God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference. – Reinhold Niebuhr
One day a few years ago I was washing clothes, and when the machine shut off I discovered to my chagrin that it had failed to spin after the final rinse; the machine was thus still full of water. I turned the dial back to “spin” and even tried spinning it in other cycles, to no avail; something was clearly wrong with the mechanism. So I called Grace, who is very handy with such things, and she told me to empty the machine so she could tilt it as needed in the repair process. I laboriously wrung out all the clothes and put them in the dryer, but the only clean hose my husband could find to use as a siphon was just a little smaller than a standard garden hose. I dropped the one end into the rinsewater and he said, “That hose is too big; you’re not going to be able to create enough suction to get it started.”
“O ye of little faith,” I replied, and set to work sucking on the hose until I could draw no more; I then quickly kinked it to prevent air pressure from forcing the water back down, caught my breath for a minute, and repeated the suction. After about three or four iterations of this process I got a big mouthful of water and immediately dropped the upper end into a bucket, then succumbed to a fit of heavy coughing due to aspirated water. My husband patted me on the back to assist in getting the nasty water out of my lungs, and as soon as I was done choking and wheezing and he knew I was all right, he looked into my teary, red eyes and said, “That was so hot!”
I guess some women would’ve been upset or angry and accused him of not caring about my distress, but I laughed because it was so typically masculine. He didn’t speak until he knew that I was all right, and I appreciated the sincerity of the compliment; a man only finds something like that sexy if the woman doing it is attractive. If Grace had been the one sucking on that oversized hose he might’ve been impressed but not stimulated because he doesn’t find her attractive, but because it was me he couldn’t help noticing the sexual overtones of my performance.
What reminded me of this story was a video which made the rounds on the internet last week, or more specifically the reactions to it. Many male commenters on various sites declared the girl (named Mel) and/or video “kinda hot” or even “really hot”, while (predictably) a number of feminist commenters pissed and moaned a la “why does everything about women have to have a sexual connotation?” etc. But as I said in the paragraph above, this isn’t exactly true; if Mel had been fat, middle-aged and ill-favored people might’ve been enchanted with her talent (as they were with Susan Boyle or Ted Williams) but wouldn’t have said anything about “hot”. But that isn’t the case; she has a pretty face, beautiful eyes, healthy hair and a cute smile and comes across in the video as sweet and fun-loving. She’s therefore captured male attention before she even opens her mouth, and everything else follows like rail cars behind a locomotive. Once a man finds himself attracted by a woman, any other positive quality – intelligence, compassion, talent, style, education, etc – tends to be viewed as an enhancement to that attraction.
Now, I understand that women who are unattractive, hate men or have been brainwashed into thinking beauty equals “objectification” might resent this, but the depth of their fanaticism both fascinates and repels me. How can anyone be so deeply in denial about Nature that she fails to understand that this is the way it has to be? The things men are programmed to find attractive in women (youth, symmetrical features, clear eyes and skin, shiny hair, a normal weight ratio, etc) are all evidence of health and good genes, and though we humans have added layers of meaning to sexuality its most basic purpose as far as our hindbrains are concerned is reproduction, and there is no getting around that. If men were not interested in sex as much as they are our species would have died out long ago, and any wrongheaded attempt to reprogram the male brain to be able to turn the sex drive on and off at will, or to be sexually attracted by some artificial non-reproductive criterion feminists consider palatable, is doomed to fail just as surely as attempts to reprogram people to crave foods of low caloric value (leaves, etc) over those of high caloric value (fats and sweets). And a good thing, too, because anyone who ate only lettuce and celery would die of malnutrition as soon as he exhausted his fat reserves, and if men were attracted to asymmetry, obesity and old age our species would die off in a few dozen generations due to attrition and accumulated genetic problems.
Bitching about the criteria by which men are attracted to women (or women to men, for that matter) is like complaining about the sky being blue or water being wet; it’s the sort of asinine waste of time which could only be found among privileged, pampered individuals in an overcivilized society who have nothing more important to concern themselves with. There are many, many things in the world which can be changed and many others which cannot, and those who learn to tell the difference are a lot better-adjusted and fundamentally happier.
Your last paragraph is probably one of the most intelligent statements that I’ve read in awhile.
Once again, you’ve proven that you have the gift of writing.
Elisabeth
Thank you, Elisabeth! 🙂
1) I bet Mel can suck a mean dick with *that* mouth.
2) “If men were not interested in sex as much as they are our species would have died out long ago”
I ironically have been saying this same thing all week.
“and any wrongheaded attempt to reprogram the male brain to be able to turn the sex drive on and off at will, or to be sexually attracted by some artificial non-reproductive criterion feminists consider palatable, is doomed to fail, and if men were attracted to asymmetry, obesity and old age our species would die off in a few dozen generations due to attrition and accumulated genetic problems.”
That’s true, but if you get too old, you’re a pervert for that truth.
A man has to like fat thighs, saggy breasts, wrinkled skin, low sex drive havin’ short haired women. Anything else is just ‘creepy.’ 😐
Nonsense; silly people CLAIM it’s creepy, but that doesn’t mean it is. One simply can’t speak the truth when surrounded by vicious fanatics. As Lao-Tze Python might have said, “When surrounded by vicious sheep, the superior man must learn to bleat”. 😉
By claiming that this is all natural and not just a terrible social program, you’re buying into the female-hating male misogynist view. Obviously, Maggie, you hate and loathe and detest women.
Right?
None of my female friends seem to think so. 😉
I’d do Mel. Not sure I want her to make those noises while we’re at it, though.
What is your definition of “women who are unattractive?”
In this context, those whom few if any men are sexually attracted to. I’m not talking here of spiritual, social or any other kind of attraction, just the biological one.
I looked at your website and love it! I don’t write a lot but when I do it’s about the issues of the surviving family members/friends of murder victims (MVS) such as what we go through, recovery, etc. Would this type of writing be welcome on your website? Or would me telling my story? I noticed a lot of the pieces on there are womens’ individual stories.
Hello Laura,
I will look at the site too.
My first husband (the good one) was murdered at is work. He owned a Cheverolet Dealership.
It was devastating and I never got to say goodbye. Closed casket and everything. The guy that did it got 60 yrs.
It taught me that your life can change in a SECOND!!!
We had a lot of plans and I still miss him. Bob Seger once said “I wish I didn’t know now what I didn’t know then”.
Hugs……………JOYCE
Dear Joyce, I’m so sorry about your husband! Unfortunately, you also know the HELL of being an MVS! Yes, MVS know how life can change with NO warning. My Dad wasn’t able to have an open casket either. Isn’t murder just GREAT? I’m being sarcastic here and my sarcasm has helped me cope over the years! I know you think of your husband every day and that’s OK. I think of my family members every day also. ###*** the ###*** that tell us ###*** like “move on” and “get over it”. Too many don’t even want to know about the hell MVS go through OR they see us as another form of ghoulish “entertainment”. But, on the POSITIVE side, there are the other MVS that we can talk to and who understand and care! Also non-MVS. I love how you didn’t let your tragedy destroy you. You could have easily. You chose instead to keep living and also help change the world for the better by the work you do for abused kids. I self-destructed in a lot of ways after the murders in my family, but wanting to live FULLY for the 1st time was also happening. Anyway, thanks for sharing and know that if you ever need someone to talk to about it I’m here. Take care.
Thank You Laura.
Yes no one really understands until it happens to them.
Hugs……….Joyce
I’m so sorry Joyce. I know that it hurts to lose someone even when it’s expected (a lingering, terminal illness). For it to happen out of the blue like that…
You have my deepest sympathies. This should never happen, and I’m sorry it did.
Thank You.
It was bad, but I have have lots of bad things happen in my life. Starting with the abuse from my Mother.
I am a survivor.
Joyce 🙂
My abuser was my Mother also. I’m very sorry you went through the abuse HELL also. But, as you say we’re survivors! Not just in the sense that we’re still alive, but that we’ve done the recovery work, etc. We could have EASILY just shut down, said “so many things happened to me. ###*** everyone, I just care about me and what I suffered, etc.” Yes, we were victimized in at least 1 way, but we didn’t choose to stay in what’s called the “victim mentality”. We didn’t take the easy way out. Yes, I’m bragging a little (wink), but feel it’s justified because after being abused the temptation is always there to TAKE the easy way out. It’s the same with other traumas people go through also. Take care, my fellow survivor!
Thank You Again Laura.
Yes we made it inspite of it all and we will continue to do so. 🙂
Huge Hugs……………..Joyce
Neo-Feminists are so nasty on this subject because they are uneasily aware that the only course of action really open to them (other than acting at all times like a wolverine on crack, which accomplishes precisely nothing) is to take it up with the designer……
…. and for the most part they are atheists….or think they should be atheists….or something.
Speaking of atheists, they get ###*** stereotyping/blanket statements also. On a message board I’m on, someone a while back said “Atheists don’t have ANY morals”. I brought up Jim Garrison (1 of my heroes) and Mike Rivero (an alternative news host I hugely admire also for his goodness) as examples that contradict that ###*** statement. It seems like all groups have ###*** said about them. But, we can keep defending them and HOPE we get through to people who make these statements!
Bravo for taking this subject on.
The idea that beauty is a “social construct” is yet another invention of feminist theory with no basis in biological reality. It also shows how feminists speak for men, while never having lived in a man’s body yet got batsh*t insane if a man attempts to claim he knows how women feel. Excuse my language, but if you don’t have a penis, please don’t tell me what makes it move. I don’t have full conscious control over that, so it’s not like it’s lying to me.
Also, if someone comes on here arguing using that phrase, I’d like to ask in advance how/why did the “social construct” develop to begin with? Was there a conspiracy? And when women prefer tall, dark and handsome is that too a “construct?” Or does that phrase only apply when men look at women?
The preference for a 7:10 waist to hip ratio is universal across all cultures; that’s a pretty damned good indicator that it isn’t “culturally programmed”. Also, computer studies have demolished the notion that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”; babies look longest at faces adults rank as most beautiful, and the analysis shows that those are the faces with the most symmetrical features. When computers are programmed to rank faces by degree of symmetry or the features, the results are exactly the same as when a group of humans is asked to rank them by beauty.
Finally, if sexual attraction is a “social construct”, homosexuality should be impossible; ditto transsexuality if gender is a “social construct”. But these facts are ignored by neofeminists just like Biblical fundamentalists ignore the mountains of evidence that the world is more than 6000 years old, and for the same reason: both are religions whose basis is faith in a body of “revealed knowledge’ set forth in certain “holy scriptures” by an anointed priesthood. And if the facts disagree with the dogma it is the facts which must be disposed of.
Maggie,
Since I like Women and I know how attractive you are, I was thinking pretty much like your husband from the beginning of it.
I have noticed men watching as I lick the straw from my decaf mocha shake. I usually just wink as I leave. Then have to go home and burn the 500 calories off on the treadmill.
I agree it is hot.
Hugs……………………Joyce(:
🙂
About fifteen minutes after I posted the column this morning, my husband called to tell me he had received the notification and read it on his blackberry, and that it put a smile on his face. When I asked if he remembered the incident, he replied “Oh yeah!” 😀
Very late, I know, but …
🙂
I’ve made some jokey remarks about a manga I’ve read. It’s just too easy to make jokes about My Balls (though it pisses me off when my doctor does).
Well, as some of you may remember I have a blinky binky. Now, you have to buy at least three of these at a time (they won’t ship just one), so I had an extra. So I gave it to my friend, the one I’ve called Middle Sister (not my sister).
She asked, “So do I just suck on this?” and then giggled, glancing at my window, which was open because my AC hadn’t been turned on yet. She then asked, “Is it clean?” and dropped it on the floor. “Not now,” she tells me. I told her, “Just blow on it and put it in your mouth.” We both laughed and she remarked that if anybody was outside my window they’d get the wrong idea.
OK, I admit it: for a second I was tempted to start saying things like, “Oh, oh baby! Oh yeah!!” But instead I just said that if anybody’s listening outside my window it serves them right whatever they hear.
She’s pretty, but rather asexual. She did take the binky home with her.
“It’s just too easy to make jokes about My Balls (though it pisses me off when my doctor does).”
LMAO… By God Sailor but you make me giggle! Thanks for that this morning.
I’m such a female chauvinist pig myself. I sexually harass and give out sexual innuendos to about 90% of the men I meet (not including those in the hobby mind you). Almost got in trouble.
OT but funny story: I was working in a hospital doing x-rays and this hot young stud comes in for an x-ray.
Me: Okay take off your shirt please.
Him: But you’re only x-raying my foot…
Me: *wicked smile* Yea I know… and?
Little dude actually blushed LOL
{reads bdevereaux’s post}
{whispers}I think I’m starting to like this girl.{/whispers}
Yeah, but guys like that! My husband once asked me why so many waitresses (for example) touch him while interacting with him or even just passing by, and I replied “because they can. Do you mind?”
He said, “No, not at all!”
