Pathologizing the Male Sexual Response

Rollo, I just saw the movie ‘Shame’ starring Michael Fassbender and felt the need to recommend it on here.

The main character is addicted to sex, it’s basically the main focus in his life. He is constantly pursuing it one way or another, picking up women he meets in his daily life, getting behind his laptop to engage in internet porn, ordering an escort girl, or just jerking off on the toilet.

He’s good with women, runs pretty solid game. But it’s all superficial, he just knows how to push the right buttons and make their ginas tingle, then fvcks them. He’s unable to establish something like a “connection” with them, fvcking is a purely individual experience for him, just as masturbation. Only, instead of using his right hand, he uses a woman’s body.

It seems as if the guy is empty inside and is trying to fill his inner emptiness by engaging in sexual activities all the time. Of course, it doesn’t get him anywhere, but he can’t help himself. He just keeps repeating his cycle of sexual activities, he’s a slave to it. The moment he would stop doing it, he’d become very uneasy, like a drug addict going through withdrawal.

Fassbender’s portayal of the main character is quite brilliant. Nothing of what I wrote above is being told explicitly, you just deduct it from his actions and body language while the movie lets you be a spectator to the main character’s daily life (so, in fact, you might disagree with certain parts of my analysis of the main character and give a slightly different meaning to his behavior, although I’m sure you’ll agree with it for the most part).

Anyway, it’s a pretty raw and engaging movie, and upon viewing it, I realized I have more in common with the main character than I’d like to admit… I suspect many of you would feel the same upon watching it. It also reminded me of Squirrels and the problems he spoke of in many of his posts. Squirrels could be this guy, lol. So if you could relate to the things Squirrels was struggling with, you’ll probably find this movie interesting.

Love to hear your thoughts if you watched it!

One of the most common themes in human storytelling is the quest for meaning in what’s essentially meaninglessness. This story has been retold for centuries in different contexts, but it’s essentially the same plot; the person with the unfillable void inside that prompts them to great acts of creative passion or horrible deeds of self-destruction. It can be a tragedy or a comedy.

Sex addiction is just the meme du jour of this century. Feminization has taken this cliché for its own purposes. Every romantic comedy, every ‘love story’ in the past 50 years, all revolve around men’s inability to fill the hole in their heart that only a special woman can. Literally, everything else in the world is just a cheap, superficial substitute for the inexplicable magical element a woman completes a man with. He literally cannot live without her piece of his puzzle.

Sex addiction is simply the new pathology of the male condition so we make the leap from Pretty Woman and the Hooker with the Heart of Gold in the 80’s to the more sinister sex addict of the new millennium who’s so hopelessly flawed he’ll burn away to hell before he sees the healing light of submitting to the feminine imperative’s medicine.

Women like it because they feel superior in their capacity to control themselves sexually (dubious, yes) in comparison to men, but also because it provides them with a self-righteous sense of pity; “If only men would just see us for our beautiful insides and be less obsessed with our bodies they’d find peace.”

Men like this narrative because it gives them a feeling that as bad as they are, they’re not THAT bad. There’s a self-righteous sense of qualifying to women based on how much better they are in controlling themselves, and again this contributes to their “not-like-other-guys” sense of uniqueness they hope women will recognize, appreciate and want to ƒuck them for. That sex addict in the story can’t make a human ‘connection’ with women, but I can, so fuck me instead.

The fact that a thought about a movie about a ‘sex addicted’ man occurred to someone and was created is proof enough of its cultural relevance for our time. The zeitgeist of this period is evidenced in what we think others will find relevancy in, regardless of any intended purpose. The story wouldn’t exist if the cultural interpretations weren’t already pre-established to make it relevant.

The Cure

One of the more insidious social narratives that the feminine imperative has convinced us of is that the inherent flaw(s) of maleness can only be ‘cured’ by uniquely female means. This is an easy narrative to follow since most modern storytelling (TV, movies, books) revolves around women’s influence being the only solution to men’s moronic, uniquely male, self-inflicted problems.

As with most other social narratives embedded into our collective consciousness, even Beta men pick up this ideology and attempt to use it to their Beta-Game-feminine-identification advantage. Convince men of an innate incompleteness, and sell women’s mystical element, women’s home-spun wisdom, women’s presumptive intuition as the completing factor he’s unable to comprehend he needs due to being a male and therefore ignorant of his deficit. Every romantic story, comedy or tragedy, has revolved around this narrative for centuries. Only recently has it been used as a social tool of feminization, as well as a commercialization of men’s presumptive inherent lack.

