Andrew Klavan is Wrong

Filed under:Jerks,Politics — posted by Anwyn on June 6, 2011 @ 12:57 pm

On women, regarding Weinergate, written by Andrew Klavan and linked with a Read the Whole Thing by the Instapundit:

I blame women. No, really. Women — by which I mean each and every single member of the female gender — you know who you are — need look no further than themselves to explain why Weiner-types behave toward them in this fashion. We men are always hearing complaints from women about how badly we treat them, what pigs we are, how pushy and abrasive… on and on. But what these same women conveniently fail to mention is that this stuff really works on them!

I’m angry about Klavan’s offhanded blaming of “each and every single member of the female gender,” which he then qualifies with “you know you are”–why would we need to know who we are if he is blaming every member of the sex regardless? But that’s beside the point. The point is that it is only THOSE WOMEN, the ones who fell into bed with the Governator or eagerly solicited dirty pics from a congressman or even didn’t eagerly solicit then but played along in accepting them, that he should be talking about blaming for the reprehensible behavior of these men. Does he even think women who don’t like this stuff exist? We do exist. And if he even grants that we exist, does he think we’ve never had men approach us like this? He’s wrong. We have. And we have shot them down in disgust.

I’ve spent way too much time online ever since college and I’ve seen this more times than I can count, first in the I-don’t-know-you-but-let’s-just-talk-dirty-awhile way and then in cases where I actually have known the men offline. At least one man I was attracted to for his smarts, humor, and articulate, pointed reasoning spent a lot of time trying to get down in the dirt of online sex-baiting with me. That fizzled, at least partly because I tried to simultaneously like him as a person, be attracted to him, and yet not play that dirty-talk game too much. There have been a few other men who I could tell were staying away from me because I would not play their type of game. There was a man in college who tried to ask me out after previously being shot down by my roommate. Why did we both reject him? Because we knew this was the kind of “dating” he was into–sleazy and fast, in every sense of the word.

These men are into sex and its pre-actual-sex trappings and flirtings; they do not, as Klavan plaintively says, just want women to love them, much less just one woman to love them or even one at a time. There are different varieties of men with different styles of approaching women, and there are different varieties of women with different styles of reception to men’s different approaches. I am not a feminist and usually don’t get mad about most high-level characterizations of group-wide behaviors, but this one is dead wrong. This is not a group-wide behavior; it is men who act this way seeking out and gleefully latching onto multiple individual women who are receptive to it.

Klavan should be ashamed of himself for stating straightforwardly that all women like this kind of garbage and that’s why men do it. All women don’t, and that’s not why some men do it. Those men do it to gratify their own urges, and they just have to look around for women who are open to it. And when you’re a celebrity, even the weird kind of political celebrity that is a congressperson, you have a much wider field to look around in. And as a side note, when you are a politician, what are the odds that a woman might be “open” to this kind of thing precisely for the purpose of getting you in trouble later? It’s a trump card. But Andrew Klavan seriously states without a glimmer of LOL that All Women like this, that this is why these piggy men do it, period. And the refutation is right there in Klavan’s own piece: “…why Weiner-types behave toward them in this fashion.” Weiner-types? Oh, so it’s not each and every single member of the male gender who behaves this way? And yet, it IS each and every member of the female gender who encourages and causes it? No, Andrew Klavan, the answer to that is no. The answer you gave is wrong. You fail on both bottom line and reasoning.

42 comments »

  1. “Throw a rock into a pack of dogs…the one that yelps is the one that got hit”

    Comment by J Dance — June 6, 2011 @ 2:53 pm

  2. Actually, Klavan didn’t say all women like this garbage. He said, “Women — by which I mean each and every single member of the female gender — you know who you are — need look no further than themselves to explain why Weiner-types behave toward them in this fashion.”

    That means that men behave the way they do because women find it attractive. It doesn’t mean that all women find it attractive, but clearly enough do.

    Personally, I agree with Klavan. I think too many women pay lip service to the idea of nice guys but actually prefer bad boys. The danger aspect is fun, plus the challenge of taming the fella, and if he does mistreat you, it’s cause for calling up your girlfriends and having a good old-fashioned pity party.

    Relationships tend to be about how the other person can gratify you. Bad boys fulfill some pretty dark but compelling needs in plenty of women.

    Comment by Llarry — June 6, 2011 @ 3:06 pm

  3. He’s overgeneralizing, sure, but not by much. Let’s face it, if it didn’t work it wouldn’t happen. Want some real insight? Read Roissy.

