LHtFA: An Explanation and a Doctrine For Male Survival

LHtFA…five letters that mean the difference between survival and despair for any male in America and others in Canada and the UK.

Leave. Her. the Fuck. Alone.

The context in which this should be applied is simple.

Any time that you are in any sort of social interaction with a woman, if for whatever reason she states that she wants you to cease your current level of interaction, you should stop that activity and abandon the field as quickly as humanly possible. This rule applies especially in situations regarding romantic or sexual liaisons, but works in any social situation as well.

The second that a woman asks or demands that you stop, you should do so at once and then leave. Once you have left, call at least two friends (preferably one of them female) and let them know that you have initiated an LHtFA. Make sure that they record the person you were with, time, date, and your location at the time that you called them. Head to one of those friends’ current location at once or head home, especially if you have a roommate or family member who you know is also home. Once you get there, let them know that you are home and again let them know that you have initiated a LHtFA and with who.

If you are in the workplace, follow those rules, except that instead upon initiating the LHtFA action, you go to your desk and document the situation at once. If possible, let another co-worker know that you were in an interaction with this woman and inform them of the details as well. This is all for your protection in case of a harassment accusation, which is all too possible in today’s workplace environment.

I’m sure that some women will object to this idea. Unfortunately, the current legal climate has made any other action tantamount of entering a environment of risk. You risk having accusations levied against you ranging from harassment on the mild end to rape on the severe end of things.

I’m sure that a lot of men will also object to this line of thinking, associating it to trained cowardice or “giving in to the women.” In the parlance of combat, it is called a measured retreat. The overall idea behind LHtFA is that you as a man are taking control of everything in the social situation if it does not go the way you want. This does so in a manner which will not take advantage of the other person involved in that situation but at the same time will leave you in a position where you can safely control the outcome of the situation. If by chance that there is an accusation of rape or sexual assault, you will have a degree of documentation that will assist you in defending yourself in the case.

I’ll use the most  relevant example. If you, a man are on a date with a woman and as the evening goes on, things begin to heat up. The date ventures into the physical and then suddenly the woman says:

“Stop, I don’t think we should do this.”

At that point, muster up whatever willpower you have available and do so. Stop at once. At that point you should end the date. Be polite and take her home, if you took her out, or part company if you two met somewhere. But for the sake of your safety, you need to end that date now. If she asks why you are ending the evening, tell her that you are doing so because you “wish to respect her wishes and this is the most efficient way you know to let things end on a safe note.”

Do not allow her to convince you that “she wants to cuddle,” or that “you should be a man, stay but  control yourself.” Cuddling is how you got into that situation in the first place and intimate contact will only lead you there again. As for “being a man,” you are. You are exercising your right to step away and cool off before a situation gets too heated. If she can’t understand that, then there is a definite problem with her and you don’t need to be a party to that problem.

I have followed this doctrine for 30 years and I have seen both respect and derision from the women I were involved with when I had to initiate a LHtFA action. The ones who respected me for doing this have at the least remained friends as they appreciated my understanding and desire to keep things under control. As for the ones who have derided me for doing this; I made a point of never seeing them again and have been better for doing so.

With that being said, If you’re out with your buddies at the club or the bar, you should designate somebody (preferably the “designated driver”) to also be the LHtFA monitor. As the monitor for the evening, your job is simple. If one of your buddies attempts a hookup with a drunk girl or if he’s drunk trying to hook up, you are there to perform a “remote LHtFA.” He may hate you at the moment and even accuse you of “cock-blocking.” But he’ll praise your name the next day when he realizes that you saved him from possibly getting nailed for date (gray) rape; whether it would have happened or not.

Until US law recognizes that the fact that a man and a woman who have been imbibing alcohol and end up in a sexual act are both incapable of giving or receiving informed consent to sexual activity, any male who gets involved in a “drunk fuck” is tempting fate and dancing in front of the gates of jail. Currently, only men can go to jail for drunk sex. A sober friend performing a remote LHtFA can protect you from that horror.

And finally…if you are trying to hook up with a woman anywhere. If she doesn’t smile and enthusiastically respond to your initial conversation or clearly tells you that she’s not interested, initiate an LHtFA action at once. Calling her names and haranguing her over it are only going to get you possibly ridiculed or at worse, arrested. Calling her a “bitch” only makes you look like a punk, anyway. Why are you getting all worked up over a woman who doesn’t want you in the first place? LHtFA and go about your business. She isn’t worth jail, man.

In closing, I’m sure that some women will look at this and claim that this is only going to be used by some rapist to help himself get off from an accusation that he rightfully deserved.

I’m sorry that some of you will feel this way. However, false rape has been a bugbear in the male community for more than a century. Allow me to list some historically instances where a false rape accusation has caused untold damage. Look up Rosewood, Florida in 1923, Tulsa, Oklahoma in 1921 (Black Wall Street), and Scottsboro, Alabama in 1931 (The Scottsboro Boys). All of those incidents, while racially motivated, also stemmed from false rape accusations by women against men.