“Exactly,” I answered. 🙂
For bdevereaux, for Maggie, and for Maggie’s husband. 😀
Women fear beauty because it’s the basis of how we compete for men. If the social goal is to make men irrelevant, or to rewrite society so that it does not reflect masculine values, then we have to pretend that women DO NOT compete for men.
Which is bullshit. Men like beautiful women. Other women are threatened by beautiful women unless they themselves are beautiful. Getting older means two things:
1. Look the other way when your husband notices (and possibly fucks) younger more beautiful women
2. Work your ass off to keep your own beauty for as long as possible
The best thing, of course, is to marry a man who loves you for who you are, but the reality is that he also loves you for how you look. And how you suck a hose.
And please, ladies, does this not go both ways? My husband is 6″2, 200 lbs, blue eyes, curly thick hair and women notice him. Of course, any sane woman prefers money over looks, but there’s no reason not to have both, right?
There are conflicting impulses for both men and women. Women want the breadwinners for partners and want to fuck Brad Pitt for the genes. Men want the home makers for partners (however you define your home) and want to fuck Anne Hathaway for the eggs.
We don’t go screaming for the hills when women refer to men’s earning potential, or chide men for any displays of that potential (nice watch!), but when men notice women’s beauty this is somehow oppressive and insulting?
Maggie, you are so right: arguing against the basis of human reproduction is asinine.
Life is a competition. So compete, bitches! Or get the hell out of my way.
Now this post is Stockholm Syndrome.
I guess we’re ALL “suffering” from Stockholm Syndrome here! 🙂
I think women also need to know that although they may not have physical beauty, this does not mean that you are out of the rat race. Yes, beauty on the outside may attract the man, beauty on the inside keeps him.
So what do you do if you weren’t born beautiful? What if most people consider you plain, homely, or just unattractive? What if you have a disease pathology that makes it difficult to control your weight (thyroid disorder or hyper/hypo metabolism)?
This does not put you out of the ‘competition’. Find your strengths and RUN with it. Maybe the only thing you have going for you in physical appearance is your eyes… make those suckers up and have them stand OUT so that that is the first thing people notice. Same can be said for your lips and smile. So your eyes are crooked… but you have a hell of a smile. Play it up so that it’s noticed. None of the above? Build up that cleavage! Flat chested? Find something that accents your butt! Ask a friend what your best physical feature is and WORK IT GIRL!!
You may not like it that men notice physical traits before they want to get to know your awesome personality but it is what it is. Fish ignore the hooks with no bait 🙂
Great advice, Brandy! My beloved paternal grandmother (whom I’ve written an essay about to appear in roughly two weeks) once told me, “without bait you can’t attract a fish, but without a hook you can’t catch him.”
I knew a girl at UNO who was a bit pudgy (not even close to obese, maybe 20# overweight) but was pretty and had HUGE tits, and though several of us tried to explain to her that if she should dress to call attention to her face and bust many guys wouldn’t even notice she was plump. However, she preferred to cling to ridiculous notions of “modesty” and was therefore seen by most guys as a “fat chick”.
Modesty schmodesty… You don’t have to brazenly bare the girls, that would be just tacky, but you can accentuate them by wearing properly cut blouses with a decent supportive bra. They can remain covered (for modesty) but still be noticed.
Two of us had to drag her to a bra fitting after discovering that she was cramming the enormous things into a 34C when she actually needed a 34G. We also took her to get tight sweaters and blouses, but she wouldn’t wear the low-cut things which would’ve really called attention to ’em.
“without bait you can’t attract a fish, but without a hook you can’t catch him.”
Granddad be wise! ^_^
I don’t fish though; I usually express that this way:
Being pretty will inspire a man to talk to you. Being kind will inspire a man to marry you. Being kind to him constantly will prove he was wise to do so.
That wasn’t my grandfather, but my grandmother; she gave me other advice as well, like “you have to suffer for beauty”. I did a column on her last Mothers’ Day.
“You may not like it that men notice physical traits before they want to get to know your awesome personality but it is what it is. Fish ignore the hooks with no bait”
Ha! I can’t wait to use this line in conversation. Fish ignore the hooks with no bait.
Love it!
“I think women also need to know that although they may not have physical beauty, this does not mean that you are out of the rat race. Yes, beauty on the outside may attract the man, beauty on the inside keeps him.” – bdeveraux
^This.
I also offer the correlation : beauty inside can, if established a priori, soak up ten times its mass in plainness, yes indeed.
But maybe I am just wierd. 🙂
Great post, Maggie! But I fear this is fast becoming academic due to the collapse in the male sperm count. Apparently our sex’s sperm count has halved in recent years, and furthermore a higher percentage of the remaining sperm are immobile and fail to make it off the go square.
Can you just imagine the uproar if all women started menstruating at two month intervals and higher and higher numbers of eggs started showing up as unviable?
I’ve suddenly started worrying less about polar bears…
Thank you Stephen! I remember reading in a medical magazine in my gynecologist’s office in the mid-’90s that the male sperm count was then roughly 1/3 what it had been when records started being kept c. 1920. Considering the author blamed that (and endometriosis, which in my mother’s day was fabulously rare but is now frighteningly common) on environmental estrogens, I’m not surprised to hear it’s dropped still more. 🙁
Some think these estrogens are put out there on PURPOSE to reduce the birthrate. I don’t think this is strange since some leaders (NOT all) have always been snobs that think there’s too many people/people are worthless, disposable trash, etc. That WONDERFUL eugenics mindset is still going strong (being sarcastic about this helps me cope).
The more accepted theory is that these estrogens are the breakdown product of common plastics; some of the earliest evidence of the problem came from studies of alligators in Florida lakes. I’ve also read that the more recent problems correspond closely with the increase in soy products in American processed foods, including baby formula. There are even some “natural estrogen replacements” derived from soy so this is not anything esoteric.
Female readers: If you’re unhappy about your man’s masculinity these days, try cutting out all the prepackaged foods in his diet and start cooking from scratch, avoiding soybean oil, tofu and soy milk as well. I can’t guarantee results but it can’t hurt to test the hypothesis.
@Andrea,
Right on.
@Andrea,
I like sleeping with attractive women. Should I dress down, get stingy, stop working out and bitch and whine?
How would that get me what I want?
A lot of feminists are women who lost out on the Sexual market Value sweepstakes. They’re also the first to sit and judge men like slabs of meat.
Following “neo”- feminist hypocrisy is a full-time job.
I think sour grapes sums up much human behavior.
it’s easy to pick on women like neo-feminists who go on and on about how men objectify women. Incidentally, to this I say, “D’uh”. Tell me something I don’t know.
They want to change this because they’re not the women who get positively objectified.
But take a look at the Manosphere. The disgruntled MRMs are often men who, instead of taking lessons from their rejection and dejection, get bitter.
In fact, the MRMs that squeal and scream the most aren’t much different, socially, from the frumpy, barrel-shaped feminists who go on and on and on and on about the patriarchy and how men objectify women and how penises are for raping.
There’s a shocking and very whiny similarity.
Perhaps we should throw a party and invite them all. Some of them might get laid.
Thank you, Gorbachev; this is EXACTLY what I was trying to say in my column of April 9th. Neofeminists and the “squealing” sort of MRAs have nearly identical motives (anger at the opposite sex), nearly identical tactics (a lot of whining and lying) and nearly identical agendas (arranging things so their sex has the better deal). And until we ALL stop giving angry fanatics like these a voice in government society will continue to suffer this self-inflicted chaos.
Yes; but alas for men, the angry MRM guys have no voice in government. The neo-Feminists and hard-core cultural marxists (read: identity politics) control our colleges like their private prison camps. I exaggerate only slightly. There’s no diversity in academic viewpoints at all; it’s like a Stalinist No Free Thought zone. The 1960’s seem to have completely destroyed any notion of free speech.
It’s all one-sided.
It’s why marriage laws are so wholly anti-male. “Family courts” are pretty much “feminist courts”. This is no exaggeration, either; it’s one subject feminists absolutely refuse to discuss. It’s the only issue I’m personally whiny about. I think it’s all gross miscarriages of justice.
Oh, and the “pussy pass” almost all women get for almost all offences. Men transgress: Sociopath. Women transgress: Studies to see what made them do it. Again, a weird convergence between conservatives (women on pedestals) and neo-feminists (women as incompetent children needing protection or victims).
You say “it’s why marriage laws are so wholly anti male. “Family Courts” are pretty much “feminist Courts”…..Gorbachev……It is so simple JUST YOU AND ALL MEN NEVER GET MARRIED!!!!!! Leave women alone and stop trying to get a slave and free pussy, then you have no problem…Correct??? Besides most women these days would apprecite the favor.
Joyce
Nobody’s forcing the women to get married either. If they don’t want to marry, don’t.
That door swings both ways.
{grumble}
Yeah the 60s just ruined everything, didn’t they? Wasn’t that the decade we finally took the Fifteenth Amendment seriously? And, you know, went to the Moon and stuff?
I think he means the rise of “politically correct” academia, Sailor, though I’d put that change as starting in the late ’70s and accomplished by the late ’80s; in Louisiana it was just starting when I was an undergraduate but a fait accompli by the time I was in graduate school in the early ’90s.
{grumble}
Some other time.
If things in the 1960’s hurt free speech so much, then why are there so many alternative news shows now? Especially since 9/11? Why would the amount of them keep growing if free speech was hurt so much years ago? I’m with Sailor Barsoom in how many wonderful things happened during the 60’s. 1 of those was that the concept of FREE love (thank you God!) was going strong for at least a few. Actually, there’s always been people who have practiced that since day 1 (thank God!), but it was more popular with some during the 60’s. This is when the term “groupie” was coined also. I love them (except the mercenary 1’s and the 1’s who are only in it for their own egos/status) as they saw having sex as a TRIBUTE to the artistic men they admired and they gave themselves freely. They’re still around (YES!) and I was glad to read about a man groupie a few years ago (YES!).
Laura, he’s talking specifically about university campuses; see his answer below.
Yes, I see he was talking about college campuses. If the campuses don’t have any people practicing free speech anymore, then that doesn’t match with how many supporters Congressman Ron Paul has gotten from colleges. It’s a huge amount. Yes, he’s a Republican and in his personal life has chosen to be conservative in some ways, BUT he’s for decriminalizing prostitution and drugs. He has the view that you don’t have to be involved in stuff you don’t want to but OTHERS have the right to be. There’s also been great progress made on campuses by some in the 9/11 Truth Movement. 1 of these groups is Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. They’re VERY contreversial with some but they also keep finding people open to their message at colleges. I have a 9/11 Truther friend who speaks up all the time in his classes against some (NOT all) of his professors for not talking about ALL the events that have happened in history, etc. Yes, there’s students who do just give into whatever mindset is pushed. But, not ALL of them (like my friend). I say give credit where it’s due instead of just saying it’s all gone downhill, it’s all ###***, no one is part of free speech anymore, etc. Thanks for listening.
Yeah, this is what I mean. It was supposed to be about equality nd freedom and free speech and whatnot – but almost the second these same people acquired power, it was about the Right way to think.
There are virtually no academics who aren’t wholly espousing multicultural history, despising anything traditional, glorifying state-sponsored business at the cost of private business, etc. It’s all Massive Statism. There’s no diversity. “Diversity offices” have incredibly narrow mandates. “Rape crisis centers” have virtually no crisis to deal with; the 1/4 women raped in college, were this figure true, would make the average college classroom more dangerous than a war zone.
Divorce courts are savagely brutal to men: even lawyers admit that if you’re a guy and you get out with 40% of what you both collectively owned, and escape crushing alimony, you’re among the lucky ones. Child support payments can send men to jail now even when they’re unable to support themselves. There are thousands of men in prison for not paying: and surveys show they’re there not because they don’t want to pay; they can’t pay. It’s often called Stealth Alimony. There are many cases of men paying alimony to women who walk out with most of the assets.
No-fault divorce: 75% of divorce cases are initiated by women. Women are generally the ones who walk out. There’s a powerful economic advantage to doing so.
Child rearing: Men are lucky if they ever see their kids.
None of this is exaggerated. Family courts have actually rendered men less than second-class citizens.
It’s been a perfect storm of traditionalists putting women on pedestals, and women taking advantage of it, feminist or conservative; and feminists with an active and openly hostile plan to destroy marriage as an institution. I minored in women’s studies back when I was in college and stupid and boot-lickingly liberal. I echoed every liberal sentiment. I kept the anarcho-libertarian streak; but the stalinist approach to everything else I can’t stomach any more.
The anti-family platform is explicit in many brands of feminism. Families and having children are pathways to subservience and oppression. Screw men over as much as possible –
and now, if men refuse alimony, or don’t get married – then force everyone to pay for benefits through taxation. Take it anyway!
There’s a direct correlation in the rise of the Mega State, with laws for virtually everything and taxes on every possible economic activity, and the rise of collectivism / cultural marxism in America.
Cultural marxists absolutely control every college. There are great studies done on this – when people doing them aren’t literally silenced. And that’s no exaggeration at all.
Feminism was a victim of this.