    Comment by Ed Minchau — June 6, 2011 @ 3:12 pm

  4. As Andrew Klavan reminds us all, it’s apparently completely reasonable to make gross generalizations about what all women want, but if you even try to claim all men are like Weiner, watch the indignation fly.

    Comment by Merry — June 6, 2011 @ 3:24 pm

  5. I have been saying for years the problem with women today is they police themselves as men do or want to do. (There be laws against that kind of thing.) From Oprah’s NewAge nonsense and quackery to this, women leave it up to others to say “Stop!” and, many times (here’s where the followers of Oprah come in) they will attack anyone who does. Especially if it’s a man.

    Sorry, Ladies, but I’ve seen the Heads-I-Win/Tails-You-Lose game being played out for far too long to buy this essay. Just a few days ago, a female friend tried to remind a group of men that not all women put their privates online and my response was “they might as well” because not only do enough do it but, because few if any women will stop the degradation of their own sex, they give cover and permission to those who do. So, please, do not spend your time attacking Andrew Klavan – by all accounts a good and thoughtful man – but use this opportunity to question yourselves about the world you and your “sisters” have created. My wife had an affair – and killed three people – but I still faced a wall of her friends, making excuses and attacking me because I was “always wanting to be right” (read: good, ethically and morally) and “a man.” It was the tragedy of my life and I’ll never forget it.

    If you ask me, how far women will go to protect their group image knows no bounds, and this essay is just more proof of that.

    Are there exceptions? Sure. I hear it claimed all the time – after something happens. But not enough to stop anything, and almost never in my day-to-day. It’s a pose. A pose to deflect blame.

    I’m still waiting for someone – anyone – to take responsibility.

    Comment by The Crack Emcee — June 6, 2011 @ 4:22 pm

  6. The point is that it is only THOSE WOMEN, the ones who fell into bed with the Governator…

    …should be ashamed of himself for stating straightforwardly that all women like this kind of garbage…

    ——————————————-
    ——————————————-

    Maybe we could rename the “No True Scotsman” fallacy to “No Real Woman”.

    I nominate the first example as: no real woman would dig jerks… except for those who do.

    Comment by Ryan Waxx — June 6, 2011 @ 4:24 pm

  7. Damn, that first line should read “I have been saying for years the problem with women today is they DO NOT police themselves as men do or want to do.”

    Comment by The Crack Emcee — June 6, 2011 @ 4:24 pm

  8. “As Andrew Klavan reminds us all, it’s apparently completely reasonable to make gross generalizations about what all women want, but if you even try to claim all men are like Weiner, watch the indignation fly.” Excuse me? I’ve actually found the opposite to be true. And, I assure you, the last time I checked, I remained quite female.

    OTOH, I must say I think Klavan was being utterly clueless in that article. For exactly the same reason as those who try to claim that all men are like Weiner are clueless.

    Comment by Kathy Kinsley — June 6, 2011 @ 4:27 pm

  9. @merry:

    The difference between the statements is that – surprise! – the truth of the statement matters.

    But yeah, other than one being true and the other being false, they’re totally the same.

    Comment by Ryan Waxx — June 6, 2011 @ 4:28 pm

  10. There are many nice ladies in the world. And what do many of them do (at least at one time in their life)? Read romance novels, where the powerful renegade sweeps her off of her feet. Does one believe this might indicate something?

    Comment by Terse_man — June 6, 2011 @ 4:37 pm

  11. @merry

    Andrew is saying that women do nothing to stop this. Standing to the side and ignoring it is not good enough. It is a sin by omission

    Comment by Terse_man — June 6, 2011 @ 4:56 pm

  12. You must be right Anwyn. After all, the PUA community has continuing growth when faced with the reality that being a decent guy usually gets you ignored while being a bad boy gets you laid.

    Yeah, men need sex, DUH. We like a lot of things. We will not get them from women anymore. We have learned what divorce courts, false rape acuusations and false domestic violence accusations do to men. We can get companionship with other men and only need you ‘ladies’ for sex.

    Enjoy the society women have created.

    Comment by Legion — June 6, 2011 @ 5:01 pm

  13. @terse_man: Yes, it means that there is something of the fantasy for many women in men who are aggressive, and maybe a bit callous – but most women recognize it as a fantasy and don’t try to make it a reality.

    Comment by FuzzyFace — June 6, 2011 @ 5:02 pm

  14. @FuzzyFace

    Does “most” apply to women under 30?