Then, there are people trying to discount the video evidence used to exonerate the four young men involved in the recent Hofstra rape case. The fact that the current argument being brought against the boys is that they should still be punished for recording the sexual activity without the girl’s permission, shows that the prevailing attitude about rape accusations is more about retribution against “any man accused including the ones that got away,” than justice for the falsely accused.

LHtFA…watchwords of survival for the 21st century American man. Tattoo them somewhere on your body where you’ll remember them….

Writing From The Pit Of Male Privilege

I’m here because I decided to start blogging after reading several posts from feminist blogs, including this one (Schrödinger’s Rapist). My goal on this blog is to try to approach the idea of gender equality and issues from a point of logical discourse. With that in mind, I ask that that anyone commenting please keep your comments in a context of logic and rationality. While emotion can fuel a desired goal, only logical thought will see us through to a successful conclusion.

Regarding the blogpost that I listed above, I approached this page with the genuine intention of finding out what the poster put out and understanding what was written. But I came to a realization; most of the commenting readers on the page and (apparently the blog owner, as I was banned after a few pointed comments and questions), do not want men to understand. From what I got, a large number of the female posters wanted to revel in being “victims of male privilege.”

I have to say that the guest blogger, Ms. Starling demonstrated a genuine desire to have a open and meaningful dialogue about the topic and I complement her on both her blog post and her professionalism in her replies. Nearly all the others had nothing but scorn for any male who posted anything other than a total and complete self-effacing admission that they were part and parcel contributors to rape culture. They didn’t want involved dialog, nor did they want open discussion. All that they wanted were high-fives from the women commenters and any men who wanted to comment on the page were expected grovel and own up to their being complicit in the evil patriarchy.

I’m quite fracking tired of feminists who feel entitled to barge into male internet (and real-life) spaces as it is their feminist-mandated right to do so, but raise hell and throw around ban hammers on men who likewise come into their spaces (or flat out refuse to let men post). Ladies…you get what you give. Feel free to shoot down the trolls who just show up to start shit, but learn to tell the difference between those who troll and those who want to ask real questions. (It goes both ways, ladies…troll is a gender-neutral term.)

In fact, more than a couple of men who were victims of rape by women aggressors were at best casually patronized, and at worst, blatantly ridiculed. I have no sympathy for these people and the fact that they want sympathy but are unwilling to give it themselves sickens me. Rape is a horrible crime and anyone who commits it is deserving of punishment and/or help as they are sick individuals. (By the way, this last belief was argued by feminists on that page too. I guess that feminists feel that the crime of rape is not the act of a sick mind but an act of diabolic evil. That is a topic for another blog post.)

Finally, to any of the feminists (especially the ones who commented on Ms. Starling’s post) who may read this blog, allow me to say this; there are far more men who are at best ignorant about what you believe rape culture consists of and belittling them on a website will not get them to see your point of view; it just makes you an internet troll just like the trolls who purposely go on web sites to cause grief. Furthermore, any man who is willing to hold a dialog with you about an feminist issue most likely is willing to be “converted to your cause.” And yes, “he is doing you a favor” because he is willing to try to let go of some of his preconceptions about gender relations in order to try to be more understanding about your point of view. Vilifying such a man will most likely convert him to misogyny as your vitriol in belittling him will only prove the other misogynists right in his eyes.

And before anyone posts that I don’t understand what “rape culture” is, I’m rather versed in it and I’ve even read up on it. There are facets of “rape culture” that tie into African American history that directly impacted our ethnic outlook. Furthermore, I’ve even read the post about Shakesville regarding the subject.

With that being said, my agreement or disagreement on each of the individual items in Ms. McEwan’s blog listed under the collective connotation of rape culture are not relevant to my ability (or lack thereof) of being able to constructively have an intelligent opinion regarding gender equality. Furthermore, the fact that I do recognize that overall that there are facets of human civilization and society which are harmful toward the well-being of women, men, and children in particular and humanity in general, is relevant. Finally, the fact that I want to address and help in addressing the current social disconnect between women and men, should end any further debate about my motives or ability to contribute constructively to this issue.

But I was instead bombarded with digs and attacks as responses to logically focused requests as to how to better work with this issue. All that I and the other men who asked the question as to how would a guy try to approach a woman and how to figure out whether she wanted to be approached, were given the answer:

“Assume that all women do not want to be approached unless she lets you know that she wants to be approached.”

Well, according to logic, then the only way that would be is if a woman decided to make first contact in some nebulous manner (a wave, a wink, a cardboard sign), that could or could not be construed as an unwanted contact (okay, except for the cardboard sign). One commenter said that anyone who bothered could just read the woman’s body language to see if she was amenable to a cold contact or not by the male. Body language, eh?

