Categories
feminism MGTOW misandry misogyny MRA rape sex

Hating female sexuality: Is it normal?

You'll see why I used this picture in a minute.

So I recently ran across a site called “Is It Normal?” The idea behind it is simple, and kind of wonderful: people confess some possibly odd thing about themselves, and others tell them if it’s normal. Now, normally (as it were) I’m against the too-rigid enforcement of what is considered “normal” behavior, especially when it comes to sexuality and sex roles. But that’s not really what we’re talking about here. Ohhhh, no. We’re talking about grown men and women eating their own boogers; having sexual fantasies about zombies; feeling an urge to jump off of high places;  or wanting to be turned into a doll or manikin. (Hey, whatever floats your boat.)

Naturally, I did a search for “misogyny” just to see what turned up. Is that a normal thing to do? I don’t know, and I don’t care, but I did it and the search pulled up a couple of pretty interesting little discussions.

The one that really grabbed my attention was from a guy who said he hated female sexuality. Which may not be “normal,” though as readers of this blog know it’s not uncommon. But this guy is  no Christopher from Oregon, whose hatred of female sexuality is part of a package deal that includes hatred for pretty much everything female.

No, this guy hates female sexuality in part because, well, he thinks the male body is ugly and so assumes – or at least feels on a gut level —  that any woman having sex with a man is being coerced, bamboozled, or raped. Yep, we’re talking about a rich and toxic stew of misogyny and misandry here. Let’s let him explain:

I Hate Female Sexuality

What little mysogyny I have in me is directed at female sexuality. I can’t stand it that females are attracted to males, ever. I hate them a little for it, just feel it in my gut. I thought for a long time when I was younger that females were basically asexual, not interested in sex, and that romance for them was something far removed from physical love. It didn’t occur to me that anyone might find the male form attractive, and I always suspected males were using some form of deception or raping women in some way when they were with them. I don’t understand this hate and distrust for my own sex. It really bothers me.

I hate that I feel there’s something wrong with a female having an active sexuality when I know intellectually there’s not. I’m a passionate feminist and attracted to females myself. I don’t really understand this feeling.

I think maybe a small part of it is jealousy when I see a couple, and the rest mostly my wierd, incongruous hatred for the male sex.

I don’t think females are doing something wrong but that something wrong is being done to them when they engage in sexual activity, even consentual, with a male, and they’re allowing it to happen, are complicit in it. This is just a feeling I have and can’t shake. It’s not overwhelming, like I’m freaking out whenever I see a couple but it’s there a lot, subtle but persistent. I’m atheist and I’m not someone who belives sexual promiscuity is wrong or even undesirable in male or females. This is just a wierd, lingering emotional problem, like fear of the dark or something like that.

Is it normal?

So, yeah. For what it’s worth, only 14% of those reading this confession rated it normal.  But, as I said, I don’t think it’s uncommon. We grow up, after all, in a society that treats sexuality as a commodity that women possess, and that men try to “get” from women – by charming them into “giving it up,” by buying it directly or indirectly (by going to a prostitute or paying for dinner), or simply taking by force.

This way of thinking about sex is pretty deeply embedded in our culture; as regular readers of this blog know all too well, many MRAs, MGTOWers, and PUAs (especially) seem unable to conceive of sexuality in any other way. Neither does the questioner on Is It Normal (who goes by the name SamuraiPeeper), even though he’s a self-described feminist.

Like a lot of misogynistic ideas, this “women own sex, men must fight to get it” idea contains a heaping helping of misandry as well – suggesting that women basically don’t enjoy or desire sex with men because male bodies and male sexuality are inherently disgusting. It’s only a few small steps from this to SamuraiPeeper’s whole muddled mixture of desire and disgust, hatred and self-hatred.

The biggest difference between SamuraiPeeper and the MGTOWers and other misogynists I write about here is that he’s aware that his views are fucked up, and is trying actively to work through his issues. And he’s actually gotten some good responses to his query on Is It Normal?

PoisonFlowers suggests that some of his hatred and disgust probably stems from a fear of female sexuality:

Is it misogyny? I don’t think it’s as clear cut as that. Perhaps because the image you had of women (almost an idealised impression it seems) when you were younger has been destroyed (instead of having romance that is above sex, it turns out that women can be just as animalistic as men), you feel a sort of resentment and that mixes with the jealousy and then as you say “a weird, incongruous hatred for the male sex.” This then becomes a strong dislike for female sexuality.

Why do you have these feelings about men? Is it the people you’ve been surrounded with throughout your life and their behaviour/attitudes? Have you witnessed a man being abusive towards a woman at any point in your life? …

You say that you feel as though “something wrong is being done to them,” which could point to an urge in you to protect women, or perhaps it is more accurate to say to protect the _idea_ you have of women that stems from the concept you had when you were younger.

randomsensuality offers some similar observations:

It definitely sounds like you want to protect the idea of females as pure, with an almost divine stature. It also sounds like you have been taught or embraced the idea that penetrative sex is inherently degrading or immoral: therefore a woman who enjoys it is equally so.

Another bit on the matter is that many men do not find it attractive when women lead the hunt, as it were. They want to be the ones in control, in the pursuit of the sex and relationships. If a woman is as much “on the prowl” as he is, then he can’t say that it was a full conquest. He wants to know he’s been where others have failed to enter, that it took his prowess to crack the nut, setting him apart and making his mate a trophy and attribute to his stature.

Lets also not forget the angle of loathing the male form, which you say you can’t understand a woman being attracted to. If you are heterosexual male, this makes sense. Of course it’s easier to wrap your brain around lesbian sex, you like women, you understand innately attraction to women. Attraction to men, is scary for more than that reason though. If a woman is attracted to a man, then she could be attracted to any man the way a man can be attracted to any woman: this vision of the situation can induce pre-emptive jealousy and defensiveness.

Meanwhile, a 19-year-old girl calling herself so_damn_unpretty offers a blunter response – and one that might do the questioner as much good as the longer, more thoughtful responses:

I love men… and cock.. and sex… so i really cant relate.

In the end, that’s probably the most important takeaway here, as they like to say in the business world. Women – most women, anyway – genuinely like and enjoy sex as much as men. Sometimes more. When a guy “scores” with a woman — she is also “scoring” with him. Rigid gender roles that define man as the sexual pursuer and women as the sexual prize may make it hard to see this, but it’s true. Not only that, but women – heterosexual women, anyway – actually like and enjoy the male body.

