So a bunch of the regulars on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit have their collective knickers in a twist about dudes getting called “pedophiles” just for saying they think 14-year old girls are hot. Because that’s “ephebephilia,” dontchaknow, not pedophilia! And besides, thingsarebad argues
Normal heterosexual males will generally have sexual attraction for pubescent females of child-bearing age, from puberty till they start to get old and gross (late 20s, early 30s usually haha).
That’s pretty much “eww.” But so is the rest of the discussion, really, from this “joke” about all women being as immature as children to this heavily upvoted claim that feminists have created a “pedo-scare … to criminalize healthy and normal male sexuality,” to this Evo-Psych-flavored argument for lowering the age of consent.
Is it just me or are dudes who get indignant when people don’t carefully distinguish between ephebephilia and pedophilia just really really creepy?
Is “the right to lust after underage girls without having to feel icky about it” really a Men’s Rights issue? Why this preoccupation with 14-year-old girls, on r/mensrights and Reddit generally?
Nobody is demonising men for being attracted to young, attractive women. (14 year old girls? Not women.) I completely disagree that men are naturally polygamous, so we’ll skip over that. I also disagree that men don’t value status and women do, and think the claim that men value fertility to such a high degree is similarly ludicrous (hey, say you meet a woman who’s absolutely stunning and clicks perfectly with you in every way – but she’s infertile? I’m gonna guess you wouldn’t be too hasty to break it off based on that alone).
“Men are perverts for not valuing status to the degree that women do, rather focusing on fertility and physical beauty. Men treat women as sex objects (let’s not talk about the fact that women treat men as status objects).”
OK, but looking at that from a feminist perspective, we would argue that men and women are valued differently. Women are told that their value lies in being sexual objects – being beautiful. Or perhaps in our ability to create other people – not necessarily for being people ourselves. Men, by contrast, are valued for having good jobs, power, money, being strong etc.
Is it really surprising then, in this culture which feminists are trying to change so that people are all viewed as human beings, that men *tend to* value women for their physical attrativeness and women *tend to* value men for their ‘status’? I’m not saying that this is right, I’m saying that when it is the case it is more to do with anti-feminist constructions of men and women than with feminists demonizing male sexuality.
“I also disagree that men don’t value status and women do”
Well, you see, Yoon, that I never said that. I said that men don’t value status TO THE DEGREE THAT WOMEN DO.
Men don’t really value fertility – they value hot bodies and cute faces, which are indications of fertility and good DNA, whether you like it not.
“(hey, say you meet a woman who’s absolutely stunning and clicks perfectly with you in every way – but she’s infertile? I’m gonna guess you wouldn’t be too hasty to break it off based on that alone).”
Um, see the above. You do have an IQ above 100, I hope?
“OK, but looking at that from a feminist perspective, we would argue that men and women are valued differently. Women are told that their value lies in being sexual objects – being beautiful. Or perhaps in our ability to create other people – not necessarily for being people ourselves. Men, by contrast, are valued for having good jobs, power, money, being strong etc.
Is it really surprising then, in this culture which feminists are trying to change so that people are all viewed as human beings, that men *tend to* value women for their physical attrativeness and women *tend to* value men for their ‘status’? I’m not saying that this is right, I’m saying that when it is the case it is more to do with anti-feminist constructions of men and women than with feminists demonizing male sexuality.”
Women *are* viewed as human beings, and they always have been. Women’s survival has always been more important than men’s and even children’s – looking the statistics for the dead on the Titanic. http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/mens-issues/titanic-day-ll/
The feminist ideal is not that women are viewed as human beings, as women are already viewed as above men. It’s that women are given even further special privileges and entitlements, while men are viewed as sub-human.
On to another point.
Men and women *are* valued differently, dependent on what they contribute. Men are often valued for their sacrifices, for their physical prowess, for their ability to handle situations, their physical beauty, while women are often valued for the same things, though perhaps in different ratios.
