Ever since my college years, I’ve had an interest in the Arthurian legends. I’ve read almost every medieval Arthurian text written, but my personal favorite is that tome of late Middle Ages England, Le Morte Darthur. Outside of The Iliad and the The Odyssey, I have never learned as much about human nature from a single text then I have from Thomas Malory’s epic.
Last night, I was watching Monty Python and the Holy Grail, a movie that is infinitely funnier if you’ve actually read Le Morte Darthur, or specifically “The Noble Tale of the Sankgreal,” which the movie was based off of. In one part of Malory’s tale, Sir Galahad journeys to the Castle of Maidens to free the women there from being bound, raped and brutalized. It’s one of the more grotesque parts of the book, which is saying something considering the drama and excess that medieval Arthuriana is known for. In Monty Python’s film, this is rewritten as “The Tale of Sir Galahad,” in which our eponymous hero finds himself “trapped” in Castle Anthrax with a coterie of maidens who desire nothing but to please him sexually:
Both stories cover the same plot, with the two difference being the swapping of the genders of the victims and the reactions that are expected from the audience. At Malory’s tale, we’re supposed to cringe and be disgusted; at Monty Python’s tale, we’re supposed to point and laugh. Why the difference? Both Malory’s maidens and Monty Python’s Galahad were being forced (or the latter case, was going to be forced) to have sex against their will, yet the former is tragedy and the latter is comedy. Why is this?
Recently, Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Tech wrote a post in which he responded to people commenting on the loss of his virginity. I left this remark on his post:
I note that the commenters expressing sadness at you having lost your “innocence” are all women.
What they don’t get is that “innocence” doesn’t work the same way for men that it does for the ladies. For them, it’s a desirable quality. For us, it’s a curse, a cross to bear. Why do you think that the most common taunt flung at anti-feminists is the claim that we can’t get laid?
This is the reality of things – male sexuality is inherently worthless. To be a woman and a virgin is to be cherished, respected, and honored – to be a man and a virgin is to be derided, mocked, and scorned as a loser. Because fewer men get laid then women, a state of existence that has persisted throughout all of human history, a man has to take every opportunity to bust his nut that he can get. By extension, the idea of a man being forced to fuck against his will is hilarious to us, because you can’t steal from a beggar. The only exceptions I can think of are incidents of female teachers molesting their male students, but even still, a common reaction to those stories is “Damn, where were those teachers when I was growing up?” In contrast, a woman’s sexuality is so much more important to her being that when we see it taken, our instinctive response is to want to see the perpetrator crushed to a pulp. So sayeth the nature of the human race.
Feminists whine about the double standard of promiscuous men being respected while promiscuous women are shunned, but I’ve never heard a single one say a single word about the double standard of female virgins being respected while male virgins are laughed at. I don’t expect them to either – that stick is just way too useful.
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
I posted this on the better beta, the lowest common denominator post,
The title of your post suits the comment:
“LCD approach, is the only valid approach for a man who respects the existence of his balls, who has the respect for his forefathers and hos bloodline.
This story I will tell is about a guy that I have used in comments before, he is the guy, who having gotten laid maybe once in the previous twelve months, while being horny as hell, uttered the sentence “man, thanks god for the sexual revolution, would have been bad otherwise”
Bad?
You bloody dipshit. Without the sexual revolution, you’d be having sex more than once a year, you’d be having that girlfriend that you are so desperately wanting now.
What happened with the sexual revolution?
guys like me are enjoying younger women every year, getting relationship proposals quite often, from women we already bedded.
You are getting the sloppy
secondsfifths fifteenths fiftieths,And we, the guys getting laid have disliking for the sexual revolution (at least 100% of the guys around me who are getting laid), but you, the tolerant boys are the ones favoring your future wives to be fucked and chucked by us.
You really do get what you deserve.
The last gem from this dipshit came when I told him I was drinking in this hipster bar on the weekend, and it is almost automatic to feel disgust at what the women choose as partners. That how can I not feel disgust for women my age, if I know they did similar choices in their past. And not one, not twice.
“Why do you care about that? It is not your business. who cares if they chose those men (unsaid: if they choose you in the end)”
You know what,
The LCD approach is the only valid approach.
Any other way, especially a tolerating way is defaming disgracing disrespecting your ancestors.
Their DNA needs to be respected more than “who cares”, you dont respect you sperm, respect your ancestors.
Either pump and dump and punped and dumped one, of dont touch her.
but dont come telling me that the sexual revolution was good if you now would cut your right arm off to be able to take care of a pumpee’n'dumpee, because you dont care what she did.
I can afford to care, you cannot. Simple as that.
Same goes for the early twenties dude investing his time into a fat ugly thirty year old girl just got dumped by her boyfriend, with a nose that resembles a witch’s.
And his sister who does not slap some sense into her older brother.
There are two types of men:
Men with options
Garbage collectors.
And you know what, when you divide this, it is mainly about choice.
You choose to have options. (LCD) If your standards for possible options are not met, you go without, as a consequence of your decision.
