18

The Swedish author Horace Engdahl wrote that:

The completed penetration is forever a defeat for the woman and forever a victory for the man.

A sentiment that has often been repeated throughout history. Women lose in heterosexual sex and men win.

  • If a woman's value is decreased everytime she has sex with a man it says that the man is low value to begin with and his low value is transferred to her when they have sex.

  • If a man's value is increased everytime he has sex with a woman it says that the woman is high value to begin with and her high value is transferred to him when they have sex.

That is, it's an ideology of men's inherent low value and of women's inherent high value.

This basic principle of patriarchy is misandrist, hidden in plain sight. Patriarchy's solution to their misandrist cornerstone belief is that men can only gain value as they keep on having sex while women can only lose value as they keep on having sex. In the end, men will always come out as the winners so it's obviously misogynist as well. One could argue that it's wholly misanthropic since it treats human intimate relationships as transactional.

In contrast, the feminist take is that women and men have equal inherent value and them having sex doesn't result in any transfer of value from one to the other. Instead the sexual relationship itself is the prize that holds value for both. The way to lower your value in a feminist framework is to treat intimate relationships as transactional, ie by being a shitty person.

The Swedish author Horace Engdahl wrote that: > The completed penetration is forever a defeat for the woman and forever a victory for the man. A sentiment that has often been repeated throughout history. Women lose in heterosexual sex and men win. - If a woman's value is decreased everytime she has sex with a man it says that the man is low value to begin with and his low value is transferred to her when they have sex. - If a man's value is increased everytime he has sex with a woman it says that the woman is high value to begin with and her high value is transferred to him when they have sex. That is, it's an ideology of **men's inherent low value and of women's inherent high value**. This basic principle of patriarchy is misandrist, hidden in plain sight. Patriarchy's solution to their misandrist cornerstone belief is that men can only gain value as they keep on having sex while women can only lose value as they keep on having sex. In the end, men will always come out as the winners so it's obviously misogynist as well. One could argue that it's wholly misanthropic since it treats human intimate relationships as transactional. In contrast, the feminist take is that women and men have equal inherent value and them having sex doesn't result in any transfer of value from one to the other. Instead the sexual relationship itself is the prize that holds value for both. The way to lower your value in a feminist framework is to treat intimate relationships as transactional, ie by being a shitty person.

28 comments

[–] otterstrom 21 points Edited

The reason women lose is because men can’t get pregnant, a.k.a. have their entire body and life hijacked

Biology isn’t male hatred.

All hate directed at men is a direct result of their behavior.

I don't really believe misandry is a real thing. Men deserve every negative thought and feeling against them. It's almost always warranted.

Misandry is very real because I really REALLY hate men. Good morning from Kazakhstan.

It's not misandry if they deserve the hatred and it's hard to find a male who isn't worthy of hating in some capacity.

Me either. And “misandry” is always very convenient. Men are logical, superior and should be in charge, but they are also uncontrollable rapacious beasts that women are responsible for. This “misandry” serves men very well, it gets them servant handmaidens and victims while keeping them running the world. The schooling system of structured, disciplined learning, set up centuries ago by men for ONLY boys and men, is suddenly “misandrist” because now that girls are let in, boys are falling behind. Let’s not forget that “misandry” is used to discredit feminism, even though mens problems are caused almost exclusively by other men and/or the society men set up. Sorry, it’s too “misandrist” to expect equity for women.

[–] furyosa [OP] no, thank you 8 points

Fair enough. I have heard the reasoning that misandry has no actual negative consequences for men other than men's hurt feelings, and I'm completely on board with that. We don't see women who hate men derive any pleasure from using sadistic torture against men, instead they want to (understandably) separate themselves from men entirely.

I want to elaborate a little on my choice of terminology. Misogyny is about hating women, and you need to dehumanize and see women as worth less than men in order to carry out hateful acts against women (and for women with internalized misogyny to self-harm, buy into NLOG, and throwing other women under the bus for the sake of male approval). I take misandry to simply mean that you dehumanize and see men as worth less than women. A truly misandrist woman would derive pleasure from torturing men the same way men do to us. And that simply doesn't happen outside maybe some fringe cases. So misandry among women isn't a real thing as you say.

However, hidden in plain sight, the patriarchal framework seems to operate on internalized misandry as described in the OP. Men hate their sense of inferiority towards women ("womb envy" as some feminists have called it) and they deal with it through projection. They project all their negative feelings about themselves onto women that they may feel superior about themselves. Their sense of superiority is all a sham, built on smoke and mirrors, and I believe they can feel it at times and that fuels their misogyny more.

