The Right To Choose

In a perfect world, women would not need to sell sexual services to make a living. But there again, in a perfect world a physically unattractive man might be able to marry on his other qualities; and the same goes for the unattractive woman. One advantage of arranged marriage is that it gives a chance to practically everyone, including those who unable to find mates in our “free” (that is, ruthlessly competitive) sexual market. Even when arranged marriage is based on property and lineage, and is thus inequitable in its own way, at least it gives a chance to different people than do our own arrangements. There is probably no system under which everybody wins, but there are systems under which our current losers might no longer lose.

If power over the woman is only doubtfully an issue for most customers, power over the situation is certainly a draw; that is, the power or right to choose. First and foremost is the right to choose whether to have sex at all. It never seems to occur to some people that this might be a problem. “I’ll go down town and find myself a new girlfriend,” they say, or “I’ll grab myself a hunk.” To some extent this is boasting, or wishful thinking; and yet there remains a residue of truth, namely that they can go down town with a certain chance of finding a girl, or a hunk, whereas the terminally unattractive man (and woman) cannot. The first tribe might have to make sorry compromises as to quality: but that they can get someone, sometime is never in doubt. Both the normal man and the dweeb have certain places to which they can go to get girls, but the former can get them free and the latter cannot. Their only choice is between heading for a brothel with the price in their pocket on the one hand, and never getting laid on the other hand. And so they choose the right to choose, thus breaking quarantine.

Second is the power to choose a woman who will not refuse, scorn or insult them. This may seem perilously close to that power over the woman and her freedom in which the dogmatists believe, but it is not quite the same. She has come to a specific place to do business, and the customer has come to offer that business. Most customers prefer the girls to enjoy the power to refuse a dirty, drunken or unpleasant man; but then those who are neither dirty, drunken nor unpleasant need have no reasonable expectation that she will take such a dislike to them as to forego a trade. It may be objected that there is no excitement in this inevitability. No, there is no excitement in the inevitability of success. But there is even less excitement in the inevitability of failure.

Third is the right or power to choose one woman over the other. This may be the most interesting power of all, for the man who would otherwise lack the power to choose any at all. Not that there is any fun in rejecting the others, and in fact some customers feel regret, embarrassment and guilt over turning down the other girls in a brothel line-up, or behave like the proverbial donkey equidistant from two bales of hay. What the unattractive man enjoys is not, therefore, the power to mistreat a woman, but rather the power to walk up to a beautiful girl and say, “Let’s go upstairs”. This power is, of course, an intolerable subversion of the gynocracy, which rests on the woman’s right to select applicants, partners and whom to stigmatise.

Posted on March 5, 2012 at 09:31 by Hugo Grinebiter · Permalink
In: THE NAME OF THE GAME, Notes From Underground

Leave a Reply