Should Drunken Sex Be A Criminal Act? New York Seems To Think So.

blonde woman holding wine glass, smiling towards the man

After over a decade of doing this, I know when to tread lightly on certain subjects and sexual assault is one of them. I wrote an article about the MeToo Movement that was widely shared and was invited to appear on a CNN Town Hall, which I declined to attend because there’s no reward in nuanced discussion in a cancel culture world.

Yet I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t still believe in nuanced discussion on my own website. I may be a dating coach for women but that doesn’t mean that all men are wrong in all situations. Drunken hookups are a perfect example. So…to cover my bases, ALL sexual assault is wrong and should be punishable to the fullest extent.

There. I said it. Then again, I don’t know anyone who disagrees with that.

But what Nancy Rommelmann does here is to make a compelling case that – without forgiving sexual assault – we should not criminalize “sex with booze.” 

According to recent New York law, “From now on, you will not be the ultimate arbiter of your own bad or good choices, at least not without fear of prosecution. We’re not talking getting roofied at a bar—current penal laws already list “mentally disabled or mentally incapacitated” (as well as “forcible compulsion,” “incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless” and being below certain age thresholds) as reasons why a person cannot consent to have sex. We are talking ipso facto being considered incapable of giving consent due to having consumed alcohol. Should you choose to go ahead and have sex while drunk, you will by default be seen as a victim (or perpetrator) driven by what you wanted at the time, a person, in the charming words of Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., “unable to control his or her conduct due to that intoxication.” 

A majority of my consensual pre-marriage sexual encounters would leave me liable to jail time.

Yep. You read that right. If I were in New York, a majority of my consensual pre-marriage sexual encounters would, apparently, leave me liable to jail time. You can see how this might be a problem. Rommelmann sure does:

“What happens if both parties are drunk? Whose word will take precedence? What if the parties remember things differently? What if they don’t remember things at all? How will the law square that someone cannot be trusted to give consent but can be trusted to know she or he did not give consent? What happens when “it seemed like a good idea at the time …” meets that morning moral hangover? What about claiming to have been drunk when you weren’t? What about when a rape charge obscures a more complicated situation? What happens when the courts are so clogged with voluntarily incapacitated cases that other rape cases have to wait, or see its victims shunted and the uphill slog to justice made that much harder?

Let me be clear: I believe women have historically been disbelieved when it comes to rape; that the backlog of rape kits in this country is vile beyond words; that the most vulnerable among us must be protected. But I will not pretend that telling women what they are allowed to do with their bodies, and when, is about safety, or freedom, including the freedom to have sex, drunk or not, that you might later regret (or forget). Aside from almost every adult I’ve known, I do not have data to support how often regret-sex occurs. Guess what? The governor’s office doesn’t either, but he, unlike me, is willing to criminalize it.”

Again, I don’t think anything about this take is controversial. Rape is wrong. Punishing a man for rape after a consensual drunken encounter is also wrong, isn’t it?

Your thoughts, below, are greatly appreciated.


Join our conversation (75 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.


  1. 1
    Angela Dunn

    I have many times had a little to drink before sex because when it comes to sex I am so nervous I have a hard time letting go and relaxing…. I don’t consider drunken sex to be a crime. I have however had men ask me to take more and more shots in order to get me drunk thinking my defenses would be down. I have always declined and removed myself from that situation so ya I think some awful men do try and use alcohol to get what they want from a woman. Its a weird thing conversation I guess…..

  2. 2

    “Who is responsible when both parties are drunk”? – The man of course! Who else would it be?

    These insane laws are feminist theory pushed into law through the backdoor. It’s funny, feminists in the 60’s wanted to have a freer sexual culture and blamed men for constricting them in this regard, yet now it’s them that want to restrict when and how people can have sex. Oh well, when they want to get hammered and have sex in the future, I’m sure there will be a new feminist theory which blames the restrictive measures they now propose on men somehow.

    Makes you think, have men ever been really responsible for restrictive measures placed on sexuality, from The chastity belt to the burka? Or have they always grown out of some feminine impulse at self protection like these?

    I wonder what the long term goal of this kind of thing is, or if there is one? After all for things to remain laws in society they need to be enforced on people and because of the nature of how that happens, in the long term men need to be on board with that.
    Laws like these fly in the face of reason to any man with half a brain. What would the male police officer think while arresting a man who had drunken sex with a woman? That it was unfair? Biased? Could happen to him? Do you think he would be on board with these laws? Hell no!
    Ask yourself what that means for the long term?

    Ugh, I know there a lot of women who won’t agree with laws like this as well, but apparently they consistently have less power of influence over the law than those who do – and so more feminist theory creeps gradually into law. Doesn’t bode well for the idea of equality (either the truth of it or the possibility) that voices like these amongst women consistently come out on top. Not for as long as men are required to enforce laws.

    1. 2.1


      Feminist, huh? You guys keep forgetting that we’re talking about physical penetration. Funny that you mention the back door. So you’re saying that if you get too drunk, and I end up taking advantage and using my strap-on on you, you wouldn’t have any problems with that?

      What if I was also the one pushing for sex. Or even got you drunk on purpose just so I can have my way with you?

      And while we’re on the subject of feminists. Let’s not forget that plenty of men have ended up in these situations as well because of other men.

      Yes, there are plenty of women who’ll actively try to get laid when they’re drunk – or even when they’re not. But fact still remains that 99.9% of customers of prostitutes are men. 95%+ of rapists are men. The high majority of people constantly trying to get laid are men. The majority of people complaining that all men seem to want is sex are women.

      And – once again – there is a physical aspect to consider. Not just the penetration part, but also the part where men have a bad habit of not controlling their sperm and the damages they can cause a woman with such. Another factor that men don’t have to worry about, because a woman doesn’t damage his body with her eggs.

      As for women always coming out on top. There’s an easy solution for you men. Keep in in your pants! Just say no. Problem solved. There is no one forcing you to have sex with women (well, unless she rapes you). Men like you always want to moan about women having all the power when it comes to sex (as if its a bad thing that rape is illegal), and completely fail to realize that it’s a two-way street.

      If you men want to have the power in sex, all you have to do is start saying no. Stop having sex. Make women work hard to get it. But you won’t. And you know why? Because you darn well know that a high majority of women wouldn’t care. Especially not nowadays, with all the toys out there. No risk of STDs. No risk of unwanted pregnancy. And guaranteed satisfaction, unlike sex with a man.

      Plenty of women like sex. But the high demand for sex is not created by women. I don’t understand why, since I have an extreme high sex-drive, but I still realize that such is reality.

      Don’t want to get arrested for drunk sex? Don’t have it. Really, it’s that simple.

      1. 2.1.1

        Actually if I was drunk and had weird kinky sex with a woman I wouldn’t have otherwise then I’d be fine with it. That’s on me. There is no such thing as “taking advantage” to me unless I’m passed out, because I don’t have an expectation or desire to be protected from the way my own actions make me feel, even when drunk.

        That’s the reason I don’t want people arrested for willing drunk sex, because I’m not mortified at the idea of having it or how I’d feel after (nothing).

        If you don’t want to be upset by having willing sex while under the influence (of your own choice), to the point you need someone to be punished on account the way it makes you feel, the solution is simple, don’t have it.

  3. 3

    “Makes you think, have men ever been really responsible for restrictive measures placed on sexuality, from The chastity belt to the burka? Or have they always grown out of some feminine impulse at self protection like these?”

    Uh, no. No, they didn’t.

    1. 3.1

      And yet here we are, in a time where some women honestly believe that as grown adults the can’t drink of their own choosing and then choose to have sex willingly, but instead become totally responsibility less and needing of protection against the terrible consequences (sarcasm intended) of them choosing to have willing sex while drunk, to the point they consider themselves to have been raped. These new laws aren’t being made because of men’s thoughts and opinions, but feminists (and apparently a fair percentage of women agree with them or at least have similar feelings).

      I could actually see it, as a strange kind of power play, l could see the same ancient female personality type as these modern feminists saying -“see the “cool girl”over there with her hair flowing free? She has no idea what those evil men are doing to her looking at all of her – we need to put a stop to them and her” Actually I could see the types that wanted this law doing either thing today and being hailed as ironic hero’s by their supporters lol.

      1. 3.1.1


        I already mentioned this in the comment above, but you are forgetting one major thing. That there definitely can be terrible consequences to a woman when it comes to sex.

        You see, men have a bad habit of spraying thousands of live bullets (viable sperm) into women’s’ bodies during sex. They have a terrible problem not controlling their sperm and protecting women from the damages men can cause with such. For some reason, a lot of men seem to think it’s a woman’s responsibility to use bullet proofing to protect herself from his sperm and his reproductive role.