Or you choose not to exercise options. You collect garbage, and are happy about it. “
Some more ranting.
You know what disturbs, disgusts me most is not the number of men the average western woman sleeps with. But who they choose to sleep with.
Interlude: I laugh with my ass at the number 3 thrown about as the median, mean of sexual partners for western women. For women at least somewhat attractive (average), and under 35, 3 is a joke. I have yet to meet that woman. Even the good girls out there are rotating one guy per year. At least.
Take for example this guy who is suffering from a break up. the guy is intelligent, a wanted guy, and is actually very handsome.
so I was talking with him about the break up, and he said, she was a good girl, average looking at best, but good girl, and he blames himself for the break up. that he did mistakes etc.
I digged a bit deeper, and found out her previous boyfriends were known to him: A drunk. a bum. A douchebag. A violent person. One simp. Another drunk.
I told him he should thank his fate that the break up came, and that these are only the guys he knows about.
LCD baby, LCD.
Let me explain.
A woman can choose an asshole, I’ll say understandable. a woman chooses a hipster in tight jeans with pressed balls, I’ll say fashion. A Peacock with the cock missing, I’ll say bisexuality.
But then many are choosing men who instill disgust in me.
I noticed this when I was telling a story about last summer to a friend.
A female friend of me was going gaga over this one guy in the bar, a guy whose facial character had changed due to alcohol and looked 10 years older than he possibly is. I did not really dwell on that, I let it go… till his arm brushed at me, with short sleaves.
I was about to puke, had to swallow the reflex.
Few years ago I’d say the assholes get the girl (including me), nowadays, even assholes do not make the cut. New peacocking style: be disgusting, but hip.
A guy who can instill disgust in me from his filthy aura, has no problem finding girls, albeit in a hipster club. Similar observations go also for trendy clubs.
I am close to rejecting WW altogether. Very close. Most, majority, are utterly dysfunctional.
You cannot sleep with what instills disgust in you.
The disgust though serves a purpose:
It is a high threshold filter. Very high. Saves time energy and sperm.
What we are left with is men who have options choosing not to commit. As a man wants sex, he will still have sex. so what happens to men with options? They start having pump’n'dumps, or short flings with the “good women” out there, becasue the sluts are too valueless even for a fuck.
Sexual revolution?
Yea, women revolving in the cycle of p’n'd, even if they were “chaste, good girls”…
What a revolution.
It is a devolution.
In hindsight, it seems so obvious that most men are dumber than dogshit when it comes to evaluating the sexual revolution. Most men barely get laid unless they have a steady girlfriend who is willing. It never occurs to them that under the previous arrangement that, while they would be a father by their early to mid 20s, they’d have had a much, much easier time finding a woman who was willing to marry them and put out for them.
**On that last note, under the old system, it was socially expected that a good wife puts out, and the concept of “marital rape” didn’t exist.
Sometimes, with my girlfriends, I play the “How much would it cost?” game, which basically goes like this:
“How much would it take for you to sleep with a man who was 200 pounds overweight?”
“How much would it take for you to eat out Rosie O’Donnell?”
The prices for um, potential prostitution can get pretty high the grosser the situation, but it doesn’t work on men as well, especially the starter question:
“How much would it cost for you to have sex with a random stranger who was moderately attractive?”
Which basically dictates a woman’s sex is worth something, and a man’s sex is not, even according to men.
You know, a valid point can be taken to far.
I was talking with an American who had moved to Germany one day in a mall.
Started talking to her in the cafeteria court, probably thirty minutes. She told me she had a boyfriend.
Then she said she had to go shopping. She was actually a fairly good talker for a girl, so I went along. Cute, little overweight, short.
She goes to the lingerie store to buy some lingerie.
Now, did I start panting? No. I didn’t even realize she was hitting on me, because I don’t do cheating. Looking back, it does seem rather obvious, but I don’t kick myself at all, because I don’t do cheating.
Now, men are ‘easier’ compared to women, but let’s avoid pushing a point to far.
Easier isn’t free, unless the men have drank the koolade.
Ferdinand, why didn’t you write something about M2F “licking”??? The tittle of this article was misleading. You got me excited for no reason.
I was one of those women who e-cried when fem-tech gave up his”v-card”.
Why? What was the point? My virginity wasn’t doing anything for you. It has no effect on your life. Unless you think I should have gone ghost completely (and there is a strong argument for this so I support anyone who does), then there is no reason to remain a virgin.
The sexual revolution may give only alphas fornication, but everybody masturbation. People sexually mature at twelve, but men marry around twenty.
Ferdinand,
I think you misinterpret the Monty Python scene entirely. Galahad covering himself with that shield, I don’t think he’s afraid that they will attack him – instead, he’s afraid that they will see his erection. Admitting to be attracted to these beautiful young women would expose his precious chastity as being against his human nature.
The joke is about tough manly men being scared of their own sexuality, not about sexual harassment against men being somehow okay. Remember how the scene ended, with Galahad begging Lancelot not to save him.
{ 2 trackbacks }