AZIZ ANSARI, WINNERS, LOSERS, AND CONSENT

Aziz Ansari is a loser. I say this not as a statement of fact about his inherent human value, far from it - but as an educated guess as to the way men like Ansari are labeled, stigmatized, and eventually programmed  by a mentality that doggedly molds them into becoming the type of men who could so blindly and callously bulldoze through all the signs a woman might give that she's just not that interested in having sex with you.   Be it for the moment or ever,  this mentality,  this fixation I'm speaking of is  America's patriarchal obsession with winning and with meritocracy.  It's not that winning, or meritocracy exist at all,  it's the dangerous and extreme preoccupation with them.   Where starting from adolescence you begin to learn a bevy of false equivocations like hard work is equal to success, and something akin to the feeble philosophy of Ricky Bobby "If you're not first you're last!".  It is a stale and almost always homophobic existence where it's sissified to hand out participation trophies, even when in many cases they still give out a championship and placement trophies.    Think for a moment about what that says, in that philosophy participation itself has no value, and It doesn't take much of a leap to connect the dots between that kind of thinking and toxic masculinity. When everything becomes about gains, when ambition is unfettered. When the destination is so much more important than the integrity of the actual journey. When all our desires are conflated with objects and objectives so that even women are conflated with objects then this is where even something as simple as the pursuit of happiness becomes extremely corruptive.  It is why when #Metoo first broke and I saw a litany of cis-hetero men so self righteously engaged in going on about other men I immediately thought ( and tweeted)   how these men were living in glass houses soon to be bombarded with the stones from their past. I said this because I knew (as so many women did before me) that there just aren't too many men that haven't internalized to varying degrees this sort of conditioning and acted out on it.  In the hierarchal universe of masculinity, aggression is magnetism, and will is like gravity.  A hyper-focus on these two will bring a man anything he wants, including a woman's affections.  A woman has no more agency over this than any human does over the tides or the moon.  This is the paradigm under which Aziz Ansari is prime "Loser" material. The wrong color, and on the wrong side of masculinity.  These "Losers"  recognize there is something wrong with the picture of masculinity,  but are less interested in the pain it's causing women because they are indoctrinated by the same toxic philosophy.  So their problem is not that toxic masculinity treats women as prizes to be won,  the dangers it poses to women, or the the way it imposes such a narrow space of being for rest of us, the problem is women aren't attracted to them!

aziz ansari - two types of guys

 Unable to adapt the aggressive tunnel-vision-like commitment of supposed “Alpha” males, or to imbibe in the sociological currency of extreme good looks, Ansari and other men learn to use self depreciation as a venus fly trap of sorts.  They feign harmlessness , but possess the same toxic intentions as most other men. Besides that, there is an undercurrent of anger as articulated quite a bit in Ansari's comedy.  Through the  power and persistence of these narratives and the effectiveness of anecdotal evidence of and from other men,  this dogma entrenches itself in the minds and attitudes of the so called " Loser.”   The loser lacks value and therefore must strive and work hard to create that value.   He must earn more everything, and his focus must not be deterred. If he didn't earn it, it is directly due to some failing of his.  Never because maybe it was never meant to be,  or because the attraction wasn't mutual.  God may laugh at the well laid plans of men,  but men take them with the seriousness of a heart attack.

This dogma, and the ubiquitous nature of it's tentacles is so far reaching that I just don't think very many cis hetero men are completely innocent. Even fewer do much to topple,  or the upset the order of things.  It feels too vast,  "there's nothing we could do" we might say, (ignoring the fact that divestment from the central tenets and beliefs might be a nice start) because the ideology and the reward methodology is so alluring. I'm not innocent of it either in my past, but I was always aware something was off. I sensed it as a child I sensed it as a team and in my early twenties after trying for a few years to wear the mask, I knew it. Frankly 21 with any true sense of self, it becomes tiring using the same tired, contrived, disingenuous, and manipulative approach without contemplating in any meaningful and empathetic way how to genuinely connect with women.   Women are not a monolith anymore than any other subset of human beings.  They can,  do,  and should have varying levels of comfort,  attraction to, or with varying degrees of aggression and persistence. Within a woman who might be firmly in the camp of Aaliyah's hit "If at first you don't succeed,  dust yourself off and try again there has to be an allowance for her feelings to change or fluctuate.     The fact that men suggest that women adapt a one size fits all attitude towards interaction with men, (especially sexual interaction with men) is indicative of an abhorrent lack of self awareness, (for themselves and other men) unwillingness to be flexible (Toxic masculinity) a lack of actual interest in who it is you're talking to or having sex with (Objectification) and a crippling fear of rejection, (Male fragility) all of which are exactly what women have repeatedly referred to when they speak of rape culture. All of which I think you can breadcrumb to a patriarchal obsession with winning and meritocracy.