Men are treated as status/utility objects while women may be treated as objects of sex appeal (as always, I mean for both of these examples that this is most often the case, not always: a woman who kicks ass in her career is seen as kick-ass, not as a sex object, just as man who fucks a bunch of chicks is seen as a sex object, not as successful in the typical sense).
Yes, men and women tend to be valued differently. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with this. Men and women *are* different.
“Men don’t really value fertility – they value hot bodies and cute faces, which are indications of fertility and good DNA, whether you like it not.
“(hey, say you meet a woman who’s absolutely stunning and clicks perfectly with you in every way – but she’s infertile? I’m gonna guess you wouldn’t be too hasty to break it off based on that alone).”
Um, see the above. You do have an IQ above 100, I hope?”
Quoted for disingenuousness. You did not, initially, say that men value hot bodies and cute faces which are incidentally indications of fertility – you said they valued fertility. So you clarified your position, then quoted someone who refuted your original position and implicitly called them an idiot for not knowing, through telepathic communication or something, what you meant.
Do you have an IQ above 100? Expecting people to magically understand your point ahead of you actually clarifying it indicates sub-par intelligence to me.
“I completely disagree that men are naturally polygamous”
Lol, forgot to include this. You obviously have no idea what male sexuality is about. No wonder you’re so confused.
Thingsarebad, you said looks-not looks and personality. You are moving the goal posts.
Well, though I’m sure you know more about what women want than an actual woman, I don’t value status. I don’t care about it. Neither do any of the women I know. When we discuss men, do you know what we talk about? We talk about – surprise! – cute faces and hot bodies. Then we talk about whether he’s funny, or has good manners, and also about whether or not he seems angry and bitter with women for existing.
I’m assuming when you say “status” you mean job, money, power. Yes, women did value that very highly in the past, because a woman was forced to rely on her parents and then on her husband in order to survive. If you update your view of the world to 2011 you’ll find we don’t really care anymore.
Not the Titanic thing again! It is, at best, questionable evidence for your argument that women have *always* been viewed as human beings. Were they viewed as human beings when denied the vote or the ability to own land or to go to university?
The ‘women and children’ first thing, was, I would argue, about women and children being viewed as similarly weak and vulnerable, and men as strong and chivalrous. You might be aware of the meme, ‘patriarchy hurts men too’ – and this is one of the instances.
Sorry, Lyn, but you’re wrong.
I said, specifically, the following: “Men are perverts for being attracted to young, fertile, attractive women.”
I did not say men valued fertility, but that they are attracted to women who are young, fertile, and attractive. Implicitly, this means most of the time. Most of the women that men are attracted to are young, fertile, and attractive. This does not necessarily mean that men are attracted to fertility – though I would say that men are attractive to young and attractive women who *seem* to be fertile.
Honestly, my dear, I’m of the same opinion as codebuster of The-Spearhead, that the idea that men and women are attracted to each other because of biological need, directly, is preposterous. Men don’t like women because they are fertile! Men like women because they are fucking sexy (sometimes). It just so happens that we evolved to think that women showing the signs of fertility are sexy. An old hag who can’t bear children is usually not that attractive to men.
“Do you have an IQ above 100? Expecting people to magically understand your point ahead of you actually clarifying it indicates sub-par intelligence to me.”
Honestly, it’s hard being a genius in a world of idiots. I have to clarify points that should be blatantly obvious, but to most imbeciles they are not. 🙂
“Were they viewed as human beings when denied the vote or the ability to own land or to go to university?”
Well, they weren’t. Land owners were granted the right to vote. Not male land owners. Land owners.
Women also gained the right to vote without being subjected to the draft. So unlike men, who fought and died for their right to vote, women got it free o’ charge. As is so often the case, women got their rights without the associated responsibilities. And it’s so weird that women and men alike fought for the right for women to vote, but not the right for women to fight and die in war against their will. Hm!
“The ‘women and children’ first thing, was, I would argue, about women and children being viewed as similarly weak and vulnerable”
And obviously, women endorse this view. Women endorse the idea that they are special, privileged little girls who have little to no responsibility for their actions when it suits them. At the same time, they endorse the idea that they should have all the rights of men, who are actually responsible for their actions.