This realization just drives home the point for me that there's nothing that we as feminists can do for men. They have their own internalized hatred of themselves that they need to deal with by themselves. Feminists must continue to work on building up women's sense of self-worth. Men can follow our example if they choose to or be left behind.

this is tangential to the point of the post but does anyone seriously consider sex to be an exchange of value? apart from incels. and who on earth is counting?

i'm not sure its accurate to say that patriarchy interprets all intimate relationships as transactional in principle though agree that in practise many people seem to treat that as following directly from patriarchal systems.

Yeah I reject this outright and find it bizarre that ANYONE has ever thought it, much less that it’s completely embedded in our culture. Sex is an activity. No one gets mad if I go ride a Ferris wheel with friends. Why is it suddenly different if I have sex with a dude? Or 200 dudes?

Obviously that’s different if it’s harmful sex of some kind, but this idea that even some feminists buy into that penetration is some kind of inherent victory or invasion or dominance is insane. I think it shows how captured even feminists are by patriarchal nonsense. Why don’t we say men are conquered by PIV because we encapsulate their entire dicks and swallow them up inside us? Seems way more dominant to me. But that doesn’t fit the “man powerful” narrative so it’s never even considered.

[–] ghoul2 10 points Edited

I personally view PIV as "inherently violent" in a way because it holds a capacity for violence that, even if it does not happen violently, is ever present. I am heterosexual so it's not like I see PIV sex as bad, it is something I want in my life, but I also feel like it comes with safety risks that other things don't come with. Violation of consent is just one, but there's also risks to my internal anatomy, or the fact that I will very likely not have physical control, a man will have a higher strength level than me 99% of the time

Edit to add I do not believe in the value transfer thing, but I don't view piv sex the same as a ferris wheel either

Sex is not the same as any other activity and saying this undermines a lot of feminist points. I am sure you will ride a Ferris wheel with your kids. Sex is an extraodinary activity were most of human rules don't apply.

[–] WitchCouture 4 points Edited

Just a wild guess but probably because PIV does not result in pregnancy, and all the health issues that come with it, for men.

Is it dominant to die in childbirth?

[–] proudcatlady 7 points Edited

Is it dominant to be so bitter that your body is incapable of creation that you cope by making your entire sex class focused on killing and destruction? Pregnancy is not a weakness. Making a woman pregnant is only a “gotcha” if you’ve already stigmatized pregnancy and made a society where it’s as dangerous as possible.

[–] furyosa [OP] no, thank you 9 points

this is tangential to the point of the post but does anyone seriously consider sex to be an exchange of value?

In the religious settings I grew up in a woman was definitely considered less than after she had sex with a man while the man would rise in status. I even remember a ritual prayer performed by a woman in this religious setting who had the power to "reset" a woman's virginity if she had slept with a guy to kind of restore her sense of self-worth that was harmed from having consensual sex with a man. It was wild.

oh wow!! i guess i knew it happened in sort of fringe religious settings but the idea women bought into it enough to have to have ceremonies to help heal their self worth is so sad. i'm glad you've got out of it.

this is tangential to the point of the post but does anyone seriously consider sex to be an exchange of value?

Yes, though I think it varies whether people are consciously thinking of it in such a blunt way. That is what is done and promoted in much of pornography - degrading women, while uplifting men. It's not unusual to see the dynamic of men hyping each other up when their buddy tells them they slept with so&so, while thinking less of the woman, especially if he has brought back 'trophy' photos to share of her in a vulnerable & compromising position. Women who are thought of as 'sleeping around' are generally looked down on, degraded with misogynistic slurs, while men in comparison are generally thought of as studs.

Even outside of religious settings like what furyosa described, virginity is still frequently tied to how a woman or girl is seen as "pure". I cannot think of any situation in which men are "virginity tested" like women are in medical, educational and other social settings.

I think that many people believe that when a woman has sex with a man, she becomes "his". Her will is no longer really her own, she is now like a zombie version of his interests.