Women, on the other hand, are portrayed as self-contained, self-sufficient entities, and even when the story develops upon a woman’s flaws it’s never due to her ‘femaleness’, and the solution to her conflict is usually resolved through the influence of other women. There is rarely, if ever, any contrition that a man might solve a woman’s problems – and when he does, it’s usually through employing feminine means to do so (i.e. he “gets in touch with his feminine side” to resolve the conflict). Feminine primacy needs this narrative to ensure its lasting predominance as a social influence.

The first thing Tiger Woods did after his sexual appetites came to public attention was to commit himself to therapy for his ‘problem’. To the feminine imperative, the male sexual response is a ‘problem’ requiring therapy, medicalization, a cure. There has been no better means to maintaining feminine primacy than to collectively convince society that the effects of testosterone and male sexual response is aberrant social behavior. Men being men is vulgar, lewd and often violent – this is the meme. When men such as Tiger’s first response is to agree with that meme and institutionalize himself, he adds one more affirmation to the feminine social narrative of men’s ‘problem’.


48 responses to “Pathologizing the Male Sexual Response

  • Ash

    Top post, I am preaching to female friends using your site.

  • Ras Al Ghul

    One of the few south park episodes I ever saw dealt with how the “sex addict” meme was complete nonesense and actually had the boys sent to be “fixed” where Tiger, David and Blill Clinton were being treated you can watch the full episode here:

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s14e01-sexual-healing

  • Stonelifter

    I always figured tiger woods pulled that move to keep endorsement money flowing

  • Ras Al Ghul

    The guys at the old Season of Tumult and Discord noted that despite this supposed meme that men need a women, most if not all the great discoveries/inventions/art that men do happens before marriage and it ends when they get marriage.

    Alkibades is still around at his new blog:

    http://thelefthalf.wordpress.com/

  • Alpha Traits

    Powerful first line. I really enjoy your writing.

  • RockHard

    Being cheated on is hard on a person’s psyche, no doubt. You’re left with 2 options: either you’re somehow insufficient or the other person has a problem. Sex addiction is a convenient label in this case. The harder truth is in owning the idea that both sides have an issue.

    Years ago I did a few months of SA meetings after a false epiphany. So I sat through day after day of meetings and realized finally that something was wrong with these guys, but not what they thought. They thought that they had a problem with sex, but what they really had was a problem with women. I started to get this after one meeting where a guy came in and shared his story, same line as everyone else, he’d cheated on his wife, got caught, and wanted to save his marriage.

    You run into lots of guys in SA who do glory holes, movie booths, bathhouses, swinger’s clubs, porn, masturbation, prostitutes, dumb shit like stealing panties when you have access to a stranger’s home. It’s all low-hanging fruit, minimal or no seduction, easy sexual release, burdened with weird fetishes born of sexual frustration. What made this guy interesting is that by his admission, he “knows how to talk to women”. He had a different problem from everybody else in that room: he knew how to talk to women too well.

    I started to realize something new: everything I read in the SA literature, every guy I met in SA, everything I saw pointed to a different problem: these guys didn’t know how to deal with women and saw them as these impenetrable creatures that had some angle on life they just didn’t understand. You know the old trope about how women are mysterious? That’s a good laugh line for a comedian but it’s no way to live your life. And that’s why you see that most guys in SA are stuck: they’ve defined themselves as addicts and for the rest of their life, they’ll be addicts, so they keep going to meetings and conferences and listen to tapes and read books and never understand that they, for the most part, are trying to solve a problem that they don’t have.

  • YOHAMI

    Dalrok just ran a similar article, worth a read.

    This was hard for me to see for how many years? now it’s clear as fuck. I wonder when the red pill is going to hit mainstream. It’s inevitable.

  • Jon

    A splendid essay.

  • Cesare

    Outstanding post Rollo. It is an particularly insidious meme that has become attached to masculine pursuits, gleefully expedited by the nearly ubiquitous psycho-babble and amateur diagnostic jargon that passes for modern conversation. Certain places certain times, you simply cannot be yourself, you cannot refer to things that give you joy and your life meaning. To do so invites a torrent of patronizing explanations of your ‘real’ motivation. It seems that most any activity other than quilting with a hearty herbal tea is sure sign you re deeply insecure, and of course what else could a man possibly be insecure about but his sexuality. Like to hunt deer, ducks, pheasants? Poor thing, you must have a lot to prove. Lift weights, sky dive, competitive distance rifle marksmanship? Seek help immediately. Enjoy a decent cigar with a beverage of equal quality? Plainly the actions of a frightened little boy masquerading as a man.