Cultural marxism seized feminism and performed a hostile takeover. When you read feminist tracts or websites now, as often as not it’s obsessed with anti-racist action (which inevitably turns out to be more profoundly racist on every level than the KKK ever managed, ironically), with Palestine, with gay rights (which are fine by me – but this is a feminist issue? – more than half of the posts on some feminist websites are wholly concerned with what happens to gay men, it’s bizarre), and Anti-Capitalist Action.
Incidentally, these are the same women who have it out for prostitutes. Cultural Marxism has been so ruinously poisonous to both the left and right that we can’t have honest debates about anything any more.
There are a few libertarian feminists out there – though not many, and they are physically shouted down and meticulously ignored in the literature.
Foreigners tell me frequently how much our campuses resemble the worst years of Soviet propaganda machines. They’re often shocked by what they see. It’s consistent.
Sadly, there’s no sign of the Berkely Free Speech movement anywhere.
Anywhere? Right! That’s why alternative news shows keep growing in # especially since 9/11. Even the alternative news hosts who are in it for the wrong reasons (unfortunately, there’s at least 1) give out information you NEVER hear in the mainstream media. Also, if people feel any mindset being taught in their college isn’t fair, they don’t have to be part of it. When I was in college, there was ###*** said about Christians in at least 1 of my classes. I was like “here we go again” and spoke against it. But, despite this, I learned many great things there and met some great people.
The internet is only able to accomplish this because it is chaotic; there is no “internet authority” to silence dissident voices like mine or yours, or to enforce “speech codes” as have been inflicted on practically every American university. It’s all well and fine to say people don’t need to be a part of unfair university mindsets, but the fact of the matter is that most people are very impressionable at 18 and absorb whatever attitude is inflicted on them by their professors. Add to that the fact that students can be disciplined or even expelled for violating campus “speech codes” (which often prohibit unpopular viewpoints) and that teachers can be shunned or fired for doing unpopular work (one psychologist I know of was refused tenure for holding a position which refuted “social construction of gender”) and you’ll have a picture of what Gorbachev means. This is exactly why the majority of American scientists below a certain age now hail from Asia. 🙁
And in the good ol’ bad days there were things you didn’t dare say, on a campus or much of anywhere else. Now, it’s a different set of things you’re not supposed to say.
Look, it’s wrong to stifle speech, Left, Right, or Diagonal. It’s wrong to stifle the speech of Marxists, Libertarians, or Whatevers. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now. I’m not going to even try to argue that things are beautiful, wonderful, magical today, because they are not.
But things weren’t beautiful, wonderful, magical back in the day, either. Not before the 70s, not before the 60s, and not before the 1330s or any other decade you care t nominate. You may get brief periods where suddenly it seems anybody can proclaim any point of view and suffer no retribution, but that’s only the transition between one set of can’t-say-its and another.
I hope for the day when the banishing of can’t-say-its becomes the norm, and not a brief transition. But that day, if it exists, is in the future, and not in the past.
There WERE NO good ol’ days. Golden Ages do not exist.
One place on campus that tends not to be colonized by feminism is the Faculty of Business.
I did my undergrad work in Film Theory (yeah, I watched movies for four years – it was great!) and that department was fully in thrall to neo-feminism. We studied things like “if a man looks at a woman first it means he wants to kill her” – *roll eyes*. Or, you know, fuck her. Oppressive misogynist!
I did my graduate work in the Faculty of Business (MBA) and specialized in marketing cultural products. It was night and day, let me tell you. The Faculty of Business has little use for what theory says, they want to know what works. If it doesn’t work, out it goes. So it’s a very difficult environment for feminism to take hold.
I worked for a short while in banking (financing cultural products) and HATED it – could not stand being a cubicle drone, and that is another arena where it’s very difficult for women to preach superiority. Banking is ultra-competitive and results focused and very much still a man’s game.
A game that could use a little more control, quite frankly. We bypassed most of the financial meltdown in Canada because we have an extremely authortarian, controlling set of men (yes, they are all men) at the Federal Bank setting monetary policy. Doesn’t it just suck when male authority WORKS?
Yeah, no.
Andrea! Didn’t you know you were a fellow Canuck. Lemme guess: Toronto.
I’m from Vancouver, pleased to meet you. Yep, we scored big time with our strict lending regulations. No bailouts here. But I remember the 1990’s in Canada, and that was no picnic. Do you remember when we used to refer to our currency as the northern peso? In all seriousness, I don’t see the US climbing out of this mess until 2020.
I know Vancouver very well. Used to live at 12th and Oak. I did my MBA at UVic, where I met my husband.
But the banking was in Toronto, yes. Right downtown. Head office of RBC. And man, did that SUCK. In all the wrong ways.
I wonder why the (Women walk out)????? Most women are lucky to find a good husband and if he is good, they sure as hell are not going to walk out. Yes (I) personally encourage all women in abusive relationships with me…even married to WALK OUT. Men should not have kids if they cannot support them. They need to COVER IT UP before sticking it in. Some men try to entrap women with KIDS, then abuse her in MANY different ways. It usually back fires on them and they get pissed. They wanted a slave and to be free to not be a true partner as he promised.
Now I do have a brother who has a bitch from hell wife that told him she was on the pill, but got pregnant 5 TIMES!!!! He should have taken action himself though. She kept him selling drugs and addicted to drugs. He told me personally that he would rather be in jail or dead than be with her, well he went to prison for a yr and then went right back to her. She now has him where she wants him. He is a convicted felon and has overdosed several times. I know she hopes he dies, so her 250 K house will be paid off, she gets about 200K life insurance and with 5 kids, she will get 7500.00 a month from the state!!!Maybe she will die first.
I know it works both ways.
JOYCE
Maggie If it is ok,
I wanted to ask What do men notice first on a woman, her FACE or her BODY?. Maybe the guys will respond too.
I have to work hard on Both..LOL!
Hugs…………….Joyce
Joyce, don’t take this as a flippant answer, but what do I see first?
The woman who works in the cubicle next to mine…I first noticed her ass, it was literally the first thing I saw.
With my wife, it was her chest, but I’d spoken to her many times on the phone prior to meeting her (we worked for the same company, but not in the same location).
With Maggie…it was her wit.
And with most women…usually their faces, I like to see that…but I admit what attracts me the most from a physical standpoint will always be the body. But just because you can trigger an increased blood flow for a few seconds doesn’t mean you can keep it going. Say something stupid enough and I’m OUT.
Thank You,
I like info on things like this.
JOYCE(:
Again, late response, but (just saw this).
Eyes. I need to see light (life) in her eyes.
Oh, boobs will catch my eye, to be sure. But they won’t hold it. There are too many big-chested women out there with empty eyes. And if she can’t sustain a conversation … then she’s going to have to step up and hold my attention in some other way.
Could she? if she got physical very quickly? (shrug) Maybe. But I haven’t experienced that in civilian social settings.
Since most women, in those settings, expect that *I* (being the guy) will “step up and hold *her* attention” (since she’s the gal), well, that’s where it starts to collapse into itself.
But if her eyes *are* alive … and if I don’t see outright disqualifiers* … then by me this has possibilities.
*I’m not fond of obesity, though I know men who prefer that.
This is one reason why I don’t have a position/opinion on things that often appear on “preference” lists such as boob size (or boob jobs, yes/no) or “personal grooming.”
So long as it’s not an outright disqualifier for me … her eyes will trump just about anything.
@Gorbachev: Nothing but a resounding “yep” to what you’re saying. I’ve been saying it myself for a while now, but Maggie is the first person to not call me a misogynist for doing so.
@Joyce: I can’t speak for all men, but we *do* have that expression ‘butterface’ for a reason.
When I notice a woman, I can notice either her face or her body first, but remember, if she has a huge rack, that’s in the same field of vision for us as her face, so it’s often face/boobs simultaneously, and then visually working our way down.
Thank You,
I appreciate your response.
JOYCE (:
When I regard a woman I look for flaws first and then do an appraisal afterwords. I first look for quality and texture of skin, elasticity and firmness. She should have a BMI of 20 and a waist to hip ratio of .7. She should have no age spots on her cheeks nor varicose veins on her calves. Her eyes should be round, her cheekbones high and her chin diminutive.
She should look like this.
You can’t see her calves in this pic, but I’ve seen them and there are no varicose veins.
In men I look for male boobs, beer guts, baldness, height and weight. Then how much money he might have, how many times has he been married…that tells a lot. I also try to look for sexually transmitted diseases that he may have, but you cannot always tell. I do the RULE HIM OUT before I give him clearance.
Joyce
I get the physical part, but this struck me as odd: …then how much money he might have…
In 2011, I think it’s safe to assume women have their own degrees, money and accomplishments. Why are you interested in how much money a man might have? You should know, we men turn and run when we meet mercenary women in search of hard, cold cash…unless she’s a whore.
Also, how many times should a man have been married? How many is too high? For me personally, three marriages is too high. Two is ok. But what about never married men?
Yes This Whore wants “Cold Hard Cash”. I do not care about how pumped up he is, the contour of his face or the size of his dick. Women want support, and honesty. The best (man) for a marriage is a very wealthy quad.
Joyce
Hold on, I’m just checking something here. In a comment string where all these guys are going on about the physical specifications they need in a women, for e.g., oh, let’s go with the elasticity of the skin and an exact BMI – you are calling into question a woman checking the ability of a man to be a provider?
Just asking. Looking forward to your response.
Stop right there! It is only 2011 on your calendar, NOT in the deep recesses of the human brain. There, it is still 1,000,000 BCE.
You need to reread the column. It’s not one-sided, Tim; I merely told it that way because of the incidents I wanted to use as examples. There is NO DIFFERENCE, zip, zilch, nada, between a plain woman bitching because a man finds looks attractive and a poor man bitching because a woman finds wealth, fame or social status attractive. ABSOLUTELY NONE.
You ask why Joyce is interested in how much money a man has; if you don’t want kids, why are you interested in “quality and texture of skin, elasticity and firmness” and repelled by “age spots on her cheeks [or] varicose veins on her calves” in a woman? If because it’s “2011” women can’t be concerned about money, then you aren’t allowed to be attracted to the things you’re attracted to either.
I think the problem for men is, they will, like a Pavlovian dog, amass wealth in the hopes of pussy at the end of the rainbow. It’s a failed endeavor; I know. I speak from experience. Wealth alone is insufficient. It is crucial, but without social skill, savvy, balls and game, wealth is useless. I wasn’t being critical of Joyce. I think a woman should look for a man’s ability to provide. But I don’t think women are well served by looking at how much money he already has. In the end, yes, even women will want to build their character. Applying rouge and mascara will run its course, and women today will need to have to some interests. It can be anything: bird-watching, art/photography, physics. Whatever it is, both men and women – in 2011 – need to have something they call their own. That’s why I think women who are interested only in a man’s finances will not be happy, ultimately. But you’re not saying that, no? I think what you are saying is, a man’s finances are a big part of his overall suite of attractive characteristics.
If that’s what you’re saying, I agree.
To be fair, Maggie, a woman can amass her own wealth. I can’t amass my own beauty.
@Tim: A woman who marries only for money is the exact moral equivalent of a man who marries only for looks.
@Sailor B: I think you’re missing the point. Wealth, prestige or fame are attractive to women just as beauty is attractive to men; whether she “can” amass her own wealth is immaterial to that portion of the brain which governs attraction. I could say to you “well, you can masturbate to relieve your sexual feelings” but that isn’t the same as being with a woman, now is it? And winning one’s own wealth is not the same as having a man bestow it upon one. Put more simply: I’ve never bought flowers for myself. Dig?
Yes, I suppose I can see that… a little. It may be one of those sex-linked things I’ll never fully get. I mean, I would buy myself flowers if I wanted them.
OTOH, I like to give flowers, and would do so more often if budget allowed.
Where your budget is HUGE is in GOODNESS! I’d rather have 1 flower from a GOOD man than a bunch of them from some ###*** bastard.
Thank you. I know you look at me through love goggles, but it still feels good.
Um, remember how good I am when you read some of my recent posts, OK?
Unless I plan on marrying him, (Which I do not) I do not care if he is a bastard as long as he pays for services rendered. I do not want flowers anyway. I have had so many flowers that my place looked like a funeral home. I would rather have had that extra gift in CASH!!! I have dealt with lots of bastards………NO PROBLEM.
Hugs…………Joyce
In 2011, I think it’s safe to assume women have their own degrees, money and accomplishments. Why are you interested in how much money a man might have? You should know, we men turn and run when we meet mercenary women in search of hard, cold cash…unless she’s a whore.
What about a houswife, Tim? A woman who thinks that children should be raised at home in a loving marriage between two different but equal partners?
My husband’s ability to support us is absolutely critical. I don’t mind being called a whore, but I resent being called mercenary. If I were mercenary, I would have married the RICHEST man possible, without regard to love, companionship, affection, compatible interests or any of the other things that drew us to one another.
