The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 04-22-2017, 07:34 PM
Spice Weasel Spice Weasel is offline
Knocking it up a notch. BAM!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I have to ask, do these "feminist" men still turn into blubbering idiots when they see a woman flashing alot of cleavage or otherwise, showing off alot of skin? Are they even turned on by big boobs or does that part of man-think go away?
I read this to my husband. His response was:

*broad grin* ''Boobies.''

You seem to think that feminism and masculinity in men are mutually exclusive. In reality, whether someone exhibits feminine or masculine traits has nothing to do with whether they view women as equals. The idea that embracing gender equality takes away one's manliness is just something misogynists made up to feel better about being assholes.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #102  
Old 04-22-2017, 08:40 PM
Velocity Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
I read this to my husband. His response was:

*broad grin* ''Boobies.''

You seem to think that feminism and masculinity in men are mutually exclusive. In reality, whether someone exhibits feminine or masculine traits has nothing to do with whether they view women as equals. The idea that embracing gender equality takes away one's manliness is just something misogynists made up to feel better about being assholes.
This reminds me of another observation; that many feminist women are as likely, or almost as likely, as non-feminist women to be attracted to men who are tall, wealthy, ambitious, confident, older, etc. - in other words, embodying the "traditional" manly image of a man, even though that may be associated as more 'patriarchal'.

Being feminist or non-feminist often doesn't change biology or biological attraction/preference.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 04-23-2017, 12:12 AM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 18,502
Being attracted to women doesn't require one to exhibit masculine personality and behavioral traits, nor does an embrace of feminist perspectives require one to relinquish tendencies to be attracted to women. The impact of feminist perspectives on masculine traits is less clear-cut: it is a perspective that tends to revalorize many traits considered feminine, and to examine conventional masculinity with a critical eye. But to the extent that we're talking about attributes of personality rather than socially loaded examples of privilege, it does at most formidable merely undo a bit of enshrining of some masculine characteristics.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 04-23-2017, 08:40 AM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
What?

You want to know if a man who lets a woman hold a door for him "even likes to look at tits anymore". What the fuck does that have to do with catching a glimpse of someone's breasts when they bend over? Are you saying that men mostly hold doors for women so they can look down their shirts as they pass, and that men who let women open doors must be perversly willing to forgo the opportunity?
Well no, you still dont get what I meant. I was asking do feminist men still get turned on by women's bodies?

It's like back in college. When the women would go lay out in their bikinis to get some sun, I suddenly had an urge to go play frisbie near them.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 04-23-2017, 08:42 AM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
I read this to my husband. His response was:

*broad grin* ''Boobies.''

You seem to think that feminism and masculinity in men are mutually exclusive. In reality, whether someone exhibits feminine or masculine traits has nothing to do with whether they view women as equals. The idea that embracing gender equality takes away one's manliness is just something misogynists made up to feel better about being assholes.
Add onto that, I dont think any man can say the word "panties" without smiling.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 04-23-2017, 09:09 AM
Manda JO Manda JO is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 9,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well no, you still dont get what I meant. I was asking do feminist men still get turned on by women's bodies?

It's like back in college. When the women would go lay out in their bikinis to get some sun, I suddenly had an urge to go play frisbie near them.
Why wouldn't they? What on earth do you think "feminist" means?
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 04-23-2017, 09:10 AM
JackieLikesVariety JackieLikesVariety is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
apparently he thinks it means they are gay.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 04-23-2017, 11:02 AM
Spice Weasel Spice Weasel is offline
Knocking it up a notch. BAM!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
This reminds me of another observation; that many feminist women are as likely, or almost as likely, as non-feminist women to be attracted to men who are tall, wealthy, ambitious, confident, older, etc. - in other words, embodying the "traditional" manly image of a man, even though that may be associated as more 'patriarchal'.