    I have heard ALL that crap in response to pursuits that enhance my life and please me in and of themselves and even wasted good breath trying to refute and answer before I wised up. This isn’t a conversation, or even an indictment, it’s a sign just like wild game makes in the woods. A sign that it’s a woman to avoid or a former man who’s balls are sitting in a jar on some Andre Dworkin-looking bitch’s mantle.

    Masculinity is on the rise; you can pave everything in sight with sterile feminism but weeds WILL grow up and crack the surface. More articles like this appear every day and I only wonder what the Beta’s will do when they are finally revealed to themselves. Well said all around.

  • From the Archive: Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder aka Marriage | The Left Half

    [...] been looking for an old Talleyrand article in light of Rollo’s post today.  Still haven’t found it yet, but I did come across this one I wrote back on 11/30/09 [...]

  • Hero

    Women love to talk about how simple men are and how we “need” sex. And yet, they seem so much happier after a good fuck.

  • Stingray

    If we do not pathologize men’s sexuality, women will lose control. If we lose control we will have to return to being feminine in order to have any power. That is simply inconceivable!!!!! Sarcasm aside, I don’t think women would have any clue how to deal with this at all. Almost an entire generation of women would go without marriage until they figured out how to bring men back around to them.

  • GeishaKate

    I think many men and women are spritually empty and they seek to fill that void with people, who can never fill that particular need. I had a very wise professorin who said something I never forgot: “Don’t turn men into gods.” I suppose its similar to the idea of not putting women on a pedestal. People have a multiplicity of needs and no one person can fulfill them all, nor should one expect someone to be able to do that.

  • Video of the day: The Beauty, the Nerd and the Pink | YOHAMI

    [...] today’s Dalrock & Rollo Tomassi posts for proper context for this [...]

  • Samuel Solomon

    you say vulgar, lewd, and violent like its *bad* thing….

    haha

  • Senior Beta

    Re: the movie. So guys who screw lots of chicks feel empty and unhappy? I dunno, Roosh looked pretty happy in his last video.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Yohami, this was brutal:

    The first rule every Beta-Herb chump needs to beat into his head:

    Hypergamy doesn’t care about relational equity.

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/05/21/relational-equity/

  • Jon

    ROTFL! She rang his Mum….

    On the plus side, (I hope) he did quite well with her for at least a short time. Hopefully not too much communal property in the pot!

  • Love's Orphan

    So, the solution to a sex addict is another woman… But why? Coke addicts dont get more coke to cure themselves… This is unfair for them. I demand equality.

  • Jorgez

    Slightly off topic, but today I did a search for “hypergamy”, and what did Google Autosuggest come up with before I hit the return button?

    “hypergamy…doesn’t care”

  • feral1404

    Not off topic: A friend of mine who is a cop once told me a story about how his special response team breached a house to apprehend a mentally deranged man who’d taken three people hostage; two women and one teenage male. When his team entered, found and put the guy down (safely – the mental dude was episodic, glassy-eyed and didn’t put up a fight), the two females literally leaped forward and clung to his legs… so much so that he had to get two other team mates to pry them off.

    I guess the point of this anecdote being that the female imperative functions well in a somewhat stable environment (Maslow’s hierarchy and all that), beebopping down the sunny street or with girlfriends club to club, but when faced with an immanent threat to personal safety, the feminine will fly to the masculine with all haste. I suppose that’s one element of the alpha thug’s ability to command female hypergamy, or at least a gamer’s ability to mimic that sphere of safety in which she wishes to shelter.

    I am confident that once the wheels totally come off the Leviathan state (and it’s clearly happening at present), you won’t have to worry about the culturally-feminized matrix for long… it’ll dissolve all upon it’s own. The trick will be to manage the female panic as it occurs. NOT white-knighting and ‘protecting’ them, mind you, but MANAGING them to your benefit.

  • itsme

    the two females literally leaped forward and clung to his legs

    whose? the cop’s, or the kidnapper’s?

    both are equally likely for females under duress.

  • feral1404

    The females grabbed at the cop’s legs (for safety and security), but granted you are correct that any masculine force would probably do.

    Your questions are valid because I think it’s similar to how sometimes police show up to a domestic violence situation where the man is literally beating the woman, but when the cops show up, the female suddenly turns and defends her aggressor mate from the cops. I’ve actually seen that scenario for myself in action and it positively boggles the mind. Beaten females will actually turn on their saviors in defense of their aggressors.

