Asheville baristas’ behavior a sad commentary
I had never heard of “The Red Pill Theory” or the “manosphere” until I saw references to them in the story that broke over the weekend concerning the co-owners of Waking Life Espresso, a coffee shop in West Asheville. By Monday, the story was in the Asheville Citizen-Times and on WLOS.
If you haven’t seen it, Jared Rutledge and Jacob Owens — owners of the business — have issued separate apologies for describing in explicit detail their sexual exploits with literally dozens of women on a website, a number of podcasts, and Twitter, all under a pseudonym. The two men thought the broadcasts of their conquests were anonymous, but when it was discovered that they were the source of the posts, they went into damage control mode and published apologies, even as a number of local businesses began cutting ties with Waking Life and pulling its products from their shelves.
To provide some context for the outrage surrounding the story, consider these representative examples that rate the women according to “face/body/personality” and then provide capsule summaries of their trysts. Believe me, in the interest of decorum, I am choosing a couple of the milder entries in this lurid little “diary” of theirs:
“6/7/7 – Played
Mid thirties ginger, hippie with a rail-thin body. Crazy in bed like older girls tend to be. Lived in an RV and smelled like beeswax, but was smart and interesting. I hit on her at my business. We stopped seeing each other because I talked too much about game (I’d just read The Game and discovered the manosphere) and it freaked her out. Classic mistake. No clue what she’s up to, but I think she’s headed towards cat lady status.”
And just one more.
“6/7/4 – Played
This is the K. I mention a lot on the podcast. Early twenties self absorbed stoner with zero ambition. The sex was amazing and I helped her through some dark times (perhaps a touch of Save-A-Ho on my part). She caught serious feelings for me but we navigated it, and recently she’s realized I don’t enjoy her company and we’ve mutually parted ways. I hope she does well but she’s damaged goods.”
Related Items
Columnist fashions his own reality
Trump doesn’t deserve our support
How can religion not guide politics?
Cherokee courts ‘underserve’ the EBCI’s members
There are 50 of these, most far more graphic and degrading than these two, but you get the gist. If you have the stomach for it, this is all available online, but I do not recommend wading through the muck of it. If you are a sentient being with any respect at all for women, you will come away feeling some mixture of fury, depression, and despair. To paraphrase one commentator on the Waking Life website, how can anybody turn out this way? What must their parents think?
It is tempting to think of this kind of mindset as an aberration, but if you are a man and have spent any time at all in locker rooms, bars, or other places where men gather, then you know that this kind of thinking is not only common, but pervasive. After all, boys are socialized at a very young age to think of girls as objects, reducing them to their most distinctive physical features, whether it is a big chest, skinny legs, or a “nice butt.” They learn to associate them with animals — the ones they deem good looking enough are “foxes” or “chicks,” while the ones they consider unattractive are “cows” or “dogs.” I realize that these are fairly old and in some cases may seem outdated, but similar terms like “cougar” and “sex kitten” still seem to be fairly popular. In any case, the result is the casual dehumanization of females.
Similarly, a young boy’s first idea of how he is supposed to relate to girls is developed in the context of gamesmanship and sexual conquest, usually couched in familiar sports metaphors. By the time he is in his teens, he probably will know what it means to “get to second base” or “to score” with a girl. He will learn that his main objective in his relations with girls is to first evaluate their desirability, and then to do or say whatever he can in order to have sex with them as soon as possible.
Moreover, he learns that if he is able to convince a girl to sleep with him, she is then, ironically, no longer worthy of his attention. On the other hand, if a girl resists, then she becomes more desirable, more worthy of “respect,” such as he is able to define it. Males who are sexually active and promiscuous are considered “players” (in keeping with the game/sports analogy), while females are considered “sluts” or “whores.”
Perhaps this double standard is not quite as rigid as it once was, but it is both naïve and destructive to pretend that it does not still exist, and that it does not contribute to a culture in which creeps such as these are nurtured and validated by equally creepy fellow travelers, whether it is on a website or in a locker room. They are, in effect, playing the same game they have been practicing since puberty. Getting to second base. Scoring. Winning the game.
I am not about to defend these poor deluded fools on the grounds that they are a mere product of a pathetic and demeaning culture, but until we deal in a meaningful way with that culture — until we stop insisting that “boys will be boys,” for example — these particular fools will be perceived as such by a disturbing percentage of their peers not because of what they did, but because they made the mistake of getting caught doing it.
(Chris Cox is a writer and teacher who lives in Haywood County. His most recent book, The Way We Say Goodbye,” is available in regional bookstores and at Amazon. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..)