        But overall, you give feminists way too much credit. They don’t have anywhere near as much power as you think. They also don’t try to control or shame other women for their choices.

        As I mentioned above, if you don’t want to have to worry, simply abstain from sex or sexual situations that could land you in trouble. It won’t hurt you to use lube and porn instead. Learn to say no to sex, and you’ll take the power away from those feminists.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Sylvana: Feminists, because they’re not monolithic, ABSOLUTELY shame others choices. Probably even more than live and let live moderates.

          And “abstain from sex” is some pretty weak sauce as advice goes. It’s the female equivalent of men saying “boys will be boys.”

        2. Bbq

          But why should you or other women want me to “land in trouble” if I and another woman both get drunk and have sex? What about that sexual situation do you think the man needs to be in “trouble” for? Why would you want or condone that happening?

          Contraception exists for both sexes, if you use it the only thing to worry about in that situation are hurt feelings. Now why do men need to be held accountable for those? Because of a primitive drive to protect women in a situation for which in the modern world they don’t need protecting from? (Apart from apparently their feelings).

          That doesn’t make sense, anymore than a man running round excpeting to be catered to on the basis of being a man. I believe those feminists would call that a learned gendered behaviour. If it were done by a man they would say society had taught them to act like that and it could be changed.

          Well, perhaps it’s time some women (like those that support this law) unlearned the gendered behaviour of excepting to be catered to in a situation of equal responsibility, because as far as this article shows, there impulses are straight out of the 1600’s.

          It’s hilarious to me that when the advent of birth control occured and women gained the ability to have these kind of one night stands and drunk sex, they campaigned for them and told men not to judge them for doing so. Yet here more than half a century later, they want men to be judged rapists for having the same encounters.

          They absolutely want to act as they wish but attempt to stop men acting the same way because of the way it makes them feel – even tho if the sex is willing they’re doing the exact same. How can both those things happen at the same time?

          It’s not logical thinking.

  4. 4

    This is a fine line. There is a huge difference between someone who’s consumed a few drinks and someone who is completely wasted. Still, I would have to say err on the side of caution. Let’s say a friend of mine has had a few drinks. Then he/she hands me their credit car and tells me to go buy myself a new car with it, because I need one. Now, I know they have the money to spare. Would I go do it?

    Hell no.

    What I will do is take the discussion up with them again once they’re completely sober. Just in case.

    Same goes for if someone I’m with wanted to try something particularly kinky in bed. One or two drinks, maybe. A few more than that, we’re walking that fine line again. Removed inhibitions are not always a good thing, and can often lead to hurt and regret. Wasted – absolutely not. I’d hate for a man to get mad in the morning because his butt is sore and he blames me for taking advantage of his inebriated state.

    There is not doubt that a certain level of alcohol consumption clearly does make a person mentally incapacitated. And its usually not that hard to tell when people have had too much to drink. So I’d say when in doubt, a man would be well-advised to just keep it in his pants. It’s just sex, after all. He can use his hand and some porn to get the job done.

    Whether it’s sex or anything else, I personally would not want to risk creating a bad situation, let alone possibly landing in legal trouble.

    1. 4.1
      Emily, to

      “There is a huge difference between someone who’s consumed a few drinks and someone who is completely wasted.”
      I was going to post the same thing. There’s a big difference between taking a woman home who’s had a few drinks and is feeling a little loosey-goosey and taking a woman home who needs to be propped up as you’re walking her to the car. A former male co-worker told me once that when he went out cruising, he’d look for women who were, as he described, “the walking wounded,” and then of course offer to buy them another drink. That’s disgusting, and why it would be appealing let alone validating to have sex with a woman who was that drunk completely escapes me. Now, that doesn’t mean she isn’t’ responsible for her own behavior but a warning that there are men who prey on drunk women and that if a woman gets that drunk in public, she’d better have a friend be watching out for her.

      1. 4.1.1
        Evan Marc Katz

        No one is defending men who take advantage of women who are nearly passed out. The reason I wrote about the law is that it states that if alcohol is involved (including the two drinks you mentioned), the man can be found guilty, regardless of the encounter. If you don’t see that as a problem and try to steer the conversation back to obvious date rape, you’re really missing the point.

        1. Bbq

          I was saying feminists wanted this above to be kind. In reality as the comments will likely show, many women will miss the point on this (as you’ve defined it). Despite supposed equality, many unfortunately still place a presumed duty of care on the man in this situation, no matter his intent or inexperience. It’s human instinct like this that makes ideals of equality hollow.

          But like I already wrote, to have laws like this exist in the long term they need to be enforced. And when men are the main enforcers, that’s a problem.

      2. 4.1.2

        “…he’d look for women who were, as he described, ‘the walking wounded’, and then of course offer to buy them another drink. That’s disgusting, and why it would be appealing let alone validating to have sex with a woman who was that drunk completely escapes me.”

        It completely escapes me as well. If a woman is drunk enough to be “swaying in the breeze”(yes, no matter what she looks like), the only thing I’m at all interested in vis a vis her is getting her a cab, unless she has friends (at least one of whom is somewhat sober) looking after her. If she’s that drunk, she’s not only incapable of giving informed consent to sex; even if she were, her contribution to the affair would likely be…well, a dead starfish would be more lively. Thanks, but no thanks! As for giving another drink to a woman in such a state, I think that’s as bad as drugging her drink; a guy who has to do that to get laid isn’t much of a man, IMHO.

        All jokes aside, a woman who gets that intoxicated in public, even totally of her own volition, is not safe on public transportation at night, or even walking down the street alone, for that matter. For us men, we need to be protecting the woman who’s had a few too many, not making her situation even worse.

  5. 5

    If you go back 20+ years, sex/relationship therapists such as Dr Ruth Westheimer recommended women have a glass of wine to help calm nerves and inhibitions. Women should always be aware of predators but the problem of men trying to liquor up women to get laid has never been lower. IMO. Wankers are a bigger problem than horny men. Our culture keeps raising the bar for consent but I think reason is more about politics and legal theory than correcting a social problem.

  6. 6
    Mrs Happy

    Sadly I suspect New York has other things on which to focus at the moment and for quite a while.

  7. 7
    Christina Connolly

    I’m Irish. In Ireland, there would be no population if drunken sex were a crime. Or else our prisons would be full.

  8. 8

    I think the core of the issue here is that women aren’t fulfilled with one night stands or casual sex. And yes, Feminists will never address this issue head on. Instead, the “me too” movement and restriction of alcohol is targeted as a way of policing men’s sexual desires, never putting into question how women fare in all this “sexual equality.” With transgender rights being the new cause célèbre, the differences between the sexes are now considered “fluid.” Hey, sisters, maybe we’re just not cut out to have sex like men? Facts available with a quick search: Only 40% of women orgasm during casual sex, compared to 80% of men. Yes, that seems like a low number. But wait…75% of women orgasm during sex in a committed relationship. Read that again. More women are able to orgasm when they’re in a committed relationship. Why aren’t women talking about these numbers? It would help us understand our sexuality and make us happier in the long run. Why are we not debating these facts? Because it would prove men and women have biological and psychological differences. So instead, modern women attack the sexual freedom of men, the only way to control the outcome without having a real conversation about what us women can and can’t handle.

    1. 8.1
      Emily, to

      ” Hey, sisters, maybe we’re just not cut out to have sex like men? Facts available with a quick search: Only 40% of women orgasm during casual sex, compared to 80% of men.”
      Do women who have casual sex expect orgasms? I don’t mean that sarcastically. I thought maybe part of the reason was for the experience.

      1. 8.1.1

        If you’d ask a man the same question, he would wonder if you were serious. If men expect to have sex with orgasm being the end goal, why shouldn’t women?

        1. Jeremy

          Not so much a question of what people should or shouldn’t do. More a question of why people actually do what they do.

          It seems to me that the complaint of many women isn’t that they aren’t having orgasms from casual sex, it’s that they aren’t getting relationships from it, are feeling used and hurt after the fact because the guy didn’t call them back. If that’s the case, what did they want from the sex? Wasn’t orgasms. Even if they’d have preferred to also have the orgasms. Vibrators are much more reliable than men in that regard, I’m told, regardless of how well acquainted a woman is with that vibrator. I’m not saying that women shouldn’t want orgasms, I’m observing that orgasms can’t be their prime motivation given how they act.

          BTW, I’d imagine that the numbers you posted are likely inaccurate. I’d imagine lower numbers for female orgasm, both casual and long-term, especially if we’re going on a per-encounter basis. Certainly the number of 80% of men orgasming seems suspicious. Are we talking the first time or the third? 🙂

        2. Emily, to

          It’s not a matter of men versus women. Men are physically capable of having orgams easier than women are. Blame the Creator on that one. 🙂 I just think that most women don’t feel comfortable telling a casual sex partner what they need. Thus, they don’t necessarily expect to get off during casual sex.