Being feminist or non-feminist often doesn't change biology or biological attraction/preference.
Well, sure. In many cases that is probably true. I do know people whose preferences have changed as they examined their own prejudices, but I find it unlikely that I will ever not be attracted to masculinity. My husband is 5'7'' and 160 pounds - not a masculine stereotype. He's gorgeous, but I didn't notice that until after fell in love with him. I fell in love with him because he is kind, intelligent, and gentle. So there's a difference between what one is naturally biologically attracted to and what one looks for in a mate. We look for shared values, wanting basically the same things out of life, and the ability to work as a team to achieve financial stability. We look for ''Can I spend 18 hours on a cross-country road trip with this person and not want to strangle him?" Whether he fits the biological stereotype of the ideal manly man is really way far down on my list of priorities.

To clarify: I have no problem with men being manly. I have a problem when men feel constant pressure to always be manly, at the cost of their mental health, and I have a problem when men are punished for displaying feminine traits. I also have a problem when manliness is associated with aggressive and controlling and abusive behavior toward women. I see them as two separate concepts that are often conflated.

Last edited by Spice Weasel; 04-23-2017 at 11:05 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 04-23-2017, 12:04 PM
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well no, you still dont get what I meant. I was asking do feminist men still get turned on by women's bodies?
I guess I still don't get it either. Do you equate "male feminist=gay"?
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 04-23-2017, 12:15 PM
DrFidelius DrFidelius is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 11,752
Maybe he's confused since feminist sounds a little like effeminate or feminine.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
__________________
The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not represent any other persons, organizations, spirits, thinking machines, hive minds or other sentient beings on this world or any adjacent dimensions in the multiverse.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 04-23-2017, 02:20 PM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 18,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I guess I still don't get it either. Do you equate "male feminist=gay"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFidelius View Post
Maybe he's confused since feminist sounds a little like effeminate or feminine.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Don't matter. Effeminate and/or feminine also doesn't equate to gay.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 04-24-2017, 12:27 AM
ruadh ruadh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
I think UrbanRedneck is supposing that feminists think there's something inherently sexist about being sexually attracted to women's bodies, and that "male feminists" have somehow unlearned this attraction as part of their feministisation process.

I'm not sure if it's a serious question or not but it's not totally off the wall. The way that some feminists carry on about "objectification" of women, it almost does seem as though they find the very idea problematic.

I have encountered heterosexual men who regard themselves as feminist and feel guilty about their sexual attraction to women's bodies. These are the ones that self-describe as radical feminists, and spend inordinate amounts of time on social media lecturing sex workers and their allies that they're doing feminism wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 04-24-2017, 04:11 AM
Gyrate Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadh View Post
I think UrbanRedneck is supposing that feminists think there's something inherently sexist about being sexually attracted to women's bodies, and that "male feminists" have somehow unlearned this attraction as part of their feministisation process.

I'm not sure if it's a serious question or not but it's not totally off the wall. The way that some feminists carry on about "objectification" of women, it almost does seem as though they find the very idea problematic.

I have encountered heterosexual men who regard themselves as feminist and feel guilty about their sexual attraction to women's bodies. These are the ones that self-describe as radical feminists, and spend inordinate amounts of time on social media lecturing sex workers and their allies that they're doing feminism wrong.
As stated above, I find some women's bodies sexually attractive too. The difference is not in the attraction but the reaction to the attraction. One can discreetly enjoy another person's appearance without treating that person as if the sole purpose of their existence is to provide you with enjoyment. I like boobs (generally speaking) and yet when talking to an alluringly be-boobed person I somehow manage not to turn into Encino Man, staring, drooling and trying to grab the pretty gazongas (or stuttering "Th-th-thank you!" for any inadvertent cleavage views). See, I have this incredibly clever trick I do in these instances. It's called "treating the other person as a person". I know it sounds crazy, but it works!

(I kid, but this is entirely the point of the "objectification" argument - not that you should never find another person attractive nor that you should never try to establish a sexual relationship with anyone in an appropriate context, but rather that your attraction and your sexual desire do not entitle you to treat another person like an object existing purely for your personal gratification. I don't know why this is so hard to understand for some people.)
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 04-24-2017, 08:02 AM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well no, you still dont get what I meant. I was asking do feminist men still get turned on by women's bodies?
What. The. Fuck?