I made it clear from the start that I expected to raise my children at home, and that I would not be contributing to the family financially for many years (not NEVER, just many years). That is a huge part of the reason Tim married me. He also wanted his children raised at home, and he values my skill set. Few women these days can bake bread, sew, keep the house clean and still have the energy at the end of the day to hit the sheets for sexytimes.
You can pay different women to do all those things for you, and that is just fine. But some men like their chef, housekeeper, nanny and whore to be the same woman. And you don’t get that plus a full time paycheque job at the same time.
Please don’t denigrate women whose partnerships with men are based on money – some of us are whores and some of us are housewives and all of us are thinking intelligent women capable of deciding for ourselves.
Ok, but there is a difference (to me) between how much money he has and ability to provide.
Ability to provide is the lowest common denominator, as most men can provide the necessities. But how much money a man has is a different proposition. There is an inherent risk in such relationships – especially if the money goes one day. Then you’ll really see what you’re made of.
But this is all speculation on my part. Yes, a woman should be shit-testing a man to see what kind of mettle he is made of. I can’t deny that.
Just like there’s a difference between “not morbidly obese” and “good figure”, a difference between “not hideous” and “pretty”, and a difference between “not quite ready for the nursing home” and “young”. There is an inherent risk in such relationships – especially when her looks go one day. Then you’ll really see what you’re made of. 😐
I don’t really see a huge difference there. I suppose you mean when a woman is looking for a man who ALREADY has lots of money, versus looking for a man who will probably earn lots of money. My husband and I were both students when we met, but I knew he would earn more than enough money to provide us with a comfortable lifestyle.
And by comfortable, I mean an older but still very nice house, one car, few dinners out, vacations at the campground – the sort of lifestyle that lots of people could afford if they wanted to.
The entire MSc. class is coming for dinner tonight, and I am supposed to be cleaning and cooking. Instead, I’m fucking around on the computer, talking to you. There will be a shit-test from my Tim if I don’t get my ass in gear.
Gotta run!
I think there are attraction triggers which men and women have that we are not fully aware of on a conscious level. I have a cousin who is my age and he married his high-school sweetheart and together they have four, well-behaved, good-looking sons. However, because they married young and were not able to pursue higher education, he was forced to take a low paying, low status job for the city. They’re still married and happily so. Whatever he had, it worked for his wife. She must have seen something awfully charming. He is somewhat athletic; he’s good-looking with a full head of hair and about 6′ tall. So I can only surmise the attraction was entirely physical. The point I am making is that most relationships are still based mostly on character.
Oh and Andrea. If you met your husband when you were both students, then you are not a mercenary at all. I’m not sure why you think you are a whore; you’re not even in the slightest vicinity of whoredom. Meeting your partner at university is the most natural thing to do. And you look good, too. I like your look.
How is a physical attraction based on character? What attracts people in the first place is not what keeps them in a relationship.
Tim, I don’t see why you feel the need to insult Andrea by saying she isn’t a whore. Or are you perhaps insulting the rest of us by pretending that a whore is something bad? Andrea trades sex for money; that’s the definition of a whore. One’s feelings for one’s client or lack thereof are not part of the definition.
Well, it was purely physical to begin with, I’m sure. They met in high school when the hormones are out of control. Fast-forward to twenty years later and it is character which keeps them together, along with children and memories. I don’t know what other choice a couple has when they have no money but to rely on character.
Regarding the word “whore”. I thought that was an insult, but I recall reading somewhere that you take that as a compliment; I’m still digesting that. All my life I’ve considered that an insult. However, for the purpose of this blog, I will henceforward use that word as a compliment. If a couple meet in college and they like each other, and the male decides to work full time, as is usual, and the woman stays home…it’s not really trading sex for money…that’s a kind of reductio ad absurdum claim. There is more than just sex in the relationship. The two have an energy which they exchange with one another. I don’t know how one breaks down an intimate relationship and quantifies and prices all the various things they provide each other with, but trading sex for money is not the sum of all Andrea does with her husband.
Tim, I don’t see why you feel the need to insult Andrea by saying she isn’t a whore.
*bows to Maggie*
*laughs hysterically*
Tim, to clarify, I met my husband in GRAD school when I was 29.
And I think the main point you are missing is that yes, of course, sex is not the sum total of what I provide for my husband. There are two human beings involved, so of course, the transaction is much MORE than just sex.
When a prostitute and a john meet, there are ALSO two human beings involved, and sex is not the sum total of what happens between them. It CAN be, to be sure. But to assume that every interaction between a whore and a client is SEX and only sex is very dehumanizing for both parties.
Think back to your one-night stands (assuming you’ve had them). Some were meh*shrug*whatever, and some of them were OMG*blow your fucking mind*more please.
It all depended on the PERSON involved, right?
Why would it be different for whores/clients? It seems like you see the husband/wife partnership as automatically human, and that is very nice. You just need to learn to see the whore/client partnership as automatically human, too.
Seriously, you think men pay $300 for a blowjob?
Cue “We Love You Andrea”, sung to the tune of “We Love You Conrad” from Bye Bye Birdie. 😀
Point taken, Andrea. It’s a mistake to extrapolate from our existence that we are above the animal kingdom, simply because we are at the top of it. We are, in the end, animals.
…No wonder Jesus said that the harlots enter the Kingdom of Heaven before the religious people.
At least the harlots have the courage to tell the truth. 😐
There’s some religious people do also and always have. Unfortunately, many want to not ever bring that up as it breaks their stereotypes/blanket statements about anyone who has any kind of religion (can’t have that…eyeroll).
Careful, Baby. You may have to take this up with an authority higher than any on this blog. ;0
Is there a way to make letters red?
Oh no, I’m in trouble now! Wink…it’s really early and I don’t feel up to finding the codes to do a winking head…lol. Yes, you know I do have that fault of being self-righteous at times (seriously). Thanks for reminding me it showed again here.
😉
Let’s see if this does the trick.
Ah well; was worth a try.
Red letters…let’s see…no, it doesn’t look like it from what I can tell.
When I 1st placed ads to meet others for sex only friendships, I really believed that no one would answer because of my size. Yes, I’m big (the horror…eyeroll). I was bigger back then, though (the biggest I’ve ever been). I was shocked and then happy when I got a lot of replies even with stating my true weight in the ads. Before this I believed that most men won’t want you in any way if you’re big. I found out that wasn’t true when it came to a sex only thing. It DIDN’T change the fact that some men when they 1st see you look at you with contempt if you’re big. I still have that happen at times in the course of everyday life. What’s hilarious to me is they don’t have to say anything: you can tell by their expressions, etc., they’ll never give you a chance. But, I also found out when looking for a relationship that there were more out there who didn’t just write me off to begin with. This was a huge deal for me as I was very inexperienced, etc., and wasn’t the most optimistic about finding anyone for either a relationship or sex only friendship. I have gotten smaller since then (and my goal is to be at a healthy weight 1 day)and a big reason for that is for health. I personally don’t like my size STILL, BUT won’t ever go back to the mindset I had that all men won’t want anything to do with me. Some never will as long as I’m big. But, there’s also many out there who ARE attracted to big women (YES!).
Absolutely there are; every city has a small contingent of “BBW” escorts who can still make a comfortable living. Confidence, a good personality and a strong sexual energy go a long way for some men.
There’s an ancient biological imperative behind the BBW-is-attractive thing too. In a survival-driven culture, extra bodymass was indicative of superior resources and technique. So liking ladies who are a little more…motherly in the hips… shall we say, isn’t as counter-intuitive as might appear at first glance.
I’ve said for some time that there is a difference between being a fat chick who doesn’t care, and being a pretty girl who needs to lose weight. Now of course I see Laura through love goggles, so it doesn’t mean anything to the rest of you if I say she’s pretty, but other people not in love with her have said so too, so yeah, Laura is a pretty girl… who needs to lose weight.
And she is losing weight. I’m proud of her.
Laura,
I don’t know if you react to me just because I’m male, but apparently I’ll have to back up my observations.
I’ve got an eye-opener for you. See this superb independent documentary. It’s just an introduction, but it’s extremely well-argued and put together.
The other parts are in sequence. It’s very watchable and won’t bore you, too.
And there’s a great woman author who writes sensible articles on policy, a woman loathed and detested by feminists across the board: Heather Macdonald. Here’s a piece that got her pilloried because 1) It’s offensive to the normative debate and 2) It’s true.
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_campus_rape.html
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/4674827-452/dont-buy-into-tale-of-campus-rape-crisis.html
Once you’re done with this, I can start you in on the more meaty subjects.
Our college campuses are almost locked-down. You don’t see it unless you happen to disagree with the Mainstream script. If you do, on any point, you’re literally assaulted.
Every foreigner I’ve met who worked at our colleges – even from countries like Russia – has said that they’ve never seen intellectually oppressive places quite like American colleges.
Laura,
I don’t know if you react to me just because I’m male,
Nah, she rags on anybody. 😉
Laura and I disagree on a disconcerting number of things, but one thing that will get either of us snarling is this nostalgia trap. I think it bothers me more than it does her, but I’m not sure.
I wrote a novel-length science fiction story set in the early 22nd Century, and the main character is a high school girl whose best subject is history and her hobby is movies from the 20th Century… And I still found a way to have her rant against the whole “things were better back in the day” silliness. I depended on Laura for a lot of the movie history I used.
She’s quicker than I am to point out exception that counter stereotypes: politicians are like this, Christians are like that, etc. If I think that most of said group falls into the stereotype, I’ll let the first few broad-brush paint strokes go by, but Laura is right there critiquing the paint job.
And male or female, it makes no difference.
It’s really sad to me you’d think I reacted the way I did because you’re a man. If I hated men, etc., then why did I have sex only friendships with some for several years? I still have an arrangement where I could act on that again. I chose to take a break from it for several reasons for about 8 years now. Anyway, if I hated men, I wouldn’t have ever had sex only friendships. So, NO, I didn’t react the way I did because of your sex. To be honest, you sometimes make statements that aren’t fair. Things like “we’re all hypocrites”. I’m paraphrasing here, but that’s the gist of it. Also saying women are “Machivellian” (it’s early so don’t know if I spelled that right and don’t feel up to checking if I did…wink). Please know that some women strive to NOT be that way. I’m 1 of them. I have 2 bosses currently who are this way also. Women get sick of women who ARE BITCHES and pride themselves on it. The BITCHES make it hard on us because so many men have been hurt by them that they (the men) become totally cynical and some just plain give up on meeting non-BITCHES. Thanks for the links you gave! I’ll check them out. I’m in agreement with you on how bad it is on college campuses. BUT, 1 of the reasons I brought up Ron Paul and the 9/11 Truth Movement was to show that there are people who are working on FIXING the problem. Things could be worse! Things can also be a lot better and the 2 examples I gave show how some are working on it. I also found websites for free speech groups on college campuses when I did a quick search. This is great as work needs to be done! Thanks again for the links.
Don’t let him make you “Sad” Laura. He was just playing the sex card crap that men do. Not sure why he seems so obessed with RAPE. We know it is on his mind though.
Hugs…………….Joyce (:
Is it possible that we can maybe not paint all people with the same brush?
You are correct, I should have said MOST men.
Joyce
And for further reading, there’s this. See if you can find the flaws in this reasoning.
“Rape culture”
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html
It’s almost all bunkus – but see if you can tell why.
If American society was really a Womyn-Oppressing Rape Culture, out to destroy the independence and freedom of Womyn, and punish Womyn by degrading and insulting them, then there would have been a revolution long ago.
Instead, women like the author of this piece essentially turn modern females into little babies who need protection; and they loathe and detest men. The visceral hatred of masculinity seethes from documents like this.
See if you can find the flaws in the reasoning in what she writes. it’s a little unfair of me; the number and power of each of the flaws is so overwhelming, it’s like asking you to add 1+1. it’s just unfair to her. But she’s written this and set herself up.
This is Official Dogma. This is what young men are up against. It’s a tidal wave of hatred and suspicion from women made paranoid to the point of withering fear.
Gorbachev,
You say “this is the official Dogma. This is what young men are up against. It is a tidal wave of hatred and suspicion from women made paranoid to the pointof withering fear” You are so right and we have a right to be!!! Violience against women BY MEN is higher than ever in the United states. Yes men are raping and killing women in staggering rates EVERYDAY. You need to read the NEWS and not try to find articles that you can twist to put women down and show how MEN are victims, trust me the WOMEN are victims of nut case, vicious men every day and ALL over the world.
See just the NY DAILY NEWS (EVERYDAY) for a few days to learn a few things and you will know why women are getting upset, scared and arming themselves.
You try to make it seem like the woman in the article is on a mission against men and is lying, when in fact she speaks the truth.
JOYCE
You’re wrong, Joyce. It is patently unfair to tar all men as rapists. No other sub-group or minority group would tolerate such epithets. It appears men are the last safe place to vent one’s bigotry. Inter-partner violence between men and women occurs at approximately equal rates, the big difference of course is that men finish the job. So yes, ultimately more women are killed in domestic disputes, but kicking, punching and the like occur at equal rates. The highest rates of domestic violence occur within lesbian relationships.