Rape culture is an incendiary term.  Mostly because of that same one size fits all context being applied to the word rape itself.  Men tend to visualize the trigger warning type material we might see in a film depicting how a woman's rape was the impetus for some man's righteous revenge. We see violent, vicous behavior, by violent vicious men and only that. The suggestion that there are leagues of men, our friends, our brothers, our fathers, Uncles, etc who would behave so repulsively is ludicrous, and therefore shot down on site as the worst kind of hyperbole and sensationalism.  Worser still, is the idea that there could be any other form of violation that would give us pause as to whether our conduct with women in general is petulant, insensitive, ignorant,  and or violent.   Rape has levels like any other crime does,  because consent has levels like any other interaction does.  But here once again is where a culture obsessed with winning comes into play.  Winning is almost always directly associated with hierarchy, hierarchy with order, order with right, and right with fair.  Fairness is often associated as  transactional, and transactions too often conflated with interaction.  You might often see men stalely relating  supposedly ambiguous cases of rape to "Buyers remorse" which belies a problematic attitude towards consent and ongoing agreement process between two people - an interaction is not the same as a transaction.  Not only is there the obvious distinction that transactions are most readily linked with objects,  but there is the fact that the approach even in the business world is fundamentally different and indicative of exactly the problems women have been outlining.  This is an excerpt from an article outlining the important differences between transactional and interactional approach in business written by Marty Stanley a CSP (Communications Service Provider)  for the American management association.

"When you talk to people, are you focused on the transaction or your interaction? A transactional encounter is one where you're going through the motions to get the task or the discourse done. Maybe you are texting, talking on the phone to someone else, or just dazed and confused, but the bottom line is that you're not engaged with the other person or the process.

Interaction occurs when two people are engaged in a dialogue or actively participating in the process. "

This in my mind directly touches on the heart of the problem with the male approach to consent.  In this transactional context, consent is not a living breathing conceptualization of a woman's agency, but rather a rigid petrified obstruction to be strategically removed in pursuit of an end goal. Masturbation with a body is the end goal not the shared experience of sex.  A sort of cognitive dissonance that obscures and blinds us to the fact that a woman and her vagina are not separate entities.   That the woman is not in effect a merchant to be haggled with over her desire for sex with you.

You may gain from an experience with a woman but your experience with a woman and especially her consent to any part of that experience should not be approached as a gain in and of itself.  Any affection given by a woman is something to be participated in while being present, not something to be gained or won through a deliberate manipulation hyper focused on a future outcome of your liking.  You don't win a woman's heart, you don't win her affections, and contrary to popular belief a woman's affections exist irrespective of male machinations. But I'm not at all surprised men are having trouble parting with "rape culture" because of its proximity to meritocracy and winning in the culture.  The ideology is far too prevalent in patriarchal doctrine.  A dangerous but persistent narrative that finds itself inextricably embedded in the cultures around sports,  prosperity, religion,  and of course human interaction.   We as men need a conscientious movement away from a mentality that frames love, marriage, and consensual sex with a woman as akin to capitalistic endeavors.  Wherein sex is a trophy, and women the opposition in the "Battle of the sexes".  A sport with clear winners and losers.  In that world there is a cultured myopia that allows for the rigidity of attitudes like " I don't worry about what my opponent might do I just worry about what I gotta do" or "Winning is everything".  These ideologies intersect,  and weave a pattern of behavior in us men that victimizes women,  and undermines their freedom,  while aiding and abetting the fragility of our own ossified and brittle existence.  I say this not to be mean,  cruel or clever,  but matter of factly.  I'm not a fan of call out culture I think it's largely ineffective.  I've never known a human being my entire life that would respond in any constructive way to a criticism that begins or ends with something that goes "You're a piece of shit", or "You're Trash" not individually or as a collective,  and especially not in front of an audience, besides that it can be performative.  That being said sometimes things just are what they are.  If the entire institution of manhood can provably be linked to such atrocity, and harm, historically (and it can) then trash is an appropriate label. I'm a man, men are human beings and we hurt and feel guilt and shame like anyone else,  sometimes moreso.  But guilt and shame unlike their portrayal in a certain very recent film (Cough Cough* “The Three Bilboards”) don't often produce useful and benevolent change.  In fact more often than not they encourage our worser demons in service of the protection of our individual or collective egos.  I believe most of us when reading about the woman's recollection of a night she deemed the worst of her life - feel some empathy for her, but sympathize with Aziz.  We are “sorry she felt that way” because we're not interested in exploring that place that guilt or shame that might shake the foundations of how we view women and sex. Admitting that Aziz was negligent, inattentive, and in the wrong means taking a hard look at all of our interactions. Which means we like Reggie Bush might have to forfeit our trophies. I know this not from the vantage point of some moral superiority, but from the vantage point of someone whose been there before and is unwilling to continue engaging in the deception.  Reading, and hearing from this woman and so many others in this current climate calling for abrupt and unequivocal change is the like the experience of muscle growth.  The constant tearing,  ripping, resting, and repairing of ones self,  that so often leads to pain, fatigue,  and a desire to quit.  Men reading that woman's story are going to respond  to that empathic ability to feel almost every bit of her apprehension as it relates to Aziz,  because the picture she paints is what many of us have suspected but ignored being on "dates" with women, where we are dead set on an outcome regardless of her actual desire.  Where we make it clear that our feelings are paramount,  (and any number of undesirable reactions could be the consequences of a refusal to go along with plans made) without consideration of their feelings and therefore without consent.  Those feelings of shame, or sympathy or guilt,  may last awhile, or be fleeting, but if not checked,  if not breathed in and meditated on,  it quickly turns into various deflections,  and  the raising of straw men arguments all in the name of protecting ourselves from any prolonged submersion in those feelings of guilt.  Guilt,  shame,  and conflict should not be avoided,  they should be embraced,  not wallowed in, but accepted as a natural part of evolving mentally.  We at this point should (and truthfully do understand) that rape, like murder can have varying degrees, while the harm remains largely the same. Involuntary manslaughter is not the same as murder in the first degree but the victim is still dead, the grieving process for the family is still the same.  If that family were to write about the pain that death caused them whether involuntary or not, and spoke about what measures they think should be taken to reduce the chances it happens to others,   how gross would it be to try and explain to them how culpable they might be?  And before you start in with death is not the same as rape I know that clearly.....

The point is not death and rape are the same it is that our actions have consequences regardless of intent.  That stifling the voices of those who suffer from our actions in defense of a tradition of lopsided courtship is disgusting.   As one person whose name escapes me pointed out in a TED talk on the staleness of our model of education...  hardly any of us have the same phone we had ten years ago because it would be outmoded and dated,  incompatible with the times.  Yet here we are as men currently using models of courtship and consent anywhere from hundreds to thousands of years old. We can do better for ourselves,  and more importantly for women.  Change is always scary,  the process disruptive,  and at times painful as I'm sure it has been for many women even while finally having a platform to be heard.  And yes it will be hard for us men as well - although for far different reasons.  But be honest,  what are the consequences?  A deflated ego?  A loss of popularity for a few years?  Before you go running to protect men like Aziz,  remember in the words of Marcus Burnett form “Bad Boys” "They tend to think Mike Lowry gon be alright.” Aziz will suffer more or less as is fitting with the crime and only in the realm of public justice. I doubt women are seeking to lock up every man guilty of bulldozing his way to consent mostly because they seem profoundly aware of how few men would be left... (Eh well.. Maybe they are)  BUT I digress,  all things considered there has been little to no corporeal consequences for men in this epoch.  And yet the advantages... A stronger more elastic society,  that lives up to the higher ideals of what American Society looked like in theory, but never in practice with less emphasis on results,  and more on the integrity of the pursuit is glorious. How amazing would that be?!  No one's coming to take away sports or winning,  or meritocracy,  but the blind obsession with the narrative around them that places an extremely singular premium on the consummation,  so that everything else is of little to no consequence including,  how we arrived there, who participated,  and to what proportion.  I want to encourage other men to stop being defensive,  and start being reflective.

 Think about why maintaining the status quo is so important to you.  Try to understand that any culture that is so fragile as to refuse any major changes for thousands of years is indeed brittle. To read about the pain of this woman -  caused as a result of Mr Ansari's combination of single minded  persistence,  insensitivity and  inattentiveness- and to think to yourself...even if she wasn't as crystal clear as she could've been,  should we need a four alarm fire to recognize there's smoke in the room?  Would it hurt us to stop trying over and over again for one woman and just invest in the one who says yes the first time?  To examine the irony of a statement like don't put the pussy on a pedestal while our parasitic reliance on it is such that your very manhood depends on it.   And to pull a Matthew McConaughey from "A Time to Kill" and consider what it might feel like to be surrounded by people who for the most part are bigger and stronger than you ( even when they're not)  and are pretty fucking bad at handling rejection...

Consider how "rape culture" exist in prison and asks yourself if in that environment if you would actually need to be threatened to feel the threat of rape?  And thusly how you would navigate interactions with these men. Before you get all self righteous about how someone should just leave - which is objectively true,  but subjectively improbable - think about how you might react of you  were surrounded by these bigger stronger,  economically more powerful people whose reactions to your outright refusal may run the gambit between your death and a tongue lashing.  This is the world we have created and fostered,  and it cannot be overstated.  But we can prevent years of future harm and devastation by actively engaging in self reflection,  and growth.  By moving away from our value being tied to merits and winning,  and into being great human beings.  And finally by teaching our young boys that winning and losing are subjective constructs.    That their manhood is not in heterosexuality,  or being a provider,  or conquering the world,  and imposing your will on it.  It's in integrity,  self awareness, accountability, and awareness of others,  it's respect, it's being a human being,   a "master of none" but a student of everyone.