She Does What She Wants (guest post by Deti)

[Martel’s note:  Much thanks to deti for providing these posts.  As I’m sure many of you know from his comments throughout the Manosphere and posts elsewhere that he’s got some great insights.

As for me, the book is proceeding well.  Book writing is a different animal than blogging, and I admit that for a while I found it pretty daunting.  Fortunately, through trial and error I’ve found a system that works well for me.  It’s still far from easy, but I can actually envision finishing it (albeit quite some time from now).

However I miss blogging, so I’ll be doing a post or two of my own soon.

But to tide you over, here’s deti:]

I  said in my last guest post here:

Almost all the time, when it comes to sex a woman does what she wants to do.   Women have sex when and with whom they want, and don’t have sex when they don’t want to, regardless of their mental states, their stations, or their life circumstances.    Whatever a woman has done sexually in the past, she did those things because she WANTED to do
them.   She had sex with other men because she wanted to do so.

Even the most naïve, sheltered women know the score.  They know what they’re getting when they go home with a PUA.   No woman gets with a player unless she wants to.    No woman has sex in the bar bathroom unless she wants to.    No woman has a same night lay or a one-nightstand unless she wants to.

If she does not want to have sex with you, trust me –she won’t.

You will hear women tell you variations on their stories of how they never wanted their lives to turn out the way they did.   They didn’t want to wait so long to marry.  It was never their intent to rack up their double digit Ns.   They have always wanted to be wives and
mothers, but things just never worked out.   The vagaries of time and circumstance never aligned in their favor for one reason or another.

It always comes out something like this:

I have always wanted to be a wife and mom, but I just couldn’t find a good enough man.

I didn’t mean to sleep with all those men.  I was drunk/high/had low self esteem.

I didn’t want it to turn out this way, it just kinda did.

I wanted to get married, but I was just a piece of ass to them.  I guess they didn’t ask me because they just wanted to have sex with me.

I made a lot of mistakes in my past.

When you hear a woman begin to spin tales to excuse, explain and
rationalize her past to you, remember this:

We live in a society which has been almost completely reordered over the past 50 years to maximize women’s freedom and options.   Since about 1960, American women have been more free and have had more options than at any other time in history.   Her freedom of speech and association is near-absolute.   She can do and say whatever she wants, wherever and whenever she wants.   There are men with fists, tasers, billy clubs and guns who are just a yell or a phone call away who will arrive posthaste to enforce those rights at any time.

She is free to go to school, live with her parents or on her own, and get a job.   She has her own livelihood and can do with it whatever she wishes.

She can have sex (or not) with whoever she wants.  She can determine the kinds of relationships she is willing to have and with whom she will have them.   Birth control is cheap, safe, effective, widely available and easy to use.  There are no societal sanctions or
restrictions whatsoever on any woman to prevent or avoid premarital or extramarital sex.  She can choose not to have sex with her husband; can choose to stop having sex with him at any time she wants.   No pastor, no judge, no family member will tell her to have sex with her husband against her wishes or desires.   The only conjugal rights a man has within marriage are those his wife decides to give him.

For years, women have been screaming from every rooftop and every media outlet that they are fully personally responsible for their own lives.   They are fully autonomous; they have complete and total personal agency in every conceivable area of their lives:   moral,
legal, rational and decisional.   This is the society and culture that women fought for, and won.

Remember that a woman’s past is the sum total of her decisions and choices.   There are no “mistakes”,   there are only decisions.   From same night lays to ex husbands, she had sex with the men in her past because she made the choice to do so.    If she is not having sex, it’s because that’s what she wants.    A single woman is such because she doesn’t want to be married.

