I am sick of hearing people’s drugstore philosophy about sexual aggression being “natural” or how the “aggression” part of the brain is right next to the “sexuality” part of the brain. This seems to feed into another recurrent feature of today’s Zeitgeist: that males are naturally aggressive towards women, sexually proceptive, and have something like a “rape instinct.” All of the above is repulsive, false, and dangerous. I could appeal to authorities like Robert Sapolsky on this matter, or refer the reader to an even more articulate attacker of the above view in Girl Writes What, but instead I will simply regale you with some plain-old philosophizing. I will argue that people consistently confuse features of the modern sexual marketplace with biological realities or necessities, and in particular seem to lose sight of the true equation that governs human sexual dynamics: males seek power to get access (rights) to sex, while females use sex to gain access to power and social standing.
It is somewhat true that male humans must be more proceptive and females more receptive: men typically initiate contact, ask for a date, inquire about marriage, etc, though some of this stems purely from our modern culture. Our dating environments reflect a stark caricature of male proceptivity, requiring as a right of passage that males compete with each other by feats of daring flirtation for the transient affections of random women. This leads many people to think that this proceptivity is the cause of rape; that men are simply pathologically proceptive, but this is total nonsense. You see, it is profoundly unnatural for men to be competing with other men via the rubric of pick-up-artistry: they are supposed to be competing with each other or cooperating against an environmental obstacle, the fruits of which being social status in the male hierarchy, as well as tangible gains like food provisions. What we see in sports is a sort of twisted simulacrum of the real thing because in the tribal environment women wouldn’t even see most of the hunting and killing; they would simply see who gets the most respect from other males and who gets to eat the best parts of the kill, or whatever. Women don’t need to see the touchdown and the victory dance, just the resulting accoutrement of power. The modern dating scene gets this entirely backwards: the victory dance, in anticipation of some “touchdown,” is made the center of the competition, whereby men receive respect in their peer group for subsequently winning sex. Let me run that by you again: today, men use deception and pick-up-artistry to win sex in the pursuit of social power, which will then give them the confidence to get sex without trying so hard (ie when they are hardened and entitled narcissists). Women fall for this bass-ackwards approach because 1) they don’t have much of an alternative, and 2) they can still see which males are getting the most respect from their male friends (ie the biggest man-slut), therefore triggering natural sexual receptivity.
There is a naturally aggressive-looking aspect to the play behavior of social animals, especially pack-hunters, but what is especially important to notice amidst all of the wrestling and nipping is that blood is not drawn. That is, the nips and tackles are carefully and tenderly controlled so as to demonstrate care and build the trust needed to hunt cooperatively. In species where the males must hunt this way, competition serves later cooperation by building trust and establishing who is best at what. A female watching two males compete should be looking both for physical virtuosity and overt caring; a pair of traits that interact in an interesting way. If I can dominate you so thoroughly that I don’t even have to give you bruises, I must be one hell of a genetic specimen! This innate drive for competition in the service of cooperation is sometimes extended, as in the case of chimpanzees, to war parties and raiding of other chimp troupes, and this seems to be where the really vile types of aggression manifest, including behaviors like rape, cannibalism, and tribal genocide. But these nasty aggressive behaviors are not the types of things that human males choose to “display” in order to attract mates, but instead, seem to keep such matters amongst the male hunting group, and then discuss such things only after reaching sufficient levels of guilt-banishing intoxication.
But what about the “love bite,” you might ask? This is again primarily a demonstration of care, but more importantly, it is open to either gender in the act of coitus, as is the choice of who provides most of the sexual, how do I say, “locomotion.” Its not like males are the only ones who grit their teeth in the presence of intense Eros or who might express this delightful frustration with a caring nibble or delicate but swift change of position. Simply put, the dude who wants to do nothing but thrust like a jackhammer is doing it all wrong, just like the girl who wants to ride her man into the winners circle of most-orgasms-per-minute-of-coitus relative to her girlfriends’ avowed performances. Perhaps there is a time for simple “fucking,” but our society has relegated human sexual intercourse to this only, with “love making” just being the pacifying phrase you use to refer to fucking when talking to your girlfriend. Truly sad. Lastly, it should be mentioned that, with oral sex for instance, it is sometimes necessary for a man to hold his girl down, which can be enjoyable for both parties, but again the authentic intention is to maximize her pleasure while avoiding a black-eye delivered by her pelvis. There is nothing “dominating” about it except in the sense that you might want to force a friend to keep laughing by unleashing a further volley of jokes.