  • TipsiMagi

    “Your questions are valid because I think it’s similar to how sometimes police show up to a domestic violence situation where the man is literally beating the woman, but when the cops show up, the female suddenly turns and defends her aggressor mate from the cops. I’ve actually seen that scenario for myself in action and it positively boggles the mind. Beaten females will actually turn on their saviors in defense of their aggressors.”

    This has everything to do with how women apply apathy with their innate insecurities.

    1) They either feel the man that is beating them is in so much internal pain he is lashing out, and because she loves him she is being there for him the way he needs her to be.

    This is the “I’m stronger than him so I can take it” mentality…

    2) She is protecting him from going out and doing it to someone else.

    3) She feels she did something to deserve it. And there are no limits to how minor it can be. In her mind, she didn’t close the bathroom door and she knew his nose is sensitive to the smell of the bathroom and she knew better but she just didn’t feel like getting back up to close the door, and she knew tonight was going to end up like this.

  • Alex

    “I am confident that once the wheels totally come off the Leviathan state you won’t have to worry about the culturally-feminized matrix for long… it’ll dissolve all upon it’s own. The trick will be to manage the female panic as it occurs. NOT white-knighting and ‘protecting’ them, mind you, but MANAGING them to your benefit.”

    Yeah, good luck with that – I imagine that men who have spent any period of their lives exposed to both feminism and the modern woman will quite likely have no interest in managing female panic and I imagine they will allow them to run around like headless chickens, while they pursue their own goals, most likely with a few trusted friends – certainly that is my plan – in a true balls up situation, most women are liabilities, unless they have some specialized and useful training( medic, surgeon, light infantry skills, something…).

  • Johnycomelately

    Great post, Fred Savage did a similar movie called the Last Run, fits perfectly into your analysis.

    Concerning the clip, wow! “I’m divorcing your idiot son.”

    That clip condensed about ten thousand words in two minutes, every game tenant possible was evidenced.

  • lavazza1891

    feral: My reading is that women feel an attraction to power and can’t stand others having power. The beaten woman does not want the police to take away her access to power and drama, and resents the police having power over her and her partner.

  • King A (Matthew King)

    “Pathologizing the Male Sexual Response” should actually be “Normalizing the Sex Addict Response.”

    Rampant male sexuality, of which Shame is one fictionalized example, leads to bathhouses, rest stops, city parks, and Fire Island chain parties. It is the equivalent of obesity under the extremes of gluttony.

    Chastity means achieving control over a base urge, just as a diet regimen controls the primitive desire to load up on fat and salt. Your philosophy assumes that not giving full voice to those urges is some kind of unnatural self-oppression. Sexual incontinence is regarded as heroic while dietary incontinence is thought of as pathetic because the latter’s effects are physical and apparent while the former’s are internal and psychological, and therefore deniable. Fassbender’s portrayal was an attempt to externalize those internals, which is how you can bring up the non sequitur of feminism without realizing your error. You want to pin the destructive effects of sexual incontinence on the “feminist” reaction to it, rather than anything inherent to the behavior itself.

    Except feminism isn’t against promiscuity per se so much as it is against the consequences of promiscuity — pregnancy, disease, exploitation, female degradation. It wants to allow women free rein to follow their hypergamous addiction while politically mitigating the consequences through abortion, “safe sex,” and criminalizing the pimps and porn directors rather than prostitutes and pornstars. They hold Slut Walks to champion the “right,” and they fund Rape Crisis Centers to manage the result.

    Sexual incontinence is not the naturally occurring sexuality of men. It is that sexuality in the absence of restraint. Because women have exhibited the need for greater restraint, you imagine restraint itself as feminist conspiracy, just one more restriction to impose on men for purposes of equalizing them. That would be true if what you and every teenage boy believes is true: that there are no consequences to men indulging in a certain behavior to the point of addiction. “Men like this narrative because it gives them a feeling that as bad as they are, they’re not THAT bad.” Exactly. If you normalize the addict’s behavior as natural, then anything less than addicted is automatically acceptable if not outright healthy and praiseworthy.

    Men sexually respond more aggressively than women, yes. But recognizing the necessary boundaries put on aggression is not “pathologizing” aggression. Rather, it is giving men the means to rationally control their urges. You suspect any attempt at controlling our base urges is pernicious, but that’s because your selective assumptions about those urges are as driven by ideology as the feminists’ are, if on opposite ends of the spectrum.