        3. Emily, to

          Hi Jeremy
          “If that’s the case, what did they want from the sex? Wasn’t orgasms.”
          The experience. I don’t mean the experience of having sex so that they can mark their calendars that they got laid. I mean the overall experince of being with that person or doing someting a little shady (casual sex still has a shade factor to it). Could be any number of reasons.

        4. Elizabeth

          The question of the study should be not how men can make their partners feel more physically comfortable, but how can the woman be more orgasm ready. Maybe the 45% of women who can’t orgasm don’t feel secure enough to? Maybe they know causal sex comes with risks. Not just sexual transmitted diseases, but the risk that after the man ejaculates, he’s more likely to bolt… never to be seen again. Think about it. Men are biologically wired to have sex with as many women as possible with little to no risk. Women, on the other hand, have a 9 month risk that will happen whether daddy is around or not. Men have 40 million and 1.2 billion sperm cells in one ejaculation. Women have 500 eggs ovulated during her reproductive lifetime. Sperm is abundant, eggs are precious. No wonder women freak out with short-term sexual encounters. It’s in our nature. Again, because it is politically incorrect to say there are differences between the sexes, this viewpoint is not shared widely. But it makes sense, once dissected.

          Here is the link of the study I quoted:–relationship.html

        5. Jeremy

          Elizabeth, you wrote, “The question of the study should be not how men can make their partners feel more physically comfortable, but how can the woman be more orgasm ready.”

          Is that the question, though? Are the women who feel negatively about having casual sex saying, “Well, I didn’t get a relationship and feel like crap because he never called me back…..but if I’d had an orgasm I’d feel much better” ? Again, I’m not doubting that they’d rather have had an orgasm than not, but it seems to me that if their major goal was to use sex to solidify a relationship, the question they should be asking is whether they have a relationship before they have the sex. They should be asking that other question if, after getting super-comfortable, they still aren’t climaxing.

          Whereas your suggestion below about men helping women by not having sex with anyone but their girlfriends is not really realistic. Because unless the MAN’S goal is to use sex to solidify a relationship, what motivation does he have to hold himself back from sex until a woman is his girlfriend? That’s HER motivation, not his. She’s responsible for her own motivations, she needs to own them, not rely on men to be the adult to compensate for her lack of agency.

          I think women SHOULD better advocate for themselves and their sexual pleasure. They should get to know their bodies and learn what pleases them and what doesn’t. They should not be afraid to ask for what they want. And I’d add, they should also stop thinking of their own sexuality as something unknown and unknowable. Something that a man will either “get” on his own, or will never “get.” Something that either clicks or doesn’t. Nonsense. Stop thinking that instructing a man in how to please women somehow detracts from his desirability or masculinity, that he’d just get it if he was a real man. Because until women can do that, their prophecies will always be self-fulfilling.

    2. 8.2

      Elizabeth and Emily,

      I believe those stats are about right, WRT casual sex. Can both of you elaborate a bit more on why this is, and what (if anything) men can do to improve the situation? I have some ideas but I’d like to hear more of what you think before commenting further. Also, if the object of casual sex or one night stands is to “scratch an itch” resulting from not having sex, wouldn’t not reaching orgasm leave a woman in such a case feeling even more sexually frustrated after than before? Thoughts?

      1. 8.2.1
        Emily, to

        Hi Buck,
        “Can both of you elaborate a bit more on why this is, and what (if anything) men can do to improve the situation?”
        It would depend on the individual woman in terms of how important getting off is for her. Of course, you’d have no way of knowing that ahead of time. The last casual situation I had … I liked the guy and I’ll just say it happened in a unique place, which ratcheted up the fun/excitement level. I had a good time. Had he pressed about me having an orgasm, that would have detracted from it, but that’s me.
        “Also, if the object of casual sex or one night stands is to “scratch an itch” resulting from not having sex, wouldn’t not reaching orgasm leave a woman in such a case feeling even more sexually frustrated after than before?”
        Yes, if she went into the situation with that goal in mind.

      2. 8.2.2

        Yes. Jeremy is right. These women are feeling used and tossed aside once the male is done with her. But on top of that, the fact that almost half the women aren’t even enjoying themselves with an orgasm is, well, sad. What are these women getting out of it? Or have they been brainwashed into thinking they’re empowering themselves by feminist-led culture? Don’t get me wrong. I’m not giving a free pass to men who treat women poorly and exploit hook-up culture. What I am doing is pointing out the obvious that women need to look at themselves and wonder why they’re not feeling happy, instead of constantly blaming the other side. As far as what men can do to help women feel at ease? Easy. Do what Evan did for several years before he met his wife. Don’t have sex with women who aren’t your girlfriend. It’s tragic that you (by asking this question) care more about a woman’s sexual and mental fragility than the woman herself. And therein lies the issue at hand.

        1. Buck25

          “These women are feeling used and tossed aside once the male is done with her…What are these women getting out of it?”


          That was one of the questions that occurred to me as well. With the hookup culture being as prevalent as it is today, I’m not sure I see what’s in it for most women, especially since they usually can’t separate sex from their emotions the way us men can. Granted this is from a male POV, but since a lot of women also haver enough anxiety about sex to begin with, wouldn’t that be worse with an unfamiliar partner? Experience would so indicate. Are they, as Jeremy suggests, hoping to get a relationship out of it?

        2. Emily, to

          Buck 25,
          I pulled this quote from a column Dr. Nerdlove wrote. It sums up that women don’t always hook up casually to get a relationship.
          “Women have sex with folks for a multitude of reasons, reasons that often have NOTHING to do with the person they’re sleeping with, just as men do. Women sleep with people because they’re bored, they want validation, to send a message to someone, as a form of self-harm, to try to get over someone else… all things that (may) mean that the person they’re having sex … was the nearest and most convenient or even the least objectionable.”

        3. Elizabeth

          Buck 25,
          Women are probably thinking that they can handle casual sex, but change their mind after. That’s why modern feminists are trying to change drinking laws. In essence, most (I said MOST) of the sex being questioned above is regret sex, not rape. Another study that I saw last year (in a book by one of the most famous pick-up artists of today) described the sexual differences between gay men and lesbian women. Gay men on average had 100 sexual partners. 25% of the gay men in the study had over 1000. Lesbian women on average had 9. Yes, 9.

          If women sought out sex for whatever reason, wouldn’t that reflect in the lesbian population? Or maybe, straight women are fed a lie to perpetuate “equality” of the sexes, including the notion that orgasms shouldn’t be the only thing women should seek out when having a short-term fling. With all due respect, that’s a heck of a lot of mental gymnastics. Again, flip it around to a dude’s point of view. Imagine a guy saying to his friends, “Yeah, man. I didn’t finish but I really connected to her all night. I don’t want to see her ever again but I really enjoyed the time we shared.” Most guys are ashamed if they cannot perform, not told there is more to one-night-stands than the orgasm. Please don’t rationalize sexual dysfunction as a normal part of the female sexual experience.

        4. Jeremy

          Emily, I’d agree that different women have different reasons for engaging in casual sex. But the ones complaining about it after the fact are the ones who did not achieve their goals, not the ones who did. IME the ones seeking intense experiences or pleasure are not the ones complaining the loudest.

          Elizabeth, I don’t think the reason straight women don’t all prioritize orgasm is because of a lie they’re fed. There’s a lot of evo-psych at play here. I hate to say, but female orgasm couldn’t have been terribly important or prevalent in ancient societies. I mean, look at the location of the clitoris and look at the mechanism of reproductive sex – it’s no wonder so many women report failure to orgasm, their anatomy doesn’t make any sense if orgasm was their sexual goal. Many scientists believe that female orgasm is an embryonic vestage of tissues that could have potentially become male – the clitoral hood is the tissue that would have become the penile glans if male hormones were embryologically present. Which is why it is where it is and why it plays no reproductive role. So why would we think it should play the same psychological role as it does in men?

          This is not to say that female orgasm should not be important to women and their male partners. It’s simply to say that thinking of lack of female orgasm as “dysfunction” is sort of a fraught concept. From an evo-psych perspective, orgasm has never been women’s primary sexual goal. So it’s hardly surprising that it still isn’t most women’s primary goal today. Regardless of societal messaging or lack thereof.

          I agree with your thesis that hookup culture isn’t good for many women. I just don’t think that the reason for that is lack of orgasm, nor do I think that having more orgasms will make those women complaining about lack of relationships any happier.

