The Man Boobz Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider clicking the little button below and sending some bucks my way.
Thanks! (And thanks again to all who’ve already donated.) Now back to our regularly scheduled programming:
So over on A Voice for Men, young Jason Gregory seems faintly jealous that young women who put up dating profiles online tend to get flooded with messages — and the occasional dick pic — from horny guys.
F]ree cock is everywhere. Men give it away like it’s worthless. … I doubt that it is unusual at all for a woman to get 300 messages in her inbox from men who are desperate for female affection, approval, and sex. There is no doubt in my mind that men send “dick-pics” and clamor, bother, and sometimes harass women for their affections and attentions.
But Jason feels no sympathy for young women who put up profiles hoping to meet some nice young fellow who’s also into Sherlock and Neil Gaiman and Indian food and instead get messages from guys who introduce themselves by expressing a desire to ejaculate in their hair.
No, Jason is angry because he’s convinced all these offers of “free cock” only serve to make the women of the world into snooty-stuck stuck-up so-and-sos who think they’re all that and a folder full of dick pics.
All you men who give it away, all you do is reinforce the entitlement mentality of women who believe that their being present is plenty. You reinforce the idea that women don’t owe anything to the relationship—that they deserve a free-ride of cocks and that they don’t even have to break a sweat.
Jason, I should add, means this last bit literally. He’s resentful that when he allegedly engages in the act of coitus he has to do all the work while his alleged partners allegedly lie there like inflatable love-dolls.
Anyhoo,.Jason has a plan to take these stuck-up ladies down a peg or two: A cock strike.
Yep, he wants men to start saying “no” to women who are interested in them, just to see how they like it. But he doesn’t want them to just say no. He wants them to be giant dicks about it.
Try telling a girl no. Tell her, after she makes it clear that she wants your cock, that you’re not interested in giving it to her. Tell her that she isn’t interesting, that her soul is dog-shit and that she has nothing to offer other than boobs and booty, that she is a piece of shit and a total failure as a human being, that you don’t find her attractive and that she isn’t even good enough to be a cum-bucket. Tell her that she is never going to be any good at sucking cock and that she needs to stop pretending that she is doing any favors and learn to compensate for her inadequacies by becoming “kinky.” Tell her that her vapid life of shoes and pop-culture and materialism are soulless pursuits of dog-shit. Watch what happens. If you Jez-ladies wanna know what “hostile” means, see this rejected woman.
Emphasis mine.
A Voice for Men, you may recall, sees itself as leading the most important civil rights movement of the 21st century. I am sure Jason Gregory’s post here will be remembered alongside Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail as a classic in civil rights literature.
EDIT: I added a couple more “allegedlys” to a sentence I thought needed them.
Re these fake profiles as experiments:
1. need to take account of the hypothesis, as this affects study design
2. the experience of females was already replicated before the guy reported on Jezebel did his experiment.
In any study, the hypothesis is important. The key hypothesis here seemed to be “female profiles on OKCupid [or dating sites generally] can get unwanted attention that escalates rapidly”. That hypothesis has already been tested by the lived experience of others posting here, well in advance of when that guy did. This type of hypothesis is not disproved by some people getting different results, because it is not trying to produce prevalence estimates, but simply asks “is this possible”?
In order to get prevalence estimates, a lot more than one profile is required in the study. Because prevalence estimates are linked to time, it is not possible to take a bunch of single case studies, all using various profile types, and bunch them together to estimate a prevalence. That is not retrospective data, it is ad hoc-ery and not an accepted scientific method.
So, YMMV with respect to any results you get. But one profile generating a different result is insufficient to disprove what I believe is the key hypothesis (i.e. the one actually being tested).
Ah, okay. However, you still might run into problems later on with guys who view porn as an accurate depiction of sexuality.
“Ooh, real-life yuri! They’ll even let me join in!” said the creepy otaku.
God, I know these guys way too well. …I’ve been studying psychology way too long.
Once again the little boys are having a temper tantrum. Nothing to see here, move along.
Yes, the ‘can I join in’ guys are v. annoying. Never ever got a woman send me that kind of message. Many messages from people/couples straight up asking me to join them for a threesome, but none of them ever pressed the issue at least.
It was always just guys – either in the first message or two, or you’d chat a little bit, think “Oh hey this guy seems cool” and then BAM all kinds of nonsense would start coming out – asking if they could watch/join in, trying to get you to tell them lesbian/group sex stories, going on about how wonderful bi girls are, guys who fantasise about turning you straight…eeww.
Oh boy, don’t think I’m going to dip my toe back into the online dating pool after reading through this thread . . .
