin women,but at the same time,we don’t bash fat ones.

        Bullshit. Uber-PUA blogger Roissy has written some absolutely savage rants against fat women. So has Roosh. I rest my case.

        http://www.rooshv.com/declaration-of-holy-war-against-fat-women

        I’ve been all over the Manosphere since January,and I find that most fatty shaming comes from the men’s rights bloggers(or whatever they’re called).

        Tell me, why would an MRA be that fixated on a woman’s appearance? They may mention it in passing but they’re hardly going to spend most of their time on that subject. They would have higher priorities such as unfair treatment of men in the courts and workplace.

        Come on,you telling me that your employer will somehow stumble upon your seduction blog,then fire you based on your writings?

        Um, yeah. It’s not as if typing in someone’s name in Google is that hard a task. Employers do that sort of background checking as a matter of course. When they do, it might not do your career any good to have detailed accounts of your latest drunken sexual escapades.

        So anonymity is a good way of heading off potential troubles with employers, schools, and even the law. If you think I’m exaggerating, there was the recent case where Norwegian MRA Eivind Berge was arrested for “hate speech” or some other trumped up charge.

        As far as me banging chics.I’m a PUA instructor and also a PUA who actively games.Of course I get laid lol!

        So what’s your lay count in a typical week? Do you have any videos displaying your PUA mastery? I saw Mystery’s and he comes off as a dork wearing a funny hat. I hope you have better stage presence than him.

        Lastly,other thing pisses me off about Manosphere is that they bash the pick-up community(on the downlow) ,

        Well, at least some of them may think your time chasing tail could be better spent elsewhere. PUAs may not be helping matters with their tendency to look down on men with other priorities.

        yet we virtually started the Manosphere

        You’ve been around for all of a year and can say this?

        Our lingo(PUA)is what the Manosphere uses.

        A lot of it consists of putdowns of men whose primary crime is either questioning the PUA belief system or not being able to get laid a lot. Get over yourselves already.

        Gmac(a Manosphere gamer/blogger)

        Never heard of him.

        told me he’s anti-PUA,yet Roissy/Heartiste who he praises is full-blooded PUA lol!Roosh,although he pretends,he’s full-blooded PUA.

        Now I think you’re very confused. First you say it’s non-PUAs (such as MRAs) that are the problem and then you’re slamming uber-PUAs Roissy and Roosh. Which is it? .

        Pure hypocrisy.

        Take it up with them. I have nothing against either Roissy or Roosh, but I’m not a member of their fan clubs either.

      3. “there was the recent case where Norwegian MRA Eivind Berge was arrested for “hate speech” or some other trumped up charge.”

        For making death threats actually, and based on what I’d read by him that didn’t strike me as unlikely. Do you have some reference on the claim that it was “trumped up”?

      4. A Viking wrote:
        “there was the recent case where Norwegian MRA Eivind Berge was arrested for “hate speech” or some other trumped up charge.”

        For making death threats actually,

        In America, death threats need to be directed against specific individuals to be criminally actionable. Oh, yes, I forgot, he’s in Norway. They have all sorts of dumb laws such as those making it a crime to have sex with a prostitute in another country.

        and based on what I’d read by him that didn’t strike me as unlikely. Do you have some reference on the claim that it was “trumped up”?

        How about that the Norwegian police didn’t press charges and released him? Guess even they realized they didn’t have a leg to stand on.

      5. “In America, death threats need to be directed against specific individuals to be criminally actionable.”

        That’s nice. Having different laws from America doesn’t make someone being charged according to them descrimination based on political affiliation.

        “How about that the Norwegian police didn’t press charges and released him? Guess even they realized they didn’t have a leg to stand on.”

        Really? Norwegian media claims the case was dismissed because the court ruled that blog posts were not public speach. That seems like a question for the courts if the law did not state one way or the other. Hence it was correct that he was charged and correct that he was released after the courts decision. No evidence that the charges where politically motivated.

        “They have all sorts of dumb laws such as those making it a crime to have sex with a prostitute in another country.”

        If one autocratic law is necessarily representative of the laws of a coutry, then I feel worse for the one that passed the patriot act. That law is a horrible law that makes a mockery of the concept of universal jurisdiction, and as a result a mockery of real human rights violation. But it is an extreme law that is not representative of Norwegian law and was only passed bacause feminists were willing to call in every last favor owed, use every bit of good will and every scrap of credibility they had. Organized feminisim has been effectivly dead in Norwegian public discourse since. Totally worth it.