    Comment by Terse_man — June 6, 2011 @ 5:10 pm

  15. Am I the only one who read Klavan’s piece as a bit of absurdist satire?

    In the words of Sergeant Hulka, “Lighten up, Francis.”

    Comment by Stephen Macklin — June 6, 2011 @ 5:24 pm

  16. Klavan does satire very well. The problem lies in the fact that
    most women don’t get satire. Same with humor. Else how do you
    explain the large women’s vote for BHO.

    Comment by PTL — June 6, 2011 @ 5:31 pm

  17. @Stephen Macklin

    Yes, it would seem that you are the only one who read it as satire. For the rest of us, this is serious business

    Comment by Terse_man — June 6, 2011 @ 5:33 pm

  18. @PTL

    Naw, they voted for BHO because they wanted free stuff.

    Comment by Terse_man — June 6, 2011 @ 5:43 pm

  19. OMG, you don’t think “each and everyone” was a deliberate exaggeration intended to mean it’s opposite? Nearly hilarious: “why would we need to know who we are if he is blaming every member” — um, you were SO close! Post #15 nailed it: absurdist satire. Ya think?

    Comment by wiz61 — June 6, 2011 @ 5:49 pm

  20. @Llarry

    Wise words these are:
    “Relationships tend to be about how the other person can gratify you. Bad boys fulfill some pretty dark but compelling needs in plenty of women.”

    Comment by Terse_man — June 6, 2011 @ 5:53 pm

  21. not so much satire as a bit of hyperbole for comic effect. klavan does make a valid point…didn’t we just have a study released about a week or so ago that indicated that women react more positively to dark and dangerous types who would probably make good protectors?? it’s something ingrained in our prehistoric dna…nothing to get all huffy about.

    Comment by el polacko — June 6, 2011 @ 6:00 pm

  22. Teenage boys who are “nice guys” often look around and find that it is their aggressive, edgy peers who are “successful with women.” So they try to do the same.

    There are a whole lot of women who aren’t attracted to “boring” men and then wake up at 25 or 30 and wonder, “why are men such jerks?”

    Comment by Roger Sweeny — June 6, 2011 @ 6:08 pm

  23. I think Klavan’s post was a lot more tongue-in-cheek than many of his detractors and defenders are giving credit for. He makes it pretty clear in the opening that the post is not meant to be read entirely seriously; I read the line ‘…and by that I mean each and every single member of the female gender’ as irony.

    It’s interesting to note the response from many male readers though. There’s a lot of bitterness out there. It’s hard to resist the impression that the mark of a successful, acceptable, worthwhile man is that he will be attractive to women. It’s even harder to work out exactly what it is that separates attractive men from unattractive; obviously very rich, powerful, famous men tend to attract lots of women, but in the middle mass of normal men the qualities that define one as attractive and another as unattractive are much harder to discern, or at least, they are for me.

    Also there can be a sense for us romantically inclined beta males to feel like we’ve been sold a lemon. We were told that what women wanted was to be loved, respected, and appreciated, but while we find that women certainly love to be loved, respect being respected, and appreciate being appreciated, those qualities rarely seem to spark that sense of attraction that makes a woman receptive to a romantic relationship with a man. Moreover we notice that sexually successful men who seem to effortlessly attract women often aren’t loving, respectful, or appreciative. (This isn’t an argument against love, respect, or appreciation; they may not attract a woman in the first place but they’re vital to the nourishing of relationships in the long term.)

    It’s very easy, once beta male realizes this, for him to respond in anger and declare that women obviously love to be abused and that therefore my own unattractiveness is a sign of my moral superiority over those thugs who are attractive only by virtue of their thuggery. Of course, this is nonsense. But accepting inferiority in any aspect of life is painful and difficult, and in a culture that often suggests that a person’s whole value is bound up in their attractiveness, the recognition of one’s own ugliness is a very better pill to swallow.

    Comment by BenK — June 6, 2011 @ 6:14 pm

  24. Llarry is correct. You misread or misinterpreted Klavan.

    However, some of the commenters lend support to your statement that there are too many men who think like that. I just don’t think you can fairly pin it on Klavan.

    Comment by Assistant Village Idiot — June 6, 2011 @ 6:17 pm

  25. Women punish good behavior in men and reward bad behavior as well.

    Comment by Quartermain — June 6, 2011 @ 6:37 pm

  26. With big-headed babies and high child-birth mortality, nature had to play a trick on women, the sane ones would never have kids, and the species would die out. This trick, the mating behavior, is called romance. The male is valuable, or so it says. The male further enhances his value by pecking at, to some lesser or greater degree, the female, making the female feel more vulnerable and also less valuble herself.