Guys, know this: while you are watching sports, or playing video games, or playing with yourself, or knitting (or whatever your favorite hobby is), there are thousands of women writing, sharing, and reading slash fic about dudes (from various TV shows and movies and books) getting it on with each other. There are no women in these stories, at least not in the dirty parts. Just dudes, and their dude bodies, having dude sex with each other. Freud once asked: what do women want? And to that we have a partial answer: stories about Sam and Dean from Supernatural penetrating one another’s deepest  mysteries.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

491 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
darksidecat
darksidecat
9 years ago

From the VAWA reauthorization act of 2005, regarding grant requirements SEC. 40002(b)(8) “NONEXCLUSIVITY.—Nothing in this title shall be construed to prohibit male victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking from receiving benefits and services under this title.” http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h3402enr.txt.pdf

Actually read the act, Kratch, before declaring it the root of all evil. You know, if your research had gone as far as googling “VAWA” and then checking the DOJ website that is the second result, you could have found all of these documents yourself. Not only are you MRAs wrong, you are just plain lazy.

mediumdave
mediumdave
9 years ago

darksidecat, it could be said that the language that you quoted was added because of the common perception that domestic violence only happens to women.

OTOH, common perceptions are not law, and it’s highly unlikely that the original act contained any language that said, or even implied, that it excluded males. (I don’t know this for a fact, but, yanno, common sense.)

redlocker
redlocker
9 years ago

Oh, yes, Song of Solomon was my first Toni Morrison book at 9th grade, and I loved it.

Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
9 years ago

Hey, I like Toni Morrison. I’ve read two of her books and they deal predominantly with racism and the experience of black men and women. As I’ve said, I believe racism and heightism to be the major forces of prejudice in the Western world, and thus Morrison is highly relevant. I’ve heard that some of her other books focus more on gender, I think I just won’t read those because I probably wouldn’t like them.

Kratch
Kratch
9 years ago

“Kratch, give it up. You’re misreading the ads.”

Solid argument. Even when I argue using your own interpretations, you avoid and/or dismiss. Just keep dismissing me until I go away, right? LalaLaLaLaLaLaLaLa and all that.

“Nothing in this title shall be construed to prohibit male victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking from receiving benefits and services under this title.”

Meaning those managing the budget can’t prohibit the funding because the requesters are men. That doesn’t mean that people like Lady V, who think men “shouldn’t look to women’s program funding first” won’t find some other reason to reject. I’d be interested if you could find a single service VAWA funds for male victims that doesn’t first and foremost service women. Feminism is constantly complaining that men, particularly those in power discriminate against women, and you expect me to believe that, despite having that hateful opinion men and pervasive male discrimination, and having the power to prop up women, they don’t in turn discriminate against men? Again, I point to NOW and other feminist organisation’s track record for opposing male equality in family (despite claims of demanding equality for all) and ad campaigns demonstrating, at the very least, a callous apathy towards men.

thefemalespectator
thefemalespectator
9 years ago

MRAL, if you like some of her work then reading the “gender” stuff will just be a different kind of good, right? That’s why you’re at university–to learn about things you haven’t been exposed to. Reading the “gender” stuff will simply build on what you’re already familiar with.
Also, I stand by my recommendation of “The Bluest Eye.” I don’t think he’s a troll (I could be wrong…). It seems to me that MRAL’s biggest problem is that the he can’t put himself in someone else’s position. Fictional narratives are a great way of helping people to think about the world in a different way. And, really, MRAL’s issue with his eye is pretty close to the central character’s desire to have blue eyes–they both want to meet a normative standard of attractiveness but haven’t questioned whether that standard actually works (it doesn’t) or even should work. You can either hate yourself or embrace the uniqueness and be creative about celebrating it–that is sexy. Again, David Bowie.
P.S. On the other thread you said you were going to school in Boston? DUDE! Bostonians are kind of rough with the manners (I’m from the South and have a hard time with East coast manners, but whatevs…) but I’m so jealous. Boston is the coolest town–get a camera and take pix of all the cool historical buildings! That place is awesome. And read the Morrison “gender” stuff–guys have gender, too.

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

but the term FireMAN or policeMAN, now there is something to get angry over.

Uh, actually I’m not angry over those. I couldn’t give a crap. How is that even a response to what I said, given that it has exactly NOTHING to do with any of it?

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

Kratch –

Actually, I think all of your proposed ads sound pretty much fine. I say “pretty much” instead of “perfectly” because I think they could be phrased more succinctly for better impact (for example I wouldn’t lump narcissistic and bi-polar disorders together – stick to just one for a stronger message). The other thing is I’d have to know what exactly they were advertising FOR – just the message without an associated webpage or group to go for for more information isn’t much help. Also, my understanding (and I am NOT a shrink) is that it’s REALLY hard to diagnose bi-polar disorder in children, so putting a girl in the ad talking about setting her house on fire would be inappropriate. Maybe a teenager.

But I think it’s still abundantly obvious that your ads are NOT saying “all women set their houses on fire”. Because, actually, SUBTITLES COUNT. Geez.

Also, here’s an anti-gang ad along the lines of what you suggested (though the kid isn’t black) that I think is pretty good:

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Abbotsford+parents+blunt+message+about+gangs/4072250/story.html

darksidecat
darksidecat
9 years ago

@plymoth, except personality disorders (such as narcissism) are not clinically mental illnesses, and bipolar disorder is not a good predictor of a person committing violent crimes. The message “I will burn the house down/commit murder because I have bipolar disorder” is not the equivalent of saying some kids grow up to burn down houses, it is the gang ad but with the words “I will join a gang because I am black” (though, while correlation does not prove causation here, obviously, there is at least a correlation there, whereas there is not even that with mental illness and violent crime).

ApeMan1976
9 years ago

“As I’ve said, I believe racism and heightism to be the major forces of prejudice in the Western world.”

We should have a victim olympics to decide who’s REALLY oppressed. That would put those whinging women in their place – way below short guys, that’s for sure. WAY below! Wait, I’m confused…

Pecunium
9 years ago

hrmn…. I look at what Kratch says he is complaining about (the unfairness) of the subtext in the ads, and then I look at the news.

A guy recently choked his girlfriend to death, and set her house on fire to hide the evidence. He then used her phone to try to set up an alibi for himself.

I don’t know how much play it got outside the local area.

Why? I don’t know, but I’d guess because it’s not that sensational a crime.

But when a woman puts her kids in the car and sends it into a lake… it was national news. And the trial was national news. And the verdict, and the sentence.

Why? Because it’s really rare. Putting an add campaign to combat it is a solution in search of a problem.

Male on female domestic violence is more common. If one is going to spend limited dollars on a PSA campaign to address it, then male on female is the one which has the best bang for the buck.