Can you please tell us what a feminist man means to you?

There's more to the conversation, but there needs to be at least some understanding of the terminology in order to continue.

In your view, what makes a man a feminist? What means that a man isn't?
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 04-24-2017, 02:34 PM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadh View Post
I think UrbanRedneck is supposing that feminists think there's something inherently sexist about being sexually attracted to women's bodies, and that "male feminists" have somehow unlearned this attraction as part of their feministisation process.

I'm not sure if it's a serious question or not but it's not totally off the wall. The way that some feminists carry on about "objectification" of women, it almost does seem as though they find the very idea problematic.

I have encountered heterosexual men who regard themselves as feminist and feel guilty about their sexual attraction to women's bodies. These are the ones that self-describe as radical feminists, and spend inordinate amounts of time on social media lecturing sex workers and their allies that they're doing feminism wrong.
That is pretty close to my thinking.

I think this picture explains it.

It just seems to me that "feminists" hate it when say men get turned on by sexy women's bodies. That whole term "objectification" is they get mad at men for being... well men. I knew one woman who told me "I should be able to walk down the street totally naked and you shouldnt do anything about it". Probably also why so many feminist women dress so dumpy.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 04-24-2017, 02:41 PM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by TokyoBayer View Post
What. The. Fuck?

Can you please tell us what a feminist man means to you?

There's more to the conversation, but there needs to be at least some understanding of the terminology in order to continue.

In your view, what makes a man a feminist? What means that a man isn't?
To be honest, it gets confusing.

Can one be all for equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, all that but still be proud to be a guy and ok to get turned on by a hot womans body? Granted I know you can look but dont touch or allow yourself to be seen looking.

So I need to ask you, is a feminist man required to turn off the "boobies are hot" part of their brains?
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 04-24-2017, 03:14 PM
raventhief raventhief is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
That is pretty close to my thinking.

I think this picture explains it.

It just seems to me that "feminists" hate it when say men get turned on by sexy women's bodies. That whole term "objectification" is they get mad at men for being... well men. I knew one woman who told me "I should be able to walk down the street totally naked and you shouldnt do anything about it". Probably also why so many feminist women dress so dumpy.
The picture you posted is a person (the caption calls her "ugly lady") holding a sign that says "Women are not for decoration."

Do you, Urbanredneck, consider attractive women to decoration?

ETA - do you find the idea that a woman should be able to be naked without you "doing anything" to be a perplexing thought?

Last edited by raventhief; 04-24-2017 at 03:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 04-24-2017, 03:37 PM
DrFidelius DrFidelius is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 11,752
What sort of thing do you believe you should be allowed to "do" if confronted by a naked lady?

Smiling and nodding are probably acceptable to anyone who would put herself in that situation, if conversation is called for then I personally find that saying "hubba, hubba" is fine if you follow it with a sincere compliment about her hairstyle or makeup.

But, a woman is not an ornament, she is person, and how she chooses to dress or present herself is nobody else's business.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 04-24-2017, 03:41 PM
Spice Weasel Spice Weasel is offline
Knocking it up a notch. BAM!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck
Can one be all for equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, all that but still be proud to be a guy and ok to get turned on by a hot womans body?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So I need to ask you, is a feminist man required to turn off the "boobies are hot" part of their brains?
No.

They are required to view women as human beings who do not exist solely for their gratification. They are required to treat people with respect regardless of their gender.

What this means varies greatly depending on the context. It's one of those things that requires judgment in the moment. If you see a pretty woman on the street, as you well know it's not appropriate to grab her and kiss her. But if you're on a date, and she is making eyes at you, and smiling, and leaning toward you, it's a very different story. You may have the exact same physiological reaction in both cases, but your behavior will be different depending on the context. Some people really cannot tell the difference. Their mentality is, ''I see this thing, it exists for my pleasure, I am entitled to it'' and that's how you get creeps following women down the street, leering at them, shouting obscenities, etc. That's how you get domestic violence (at my org, fully 60% of domestic violence incidents involve sexual assault). Domestic violence toward women is a form of objectification; it is predicated on the idea that a woman is a thing to own and control. Objectification is how you get date rape and all other sorts of evils.