Women are also the most likely to commit child abuse, and do so at a higher rate than men. Children are being harmed and abused EVERYDAY by WOMEN.
An FYI, in at least some cases women also “finish the job” as you call it. Murder can also be the result of NON-physical abuse. That’s something that doesn’t get talked about ENOUGH.
Yeah, yeah, and men get more traffic tickets and catch bigger fish, and women pollute the environment with their hairspray and cause traffic jams with their boobs. We get it. There isn’t actually a prize for whichever gender is the second-biggest asshole, people. Perhaps we should all just stop being such dicks to each other.
And I’m talking to both of you.
Correction: All three of you. Didn’t spot that Tim was responding to Joyce who was responding to Gorbachev.
Actually, Joyce, all types of violent crime have decreased in the US over the past several decades, including crimes by men against women; only narrowly-defined categories such as “drug-related violence” have increased. The only reason you here more about it these days is because the news has gotten better at disseminating these stories.
Also, you and Gorbachev are comparing apples and oranges; he’s talking about institutionalized discrimination and you’re talking about individual actions. The only thing these might have in common is if my theory is correct and there starts to be a backlash by angry, disaffected young men against the women whom they blame for their mistreatment. Of course, it isn’t the women’s fault; our “safety” and “rights” are just excuses used by the state to clamp down harder (as in Swedish Model states). Governments don’t give a damn about women, they just pimp us to make more pervasive and Draconian laws. But it’s we who will bear the brunt of male anger now the pendulum has started to swing the other way…attempts to roll back women’s sexual rights are as of yesterday officially afoot in all 50 states, and the Swedish disease (which officially designates us as legal incompetents on sexual matters) continues to spread virtually unchecked.
Exactly, Emily. Thank you! I’d like to see less of this groupthink; neither “men” nor “women” are a hydra-headed entity which acts together. Even government can’t do that effectively (thank the gods!) and it’s bound together by rules, structures and a common purpose (growth and control).
Most of the abuses MRAs blame on “women” are actually abuses of GOVERNMENT using women as an excuse, and most of the abuses feminists blame on “men” as a group are either the actions of individuals or the actions, again, of governments seeking to control women in order to control the future.
One of the points I’ve tried to make on this blog over and over is that BOTH sexes must work together for harmony. Yes, men abuse women. Yes, women abuse men. But governments abuse everybody, and anyone who believes that politicians don’t love it when the sexes attack one another and ignore the real enemy is living in a fool’s paradise.
The last safe place to vent bigotry is the young. Ask a random adult, and you’ll be told that violence, pregnancy, and drug use are higher among young people than ever. In fact, according to statistics from both the FBI and the CDC, all of these are DOWN among young people. More people my age (mid-forties) hit the hospital for drug overdoses than teens.
Hell, at least men AND women can vote. Eddie Cochran had it right over fifty years ago: “I called my congressman and he said, quote: ‘I’d like to help you son but you’re too young to vote.'”
But it’s we who will bear the brunt of male anger now the pendulum has started to swing the other way…
I’m flattered you think men have such power, Maggie. Yes, at the very top of the pyramid, men are still in control. But then avert your gaze downwards…towards the sorry lot of ordinary men. I think it’s safe to say you’ve nothing to fear from the teeming masses of socially impotent, invisible men.
Perhaps you were referring to a backlash by alpha men?
Tim, please don’t tell me you honestly believe a man has to be an “alpha” to take out anger on a woman. Male legislators may indeed be (unconsciously) taking out their frustrations by rolling back women’s rights, but I was talking of earthier means. Social impotence increases the chance of a man committing rape or murder, or hadn’t you noticed how much higher crime is among those at the bottom of the heap?
I see your point, Maggie. You have a talent for thought of a higher-order. It is true that alphas at the top of the hierarchy do require the support of the monkeys at the lower end of the spectrum; it is a relationship. You are correct that the masses of men cannot be ignored, lest there be an upheaval. For example, the governor of Wisconsin was playing with fire when he thought he could screw with the police and firefighter’s unions. There is no doubt in my mind that if those boys don’t get their just deserts, they will vent their spleen on those beneath them.
I stand corrected.
Thank you, Tim. I see many angry young men on the internet, and while I agree with those who brand their behavior “misogynistic” I refuse to accept the asinine neofeminist assertion that this is due to the almighty “patriarchy”. I’m old enough to remember that in the ’70s and ’80s very few men behaved like that, and indeed few older men who haven’t had bad experiences with individual women act that way even today. Misogyny has grown far more common among young men since the early ’90s, so anyone who isn’t in denial about its existence or blinded by the dogma that it has always been there is forced to ask, “Why has it increased?” I think it’s justifiable anger at their mistreatment by the current system, wrongfully directed at the ordinary women whom the neofeminists and politicians have essentially set up as patsies.
Now that I agree with!
Yes Maggie as I said before in my post. The Violence against women has increased. Yes this goes along with the HATE and JEALOUSY men have of women. Also the intensity of the violience has gotten worse, such as in how men rape and kill women.
I will never believe that men’s anger is justifiable though.
If men do not want to get married….THEN DON’T, especially since they think they only end up being “victims”. The problem is they want a WIFE, but they also want to SNEAK around…They cannot just be honest for some reason. They want to entrap a woman into marriage then abuse her. When she wants out, they want to get ugly and violent about it. I say just kill the bastard and be rid of him forever.
Yes women do bad things too and bad things to men, but as the FACTS state MEN commit most crimes of violence.
I know a woman that married a man, they had a child, she did not want anymore kids, but caught him punching holes in a condom!!!! She has a right to hate him and divorce him. She has a right to child support!!!!
I know a man that married a woman…He was a vet, told her she would have full coverage insurance, but that was a lie, she had to pay 25% of all HER medical, when she had state aid before that paid it all. He also had herpes, never told her and infected her!!! She has a right to divorce his sorry ass, sue him for ALL Medical bills owed as well as to sue him for infecting her with a life time disease.
And then men bitch and say THEY are victims???? They need to just leave women alone, pay for pussy that THEY can afford and adopt their own kids if they want kids. They cannot have their cake and eat it too!!!
They know if they get married and have kids, there is a good chance they will divorce at some point in this day and age. They know they might have to pay the wife support and they will pay child support.
Usually in a divorce it is the man’s fault…I SAY USUALLY and that is a fact. He either abuses her, runs around on her or does something to make her hate his guts and want nothing more to do with him. If he wants to cheat, just tell her upfront. If she agrees then that is good. If she wants to work as a whore, he should not try to change her. Everyone just needs to be honest from the beginning or it will NEVER work. It would be like a woman trying to work in the business behind her husband’s back…It will not work forever.
Hugs……………………………JOYCE (:
I knew there were a lot of angry men on the internet…but I didn’t know it was concentrated in the youth. That’s scary. Young men should be happy.
Also, I wasn’t aware that misogyny had increased. I think you must mean passive aggressive misogyny, because if a man actually acts on his misogyny today, he is going straight to jail.
I was talking about purely verbal, relational misogyny. Attacking someone is violence, not mere misogyny.
From a new book about the use of internet porn entitled ‘A Billion Wicked Thoughts’ by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam (who have a blog at Psychology Today):
‘Though the popularity of adult women doesn’t quite reach the stratospheric heights of teens, it’s worth observing that more men search for fifty-year-olds than search for nineteen-year-olds.’
And this:
‘Adjectives describing body size (such as “chubby” and “thin”) are the third most frequent category of adjectives appearing in Dogpile searches. Are most of these searches seeking the slender bodies of cover models? For every search for a “skinny” girl, there are almost three searches for a “fat” girl. […] On the Alexa Adult List, there are more than 504 adult sites explicitly dedicated to heavy ladies (such as Fat Tube, Sugar Fat Girls, and Hippo Girls), and only 182 explicitly dedicated to skinny ones (such as Skinny Teens Naked).’
Hand-picked samples don’t make a case and there are a lot of open questions about context and such like, nevertheless, it is data that those with open minds might like to take on board.
“There WERE NO good ol’ days. Golden Ages do not exist.”
Not true if you’re an American straight white man. They’ve always had it pretty good.
I’m an American straight white man. The past was only a Golden Age for us in the sense that it was just assumed and accepted that people like me (American, straight, white, male) were innately superior to anybody who wasn’t all four. In fact, I’ll add Christian to the mix and amend my statement to say “all five.”
But even then, that just meant that ACSWMs had it golden compared to everybody else. Not compared to now. Since I don’t subscribe to the idea that my nationality, sexual orientation, race, or sex make me innately superior to anybody,* I can categorically say that I’d rather be alive now than at any time in the past.
Don’t get me wrong: I like Elvis as much as the next guy. There is a part of me that wishes I could have been at Woodstock. I like Eighties music more now than I did in the Eighties. There are features of the modern world that I do not like. I believe that lessons can be learned from the past, and not just what not to do (though boy howdy is there a lot of that!). But the past was, on balance, worse than today, not better. Only by turning up the volume on the good stuff louder than it really was, and hitting the mute button on the bad stuff, can the past be made to look golden.
* Had I lived in that time, I probably would have believed that… and that sucks.
According to some of the posters on this blog, the straight man is one of the most abused beings on earth. One would presume they include white straight men as well.
I’m with Sailor*. People are assholes. Occasionally in the great game of Assholier Than Thou, the Biggest Asshole Du Jour is knocked off the mountaintop and there is a brief period of reduced assholishness while the rest of the assholes scramble for the temporarily empty Biggest Asshole title. Then the winner announces the last asshole’s behaving like an asshole gives him/her free reign to be an enormous asshole in the exact same manner, but for different reasons. So that’s okay then.
Like sands through the hourglass, these are the days of our lives…
F’ing assholes.
*Anyone who can regularly work Sailor Moon and My Balls into deep philosophical and cerebral chats has my undying respect.
#^_^#
I forwarded this to a friend who is a history prof, and he is going to print it out as a summary of Human Civilization for his class.
Hahahaha!
You’re hilarious, Emily!
*is flattered*
Isn’t she though? I’m still laughing at “Eat a bag of dicks, you pedantic arrogant twat.” 😀
Tim,
There was no REPLY button to you so I will answer you this way…Why did you find it “odd”. Men look for sex, women look for money…what else is new??????
Yes I know men want FREE sex and no mention of money, but it will never happen………Sorry, just keep running then.
On the other issue, Pushing, punching etc..does not warrant MURDER of the woman!!! Just get a fucking divorce!!! Women are suffering much more violence than men and that is a fact, you tell me I am “Wrong”, but leave no way to reply…COWARD!!!
Yes women kill kids more than men do and you are telling THIS to a child advocate???? The issue was about rape and other violence against WOMEN. Yeah do the usual man thing and try to redirect our weak female minds….LOL!
Not true that more violence occurs in Lesbian relationships…Support your statements please. I did mine with refference to NY DAILY NEWS.
No one is (Tarring) ALL men as rapist either, so do not even try that shit!!!
BTW…IF a man ever tried to abuse me…I WOULD FINISH THE JOB, NOT HIM!!!! Most women are just not as punishing about abuse from a man as I am.
JOYCE
Joyce, it isn’t Tim’s fault there’s no reply button on that post; WordPress only places “reply” buttons for about two steps, then you’re on you’re own. Neither Tim nor anyone else can control that. 🙁
I suspect that a lot of the anger against men (and yes, much of the anger against women) is due to things beyond the control of men, women, or hermaphrodites.
Not sure I understand that, but it is OK, I can respond at the bottom of the page. Yours had a reply button so this reply was easy. I guessed the person decided if they wanted a reply or not. I know I did ask you about it in an email one time.
Hugs………………JOYCE. Sorry about that part of the response Tim, but ONLY THAT!!!
Joyce, the Human Scorch told me how to modify the depth of the reply nesting. Apparently the default is 3, so I changed it to 10 (the maximum). That should help in the future! 🙂
Emily H,
They is NO reply button for me, so it is difficult to reply this way, but I will try. I thought he was telling what he looks for in a sex partner OF ANY KIND. I told what I would look for in a male. If I wanted one, which I do not orther than work. Men do not seem to notice their own “Flaws”, just those of women. Yes these guys have balding, beer guts, dirty nails, yellow teeth etc, but want a beautiful woman. I just see a private clientel now, but I used to turn certain guys away. I did not have to see them and posted the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. A guy once showed up at my location and his body looked like a MAP from all the tatoos, even his neck was covered in tatoos, arms legs etc…He had rings in almost everything and yes I refused service to him. I felt he was a walking case of HEP-C. There were many others also for many different reasons.
I hope I answered the questions, but as I said with no REPLY button, I cannot look at your post as I reply.
Back on later to read some more, but I have things to get done right now.
Hugs……………JOYCE
Joyce,
Link, as per your request:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-02-03-sommers04_st_N.htm
This Proves NOTHING!!!
In fact the last paragraph is have more truth than any of it. They even say HOLDER need to correct his web site so thank you for proving YOURSELF WRONG!!!
Facts are FACTs Tim and to ignor them does not change them, nor does trying to twist them.
Joyce
Oh dear, I’m confused. Joyce, Tim, I think you both need to count to ten before replying again.
Tim, Joyce asked for a link about violence in lesbian relationships, but you gave her one about domestic violence mythology (a subject I’ve covered before). Am I missing something?
Joyce, the article Tim linked, by Christina Hoff Summers (author of the excellent Who Stole Feminism?, a book about the rise of neofeminism), was critical of Holder’s misinformation so I’m not really clear on how her calling him to correct his false statistic “disproves” the assertion that it’s a false statistic. Am I missing something?
Play nice, kids; I think y’all are both getting too excited to think clearly before posting. 🙂
Joyce, what gives? You seem hostile. I don’t mind a friendly debate but I’m not interested in a flame war.
Anyway, more links:
http://www.musc.edu/vawprevention/lesbianrx/factsheet.shtml
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html
I think I already stated my case on HOLDER. The man is an idiot and just because HE says something does not make it true. He even said the women in Iraq are better off than the women in the west. This guy is from some Arab Country or another.
I meant a link of proof from a reliable source. Someone else already posted the HOLDER BS.
JOYCE
Joyce, I posted the FBI statistics, which are as reliable as it gets in the U.S.
Thank You Maggie,
Yes I know what you posted, but FBI/FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION is ….The Government, the ones we cannot trust.????? I really prefer to trust and believe organizations like http://www.womenwon‘twait.org
We cannot just post as FACT what the Government says when we want to and then other times call them liars. They are liars.
What “RIGHTS” is it that police and politicians are wanting me to “Vote away”? Infact the police and politicians/Government want us to bring a type of
SHARIA law into affect upon us.
The reason for the intensity of the violence is that women now are more educated and do not have to stay with the abusive husband. Men have an issue seeing more and more women able to escape their control and also men try and continue to treat them as objects and possessions. That is the “Back Lash”
More Opportunity is now available to women and men just cannnot deal with it so they turn to extreme violence, just like in the article I sent you where the guy attacked his wife in divorce court, broke her nose and knocked her teeth out. He should have been SHOT by police right then and there.
I have asked everyone here to check out the New York Daily News to see the # of women murdered by men and the extreme brutality of it on a daily basis.
One man cut his wife’s head off and no he was not Arab. ( I sent you that link) not long ago I think a televised version of him being put to death would help to stop a lot of it.
Yes there needs to be MUCH tougher laws against ANYONE that commits these crimes. I do not think society is out to get men. I think men have turned more evil and yes they publish it on the net etc….
As for Guns, yes gun sales have increased and yes they should be “Registered Sales” if it is a hand gun. One can still buy shot guns and rifles and not register them. Gun Sales have increased in ALL areas, but we can just go by the ones that require being registered.
If you go to WIKIPEDIA and type in, Crime in the United States, You will see that most Crimes occur in the cities not the urban areas. It is just simple facts such as the South has the over all highest crime rate and Blacks commit more Homicide and crimes than whites do…simple facts that cannot be skewed. The US Homicide rate is still among the highest in the world with MEN commiting MOST of them.
I tried to cover BOTH of your responses here in one.
Hugs………JOYCE
Yes, the FBI is part of the government…and it has to have FACTS to back up its figures due to auditing procedures and the press. I don’t trust the FBI’s motives, but I trust their figures because they have no choice but to keep them straight. Besides, if the FBI wanted to fake statistics it would certainly claim that crime was INCREASING rather than decreasing so as to justify a bigger budget and more power.
Organizations such as the one you link are highly motivated to fake statistics, since their very existence depends on them; their tactics are no different from those of the “trafficking” fanatics. Organizations with agendas tend to lie to support those agendas; that’s why it’s so important we tell the truth even when it makes our side look bad.
BTB, sugar, “urban” means having to do with cities; I think you’re confusing the word with “suburban”. Areas wholly outside cities are “rural”.
@Joyce,
Rape as a crime is at its lowest rate in generations. Despite the hoopla, college campuses are among the safest places on Earth for a woman to be, even if naked and running drunk through mens’ dorms.
There are so many cases of false rape accusations that some colleges won’t compile statistics: there’s even an online group dedicated to tracking news stories related to this (the False Rape Society).
And yet, we hear how Rape Culture threatens every girl and it’s never been worse and college campuses are scary.
It’s he same as the “poor people are having too many babies and degenerating the race and having incest and etc.” panic in the 1920’s. It’s a “Moral Panic.”
It’s utterly irrational.
But it suits many people in power – men and women – to paint all men as violent rapists.
Now, “rape” means nothing. It now means: any unwanted sexual attention; re-evaluations of consenting sex (ie, in the morning, or even 3 days later, if the guy doesn’t return phone calls, then you never consented to free sex when you wanted a relationship and therefore it’s rape); drunken fumbling by two equally drunk teens (but *only* the man is responsible for the events, even if the woman drunkenly assented); and “sexual assault” includes unwanted touching.
Every college has lists of cases which were brought up for complaint which don’t meet even the most basic standards of evidence. In many cases, the woman admits she lied – and the case moves forward. Why? While not forcible rape, maybe the guy assumed consent and she never emphatically said “yes”.
I knew of two men hounded out of my college in the early 1990’s by insane, torch-bearing mobs of administrators: In both cases, by the way the *only* official “rape” cases brought up while I was there – the women lied to administrators and police. One was getting revenge on her ex-BF. She said he’d raped her months before.
It took 3 years for him to be cleared: he got a massive settlement. The university changed no policies.
I’m not saying rape isn’t a problem. I’m not saying rapists shouldn’t go to jail. What I’m saying is that its nothing like the problem we think it is; it’s not happening where we think it is (college campuses).
The reason for the focus on college campuses? Because these are the only places the Leftist Mobs control.
The real place rape is a problem is in poor communities where women (mostly black, if statistics are correct) are completely disenfranchised and are ignored.
But this isn’t the picture that neo-feminists will paint. They want more ammunition in their sexual war against men and women.
The truth be damned.
I think it’s been a while since you’ve been on a college campus.
College campuses are infested with young people. Therefore everything must be much worse than ever before.
In fairness to Gorbachev, Sailor, I don’t think he’s saying it has anything to do with the young people; after all, they don’t set policy. The policies he’s talking about are set by administrators and activist academics and inflicted ON young people. That’s not young people’s fault, it’s the administrators’ fault.
And while I understand your disapproval of nostalgia, the fact remains that things DO change in the short run. It doesn’t matter that at some time in the past things were just as repressive as they are now (Shelley, for example, was expelled from Oxford for writing a pamphlet entitled “The Necessity of Atheism”) because nobody alive now was alive then. What’s important is that in our lifetimes it has become more intellectually repressive. Was it just as bad at some point in the past? Of course. Will it go back to greater freedom of speech and thought in the future? Of course. But to equate a recognition that the pendulum is currently swinging toward intellectual repression, with belief in a linear degradation from a “Golden Age” to now, is both unfair and silly.
I know he wasn’t saying that young people are eeevviiilll. He was saying that the reason you find these lies promoted on college campuses was because they are the only places the Leftist Mobs are in control (I thought they controlled everything?).
It isn’t because of Leftist Mobs or because of Right Wing Zealots. It’s because too damned many old people will believe anything you tell them about young people, so the young people get lied on a lot. Screw leftists, righties, and the rest of the supposed political extremists who are supposed to be the authors of every bad thing. The truth is, people believe that campuses are full of horrid behavior because it’s easy to believe the worst of the young.
I went to a community college, not a university, and I don’t have the patience to look up a ton of statistics or some such. I suspect that things aren’t really any worse now than they were twenty years ago (never mind a hundred), but I don’t have the will to try proving it, so screw it, I think at this point I don’t care who’s right. Maybe you and him went during a transition between can’t-say-its.
When I attended UNO in the ’80s, one could say anything one wished out loud and even publish papers on it; it was that way in the ’70s as well. By the time I was in graduate school in the ’90s a pall was descending, and when a younger cousin attended in the late ’90s he was given a sheet with the “speech code”, and I saw the “code of [sexual] conduct” posted on the bulletin board in the lobby of the men’s dorm when I arrived to give him a ride home one Friday.
It’s definitely grown much, much more repressive for both students and faculty in the past two decades.
It is true, I have not been on a college campus for awhile, but why should I be?
Anyway, I really am not concerned with the (College Campus) issue.
You post “Now, “Rape” means nothing. It now means: any unwanted sexual attention”……… No that would be SEXUAL HARASSMENT. It SHOULD be felony rape, as NO MAN has the right to give “Unwanted sexual attention” to any female. No man has the right to bother a woman without consent. There are more REAL TRUE RAPES than made up ones. Get real….Some female is going to claim rape because some ass hole man does not call her back????? Most rape cases are proven with DNA testing and cannot by law be claimed 3 days later. They would ask her why she did not report it right away. I was raped when I was young. I know what it feelks like and it last forever!!!! Can I report him now??? I did not report him because I knew BACK THEN how society would take it…She deserved it…etc…TIMES HAVE CHANGED and men cannot stand it that they are losing their control over women and laws are getting tougher on men, well too damn bad!!!
You are living in a FAKE world…THERE IS NO SEXUAL WAR ON MEN!!!!!
Yes you have to pay for pussy, it will NEVER be FREE.
Go post your garbage on PETER’S board.
This blog is becoming a hate board of women because of Men like you and a few others. Not good for Maggie’s board.
Joyce
WHOA! Joyce, your anti-male rhetoric is just as wrong and destructive as anything you’re accusing Gorbachev of. And it needs to stop; I’m not going to tolerate any more anti-man or anti-woman posts from ANYONE for a while. Any posts about how “women are attacking men” or “men are attacking women” will immediately be deleted until I say otherwise. Such posts are foolish, selfish and just plain WRONG because in most cases it isn’t “women” or “men” who do these things, it’s governments.
Maggie I posted several replies but they never were posted on the board. It is not fair to only post what you want people to see.
As I said I want nothing more to do with the woman hating male suck up board.
Joyce
Joyce, as I said this morning, until further notice I am deleting ALL “gender war” posts no matter who makes them. Men and women are equally important to the world, and I’ll not play hostess to men bashing women or women bashing men any longer.
I hate to break it to you people, but:
If a whore is a woman who exchanges money for sex, then almost all women are whores.
The rest are virgins.
The only difference involved is the price.
Women CAN choose to have sex with as little money involved as possible. I did that on purpose for years and if I see anyone again within my arrangement that won’t change. I get so tired of this mentality of women are either whores or virgins. What the ?? This isn’t fair or realistic. I personally hate prostitution and that’s another reason I did things the way I did when I had sex only friendships. I don’t want any part of that system. Also didn’t want any part of the EVIL “dating game” system. I think sex should be as free as possible at ALL times. It doesn’t have to be a mercenary thing and keeping track of every little thing like a miser does. Yes, I know: there’s not many like you, etc. But, I know I’m not alone in wanting to do things this way (thank God). As as example, I’ve made a woman friend in the past year who is with me on the evil dating game “rules”. YES! Every person counts including small groups who don’t want part in systems they’re convinced are evil, etc. Before I hear any screaming (hope I won’t, but just in case…wink) I do want prostitution decriminalized. I don’t say that to look good, fit in, etc. I mean it. I just don’t want any part of it EVER. I also hope I’m NEVER in the position I’d have to do that or starve. I’m very thankful I haven’t had to make that choice so far in life. I notice you use the phrase “slutty college tramps”. Am wondering: do you think that if those women don’t specifically charge for sex they’re “missing out”, “not smart enough to get something from it”, etc.? Do you think if they don’t want to charge a cent they’re less honest than outright prostitutes? Something else that needs to be said: there ARE women who think using men to get stuff is disgusting. This includes free meals, drinks, gifts, jewelry, etc., etc. I saw this ###*** from the time I was a teenager and have hated it ever since and resolved to never be part of it. I do think once you’re in a relationship it’s wonderful to give each other things, but it should never be unbalanced. Actually, you can give each other gifts if you’re friends only also. It’s just the unbalance and taking advantage I hate. Putting on an act to get things, like flirting with men with no intention of having sex to just get a free meal/drinks, etc. ###*** that! When I was ready for a relationship how much $ the man had, etc., wasn’t the deciding factor. Who he was INSIDE WAS. I don’t want to say if I met someone who was a millionaire who was also a good man INSIDE I would have not gone out with him. I would have. But, if he was a BASTARD than forget it. If he didn’t do anything to change the world for the better, forget it. So please don’t think all women ARE out to get what they can materially if they charge specifically for sex or not. Thanks for listening.
I once thought whores were disgusting and repulsive. Exchanging money for sex was repugnant.
Then I met a cute girl in Korea. She was young and charming and all of that. Smart, too. Ambitious. I chased after her; caught her; then recoiled. She told me what she did.
For months, I maintained her as a fine friend. I assumed there was no chance of anything: I don’t pay for sex; she was a whore (and I came up with all kinds of excuses for her: “entertainment girl”, “Karaoke girl”, “She doesn’t look like that”, “She doesn’t need to do this – the money’s just too good”, “She’s mostly a high-priced escort.”)