The poster gave examples of “nervous smiling,” “twisting of the hair,” and other things of that nature. Here’s a question; is she nervous because she is afraid of me, or is she nervous because she likes me and is uncertain as to how this first talk will go? This idea would be especially problematic for the socially-inept male who has no knowledge as how to read women’s body language

I can see how that first encounter will end.

“Officer, I don’t understand! I read her body language and she seemed kind of shy, but she was smiling so I figured that she was still interested…why am I being arrested? I’m no masher!”

Despite the fact that many of the men posting agreed that if a woman did not want to talk to a guy who approached her cold, she had the right to not be bothered, most of the male questions and requests for further clarification were met with ridicule and scorn from the assembled feminist commenters and some of the blog moderators.

Then I learned from one of the blog mods something that clued me in to a way how most guys could tell. Are you ready?

Here we go.

Guys, if you see a woman in public, especially traveling on a form of public transportation reading a book or wearing a pair of headphones, don’t approach her. In fact, one of the regular bloggers/moderators stated that many women wear headphones in public because they don’t want men to talk to them.

Whenever a man brought up the idea of the uninterested woman politely but firmly telling the intruding guy that she wasn’t interested in a contact, we told that we couldn’t understand the issue. And when we insisted in saying that if the guy was a problem, then make a scene and let people around you know that he was a bother, we were again told that we didn’t understand.

Women, could you please confirm or deny this datum? I’m puzzled; I wear headphones because I want to listen to music or pass the time while I’m traveling or waiting for something. Could you please try to make an explanation that is not couched in derision and condescension.

A lot of women posted words to the effect of: “We have a right to not be hit upon by guys.”

Agreed. But at the same time, the drive for romantic companionship or sexual intimacy are two of human civilization’s most fervent drives. There should be rules and conventions regarding inter-gender contact. But right now as the prevailing social dynamic stands, the male of the species is the designated initiator of this type of contact. Yes, more women are adopting a willingness to initiate contacts with males for the purpose of romantic or sexual liaisons and fewer of them are being ostracized for doing so (thank whatever deity you believe in for that). But again, nobody on that blog page could come up with a reasonable alternative that could be clearly conveyed to men who were interested in resolution other than just “leave women alone.”

The only problems with that idea is:

  1. Until our social gender conventions are completely changed, it runs the risk of further causing social problems for women who have no problem with approaching men for romantic or sexual liaisons.
  2. The only people who will be disadvantaged by this convention will be the socially-inept men who for whatever reason cannot read between the lines. These men will continue to bother women because they will have no idea as how to time or schedule their approaches as not to offend or violate a woman’s personal space.

I suggested that we adopt the Victorian usage of the “calling card.” Rather than try to initiate a total cold contact with a woman on the street. A fellow could use a calling card with his name, a polite statement and me,ans of contact printed on it. The woman had the option to either accept the card or reject it and if she did accept it, then she still had the option to either follow up on the contact or simply discreetly dispose of the card, thereby ending the situation. In addition, with this convention, it would be assumed that the offering party (male in this case), bore the burden of dealing with rejection as it would be deemed “unseemly” for him (or her) to focus it on the potential recipient of your calling card. The advantage of the card was that rather than a woman having deal with a lengthy interruption of her previous activity, she just either took the card or not at her choice.

While that was not a perfect alternative, nobody could offer one better. But the replies (except from Ms. Starling) were couched in words to the effect of: “Yeah, but why should we have to even bother with that?”

I don’t have an answer. Ladies, guys are going to hit on you. Humanity has not evolved yet beyond being able to approach a person of the opposite gender (or preference) without some level of sexual evaluation. (Except for the number of “asexual” humans who seem to be popping up as of late.) I’m sure that some feminist will accuse me of advocating rape culture by making that statement.

No. That. Is. Not. Rape. Culture. That. Is. Human. Social. Biology.

Men and women evaluate each other as potential mates or sexual partners. All of this debate is simply how can we be polite about it.

On a side note to Kate Harding, the owner of the “Shapely Prose” blog:

People base a great deal of their personal knowledge on personal experience. While this does not define the entire body of our available and collective knowledge, personal experience often shapes our individual and to some degree our collective viewpoints. Dismissing another person’s experiences offhandedly is in of itself, a rather dangerous form of hubris as you risk placing your personal experiences above someone elses and thereby denying yourself of information that would not have otherwise been available.

Furthermore Ms. Harding, there is a debate, if no longer on your site, at least on the rest of the web because feminist theory has been steadily shaping national policy and social convention. I, for one, will do my damnedest to see that the future will be shaped in the interests of neither men or women, but in the interests of humanity.

There are men and women who are genuinely interested in pursuing an informed and hospitable dialog regarding equality in gender relations. I’m sorry to see that your page does not support that ideal.