Reddit mentions of Girls & Sex: Navigating the Complicated New Landscape

> Admit that women control this generations sexual market and access to sex/loss of virginity and that virgin shaming is something they use as a weapon against unsuccesful men

I don't agree. Exercising their right to say "no" does not mean they control anything. Men also have the right to say "no" which women must respect. Plenty of men I've been interested in have turned me down. I don't frame that as them "controlling" the sexual market, just being human beings who are allowed to make personal choices.

And one could argue that among modern teenagers (who are just learning how to relate to each other sexually and possibly learning patterns that will follow them through their lives), boys actually have control because they often pressure, cajole, and shame their female peers into sexual acts. (This book was good for reading about the kind of sexual landscape young girls face)

I don't think virgin shaming is right, and I don't agree with anyone who uses someone else’s sex life as an insult. But many women who haven't had sex feel this shame, too.

> Admit that some people were born genetically inferior to others either through intelligence/beauty/frame/health and that these people have less potential or a much harder time finding a woman to "love" them

Yeah, no one is born equal. Many people will always be more attractive, more intelligent, more talented, healthier, or luckier than you. Other people will have worse circumstances. Maybe someone without some advantages will have fewer people who want to date them, but if you would open your eyes and look around you in the world, you would see that TONS OF unattractive people find love.

I have conventionally “unattractive” friends, male and female, who are always in relationships. I have conventionally attractive friends who are constantly unlucky in love, and it has more to do with their personality and/or the kinds of women they pursue.

> Admit that some people can change themselves and their looks only so much before they have to resort to plastic surgery to fit a majority standard of someone who is desirable/dateable, and that such things as "lookism" only exists because women value looks more so than other features at the start of a relationship

Yeah, again, everyone is born different and some people are more conventionally attractive than others. That's life; that's how it's always worked. But again, if you look around, MANY, MANY ugly people date and find love.

But how can you say that women in particular value looks more than other qualities? If you are seeing someone for the first time and deciding if you're attracted to them, yes of course you're basing that on looks. You have no other information to go on. Do you think men don’t do this?

In my experience, women are much more likely to change their opinion on how attractive someone is after getting to know them. There have been studies that show that women's brains are turned on by a much wider range of things than men's brains. As men age they continue to be attracted to women in their 20s, whereas women seek men close to their own age at every stage of life.

Women's taste is much more varied and malleable than incels want to admit. I feel like the incel community has to ignore almost all of real life relationships to justify this belief that women are only attracted to a small subset of evolutionarily perfect men.

> Admit that women are hypergamous in nature and that it has only gotten significantly worse through things like tinder/social media

Absolutely no. I don't believe this at all and I don't see any evidence for it. Of course it happens in the world because everything does. But 99.99% of women in western society marry for love. Any lingering use of marriage for social climbing is leftover from a patriarchal society where it was the only way women could improve their station.

> Admit that not everyone has an equal chance at "love" compared to those of a higher social status either through beauty/wealth/popularity

Yeah of course everyone doesn't have an equally easy time of attracting sexual partners. That's some basic "life isn't fair" stuff. But "love" is different. I think love is hard to find for anyone, and if you're in a high social status I think it might actually be harder.

> Admit that women don't need a man for most things anymore and that makes men much more disposable

We're getting (slowly) to a point where women will need men for exactly the same reasons men need women. Companionship and partnership and stuff like that. We're all humans and in an equal society we need roughly the same things from each other. Does that make us all disposable? I don't really think so, but I guess you could look at it that way.

> Admit that women are never happy with their base man and that they try to shape them according to their expectations

I think this sounds like a trope from movies. Partners have expectations of each other and they should. But beyond that I don't see how this is super widespread.

> Admit that a relationship wouldn't be very successful if you weren't sexually attracted to your partner

Of course not. So women shouldn't be obligated to sleep with men they're not attracted to. And vice versa.

But also sexual attraction is very individual and very malleable. Some people are attracted to their partner off the bat, some get to know them first and then start to find them more attractive. Some find their partner very attractive even though other people around them may not agree.

But why is that being gendered? Do you think men don’t care what their female partners look like? Do you think men don’t pursue women based on attractiveness? Why is this being framed by incel communities as some special discrimination that only women commit?

> Admit that most of the time a "creep" is someone you find physically unattractive

Absolutely untrue. A creep is someone who doesn't respect boundaries. Men who discount women's experiences are always saying this. Saying it over and over doesn't make it true.