It’s not that there is no female on male abuse, but the relative rates, and the air of societal acceptance (such as Sean Connerey saying sometimes a woman needs a punch in the mouth, and not having any real repercussions as a result) is enough that a countervailing message (as with drunk driving; no one ever argued that most people were willing to drive while drunk, just that anyone could, and those who did were a real problem), is a useful tool in reducing societal tolerance.

Xtra
9 years ago

MRAL, I hate to tell you this, but a lot of writers are fat.

I just assumed he would only like male writers. Fat males are a victim of the feminist system. The only fattie-fat-fats that are sub human are the wimminz.

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

Darksidecat – I did mention I am not a shrink and I did express that most of my nits with the proposed ads DO revolve around the expression of said mental disorders. But I think we can both agree that an ad that suggests that people with certain types of mental disorder are likely to do violent things and should seek help is not saying anything close to “all women will burn down their houses”.

Of course another issue is that unless they’ve actually already sought some sort of help, most people don’t KNOW they have a mental disorder or what kind it might be, so such an ad campaign is not likely to be super useful. But I’m not OFFENDED by his proposed ads – I just think they need work before they are actually helpful and useful ads.

p.s. – my name has a “U” in it. I’m named after the now extinct line of automobiles.

Kratch
Kratch
9 years ago

“Also, here’s an anti-gang ad along the lines of what you suggested (though the kid isn’t black) that I think is pretty good:”

And you miss the point that, it is the kid being black that would cause the uproar. There is a distinct reason they didn’t use a black kid in the ad.

“. I look at what Kratch says he is complaining about (the unfairness) of the subtext in the ads, and then I look at the news.”

Are you suggesting that we can’t take offense to subtext, but you can? I hear feminists bitching all the time about how women are portrayed, even subtly and unintentionally.

“but I’d guess because it’s not that sensational a crime.”

or perhaps, it is because, when a guy commits a crime, people think, meh, guys are bad, just another example. But when girls commit a crime, oh heaven forbid, what could have possibly happened to that poor girl to have made her do such an extreme action, it must have been a guy (and then turn their ire onto the poor grieving father of the 3 kids who drowned in the Hudson river, villainizing him for the actions of the mother). This is the type of thing I mean when I say Dworkin’s hateful ideology has permeated our culture, if perhaps more subtly the Dworkin herself. But I suppose it’s easier to disagree with my examples then to even acknowledge the point.

“Why? Because it’s really rare. ”

Is it more rare? Statistic would say it isn’t. In fact, Statistic suggest that it is biological mothers that cause more deaths due to abuse and criminal neglect then biological fathers. A possible reason for the sensationalism of it is because it is so hard to accept women doing something like that, but perfectly easy to see a man doing it. And that demonstrates a rather hateful attitude towards men, and a rather female chauvinistic attitude about women.

darksidecat
darksidecat
9 years ago

@Kratch, let me give you my construction worker analogy again. Men cause the vast majority of negligence deaths in construction. Why? Is it because they are really terrible at it? Is it because they are extra negligent? Not really, no, it is because they make up a vast majority of construction workers. In a similar way, women make up the vast majority of negligent parents, because we only consider the primary caretakers negligent and women make up the vast majority of primary caretakers. Women do not commit a disproportionate amount of these crimes, they are just massively overrepresented in the feild, like men are in construction.

Also, if you want me to believe that VAWA funding does not go to women more because women make up more of the victims, but because of some grand conspiracy, some evidence would be called for.

Kratch
Kratch
9 years ago

“Also, if you want me to believe that VAWA funding does not go to women more because women make up more of the victims,”

Go to women more? I don’t think VAWA funding is going to men at all, except in cases of shelters that,. first and foremost, help women. I’ve asked for someone to show me just one example of VAWA funding going to a purely male service, much like the many purely female survices that exist. I never said anything about who should get “more, just that I don’t think men are getting any.

I also find it terribly hypocritic for someone who cries about discrimination causing the glass ceiling and gender wage gaps to find it implausible that someone, who felt victimized by those glass ceiling and wage gap theories, couldn’t possibly in turn discriminate in turn. Somehow you find it perfectly rational to believe in a grand conspiracy against women, but not a discrimination against men by those who have spent the last 50 years bitching and moaning about how evil they are.

As to what I was saying about the man-hate feminism becoming an accepted and pervasive part of our society… I’m not the only one…

http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/around-town/we-need-to-talk-about-manhating-feminism-2660407.html

darksidecat
darksidecat
9 years ago

From Nebraska’s VAWA, citing one of their priority public awareness/education goals to be addressing “Lack of public awareness of male domestic violence victims” and also list male shelters as an “underserved population” whose applications for the state’s VAWA funds are given precdence. http://www.ncc.ne.gov/pdf/grants/2011_VW_Application_Instructions.pdf There you go, a VAWA commision specifically trying to address male victims in its fund distribution. That took a whole minute on the google, you lazy, lazy conspiracy theorist.

Again, women are 85-90% of victims, so it would be absurd if there were not more shelters set up with women in mind than with men, but, as you can see, there is an official non-discrimination policy in regards to funds, and there are a lot of funded organizations which are specifically gender neutral in services.

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

And you miss the point that, it is the kid being black that would cause the uproar. There is a distinct reason they didn’t use a black kid in the ad.

Why? If a black girl can stand for “every woman” in an anti domestic violence ad and a white boy can stand for “every man” (which they don’t actually but that was your assertion) then why does it matter what race the gang boy is? So now the one with the white boy ISN’T offensive anymore because he’s not black? In any case, that’s just the first one I found in like 2 minutes of googling. And in that specific case it turns out that Abbotsford, BC, where the ad came from, is 74% white so of course they would target white people in that – that’s who the gang members ARE in that city! The next largest group at 19% is south Asians. People of African origin don’t even make up a significant enough percentage to make the demographic statistics.

Somehow you find it perfectly rational to believe in a grand conspiracy against women, but not a discrimination against men by those who have spent the last 50 years bitching and moaning about how evil they are.

We DON’T believe in a “grand conspiracy against women” or that men are “evil”. That is a fundamental disconnect between what MRAs and feminist critics THINK feminism is about and what feminism is ACTUALLY about. Discrimination is WAY less intentional and directed than that. It’s subtle and pervasive and requires being fought on a lot of fronts in a lot of different ways. And we have made massive massive progress and I think it’s really encouraging.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Kratch: Is it more rare? Statistic would say it isn’t. In fact, Statistic suggest that it is biological mothers that cause more deaths due to abuse and criminal neglect then biological fathers.

Citation needed.

Also, when did the subject move from abuse by males vs. abuse by females to abuse to children?

Because the ads aren’t that specific.

traindodger
9 years ago

This is interesting, because SamuraiPeeper’s view of the whole situation is not at all dissimilar to my own. I see men treating women as a whole like shit, and I honestly wonder how women could be attracted to my kind.