Incels/mra/redpill do on paper and very openly, but they are just a magnification of cultural principles already at play. I have definitely seen "normal" folk criticize women for having too many boyfriends in a certain time period or similar

Load more (1 comment)

I'm not sure that this tracks for me; I think the power shifts are more that it's seen as an act of domination and conquest from men, and an act of being dominated/conquered for women. I don't believe that it follows that for this to occur, the power dynamic had to have originally been flipped with the man at the bottom and the woman at the top, only that the man takes and the woman is taken from, the man gains what the woman loses, he is augmented and she is reduced, or putting it more coarsely (and spoilered for NSFW) the difference between fucking and being fucked

Less of a wrestling move reversal ("ahah!" now I'm on top!"), and more like Vikings pillaging peasants with few defenses. The wealthy rob from the poor every day.

[–] furyosa [OP] no, thank you 1 points

I agree that it's rooted in domination and conquest. But it wouldn't be much of a conquest if the prize of your endeavors was seen as low value. Men don't kneel down to get his picture taken over a mouse that he shot. No, he does it over the lion that he knows is stronger and more powerful than him and gives him bragging rights among his fellow men.

When I look at consensual sex through the patriarchal framework, the one being fucked is seen as the one who is getting the worse deal ("losing"), ie the man himself is the bad goods - the woman loses by accepting the low value that the man represents. While the one who is doing the fucking is getting the good deal ("winning"), ie the woman is the one with the higher value - the man wins by getting to claim the high value that the woman represents.

[–] crodish 3 points Edited

Lmfao what. isn't this "women are responsible for what men do" but the insanest take on it. Misandry, a prejudice towards men, is responsible for patriarchy, a system where men are valued over women? Really? Shouldn't it be the other way around that misandry is born from the fact that the patriarchy is a thing?

[–] furyosa [OP] no, thank you 0 points

As I responded to hontrapoints, it's not women who consider men to be of lower value than them that is driving patriarchy. Women being misandrists the same way men are misogynists is not a real thing. However, it's men's internalized sense of having a lower value than women ("womb envy" as some feminists have called it), or internalized misandry, is one tenet driving patriarchy. And I'm simply pointing out that men with a patriarchal mindset admit as much in the way that they describe that women "lose" when they have consensual sex with men while men "win" when they have consensual sex with women.

If you "lose" in a consensual interaction you are considered to have gotten worse after the interaction than you were before. You were taken advantage of and made to give more than you got. If you "win" you were the one taking advantage of the other person, and you took more than you gave back.

Objectively, in heterosexual sex where both partners are said to go into it willingly and where both get mutual pleasure from the interaction, nobody is worse off after the interaction. There may be pregnancy but if it's desired then that's not being worse off. However, in the patriarchal framework, the woman in this instance (regardless of potential pregnancy that won't be obvious until much later) automatically "loses" and the man automatically "wins" from the interaction. The only way that the woman "loses" in this case is if she brings a certain value to the interaction and leaves with a lower value after. What changed her value in this patriarchal mindset? An interaction with a man. Patriarchy views women sexually interacting with men as lowering the women's value. The more interactions she has, the lower her value becomes while the man rises in status. I can only read this as patriarchy thinking very lowly of men; that a consensual interaction with them, where nothing objectively is lost, the woman is still worse off after the interaction. Patriarchy is telling us it's misandrist and they cope with their inferiority complex through projection which leads to extreme misogyny which gives them a way to rise to the top.

[–] ghoul2 5 points Edited

One could argue that it's wholly misanthropic since it treats human intimate relationships as transactional.

To me this is exactly it. It's a philosophy based on destruction, antithetical to creation. Not to sound bioessentialist but I do feel like there is a creation/destruction dichotomy present when comparing matriarchy/patriarchy, or gynocracy/androcracy. It is the collaboration versus competition model as well. I don't see men hurting themselves as misandristic, but I see it as a side effect of them hurting others. Same way as how climate change and estrangement from nature is the human world shooting ourselves in the foot, at the hands of an economy running on these androcratic principles. Destroying others inevitably chips away at yourself.

Makes me think about that scene in fifth element where the two guys are arguing over whether life is of supreme importance, and the guy starts saying that death allows the creation of jobs, that the economy can thrive on death. Such a male mindset present in gary oldman's character haha.

A transactional mindset of sex and relationships is another reason why sex can be stolen as well, and stealing sex is seen as profitable to the rapist. I know rape is often not about sex at all, but I feel like a lot of times in our screwed up sexual economy, it IS about sex and stealing. The boundaries do not matter because it's a product/service.

Transactionalizing relationships and sexuality is probably the worst thing to happen to humans.

Edit to add: I think the value transfer mindset is very casually present in society, not just in fringe groups but how teen girls will call other girls in school a slut etc. It's everywhere. But I definitely see it as wrong and I hope it can be dismantled