        5. Emily, to

          I feel like we’re talking at cross purpsoes and, to be frank, it sounds like you haven’t had much, if any, casual sex so you don’t really have a perspective on it or understand would motivate women to have it. To me, there’s nothing political about it. You do it if you want to. You don’t if you don’t. Some women are into it; some aren’t. I’m just tired of the narative that a woman’s only motivaton for casual sex is to secure a relationship because she’s really into the guy. That’s simply not true.

        6. Emily, to

          “Emily, I’d agree that different women have different reasons for engaging in casual sex. But the ones complaining about it after the fact are the ones who did not achieve their goals, not the ones who did. IME the ones seeking intense experiences or pleasure are not the ones complaining the loudest.”
          I agree with the first part. Those looking for intense experience aren’t complaining. But I do remember way back in college a couple of girlfriends complaining about the lack of pleasure (Elizabeth is right: orgasms) in casual sex. Unless a woman starts hooking up with a regular partner, even if that partner is casual, chances are high that a one-off won’t be all that physically great.

        7. Elizabeth


          Seriously? Bish, please. Never assume what you don’t know. …”to be frank, it sounds like you haven’t had much, if any, casual sex so you don’t really have a perspective on it or understand would motivate women to have it.” Or maybe that’s why I’m posting about it? I’m a product of modernity and have been brainwashed by pop-culture, societal pressure, etc… to have sex like men, because, well, grrrl power! Throwing caution to the wind (at the expense of my sanity and my own biological makeup) has left me with sexual dysfunction. My body has literally shut down and said NO MORE! Being pumped and dumped over the years sure doesn’t feel liberating like the feminists said it would. It’s taken me a decade to figure this out on my own, because damn well no 3rd wave feminist will lead this parade. Why? They’re too busy fighting 2nd wave feminists on why sex work is liberating for women and not self-exploitative. I’m angry at feminists for not only not addressing these issues, but encouraging more dysfunction in the name of female empowerment. They know exactly what’s going on but throw women under the bus so that we can have a corner office instead of a cubicle. One step forward, two steps back. Is that progress? Here are a few lines from a Hanna Rosin article, ” To put it crudely, feminist progress right now largely depends on the existence of the hookup culture… Even for those business-school women, their hookup years are likely to end up as a series of photographs, buried somewhere on their Facebook page, that they do or don’t share with their husband—a memory that they recall fondly or sourly, but that hardly defines them.”

          So pain, as long as it’s only for a few years in college, is worth it for the sake of feminist progress? Hate to break it to you, Hanna, but hook-up culture is not just regulated to college campi anymore. It’s spread to dating of all ages. Hook-up culture IS modern dating. (Hello, dating apps anyone?) What used to be a moment in life that “hardly defines” college girls, has become a nightmare that follows these same girls throughout their lives, inflicting psychological damage they just can’t shake. But, hey, they got a raise! That is, after all, the most important thing a woman should strive for, right? Just today, news of the marriage rate has decreased, even for the college-educated. Again, more “progress.” Why must aspiring, career-minded women and hook-up culture be mutually inclusive? Can’t we have an honest discussion about the ramifications of said culture without hurting the ambitions of women in the workforce? It’s infuriating that feminists are anti-biology and anti-science in the grand scheme of pushing their political ideology whilst hurting the same women they claim to advocate for.

        8. Emily, to

          You sound really angry, so I’ll leave it to the expert. There are plenty of relationship-minded men out there. Maybe Jeremy can chime in here. If I remember correctly, casual sex is not and never was never his thing. It’s all not “pump and dump” out there.

        9. jo

          Whoa… maybe best to hold off on name-calling. Elizabeth, I’m sorry for the losses you’ve suffered in your past. But I’ve noticed your constant blaming of feminism for women’s sexual dissatisfaction in the last decades, and would challenge that allocation of blame. As a feminist myself, I’d never heard, nor propagated, the notion that feminism means that we women must make ourselves more sexually available or say yes to hookup culture.

          If Hanna Rosin really claimed that these phenomena were equivalent to aiming for a corner office or equal pay for equal work, I’d like to ask her: ‘And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?’ She is conflating two completely different concepts. To the extent that feminism has influenced sex, it is more about birth control so that women don’t need to get pregnant if they don’t wish, protection from STIs, and reducing the stigma around women ‘sleeping around’ (which includes everything from shaming to killing in some countries). It is not about women needing to say yes when we would rather say no. I would say that this is the result of an entirely different sort of force, but to blame feminism is inappropriate.

          The one area in which I agree with you is that we women should take responsibility for our choices. I am not speaking of times that we’re so incapacitated that we can’t make rational choices. And that means that we need to strengthen our figurative muscle for saying No, and learn to prioritise caring for ourselves above pleasing others.

        10. Bbq


          So who decides when you are so incapacitated that you cant make rational choices? You after the fact? The man before the act? The law after it? What about when the man is just as incapacitated? What if men believe that so long as they are conscious and making choices they bear ultimate responsibility for their own choices? Should they not believe women should do the same? Or are they to be specially privileged? (Unequal)

        11. Elizabeth

          I sound angry? Ignorance is bliss. You attacked me for not having experience in casual sex, “to be frank.” Now, I never made the same claims about you. I just think your viewpoints are standard fare. In essence, what every women is told to think without questioning the source.

          You are right about feminism not always being about sexual liberation…in 1884 during the first wave of feminism. Type in sexual revolution in your search bar and you’ll see this: “Coinciding with second-wave feminism and the women’s liberation movement initiated in the early 1960s, the sexual liberation movement was aided by feminist ideologues in their mutual struggle to challenge traditional ideas regarding female sexuality and queer sexuality.” To think that feminism and female promiscuity are not linked is intellectually disingenuous. And to think that they give as much thought to women who choose to live a more chaste life is, well, laughable. Let’s be real here. As a feminist, you must have seen slut walks from every corner of the world. Where have you ever seen a virgin walk? Chastity rights? Celibacy month? Anything that promotes abstinence coming from the pink-hatted crowd? If you can find something to that level of protest, I’ll give you a round of applause. I grew up in the most liberal city in America and everyone thought I was a freak for remaining a virgin as long as I did. I had no chance to survive in that environment with a chaste mindset and still have a normal social life. Had I grown up in a different part of the country, things might have turned out differently. So what did I do when the pressure was on everywhere I turned? I adapted to my surroundings, never questioning why promiscuous seekers were on the “right” side of history. It wasn’t until I started reading Pick-up artist blogs religiously for a few years did the rose-colored, feminist glasses start coming off. The insight into manosphere groupthink and the sum of my experiences enlightened me as to how woman had sold each other out and given male predators the keys to the car. Jo, if feminists are truly agnostic about the sexual preferences of women, why haven’t they explored the physical and psychological aftermath of free love, hook-up culture, whatever you want to call it? Where are the panels, graphs, studies, etc…? Where is the discussion of the long-term consequences of this cultural phenomenon on a global scale?

        12. jo

          Elizabeth, assuming that you do wish to have an honest intellectual discussion about this, two problems I see in what you describe are that: 1. correlation in time does not equal causation, and 2. the problem in your experiences may have less to do with ‘feminism’, and more to do with a weakness in boundaries (which is common in young people, so not any specific criticism – we get better at setting boundaries as we grow older).

          Many events co-occurred in the time of the sexual revolution in North America (roughly 1960s), including the increased availability of the pill, cultural, musical, racial, civic upheavals, a Cold War, a Vietnam War, assassinations, scientific advances… what a tumultuous time. It would be very hard to draw direct lines saying one caused the other, when so many moving parts were changing at once. You say that it would be foolish not to link feminism to female promiscuity. I would reply that female promiscuity hadn’t changed as much as you might have guessed over history, but it had to be hushed more in the past, and after certain feminist advances (including birth control and STI control), was no longer as taboo to discuss. To draw a direct causation is not well supported. It is simpler, and more accurate, to correlate rises in feminist goals and less hiding of promiscuity in time.

          Second, some of your comments really gave me pause. You didn’t have to reveal whether you were a virgin or not to anyone else; that was your choice. You didn’t have to feel ashamed for choices regarding your own body. You didn’t have to go along with the flow regardless of where you lived – many don’t. I don’t see a case for blaming feminism, or anyone or anything, on the outside, for your personal choices.

          I hope that with the passing time, you’ve come to own your own power – but part of that has to involve giving up blaming others, or something like feminism, for your own choices. In the end, I think that’s what this post was about. The lesson is broader than the immediate topic.

        13. Elizabeth


          I was hoping for a neutral discussion but I see that’s not gonna happen. Why? Because I am criticized by women who think a) I don’t know what I’m talking about when it comes to casual sex because I have a different view than most modern women. B) The sexual revolution had nothing to with feminism.

          I’ve already covered A, so let’s discuss B. By the way, Jo, you never answered my questions about where the pro-abstinence wing of feminism is. Why? Because it doesn’t exist.