Sometimes, I wish I was a woman, just so I could connect with women better and express a degree of platonic friendship with them without harboring any lingering sexual desires that may “poison” our relationship. I know that sounds strange, but I think that men secretly harbor a lot of guilt about male sexuality, and this is precisely what drives their hatred or fear of female sexuality.

Furthermore, though I am easily capable of conceiving of the notion that being the receiving partner in a sexual act is not an inferior position but a mutual and complementary one, I often fear that the people who are willing to accept this as a fact are too marginalized and few in number for it to be taken as reality.

Even if you want to think of sex in egalitarian terms, culturally-ingrained stereotypes still prevail in the vast majority of the world’s population. Regardless of how we think about the act of sex itself, there are some key biological differences between how male and female genitalia function, and these biological differences lead to people making bizarre and unbecoming assumptions about the opposite sex.

Strictly speaking, females are “worth” more from a reproductive standpoint. An individual female can only get pregnant and carry a child to term once in a nine-month period. An individual male can impregnate thousands over the same time scale. If polygamous relationships are allowed, it is hypothetically quite possible to maintain stable population growth with a low male-to-female population ratio. Say, ten females for each male. The reverse is not true.

Of course, I fully realize that I’ve just stated the bleedin’ obvious, but this is where things get a little more complex. See, the human mind is prone to subconsciously making assumptions about the nature of the sexes because of these intrinsic biological differences. For men, sex is thought of as a triumph. For women, it is treated as an unpleasant ordeal.

The whole process of pregnancy and childbirth is not a pretty sight for most men. I mean, women may be perfectly fine with the whole idea of it, but how do you think men feel about it? Morning sickness, puffed-up abdomens, reduced mobility, increased physical vulnerability, weakness, irritability, birth pains. Heck, for some women, there’s a very real possibility of actually dying during it. The only natural response to all this is one of revulsion and fear, no matter how much we try and hide it.

This is why I’ve despised the male gender role for so long. It seems that men are essentially reduced to shoving aside their empathy for others and putting on bizarre mating displays in order to satiate their hormonally-induced sexual desires and fulfill their “ultimate goal” as a living organism; to conceive offspring.

I mean, think about it; when you impregnate a woman, you’re either a sadist who enjoys making people miserable, or you just don’t care how they feel. As a man, how do you think that makes me feel? It makes me feel really fucking awful, I’ll tell you that much.

This is also where the fear of female sexuality comes from. If women abide this sadistic, thoughtless behavior so easily, or actually desire sex and impregnation, that must necessarily mean that they are masochistic. That they enjoy pain and humiliation, somehow. That the idea of risking their life and personal autonomy for a short period gives them some kind of sick thrill; like skydiving, or riding a roller coaster.

This leads us further to the incredibly disturbing conclusion that MRAs and MGTOWs – after facing rejection when employing conventional mating tactics – have already deduced all this on a subconscious level, and they think that they’re attracting women by “giving them what they want” and acting verbally and physically abusive towards them.

The problem with their way of thinking is that not all women fit such simplistic generalizations about female sexuality. And, as my own thoughts on the matter would seem to indicate, neither do all men.

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

Riding a roller-coaster is a sick thrill?? We live in a country full of sickos, really? ‘Cause, man, the lines last time I went to Six Flags were unbelievable! All those crazy sickos and me one of them!

p.s. – There’s this great modern invention called birth control. I’ve used it to fuck to my heart’s content for well over a decade and not get impregnated once! Awesome!!

p.p.s. – I know you made your comment in all seriousness and I apologize for making light of it but I’m afraid that if I were to actually take it seriously I would be too depressed.

Ok, that was a shitty apology. I apologize for my original apology being shitty.

Uh.

I give up.

traindodger
9 years ago

I see where you’re coming from. Riding a roller coaster may seem innocuous, but is it? I mean, why would people want to take their life into their own hands like that?

When rides malfunction, people can die very, very messily indeed. I can only conclude that they wish to feel vulnerable.

If you take that statement a little bit further, one could even say that men partake in dangerous, thrill-seeking activities because – on a subconscious level – they desire to feel like what they perceive women to be. Skiing, rock climbing, parasailing, surfing… these outdoor activities and the risk entailed in them is representative of the innate desire of human beings to feel helpless on a psychosexual level. Alternately, one could argue that the mastery of these activities would provide a serious ego boost to the participant, making them feel as though they are in complete control of their lives.

There’s a clear dichotomy between masculine and feminine interpretations of these experiences. However, I don’t want to generalize. When I refer to things as masculine and feminine, I am perhaps over-simplifying the matter. In reality, all human beings possess both masculine and feminine traits to varying degrees. The problem comes when you define Masculinity as “Power/Control” and Femininity as “A Lack of Power/Control”. Both have power and control, but they express it in different ways.

At the most basic level, I define masculinity as a divisive force and femininity as a binding force. Masculine thought patterns involve advancing arguments in opposition to other ideas. Feminine thought patterns are all about finding points that all parties agree upon.

When a man makes friends and networks with his co-workers, he is engaging in feminine thought and behavior. When a woman writes an essay detailing a scientific hypothesis that contradicts prevailing theories, she is engaging in masculine thought and behavior.

Masculine governments are tribal and divided into finely-grained portions. Feminine governments are homogenous.

Masculine economic systems stress having a free market. Feminine economic systems are highly managed from the top.

Yes, I know how that sounds. Man = Tribalistic Warlord Scientist Capitalist Logic Guy, Woman = NWO Hive Mind Sympathetic Communist Illogical Gal. Ugh, excuse me while I pour paint thinner in my eyes for having to gaze upon what I just wrote.

Once again, I must stress that this is my own personal interpretation of what is stereotypically defined as masculine or feminine in extreme cases, and that it has almost no bearing at all on actual, real-world behavior exhibited by people, which is far more nuanced. Once again, both males and females express both masculine and feminine behavior, or combinations thereof.

As far as I can tell, the cause of feminism is chiefly interested in giving women an opportunity to express masculine behaviors without fear of social repression, like the female scientist handing in an essay that I mentioned in my hypothesis. Believe it or not, there’s still a huge bias against women in academia.

I remember feeling heartbroken when I read about a female mathematician who became an FTM transsexual. Before undergoing the operation, her work was treated as though it wasn’t credible or valid at all. Afterward? Her peers – or now his, I should say – completely changed their tune.

I don’t mean to bash transgendered people at all. If they’re sure about it, then I say go for it. But honestly; you shouldn’t have to get a sex change just to be taken seriously by others. There should always be a modicum of decency and respect for others and their work, regardless of their gender or sexuality.