Our modern, backwards social system has the effect of increasing natural male insecurities while decreasing cooperation and trust, the very opposite of what natural male competition is all about. Today, all of the animosity or frustration that would have been directed at a nimble gazelle that got away (or whatever God-of-the-Hunt that failed me) can only be directed at 1) that uptight bitch who unjustly shut down my advances, or 2) that dick who cock-blocked me from making the kill. This mix of backwards psychology and constant humiliation breeds a powerlessness and desperation in men that easily leads to violence and rape. Furthermore, it breeds dishonesty and sociopathy because each man must be his own advocate and salesman. In fact, his self-advocacy, sense of smug entitlement, and salesmanship are precisely the “virtues”or “fitness markers” that will determine his success as he apes the natural trappings of success, status, and power with NLP, self-hypnosis, and foolhardy bravado. The natural state of things involves a woman seeing some legitimate evidence of fitness and status, which importantly includes another female or male advocating on behalf of such a fit, if overlooked, male. How many of you women have suddenly become interested in a man simply because your girlfriends saw something in him? If you will forgive the digression, let me remark that the same thing applies to the modern job market: really we should return to a system where “referrals” and “character references” dominate, instead of relying on each person’s self-advocacy. If this happened, people would be naturally motivated to simply be competent and honorable people; to compete to be a character deserving of strong referrals. It would be a society of virtue ethics, true relationships, and honor, instead of today’s pathetic assembly-line for the production of sociopaths.
The tragedy is that we have essentially socialized or conditioned our males to have the opposite temperament and character to their natural inheritance. Males today routinely talk in militaristic terms about their various sexual “conquests,” trading fantasies about how aggression, initiative, and force “won” the day. To put it bluntly, the male who talks about wanting to push a girl up against a wall, turn her around, and tear off her skirt is likely harboring some homo-erotic tendencies, sociopathic tendencies, has been abused, or is simply lying. If you ask men what they dream about at night, or what their fondest sexual memories are, they invariably involve exactly the opposite of this “proceptivity/aggression” myth. Men fantasize about deserving sex so justly that a woman grabs them by the belt and pulls them into a side room with a coy smile and accepting embrace. That is, men are turned on by women being turned on; they are longing for the right to procreate, not the physical power to dominate a woman.
A man’s true libido is not very different than his fighting spirit, as they are both intensified and liberated by honor and a sense of deserving honors. In fact, the “rescue-the-damsel” myth is the raison d’être of a man’s fighting spirit and he longs to prove himself by protecting his women against the invader or rapist. Along with the universal rape taboo, this fighting spirit is exactly the natural mechanism that ensures honorable sexual relations. The greater the justification for protective violence, the greater the will-to-fight and the greater the will-to-procreate. Many a nice-guy hesitates in a fight because he is unsure of whether he is truly justified in harming the other guy, just as he often hesitates in pursuing a woman because he is unsure whether he has a right to. But the simple fact is that he doesn’t have a right to! Women are all-to-quick to make him aware of this, even when they have placed their thong-partitioned butt-cheeks on a bar stool and are obviously putting on a sexual display. The truly sad fact is that the modern male hero-myth requires the male to “face his fear” (a legitimate fear!) and pursue a woman precisely despite the fact that he has been granted no right to do so! This only inflames the urge to fight and compete amongst males, because they see all of this injustice taking place, all-the-while longing for a situation where they can come to the rescue of the girl who can’t seem to get rid of her nagging pursuer. Unlike women, men must do something to think of themselves as adults (as “men”), but the modern equation for obtaining manhood is only a recipe for shallow philandering, misogyny, male powerlessness, violence, and even rape.
I always felt inadequate for not being able to pick up chicks, when in fact, I was simply a good guy who naturally sensed the injustice and backwardness of this kind of pursuit. Never did I want to impose my sexual and self-image needs onto an unsuspecting and unreceptive female; never did I want to be such a burden, but then “win” her affections based on persistence or guile. All I ever wanted was to be wanted, and to deserve being wanted by someone similarly deserving. Our twisted society has somehow encouraged people to adopt an attitude whereby women have this commodity called “sex,” which they dole out to the person who best competes for them, or as it often tragically happens, with them (see “negging“). This is the very apogee of a malformed sexual discourse: where men compete with women using the tools of deception and contempt sufficient to display their relative advantage in social power. You could not develop a more twisted application of human longings than this complete inversion of the human sexual equation.