          Moving on… From PBS: “As the feminist movement evolved in the late 1960s, women started challenging their exclusion from politics and the workplace. They also began to question traditional sexual roles…. At the core of the sexual revolution was the concept — radical at the time — that women, just like men, enjoyed sex and had sexual needs. Feminists asserted that single women had the same sexual desires and should have the same sexual freedoms as everyone else in society. For feminists, the sexual revolution was about female sexual empowerment. For social conservatives, the sexual revolution was an invitation for promiscuity and an attack on the very foundation of American society — the family. Feminists and social conservatives quickly clashed over morality of the “sexual revolution,” and the Pill was drawn into the debate.”

          I thought this was common knowledge?

          Yes, you are correct. The pill did have a major part in the sexual revolution, but it wasn’t the catalyst that brought on “free love.” That was the lessening of sexual restrictions stemming from the 2nd wave of feminism. (Women could have had the pill and still wait for marriage to have sex- as was the norm prior to 1960, unlike the hush-hush, rampant hook-up culture of the 1950’s that you may think existed. Huh?) Or maybe instead of my consistent “blaming” of an institution, your loyalty to an ideology is making you blind to the truth. Look, I get it. I was once like you and Emily. I thought feminists always had my back. And then I stopped drinking the equality kool-aid and questioned everything. You may say I have weak boundaries. And in turn, I would say you and Emily lack critical thinking. I don’t even pause anymore. I’m used to it.

          Before I go, I’ll leave you with this: If you are politically blinded to something, a greater evil can occur. And it has and still is. Let’s just agree to disagree.

        14. Jeremy

          I feel a sort of kinship with you, Elizabeth. I too absorbed feminist messaging in my youth, somewhat to my detriment. I too was angry. I too sought validation and ended up in the manosphere, surrounded by men shrieking their pain, transmuting it to anger. I too made that mistake, it’s so easy to make.

          The problem is that “feminists” aren’t some all-knowing divinity, they’re just people. People who can’t see the future, who can’t plan every contingency, and who have a political agenda. They gave me advice to be polite, respectful, servile, non-aggressive – advice I later discovered made me less arousing to women – to the very women giving me that advice!…though it made me more attractive for relationships in the absence of arousal. How could these feminists not have known what their advice would do to me? Answer – they didn’t really care what it would do to me. Their goal was to reduce male aggression in a world where they perceived men to be too aggressive, in spite of the fact that women find a modicum of aggression to be arousing. They weren’t trying to get me laid, weren’t trying to make me un-arousing – these things simply never entered their minds, human as they are, unaware of the Law of Unintended Consequences as they are.

          In the same way, you ask how these feminists could not have known, not have told you, that having promiscuous sex without commitment would be harmful to your psyche. How could they be so unaware of the way many women see sex, see relationships? Answer – because they were trying to free women from what they saw as the control and oppression of their sexuality. They were trying to give women OPTIONS, not tell them what to do. And in their ignorance of human psychology, and in light of their agenda, they ignored the fact that so many women internalize values from their surroundings, and might find themselves locked in internal conflict between how they want to be internally versus how the wave of pressures resulting from the unintended consequences of feminist messaging has affected them.

          Years later, some wisdom gained, I’m no longer angry at feminists. I understand what they were trying to do, I perceive the positives in it along with the negatives. I am critical of those aspects of feminism that I find ignorant of human psychology. But I realize that the advice I was given was given without malice. It is now incumbent upon me to forge my way forward. To forgive myself for my mistakes and resolutely set my own path forward. For me, this involved making a conscious decision of how I wanted to be – and unlike before, it would be an INFORMED decision. I might still choose to be respectful, solicitous, non-aggressive, but I’ll be that way because it’s how I choose to be, to be in harmony with myself, KNOWING that it will make women less aroused……and not caring.

          In the same way, I think you now have a choice. You’ve perceived your dichotomy, understood your hurt… going forward, how do you want to be? Now that you’re more informed, what decision will you make to both obtain your goals and be the person you want to be…..insofar as those two things are compatible? Answering that question for yourself will help you regain your power, the power you feel you’ve given away. I’ve also found that staying off certain websites, like the manosphere, is a helpful first step in this. It’s hard to let go of anger when you’re surrounded by it. And while anger is a powerful catalyst for change, it can also be a powerful catalyst for inertia when we find ourselves unable to move beyond it.

        15. Emily, to

          “Because I am criticized by women who think a) I don’t know what I’m talking about when it comes to casual sex because I have a different view than most modern women. ”
          No, you aren’t that much of a unicorn. There are plenty of women who have no interest in casual sex and navigated through the hookup culture either single or with a steady boyfriend.

        16. Elizabeth


          It looks like we’ve gone through a similar awakening on opposite sides of the spectrum. You are absolutely right. The years I spent reading Pick Up Artist blogs were dark times indeed. Feminism has created the opportunity for PUAs to feel entitled to women’s bodies. Even my “red-pilled” girlfriend told me to stop reading the blogs. That is was poison. It was. I looked at humanity differently from then on. I saw men as sexual predators and not human beings. Not a good place, so I stopped engaging with that scene. In fact, I refuse to date men who are knowledgeable about that world. I can’t trust them.

          Yes, you are right that feminism knew not the damage they would inflict. But, Jeremy, it’s been 60 years since the sexual revolution, and feminists have doubled-down on “free love,” relabeling it as sex-positivity. They know exactly what is going on but could care less. I shared the article by Hanna Rosin earlier in the thread. She sees the damage, and says so in the article, but still rallies behind her thesis that in the long scheme of things, women are better off this way. WTF? At this point, it’s malice.

          Do I forgive feminists? That’s a tough question. I am grateful that I have options. I am not reliant upon anyone but myself and I know this is due to feminism. I am not forced to marry just to survive. I can remain single for life and be perfectly fine if don’t ever find the right, compatible match. PUAs are adamant that women will pick beta males in their remaining child-bearing years out of desperation. Not true. We would rather go solo than be with anyone we don’t respect. In essence, women who go their own way. Let’s not forget, that is why feminism was created.

        17. Jeremy

          What would you have them do, Elizabeth? It’s a genie that can’t be put back into its lamp. I somewhat agree with Jo that feminism never meant to discourage the choice of chastity for women – it just meant to expand the realm of choices available. Problem was psychology and economics. The psychological mistake was assuming that men and women want the same things in life – the picture may look similar all-in, but the hierarchy is opposite. With sex primary and lifestyle secondary for most men, and the opposite for most women. And therein lies the economic mistake — Remove sex as a “cost” for relationships for men, and you’ve got a bunch of men who will eschew relationships, thereby reducing women’s leverage to obtain relationships and cheapening the value of sex. As long as there is a critical mass of women having promiscuous sex, there will be a shortage of men for those who aren’t. I feel your pain. But why expect women who don’t necessarily value relationships to empathize? Why expect women who don’t feel the same as you to give up their freedoms? Just as I have to accept that being who I am makes me less desirable to many women, so the chaste woman has to accept that she has less choice than she once might have. Doesn’t mean she has no choices.

          Oh, and also, one other thing you wrote stuck out: I agree that women would rather be alone than be with a man they don’t respect. But perhaps with time and experience….some can come to respect qualities other than those their adolescent selves did. Evan came to realize that kindness and acceptance were more valuable in a mate than brass and sass. What might be more respectable than height and bravado? Most of the guys on the manosphere aren’t sexual predators. They’re guys who’ve just been powerless their whole lives and don’t like it any more than you. They’re just trying to regain power in entirely the wrong way.

        18. jo

          Jeremy, I’ve so enjoyed reading your comments in this thread. Two of your comments that provoke further thought:

          The first involves the limitations of the English language: relevant not just in this post, but the discussion you’re having about semantics with Andrew in another post. You mentioned aggression as a quality that attracts women. But aggression repulses me; it’s not attractive at all, and I think many women feel similarly. But maybe we’re thinking different things when we use that word, and maybe the English language simply doesn’t have an adequate word for that delicious quality in a man that is universally attractive to women. Heck, we don’t even have an English word for ‘je ne sais quoi’ to describe that quality. 🙂 It’s not so much confidence as it is a certain kind of groundedness, a kind of inner power that has nothing to do with aggression or ego, and everything to do with calm assuredness in reading and responding and acting in life situations. A sense that a man can take care of a situation, and can take care of you. In past posts, Sylvana has referred to it as dominance, an alpha quality, and semantic wars resulted from that – so maybe dominance isn’t the right word either. And ‘groundedness’ isn’t sexy enough to convey its sex appeal! Anyway, I hope you know what I mean.