Masculism, on the other hand, is all about maintaining the status quo. It isn’t even about letting men express themselves in a feminine manner; it’s all about making sure that “men stay men, and women stay women”. That just doesn’t cut it for me, because these “men” calling for a return to the status quo aren’t well-adjusted adults. They’re a bunch of spiteful, petty, vainglorious asswipes.

Anyhow, modern and effective birth control methods haven’t existed for very long. I think that it’s going to take some time before our culture fully adjusts to the ramifications of its use.

Uh, I think I give up too. This is getting too depressing, even for me.

Marc
Marc
9 years ago

I always think your wasting your time on trolls!
You have a nice blog (well, not necessarily contentwise but at least it looks clean & tidy in contrast to most of the blogs you “mock”) but come on! Taking apart the *** that extremely bored people SPAM the Internet with is just SAD.
isitnormal.com really is the troll playground #1 of the entire Internet. And no, even if a post is long and well written it will be a troll post with (conservatively estimated) more than a 50% chance (just look at all the incest stories there!).

There are two billion people on the internet protected and disinhibited by anonymity some of them e x t r e m l y bored so PLEASE do yourself a favor and ignore the stuff except if
(a) somebody (not necessarily the author himself) has the guts to take responsibility with his name for the things you read
or
(b) it’s completely anonymous but it’s a rational and sane argument. In this case you can’t loose… and no “this post sounds sincere” is not enough!!

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

“I don’t mean to bash transgendered people at all. If they’re sure about it, then I say go for it. But honestly; you shouldn’t have to get a sex change just to be taken seriously by others. There should always be a modicum of decency and respect for others and their work, regardless of their gender or sexuality.”

I had to “get a sex change” (and yes those are scare quotes) to be taken seriously as female. Heck, until I get surgery, I won’t be taken seriously as such by 95% of potential mates and the government, and employers who get to know my legal mention of sex.

I’m female regardless by the way, but try to convince the world it is so.

Kratch
Kratch
9 years ago

@Darkside So, in order to prove me wrong that VAWA has, indeed spent money on men in it’s 17 years of existence, you provide me an application kit, released just over 6 months ago, that lists Violence against men as a gap that needs to be addressed (meaning it is something that hasn’t been addressed enough, if at all, in the past.) and STILL doesn’t actually show money being spent on men, only an acknowledgement of a gap that needs addressing… Conveniently this comes at the same time it is coming under fire for being sexist, and also conveniently, at a time approaching it’s renewal.

I also notice that, despite my mentioning that I wasn’t positive about VAWA, you seem to have chosen to focus on that and ignore my mention of Canada’s women’s ministry. You will find a single allotment of $1,500 to one west coast men’s shelter… again, this year, allocated by a court that referred the male victim to the shelter (IE, they were forced to).

I’m not opening the can o worms that is victimization rate. I’ve been distracted far enough from my original point

Pecunium “ Also, when did the subject move from abuse by males vs. abuse by females to abuse to children?

When you claimed that women were sensationalized in the media for violence because it was more rare.

Remember, this discourse isn’t about abuse at all, it is about the hateful, disrespectful …misandric attitude directed at men today, and the embracing of female chauvinism as a virtue. It’s in our media, our government policies, even our charitable foundations. And it is most certainly in the Domestic Violence, Family court and rape culture industries.

The claim was made that radical feminist idea’s have disappeared, but I argue that they have not, they have simply become so commonplace that most don’t see it, like your nose in front of your face, only noticeable if you choose to look. And I don’t think any of you will choose to look. I’d be willing to bet you each couldn’t find five things in the media demonstrating hateful of men or extremely female chauvinistic that the rest couldn’t then justify in the manner these ads have been. I’ll also point to traindodger as an example…

@Marc In other words, we should feel justified in dismissing anything we don’t agree with because people don’t put their real name on things? That would be Marc …? Or should I just dismiss you as an anonymous troll?

Whatever. Since I’m just a lazy lazy conspiracy theorist, I think I’ll go to bed.

traindodger
9 years ago

I guess what I was trying to say in that mess I wrote was that it ain’t fair and it ain’t right that women receive unequal criticism for doing the same work and having the same hobbies and talents as men do.

I think that a large number of “men” out there like to sadistically denigrate women – along with the fruits of their labor – in the hopes of damaging their self-esteem and somehow making them more amiable to sex.

I guess you could say that I hate female sexuality because I hate male sexuality too. They’re both manipulative and controlling, but in different ways.

The problem with our society is that we suffer from phallogocentrism, i.e. “a vagina is a defective penis”, or “the penis equals power and control, the vagina equals a lack of power and control”, or “a woman is everything that a man is not”. Don’t believe me? It’s even in our language, which derives in large part from Latin. Where do you think the word “virtue” comes from? It’s not really gender-specific today, but it derives from a word that literally meant “manliness” or “positive attributes ascribed to men”.

So, when you hear someone say something like “feminine virtues”, what they’re actually saying is “things that are manly about women”. How can we have a society free of tyranny when every other word that comes out of our mouths contains subtle put-downs against femininity? If you want to put a stop to sexism, the first step is to completely revamp the language we speak until it no longer privileges or prioritizes one sex over the other.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

“I guess what I was trying to say in that mess I wrote was that it ain’t fair and it ain’t right that women receive unequal criticism for doing the same work and having the same hobbies and talents as men do. ”

Men receive similar unequal criticism for doing the same work and having the same hobbies and talents as women do.

That’s why stay-at-home-fathers are often treated harshly – by their wives and SAHM in communities there.

Men who have any interest in childcare of any sort are treated as ‘less manly’ and potential pedophiles (because why else would they have ANY interest in children that aren’t theirs (and sometimes even theirs)). That’s so attractive, I just can’t see why all men aren’t jumping in McMartin…oops, I mean caregiver roles in daycares and the likes.

So it’s not all “men give those roles to women because they think women suck”.

It’s more of a “we have an attitude that punishes people who stray from the role that was assigned to them at birth”. And nearly everyone does it to a degree. Parents do it for sure.

“I think that a large number of “men” out there like to sadistically denigrate women – along with the fruits of their labor – in the hopes of damaging their self-esteem and somehow making them more amiable to sex. ”

I think it’s more or less universal to denigrate others you care little about (for most people, and not just men: everyone but their family and friends). Not that it’s good or moral – but people do it often. That’s what bullying is after all. Not everyone bullies directly, but everyone vents, rants, and some groups are easier to attack than others (and those groups are not just ‘men’ or ‘women’, they’re subgroups). Everyone who isn’t like you in some way, whom you think could give you an advantage by being put down. People considered ugly certainly get that treatment, by the people who consider them so.

