FEMALES

(on the manosphere)

Sexual assault is the act of instigating helplessness under an umbrella of eroticised violation. The manosphere, otherwise defined as the ideology of male entitlement to penetration, is a politics of sexual assault because it is a politics of access: in other words, the manosphere is a newfangled, fashionable term that describes operationalised ‘gender views’, which manifest in the form of profitable abuse tutorials, the advocation of widespread domestic violence, and the indoctrination of pubescent boys into a fraternity built upon private and collectivised coercive control. The manosphere must be described, therefore, as public participation in rape activism, the widespread desire to violate female sex organs, and the denigration of womanness as men believe to have found it.

Access to females ought not to be confused with access to femininity. The manosphere takes no interest in representing feminineness, because to understand ringlets, frills, or pussy waxing is to render the humanity of the female beyond a series of negatives that describe what it means to be a woman from the standpoint of a masculine man. A woman is without reason, without external genitalia, and without participation in serious matters. Her feminine wile is to be encased and preserved, and her task is to passively experience both sex and birth. Meanwhile, masculinity is forged in the flames of conquest. This is why the most passive version of the penetrated woman through the eyes of the manosphere – she who is experiencing a rape – is undergoing feminine confirmation, while her rapist is asserting his manliness. Thus, a woman from the perspective of the manosphere experiences what it means to be female through her rape.

The manosphere assumes that many women are not yet privy to some of their discoveries about female nature. In roving gangs, predatory men flatter young women with vocabulary plucked from conquistadors who find stealthing unrelated to sexual abuse, and who despise women who falsely accuse men of raping them, even when the false accusations are true: high-value, wife material, fertility-minded, etc.. Some women need always belong to a class of whores abused for the purposes of violent hookups. Whores exposed as such – for example, women whose rapes are racking up views online; women who post photographs of themselves by the pool; women who went to university to stretch their cunts, not their minds (otherwise understood by the manosphere as all women in higher education) – are to be avoided long-term. The problem is that everyone is someone’s whore, much like the proclamation in fascism studies that everyone is someone’s fascist. This provides ever more justification to treat all females as suspect until proven otherwise.

The only women allowed to participate in the content operation of the manosphere are those who consent to, or unknowingly experience, the act of slamming, spanking, silencing, destroying, annihilating, smashing, shredding, or demolishing. This is why the overlap between prostitution and the manosphere renders any criticism of radical feminists, who object to the bodily exploitation of prostitutes, strippers, or ‘whores’, unintelligible: so the story goes that ortho-bros, farrighters, redpillers, and noticers, hate porn, just like radical feminists. This could not be further from the truth. The manosphere loves porn: it hates women who do porn. Radical feminists hate porn: they love women who do porn.

The manosphere does not define porn as the monetisation of sex acts performed on camera. It defines it as any woman who participates in maleness, activities and states of being which include but are not limited to debating, immodesty, sexual perversion, and travelling. Porn in the manosphere represents an ever-expanding category of dehumanisation leveraged to justify the reinstatement of so-called Western values, in women who do not consent to coercive control or its ruinous consequences. In fact, the ‘feminised’ West has itself become a penetrable civilisation. To restore the West is to re-masculinise its body, with a sex-change as such. Everyone is someone’s whore, because the category of porn must expand if its function is to avoid purposive exhaustion.

Thus, for the manosphere to call a woman A FEMALE is therefore to reference her mammalian nature without the qualifier of humanness, even though it would be grammatically correct to qualify it. FEMALE as a standalone insult feeds the oil-guzzling machine of abuse proliferation by implicitly proposing that the woman-species is a passive object of masculine rational study. FEMALE is, essentially, the smallest available unit of the politics of access. It fits in the mouth of almost anyone.