It is not a chemical substance’s fault that she is having sex.  No one poured it down her throat, put it in her lungs or shoved it up her nose.  She did that all by herself.   If she is having consensual sex while drunk, the booze freed up her inhibitions, just gave her that
little push to do what she wanted and intended.  Even while intoxicated, people don’t tend to do things they don’t want or intend to do.   Intoxication does not absolve her from responsibility for her conduct behind the wheel of a car; it should not relieve her of the
consequences of a decision to get busy with a guy.  No matter her mental state, she is free at any time to say “no, I don’t want to do this” and BY LAW her erstwhile paramour must stop or he will see the inside of a jail cell for a number of years after the aforesaid men with guns arrive to crack open his skull.

It’s not her lack of self esteem.   Her friends are not requiring her to have sex.   Nor is any good looking player forcing her into that bedroom.   She could have chosen any number of  other things to boost her self-worth and self regard.  She chose sex and sexual validation.  That’s her choice and her decision to make; she is free to make it; and no one can stop her from making it.

Her having sex with a guy who “done her dirty” was not a “mistake”.  It was a judgment call, a choice, a decision; the responsibility for which is fully hers and hers alone.

She can’t blame the charming cad or the good looking player.  Ultimately, she made the decision to sleep with the man.   Her body, her choice.   In the final analysis, she’s the sex gatekeeper.  When it’s all said and done, her decision to sleep with the player is on HER, not him.

She is single not because there are no good, available, marriageable men.   She is single because she doesn’t want to marry any of the available marriageable men, isn’t attracted to such men.  She is single because she prefers that to marriage to any man other than a top man.   Or, she is single because she had a good man and (70 to 80% chance) chose to end the marriage or forced an end to it.   It is only when her options starkly disappear that she will change her heart and mind.

So when she tells you her sexual history, lays it out for you, and then ratchets up the excuse machine, remember that she’s not a victim of circumstance.   Things worked out the way they did because of HER choices.   Her past is what it is because of her decisions.   She had sex with each of those prior men because she wanted to.   She had sex
with them because she made the decision, made the choice, to have sex with them.   She isn’t married because that’s the life she has chosen for herself.

She made the choice to get drunk, to get high, to party.   She made the choice to use her sexual power to serve her own purposes:  to boost her self-esteem, for validation, for affirmation, for a sense of belonging.  She could have chosen other things to elevate her own self-regard and worth.  She didn’t.  She chose sex.

She made the choice to have sex with the top men instead of pursuing commitment from a good man.    She could have chosen to hold out for marriage.   She didn’t.  She preferred sex with a top man now over commitment from a more stable, more attainable man later.

No one made those choices for her.  She, and she alone, made them.  The decisions, and the consequences that flow from them, are on her.

Her life turned out the way it did because she chose it.

This entry was posted in Culture, Feminism. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to She Does What She Wants (guest post by Deti)

  1. donalgraeme says:

    I am going to quibble a bit with the end.

    Her life turned out the way it did because she chose it.

    She might not have chosen how her life turned out. In fact, it might have turned out quite different from what she really wanted. However, she did choose the actions which led to that point. Whether it was because she was foolish, or because she had no concept of cause and effect, or because she was lied to about the consequences of that life-path are another inquiry. But whatever else, she made choices every step along the way to that destination.

    • Carlos says:

      This is an interesting statement. While it might be true that every single choice that a woman makes led to a *particular* consequence (i.e. gratification, self-affirmation, validation, belonging, etc. was attained) they never foresaw that the *collection of those choices* would lead to undesirable consequences. This in turn shows that rational autonomy, by itself, is not a good because one cannot take into account the consequences of a collection of choices over a long period of time. This “higher tier” of consequences may end up being the opposite of the “lower tier” in terms of desirability.

      That being said, men should take this into account and consider what are the aggregate consequences for leading a life of self-improvement and maximizing one’s notch count. It is intuitively clear to us which, in itself, has desirable long term consequences.

      • donalgraeme says:

        @ Carlos

        This in turn shows that rational autonomy, by itself, is not a good because one cannot take into account the consequences of a collection of choices over a long period of time. This “higher tier” of consequences may end up being the opposite of the “lower tier” in terms of desirability.

        Well spotted. “Liberty” is not a “good” for a number of reasons, but this is one of them. Ultimately its only true value lies in the notion of choice itself, which any rational inquiry will see has de minimis worth.

      • deti says:

        Carlos:

        An interesting, and very astute, take on the issue of agency. It’s getting back to one of the recent discussions around these parts about freedom, liberty and democracy. They are not “goods”, they are not “ends” in themselves. When liberty becomes an end in and of itself, liberty and freedom for their own sakes, then it’s not too far to take that to license. And in matters of female sexuality, complete and total license is what we have now. Women like to tell us this is fair and just because there was male sexual license in the past. I’d argue we never have really had male sexual license, for a couple of reasons: (1) the sexually desirable men were constrained by finite resources and by other men; and (2) most men just weren’t desirable enough or resourceful enough or lived long enough to get even one wife, let alone more than one.

  2. theasdgamer says:

    Her having sex with a guy who “done her dirty” was not a “mistake”. It was a judgment call, a choice, a decision; the responsibility for which is fully hers and hers alone.

    Deti, you know my background as a PUA during my teen years. I used to feel guilty for “taking advantage” of women. Your words in the past along the same lines clarified for me what was going on–I was simply giving girls what they wanted. Now, otoh, most women have a seduction fantasy and PUAs play into that fantasy. However, a woman can always decline to pursue that fantasy. Anyway, thanks for clarifying things.

    Her life turned out the way it did because she chose it.

    I would have put it this way: “Her life didn’t turn out the way she originally wanted because she didn’t take steps to make sure it did and avoid choices that would have torpedoed her plans.”

    Or perhaps:

    “Her individual choices as her life proceeded resulted in the way her life turned out.”

    • donalgraeme says:

      @ theasdgamer

      “Her individual choices as her life proceeded resulted in the way her life turned out.”

      I like this. Another way to put it:

      Her life turned out the way it did because she made a number of choices in her life, the outcomes of which put her in her present state.

    • Robin Munn says:

      Deti, you know my background as a PUA during my teen years. I used to feel guilty for “taking advantage” of women.

      It’s not an either-or case; this is a classic example of the fallacy of the excluded middle. You were taking advantage of them, and they bear the responsibility for their own decisions to sleep with you. Both you and the women you slept with were sinning, and their responsibility for their own sin does not absolve you of your own. You did take advantage of their desire to sin, and your guilty feelings were a correct prompting from your conscience.

      • Gouv says:

        Sinning. Right.

        As it happens, Jesus only condemned adultery, not mere fornication. And before you throw the apostolic letters at me, they aren’t binding on us.

        ASDGamer, fuck ’em to your hearts content.

      • Robin Munn says:

        … before you throw the apostolic letters at me, they aren’t binding on us.

        You make an extraordinary assertion, which is contrary to the beliefs of pretty much the entirety of the Christian church throughout history, and yet provide no evidence to back it up. On what grounds do you conclude that 23 of the books of the New Testament are not binding on us?

        Before you answer, consider 2 Timothy 3:16 – “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (emphasis mine). All Scripture. So if something is part of Scripture, we need to pay attention to it.

        And are the apostolic letters part of Scripture? Well, Peter asserts that Paul’s writings are part of Scripture. 2 Peter 3:15-16: “And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (Emphasis mine, again).

        “The other Scriptures”. The apostle Peter considers Paul’s writings to be Scripture, and it’s just as much a problem for people to twist the meaning of Paul’s writings as it is for them to twist the meaning of the other Scriptures.

        Your assertion that the apostolic letters “aren’t binding on us” is an extraordinary claim, running contrary to the belief of almost the entire Christian church throughout the ages, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Yet you have presented no evidence. Since I have now presented plenty of evidence to refute your claim, what evidence are you going to present to support it?

      • John Nesteutes says:

        @Gouv

        asdgamer is married; he should take caution not to even look at a woman to lust after her so as not to commit adultery.

        You are no follower of Christ, and you twist and pervert his words. You should consider choosing another belief system, or else repent of your wickedness and your desire to lead others in to the gravest of sin.