      6. JE (who posted as A Viking above because he got his nick here confused with his nick on Danny’s Corner) wrote (quoting me):
        August 10, 2012 at 7:34 pm

        “In America, death threats need to be directed against specific individuals to be criminally actionable.”

        That’s nice. Having different laws from America doesn’t make someone being charged according to them descrimination based on political affiliation.

        Well, what’s the law in Norway? Do threats have to be against individuals to be legally actionable or not? The US law in this case seems to be fairly commonsensical. Otherwise we’d be arresting bloggers who rant that they’re going to kill the next driver who cuts them off at an intersection.

        “How about that the Norwegian police didn’t press charges and released him? Guess even they realized they didn’t have a leg to stand on.”

        Really? Norwegian media claims the case was dismissed because the court ruled that blog posts were not public speach

        IOW, they didn’t have a leg to stand on. Just what I said.

        That seems like a question for the courts if the law did not state one way or the other. Hence it was correct that he was charged and correct that he was released after the courts decision. No evidence that the charges where politically motivated.

        Somebody read his blog and didn’t like what he said. He got arrested. What exactly do you mean when you state that there’s no evidence the charges were poliitically motivated? Do you think the individuals who made the complaint against him were just some disinterested party?

        “They have all sorts of dumb laws such as those making it a crime to have sex with a prostitute in another country.”

        If one autocratic law is necessarily representative of the laws of a coutry

        This particular law regulates private behavior outside national borders. That’s why it deserves special mention for its odiousness.

        then I feel worse for the one that passed the patriot act.

        Whatever. If you’re going to argue that the US has its own share of dumb laws, I’ll gladly agree. It hardly justifies Norway’s own stupidity in this matter.

        That law is a horrible law that makes a mockery of the concept of universal jurisdiction, and as a result a mockery of real human rights violation.

        No doubt. But at least it was one that was passed in response to an act of war on American soil. What’s the proximate excuse of the Norway nanny state for telling Norwegians they can’t trade ass for cash, even in another country?

        But it is an extreme law that is not representative of Norwegian law

        Is Jante Law representative of Norwegian law? I consider Jante to be a perverse doctrine.

        and was only passed bacause feminists were willing to call in every last favor owed, use every bit of good will and every scrap of credibility they had. Organized feminisim has been effectivly dead in Norwegian public discourse since. Totally worth it.

        Eivind might disagree with you. And if feminism is so dead, why hasn’t the law been repealed?

  4. Ray-2 out of 200 guys(PUA’s)bashing fatties should be constituted as a whole community bashing fatties.

    As far as PUA’s should be spending time other than chasing ass.We do!PUA’s over the past 3 years have been leaning towards an overall lifestyle change(which inevitably attracts HB’s).So it’s not all about sarging(chasing ass).

    The Manosphere guys are the ones without a life besides bashing feminism and fatties.

    As to being anonymous.Come on!This isn’t Afghanistan.No employer would dare fire a worker for having a personal life which the employer may not have agreed with.

    Isn’t this discrimination and violates free the speech amendment?

    It’s unheard of!No employer would take that risk to fire someone under such pretense.

    It’s just an excuse to hide their identity.

    90% of the Manosphere guys are unsightly to women.Why would you doubt that?

    I’m Twitter friends with 99% of the Manospeher bloggers.Not once has any 1 of them posted a fly-by pic of themselves.NEVER!!Why not?

    I rest my case bro’.

    1. Socialkenny wrote:
      Ray-2 out of 200 guys(PUA’s)bashing fatties should be constituted as a whole community bashing fatties.

      No, just two guys who are about the first to come to mind when PUA is mentioned. I’ve visited their forums a few times and I must say that the opposition to their fat-bashing is underwhelming (I’m trying to put it as mildly as possible). Same is true for the other blogs that link to them.

      As to being anonymous.Come on!This isn’t Afghanistan.No employer would dare fire a worker for having a personal life which the employer may not have agreed with.

      In nearly every state in the country, employment is legally “at will”. That means that an employer can terminate an employee for literally any reason. Members of protected groups (women, minorities, etc) are treated with kid gloves but that doesn’t hold true for men, particularly white men.

      Isn’t this discrimination and violates free the speech amendment?

      See above. And if you want to see how feckless the first amendment can be, look no further than family court, where fathers are routinely forbidden to speak out about the injustices against them.

