So, Danczuck likes birds with big tits then

Hardly the world’s worst fetish, is it?

Sophena, who turned 18 at Christmas,

Ho hum, single man uses current media to approach single women. My word, aren’t we outraged?

Our society insists, by law, that she is old enough to decide who she wants to fuck. By two years in fact. Great, the flip side of that is that people get to offer to fuck her.

89 comments on “So, Danczuck likes birds with big tits then

  1. Yes, but isn’t the age of consent 16? A bit lecherous but not criminal.

    Unless they can claim he was offering a job in return for a shag; could that make it prostitution? Think the age limit for that is 18.

  2. She was 17 and he is near 50. I know how some on here love to bend over backwards to defend the actions of old pervs but how would you feel if she was your daughter?

  3. @KJ: Stephen Fry is 30 years older (57 to 27) than his partner, Elliott Spencer, who he married this year, to universal media acclaim of what a lovely couple they were etc etc. I can’t recall anyone suggesting that SF was an old perv for lusting after such younger person.

    Or is such leeway only given to those of a homosexual persuasion?

  4. Quick sidestep and switch to gay bashing, expertly done.

    What I really don’t get is how a man of 49 can actually fancy a 17 year old unless there’s something wrong with him. I know the age of consent is18 but she is a child and he is almost old enough to be her grandpa.

  5. I fell a bit sorry for him, he’s always struck me as one of the good guys, relatively speaking, and as he admitted there’s no fool like an old fool.

    Yes, he should have known better but I can’t help feeling that there’s more to this that we’re being told. It may be a coincidence that he appears to be on Momentum’s hit list because of his views of Corbyn, but Labour has a history of this sort of thing and the hard left is viscous when it comes to entryism.

  6. KJ,

    If she’s a child at 17 lets hope that the voting age isn’t lowered to 16 then because they obviously can’t be trusted to make informed decisions.

  7. Make your mind up, last week she was an adult who should be able to vote on matters of national importance, this week she’s a child who must be protected from her online flirting (self admitted) with an older man.

    And I’m not gay bashing, I’m just pointing out the inconsistency between how a very popular famous gay man was treated when he dated and married a man 30 years his junior, with this case.

    Or are you saying that it would have been a legitimate point of view to call Stephen Fry a dirty old man for his choice of partner?

  8. Nobody is saying he has done anything illegal, of course but he’s clearly acting incredibly inappropriately. Sending sexually explicit texts to a girl who is younger than your own children, even if she is technically an “adult” is sleazy. Doubly so when you’ve feathered your own nest by grandstanding against child abuse. And that’s without the nature of their relationship. She’s seeking employment, he’s a Member of Parliament offering that employment. For all her amateurish flirting, he is CLEARLY the one abusing his position of power.

    Fate never fails to intervene sooner or later for people like Danczuk. You’d think he would’ve learned from the experience of other reactionary big mouths like Brooks Newmark, Seesil Parkinson and Paddy Ashdown. But it seems like an immutable part of their nature that such tedious old goats can’t stop until they butt themselves unconscious.

    Meanwhile, I bet the New Labour gobshites are less than pleased he’s on their side. The sooner he and they have vanished from the scene the better for the political health of this country.

  9. He’s the MP for Rochdale, let’s just be grateful he wasn’t getting a string of girls from the trafficking gangs there.

  10. ” You’d think he would’ve learned from the experience of other reactionary big mouths like Brooks Newmark, Seesil Parkinson and Paddy Ashdown. But it seems like an immutable part of their nature that such tedious old goats can’t stop until they butt themselves unconscious.”

    Yes, because that bastion of Leftism the SWP was such a beacon of sexual equality wasn’t it?

    Do you really have to push the ‘Left good, Right bad’ meme at every opportunity?

  11. Why would a man that age want a 17/18 year old girl?
    For her body? For something nice to look at? For other guys to go nudge nudge wink wink?
    Have no problem with it unless coercion.

  12. KJ of course will condemn Bill Clinton who similarly abused his position?

    He had behaced foolishly and his wife is a nut. But I’d jump on her in a moment. Great Tits.

  13. It’s a set up.

    And he is an old fool for falling for it. More to come. The purge has started!

    Happy New Year!

  14. KJ

    So you don’t like the idea of older men with younger (tho’ legal) women.

    So what? The world is what it is and such events are hardly novel.

    As for the “What if she was your daughter?” bit. Again she seems to be a volunteer and everybody’s daughter is looking for somebody to fuck her at some point–regardless -or perhaps even because of–Daddy’s disapproval. Hell ,to acquire a daughter you must have fucked someone else’s at least once.

  15. If you don’t think an older man should contact a 17 year old girl, then change the fricken law to stop older men contacting 17 year old girls – otherwise it’s perfectly acceptable. These moral arguments about age gaps are as bad these moral arguments about companies not paying tax they are not obligated to pay.

  16. This story is as old as time itself with the contemporary twist of texting.

    It’s Molière in the twitter age and KJ, to whom thanks, refers to the subsidiary plot whereby the Corbynistas, with indecent haste, rush to settle scores with a critic from their enemy within.

    Stupidity with an overlay of stupidity.

    Pure joy to usher in 2016.

  17. Danczuk’s demise won’t have anything to do with Jeremy Corbyn or “purges”. He wanted tabloid coverage and his wish has been granted.

  18. KJ – “She was 17 and he is near 50. I know how some on here love to bend over backwards to defend the actions of old pervs but how would you feel if she was your daughter?”

    Not happy. He is a Labour Party member.

    KJ – “What I really don’t get is how a man of 49 can actually fancy a 17 year old unless there’s something wrong with him.”

    Sorry but on what planet does this comment make sense? We have evolved to fancy 17 year olds – especially 17 year olds like this one who don’t look that 17. There is a word for 50 year old men who don’t fancy this sort of girl – Gay.

    Now as it happens we shame older men for their perfectly natural feelings. Rightly in my opinion. A monogamous society can only survive with a fairly even playing field if older men with a lot of advantages are kept off the pitch. So by all means, shame away. But everyone’s biology is going to remain what it is and men will want to shag girls like this.

    Although sensible people keep away from girls who think they are vampires. Just sayin’.

  19. He’s a cuntmug. Where to start? Writing in a blatantly anti labour paper slagging off his own boss. Not paying child maintenance for his son from a previous marriage. Playing on petty nationalism when he suggested foreign aid should go to flood victims. Dumped by his Cllr girlfriend when she saw these texts and a girl he was obsessed with filling up his twitter feed with.. He’s an arrogant self publicist prick and the most entire satisfying thing for me about this is that about three weeks ago he described that shitrag The Sun as a national treasure. Sleep with the devil Simon and he may occasionally fuck you over when you least expect it. Good riddance to bad rubbish

  20. “Yes I will condemn Clinton and the SWP are a bunch of authoritarian thugs.”

    Well lets have less of the idea that sexual stupidity/inappropriateness is somehow linked to where you are on the political spectrum then.

    And as for this case, as far as one can ascertain, his part in it was one of reaction it seems, rather than an active attempt to lure an innocent in. She seems to have gone along with it all quite happily for quite some time, indeed stepped it up several notches herself. They exchanged messages for a month (presumably of a fairly innocent nature) before he even asked how old she was. And looking at the messages in the Sun article, she was luring him on something rotten. Yes he’s an idiot, a horny idiot for sure. But its hardly a crime to respond in kind to a young girl sending you suggestive text messages. He didn’t even meet her for Gods sake, let alone lay a finger on her.

    To be honest, something stinks about this. Danczuk has been on the Corbynites hitlist for some time now, pretty much since he came out for Liz Kendall in the leadership election. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find out this girl was put up to it, or when it was found out she was messaging him, told to ramp up the sexual flirting to try and entrap him. Its interesting that it only appears to have really got going after Jeremy Corbyn was elected Labour leader.

  21. You’ve got that all arse about face. Danczuk has been plotting to oust Corbyn from the second he was elected leader, if not before.

  22. KJ – “He’s a cuntmug.”

    Sure, but not because he fancies a 17 year old freak.

    “Not paying child maintenance for his son from a previous marriage.”

    Good for him.

    “Playing on petty nationalism when he suggested foreign aid should go to flood victims.”

    The horror! Suggesting British tax payers’ money should go to British people rather than Robert Mugabe’s Swiss bank account!

    “Dumped by his Cllr girlfriend when she saw these texts and a girl he was obsessed with filling up his twitter feed with..”

    Would it have been better if she stayed?

  23. “Writing in a blatantly anti labour paper slagging off his own boss”

    Bit like JC then over the years. opposing every Labour leader of the Labour party that he was a member of.

    “Not paying child maintenance for his son from a previous marriage”

    Bit like JC then, breaking up his family over his ideological opposition to his childs education.

    “Playing on petty nationalism when he suggested foreign aid should go to flood victims.”

    Bit like JC then, playing petty racial politics by supporting pro-Islamic terrorists at every opportunity to curry favour with the Muslim bloc vote.

  24. “Young girl”? She was 17, that’s one year away from ceasing to be a girl and becoming an adult.

    And “foolish old man”??? He’s the same age as me, for glod’s sake. Please, middle-aged at least.

  25. “Danczuck’s former girlfriend split up with him after reading the messages.”

    So, clearly a case of phone hacking/unauthorised access to electronic data. When’s she up before the beak?

  26. I think the more important story is that the Mail has better pictures of her tits than the Sun.

    What has happened to the Sun? Is Murdoch losing his grip?

  27. KJ: Danczuk’s demise won’t have anything to do with Jeremy Corbyn or “purges”. He wanted tabloid coverage and his wish has been granted.

    Such fun to have you wandering through this thread wearing an ass’s head.

    Andrew Fisher’s survival seems altogether more likely than Simon Danczuk’s.

    Time to dig up Vasiliy Ulrikh to help with the process, eh?

  28. Danzuk is a hypocrite and a fool, and possibly the victim of some kind of revenge shaming by this councillor woman who publicly “dumped” him on Twitter after they were criticised for partying while the North went underwater. The one who is described as being 32 but looks 42. What he isn’t is (at least on this) a “pervert”. This is the mess you get into when you deny the reality of human nature when making your moral rules.