  3. Robin Munn says:

    There are no “mistakes”, there are only decisions.

    The way many people use the word “mistake”, to avoid taking responsibility for bad decisions, this is a very true statement. I’d only quibble with it to the extent that some people will say, “I made a mistake in my youth — I slept with that hot guy/girl that I really shouldn’t have slept with — and now I’m paying the consequences.” In other words, some people do acknowledge that their past decisions were decisions, and use the word “mistake” to mean “I made a bad decision.” I’ve met both men and women who used the word “mistake” like that, acknowledging their responsibility for the past.

    So I’d say if someone uses the word “mistake” a lot in talking about their past, double-check whether they mean that as an excuse (it wasn’t “me” doing that, it was just a mistake) or whether they are taking responsibility for their past mistakes (“yeah, I made a bad mistake that time”).

  4. theasdgamer says:

    @ Robin

    You were taking advantage of them

    No, you are arguing the Blue Pill. I wasn’t “taking advantage” of them. “Taking advantage” means somehow using some attribute of superiority to coerce or deceive someone into participating in something to their detriment. There was no coercion or deception involved. No alcohol or drugs. No mitigation of their decisions. The women were fully aware and willing participants. The women were doing what they wanted.

    The question of sin is irrelevant to my point.

    • Robin Munn says:

      Ah, I see — we read that phrase differently. I saw the phrase “taking advantage” as implying opportunism rather than superiority. I.e., they wanted to sin, and you took advantage of the opportunity. By saying you were “taking advantage” of them, I did not mean to imply that you were somehow tricking or forcing them into sin. So we pretty much agree on that point.

      The reason I mentioned sin is because the way you said “I was simply giving girls what they wanted” sounded like an excuse of a justification. I.e., it sounded like you were saying “I wasn’t sinning against them, because I was simply giving them what they wanted.” But since what they wanted was sinful, it was sinful to give it to them.

      If you were not trying to excuse or justify your past sin, though, then my rebuke was unnecessary, and the point can be dropped since we’re in agreement about the rest (i.e., women’s responsibility for their own sin).

    • John Nesteutes says:

      It’s not good for young women (or teenage girls) to sin, but it’s not good either for men or young men to lead them into sin.

      I don’t really care about the mechanics of how or why fornication happens. It’s about as exciting to me as gluttony. “Hey guys, I figured out this amazing trick! You can get two Quarter Pounder meals for $10 at McDonald’s right now!”

      And the mechanics of pre-marriage fornication game are not particularly relevant nor useful for married men, unless a married man finds himself married to a woman who engaged in Olympic-level fornication in her unmarried years. That hardly seems a situation we should be busy promoting.

      • Robin Munn says:

        And the mechanics of pre-marriage fornication game are not particularly relevant nor useful for married men …

        For the record, before I start disagreeing with this point, I want to say that I agree with most of what you’ve said, and this is about the only point of yours that I have any disagreement with. There is one thing that fornicators do very well, which married men would also be wise to learn to do well, and that is to *create or enhance sexual desire in a woman*. Fornicators do this to many women, whereas married men should be doing this only to their wives, but it can be wise to study the approaches that fornicators are successful with, because many of those approaches can be used in a Godly way to improve Christian marriages. E.g., the fornicators have learned that supplicating to a woman or putting her on a pedestal is a turn-off to her, but making it clear that you are a man who expects a certain standard of behavior from her makes you seem more attractive. This is something that is entirely in keeping with Scripture, and which Christian men would be wise to do in their own marriages.

        There are many ways in which Christian men should *not* emulate the fornicators, of course, and some seduction techniques that fornicators use that would be wrong for a Christian husband to use on his wife. But I cannot agree that “the mechanics of pre-marriage fornication game are not particularly relevant nor useful for married men.” There are *some* of those mechanics that are not relevant, yes — but many are, and many Christian men would benefit from a better understanding of how to make themselves more sexually attractive to their wives.

  5. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2014/09/24 | Free Northerner

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