    As John Derbyshire wrote last week, stereotypes are simply nature’s way of doing statistics. I’ll believe that women aren’t attracted to bad boys when I start seeing women settle for less wealthy, shorter, and less handsome men. Not holding my breath.

    Comment by pashley1411 — June 6, 2011 @ 6:52 pm

  27. I read Klavan’s article as being intentionally over the top, but also that he was trying to make a serious point.

    I think women often choose men that violate so much of what they say they want. It is very baffling for us men.

    I finally decided that what women all wanted from men is strength. What makes it so confusing for those of us on the other side is that it takes different forms for so many women. For some it is physical strength, for some it is financial strength, for some it’s political power. There are even women interested in intellectual strength.

    I had a male friend who was brilliant and not bad looking. He spoke several languages, he was a private pilot, did welding for fun, and yet cooked a mean gourmet meal. Brilliant conversationalist and all around good guy. Couldn’t get a date ever.

    He was about 5’5″ and had a high voice.

    I think about him whenever I’m told how superficial us men are.

    Before you get started, I’m not some bitter loser (well I’m not bitter at any rate). I faked out a very attractive lady just about 21 years ago and she still has the bad taste and lack of judgement to be stuck on me to this day. Proof positive that women make bad choices!

    Comment by fustian — June 6, 2011 @ 6:57 pm

  28. When you are a woman at any level considered “professional” in this society, you are (per the mainstream) supposed to go along with the pack — which means, if a Republican does this kind of sleazy thing you scream, but if a Democrat does it, you yawn and say “oh, men.” Like being on The View. But from my 30+ years in the real world, that’s just so much BS.

    More women need to wake up to their own “Mamet moment” (google David Mamet and “brain-dead liberal”) and realize that if they are offended by this conduct, it shouldn’t matter what letter — R or D — follows the name of the sleazebag. And if resignation suits one side of the aisle, it suits the other as well. Anything less makes them just as misogynistic as their alleged tormentors.

    But if you aren’t really offended, then get the F*@$% over it. That goes for Rs as well as Ds.

    And as soon as Rs and Ds get the same treatment, then we’ll know we really are over it. One step closer to real equality.

    Comment by Terri — June 6, 2011 @ 7:51 pm

  29. Klavan is tongue in cheek. But barely. True “not all women are like that.” But enough are so that they create the playing field. Most men (about 90% of men) just are not attractive to women. Who prefer the “bad boys” that combine aggression, dominance (women LOVE LOVE LOVE male dominance) and power over EVERYTHING else: character, intelligence, fidelity, etc.

    Charlie Sheen, Bill Clinton, Tiger Woods, Roman Polanski, all did not lack for prominent, hot female defenders.

    Just as all men are not created equal (10% “hot” bad boys, 90% “icky beta males”) neither are all women. While average looking women can and do bed “hot” bad boys (look at Tiger’s harem, for example, or Arnold’s, not a lot of stunners there) the same is not true in reverse. You have to be a rock star (Rick Ocasek) to be ugly and bed supermodels. Or even average (Billy Joel).

    Point being is that the “market for men” is set by women of average attractiveness and up. What Beth Ditto or Kirstie Alley want in a guy is irrelevant. Most men (average attractiveness) will make themselves into utter jerks to get the hottest girl they can get (generally about the same rating scale). Also younger women are more desirable than older ones.

    A woman who dates A-hole jerks, in her attractive twenties, wants a guy who will stick around and cannot get the hot A-holes she craves anymore in her thirties for anything more than transient sex, wonders “why are all men jerks?” Duh because that’s who she slept with when she was youngest, and therefore hottest.

    Women set the market for men. Bill Beta-Male in his cube is going to go full on Weiner. His role models are Pauly D, Mike “the Situation” Sorrento, and of course, Anthony Weiner. Because that’s who gets the most best sex. What Kirstie Alley wants is irrelevant.

    So get ready for the male equivalent of Snooki. The spray on tan, or tanning booth tan. The capped, white teeth. The obsessive working out, low-fat diet to show off “ripped” abs and constant, obnoxious, aggressive displays of dominance and power. IT WORKS!

    It doesn’t matter what you ladies say, what matters is who actual attractive women sleep with. And hint: women in their twenties are MUCH MUCH MUCH more attractive than women in their thirties.