    So ask yourself, if:
    overindulging thirst leads to water poisoning;
    overindulging hunger leads to obesity;
    overindulging a dopamine kick leads to heroin addiction;
    overindulging porn leads to impotence;
    overindulging anger leads to rashness;
    overindulging bratty entitlement leads to spoiled princessery

    … then what makes you think overindulging sex doesn’t lead to some ill-consequence? What makes you believe that sex is the one behavior that escapes all forms of self-abuse at the extremes?

    Matt

  • King A (Matthew King)

    One of the most common themes in human storytelling is the quest for meaning in what’s essentially meaninglessness.

    You presume that the “hole in their heart” is a wicked harpy invention that sends us on a “quest for meaning” in a world of “meaninglessness.” But what if young men and women actually do have an erotic longing for completeness that is not “essentially meaningless[]”? And what if that completeness can never be satisfied no matter how many acts of pleasure one engages in?

    No, the hole in the soul is very real. Every young lover experiences it, the jaded experiential wisdom of old men notwithstanding. Poetry is written for it, wars are started about it, children commit suicide over it. There were romcoms and epic love tragedies before the feminist era. Romeo and Juliet would be nonsensical without an ubiquitous, preternatural urge with which we are all familiar. Science itself would be inexplicable without the erotic longing to know. One cannot pass off the entire Romantic Period as the invention of hapless betas; clearly for a movement to envelop a civilization, it would require some universally shared principle. And you would have us object to erotic longing itself because a few feminists of the current age command us to recognize only certain ends as proper to eros, such as courting the “special woman” of modern sensibilities.

    You take the practical insights of game and attempt to transform them into categorical laws of life, and they simply do not apply. When PUAs run out of tips for betas they turn their gaze toward scenarios that do not fit their hard-won wisdom, such as interpreting eros itself as a feminist conspiracy.

    There is no victory over feminism without discipline. There is no controlling women without first controlling ourselves. You treat feminism as a bête noire, the foil against which you might present your hypotheses of human behavior. And yet, by accidentally supporting the theory that sustains feminism, your hypotheses undermine the very attempt to deracinate that poli-philosophical weed.

    That erotic desire resident in every breast must be directed toward greater things than collecting beaver pelts. You intuit this, and yet you cannot make your pick-up philosophy consistent with it, perhaps because you are defensive of your previous player-life as sacrosanct. Have you ever posted a critique of the player life? Have you ever imagined it possible to critique it? Surely there must be some elements of male promiscuity that does not redound to The Best Life Possibly Lived.

    The ends of such a reckless pursuit are developed artistically in a movie like Shame, and you feel the need to lambast the effort because it undermines the justification at the bottom of your entire project. More and better pussy is a rallying cry for fraternity houses, but it is not an adequate warrior code with the power to slay the Medusa of feminism. Anything less than a comprehensive approach to life and the culture effectively means compliance with the prevailing reign of estrogen. Your understanding of the need to go beyond game is promising; your execution is lacking.

    Matt

  • Wilson

    Back when men ran things women were treated for “hysteria” and “nymphomania”. Of course at that time the state of medical and psychological research was very primitive. That women are getting away flipping the concept in modern times just demonstrates how dedicated they are to producing the negative image of “patriarchy”, the Satan to the God of Man.

  • Linkage Is Good For You – 7-29-12 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

    [...] The Rational Male – Case Study – Wanted: New Daddy, The Five Stages Of Unplugging, Pathologizing Male Sexual Response [...]

  • s

    whats with “i am different from other men” thinking?

  • Special K

    Article was fantastic (as always) but that video clip, holy shit.

    I could tell it was gonna go bad from the minute she got mad and he started supplicating.

    Serious lack of masculinity notwithstanding, there’s an even bigger principle at play here. The person cheated ON is the one who should be angry, and the person who did the cheating should be contrite (regardless of gender). Guy lost frame 1/2 a second into the conversation when he let her get upset when she should have been begging for forgiveness.

    Poor bastard never stood a chance after that. The worst part was him sitting in the car afterwords. “I can’t believe that explanation. I’m not enough of a man for her. Like Ramone is, he can’t even hold down a job.”

    Poor clueless bastard.

  • Tertullian

    @ King A (Matthew King):

    Here we go again.

    Once again, our resident Jesus – Freak deliberately distorts Rollo’s post to suit his own ends of trying to save the PUA/Red Pill community, one misguided sinner/Alpha/MGTOW at a time.

    Here’s a clue, dimwit. No one suggested that “not giving full voice to those urges is some kind of unnatural self-oppression.” That’s an interpretation that YOU put on the article, and it’s clear that you did so to give yourself the excuse to indulge in yet another flatulent jeremiad extolling the virtues of white-knighting.

    Can’t you just go on a mission to Africa or something? There are plenty of sinners around the world who need saving; get to it, and spare us your drivel.

  • On Power « On the Rock

    [...] Rollo and Dalrock have had posts recently regarding the feminine imperative and some of the repercussions of this.  In a nutshell, the feminine imperative is the idea that most everything female is good and held up in society while those things male are not (to take it further, all things male are often derided and frowned upon).  Woman have come by this imperative by seeking masculine power for themselves and then adding into the narrative how people used to feel about women.  People seem to be slowly realizing that woman cannot have both.  They cannot work to achieve all things masculine while maintaining their feminine privileges. [...]

  • m

    There’s a Cheerios commercial currently in rotation in which an herb is sitting at the breakfast table gushing over the cereal’s cholesterol-lowering properties. His owner, er, wife condescendingly chimes in “you still have to go to the gym.” Imagine the shitstorm that would ensue were the genders reversed.

  • Mark Minter

    For what its worth, I just discovered something the other day. On one male site, the guy was talking about changing your life one month a time, about 60 or 90 days of an action can form a habit when you start deliberately incorporating positive behavior into your daily regime. Then he asked for ideas. One guy said “Not watching porn” and linked to some site. I clicked it. The site talked about the connection between ED, porn, and masturbation. They called it PMO, porn, masturbation, orgasm and made reference to noFABing, which I guess is Fantasy Activated Brain. They cited examples of 20 year old guys with ED that started watching porn when they were 12. It seems porn is so supercharged visually that it can preempt normal sexual signals.

    So it pinged in me. About six months ago I stopped looking at porn completely but only because my laptop had died and I had to resort to an older slower machine that didn’t have the jam to play video without skipping. I had also quit alcohol and pot a year earlier. I am 57 years old. I had ED and just thought it came with age. But then the ED went away. I thought it was because I had quit alcohol and pot. I wasn’t sure which one, but I had just assumed that it was one or the other. I had some degree of ED since about 2000 which is exactly when I got the internet at home. The ED was at its very worst when I was divorced and single and staying home. It almost perpetuated itself. I avoided women for fear of the ED and an inability to get an erection when necessary with a woman, but stayed on the internet because the juice from the porn would give me erections. I used to even laugh saying porn is better than women. It always works. It is always what you want. It is always there. It is always cute. I could get erections but they were never as big as when I was younger or as thick or as hard. Again I chalked it up to age.

    Then, even though I wasn’t aware of why, the erections started coming back. Like waking up with a piss hard. Having the thing be as long as it was before and hard, so hard you couldn’t bend it, having it stick out of my waistband again. Imagine stuff that used to get you hard when you were a kid, like the covers in the bed, the slightest touch. Imagine that the greatest cliche of a man getting older just suddenly went away. poof. And your dick came back. i wasn’t until I saw that site that I understood why. I am sure no alcohol and no pot contributed but I now I am pretty sure it was because I quit looking at porn. And I didn’t quit for any kind of “I’m addicted” or under any forced regime like trying to save a marriage. I quit because the computer skipped and it is a good place to pick up computer viruses. No therapy, no group of guys moaning to each other, no introspection whatsoever. Just stopped and then a little while later, bingo, my dick was back like it never left.

    So I am living proof that what these guys over at that site are saying. I started beating off when I was in the Marines. There were no girls and none to be had. It was survival as far as I was concerned. Then I got married almost right out of the Marines. After a year, the sex was like you would expect and we could a go month before she would even perk her head and think “Hey, he’s not screwing me””. So I jerked off. She never suspected a thing. And it got to where even when I was having sex I would have think of something or someone to have orgasm. We divorced and I was in prime SMV and I had some of the best girls in my life, like bunnies, and still had to think of other stuff after the first couple of months. I got married again and stayed married for 17 years and continued to masturbate. I didn’t have to think of other stuff with her because she was Jewish, super dry, super tight, and I had to use Vaseline just to get in. She was almost like the perfect masturbation toy, like an extremely tight fist with Vaseline. So I had issues with that FAB stuff but I still got erections. We separated about 2002 and I am sure the internet and porn had been the final thing push to bust us up. My ED got worse when video became common on the internet. But I thought it was age and anger and alcohol and cigarettes, and pot, and depression from divorce. I didn’t put it all together until I saw this site.

    So I don’t know if I would quickly write off this whole Sex Addiction thing as mere male shaming. The way women use it is shaming, but I wouldn’t totally discount it from a clinical standpoint. I used to, like as late as last week. But I would evaluate what you are doing and if you are looking at lots of porn and your erections aren’t like they were, even though you can get one, like you have to coax it to being erect, if they aren’t very hard, if you have trouble getting erections with women but being able to masturbate, if you you have to think of other shit when you are screwing to reach climax, then you might think about getting away from porn and quit masturbating. Its gonna accumulate on you.

    Tell me why in the last 10 years is there so much talk about ED? It might be that there is also such high penetration in the home of broadband services. Everyone thinks its age of the men. Before the internet, almost no one looked at porn. Now everyone does to the extent it is changing what is considered normal sex. 15 years no one had anal sex. Girls would freak out over it. Now its the third hole. I have anal sex with every girl and they all like it. I think porn is pervasive. And remember that I am saying this as a person that last week was defending it on women’s sites saying “You just hate it because it breaks your monopoly on sexual access, that with porn, men can get by perfectly well without you. Porn is better than your wife after three years.” And maybe that is the truth. Maybe porn is more of a mental stimulant than most boring ass wives and their saggy ass bodies can’t compete. I know what my hand is better than most vaginas. Most women have no sex skills and have a piece of shit for a vagina. I am tall and I tend to attract tall women and they have what OB Doctors call a “tall vagina”” which is polite way of saying cow vagina. So porn is better than a lot of them.

    But I think there is something to the connection between porn and ED. Don’t think only in the “addiction” model. I don’t think you have to be “addicted”, like cigs or heroine or coke. I wasn’t addicted in the classical sense. I quit because my computer skipped. No big deal. I wasn’t sneaking back, having withdrawal issues. I just stopped. Wish I could quit cigarettes like that. But if you look at porn, it might be having an effect on you. I am telling you this as a 57 year old smoking guy that went from having lame ass erections that were barely hard to have a dick that sticks out of my waistband and erections you can’t bend without pain, to having a piss hard on in the morning that will wake you up like a 19 year old just because I quit looking at porn. And I am pretty sure that a lot of other stuff during sex with women would improve if you quit all masturbation.

    I think the term Sexual Addiction just be a contrived term trying to throw a bunch of emotional connotation into some actions and drum up business for doctors. I agree women have used it in a way to further shame and discount men. I agree that women wish to humiliate any sexual action that is other than in marriage and getting them pregnant. But I don’t really think that lots of partners can fall into the addiction thing. Neil Strauss had talked about how sargeing got so compulsive in project LA that guys ignored other aspects of their lives, but it don’t think it was addiction. I think women use the addiction term too easily just to put a pejorative light on that behavior because they don’t like it. And some men might jump on it as way to use a get of jail card for getting busted at something. But if you are doing anything else, porn, strip clubs to excess, other going than because they are OK places to hang out and you’re buying lots of dances, web cam girls for pay, any of that stuff, than maybe you better think about it and what effect it might having on you.

    I quit and Mr Stiffy is back. No pills. No nothing.

  • Mikä miehiä vaivaa? « mgtowfi

    [...] The Rational Male kirjoitti aiheeseen liittyvän artikkelin, jossa analysoitiin tuoretta elokuvaa nimeltä Shame. Elokuvan päähenkilö on seksiaddikti, joka ei vilkkaasta seksielämästään riippumatta luo henkistä yhteyttä naisiin ja kokee sen takia elämänsä tyhjäksi. Tuo aukko miehen sielussa, jonka vain nainen voi täyttää on romanttisen kirjallisuuden keskeinen trooppi ja se on myös keskeisin fiktiivinen trooppi, jolla parisuhdetta myydään miehille elämän tärkeimpänä saavutuksena. Nainen, joka kykenee täyttämään miehen henkisen aukon on näissä tarinoissa miehen elämän tarkoitus. Hän on se oikea, jonka ansiosta miehen elämä saa tarkoituksen ja jonka ansiosta hän on valmis uhraamaan kaiken. Naiset, jotka pystyvät tarjoamaan tyhjän seksin sijasta henkisen korkin miehen sielulle ovat miehen pelastavia enkeleitä ja nykynaiset tuntevat roolinsa varsin hyvin. [...]

  • Rollo Tomassi

    In light of recent comments here I feel like I should add some clarity to this post. My intent with bringing to light the new pathology of male sexuality isn’t to debate the effects of porn or an un-self-restricted sexual response in males. If anything I’ve argued for more self-restraint with regards to masturbation in prior posts:

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/the-pheromonal-beta/

    My issue is with the wholesale pathologizing of the male sexual response as a means to effect social control over men. Imagine for a moment applying the same degree of social shaming about sex we accept as normal for men to women. Make even a slight mention that a woman use more restraint in her sexual habits and you’d be reprimanded for sexual harassment or worse. This is the contrast I’m getting at.

    It’s not that I don’t recognize the deleterious physical and psychological effects a ‘dependency’ on porn can mean to men; it’s the new commodification of that dependency that I’m addressing here. It’s the presumption that ALL men are sex addicts, or potential sex addicts. On a social engineering level this is a classic marketeering schema – convince the consumer of their ‘problem’ and sell them the cure you already have available to solve it.

  • Alexandre Takahashi

    Yes, people (girls and plugged betas) tend to shun any explicit sexual attitude. It happened to me, soon after unplugging I was eager to show my new sexual, ferocious alpha wolf of the pack attitude. One of the girls of my social circle called me out on this, saying: “Gosh, you sound like an animal!”. Only to, at a party, make out passionately with me saying how wet I made her…
    Moral of the story, don’t let social conventions (since most of them are feminized) take you out of the masculine way. Be a man, be proud to be a man and proud of everything that makes you masculine. Don’t be afraid to be a little savage sometimes.
    BE A MAN!

  • GeishaKate

    Men wanting sex is not a problem; men not wanting sex is.
    :)

  • Nate

    Rollo, did you watch the movie ‘Shame’? It’s not a movie about sex addiction, it’s a character study about a man with poor sexual boundaries, from an obviously troubled family, who deals with his problems of self-worth by debasing himself.

    I like your writing and your blog, but this movie has a powerful message, and one that shouldn’t be perverted by mapping it onto a power struggle between the sexes– his sister in the movie has similar problems to him.

  • Thasswhatimtalkinbout

    You can’t talk seriously about what over-indulging in sex means if you don’t distinguish between compulsive and impulsive behaviors.

    Compulsions are repetitive, rigidly performed behaviors whose purpose is likely relief from psychological pain, not gratification. Compulsions typically cause distress and interfere with functioning. Think of an OCD who isn’t certain he turned the stove off — not a happy person.

    By contrast, impulsive behavior is when you can’t resist desires that involve pleasure and gratification. Being driven by pleasure is not the same as being driven to reduce inner pain and depression. Impulsive behavior is what little kids do — no boundaries, no limits, no off-switch.

    The test is between sexually compulsive and sexually impulsive behavior is how you feel after you’ve shot your load.

    If you feel the monkey is off your back and you’ll never do that again, you’re probably compulsive. Of course, you’ll be back to the same old-same old the second the monkey again climbs aboard. Like drunks promising today is the day they finally get cleaned up. Which lasts until the hangover wears off.

    If you feel “wow, that was fun and I can’t wait to do it again,” then you’re probably being impulsive. Clinton may have used bad judgment regarding Monica, but I doubt he felt bad about the fun they had.

  • Small Update, October 11th 2012 « Manosphere Links

    [...] One of the more insidious social narratives that the feminine imperative has convinced us of is that the inherent flaw(s) of maleness can only be ‘cured’ by uniquely female means. This is an easy narrative to follow since most modern storytelling (TV, movies, books) revolves around women’s influence being the only solution to men’s moronic, uniquely male, self-inflicted problems. http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/pathologizing-the-male-sexual-response/ [...]

  • Agent1406

    Rollo, I don’t think you got the idea of the movie ‘Shame’ quite right. The movie displays a sex addict that only lives his life thinking about sex and don’t care for his job/career life (he is not a “positive” male). Also, it does not imply that only men have this problem (the sister of the main character also have issues), neither that monogamy is the cure (it only shows how the guy have problems to stay/create relationships). The movie don’t even show if he is “cured” after all, it has a duplicitous finale.

    That said, I totally agree with your view about people pathologizing the “healthy” male sexual response.

  • Balancing Act |

    […] ubiquitous pornography and then the social pathologizing of the male sexual response (while empowering and encouraging the female sexual response) are two very easy observations of […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,703 other followers

%d bloggers like this: