The Obsession with Wife-Beating

Screen Shot 2017-07-28 at 08.46.27Over on Dalrock blog, a critical article was recently published about the work of one Pastor Doug Wilson (link). Wilson is a cunning neo-feminist who uses various lawyerly tactics to redefine marriage in order to conform with feminist norms. Wilson noticed the critical article, and immediately confirmed his feminist credentials, by poisoning the well with broad accusations of wife-beating. (link)

Of course, the fact that people disagree with Wilson doesn’t automatically imply that they beat their wives, and people who use these fallacious tactics are safely ignored. It did surprise me to see Wilson use this cheap trick. He’s a very clever guy, and his arguments are (formally speaking, anyway) quite well constructed.

When I see men in the sphere talking about wife-beating, I instantly prepare myself for a handful of distinct, but related, neurotic types. In the first place, there is the feminist, who socks up to indulge in black propaganda. Our deluded sister will pretend to be a man of the sphere, and under her very manly pseudonym, will boast about keeping “his” little lady in line. There are also the trolls, who write over-the-top parody. Matt Forney is alleged to have created a funny web page about this, years ago. Disguised as a female, he drove the saps crazy with sexual allusions and garnered a few bucks in the process, from thirsty simps who just couldn’t help but fantasize about a night with this prize catch of a drag queen. And then, there are the fetishists.

Screen Shot 2017-07-28 at 08.59.51My nigga Artisanal Toad (visit his blog here) is a quasi-famous polygamist and advocate of the spank fetish. Toad encourages men to spank their wives, going through a whole spectrum of less-than-optimal responses, until he touches on the perfect woman, with the perfect attitude.

The truth is if a woman is honest with herself, she’ll admit that at least some man exists for whom she will get undressed and with tingles running through her body… lay across his knee in anticipation of having her bottom turned cherry red.  But, only rarely does one find a woman who can admit she would do so for the man she is with.  She may love him and she may even be in love with him… but not like that.

If Toad’s thesis is correct, then, a wife who eagerly accepts her spanking is the perfect woman, who is perfectly in love with her man.

By the same token, there are men who may not be sufficiently interested in beating their wives for sexual thrills. These men are not merely people who have other interests. Toad explains in detail, as follows:

there are also many reasons why a man might object to this, chief among them is the claim that women are adults and should not be spanked.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  When men object, as a rule the objections are driven by fear.  They know the woman they are with would never allow such a thing to happen, which only leaves one of two paths to take.  Either they acknowledge their woman is just not that attracted to them, or they come up reasons why it shouldn’t happen.  Their wife or girlfriend will back them up on this 100%, knowing she would never allow him to do something like that and even claiming no man would ever be allowed to do such a thing to her.

In other words, if you married bros aren’t interested in spanking your wives, it’s because you’re insecure. You must conform to Toad’s weird sexual fetish, or you’re not a real man.

If you disagree with Wilson, then you’re a wife-beater. If you disagree with Toad, you secretly wish you were a wife-beater, but your wife isn’t sufficiently attracted to you to make you want to beat her.

If I were to take this nonsense seriously, I’d honestly need a spreadsheet to keep track of all these convoluted arguments about paraphilias and sublimated desires.

In reality, most men just aren’t interested in spanking their wives. They’re probably too busy fucking to bother with any of this other nonsense. Most men aren’t anorexics, pedophiles or zoophiles. Most men don’t get turned on by smelly feet. Most men don’t have granny fetishes. Most men aren’t interested in anal or oral sex. None of these normative men have a problem. They’re perfectly happy. I’ll stop short of speculating on the underlying neurotic energy that makes people like Toad and Wilson focus so much of their efforts on wife-spankery. Maybe these people enjoy it, and it’s nothing to me, but the fact that not everyone agrees with them doesn’t imply some underlying hangup.

I do think there is a general problem (with both social and individual dimensions) with fetishism. One aspect of paraphilic degeneracy (whether it be the spank fetish or something else) which seems universal, is the gradual overtaking of all other aspects of the relationship, by the primacy of the sexual fetish. For men like Toad, real emotional intimacy, and interpersonal connection, is secondary to the act of beating a woman’s ass. The fetish eventually comes to replace feelings of love and union. The act of beating a woman’s ass may eventually become a substitute for actual sex. Experiencing the beating is the telos, and intercourse may never occur, or may be a halfhearted, masturbatory afterthought.

Advertisements

Author: Boxer

happy bachelor, iconoclast, frankfurt school. #Alt-Left

16 thoughts on “The Obsession with Wife-Beating”

  1. There is also evidence, ranging from surveys about sexual preferences, IQ distribution and studies about personality (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3612964/) that there is generally more variability among men than among women.

    I mean, there are men who are into fat women but are there women into short men? There are men who are into dominant women but are there women who are into submissive men? I think the answer to both of these questions is no. Likewise, both the funniest people are always male but the super serious preacher/black-dressed-poet types are also male. Dyslexics are mostly male but the people with an IQ of 130+ are also mostly male. The great artists are all male, the stupid “reading is just for faggots!” types are also predominantly male.

    And I think that’s also true for wife beating and all that 50 shades stuff. I do believe that the average female is sexually submissive and that that toad guy has a point … but with men there seems to be more variability. Sadly, people who talk about men’s rights and men’s issues often seem to forget that, and then you get that “MGTOW wants to instill masculinity in men” stuff. It’s just a general impression I have sometimes, that even on pro-male sites people often forget that men seem to vary much more than women.

  2. Alleged, no Matt Forney admitted to it on both websites.

    I suspect you are right most men aren’t interested in spanking women, even less so for discipline. My sense from the testimonies online is way more women are yearning for this than men (whether for fetish or discipline) . Certainly the success of 50 shades and the stats on violent domination fantasies lends credence to that. But its hard to say anything with certainty.

    But its not fair to claim fetish’s or sexual preferences will necessarily replace love and union or become primary over connection and intimacy. Usually they become one of the ways that intimacy is felt, but not necessarily the only way. You’re painting with an awfully broad brush.

    All sides trying to pain others to the extreme. If you excercise any authority over your wife you’re a wife beater. If you don’t spank her you’re derelict. Anyone who spanks their wife has an obsessed unhealthy relationship. Thats simply not true, just rhetoric to smear our opponents.

    Frankly I don’t care, whatever floats their boat if they can maintain stable, intact marriages that produce healthy children. Its not my place to dictate their marriage.

    1. Dear Gary:

      Welcome brother. Thanks for an interesting rebuttal.

      But its not fair to claim fetish’s or sexual preferences will necessarily replace love and union or become primary over connection and intimacy. Usually they become one of the ways that intimacy is felt, but not necessarily the only way. You’re painting with an awfully broad brush.

      That’s actually a really good point on the surface, but note: the idea of a face-to-face experience during intercourse is a distinctly human notion. It evokes feelings of love and empathy that aren’t available any other way.

      I’ll cop to the fact that I haven’t thought very deeply about this sort of thing. It’s an interesting topic, and I’ll get back to writing about it in the future. In the interim, if you (or Toad, or anyone else) wants to keep talking about it, I’d be glad to host a guest article that takes issue with anything I’ve written.

      Best,

      Boxer

      1. Thanks Boxer. I’ve long respected your opinion on various sites around the intertubes. I myself am only beginning to think this through as well. Its certainly not my dead horse.

        Oh hi AT. 🙂

      2. Fetishes contribute to the intimacy you describe as “a face-to-face experience during intercourse.” They are not antithetical, as you suggest. They are just another secret a couple shares. Your exclusion of oral and anal from normal-course sexual behavior (and female desires) is equally misinformed — 180 degrees out-of-phase. There is no research that supports either opinion.

        I also find Toad’s rambling about spanking tedious and vulgar.

      3. Welcome Brother BuenaVista:

        You write:

        Your exclusion of oral and anal from normal-course sexual behavior (and female desires) is equally misinformed — 180 degrees out-of-phase. There is no research that supports either opinion.

        I assume you’re talking about monogamous married couples, rather than playaz and ho’z. If that’s the case, then not only are you (and Toad) wrong, but evidence of your combined ignorance took me less than a minute to find.

        From Leichliter, et.al. “Prevalence and Correlates of Heterosexual Anal and Oral Sex in Adolescents and Adults
        in the United States”

        One-third of men and women had ever had anal sex, and three-quarters had ever had oral sex. Condom use during last oral or anal sex was relatively uncommon. In separate models for men and women, having ever had anal sex was associated with white race, age of 20–44 years, and having had a nonmonogamous sex partner. White race, age of 20–44 years, being married, and having higher numbers of lifetime sex partners were related to having ever given oral sex in men and women. Giving oral sex was associated with having a nonmonogamous sex partner in men. Ever receiving oral sex was associated with white race and a nonmonogamous sex partner in men and women.

        I imagine more than half of modern married couples have “ever had” oral sex. Like ya boy Boxer, most of these people found it distracting to kiss a woman after she just had her tongue on his piss-pipe.

        Like many degenerate activities, thinking about doing such things, before you’ve ever done them, is far more erotic than actually doing them.

        Best,

        Boxer

      4. The study you reference is junk because it’s a) self-reporting, and b) designed to prove a point about HIV transmission. It also does not distinguish between demographic cohorts. I gather you don’t do science.

        It’s useful if you want to call people degenerates, playaz and hos. I don’t do black patois so I have no idea whom you include in each category. That seems to be your main point. Your concluding comment about “thinking about doing such things, before you’ve ever done them, is far more erotic than actually doing them” I suppose could be a generalization, or it could be an imprecation directed at me. If the latter, that’s pretty funny, but is consistent with an outlook that is informed by your preferences in your life and labeled truth.

        Everyone has a kink or three, and I’ve even met them in Nauvoo and Carthage.

      5. Dear BuenaVista:

        The study you reference is junk because it’s a) self-reporting, and b) designed to prove a point about HIV transmission. It also does not distinguish between demographic cohorts. I gather you don’t do science.

        Since you’re the scientist, I’m sure you’ll explain in detail this funny contention of yours, that there could be a study about private sexual practices that wasn’t self-reporting. What would the conditions be, in your “non-junk” study? What would be the independent variable? Lay it all out in plain language, that the rest of us common idiots can understand.

        Regards,

        Boxer

      6. 1. Filling out an anonymous form is different than being interviewed and studied by a pro. Trusting an anonymous, voluntary entry swells a so-called sample size but as we know from October 2016, when polls declared Clinton the winner by 10 points, it’s probably a good idea to inspect and manage the integrity and cohort distributions within that sample.

        Self-reporting blind surveys are the grad school version of taking female online dating personal profiles as gospel. If we could do that, I could write a research report that says, “78% of unmarried 35 year-old women are “amazing” and “quirky” but “love to laugh” and are “athletic and toned.”

        Otherwise the surveyor is just saving time and effort, or stacking the deck, via lying.

        2. Science that pursues a political agenda (food pyramid, ozone hole, global warming, HIV rates) magically produces outcomes consistent with a political agenda. Also, it’s no longer science.

        3. I didn’t call anyone a “common idiot.” That’s multiple times you’ve restated an expressed opinion morally deficient. If you wish to snark, just save your breath and ban me. Your rhetorical devices are remarkably similar to Wilson’s, when the latter wishes to avoid an issue.

      7. Dear BuenaVista:

        Here’s your original request, since you apparently forgot the making of it:

        Your exclusion of oral and anal from normal-course sexual behavior (and female desires) is equally misinformed — 180 degrees out-of-phase. There is no research that supports either opinion.

        To which I cited this:
        https://academic.oup.com/jid/article-lookup/doi/10.1086/522867

        Clearly you’re wrong. There is, indeed “research that supports either opinion”. Rather than discuss the study, you decided to call it “junk”, for reasons you’ve only now given.

        I didn’t call anyone a “common idiot.”

        You continue to forget things that you, yourself, wrote, mere moments earlier. What you actually wrote was

        I gather you don’t do science.

        There is a charitable interpretation of that sarcastic remark, which equates to an accusation of me being a common idiot. There’s a strict reading of it, which is closer to an accusation of fraud. I always give people the benefit of the doubt, so I read you charitably.

        And, for the record, you’re correct. My degree is in mathematics. I did the physics series as an undergrad, and I do know the ins-and-outs of a peer reviewed study, but I am not at all familiar with Biology or Medicine. Hence my questions about what a better investigation would look like.

        That’s multiple times you’ve restated an expressed opinion morally deficient.

        I don’t understand this sentence.

        If you wish to snark, just save your breath and ban me.

        I don’t ban people for making fun of me, criticising me, or otherwise being disagreeable. See the comment policy.

        Your rhetorical devices are remarkably similar to Wilson’s, when the latter wishes to avoid an issue.

        Well, I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree. Thanks for stopping by!

        Regards,

        Boxer

  3. “my nigga”

    Really? The mind boggles…

    I should edit that post with you and Dick Wilson in mind. Wilson, of course, is an idiot with a depraved mind. But you? It isn’t that you can’t comprehend the female fascination with and attraction to expressions of male dominance, at least from an intellectual standpoint, so you’re being disingenuous while Doug Wilson is just being a dick.

    “In reality, most men just aren’t interested in spanking their wives.”

    Too true, but you’re intentionally choosing to see a fetish where there is none. To put it another way, in reality, most men don’t know how to respond appropriately to nuclear shit-tests from their wives, or even recognize the behavior as a shit test, much less understand why a wife would deliberately provoke her husband in the extreme. You know this is true, just as you know it’s true that most men have been “socialized” into feminized drones who fear the idea of any expression of male dominance.

    Surprisingly, you seem to have taken the feminist side of things, choosing to use inflamatory language (beating) and fetishizing the behavior in order to shame it regardless of the facts. Are the occasional playful swats on the ass (which are very much symbolic expressions of male dominance) included in your quest to discover a hidden fetish?

    While playing the part of the disingenuous gadfly, one particularly bold assertion you made was this one:

    “Most men aren’t interested in anal or oral sex.”

    Leaving aside anal, this oddly fits well with your predilection for seeing fetishes behind every bush. Did you have a source for this, or is it just Boxer’s view of things? I ask because fellatio is one of those acts that women don’t want to do for a man they aren’t that attracted to, but as attraction to the man increases so to does the enthusiasm and desire to please him. So, do men simply not want it, or is it that they’re not interested in demanding it from a woman who obviously doesn’t want to do it with them and isn’t interested in explaining that it isn’t the act itself, it’s him?

    There is another point of view (of course!) that I’m reminded of, exemplified by a discussion quite some time ago over at Cane Caldo’s blog. The men there advocated eschewing even the idea of fellatio because it’s a physical act of worship. In fact, it is very difficult to describe the act of a woman, naked and on her knees while fellatiating her man, as being anything other than a physical act of worship involving sacrifice on her part and pleasure on his part. That, of course, is simply too much for quite a few men to handle. In fact, I recall that over at the redpill subreddit, someone proposed that how a man handles getting a blowjob is a good indicator of whether he’s “alpha” or not. Can he lay back and enjoy it with confidence?

    Your take on this reminds me of the pro-homosexual attempts to redefine the Bible, seeing homosexuality everywhere (such as between David and Jonathan or between Jesus and John). You seem to see a fetish because you want to, probably because the fetish is a conveniently easy target for shaming that doesn’t require the underlying behavior to be examined. It’s the same with willful blindness to reality, which is what feminism is all about.

    1. Dear Toad:

      “my nigga”

      Really? The mind boggles…

      It’s an expression of affection among the twentysomething crowd (with whom I’m paid to rub shoulders daily). I didn’t mean any disrespect.

      Believe it or not, I’m actually a fan of your work. Formally, it’s very good. I’m pretty sure you’re more intelligent than I am (and few people are). You’re certainly a better writer than I. I just don’t agree with all your premises.

      While playing the part of the disingenuous gadfly, one particularly bold assertion you made was this one:

      “Most men aren’t interested in anal or oral sex.”

      Leaving aside anal, this oddly fits well with your predilection for seeing fetishes behind every bush. Did you have a source for this, or is it just Boxer’s view of things?

      Admittedly, I may be wrong, and you’re right that I don’t have a source, but I’m sticking to it, just based on the fact that there’s still a birthrate in the world.

      Anal and oral sex are, to me, very similar. Digestive-tract sex was appealing until I did it a few times. Once I got over the thrill of the forbidden, I rapidly lost interest. The idea evokes endless hassles. e.g.: Even with my tiny, pinky-sized micropenis, I couldn’t thrust deeply in either the mouth or the anus without choking and/or pain. It was distracting. She tended not to be into it.

      Why not just fuck in the vagina? It feels better, and is an all-around better experience.

      Your take on this reminds me of the pro-homosexual attempts to redefine the Bible, seeing homosexuality everywhere (such as between David and Jonathan or between Jesus and John). You seem to see a fetish because you want to, probably because the fetish is a conveniently easy target for shaming that doesn’t require the underlying behavior to be examined. It’s the same with willful blindness to reality, which is what feminism is all about.

      This is a disappointing response, and frankly, I expected much better from you. You’re the one shaming people (those who aren’t interested in spanking are insecure ladyboys, remember?)

      The reality is that there is no overall benefit to any of these paraphilias. They come at both a social and individual cost. If you disagree, then construct a rational rebuttal. I’d be proud to host it unedited here, if you’d like.

      Best,

      Boxer

      1. “If you disagree, then construct a rational rebuttal. I’d be proud to host it unedited here”

        Tempting.

        “It’s an expression of affection among the twentysomething crowd (with whom I’m paid to rub shoulders daily). I didn’t mean any disrespect. “

        I’m currently in South Alabama. I rub shoulders with 20-something every day, the majority of whom happen to be black. I hear them using the term all the time as an expression of affection for one another… I was envisioning such individuals making such a reference toward me. I am, after all, a complete asshole with a reputation for saying the most completely un-PC things which happen to be inconvenient truths. Sacred cows on the BBQ and all that. No offense taken, it was simply incongruous.

  4. “Most men aren’t interested in anal or oral sex.”

    Um, who isn’t interested in getting a good BJ? Or do you mean giving? That would be more true, but men in committed healthy sexual relationships do it a lot more often if its something the woman enjoys.

  5. Sir
    I remember one episode of entourage where Jonny said that vagina was his third favorite hole.
    I am not nearly as smart as you or sir toad. But that was a broken line I actually wanted to comment about. God is always asked me how can I be a Christian if I have DSL’s. Which is weird because we think it’s Upton of one time that I changed my nephew diaper i’ve never actually seen one in real life. Pics from guide from OkCupid don’t count.

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