    The power of the internet means guys will fight to become the biggest Jersey Shore D-bag they can be. Because that’s who the hottest among you slept with. Reap and sow.

    Comment by whiskey — June 6, 2011 @ 8:52 pm

  30. If I had a dime for everytime I’ve watched some intelligent, well educated female friend of mine throw themselves in front of these types of men I could retire. Nice guys finish dead last.Women’s Mags write glowingly about the” bad buy” aura.
    You have only yourselves to blame.

    Comment by Raymond Chandler — June 6, 2011 @ 9:16 pm

  31. Whiskey, there are just too many examples of life-giving relationships and women who genuinely love their men to take your bleak picture as the whole truth, or even the larger part of truth.

    Comment by BenK — June 6, 2011 @ 9:21 pm

  32. Sweetie.
    I have published all my materials from my divorce even including the court meeting.

    I had a long series of crimes committed against me and I am telling young men about it.

    I am telling young men “5% is the new 50% if you are a man” as my ex was given 95% of the property despise refusing to work for 16 years of an 18 year marriage and bringing nothing to it but two kids.

    You women are being exposed as the liars, hypocrites, cowards and criminal supporters that you are. The young men are listening and there is NOTHING you can do to stop this now. You have sat on your arses for the last three years as I asked you to give me remedy for my crimes. Well? You didn’t. So you forfeited credibility.

    Here is my intro link. You can read my case all you like.

    http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/39/threadid/45/scope/posts/Default.aspx

    Comment by Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) — June 7, 2011 @ 12:27 am

  33. PS. I was a great husband and father. I was hated on.

    Now I am an ‘alpha-player’.

    I tell young men that ‘good guys finish last’ when it comes to women. I tell young men. Never marry, never co-habit, never have kids. Date them as long as you can and then when they move on just get another one. I even tell men now that I have no problem with men lying to women and no problem with men having sex outside marriage if the wife does not put out.

    You women support and condone perjury, kidnapping, extortion and theft which are CRIMES? You can hardly complain that men like me have chosen to condone lying and cheating (not crimes).

    Here are 250 women condoning crimes. So don’t even THINK about trying the bullshit that you women do not condone these crimes.

    http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/80/threadid/337/scope/posts/Default.aspx

    Comment by Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) — June 7, 2011 @ 12:31 am

  34. @Ryan Waxx – neither statement is true. When you start with “all men” OR “all women” you’re saying something untrue. Was Klavan exaggerating for effect? Sure, but it certainly brought out the very best misogyny the conservative blogosphere has to offer. Though at this point, some of the male commenters over there (and here) are so bitter that it’s more sad than offensive.

    Comment by Merry — June 7, 2011 @ 2:10 am

  35. If anyone of those women had felt put upon they would have outed him sooner but they did not. It is these women who allow the pigs to prey upon them and lift them up by playing along that destroys any respect for the female gender at all. When NOW and other women’s groups start fighting for WOMEN and not Democrats perhaps there will be an awakening but as long as these groups are groupies instead of history making organizations we will continue to have Weiners in the midst!

    Comment by JadedByPolitics — June 7, 2011 @ 3:22 am

  36. Peter-Andrew Nolan, you may have your facts, but your conclusions come solely from your misogyny. If we changed your “women” to “Jews” you’d be nothing but a looney anti-Semite.

    Comment by gus3 — June 7, 2011 @ 9:42 am

  37. Dang. Sometimes I forget how bitter and whiny men can be. I’m used to it from some women friends, but good lord…

    For the record, I’ve always loved Klavan’s culture videos. I’ve sent them to friends and they’re one of the ways I stay sane over here in Europe.

    But, I’d like to know, which is it, men commenters? Was Klavan doing satire, or not? If he was, why the hell are 80% of you echoing his satirical remarks with sincerity, and with hostility towards Anwyn’s pushback?

    Also, has it escaped all notice that the women who were slavering over and following Rep. Weiner were almost certainly liberal Democrats (otherwise they’d loathe the dude like I do), and also very young and therefore stupider than average? And yet so many conservative men here (the ones who don’t see Klavan’s piece as satire) are happy to smear all womanhood, apparently including grown-up conservative women, with the awful characteristics of those fool girls.

    I notice he mentioned Schwarzenegger and Strauss-Kahn along with Weiner. Was that part of the satire or part of a serious argument? You decide, but Schwarzenegger is about as conservative as the Kennedys, and Strauss-Kahn is a French socialist, say no more, so whoever the “chicks” who “dig those creeps” are, I’m pretty sure they aren’t anyone most of you would ever try to date or marry.

    Probably Klavan was kidding about that chicks-digging-creeps thing – but you wouldn’t know that by the majority of these comments.

    So the question: was the Klavan article satirical or not? If not, who the hell are you guys dating? 21-year-old liberal Democrats? Or are you talking about fully-grown adult conservative women who act this way?

    Comment by Rachel Lucas — June 8, 2011 @ 11:15 am

  38. Rachel,

    Klavan was having a whinge about something that is really annoying – that arrogant, uncaring, unfaithful men often seem to have no shortage of female attention – but in an obviously hyperbolic tongue-in-cheek fashion (‘each and every member of the female gender’ for crying out loud!)

    The floodgate of genuinely hateful misogyny that’s been unleashed in the comments is ridiculous, and embarrassing. I really hope Klavan addresses it, because he doesn’t deserve to have this insanity associated with him.

    Comment by BenK — June 10, 2011 @ 7:01 pm

  39. Read more about Loopy Pete here: http://peternolanpsychopath.blogspot.com/

    Comment by Illuminati Ingrid — June 15, 2011 @ 8:36 am

  40. Klavan’s an idiot. But his reasoning is typical of many men who behave badly. They are infantile and irresponsible and they refuse to take responsibility for their own bad behaviour. This stuff never goes away. I have a theory as to why. Unfortunately alot of men hate themselves.

    @ Peter-Andrew: Nolan – I read your court documents. The court didn’t make a 95% – 5% division of property. Lie number 1. Your ex-wife had 4 children to look after and buddy that’s work. She just didn’t get paid for it. Lie number 2. Anyway, your wife was employed for money during your marriage. The documents show she was also a co-director with you in your family company. Lies 3(a)&(b). You are not a great father, in fact you disowned your children. Lie number 4. You are not an alpha player. Baby, I looked at your photo and you’ve exposed your personality. Lie number 5. Now just because you are nothing but a liar does this make ALL men liars? No, of course it doesn’t.

    Comment by Sandy — June 15, 2011 @ 7:39 pm

  41. Allow me to point out that men who complain of not being able to get female attention because the a-holes snap it all up are also the men who typically sit back in the corner hoping some woman will pay them some attention. And too many women do not want to be that aggressive because we get shot down and either called skanks and hos or totally passed over. And meanwhile, no one knows ahead of time that a pig will be a pig. They almost never act like jerks when you first meet them. If they did, they’d be far less successful in scoring. Go through the domestic violence advocacy literature sometime. The stories are eerily alike. “He was so sweet at first, so attentive, so engaging.” Exactly. He was playing them. Soon as he had ‘em hooked, he gave ‘em his left hook.

    If you want the women to go for you, Nice Guys, try acting interested in them the way the a-holes do. Only, once you’ve got them, you have to actually behave like a decent person. And yeah, some of them have abuse backgrounds and won’t know what to do with you. And it hurts. But you let the psychos go and you try again, just like women have to do.

    Married men or perverted men (I mean that in a bad way) do not come on to women because women like skanky men. They do it because society tells them that behavior is OK. How do you think men will interpret it when everybody blames the women for men’s behavior? All society has to do is start making it painful for men to behave this way and they WILL change. I don’t mean doing anything with the laws. I mean convicting them in the court of public opinion–and then making it stick, hard. Kind of like we used to do to women whose only crime was sex before marriage–and frequently with guys they thought they wanted to marry. This, as far as I’m concerned, is far worse.

    P.S. I’m really not interested in Nice Guys. I rather prefer Good Men. Any of you whiners think you can handle that? Didn’t think so.

    Comment by yeah right — August 25, 2011 @ 6:56 pm

  42. The question is not “all women”, but “sufficient women” to cause Klavan’s result. Do we have sufficient? Remember that even men can learn by observing. It doesn’t have to happen to them for it to count as a teachable moment.
    It starts in, at least, high school. Who gets the girls and who doesn’t. Is there a pattern? What is it? And guys who, it would seem to other guys, shouldn’t get the dates–they’re buttheads–get dates. True? False? Which means?
    You cannot in reality insist there is no, absolutely no, evidence for Klavan’s thesis. Question is whether it happens enough to be annoying to normal guys.

    Comment by RIchard Aubrey — August 26, 2013 @ 5:35 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)




image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace