On feminists refusing to make sexual harassment SPECIFIC

Specifically here are the facts:

For ANY PERSON to get together with another person (including forming a gay couple) you have to go through some steps such as

– first fleeting touch
– first decrease of physical distance
– first more intimate eye-gazing
– first more intimate touch
– (or) first sexual innuendo
– first asking the person for an intimate encounter

Feminists REFUSE to define what is the right way or time or place or way to do these things. In other words they refuse to write a list that says:

“If you have interacted with a woman for more than 250 minutes and she has shown no discomfort in interacting with you, you may attempt an increase in eye-contact duration, increasing it from 5 to 15 seconds”

“If a woman is fine with the increased eye-contact for more than 5 interactions, you may now attempt an innocuous friendly touch”

“If you have had more than 5 innocuous touches with a woman and she has responded to each one of them favorably, you may attempt to make a distance decreasing move”.

Feminists say that if you make a touch too soon, gaze at her too long (etc)… you are a evil, despicable proto-rapist… But you’re not allowed to know when “too soon” or how much eye-contact is “too much”. In other words, you’re supposed to “just know”.

But if you ask feminists how you are to know which woman prefers how and when and how much and under which conditions, they will shame you, ridicule you, mock you or tell you to buy blow up dolls. But they will REFUSE any CLEAR and SPECIFIC guidelines.

They will tell you that you are an evolutionary despicable crap worthy of evolutionary extinction, but they will refuse to DEFINE any CLEAR, SPECIFIC guidelines.

Why? Because they know no two women are the same. One woman expects you to make a move between 50 and 100 minutes of knowing her (and if you don’t she writes you off as a wimp forever). Another woman is offended if you make a move in less than 5000 minutes of knowing her.

And that is FINE – diversity is cool. Of course different women will have different preferences!!! So of course feminists can’t write a list that says “you’re allowed to attempt a decrease in physical distance by 1 inch after 250 minutes of knowing her”. BECAUSE DIFFERENT WOMEN PREFER DIFFERENT THINGS.

– One woman (Jane) is offended that despite her being “super-flirty” (in actuality just friendly) for 2 hours you still haven’t decreased physical distance and you still stand away from her to a formal distance, in fact JANE thinks you are an ARROGANT prick and feels rejected for it

– ANOTHER woman (Susan) is offended that despite her merely friend behavior, you DARED come EVEN TRY to lean in closer to her, heck she’s only known you for a week!!!!

But here’s the issue then. If women PREFER different things, how is a man supposed to know what a PARTICULAR woman prefers? I and any sane human would argue that it is impossible to know without asking/testing.

And if a man can’t know a woman’s preferences in advance, how can he be punished for breaking them? Do note that the very act of asking/testing is ITSELF a move. Asking a woman if she’s interested IS a come on. Asking a woman if she wants to be kissed IS a move (which many women are offended by ironically enough, even if they like you, they get offended you asked).

Feminists say “err on the side of caution” – as in, “sure some women prefer you get touchy feely after just giving you a dozen or so signals on the first date – but to protect the discomfort of the women who prefer no touching until 10 dates have passed, you as a man need err on the side of waiting till the 10th”.

Ok fine, but “caution” is an infinite amount. Some woman somewhere prefers a man get to know her as a friend for a minimum of 5 years before he even attempts a decrease in physical space or increase in eye-contact depth. Sure, she might be one in a million, but where do we define “caution”. Is it to the level of accomodating for the 1 in 100 woman? Is it accomodating for the 1 in 1000 woman? Is it accommodating for the 1 in billion woman?


I honestly don’t care if feminists say “err on the side of caution to where you must make sure a woman passes 675 tests of interest before you attempt to kiss her” AS LONG AS THEY DEFINE IT – put a NUMBER ON IT. Make it SPECIFIC.