      It’s unheard of!No employer would take that risk to fire someone under such pretense.

      Dude, you need to get out more. Employers lie about their reasons for dismissal and not hiring all the time. I haven’t heard anything that naive in a long time.

      90% of the Manosphere guys are unsightly to women.Why would you doubt that?

      How would I know unless I saw them? I imagine at least a fair number of the dad’s rights types are presentable enough. After all, they managed to get someone flat on her back long enough to impregnate her.

      If you want to make some know-it-all claim about MRAs, go ahead, but don’t be offended if someone asks you to back it up with more than hot air. So far, that’s all I’ve seen from you.

      I’m Twitter friends with 99% of the Manospeher bloggers.

      From the way you’re badmouthing them, “friends” like you they could do without.

      Not once has any 1 of them posted a fly-by pic of themselves.NEVER!!Why not?

      Because it’s not that important to them? I don’t even use Twitter. Men as a rule aren’t vain about their appearance (like women) so it doesn’t occur to them.

      I rest my case bro’.

      You have no case.

      1. Come on bro,let’s not get into legal matter on this.I know the law,some constitution,amendment,labor/union laws and what employers can and will do.Let’s not inject stupidity in your argument.

        You’re defending the Beta-male acts of weirdos in the Manosphere who hide behind gravatars!WTF!

        Yes,as a PUA,95% of us use pseudonyms.But the reason for that,is because we write “lay reports” on PUA forums and blogs,and we definitely won’t want a chic we’re banging to google our names and see what we wrote about them.

        But to say that concealing your face to protect your job is bullshit!

        99% of the Manopshere guys use nicknames anyway!!So why not just use your real photo,or post your photos in your blogs!!?

        You telling me an employer can google an image which redirects to your blog lol!?So don’t be stupid tryna defend insecure guys.

        They are fat,ugly,unsightly,nasty-looking.And that’s the reason they hide.

        Pure beta-male,poor inner game behavior.

        I’m not Brad Pitt.But I’m secure enough with my looks to not hide.This’ what confidence is about.The manospehere lacks confidence.

        PUA’s don’t hide neither.Only Manosphere PUA type hide.

      2. Socialkenny wrote:
        Come on bro,let’s not get into legal matter on this.

        I won’t bother myself, I’ll just reference Wikipedia. It agrees with what I said. With very narrow exceptions, employment in the US is “at will” in 49 of the 50 states (Montana is the exception). In practice that means that an employee can be terminated at the pleasure of the employer. It doesn’t have to be for incompetence; it can be for a reason like “we don’t believe you act as a team player” or some other type of nonsense.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_will_employment

        I know the law,some constitution,amendment,labor/union laws and what employers can and will do.

        No you do not. And even where laws exist, the burden of proof is on the employee to prove wrongdoing.

        Let’s not inject stupidity in your argument.

        Inject stupidity??! Your pontificating about what you think the law ranks you somewhere below a babe in a forest of starving predators. Even the most
        asinine thing I can think of couldn’t possibly compete with that level of ignorance.

        You’re defending the Beta-male acts of weirdos in the Manosphere who hide behind gravatars!WTF!

        Oh yes, Beta males. Waving your cock around about how superior you are to Beta males doesn’t impress me. Probably because without their willingness to further civilization you’d be shivering somewhere in a cave.

        Yes,as a PUA,95% of us use pseudonyms.But the reason for that,is because we write “lay reports” on PUA forums and blogs,and we definitely won’t want a chic we’re banging to google our names and see what we wrote about them

        So you guys do the same thing that MRAs do, yet for you it’s ok. What was that you were saying about hypocrisy?

        But to say that concealing your face to protect your job is bullshit!

        99% of the Manopshere guys use nicknames anyway!!So why not just use your real photo,or post your photos in your blogs!!?

        They are fat,ugly,unsightly,nasty-looking.And that’s the reason they hide

        How would anyone even know a photo is real? Or that your photo is real? The bottom line is nobody gives a shit about it. Except you.

        I’m not Brad Pitt.But I’m secure enough with my looks to not hide.This’ what confidence is about.The manospehere lacks confidence.

        Blah blah blah. Post some stats about lay counts and a video of you doing your pickup thing. Right now you have all the credibility of one of those Internet tough guys who thinks he can puff himself up at someone else’s expense.

        PUA’s don’t hide neither.Only Manosphere PUA type hide

        This reminds me of that commercial that tells me not to “pay attention to those fake psychics” and then gives me the number of a “real psychic” to call.