You think men put down feminine men to have sex with them, too? Everyone guy who commented about it wants to screw Johnny Weir?

“Where do you think the word “virtue” comes from? It’s not really gender-specific today, but it derives from a word that literally meant “manliness” or “positive attributes ascribed to men”.

So, when you hear someone say something like “feminine virtues”, what they’re actually saying is “things that are manly about women”.”

There are two ways to speak of virtue. You used it’s etymology – and the sense most people DON’T know about. The sense most known is the one in Ultima videogames. Something good about you as opposed to something evil about you.

Courage, patience, compassion, empathy. All virtues. Greedyness, gluttony – vices.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

Feminine virtue commonly means Chastity by the way.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

and about “people who get sex change”

Most people don’t sacrifice their health, possibly their attachment to family, friends, their own children, thousands of dollar and voluntarily face incredible discrimination, just to have their pet theory heard, or being taken seriously.

Coming out as trans is usually not a good thing for your career, or your dating prospects. It’s like you contracted leprosy for some people. They’ll justify not hiring you on spurious basis and say it might affect their income if they have you there, even in the back – because what will the clients think?

mediumdave
mediumdave
9 years ago

Schala, you’re being willfully obtuse.

Traindodger, I appreciate you sharing your honest thoughts here. As I said earlier in this thread, I think you recognize that this way of thinking is maladaptive. You really aren’t so unusual… many bright, idealistic young people become frustrated with the messy realties of human relationships, and turn misanthropic as you have. Fortunately, it tends to be a temporary condition. 🙂

The thing is… people are complicated, and we have lots of contradictory thoughts, feelings and desires bouncing around in our heads. It’s true, as you say, that men and women resent one another. But we also genuinely love one another (most of us do, anyway).

BTW, if you’re thinking about seeking professional help, that’s good, but be careful. There’s a great deal of sexism in the “psych” profession still. My own therapist, actually, is a bit old-fashioned in this area even though he’s great in most ways.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

“Schala, you’re being willfully obtuse.”

Because going to look for old meanings that don’t matter for present day words is useful?

In other news, “girl” used to mean “child” (as opposed to female child). In the 1200s. So when we use the word child or children or kid/s, we really mean that they’re all female…

That’s what he did with virtue.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Kratch-I think Kave once explained why the men’s shelter did not get a lot of money. It was not because the government was outright refusing, it was because there was no demand so the government decided to not waste money.

I know! How dare a government at any level be sensible about money! It is unfair I tells you!

But with limited funds and resources, simply saying “well it is not fair to have a woman’s shelter but not a man’s shelter” is not going to change the fact that with no demand, there is no reason to waste the money.

What you could point out is that there is a lot of male on male violence. And work on reducing that while making it more acceptable for men to seek help for female on male violence. That helps with achieving equality-not removing programs for women for the mere fact that may be unfair or unequal to have such programs with no male equivalent.

Oh and no asking feminists or other women to drop their efforts for women to fix the problem. That is unfair to demand that what women are trying to do to help other women should be left alone until men are taken care of.

mediumdave
mediumdave
9 years ago

That’s true, but it’s irrelevant to the point he was making, which was that sexist assumptions are built into our language.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

“Kratch-I think Kave once explained why the men’s shelter did not get a lot of money. It was not because the government was outright refusing, it was because there was no demand so the government decided to not waste money.”

Yes, demand for women’s shelters sprung overnight, because of victims themselves marching in the streets asking the government for them, right?

There was outreach work before they could even ASSESS the demand. And outreach to male victims will be a toughy, since part of the definition of “being a man” is “NOT being a victim” or weak or vulnerable.

So many rationalize that they can NEVER BE victims, regardless of what actually happens. Because men are not victims. Rather circular, but rationalizations often are.

mediumdave
mediumdave
9 years ago

Unwarranted assumption, Schala. “Male victims of DV are too ashamed to seek help” does not imply that there’s a vast, unmet need out there for shelter for them.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

Maybe, but saying “Men don’t need shelters” and “Men are not victims” certainly is not a way to make them come forward (and to who, I might ask?). The 85% figure is also police reports. Hence inaccurate, unless you think rape police reports are an accurate presentation of the rate of occurrance, too (which I personally don’t).

Who would a male victim ask if he wanted a DV for male victims service not too far from his home (like not in another province)? The council of status of women?

There is a vast unmet need simply because there is no offer at all. Go all you want with a “but there’s no demand!” but if you don’t offer anything, no one will come.

mediumdave
mediumdave
9 years ago

blockquote>saying “Men don’t need shelters” and “Men are not victims”

I said neither of those things. I said that a theoretical need is not a demonstrated, actual one.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Schala, there is no “vast unmet need” because we cannot assume that not asking means there is a large need.

There is a need-that much is obvious because there is violence against men by other men and by females or by domestic partners period. But the size of the needs is unknown because no one has bothered to check so best not assume the size.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

You’re not saying that, but I’ve heard and read it.

I’ve seen a shelter that showed on its site a snippet to the effect that 95% of victims are females victim of males, 5% are male victims, including 1% victims of female on male violence (so 4% are male victims of males). No mention at all of female victims of females.

Based on no study at all. Even police statistics are far from this blind.

People on ‘Alas, a blog’, a moderate blog, have said things to the effect that men are richer than women, and often don’t need shelters at all (as a place to stay), are not fearing their spouse (made up assertion, with “common sense”), and so we can safely ignore them.

Shelter staff often treats males who call them as if they were abusers themselves (and it’s not like they got that many places to turn to, either).

Shelters often say they do offer services for males…but only perpetrators – anger management stuff.

And the Duluth model, which posits power and control as a male-exclusive thing, and innate. It’s probably innate (something healthy gone wrong due to bad social variables), but not male-exclusive.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

Toy Soldiers and Daran both have tried to help male victims directly, and seen firsthand that funding could be removed if an organization served male victims at all (even secondary to female victims).

This is both rape and DV shelters and organizations.

Who denied the funding? Those who control it’s dissemination. Ergo, feminist organizations who decide which shelters get funds. Here in Quebec province, the Minister of Culture and Women is who controls that funding at the very top (and is a woman, yes). Then it’s the Council of Status of Women. Then aggregate feminist organizations of which shelters are member of, and lastly, shelters themselves.

Who blocks the funding and says it’s unnecessary?

traindodger
9 years ago

“It’s more of a “we have an attitude that punishes people who stray from the role that was assigned to them at birth”. And nearly everyone does it to a degree. Parents do it for sure.”

Very true, and this is precisely what disappoints me about humanity. On some level, we always feel the need to conveniently file people away into little drawers with clearly-marked labels on them. No wonder I’m such a misanthrope. Ah, see? I just put myself in a file cabinet too.

“I think it’s more or less universal to denigrate others you care little about (for most people, and not just men: everyone but their family and friends). Not that it’s good or moral – but people do it often. That’s what bullying is after all. Not everyone bullies directly, but everyone vents, rants, and some groups are easier to attack than others (and those groups are not just ‘men’ or ‘women’, they’re subgroups). Everyone who isn’t like you in some way, whom you think could give you an advantage by being put down. People considered ugly certainly get that treatment, by the people who consider them so.”

I’m a bit of a black sheep in social settings. I’ve been called names. I’ve had people rip stuff out of my hands to demonstrate to me what they believe is its proper method of use. In conversation, I tend to go on and on about whatever useless trivia that I happen to be obsessed with at the moment. When I’m lazy, I’m the laziest guy on the planet. When I work, I’m a tireless workaholic who won’t put a task down until it’s finished even if I’m commanded to.

I have the face of a serial killer. I can’t help it. Even if I put on a genuine smile, I still look like I’m plotting to put people in bodybags. It doesn’t help that I’m built like an ox. Sometimes, I scare myself when I look in the mirror.

When I grow my facial hair out, people actually physically recoil from me. It’s like I project a dense miasma of negativity that has the power to clear just about any space. I can literally end up having a room all to myself just by being present. Since I enjoy the solitude, that’s more room for me to roam. One time a few years ago, a bunch of dudes playing loud music from their stereo hassled my mom outside our old apartment. I went outside all dressed in black with my mustache grown out, and they bolted like rabbits. I didn’t even say a word. I just frowned at them. They probably thought I was going to rip off their legs and club them to death with them.

But if there’s one thing I’ve never done, it’s bully someone else. I’m a softie on the inside. I’m always polite, courteous and respectful to others. I’m as slow to anger as a human being could possibly be. Do I get any respect for it? No, I don’t. Whenever I’m in a group, people start treating me like… like a woman, or something. Always trying to boss me around, even if it’s completely uncalled-for. What’s the deal? Do I give off some kind of pheromone that says “I’m a woman”, and is that what’s making them act in a controlling manner towards me? Is it a result of my own personal problems or theirs? I can’t tell. At one point, I reasoned that if the treatment I’ve received is anything like the way people treat women, then women have every right to be irate about it. Heck, maybe we all aren’t so different after all.

But still, I just don’t get it. Why am I such a pariah? What is it that compels people to tell me what to do while letting everyone else get away with murder? Why is it that I can see other folks make the same mistakes I do and get a slap on the wrist or a knowing look of camaraderie mixed with mild disappointment, while I – on the other hand – get the full lecture like its the McCarthy era and I’m commie sympathizer? Why is it that I get singled out and made an example of, while others don’t? I asked my dad about it, and to hear it from him, it sounds like it basically runs in the family. Maybe it is in the genes. Maybe I “smell” weird to other people, and it ain’t just personal hygiene or lack thereof. As far as I know, I’m simply the most obnoxious dude in the universe. I also have a tendency to ramble on and on like an idiot about pointless crap, like I’m doing right now. Sorry, can’t help it. All I can do is hope that the rambling and personal anecdotes flesh out my arguments somehow, or lend my grievances some credibility.

The more I learned about this pecking order nonsense, the more I realized that we’re just a bunch of hairless apes who walk upright. The way things are now, if you aren’t a silverback, you’re just an ass in the air waiting to get screwed. Whenever there’s a leadership void, someone always tries to be top dog, even if they have to rip out a few perfectly good throats in the process.

When I hear all those self-help people going blah blah on their talk shows, rambling on about how to “be more assertive”, I hear a bunch of sadists saying “be more like us”. Conform. Follow the herd. That’s all it’s ever really been about. I would have sought therapy ages and ages ago if I didn’t think they’d try to deprogram me and turn me into a mindless sex machine. I’d rather be an obnoxious, rambling little weener than a take-charge jock asshole. Yeah, that’s right. They all hold up “Alpha” as the ideal.

What good is “Alpha”-ness anyway? As far as I can tell, all that jock bullshit did was deplete the ozone layer, drain up aquifers, empty out mines and leave us with seven billion people and counting, whose progeny have a very real chance of starving to death when the century’s up. Civilization’s such a triumph, eh? Well, fuck that. I’d rather live in a tree if it meant I didn’t have to hear about how great and manly those “Alphas” are for stranding humanity in such a precarious fucking position, fuck you all very much. Heck, they’d probably find some way to blame women for it anyway. “I couldn’t help it that I overpopulated! Their vaginas made me do it!”

You think I’m crazy? You think I need therapy? That’s rich. We’ve got FDA-approved poison in our foods. Hedge fund managers sit on their ass and do nothing, all while making money hand over fist. Factory workers in China starve if they don’t do overtime, and political activists over there are executed and their organs given to wealthy transplant tourists. How many women were raped in Sudan in the last minute while we were having this nice little chat? Apparently, sanity entails total apathy, so put those blinders on and get back to work. The government needs your income tax money so the IMF can use it to destabilize some more third-world governments.

Humanity disgusts me. Well, except for my fellow nerds, that is. I get along with Trekkie types just fine. We can sit around and jibber-jabber for hours about things like the performance specifications of a ten-story tall walking robot from an obscure eighties anime while people give us funny looks or put their hands to their mouths to amplify their voice and scream “VIRGINS!” at us.

Yeah, that’s it. Point and laugh all you want. When I build a nuclear-armed walking tank in my garage and the zombie apocalypse comes, then we’ll see who’s laughing.

Needless to say, I got problems. On some level, we all do, but I suppose we try our best. Sometimes, I wonder what for. It’s easy to be nihilistic when your entire species makes a giant douche out of itself on a regular basis. On the other hand, it’s difficult to respect one’s role in a society when you think that civilization itself is simply another form of organized crime.

“You think men put down feminine men to have sex with them, too? Everyone guy who commented about it wants to screw Johnny Weir?”

Actually, you might be onto something there. It could very well be that their revulsion towards him stems from a subconscious rejection of their own latent homosexual attraction to him. Just a theory; I’m no psychoanalyst, but I have a few hunches about how this stuff works.

“Because going to look for old meanings that don’t matter for present day words is useful?”

Etymological origins of words do matter when you’re sniffing out the subtext behind them. The example that I used – virtue – contains the “vir-” prefix which means “of a male”.

If you think about it long enough, you eventually realize that the essence of the word means “to be good, courageous and morally-upright is to be like a man”. In other words, “man = good, woman = bad”.

The English language has some sexist hold-overs from its forebears. I mean, we don’t even have a proper gender-neutral singular third-person pronoun (singular they is a grammatical abortion, in my humble opinion), and the feminine versions of the names for some professions and titles are just variations of the masculine ones, which is why we have suffixes like “-ess” and “-trix”.

In summary, I think that female sexuality itself is precisely why MRAs are so violently opposed to feminism. For them, it just doesn’t compute. The whole idea of women being treated with respect on the same level as men is completely illogical to them.

To an MRA, the penis is a literal siege engine, and the vagina is a fortress waiting to have its gates smashed in. The fortress cannot approach the battering ram; it’s supposed to be rooted to the ground, immobile and helpless. Even if the fortress could sprout legs and approach the battering ram, what would it do then? Demand to have its gates smashed in?

As you all no doubt realize, there’s a double standard where males are expected to obtain sex like it’s a trophy, and women are expected to guard their genitalia from it for as long as is humanly possible.

Feminism changes this sorry state of affairs. It offers to basically take female sexuality – which has long been restricted and controlled by men – and give women the reins like they should’ve had all along. Naturally, this incites fear and jealousy from men, who begin to see women as competitors on the sexual battlefield and not simply fixed fortifications.

MRAs view such women as mercenaries who will “do anything or anyone for money”, while seeing themselves as true patriots who fight solely for the good of their tribe and not for personal gain. They think that these women are trying to “whore themselves out” to the other tribes (read: other men), and this makes them green with envy. So, naturally, they shout “get back in the castle, where you belong”, or something of that nature.

To the chauvinist male mind, power and control of any variety comes strictly from other males. If a woman is not obeying you, then she’s obeying another man. If she’s not obeying that man, she’s obeying a third, as-yet unseen man. It never occurs to them that a woman could basically be obeying herself, following her own directives and setting her own goals like a normal human being. They cannot even comprehend the idea. They think that women are physically incapable of not being led around by the nose 24/7, and for what it’s worth, that perception colors their entire worldview.

After you redefine the language, you need to redefine sex itself. You need to get rid of the notion of sex “defiling” women, otherwise the above scenario will continue to play out in the back of people’s minds.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Pecunium “ Also, when did the subject move from abuse by males vs. abuse by females to abuse to children?

When you claimed that women were sensationalized in the media for violence because it was more rare.

Nonsense. I made an apples to apples comparison. You changed it to artichokes. This discussion isn’t about “misandristic attitude”, it’s about misogyny.

The claim you are making is that feminism, by it’s very nature is unreasonabl. Simone de Beauvoir said, Man is defined as a human being and a woman as a female – whenever she behaves as a human being she is said to imitate the male. . Schala makes much the same claim in her definitions of, “male/female” behavior.

Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler made it plain what it is you, and yours, find extreme in feminsism. feminism is the radical notion that women are people..

When you say we won’t choose to look, and so not see the, “radical nature” of feminism you make mistakes. The primary one is the category error of assuming anyone who does look must see it your way. Do I think all feminism is well thought out? No.

But those failures don’t negate the actual harms feminism talks about. I could argue your blinkered idea that Men are being oppressed, and villified unjustly is because you refuse to look at the facts. That you won’t admit to the truth.

That’s your argument. It’s nonsense, because it only allows for one correct answer.

Men make up half the population. Men are the greater number of partner abusers. Men are socialised to think this is, at the very least, the way things are. You are in denial about it. When pressed you change the topic. I won’t say you like that. I won’t even say you Mwant to perpetuate the problem. I will say you don’t give a damn about stopping it.

Because guess what… if the general idea is that abuse is bad… abuse will decline across the board.

But you have a hair up your ass that men are being accused of something you don’t want to think is true, so you go on about how this is unfair. The stats don’t support you. I can offer any number of sources, but you will find a justification to dismiss each of them.

MRAL is at least honest. He says he doesn’t care about the studies. He doesn’t believe them. You shuck and jive, but it’s all smoke and mirrors. There is no meat on the bones of your argument. Persiflage and empty rhetoric.

But I’ll give you this, you aren’t a lazy conspiracy theorist.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

“But if there’s one thing I’ve never done, it’s bully someone else. I’m a softie on the inside. I’m always polite, courteous and respectful to others. I’m as slow to anger as a human being could possibly be. Do I get any respect for it? No, I don’t. Whenever I’m in a group, people start treating me like… like a woman, or something.”

It’s all about resentment for past hurts they get out on you.

The one person who bossed me the most around…has been my younger step-sister (not blood related), because everything had to be micro-managed her way (or her mother’s way).

She didn’t treat me “as a woman”, she treated me as a slob (anything less than perfection is a slob) because I wasn’t up to their cleanliness standards. I would keep papers on my desk, and do the dishes once a day or when needed. With them it was no papers, dishes every meal, right after it.

I did feel bad about being controlled and also more or less forced into this arrangement (I didn’t pick my mother’s girlfriend for him, but had nowhere else to go).

traindodger
9 years ago

“It’s all about resentment for past hurts they get out on you.”

Yeah, well maybe if people stopped hurting each other…

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

“Man is defined as a human being and a woman as a female – whenever she behaves as a human being she is said to imitate the male. . Schala makes much the same claim in her definitions of, “male/female” behavior.”

I’m describing other people’s definition. Not my definition.

When I use quotes like “this”, I mean that someone else said it, or I don’t believe it myself (the term itself). Like say “change sex”. It’s an inaccurate term, because, as I said, I was always female.

If people say that they’ve been told all their lives that to be weak, vulnerable or a victim was unthinkable for a man, that it meant his failure as a human…well yes, some will internalize it.

I personally don’t, but being aspie means questioning what is thought to be common sense or wisdom. I’m also very “outside the box” in thinking, like traindodger.

“As for the fact that some people are opposed to this funding, well, guess what? Every single political and social movement has faced opposition. ”

What is especially damning is that people who claim to be for equality are fine with stepping on victims for ideology’s sake.

When a theory doesn’t fit the facts…rethink the theory, don’t dismiss the facts.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Schala: Once again, I must stress that this is my own personal interpretation of what is stereotypically defined as masculine or feminine in extreme cases,

That’s not quoting other people.

Schala
Schala
9 years ago

@David

Well, as someone said before, maybe on some other blog: feminists and people of color and lesbian+gay and transgender, and bisexual movements have a bit of an advantage in terms of organizing. They’re older, they got government backing in some way.

You’re expecting the MRM to be as advanced and mature.

Back in the 70s and second wave feminism’s nascence, it was extreme, vocal to the limit, hateful in many respects, also transphobic and racist, and definitely misandrist.

But hey, it needed to start this way to get heard at all. Same for men’s rights. Squeaky wheel and all.