          The second concerns your most recent comment about the difficulty of getting into relationships in a society with more sexual freedom. I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing, in that now we have the chance to know whether we’re physically compatible with someone before making a lifelong commitment to them. That freedom wasn’t widely allowed before the sexual revolution, and it led to sad, largely inescapable situations for many women (and probably many men, too). While I think it’s more important that a couple is personally, intellectually, and emotionally compatible, I also think that physical compatibility is important in LTRs, including marriage. If it’s now ‘more difficult’ to get into relationships, maybe it is simply one other item that we need to test (and every additional item means more work, of course), but overall ensures happier relationships once they’re achieved.

          Anyway, it’s been a very interesting conversation.

        19. Jeremy

          Hi Jo, thanks, I’ve enjoyed your comments too. Regarding your paragraph about that je-ne-sais-quoi quality, the one described as dominance per Sylvana, confidence by Emily, and aggression by me – I agree that language is limiting our communication. But I do know what you’re talking about even though I’m not a woman. To me, what you perceive as “centeredness in self” I tend to turn around and call “self-centeredness.” But I find the disconnect between an individual’s motivation for action versus how that action is seen by others. For example, a woman who rarely has to initiate doesn’t necessarily understand how or why romantic initiation involves aggressiveness. To the willing woman it’s not aggressive, it’s just confident and desired. But to the man who doesn’t know how that woman feels, who feels a mixture of his own desire, lust, and the fear he must overcome….must have that modicum of aggressiveness to overcome that fear. In what other domains will that aggressiveness show, where it will be more likely to be recognized as such?

          Regarding your second paragraph, I agree with you that there are positives. That’s why I don’t think the genie can or should be put back into its bottle. I have only to look at very religious communities where courtships are short, premarital sex is prohibited, and marriages happen at a young age because the kids are horny as hell. Disastrous marriages, the spouses barely know themselves, much less their partners. All I’m trying to do is to validate Elizabeth’s perspective – rather than just disagreeing with her, instead telling her that I see why she sees what she sees. There’s just more to it than what she sees. She’s not wrong, she’s just not seeing beyond her own perspective. Which is fair, cause it’s her perspective.

        20. Emily, to

          “A sense that a man can take care of a situation, and can take care of you.”
          That’s a good way of describing it. The boss I have now is a man. My previous boss was a man. When the former says, “I’ll take care of it,” I never have to mention it again. When the latter said the same … well, to be honest, he’d either bungle it or forget. And I had a sense of this — that one inspired confidence and one did not — when I first met them. Just an energy. And, no, I wouldn’t describe either as alphas.

        21. jo

          Emily, yes. Isn’t it funny how the ability to get things done and to be reliable is so attractive in men?

        22. Emily, to

          “Emily, yes. Isn’t it funny how the ability to get things done and to be reliable is so attractive in men?”
          Yes, and if a man has that “can get things done” quality, it can also make you notice him in a way you didn’t initially. I mentioned my former boss, who was not a can-doer, but his boss was. I’d ask him a question and if he didn’t know the answer, he’d say, “I’ll let you know.” It might be a week or two later, but he always called me up (not email, mind you, actually picked up the phone) to give me the information. He wasn’t a man I would have noticed initially but after a few months of working with him, I wanted to sit in his lap. 🙂

    3. 8.3

      The fact that men orgasm more reliably than women do is nothing more than nature’s way of ensuring the survival of the species. Nothing more, nothing less. From a strictly biological perspective, males MUST orgasm dependably if procreation is to take place, females not so much. It doesn’t mean that men are hornier than women, it doesn’t mean that men enjoy sex more than women.

      And let’s face it, there are orgasms and then there are ORGASMS. I think most men (if they are being honest) would admit that the vast majority of their orgasms are of the small o variety, especially if they have been with same woman for any length of time. Every once in a while, if the stars align just perfectly, a man might have an orgasm with a capital O, but I think it’s a rare event. Now, an orgasm with a small o is still better than getting poked in the eye with a sharp stick, but it’s hardly a mind-blowing experience. But only on very rare occasions do men truly see fireworks and feel the earth move.

    4. 8.4

      First off, I don’t believe your a woman.

      Second, who cares if women do or don’t want free love and one night stands – the point of this article is there is no logical reason why they should expect to be able to police and punish men for acting in the same way by having it that they want to be freely allowed to act in – nor is it even possible in the long term (but not that long) that they could do so.

      Yes feminism is half baked and can’t bring any kind of equality (because it highlights natural differences in desires of all kinds) and yes it’s doomed to fail and yes it’s made long term relationships worthless in many ways – but those PUA guys are weirdos. So you can get layed and have casual sex? Big Fn deal, men have been doing that throughout history, it’s not some new scientific formula red pillers have discovered.

  9. 9

    The above comment was meant for “Elizabeth”.

    1. 9.1
      Mrs Happy

      1. Elizabeth is a woman. Her ideas, emotional intelligence, portrayal of female experience, point of view, syntax, vocab choice, cadence and rhythm to her speech, are all consistent with her being female.
      2. When I consider the enormous taxes I have paid for decades to provide all my countrymen including you with 13 years of basic education I could weep.

      1. 9.1.1

        1.I say no chance. The deep dive into red pill philosohy and identification with and fixation on certain elements of its philosphy (and lengthy discussion of them) all screams man. There are many guys like this on the comments sections of YouTube pretending to be women – all on women’s channels attempting to “warn” them of the consequences of their feminism – like that’ll help. But only “she” can settle this – Elizabeth, who has the logical read here? Mr BBQ or Mrs Happy?

        2. You have a problem with the content of my comment and wanna address what I said about feminism – maybe address it head on instead of passive aggressively. That should be easy enough, I’m sure your education has you well equipped to do so.

        But if you wanna know something personal, I had terrible grades throughout school, was expelled in high school, and only did year twelve by doing it remotely. And for that I received extra money to attend university. And that taught me basic education is a waste of my time and not having it won’t hold me back lol! So weep away! (Ozzy Ozzy Ozzy!)

        1. Mrs Happy

          I have no desire to discuss feminism with you Bbq. I am not passive aggressive. On the contrary, I am exceedingly straightforward and blunt. What I wanted to say to you I did.

          My comment on your intelligence and education was uncharitable. A child’s educational disadvantages are almost never their fault, which I realised as soon as I posted. IQ is but a roll of the genetic lottery dice.

          I usually remind myself to be tolerant of idiocy, but at the moment I am observing idiotic world leaders lead to death on a massive scale, and thus my general tolerance for stupidity slipped. I should not have taken out this anger on a random person.

          Evan’s comments site does not tend to attract the same sort of masked contributors as do other sites; it’s helpful to read the room as well as individual replies.

      2. 9.1.2

        Mrs Happy and BBQ, this discussion is interesting. I would disagree with Mrs Happy that the comments showed emotional intelligence – they portrayed a lot of anger and uncritical blame lobbed at feminism, comment after comment after comment. Nor do I agree that the point of view or syntax are stereotypically female. The comment to me about how I should just google a phrase and that the top page gave the ‘correct’ description of feminism was extremely naive, but consistent with mansplaining (both to Emily and me) that I’ve exactly experienced in the past. Same with the comment about ‘forgiving’ feminism. But that is a stereotype, and of course most men do not mansplain, so my apologies.

        It is possible to believe that women should take responsibility for actions that they later regret (if they were sufficiently coherent) without blaming feminism again and again and again. I do think we women should take such responsibility for our own actions, AND am a feminist. So yes, I did find all those comments to be very strange (no clear idea of gender, though).

        1. Bbq


          Even though I don’t like the term in a lot of the instances it’s used in the media, it was as clear an example of “mansplaining” as you’ll get.

  10. 10

    Mrs Happy

    Yeah your your so much smarter than me your incapable of discussing anything with me, yet you felt emotionally compelled to insult me because you saw a take on feminism you disagreed with. What a display of intelligence that was. I’m left in awe!

    Or perhaps you agree with these laws and am angry for that reason, idk or care. If your incapable of discussing things with people you disagree with you wont. Make the excuse to yourself that’s because you and your superior intelligence are above it if you wish, not because you lack the ability and intelligence yourself (turnaround is fair play Mr. Katz so I hope that bit doesn’t stop the comment), whatever’s easiest on your mind.