  5. hahahaha,

    I go to the beach, relax a bit and come back and see this….

    😉

    as far as “employment” I know of one blogger who was canned possibly because of what he wrote online. He had posted on my blog and I’d consider him moderate and very willing to listen to people with differing opinions…. He showed a willingness to talk to feminists and MRA’s…

    He revealed enough about his personal life online that you might reveal to someone over, say a few drinks. While it was nothing shocking, it could possibly be embarrassing. That is also a reason why I don’t socialize with co-workers at “happy hour.”

    I won’t link to his blog as I don’t think it would help his cause of finding new employment….

    Writing about topics like race, sex, gender etc can get all kinds of people mad. So for example, while I would agree little with a feminist like Clarisse Thorn, I can respect that she blogs under a pseudonym and so long as she is not threatening anyone with violence, I would see no reason to “out” her even if I vehemently disagree with her….

    1. stonerwithaboner wrote:
      I go to the beach, relax a bit and come back and see this….
      😉

      Hey, I love providing cheap entertainment for the masses.

      as far as “employment” I know of one blogger who was canned possibly because of what he wrote online

      And I’ve seen bloggers delete posts and even whole websites either because they were ‘outed’ or to head off trouble. Ferdinand Bardamu had a strict banhammer rule about anyone who revealed personal information about anyone who came to his website. So the risk is there and it’s nothing to scoff at. SK’s assertion that employers won’t do it because it’s “against the first amendment” is sheer stupidity at its finest. If they can get away with things like age discrimination and preferential hiring (which they do all the time) they can get away with canning someone for saying something they don’t like.

      That is also a reason why I don’t socialize with co-workers at “happy hour.”

      I make it a point not to offer up too many details of my personal life online and don’t discuss my online persona with people at work. That’s probably sufficient
      – I’m not paranoid but there’s no reason to blab about it.

      Writing about topics like race, sex, gender etc can get all kinds of people mad

      Yeah, and it doesn’t help to be on the wrong side of the gender line. .

      1. Also AFAIK the first amendment only prevents government censorship, people can treat you however they want (as long as it’s otherwise legal) because of what you say and the first amendment does nothing.

  6. 1. Yes, she is a *very* entitled “Nice Girl”(TM)

    2. As another guy who appreciates some cushion for the pushing, I wouldn’t approach her unless I was getting paid. She’s too fat, end of story. My current weight ifluctuates between 190-195 pounds. Dating or even hooking up with a woman who outweighs me is beneath me.

    1. Wow. Just… wow. BENEATH you? If I said I wouldn’t date some man because he didn’t have the money to take me here or there, and was therefore BENEATH me, what would you think of that? I’d be linked on every MRA blog in creation and run out of Blogdonia on a rail.

      Beneath, wow… Beneath? Damn, what kind of snobbery and looksism is that.

      I think you just made her point for her.

      PS: I weight 155, and I still weigh more than my husband. Glad he isn’t as snotty and superior as you are!

  7. If you want to see entitlement, check this video where women are claiming the way they’re treated in online forums is “harassment,” even though men have been getting flames for years. The comments section is worse — feminists parroting the lies their professors taught them.

    I’d like to see this video passed around the manosphere and have everyone vote to DISLIKE it on YouTube so we don’t get any more of this.

    1. I only got part way through the video….

      seems like a one sided discussion and also seems to have the attitude feminism should not be questioned….

      One interesting part was where it was mentioned that women have been able to talk about gender for over 200 years since the Seneca (Falls) Convention and that many men have not had the same space to discuss masculinity. She even acknowledges that men have been discouraged from talking about gender. She never mentions it but dare and go to a feminist space and see how long it takes to be accused of “mansplaining” when you mention that the discussion does not line up to your personal experiences…..

      Anyways the future for us as men is to create spaces where we can speak honestly and openly without worry about placating to others…..

  8. This girl’s monologue is cringingly banal– esp. with the constant lapses into a) little girl squeaks (disturbingly ready to hand whenever she’s trying to insinuate something “say-ekks-u-ale) and b) ghetto speak (?).

    If she wasn’t a slave to cliches and passive-aggressive hostility, she might be a pleasant person (at moments I almost pity her): but she’s not.

    And she hasn’t got the basic intelligence to apply to the bourgeoisie, so I cannot countenance calling her a Nice Girl.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s