Curious if anyone here has any good suggestions for alternatives to meet men for dating . . .seems like it’s so much about online these days, and . . . yuck.
it’s possible that buttboy didn’t get a bunch of creepy messages. Full disclosure: I’ve actually never really been sexually harassed, online or in person. Maybe I’m randomly the Holy Grail of harassment-proof traits, maybe it’s just coincidence, but either way It Doesn’t Matter with respect to the general trend because my experience is the aberration, not the norm.
I made an OKC profile a couple of days ago and I haven’t gotten a single message, creepy or otherwise. Is it weird that this makes me feel insecure? I’d say it’s because I’m only looking for friends, but that’s never stopped creepers on other sites (or OKC last time I was single).
Maybe there just aren’t as many creeps in the Boston area.
So much for reading comprehension. Jezebel did not conduct the experiment, a guy on Reddit did. Jezebel merely did a post about his Reddit post.
The key hypothesis here seemed to be “female profiles on OKCupid [or dating sites generally] can get unwanted attention that escalates rapidly”.
No, I was specifically testing the redditor’s story. Whether or not women get a lot of crude messages on OKCupid, that specific anecdote seemed over-the-top.
Also, it wasn’t a scientific experiment, it was a personal exercise for me to confirm what I already strongly suspected, that being that the anecdote was pretty obviously fabricated.
@grumpycatisagirl – this might sound a bit trite but mixed sports clubs/teams/other interest/volunteering groups are good places to meet people, some of whom you may want to date. or who have friends you may want to date. without any pressure resulting from anybody expecting you to want to date IYKWIM. plus no dick pics. probably.
@emilygoddess – i changed to just looking for friends and messages dropped right off to one or two every few days. a couple of them would still be asking if the ‘friends’ came with benefits though. i changed my location to my other city and got nothing at all. creeps may not be evenly distributed. hmmm.
Well, then you’re being even stupider. You can’t verify the truth of a story by replication. If your friend trips on the sidewalk and rolls his ankle, you don’t walk down the same stretch of sidewalk without tripping and then declare him a liar, do you?
If you’d already decided it was false, why bother trying to test it at all?
Got news for ya buddy, your story is just as anecdotal.
Well, not a MAN, obviously. Don’t you know? It’s only women’s lived experiences that are faulty.
Even if he was trying for replication he didn’t, since he didn’t make the profile available to casual sex and won’t answer whether he replied to the interested gentlemen. And god only knows what kind of obvious trollbait the profile looks like, since he conveniently refuses to share that too.
It doesn’t matter if it was unscientific. You did the exercise to confirm your belief that the story was nonsense, yet you didn’t even fully replicate the story. You have no reason to conclude that the redditor’s story is made up by confirming with a test that is, for all intents and purposes, not identical to the test that the redditor did.
“Also, it wasn’t a scientific experiment, it was a personal exercise for me to confirm what I already strongly suspected…”
Oh buttboy, don’t ever change! <3 <3 <3
This would also account for the discrepancy if Buttboy tried the same thing as the Redditor and got different results. (A big “if”, I know)
So basically, buttboy was looking for confirmation of a hypothesis he’d already decided was correct. Gee, I think there’s a word or phrase to describe that. What’s that called again?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Not a regular commenter & I can’t speak for anyone else here, but I’d like to respond to Snorkmadien.
I thought Freemage’s correction of Jojo’s language was done gently & assuming he/she meant no offense. I don’t think the aggressive comments about Jojo leaving came out until he/she reacted by getting extremely deffensive and angry about the correction and stating basically ‘if I can’t talk how I want, I’m leaving.’ He/she also said the correction was bullying.
Regardless of whether a word bothers/offends you personally, if you are in a group and most of the group finds it offensive, it isn’t bullying for them to say so and state they don’t want that here.
It is hard to not use words that are pervasive in our culture, especially if the word nevet seemed offensive to you. If someone says it hurts them, I think using a less problematic/charged word shouldn’t be too much to ask or be confused with bullying.
Hope that makes sense & I’m not trying to say anything bad about a poster, just explaining things as I read them
This is irrelevant, but last night I googled “Wikipedia” and the first result was the Wikipedia article on Wikipedia. Which details all the criticisms people have about Wikipedia.
Whoa. That’s meta.
Total ouroboros moment.
Snorkmaiden, I think you could have made your point without dismissive phrases like “gets the vapors”. People feeling hurt by things you don’t personally find hurtful doesn’t make them hypersensitive or old-fashioned or whatever you were trying to convey with that word choice.
I also have a mental illness and don’t find the word “crazy” offensive or ableist, but I don’t use it here because other members of the community find it upsetting. It’s not that fucking hard.
OMG, I just saw this posted over on Captain Awkward and it seems appropriate considering the conversation about turning down creepy internet dudebros. I hope the embed link thingy works. I’m totally using this as a response to inappropriate people from now on!
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75aGG27dGUA&w=560&h=315%5D