  11. 11

    Alright, y’all… I appreciate the interest in my sex. And to answer the question, I am very much female. BBQ, I don’t think you’re used to a chick with a such a grasp of red pill mentality like I have, hence your confusion. I’ll take your head-scratching as a compliment 😉 It’s all legit. What can I say? I like diversity of thought. I like to research ALL points of view (including that of the Manosphere) and come up with my own conclusion. Thank you, Mrs. Happy, for believing in me and of the notion that women are allowed to have different views without their femininity being questioned. Jeremy, I’m glad you’re on here. Unbeknownst to us, we had a good cop/bad cop dynamic going on and it was effective as shown by all the comments. I don’t care if I rub people the wrong way as long as the message gets across. Speaking of rubbing people the wrong way, Jo, dear Jo… Mansplaining, really? You have been condescending since minute one. You don’t know your basic history of feminism and instead, when called upon it, you lash out and talk about my “lack of boundaries.” Now you’re using a sexist term to show how evolved you are as a feminist? And technically, since I’m a woman, it should be called womansplaining. Get your gender slurs correct!

    Now let’s get to the meat of the issue. “…Second, who cares if women do or don’t want free love and one night stands – the point of this article is there is no logical reason why they should expect to be able to police and punish men for acting in the same way by having it that they want to be freely allowed to act in – nor is it even possible in the long term (but not that long) that they could do so.”

    I completely agree. The reason the comments went off into a different direction is because of the fact feminists refuse to acknowledge their own biology, and in response, they’ll continue to police yours. Sadly, it’s only going to get worse. Next thing you know, we’ll all have to sign contracts with “affirmative consent” before sleeping with one another. Laugh now but that might be the future that awaits us.

    “That’s why I don’t think the genie can or should be put back into its bottle. I have only to look at very religious communities where courtships are short, premarital sex is prohibited, and marriages happen at a young age because the kids are horny as hell. Disastrous marriages, the spouses barely know themselves, much less their partners. All I’m trying to do is to validate Elizabeth’s perspective – rather than just disagreeing with her, instead telling her that I see why she sees what she sees. There’s just more to it than what she sees. She’s not wrong, she’s just not seeing beyond her own perspective. Which is fair, cause it’s her perspective.”

    I’m not saying we should go back to the olden days where there was no premarital sex. I know the genie can’t be put back into the bottle. And honestly, I don’t know the answer. Yes, women who don’t value relationships have made it harder for those who do and have cheapened sex, but it’s more than that. Evan has talked about the paradox of choice and how that has impacted online dating. It’s the combination of technology and the free-for-all sexual marketplace that has made dating so…well…fleeting. Nowadays, it’s harder to find a connection, let alone a relationship. Will the marketplace correct itself in the long run? Possibly. Or maybe we’re all adapting to the new normal of self-sufficiency and living our “authentic selves” at the expense of seeking out human connection through relationships. Only time can tell.

    1. 11.1
      Emily, to

      “Yes, women who don’t value relationships have made it harder for those who do and have cheapened sex, but it’s more than that.”
      I still say there are men out there who are interested in having serious relationships whether or not casual sex is easily available. and it’s usually fairly obvious which guys fall into that category fairly quickly in the dating process. It doesn’t necessarily mean he wants a serious relationship with that particular woman by date 2 or 3, but that he is at least in the market for something serious and in the right head space, so to speak. And if a woman wants a serious relationship, those are the guys she needs to date.

    2. 11.2

      I don’t believe you but that’s whatever.

      You are right that there are many who would like signed consent forms and extreme rules like that, but what on earth makes you think that rules would continue to be set and made according to feminist (or just woman’s) whims and interests alone perpetually into the future? After all there would be little use to making laws that would go unenforced and unrecognised by men and why would men simply do the bidding of extremists to their own detriment without reward forever more?

      I don’t want to put the genie back in the bottle either. The genie is out of the bottle, he’s done granting wishes and soon he’ll reallly be running wild – and all the feminism in the world won’t hold him back lol.

    3. 11.3

      “I don’t believe you but that’s whatever.”

      This is hilarious to me. I don’t know how else to prove it besides showing you a pic of my titties but that ain’t gonna happen. Interestingly enough, this has happened to me before. Probably more than it should have. One time a date wouldn’t believe my view on politics and I was sitting right in front of him! You just can’t put women like me in a box. We’re rare, but we exist.

      1. 11.3.1

        If I’m wrong then I’m wrong. The main reason I’m sus is because there are loads of transparent men on YouTube’s comment sections who pretend to be women to give “warnings” to “their sisters” about the consequences of their feminism.

  12. 12

    “You are right that there are many who would like signed consent forms and extreme rules like that, but what on earth makes you think that rules would continue to be set and made according to feminist (or just woman’s) whims and interests alone perpetually into the future? After all there would be little use to making laws that would go unenforced and unrecognised by men and why would men simply do the bidding of extremists to their own detriment without reward forever more?”

    Because men like sex. And the only way that you won’t follow feminists down the rabbit hole of male sexual restrictions is by not having sex. Where is this pushback against feminist culture that you speak of? Sadly, men are already saying they are scared to hit on women in the workplace out of fear it could be construed as sexual harassment.

  13. 13


    “And the only way you won’t follow feminists down the rabbit hole of male sexual restrictions is by not having sex” oh, that’s far from the only way and this is far from the only (or most important) issue feminists seek to control purely by their own desires.
    Anyone who is interested in any kind of “pushback” against feminist culture is glad to see these types of laws being made, not angry about them. Feminists should go on and make things as uncomfortable for men as they can and any pushback by men should be designed to fail and designed to be seen to fail.
    What would a pushback even mean? Pushback to what time? The 90’s? The 60’s? What for? Things would just quickly end up the way they are again.

    I’m more interested in a push forward. Red pillers and mgtowers and similar don’t have a clue about anything really other than being able to point out their problems and unfairness (as they see it). But their solutions to said problems are usually idiotic.
    However tho their ideas and emotions are not expressed in mainstream culture often, if you were around young men often you would know that the vast majority hold similar (tho perhaps less “intellectual”) views. It also isn’t hard for a lot of them to find women who either will agree to them or at least go along with what they want.

    So if feminists are dominating law and government and making things worse for men (who are needed as enforcers of law), yet those same men can find women who will agree with their povs, then what? If one disaffected man is a loser – what are a hundred thousand disaffected men?
    Could it be as feminists power grows, it also inevitably comes closer to its end, since those who are the tools of implementation of its power over men are by necessity men themselves?
    Are feminists unintentionally turning themselves into the Marie Antoinettes of their time? A ruling class with no enforcers? Is it inevatible that they should do this? Have I been smoking too much pot? Should I proofread my comments? …..

  14. 14
    Rowena Harry

    There are numerous men out there who would ply a women with alcohol with the intent that it will enable the opportunity to have sex with her and many other men who probably know a man (or two) like that. Some men will have sex with a woman who was conscious while making out but passes out before the sex actual occurs. Safe bet; if she’s not actively participating at any point in full form; don’t risk it, stop or don’t even start. If that impacts your ability to get laid as often…uhm those are the breaks. If that upsets anyone; then think twice about why that is. Women have choices and so do men so if casual sex puts you men in a possible danger zone/claim of rape, then you can enact your choice in any circumstance to abstain. We women have to take all sorts of ridiculous protective measures in almost every social circumstances so if men have to deal with a limited few; until we as a society sort this out; uhm…okay… This reminds me of something I heard where a man was complaining about the need to social distance due to Covi-19 and how in fear they were when strangers approached them in uncomfortable proximity and a woman overhearing was like ‘yeah, that’s the life of a woman like every day’. #Perspective

    1. 14.1

      Rowena Harry

      But this article specifically states that having sex with a passed out woman is not ok and should be rape, so why are you even trying to make it sound like that is what is being defended here?

      What is being said is that even if both parties are actively participating, consent can be nullified by the alcohol both parties have drunk of their own choice, whether the man bought the woman drinks or whether she bought all the drinks. Under that way of thinking any sex while drinking can be defined as rape after the fact no matter how willingly both parties where participating at the time.
      That is what men are having a problem with in this case. That is not hard to understand if you actually read what is written without becoming emotional about things that aren’t.

      So do you think that when both parties are actively participating at all points and neither is passed out that sex can be unconsensual because of willing alcohol use beforehand (or during) or not? Because that is what is being asked and seemingly being answered in the affirmative by some women (like yourself). Being that it is women’s free choice to both drink then have sex, this is what seems so ridiculous and pisses off men, the thought that they should some how be culpable in this situation – the thinking behind it seems straight out of the 1800’s and paints women as delicate in that situation and needing special protection from their own actions and holds men as culpable for not preventing women from willingly having sex, yet is being championed by the same women who claim to be for equality between the sexes and paint themselves as strong women who are able to make their own choices.

      That’s a problem, because for laws like this to last into the long term, men actually have to enforce them, otherwise it makes no difference how many women want them. And why would men want a law which is so ridiculously one sided and can be defined and re-defined not by what has happened at the time, but by a change of opinion after the fact? If enough women really did want this, all that would prove to men was that apparently and unfortunately women can’t handle having sex and drinking or perhaps even casual sex in general and can’t think logically about it. Do you think that is a good thing to teach the young men?