One rainy night she kissed me and asked me to pretend we lived during the Chosun Dynasty and asked me if I knew she was a woman.
We dated for maybe half a year. I never called her my GF. I was in a rutting phase. While she was a Whore, I was just being a Man. While she did things that were Detestable, or at least Unmentionable, I was fine and dandy. Some other girl who tarted around and showed off the presents men gave her was Normal. But my “friend” was a Whore.
Fuck it all. I’ll say this again: She was one of the most decent, most honest, and most generous woman I’ve ever met. She was as emotionally fragile and needy as anyone else. She got just as upset when I didn’t call. She needed reassurance. She wanted me to say she was pretty. She wanted to talk about books she read. She wanted to talk about traveling. She was, in every possible sense of the word, exactly like every other woman I ever dated, except that she was more honest and more decent. She remembered my birthday years after we stopped dating.
When we met again, a year ago or so, with her new BF (tall, handsome, Australian, well-to-do, treats her like gold, knows everything about her), we had a great dinner. She laughed at how un-strange it was, sitting with her Fiance and her ex-BF.
You know what hit me?
She said ex-BF. I was her *ex-boyfriend*. In all the time we were together, all the nights, all the hot, sweaty sex, the little trips we went on, the long walks and the endless conversations – all the human time we spent together –
I NEVER CALLED HER MY GF. I could spend time with her, appreciate her as a human being and pat myself on my back for being Morally Superior by getting over her “issue” – her job – but I never considered her my GF.
In that moment, I felt a withering shame. She’d been worth greater consideration from me. I was also angry at the rest of the world – especially her world, Korea, so two-faced about it all and hypocritical – for programming me this way.
She radically altered my perception of women. And men.
I can’t look at slutty college tramps and not say: There, but for the technical admission of the law, go a few more prostitutes. I can’t look at hard-assed women in divorce courts, driven by rank greed and crass opportunism, and not say: More revolting than whores. The differences are miniscule.
In fact, it hit me hard: Whores are people. Not only are they people, they’re women. Bad women. Good women. Normal women.
And bastards – and I’ve been one – can bang a hundred women and even if they don’t lie, pat themselves on the back and say: But at least I’m not a whore.
Whatever. I’ve slept with a woman on more than one occasion to further a career or get some tangible goal. to make a “friend”. To give the impression I might want a relationship when the woman is completely wrong and I just like her ass. But that just makes me a Man, right? A bastard, sometimes. But not a Whore. Whores are Gross.
I have contempt for men and women who pass judgment like this. I have contempt for attitudes that prevented me from identifying with little “Mina”, a woman who was able to command men with her feminine wiles and the raw power of her sexuality – and yet who chose to spend time with me for who I was.
I’m sure she’ll make her fiance a very good wife.
I detest feminists for their endless war on men and women. I detest them for their endless judgment, their holier-than-thou sanctimony and generalizations and hypocrisies. I detest the conservatives who blow smoke out of one side of their mouths while preaching from the other.
I’m not saying women should charge men for sex. I’m not saying it’s wrong, either.
But when people stop treating others as individuals – unique, rarer than gold on a universal scale, and worthy of basic respect – it pisses me off.
We need to legalize prostitution and all “crimes” of consent. I base my opinions on little ideology. I base it on experience of people.
What governs best is what governs least.
Feminists don’t get it.
Whenever I hear the word “whore” now, it doesn’t have the negative connotations it did for me before. I no longer assume a woman is “pure” or “clean” and another “dirty”.
So many men pine after pure, virginal pussy. I’ve come to appreciate the power of a woman’s sexuality. Men should grow a pair and stop worrying whether a woman is chaste enough or experienced too much.
And it’s women I hear most often using the word “whore” to set themselves up on pedestals.
Long rant. Long night and too much magkoli. I should never write under the influence of alcohol.
Seeing the word “whore” just set me off.
Thank you for this, Gorbachev; I think I can speak for the other whores here when I say we really appreciate it. And judging by what you say here, think you’ll appreciate tomorrow’s column. 🙂
Just to throw another of my 2 1/2 cents into the fray…
I think the problem for some is the idea of “something for nothing.” That to me sounds like the root of all the frustration.
Men that don’t have any personal hygiene standards or any wealth or any game/charm/social skills still think somehow that they can get sex with beautiful women just because they *want* it.
Some women, some wives in particular, think that once a man marries them, he just naturally owes them most or all of his money and they don’t have to do anything to maintain his interest or satisfy him.
Again…the problem is adherence to the foolish notion of “something for nothing.” Some women understand the value of their favors & aren’t going to give it away for free, even if they use the(heavily corrupted) vehicle of traditional marriage to do it…and men with looks or charm or game or sometimes even just height are always going to get more play from females; alpha males and all.
Once you get past the idea of ‘something for nothing,’ things start to make a lot more sense. I think anger comes in when people overprice themselves; when a man thinks that he can just sleep with anyone, or take possession of them because of money or marriage…or when a woman has a ‘list’ of things she wants in a man, but doesn’t have the beauty or attitude to justify what she wants in return.
Olden days, everybody understood…if you want to have some young virginal pussy, you better be showing up with a king’s ransom, and women understood that if they had no beauty, or got too old, their prospects for getting married and having a family would be slim…and everybody knew that whores trade sex for money.
Life is easier when you keep it simple.
Well-said, Scorch. 🙂
Some women understand the value of their favors & aren’t going to give it away for free-I’m wondering: do you think that women like me who want sex to be as free as possible (the horror!) don’t know their value, don’t want to know it and also value themselves very little?
No, not at all Laura. I’m saying that some women recognize the supply and demand nature of their sexuality, and choose to capitalize on it…there is absolutely nothing wrong with having sex for pleasure or experience at no charge.
I’m not saying that women *have* to be either way…I’m saying that some women do realize the lengths that men will go to for what they have and charge accordingly. But as Maggie has said repeatedly, that doesn’t mean that they all have integrity while doing so.
It would be really nice if we lived in a world where people did things without strings.
This blog has really helped me to grow and consolidate my thoughts/outlook on relationships.
Because now I understand that nature’s goal is to perpetuate the species, i.e., keep life going, just as it is in all other life forms on the planet, no matter how they reproduce.
As Maggie has so eloquently stated, it *has* to be that way; women being naturally attracted to the best genetic material and/or the strongest protectors/providers, and men having a natural need to spread their seed amongst the most healthy & fertile of women. Otherwise the human race would look very different in terms of health, numbers, and societal structures.
Also, what I’ve discovered as seemingly another source of frustration for many on this blog(and it used to be one for me too until my understanding increased) is what Maggie has called ‘The Tyranny of Nature.’ In other words, nature works the way it does, and just does not give a damn about your friggin’ hurt feelings or misconstrued sensibilities or agendas. Nature’s goal & design is to perpetuate and support life, and everything is structured around that.
So if you’re a woman that was born without much beauty, you’re gonna have to develop what you *do* have, learn how to be seductive and alluring, get plastic surgery, and learn how to suck a dick like an Olympic champion if you want more male attention. Oprah and her minions be damned if they don’t like that.
If you’re a man that’s short, old, unattractive, or broke, better do the best you can to become rich and/or famous, and that will dramatically increase your pussy-gettin’ options, in spite of being vertically challenged or having a slow acting wrinkled old dick.
Because at the end of the day, height, ambition, confidence, wealth, strength, power/position, and knowing what to say gets the panties wet.
At the end of the day, youth, a good rack, a good head of shiny hair, a tiny waist, a switch in the hips, a sparkle in the eye, and playing the role of the Wanton Woman will make men go crazy, and turn over their entire fortunes to you.
If you don’t like *that,* then let me put it another way:
You wouldn’t exist if your father didn’t want to fuck the shit out of your mother.
😐
I often wonder why neofeminists just don’t kill themselves; after all, their existence is a constant reminder of the repeated rape and oppression of their mothers by their fathers. 😐
This makes me think of the kids who ARE conceived from TRUE acts of rape. I imagine they have ###*** personally attacking them for this. The kids that have had 1 parent murder the other I know some of them get this ###***. How WONDERFUL! I have a strong feeling the neofeminists would personally attack the kids conceived in rape. I’m hoping not, but with their track record it wouldn’t be surprising.
Joyce,
Violence against women, and violence overall, has decreased dramatically for the last 3 decades.
I’m not sure where you’re getting your ideas from.
In the 1890’s, murder was almost common; in the 1790’s, in NYC, the streets were positively dangerous.
Glad you mentioned NY. I asked those heer to suscribe to the NY DAILY NEWS online.
I send out 5 or 6 new Murders of WOMEN BY MEN each day and they are beheadings, throat slashing, dismemberment etc……Now tell me where you get your information!!!
The Streets in NYC and many other cities are “Postitively dangerous” Right now!!!
Btw, How do you find the time to sit on this board 24/7. My guess is you have no life outsite of an interst in hookers, overpriced pussy vs free pussy, men being victims and rape……….Digusting!!!!
I have to go work out, but back on when I can.
Joyce
Joyce, Gorbachev is correct; nearly all crime figures have been decreasing for decades, as you can see on the FBI site. The reason you’re hearing more now is because the internet has made news more accessible; alerts, for instance, allow a person to access news from all over the world on a particular subject which 20 years ago he would never have known about. Also, there is greater concentration on the lurid all the time so details which would’ve been downplayed when we were girls is now reported in great detail. This is done to scare people and thereby induce them to accept ever-increasing police powers. 🙁
Hi Maggie,
I sent you the link on the increasing (intensity) of the violence. The killings are becoming more brutal than ever before.
Not sure they are getting what they want if they want people to accept increasing police power. More people are buying guns than ever before because of it. This is very good though especially for women. I think it raises awareness to women to use caution and always shoot to kill!
Hugs……………………JOYCE
Joyce, there aren’t any statistics on “intensity”of violence unless you want to count percentage of murders against all violent crimes, and as you can see from the linked table that hasn’t increased either. Police and politicians wish to scare you with fables about “increasing crime against women” so you’ll vote your rights away, and feminists promote the same lies because they want you to push for more laws against men specifically. But the fact is, neither the type nor intensity is increasing.
As for guns, most of the sales which are increasing are registered sales, which mean nothing since they can just pick those up whenever they like. Gun ownership in urban areas (where most crime occurs) has not increased.
He said violence had decreased; he didn’t say it no longer existed.
I did not say HE said it “No longer existed”.
He said it has decreased, I can prove it has increased as well as the intensity of the violence.
Just as the violence from Women agaist kids has increased and become more intense. Nothing like what men do to women or at least not as often.
Joyce
If you have proof, I’ll withhold further comment until you post it, and I’ve read it.
I did post it, I guess Maggie removed it.
Fare well
Dear Sailor B, I found some stuff that I’ll post the links to. These are articles about murder. Please realize that with murder statistics that even if the overall murder rate goes down, SOME TYPES of murder still go up at times. 1 of the types that’s gone up is murder of pregnant women. I also found out when searching on all this that the # of “honor killings” has gone up (God help us). I don’t know if there’s been any honor killings in the US. The articles I saw were about the 1’s in other countries. Also, Joyce is an MVS. Joyce, if you think I’m ASS-uming about you with what I say, please tell me and I’ll not say it again about you. At least some MVS take most of the articles they see about murder a lot more “personally”. Statistics to us aren’t complete because we know 1st hand there’s real people behind those. We “read more” into statistics. I personally think these statistics are GREAT especially when you’re trying to educate about MVS, etc. But, I also see them at times as “just the surface” of it all. When we see things in articles like Joyce is mentioning, it hits us very hard. We think “there’s even MORE new MVS”! It hits us the hardest if the cases or cases have at least a few similarities to our own cases. I do understand Joyce’s reactions to these articles.
Thank you, Laura. If you want to show these to me tomorrow or over the weekend, I’ll look at them. You will not be surprised to know that I will be particularly interested in seeing the trends for murders committed by and/or against young people.
I think you’re probably right about Joyce’s reaction, Laura; we all tend to be a bit blind about things which affect us personally. I just wish Joyce could stay calm and not accuse others of lying or “hate” because they don’t see things through her spectacles.
@Joyce,
I sense a lot of male hatred and suspicion in you. You react without thinking much of the time.
You can distrust government statistics, but crimes against women have been dropping for decades. In fact, crimes of all kinds have been dropping for decades. And the worst times weren’t recently – they were over a century ago. NYC in 1890 was a gambler’s den: Pretty good odds you could get killed.
As far as domestic violence is concerned, again, the figures show assaults are *way* down from the 1950’s and 60’s. Actually, they’re not even comparable.
Most of the crimes you worry about are crimes of poverty – and even in ghettos, the scale of crimes have dropped.
To counter your facts:
– Crimes are no more shocking now than they were before. Gruesome mass murders and serial killers stalked women more in the 1930’s and 40’s than they do now. When they killed prostitutes, the crimes were reported but rarely investigated. Now, shockingly, they’re often investigated.