    Men are attracted to female secondary sexual characteristics, not birth certificates. The primary SSC in women is the condition of the skin and connective tissue in the fat layer. Thus, while men like tits, this needs qualifying as “tits which are firm and youthful” not elderly saggy tits. And so on. This preference persists however much the male ages. Because he’s evolutionarily designed to look for mates who are displaying fertility signalling. If you label this as perverse you end up with comments like-

    What I really don’t get is how a man of 49 can actually fancy a 17 year old unless there’s something wrong with him.

    Perhaps KJ might want to consider why Page 3 Girls and glamour models in general are in the 18-25 age group, and were 16-25 until similarly deluded moralists made 16 into “paedophilia” in 2003. Sam Fox, Maria Whittaker, Linzi Dawn Mckenzie, etc etc, all started modelling at 16. When their tits were in optimal viewing condition.

    Meanwhile in the Daily Mail, I give you Justin Bieber’s friend Madison Beer, aged 16, in a bikini.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3379871/Bieber-s-prot-g-e-Madison-Beer-hits-beach-boyfriend-Jack-Gilinsky.html

    She also has great tits. It’s fine to look at her and think, “great tits”. A paedophile is a person who seeks to mate with those without those secondary sexual characteristics. If you look at either of these girls and think “ooh, tits”, then congratulations, you’re not a pervert, you’re just fine.

    Danczuk is still a fool though.

  29. Anyway, judging by the state of his ex-wife and ex-GF, you have to get them young in Rochdale, time doesn’t seem to do the women there any favours. One calendar year seems to equal 2 years of ageing once past 20…………

  30. I am shocked and disgusted by this Danczuk fella.

    Sophena (sic) is a moon-faced she-chav with a Yorkshire terrier’s hair. I don’t care how big her tits are – she looks like Mrs Potato Head.

  31. And KJ, expecting the same outrage to be expressed on noting the similarity with Stephen Fry, and querying such double standards, is not ‘gay bashing’.

  32. The age of consent in the UK is 16. I just googled it. To those who say it is 18: Sorry – you are just wrong.

    Ages of consent are arbitrary. Why 16? Why not 17? Why not 15? For better or for worse, in the UK, the age is 16.

    That means when a person reaches the age of 16, they can decided to agree to have sex with someone. They can agree to have sex with a fellow 16 year old. They can agree to have sex with an 80 year old.

    It is called freedom of choice. What some people have argued for is to have an adjustable age of consent where depending on the age difference between two people. Frankly, such a system would be equally arbitrary and quite frankly next to impossible to police. It would also make participating in a 20 way orgy an interesting legal exercise.

  33. Gunker: It is a play on words.

    I have no quarrel with (almost) anyone who isn’t a leftist or some other type of evildoer.

  34. “Sending sexually explicit texts to a girl who is younger than your own children, even if she is technically an “adult” is sleazy. Doubly so when you’ve feathered your own nest by grandstanding against child abuse.”

    Sorry, but how the fuck do you connect hitting on a 17 year old with child abuse? They’re of legal age.

    It’s troubling to me how we are infantilising children beyond their years. We’re forcing them to stay in the 6th form, despite the pointlessness of keeping chavs in school beyond the age of 14. The story about schools allowing 16 year olds to have alcohol suggests some people want it to be socially unacceptable to give under 18s alcohol. We’ve criminalised 16 year old kids sending each other naked pictures as child pornography. Kids that are already shagging each other.It’s hard for kids to get Saturday jobs at 15 because then it means running a load of criminal records checks on all the employees.

  35. Joy unconfined at that story. You thought his Missus was bad but he’s worse. Not illegal but ill-advised given his various public pronouncements.

  36. It’s the liberal versus puritan thing. Puritans see adulthood as the “loss of innocence” (as if innocence is in some way meritous) so attempt to delay it as much as they can. Liberals see it as the gaining of agency, so applaud it. Which is why the Puritans are incapable of understanding and managing the transition.

    I like also the use of the word “technically”.

  37. Ian B,

    “She also has great tits. It’s fine to look at her and think, “great tits”. A paedophile is a person who seeks to mate with those without those secondary sexual characteristics. If you look at either of these girls and think “ooh, tits”, then congratulations, you’re not a pervert, you’re just fine.”

    It’s OK to fancy 14 or 15 year olds. A mate of mine was in a club hitting on a girl. He was about 23 at the time. I left them to give them some space. 5 minutes later he walks over looking anxious. Turns out she was 14. And I thought she was pretty tasty too.

    I actually think 16 is sensible for the AOC. We probably need to codify what we do about 15 year olds shagging their 17 year old boyfriend (which we consider to be OK and don’t prosecute) but it works as a way of stopping girls with confused hormones from having sex with older men who would take advantage of their naivety and getting them pregnant. At 16, they start to find boys around their own age more desirable.

    (and yes, it’s about girls – there are few cases of older women shagging 15 year old boys, mostly because they’re not very desirable for women).

  38. There seem to be quite a lot of cases of older women shagging 15 year old boys. And girls indeed. For much the same reason as I outlined above; the appearance of secondary sexual characteristics. This only seems paradoxical if you stick with the idea that women are only interested in social status, which seems to me to be clearly not true.

    I’m never quite clear why an older man (or woman) is “taking advantage” in some way that a younger man or woman isn’t. Sex is always about much the same emotions; I find you attractive, I want to play hide the sausage. I don’t see 17 year old boys as any less motivated by that than 47 year old ones.

    The point of all this for me is that as a society we are doggedly enforcing rules that do not seem to make much sense or have a good rational basis, even claiming that normal emotions are “perverse”. Thus for instance ending up in the bizarre position that what somebody objectively is depends on who is looking at them. If 14 is demonstrably too young to have sex, it cannot matter whether the other party is under or over 16. Or 18. Or whatever.

  39. Ian B,

    I’d even go as far as to suggest that university is part of extending childhood and if you read the stories about the various protests at US colleges, how people complain about a frat party not allowing black girls, the talk of “safe spaces” here, it is no longer in the zone of “adult” and is now part of childhood. I’d go as far as to say that being in the 6th form or at technical college when I was a lad had more of a “you’re a grown up, act like one” attitude.

    But you just have to look at how some parents raise their kids. My neighbours kids never did any work for money until they left university. One of the parents in our street didn’t allow her daughter to play out in the street until she was nearly a teenager.

  40. Stig-

    Yes, it’s a general process that has occurred over the rise of the Neo-Progressive Era. I agree with your observations about University; apparently nowadays adulthood doesn’t start until you end “education”.

    I was a child in the 1970s and back then, which is not that long ago, adults would encourage children to be “grown up”; and by that I mean ordinary (sorry Tim) working/middle class people. “You’re a big boy/girl now” etc. This whole attitude seems to have evaporated and replaced by parenting that would have been called “mollycoddling”, “spoiling” etc, and a generation of kidults is the result.

  41. Ian B,

    It’s newsworthy in a “man bites dog” way, because it doesn’t happen that often. In general, adult women don’t seduce 15 year old boys. They might find them cute, but they don’t want to play hide the sausage with them. Other than being insanely horny, they have nothing else to offer, and women generally want more than that (like being a provider). What men want from women is that they’re hot enough and not too crazy.

    As for “taking advantage”, I’m talking about the difference in experience and how older men are more interesting to 14 year old girls than their male classmates.

  42. I have to say, this case does disgust me. For a number of reasons, none of which are KJ’s. As noted above, variously, Danczuck (MP)’s actions are sexually normal if, in his position, (what is the word you would use instead of ‘profession’ if you are talking about politics? It’s not career, either?) whateverly-suicidal.

    As Steve points out, she is a bit of a munter. But then so was Monica Lewinsky (although she seems matured better than you would have bet on at the time.)

    But, really? All the blokes in Rochdale available for a lass with big knockers and the best she can do in mate selection is an over-the-hill Labour MP?

  43. Well, it does seem to happen quite often, and people just assume it doesn’t because of this dogma that women are motivated by gold digging and men by physical nature. Okay, little anecdote-

    My ex girlfriend, worked in a middle class nice publishing environment with lots of other women. One evening she goes for wine and chat with the girls, all thirtysomething or above at one of their number’s house. During the evening, the woman’s 15 year old son pops into the room to tell mum he’s going out. My girlfriend told me the reaction among the ladies (herself included) of silent repressed lust for this handsome young chap in his leather jacket and spiky hair and so on. He’s a hunk. The nominal point of her remarking this was in comparison to her sister’s son (we’d visited a few days before) who at about the same age was still weedy and “childlike”.

    Women really are turned on by the physical nature of men. They do not, as per the dogma doing the rounds of the “Game” sites, simply follow this supposed sociobiological imperative to snap up a socially alpha male.

    As for “taking advantage”, I’m talking about the difference in experience and how older men are more interesting to 14 year old girls than their male classmates.

    So you think girls should only be allowed to have sex with people they find less attractive? Because if they have sex with the person they want, they’re being taken advantage of?

  44. All the blokes in Rochdale available for a lass with big knockers and the best she can do in mate selection is an over-the-hill Labour MP?

    She was apparently interested in politics. It’s not unknown for attractive females to use their sexual advantage to gain rapid advancement compared to other females, like the dowdy 32 year old who apparently tipped off the press about this.

    Hence the point about whether older females are really interested in protecting younger ones from exploitation, or in eliminating their competitive advantage.

  45. KJ said:
    “She’s seeking employment, he’s a Member of Parliament offering that employment. For all her amateurish flirting, he is CLEARLY the one abusing his position of power.”

    Not sure he’s the only one abusing power. Looks rather like she wanted a job and was prepared to use her sex to get it.

    And, judging by how he behaved, that certainly did give her quite a lot of power over him.

  46. Surreptitious Evil said:
    “All the blokes in Rochdale available for a lass with big knockers and the best she can do in mate selection is an over-the-hill Labour MP?”

    I assume you haven’t been to Rochdale. Danczuk is, relatively, quite a catch.

  47. Ian B,

    “So you think girls should only be allowed to have sex with people they find less attractive? Because if they have sex with the person they want, they’re being taken advantage of?”

    No, I’m talking about their ability to judge a good mate and sort out bullshit at that age, and what a couple of years difference makes. And I don’t have a problem with 15 year olds with 16 year olds because at 16, boys haven’t figured out the tricks.

  48. Ian B,

    “My ex girlfriend, worked in a middle class nice publishing environment with lots of other women. One evening she goes for wine and chat with the girls, all thirtysomething or above at one of their number’s house. During the evening, the woman’s 15 year old son pops into the room to tell mum he’s going out. My girlfriend told me the reaction among the ladies (herself included) of silent repressed lust for this handsome young chap in his leather jacket and spiky hair and so on. He’s a hunk. The nominal point of her remarking this was in comparison to her sister’s son (we’d visited a few days before) who at about the same age was still weedy and “childlike”.

    Women really are turned on by the physical nature of men. They do not, as per the dogma doing the rounds of the “Game” sites, simply follow this supposed sociobiological imperative to snap up a socially alpha male.”

    Did any of them shag him, though? Women might find a man physically desirable, but that doesn’t mean they’ll go through to shagging him. Women generally are looking for husbands. If they shag a man on the side, it’s as a test run to replacing their current man, not as an addition (which is what men want).

  49. Did any of them shag him, though?

    What, in the middle of a girls’ soiree? They weren’t in a porn movie.

    Women might find a man physically desirable, but that doesn’t mean they’ll go through to shagging him. Women generally are looking for husbands.

    So everyone keeps saying, it’s almost as if people don’t believe that women really enjoy sex qua sex. Which funnily enough is the belief put about by the Puritan matrons. It’s just unthinkable that a woman would have the same beastly urges as a man. She must be motivated by her higher spiritual whatever blah de blah.

    As indeed in general in this thread, all the way through is the assumption that women are “tricked” into bed by men, from which they need protecting until they are wise enough to avoid the “tricks”. Because they don’t have a sex drive. They only want a husband, who pesters them as little as possible to do dirty things.

    The thing that baffles me is why everyone seems to prefer this dismal model of human sexuality.

  50. “Did any of them shag him, though?”

    Did Danczuk shag the girl in question? No. Would he have gone through with it if she’d given him the chance? We don’t know. Would any of those women have shagged the lad given an actual opportunity? Possibly, if they were desperate enough and thought they could avoid getting caught.

    I mean, there’s enough cases of female teachers shagging their teenage male pupils to suggest that there’s a reasonable level of female desire for young lads out there, just one that is 99% of the time not acted on. Hell, my ex-GF (who I’m still good friends with) has a crush on a young lad who works the tills in a local supermarket, she’s 30 years older than him at least. I doubt she’s going to throw herself at him and attempt to run off into the sunset, but the thought process is there. Anyone who has spent any amount of time with women as platonic friends will tell you, they are just as lusty as men, just a lot more circumspect about who and how much they tell about it.

  51. “You’ve got that all arse about face. Danczuk has been plotting to oust Corbyn from the second he was elected leader, if not before.”

    This was just the latest on a series of comments that show KJ’S real beef with Danczuck was political. His behaviour is simply jeir cover for the leftist purge.

    P.S. Does KJ intend to respond to the Stephen Fry ‘compare and contrast’ or does he wish to maintain, against the evidence, that it was just gay bashing?

  52. I’m disappointed with Danczuk. I thought he would be cannier than that. As soon as Corbyn won he had a target on his forehead. He might like the ladies and I’ve no criticism of that, but he ought to have seen where this might lead, as it has.

    I grew up in Rochdale, but left it decades ago, as I think most people with a bit of ambition would have. Even when I left, in 1970, the seeds of its decline were already sown, in the last gasp of the cotton industry. It could have become a comfortable dormitory town for Greater Manchester – the transport links have always been good. But it didn’t, for whatever reason.

  53. Ian B,

    “So everyone keeps saying, it’s almost as if people don’t believe that women really enjoy sex qua sex. Which funnily enough is the belief put about by the Puritan matrons. It’s just unthinkable that a woman would have the same beastly urges as a man. She must be motivated by her higher spiritual whatever blah de blah.”

    No, women like sex. It’s just that women like sex with commitment or at least, potential for commitment, and that’s about limited womb options and that they historically had to raise the kids and wanted a provider. A woman who is getting properly rogered by a man and who is being looked after by her is not going to have an affair, but a man with a beautiful sexy wife will often fuck the girl in the office if the opportunity arises. This might change as women can have fairly reliable, casual, consequence-free sex, but that’s only existed for 50 years after 200,000 years of evolution.

    Look at all sorts of data out there: prostitution is almost entirely a service to men. Sex toys are bought far more by women than men, and that’s a way of avoiding sex – women feel less ashamed of masturbation than picking up some strange, where men feel the opposite.

  54. Jim,

    “I mean, there’s enough cases of female teachers shagging their teenage male pupils to suggest that there’s a reasonable level of female desire for young lads out there, just one that is 99% of the time not acted on. Hell, my ex-GF (who I’m still good friends with) has a crush on a young lad who works the tills in a local supermarket, she’s 30 years older than him at least. I doubt she’s going to throw herself at him and attempt to run off into the sunset, but the thought process is there. Anyone who has spent any amount of time with women as platonic friends will tell you, they are just as lusty as men, just a lot more circumspect about who and how much they tell about it.”

    Enough? How many? What’s the data on news stories and prosecutions for male and female teachers having sex with 15 year old pupils?

    Sure, it happens. I’m not denying there are women that have sex with 15 year old pupils any more than women that like getting into a 3 way with a couple of different builders every week (I worked with such a woman). I’m talking general behaviour here.

    And yes, your ex-GF might have a crush on him, but like Ian B’s group of women that fancy a 15 year old, there’s a big difference between women finding someone physically attractive and that woman letting that man penetrate them. It’s why women don’t put out for 3 or 4 dates. They’ve established that you’re physically attractive by date 1 – they’re now trying to understand if you’re likely to be a good partner.

  55. Stig,

    The vast majority of men ogling women incidents don’t lead to sex either, neither is there any intention of it on the part of those going Phwoowarrh. The point is it’s the same process.

    The assumption that women are more interested in husbands is just that. Take away the moral compulsion as we have experimented with socially in the past few decades, and the effect evaporates, as can be seen in the lower orders (more distantly removed from moralism) which upset the likes of SMFS and Theo. There is simply an expectation that they should act this way due to theory (high investment in offspring) but it isn’t supported by behaviour.

    And I don’t think it bears evolutionary reasoning scrutiny either. Remember for instance that chimps have high investment young also, but no pair bonding at all. The two things are not automatically bound together. And the simplest argument is that if women naturally just feel this way instinctively, there would be no need for matrons to subject them to such massive moral pressure, since they’d just act in this “wifey” mode without coercion.

    It’s this problematic thing where the same behaviour gets used as evidence of different things. A man sleeps around, he’s just spreading his seed. A woman does, she’s looking for a husband (and being tricked by males with no intention of being one). A man has an affair, he’s spreading his seed. A woman does, she’s looking for another husband. A man looks at a woman’s bum, he’s just hoping to spread his seed. A woman does it, she’s looking for a husband.

    And so on.

    As for “putting out for 3 or 4 dates”, there are lots of interpretations other than “she’s looking for a husband”. One reason for instance is to check whether the man feels safe to be alone with. Men don’t worry about women raping them. Women worry about men raping them. That’s when they do hold out, which is not automatic either. At the risk of blowing me own trumpent with some more anecdata, a girlfriend once said to me she’d never slept with anyone else so quickly. I asked why, and she said because straightaway she knew I was safe.

    (Sorry Ironman, I’m actually quite a nice bloke to meet, apparently).

    Women are not closer to the angels and men to the beasts. We all experience emotions in mixtures- in this case, desires for sex, for companionship, which combine to make us seek various types of relationships. We each look at the opposite sex and go Phwoowarh, and that is purely that part of us that wants to have sex with what we’re looking at.

    This whole “women are seeking partners” bollocks is how we get to “and if you wake up the next morning feeling bad about having sex last night, you’ve been raped” rubbish.

  56. Ian B,

    “Women are not closer to the angels and men to the beasts.”

    That’s your problem. I didn’t say that at all. I’m just observing how men and women are, with no judgemental perspective. Like I said: there’s plenty of observable data out there that show that men behave differently, sexually, to women.

    The fake rape accusations are mostly about women’s impaired judgement due to alcohol. They become more like men, more bestial, if you like. They set aside all the normal judgement stuff and shag a bloke for his physicality alone. They wake up sober the next day and the judgement is back.

  57. Stig – “A woman who is getting properly rogered by a man and who is being looked after by her is not going to have an affair”

    This is 100% horseshit. 70% of divorces are initiated by the wives and the no. 1 reason is that they are bored by their beta provider husbands. You should also check out the stats for “dads” who are unknowingly raising someone else’s kids (1 in 10 being a fair estimate)

  58. They set aside all the normal judgement stuff and shag a bloke for his physicality alone.

    Stig, you’re not getting the point. Why would they do that if their instincts are “husband-seeking”? Isn’t it actually evidence that their instincts are “physicality-seeking”, controlled by inhibitors?

    Say I get drunk and punch somebody I wouldn’t have punched when sober. It implies that my natural urge is to punch him, but when I am sober I control that urge due to inhibitions which come into play to stop me going to jail, losing my job, etc. The instinct is violence, and that’s the part you can blame on genes. The inhibition is awareness of social constraints, which is to use a cliche “socially constructed”. If I lived in a society that admired punching people out, I’d punch him out sober as well.

    The expectation of women being morally superior- and thus disinterested in the pleasures of the flesh- comes (I argue) from a stereotype of the Victorian Era. It is worth noting that prior to that, women were see as sexually proactive “jezebels”. That got replaced with the woman as the natural virgin, the good wife, the mother, anything but a wanton hussy. And that still extant (and currently resurgent) assumption colours everyone’s reasoning and expectations on this.

    That girlfriend I mentioned; I replied to her that she could have shagged me on the first date if she wanted, and she replied that she’d wanted to but didn’t want me to think she was cheap. That’s social construction for you (a term that is horribly abused, but the basic idea is valid if applied cautiously).

    Societies put enormous effort into suppressing female sexual impulsiveness. They simply wouldn’t need to if it were innate.

  59. Johnnydub’s comment reminds me of the comment I made the other day, in which I argued that the primary reason women get bored with their partners is sexual disappointment, due to the pressure to marry for “relationship” reasons and treat sex as consequential to the relationship. I suspect this is something the “Game” theory mob really don’t want to consider, which is why their whole schtick is devoted to “pulling” rather than “retaining” women.

  60. Ian B,

    OK, maybe the instinctive drive is to mate, but when sober, women are more considerate of the longer-term prospects with regards to raising a child.

    I’m not at all sure about your “jezebel” comment. Women were generally virgins when married, or the act of copulation was equivalent to an engagement or marriage. Women could be branded as jezebels, but I’m not sure that was a common view?

    Johnnydub,
    It’s not that they’re betas, it’s either what Ian B says about sex, that women married for the wrong reasons, or it’s that men just give up.

    I’ve had flowers at work, flowers I picked up from the florist to take home, and had attractive women, not even 40, say things which suggest that their husbands never surprise them with flowers. I’ve got 2 cousins that spend a fortune and lots of time on expensive hobbies (gliding and racing cars), but they never spend money on their wives. One is going through a divorce, the other just seems really sad the way she talks about stuff “Oh, how was Paris? I’d love to go, but Neville says it’s too expensive” (while Neville spent £10K on a glider).

  61. Ian B – “I suspect this is something the “Game” theory mob really don’t want to consider, which is why their whole schtick is devoted to “pulling” rather than “retaining” women.”

    Sorry but “Alpha f**ks, Beta bucks” is a catchy little phrase the Game community has given the world. In their world, women want the men who f**k ’em and leave. They marry the pathetic disappointments who will pay the bills.

    I don’t think it is entirely inaccurate either. After all, it is official Team Women policy now. Sheryl Sandberg advised women to sleep with the bad boys but marry the one who would do the dishes.

  62. Stigler: “women feel less ashamed of masturbation than picking up some strange, where men feel the opposite.”

    Eh? You’re telling me most blokes (including Blokes) have fewer moral scruples about picking up a slapper than having a crafty J. Arthur? Do tell.

  63. Ian B – “The assumption that women are more interested in husbands is just that. Take away the moral compulsion as we have experimented with socially in the past few decades, and the effect evaporates, as can be seen in the lower orders (more distantly removed from moralism) which upset the likes of SMFS and Theo. There is simply an expectation that they should act this way due to theory (high investment in offspring) but it isn’t supported by behaviour.”

    First of all, you misunderstand me. The Feckless will always be feckless. What upsets me is that the middle class, on which a modern society depends, is copying them and so inevitably becoming part of the underclass.

    Second we have taken away the moral encouragement, but women have not changed that much. They still want to be married and they want some children. They are simply told, untruthfully in most cases, that they can shag like men, have exciting careers and still be mothers and wives. They are increasingly find out that they cannot – and those that try are increasingly unhappy.

    Third the moral compulsion put on women in the old days was to limit their sexual behaviour. Not to force them to have a husband. Women have always wanted those. But not to cheat on him. Not to dump the perfectly good boy in favour of the dream of an Alpha. To be reliable. Sexual appetites are a kind of insanity. They affect both sexes. But not in the same way.

    “At the risk of blowing me own trumpent with some more anecdata, a girlfriend once said to me she’d never slept with anyone else so quickly. I asked why, and she said because straightaway she knew I was safe.”

    That is a cute line. But is likely to be untrue. Women do not sleep with men who make them feel safe. Brian in Accounts is not going to get a shag. But Pablo, with his tattoos, motorcycle and prison conviction, will. Still, boys will believe anything I suppose.

  64. SMFS-

    To illustrate the fallacy I think is pay with the Gamers, let’s swap sexes and try this. A male has a choice of two potential women. Woman A is smokin’ hot, and crazy as a box of frogs. Woman B is kind of plain, and sane. Sane Plane Jane, heh. He chooses Woman A.

    Conclusion: men prefer crazy women.

    We could test this with;

    Woman A: plain, crazy
    Woman B: plain, sane

    Now we find he chooses Woman B. So, the conclusion seems to be in error. Now try this for a woman’s choice with-

    Man A: attractive, unstable
    Man B: attractive, stable
    Man C: plain, unstable
    Man D: plain, stable

    What’s the best choice: Man B. What’s the world full of? A, C and D. And C and D males telling themselves that women want A’s. Attractive men, like attractive women, can get away with worse behaviour. My argument here is that women are looking for type B’s. Otherwise known as Chris Hemsworth. They would like hot and safe. They have mostly a choice of hot or safe. So they end up shagging an A and marrying a D.

    “Safe” isn’t attractive on its own. But I would endeavour that women really do feel more comfortable with men who they feel safe with. They want to have sex with men who are good physical specimens. The problem is a severe shortage of Chris Hemsworths in the world.

  65. Ian B – ““Safe” isn’t attractive on its own. But I would endeavour that women really do feel more comfortable with men who they feel safe with. They want to have sex with men who are good physical specimens. The problem is a severe shortage of Chris Hemsworths in the world.”

    As I understand the Game world, they would argue safe is not attractive at all. Women have nothing but contempt for men they can rely on to be home every night. They have no measure of whether their man is a good man or not. All they know is that other women want him. If others don’t want him, he is worthless.

    There is more to it than being is good physical shape. Someone like Peter Andre can be as buff as he likes. He is just a nice, and dim, guy. So Katie Price treats him like crap. The world is full of nice guys who are in perfect physical shape who can’t maintain a relationship. The world is also full of wife beaters who have no problems doing so – and if their women leave them, they replace them in no time.

    At some point the modern world may intrude. Women may decide they want a house and a 4×4. In which case they will settle for someone who can pay the bills. But they will hate and resent him – and refuse to sleep with him as soon as they have popped the two sprogs. Regardless of what he looks like. They know they are settling.

    As a description of modern marriage, I find it very convincing.

  66. Yes, this is why I don’t agree with the Game world, who use a kind of 101 sociobiology for support rather than illumination. They are bitter cynics. They have every right to be, but the result is simply an inverted feminism in which the sexes are swapped. It’s not that these motivations are not part of the human palette, it’s the trying to explain everything by them and explain away everything that doesn’t fit that bugs me.

    All humans have a set of goals which can often come into conflict. The idea that every woman is a remorseless bitch is no better than every man being a remorseless bastard. They’re just swapping who (as a class) is exploiting who (as a class). Which is the problem with these kinds of class theories. You have to have a class conflict, one which cannot be resolved. Whether you’re a feminist or, let us call it, a masculist, it’s war without end.

    I will sound a bit SJW now; but I do think a lot of these masculists reallyjust do not like women, just as the feminists really just do not like men. We need to do better than that if we want to understand the dynamics of human society, rather than just compose comforting lullabies that blame everything wrong on “the other side”.

  67. Ian B – “They have every right to be, but the result is simply an inverted feminism in which the sexes are swapped.”

    I don’t think they are big on male motivations either. I think they are perfectly equal opportunity haters.

    “The idea that every woman is a remorseless bitch is no better than every man being a remorseless bastard.”

    Indeed. But suppose both are true?

  68. I’m not at all sure about your “jezebel” comment. Women were generally virgins when married

    Pre-Victorian era, I don’t think this is true. I seem to recall that engagement was when a couple would start trying for children, and if none arrived in a reasonable time then the engagement could be broken off and both parties would go on to potential marriage with other partners. I think this was correlated with dates of birth compared to dates of marriage of the parents.

    Returning to my copy of “17th Century Sex” (Mac Sween and Jones, Stuart Press) it says:

    Courting couples were generally allowed more license. Quaife [“Wanton Wenches and Wayward Wives”, G. R. Quaife, Croom Helm] indicates that there was “very little premarital sex” because marriage was taken to be the promise and the act rather than the ceremony. Marriage only if pregnancy resulted was an acceptable norm.

  69. Indeed. But suppose both are true?

    I don’t believe they are, which is why I’m a Libertarian rather than a Progressive or Conservative.

  70. Just as some more anecdata on the affairs with the young issue, here’s the Daily Mail telling us about the latest offenders-

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3331607/Incredible-roll-call-51-teachers-banned-classroom-sexual-misconduct-Inappropriate-behaviour-includes-affairs-pupils-sexting-groping-children.html

    Neither of the pictured women look like desperate old baggages (in fact the pictured men aren’t too bad either) who can’t get a date. Ruth Vaughn there is quite the hottie, I’d imagine any sixth former would have been chuffed to be offered some, er, private tuition.

    The other point being that most of these cases seem to have nothing to do with paedophilia. They are not insitutionally desirable, but are more akin to office romances than “grooming” and “abuse”.

  71. @Ian B: interesting to note from that article that we have now reached the stage where an adult woman (because she is over 18) is not considered capable of deciding whether to have a sexual relationship with a former teacher or not, even after she has left school. What is the point of having an age of legal adulthood if we continue to treat people like children the moment sex comes into the picture?

  72. Jim,

    Indeed. But this is standard Progressivism; the more “progressive” a nation becomes, the less anyone is considered to have any agency.

  73. Ian B – “I don’t believe they are, which is why I’m a Libertarian rather than a Progressive or Conservative.”

    Libertarians think people are ruthlessly self-interested when it comes to their money. Why not their children? I would have thought that world went well with libertarianism.

    For instance, Jessica Michibata managed to persuade Jeremy Button to marry her – despite not living on the same continent most of the time. Six months later, the marriage was more or less over. A year later they are getting a divorce.

    So she gets half his millions.

    How to explain that except as self-interest?

    Ian B – “Neither of the pictured women look like desperate old baggages (in fact the pictured men aren’t too bad either) who can’t get a date.”

    Sure. The appeal of the school boy is odd but it is rare that is a woman who can’t get a man. Presumably it is the whole bad boy thing.

  74. Presumably it is the whole bad boy thing.

    I’m presuming they fancied each other. Why does he have to be a “bad boy”?

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.