    2. 14.2

      First of all, I knew a couple of guys in college who would get a girl falling-down drunk in order to have sex with her. I wasn’t impressed then and I’m less impressed now. One who has to do that to get sex is a pathetic excuse for a man, in my book. I think it’s pretty clear that having sex with an incapacitated woman is rape. Same with someone who puts Rohypnol, GHB or in a woman’s drink. That’s also clearly a criminal act, as I think most people of either gender would acknowledge as such.

      In the case of this law however, that’s NOT what we are talking about. The way this law is written, and woman who has consumed ANY alcohol at all, is presumed incompetent to consent. What’s the evidentiary standard for this? In other words, how is it to be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accuser was intoxicated at the time of the alleged offense? Witnesses present at the time of the alleged offense, or immediately before? Video evidence showing the woman clearly impaired? A BAC reading immediately before the alleged offense. You do realize that except at a party, exactly NONE of these are likely to exist, with the possible exception of surveillance video from a bar. If the accuser says she had nothing to drink earlier, but he gave her one or more drink at his home/apartment prior to the alleged offense, and the accused denies that, all we have is she said, he said. Remember that it’s a court of law we’re talking about here, not college disciplinary hearings which can (and often do) simply take the accuser’s word as fact, and/or presume the accused guilty until proven innocent. In a real court of law, due process and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty MUST be provided to any defendant. Here the defendant does not have to prove his innocence; the burden lies solely on the state to establish by testimony and evidence proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In the case of this law that means proving that (1) the alleged a victim was intoxicated, voluntarily or otherwise, before the alleged offense, and (2) impaired to a degree that the defendant can reasonably be presumed to have known it, before having sex with her. Even if (as this law apparently states) the standard is that ANY consumption by the alleged victim of any amount of alcohol, however slight, prior to the act, is presumed to render the alleged victim unable to lawfully consent, how can that be proven to have occurred, absent a direct witness to said consumption, or clear video evidence of same? Answer is, it can’t be. This is clearly a law that purports to remedy a defect in existing law which in fact does not exist, since the existing law already stated that significant impairment by alcohol and/or drugs implied inability to give lawful consent. The only thing this new law does, is declare that a woman who has had so much as one glass of wine prior to the act cannot lawfully consent to sex. I think any sensible person can see how absurd that is, don’t you agree? Otherwise, the burden of proof which must be established is essentially the same as under the prior law.

      I realize some women have a problem controlling their own alcohol use/abuse, but does that justify infantilizing all women by having their both their drinking and their sex lives policed by the nanny state (all for their own good of course)? No wonder the woman who wrote the article Evan linked ended it with “Gov. Cuomo, get the F___ out of my bedroom!”

  15. 15
    Rowena Harry


    If any man is concerned about a sexual act being misconstrued after the fact as rape due to the sexual act being with a woman who was drinking/intoxicated then I would advise men in general, for the time being if not for going forward all together, to not have casual sex with a woman who has been drinking past the limit where they would no longer be able to say; drive a motor vehicle. We can argue about the validity of this notion/mandate but why not just play it safe for your own (men) benefit? Why are men so distraught over the fact that now they may be held liable for having sex with a woman who may conceive the act as rape? What kind of sexual circumstances are you having that puts you in the position that you (men) may be accused of rape? Sure; there are the rare occurences where a woman may lie about rape but are you (men) really concerned about being lied on about regret-sex or are you more concerned about the acts of sex you’ve been getting away with thus far now being considered as inappropriate/illegal/an act of rape? I am asking a serious question here because both sexes can speak on casual spontaneous sex but how many women really have accused a man of rape after regret-sex? I think it’s more like how many women who have been raped while under the influence of alcohol who will now have a legal avenue to pursue their claim. Whenever a women is raped (yes; actually raped) they have the question put to them of how they got into this circumstance of being raped so it’s not insensitivity to ask the same of a man who is accused of rape and putting them under the same scrutiny. If there is any man here that wants to share their personal story of how they f**ked a drunk girl who claimed it was rape when it wasn’t rape I would appreciate hearing their account.

    1. 15.1

      Rowena Harry

      But again, you are describing a situation where a drunk woman is raped, irregardless of being drunk, that is not what is being described in this article (as it clearly states).
      What is described here is merely two people getting drunk (willingly) and having sex, any instance of which can under law be described as rape. And what you are now suggesting is that women should have total power to describe that mutually consenting situation as a rape.

      What is the problem with that? Well women still want to go to bars or parties and drink, and they still want to have sex after doing so. So tell me, why is it that a law which specifically places the obligation to protect them from doing this willingly onto men so appealing? Many women would feel that being turned down for sex on account of them being a little tipsy because they couldn’t handle it and it was up to men to be the bigger more rational and responsible people and make that choice for them condescending. And that is exactly what you are suggesting men do in this situation, there’s no two ways about it.

      What situations have I been in? I’ve had consensual sex with women after drinking with them, as have a hell of a lot of people. Apparently according to you, that is a no no for women now, despite the fact they still do it constantly and willingly.

      So if you way is or becomes the prevailing way of thinking about this for women, then I would advise women in general, for the time being if not for going forward all together, that for their own benefit they should never drink and then have sex afterward even if they feel in full control at the time. As a matter of fact, perhaps they shouldn’t drink at all even if they have no intention of having sex afterward, as (according to your POV) anything they do willingly after this is out of their own control and in the control of the men who are responsible for looking out for them.

    2. 15.2

      “…but how many women really have accused a man of rape after regret-sex?”


      Actually quite a few, especially on college campuses. Woman has sex (drunk or sober) with a guy. Woman decides that it really wasn’t all that great, thinks about it (sometimes for a couple of months) then decides that since she didn’t get much out of the encounter, surely she must not have consented to it. Yeah, that has to be it; so she files a complaint, not with the police, but with the campus judicial system, which does not have to afford an accused any sort of due process. Both parties are interviewed; There’s a hearing (often with the accused not allowed so much as to present witnesses on his behalf). The “victim” gets to pile on all the evidence she wants, in one case, being allowed to correct,(without rebuttal) inconsistencies in her different accounts. In this case she’s automatically presumed to be totally truthful, “believe ALL women” being the standard of justice on that campus. The guy accused usually stands about a snowball’s chance in hell; in one case I read of, the accused was convicted and expelled, on the sole ground that while he committed no violation according to the university’s disciplinary guidelines, he HAD, (are you ready for this?) “Cajoled her” !! In other words, verbal seduction was declared reasonable cause for expelling him for “non-consensual sex” with the “victim”. University administrators actually upheld this absurdity, and added “cajoling” to the long list of “unacceptable behaviors” by a man attempting to get a woman to consent to sex. Cajoling was “a form of coercion”, so it said. I know, I didn’t believe this one myself, but a search revealed the incident took place as described (It’s now the subject of a lawsuit). I don’t know whether to be more indignant over the sheer injustice to the man involved, the rather infantilizing and condescending implication that an adult woman somehow is incapable of resisting a man’s verbal flatteries and entreaties, or the twisting and torture of the English language necessary to render the the verbs “to cajole” and “to coerce” interchangeable.

      So yes, such accusations do happen, at least in the zany, PC, “safe-spaces” world of today’s colleges and universities, I don’t know whether the trend has metastasized to the real world yet, but if not, it’s only a matter of time. Sometimes these days, I’m glad I’m not young anymore!

  16. 16
    Rowena Harry

    Bbq; Buck25. Thank you for your responses. I did some research into the specifics of what you both are concerned about and can’t deny that an erosion of law that denies any person’s civil rights; even if it’s rooted in a vigorous attempt to close loopholes that need addressing, is a misappropriation that requires adjustment.
    I appreciate you both taking the time out to reply and provide me with some counter-perspective.
    Take care.

    1. 16.1

      Rowena Harry

      Well that was unexpectedly civil for this topic for the internet lol.
      You have a good one.

  17. 17

    If you’re old enough to consume alcohol, you are old enough to set boundaries. Don’t drink to get wasted, if it’s something you can’t control, well then simply do not drink.
    I am a women and I am sick and tired of women transferring all the blame to men ( I am not talking about obvious crimes such as roofing, abusing, etc).
    I read the other day that it was not ok for a man to kiss a woman unless she tells him it’s ok? Mmm what the hell? If you do not want to be kissed, say no, push away, etc. If my boyfriend had to ask me if it’s ok to kiss me each time, I’d lose my mind and say goodbye to all of the nice spontaneous acts of love. If he asked me if it’s ok for him to kiss me the day we hooked up, he would have ruined the moment completely.

    Honestly, you are all grown people learn how to control yourself and speak up for yourself. It’s not other peoples’ job to take care and think for you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *