How far ahead can I get by being flirtatious without putting out? It's a bad strategy except in the most special circumstance. I'm nice looking, for now, but no Gal Gadot. Mostly, it's going to be me putting myself in a situation where I'm actually expected to suck that dick. No thanks. I'll keep competing on merit in the workplace, do my part to not interfere with my boss's marriage, and bet your ass I'll slut-shame and tattle on both him and the colleague who sucked his dick to get a promotion over me. What you're proposing is silly if you think pure flirtatiousness will get far without actually putting out sex. It's also demeaning to men. My boss would be insulted if I thought he wanted a blowjob in exchange for a raise. He just wants me to do my frigging job well, keep improving, and he really does have a benign interest in my job satisfaction. The number of ethical managers and colleagues far outnumber those willing to deal in sex and attempting to fuck and suck my way up the ladder would likely put me out of employment. (Nor would it sharpen my performance, increase my productivity, or enhance my job satisfaction). Your solution, to a rare problem, is unethical and against my morals, and will result in more harm than good. It's no solution at all.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
There are lots of ways to get ahead without putting out. Maybe the guy who has expressed an interest in you is a wicked computer programmer and could teach you a thing or two, thus helping advance your career. In that case, stringing him along and letting him pat you harmlessly on the ass on occasion as his reward for teaching programming skills could be a huge win/win for you both. Lots of nerds would be thrilled with a pat on the ass and nothing more.
Or, if the guy is your boss, then you could easily redirect his interest from your bodily assets to your intellectual and business assets. For instance, one of the most difficult things for an underling to get is the boss’s attention. How many underlings would give their right arm for an hour long lunch with the boss during which they could make their pitch for their latest great idea? Well, if you plays it right, the fact that the boss admires you physically means that your more likely to get that lunch, right? I respectfully suggest that you should exploit the hell out of that! No blowjob required.
Does doing that mean that meritocracy is being undermined? No. Your idea may be the most meritorious in history, but it will never see the light of day if you can’t get the boss’s attention. If your physical beauty and sex appeal help bring the necessary attention to your idea by getting you that lunch, then you, the business and all of society win as a result.
I find it very difficult to believe that you have written this many thousands of words on sexual human nature and do not see what will occur next. C'mon. Surely you know what a sexually interested man will do next if I signal that I'm open to his interest? I think you ought to consider this carefully and see how much of what you've written and replied is based on an unrealistic expectation of how a sexually interested man will react to the strategy your proposing.
Additionally, I'd like you to consider another set of natural traits/abilities that women have. Surely you have noticed that we appear child-like? Cry easily, high pitched voices? We're quite easy to pity, actually. It's a nice little defense mechanism granted by nature. Surely we should exploit our "cuteness" and vulnerability to get ahead? Surely it is only natural for us to play the victim? What is it you don't like about feminists playing victim? It's a tried and true strategy, surely with a basis in our genes, no?
I have thought much about thsoe scenarios, and as a man I’ve actually been in those scenarios, and while I’ve very much enjoyed the flirting and the banter, I’ve never even once sought or demanded more from a coworker. So, I respectfully suggest that your assumptions as to how things would play out are false, at least in many (probably most) circumstances. Most guys are sex-deprived nerds and would be thrilled to just lovingly touch a beautiful women and nothing more.
You raise a great point about playing the victim. You’re exactly right! It’s a very effective strategy in many instances, and one that should be exploited. Non-feminists will have no problem doing so. But, honestly, have you every seen a “loud and proud” feminist play the victim in a cute an endearing way? I’ve not. Instead, most react, as @techslut did, with viscious name calling and ad hominem attacks. The point of my original post was to explain to them how these particular attacks are actually counterproductive (when you call a sexist a sexist all you do is let him know that he’s winning) and that other types of attacks would work far better.
I absolutely disagree that most guys are sex starved nerds who will stop after being granted physical contact. That's preposterous and not reflected in our courtship rituals or anyone's experience. When you allow a man to sexually touch, he inevitably moves forward.
I tend to agree. To assume the majority of men will enjoy what women choose give them and then, on a dime, stop the moment the women withdraws her consent seems inconsistent with the many stories we here of women being taken advantage of by stronger, dominant men who have no problem violating her consent.
That said, I also just thought about strip clubs. For some reason, in that context, men get what they pay for and no more. I wonder if that would be a support for Sean's view or not.
Not sure, in a strip club there are bouncers, and clear pre-established rules. Men get what they pay for but they also go in knowing where the hard limits on behavior are (not that the rules aren't frequently violated)