This doesn’t mean things are perfect – just that your impression of American society being an ever-increasing war of Men against Women is 100% wrong.
Lots of women believe this. They hate and mistrust men because of it. This is the War on Men we men all talk about: Myths and lies told about men to either treat women like little children or as victims of a mass crime.
And then you say this:
You say “it’s why marriage laws are so wholly anti male. “Family Courts” are pretty much “feminist Courts”…..Gorbachev……It is so simple JUST YOU AND ALL MEN NEVER GET MARRIED!!!!!! Leave women alone and stop trying to get a slave and free pussy, then you have no problem…Correct??? Besides most women these days would apprecite the favor.
Joyce
I would love to do this, but I want to live my life. My Significant Other wants to get married – it’s one of her life goals. It’s also true for virtually every woman.
Almost every woman wants to get married. They don’t want to BE married – this is pretty clear – and the divorce stats show this very clearly; married life is no fun. But they absolutely want to GET married.
They also want, in many cases, alimony (even when the woman was working), and sole possession of the children, but also support for the children. Stealth Alimony.
Unfortunately, for the health of society, we *need* marriage. We need a new generation. And what happens to women without fathers for their kids? The social collapse of urban black society is a telling warning to everyone else as to what happens when the government and women push men out of their lives.
Men and women are designed to complement each other. Women and men *need* each other. Our societies can’t function without both women and men.
And you can’t stack the deck wholly in favor of women. Or men. Right now, family law is all about how much can be given to women (not even to the children).
Judges, lawyers and politicians actually agree on that. Even feminists just refuse to discuss family law: Because it’s obvious that the entire system, from beginning to end, is a means of just beating the crap out of men. Every lawyer will tell you: Winning the slightest thing in family courts, even being treated as an equal, is more or less impossible for men.
Dating: Nowadays, huge numbers of men are refusing to get married. More and more women, especially professional women, are single into their late 30’s. And *THIS IS NOT BY CHOICE*. New York, LA, Chicago: the number of women who simply CANNOT find a man for a permanent relationship is the highest ever.
Why?
Because it’s always been women who want to get married. When men did, it was because they got serious benefits.
Now, there are no advantages to getting married for men. What? Sex? Marriage usually puts an end to that completely. Many married men see prostitutes largely because their wives have given up on sex. But we blame the *men*. *Men* don’t try hard enough. *Men* don’t do their share.
The equal-pay myth: Most women are unwilling to work the same hours for the same rewards as men. Almost all overtime work is done by men. Women most careers end up in middle-management because they’re not *willing* to sacrifice their lives for their jobs – even when they don’t have kids. The “myth” of Unequal Pay has been thoroughly exploded. In fact, for young women, they generally earn MORE than men their age.
Society has taken away all the benefits of marriage for men, but increased the burdens.
You think just getting rid of marriage is a good idea?
You may not believe it, but take away men’s labor and men’s work, and society falls apart completely. Same when you take away women.
Women absolutely need men, in a desperate way that can’t be under-emphasized. Traditionally, men desperately needed women.
NEED
So: When you make marriage a one-sided deal, the way it is now for women, when you twist every workplace into “female-friendly” workplaces and force a few women into positions they’d never take otherwise–
men start to get angry. They withdraw. They stop paying taxes when they realize this just goes to support a society that wants their money and labor but has no interest in rewarding them.
You can go on and on and on about the War on Women – but that war ended a while ago.
In all school districts, *BOYS* are in the most trouble. They fail at higher rates. The school system is designed for women’s learning styles; anything even remotely male is discouraged. It’s horrible for men out there.
You don’t see it because you’re a woman and you’ve been trained to loathe and hate and suspect men. It makes you a willing soldier in an unfair battle.
Of course, you can’t see this.
To you, I’m just another Womyn-Hating Man.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
FYI, even though the overall murder rate has gone down in the US the actual NUMBER of serial killers has gone up GREATLY starting in the 1960’s. Also, if all women have been taught to hate men, etc. then why in the world are there some who don’t follow it? I’m 1 of them and know I’m not alone with this. Just because there’s evil messages out there it doesn’t mean ALL go for them. People don’t HAVE to accept it OR live it out. The company I work at there’s at least a few women at the HIGHEST management level. But, I thought women don’t get that high or want to…these women at the company I work at blow apart that blanket statement…HHHMMM…There ARE men who WANT to get legally married. I happen to know 1 very well. I’ve met at least a few other men who WANT to also. They never said a word to me about anyone forcing them, how they’re terrified to not go along, etc. (eyeroll).
http://www.glennsacks.com/women_who_have.htm -this is a BIG list of women who have done great good in fighting for men to be heard, etc., in family courts, domestic violence against men, etc. What these women have done and are still doing is wonderful. If they’re feminist or not, why does that matter? Isn’t the good they’re doing more valuable and important than a label?
I totally agree that deeds speak more loudly than labels, but many people feel that their self-applied labels (“conservative”, “Democrat”, “Christian”, “feminist”, “gay” or whatever) are the most important things about themselves, and that’s truly sad. 🙁
A label is supposed to describe the contents. But just as some people believe that declaring loudly and often that they are “Bible-believing Christians” is more important than actually reading and learning about the thing, there are others who label themselves a great number of things, but if they were a can labeled “PEACHES” they’d be full of salmon.
…label is supposed to describe…
@Joyce,
You didn’t know that 45% of rapes reported to police are usually dismissed as “obviously” false – and the number of false rape accusations that flow any given Friday night is legion? Cops I know have to deal with them all the time. They say most never get reported. Half the time, it’s just revenge: woman was spurned, wanted ammunition for family court (lawyers even suggest making false sexual assault claims), young women who need alibis because they cheated on a BF or their parents found out they’re having sex —
The Duke Lacrosse incident was one high-profile condemnation of men and “rape culture”, when clearly, there was *NO* rape culture. But actual statistics suggest that for every rape, there’s a false case.
Women claim they’re raped when nothing happened for a huge variety of reasons. Why? Because WOMEN ARE HUMAN. They LIE, CHEAT and STEAL as much as men.
They take advantage whenever they can, for their own profit or to protect themselves. They have the same morals as men – often, not many moral qualms about anything at all.
As for the rest of what you say – clearly, I was operating under the presumption that you think first and speak later.
I’m no insane men’s rights activist. But I’m not going to make excuses for bad behavior from either gender.
I’ve got to come to the conclusion that, with all due respect, you don’t actually know much about what you’re speaking of. The mere fact that you’re a woman doesn’t make your opinions more valuable than any man’s. Anywhere.
And if you think men who disagree with you should shut up or go somewhere else –
Then I have more faith in human nature (male and female) than I guess I should have.
Well, again, I see a lot of arguing back and forth, but who’s presenting solutions?
We get that there’s abuse and potential for abuse from both genders.
We get that women used to have no rights in the family, and now the pendulum has swung all the way to the other side.
We get that we need each other to perpetuate the species, but that the priorities in a relationship are different.
So what are some viable solutions? …because we certainly aren’t going to change the way nature works.
Solutions would require a huge change in the way people think, more even than in the laws on the books. That takes about twenty years, because it’s the generation not yet in power who will think differently.
It took laws to integrate schools, but it took a generation of white kids that had grown up with integration to think that black people are actually the same as us.
If anyone on here wants solutions on how to keep TRULY violent criminals in prison as long as possible I’m glad to give that information. Since at least some of these replies deal with murder, etc., I thought I’d offer the information. With the other things don’t know how much I can offer, BUT do want to say this: With the “gloom and doom” thinking that so many REVEL in with the issue of men vs. women no wonder things are so bad with so many. How about some OPTIMISM? Not thinking the worst after you have even 1 bad thing happen to you? Or meet 1 bad woman OR man? The truth is my 1st reaction to everything is to think the worst (due to traumas/abuse I’ve been through), BUT I was taught in counseling how to keep it to myself as much as possible and keep doing what I need to do. It’s sad to me how much people complicate all these things! Especially in the sexual area. There’s so much cynicism going on. I’m convinced it’s a huge part of this whole conflict.
@Maggie
WHOA! Joyce, your anti-male rhetoric is just as wrong and destructive as anything you’re accusing Gorbachev of. And it needs to stop; I’m not going to tolerate any more anti-man or anti-woman posts from ANYONE for a while. Any posts about how “women are attacking men” or “men are attacking women” will immediately be deleted until I say otherwise. Such posts are foolish, selfish and just plain WRONG because in most cases it isn’t “women” or “men” who do these things, it’s governments.
I agree wholeheartedly. The shills and “advocates” who make trouble for us all (neo-feminists; traditionalists; religious fundamentalists; blank-slatists; cultural marxists; etc.) all work hand-in-hand with government.
It amounts to persecution. Either you get women denied the vote and unable to own property, or boys dropping out of school and men without any rights in courtrooms.
Then you get hysteria over more or less non-existent crime levels (given our population); and otherwise bright people surrendering their freedoms for phantom enemies.
Most of new-wave feminism is this sort of thing. For that matter, a lot of right-wing traditionalist Men’s Rights advocates are in the same camp more or less. The irony is striking.
What gets lost is the whole point: Civil Rights and Civil Responsibilities.
“Anti-Male Rhetoric”,
Why are you not posting this to Gorbachev? Why did you not stop his “Rhetoric” sooner instead of agreeing with everything he says and letting him go on and on. You even told one guy that it is a fact that women cheat LESS than men, but when Gorb says it, you say nothing. I posted facts that MILLIONS know are facts.
If you plan to write the book, WOMEN will be most of the buyers so I think you need to stop defending MALE HATE and JEALOUSY of women. I feel sorry for NO man when women and kids are suffering all over the world at the hands of men. I care nothing about babying egos.
I want no more emails from this woman hating, male suck up board. I will unsubscribe
JOYCE
Joyce, I hate neither men nor women, nor do I “suck up” to either, nor do I defend ANY hate because it’s all wrong no matter who does it.
And yes, women DO cheat less than men; if anyone (including Gorbachev) said otherwise he is wrong. I think it should be clear by now that don’t baby anyone’s ego.
Men and women are two sides to the same coin. We genuinely need each other.
And there are so many great women. I know no end of them. As I’ve said before, one of the best was a (shock) whore, more or less. Actually, she was: I still have to couch the word, my instincts have me shrinking back from the word still. Programming is hard to break.
Some are politicians, too; some are mens’ best friends.
Like bad men, there are armies of horrible women, too.
Ideology divides people, whether it’s religion or radical conservatism or radical liberalism.
But at the end of the day, we all dream the same dreams (fundamentally) and we get what we need from each other.
My SO and I aren’t the same – and why should we be? Sharing our lives is interesting because we’re different.
And even if some things about men and women – differences – enrage me at times, as a non-female, I find women endlessly fascinating. Shattering illusions about what men and women are has been great. I no longer expect sameness: I know women are different on fundamental levels. I also know we share human natures, as well.
Once you embrace reality as opposed to trying to shape it to your liking (re: feminist absolutists; conservative patriarchs), you can glory in the great wonders of the Female while not putting it on a pedestal.
And my SO tells me: I like the fact that you don’t try to be “femi-centric” – I’m relentlessly Male. There can be some negative to that – but she finds the negative and the positive to be central to why she likes men.
It would be great if we could drop the ideologies and just accept each other. I don’t expect women to be men; I don’t expect men to be women. And as individuals, I don’t expect anyone to fit any stereotype.
That’s the glory of being Human.
It’s great to hear some positives! I’m not being sarcastic here. I mean it. I don’t fully agree with you on ideology. I’m convinced by my own experience and that of others that it can also bind people in a good way. When I 1st “met” other MVS who had the same type case as my family’s it was wonderful. I say “met” because it happened on the Internet. I’d finally found people that could understand to a huge degree, would listen, etc. I’ve made friends I consider family and hope to meet 1 day. Yes, ideology can be very dividing also which is very sad. I do agree with you on that, but am convinced it doesn’t happen with it in every case.
Well put, Gorbachev!
It seems to me that any woman who can generate enough lift to drain water from a washer using a garden hose( something about a golf ball can be inserted here) has my admiration and interest. Now if she can actually conduct critical thinking ,it automatically elevates the status. Not much matches that except maybe living adjacent to the Dickel plantation and having that hose available. Now that would be a multi tasking winner….. Just my “sipping” opinion.
LOL! My dear Denise would agree with you about the Dickel!
[…] With the Olympics, comes the requisite stupidity about athletes being too sexy and Americans focusing on the wrong sports. I respond to this stupidity here. And if the attention to the Michelle Jenneke video seems wrong, read this. […]
For future reference: Here is an alternate method of starting the siphon to empty your washing machine, etc. It is not nearly as “hot” as sucking on the hose, but guarantees you will not have to swallow…
Put one end of the hose under water. While holding the end under, slowly slide the rest of the hose into the water (it will fill the hose). Put your thumb over the end of the hose, lift it out, and move it lower than the water level before removing your thumb – instant siphon!