Women demand special treatment. They demanded – and accepted – that they got special treatment over little fucking children on the Titanic. They demand – and accept – that they get special privileges over men in college, in the legal system, in every aspect of society.
There are a few women out there who point these imbalances in favor of women, and the resulting demonization of men and boys, out. Maybe you should read them sometime.
Planning on having children someday? Read Christina Hoff Sommers’ “The War Against Boys”.
Uh, you brought up fertility as one of the three main things men are attracted to in women – and contended that society apparently thinks that men are perverts for thinking this. If fertility isn’t that important, why bring it up? And we’re supposed to know by magic that you think it’s less important than the other two things you listed?
Again, if you clarify your point and then call someone an idiot for not getting the point that you just clarified…well, that’s shifting the goalposts, among other things.
“Uh, you brought up fertility as one of the three main things men are attracted to in women”
No, I didn’t. Do you not understand the English language?
I said the following, quite clearly:
“Men are perverts for being attracted to young, fertile, attractive women.”
This not me saying that fertility is “one of the three main things men are attracted to in women”.
Jesus. Seriously, do you not understand the English language?
I’m just going to leave this study here.
Key quote: “True to the stereotypes, the initial self-reports of male participants indicated that they cared more than women about a romantic partner’s physical attractiveness, and the women in the study stated more than men that earning power was an aphrodisiac,” said Paul Eastwick, lead author of the study and graduate student in psychology in the Weinberg School of Arts and Sciences at Northwestern.
But in reality men and women were equally inspired by physical attraction and equally inspired by earning power or ambition. “In other words good looks was the primary stimulus of attraction for both men and women, and a person with good earning prospects or ambition tended to be liked as well,” said Eli Finkel, assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern. “Most noteworthy, the earning-power effect as well as the good-looks effect didn’t differ for men and women.”
>If fertility isn’t that important, why bring it up?
Jesus.
Okay, let me explain. *Perceived* fertility is important. Superficial perception of fertility. Understand yet? What appears to be the signs of fertility to a normal heterosexual male happen to be the same things that attract normal heterosexual males. Are you completely bamboozled by feminist propaganda?
Think for yourself, God Damn.
When women are denied the ability to own land, and owning land is required to vote, that then means that women can’t vote. It’s not hard if you think it through.
Also, women didn’t demand that right to get on the boats first. In the situation where the phrase was coined, soldiers insisted that women get on the boat first: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Birkenhead_%281845%29
As to the draft = vote thing – do men have to risk their lives in childbirth to create more citizens? Not so much. Also, not allowing women to fight is part of a sexist policy, not a feminist one – it is predicated on an understanding that women are inferior and that their main function is to create babies. I do not support forcing anyone of either gender to fight, but I do support the right of both genders to volunteer to fight.
And, I’m a woman, and I don’t want any special treatment – I want to be respected for my ideas and arguments and abilities, such as they are. That means that, if I’m raped, I would like to go to a courtroom where my voice was heard and respected rather than being dismissed as unreliable because I don’t live up to some mythical understanding of how women should be.
I’ve also read plenty on the subject, thank-you. I disagree with many of the women and men who argue that women are privileged in our society – after reading about the systematic denial of women’s voices, reproductive rights, sexual autonomy throughout much of history.
“But in reality men and women were equally inspired by physical attraction and equally inspired by earning power or ambition.”
I’ll happily admit that men are attracted to women for their personality (power or ambition), not just their physical attractiveness. But it’s well-known, and easily proven, that far, far, far, far, far more men would date a woman without a job, than women who would date a man without a job.
The vast majority of the homeless are men. Why? Because men are happy to take in homeless women, while women are not willing to take in homeless men.
It should be obvious that women are far more “inspired” (turned on by) power or ambition.
Pro-tip for you TAB: Creating a straw feminist to argue against isn’t a powerful argument. It just makes you a fucking idiot. Also, the Titanic has been done to death. Seriously, find a better argument that indicates power and privilege across a swath of history. Not patriarchal ideals hurting everyone.
Christ, Things Are Bad. We all understand what you were trying to say, whether we agree with it or not, the issue was the actual clarity with which you expressed that initially. There is no confusion! FFS, stop being obtuse.
And on another point. It’s not “men are polygynous”, it’s “humans are polyamorous.” Women catch quite a bit more flak for acting on that, so I’m not sure why you think stigma for this is some special snowflake cross men, and men alone have to bear. The MRA community certainly does it’s share of bitching that women don’t stick with only one partner for life.
Plus, the only time I actually see anyone criticize men for this is when they are not being honestly polyamorous, but trying to have their cake and eat it too by pretending to be monogamous.
Damn italics tags.
Things Are Bad, condescendingly calling women who dare to disagree with you “my dear” and getting frustrated when they don’t interpret what you say in a way that paints you in a sympathetic light will not win you any points. Please try to engage with the women debating with you as if they are human beings on the same level as you, because right now you’re treating us like stupid little children.
On a similar note, I’m quite sick of men who have never been and never will be drafted crying about the draft. Once you’ve been drafted, then you can use it as proof that you’re discriminated against.
“When women are denied the ability to own land”
Lol.
“In the beginning, almost no one could vote. It was a right reserved for a few older white males who owned land, which left almost all men and a lot of other people out of the picture. This doesn’t say anything particularly special about women. So if this constituted oppression, then it meant that nearly everyone was oppressed. Maybe the early Americans didn’t catch on to that one because they were too busy celebrating their new found freedom.”
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/the-myth-of-womens-oppression/
“The same was true for owning land. Plenty of women weren’t allowed to…for a while, anyway. It probably had something to do with the fact that it was men who had to have land on which to build women homes, or perhaps they figured that men who were expected to face bullets in order to protect that land might be better, more deserving keepers of it.”
“As to the draft = vote thing – do men have to risk their lives in childbirth to create more citizens? Not so much.”
That is such a ridiculous comparison that I might have to label you a complete misandric idiot.
“And, I’m a woman, and I don’t want any special treatment”
Huh-what??
“As to the draft = vote thing – do men have to risk their lives in childbirth to create more citizens? Not so much.”
Anyways…
“That means that, if I’m raped, I would like to go to a courtroom where my voice was heard and respected rather than being dismissed as unreliable because I don’t live up to some mythical understanding of how women should be.
Oh God, please don’t play the rape card. We all know all women are raped repeatedly, every day. Oh, what? More men are raped than women every year? Half of all rape accusations (by women, at least) are false? Huh-what?
“I disagree with many of the women and men who argue that women are privileged in our society”
Oh, God Damn right you are privileged, you stupid cunt. Imagine the response if you were a man and I had just called you a stupid dick. Lackluster. But boy, I called you a stupid cunt, and just because you are a man-hating twat! I must be a misogynist, who hates women only! No, bitch, women *are* privileged, and you love it.
And TAB has truly proven that he is a misogynistic asshole who can’t engage in any reasonable discourse for his head is so far inserted into his own ass that he must wear sunglasses to protect the shining ignorance that permeates his entire core.
So, TAB, your fiancee knows that you consider her a “privileged little girl” who shouldn’t have the same legal rights as a man, that you don’t think she can compete with any given teenager in the “looks department” now that she’s an old hag of 25, and that you plan to cheat on her regularly (men are naturally polygamous and if she doesn’t accept that she just doesn’t understand men, right?)… but she still wants to marry you?
I agree with your plan to hang on to this one for dear life.
“And on another point. It’s not “men are polygynous”, it’s “humans are polyamorous.”
I found your comment the only one worth responding to. Men are polygamous, and women are hypergamous. Men and women are not the same, and they are not “polyamorous” to the same degree. Men’s natural polygamy, characterized as “sex addiction” by the mainstream media and women who think their SO’s shouldn’t masturbate to other women (almost all western women), is, like I said, natural. Just as women’s hypergamy, meaning they seek out high status men who get their knickers wet, is natural.