The tree of knowledge and a girl called John
October 2, 2013 § 52 Comments
I’ve proposed the idea before that modern romance novels and movies are a form of pornography for women, and that the main difference between pornography targeted at women and pornography targeted at men is that the latter is still subject to at least some degree of social stigma, whereas the former is celebrated.
I’ve also suggested that beta orbiting behavior in men corresponds to slutty behavior in women: that some women have “harems” of beta orbiters in much the same way that some men have “harems” of sluts. Again, the main difference is residual societal stigma of the latter.
Men and women are different, so when it comes to matters of moral vice they tend to play different roles in society. In some parts of the blogosphere which discuss our modern sexual dystopia it is often stated, as some kind of big point of existential outrage, that women can get sex any time they want, while men cannot. But this isn’t actually true. A man of modest means can get sex as quickly and as easily as a woman of modest looks, provided neither is particularly picky. She just has to use her looks to attract a cad; he just has to use his money to purchase the services of a prostitute.
So another vicious symmetry in amoral modernity is between the pickup artist (PUA) or cad, and the prostitute. This implies symmetry between the slut and the john: a slut is the female equivalent of a john. Once again the main difference is residual disproportionate disapproval of male bad behavior versus female bad behavior. Fornication and adultery used to be illegal in many or most jurisdictions; prostitution still is.
What further follows is that men going to cads to learn about women is rather like women going to hookers to learn about men. Sure, you might learn a thing or two. But watch what you catch in your filters.