Now most men, even men who do not identify as feminists, would not engage in these awful behaviors, but their silence in the face of them indicates tacit approval. They may undermine a woman's view of things or handwave away her story of assault (just peruse the Dope if you're looking for good examples), or they might not speak up if they see a woman being harassed, and that, IMO, is where the onus of responsibility lies on most feminist men. To be a feminist man means you can't just sit back and let that shit happen.

Being turned on by a woman is human, natural, beautiful. Disrespecting her as a person is not.

I don't think that meme is consistent with feminist values at all. Women are not, in fact, decorations and the protestor's personal level of attractiveness has jack shit to do with the validity of her argument. The meme actually proves her argument - she is being treated as an object, a less desirable one than the other objects in the picture. In reality, the worth and value of every woman in that picture transcend whether some meme-creating asshole thinks she's hot or not. (I see this as very different than say, posting a picture of a woman you find attractive -- there is no inherent value judgment in that, just ''this chick's hot'' which is human enough.)

Last edited by Spice Weasel; 04-24-2017 at 03:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 04-24-2017, 03:51 PM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 18,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
To be honest, it gets confusing.

Can one be all for equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, all that but still be proud to be a guy and ok to get turned on by a hot womans body? Granted I know you can look but dont touch or allow yourself to be seen looking.

So I need to ask you, is a feminist man required to turn off the "boobies are hot" part of their brains?
It's not as stupid a question as some people may be thinking it is. Some feminists HAVE EVER expressed the sentiment that it is always evil and wrong to sexually objectify someone. Or at least for a man to do so to a woman because of the existing power imbalance.

Most of the feminists with whom I've had that kind of conversation have said that the problem isn't objectification in and of itself, but rather a tendency to let it take priority over treating people as people in virtually any context -- and that it is the pattern of men doing THAT towards women that is part and parcel of the existing power imbalance. Thus, it isn't always wrong to respond to a female person with a reaction mostly grounded in having the hots for her, even if who she is is a former senator and a brilliant oil painter. Context is everything. If you're chairing a debate and she's a participant, it's totally inappropriate to deal with her as a cutely curvy attractive person and ignore her as a proponent of tax credits for carbon footprint reduction who has a track record of reaching across the aisle.

Sexuality being what it is, anyone can be struck at any time with a powerful impression of someone else as a deliciously attractive sex object, and yes it can eclipse other impressions of that person. Feminists don't say that this never happens to female people; they say that as women they learned to hide and suppress and subsume that reaction, and that men whose attraction is towards women have learned instead to embrace that reaction with a "hot damn!" because gee how could it ever be inappropriate because after all that's why women were put on earth iddn't it? etc;

There's other feminist observations about male sexual behavior, observations made with varying degrees of irritation and critical dissection, to which an attracted male's behavior could run afoul. There is a lot to be learned by NOT assuming you know which differences in sexuality are built in biologically and which aren't, and looking at your own (and other men's) sexual behaviors as they differ from women's and analyzing them yourself, just to be thinking about it. Is there, for example, something about a lot of stereotypical male reaction that makes it all about his appetite and very little about whether or not he is attractive to her in return? Might there be a reason for that, a social reason?
Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old 04-24-2017, 04:27 PM
Spice Weasel Spice Weasel is offline
Knocking it up a notch. BAM!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
It's not as stupid a question as some people may be thinking it is. Some feminists HAVE EVER expressed the sentiment that it is always evil and wrong to sexually objectify someone. Or at least for a man to do so to a woman because of the existing power imbalance.
Some feminists have claimed penetration is in itself a violent act. They hardly represent the majority, but that's why it's so difficult to generalize about feminism. Each individual woman has her own view of what that means. This is markedly obvious from a generational perspective, but even within generations, there are differing views of what feminism is, and some factions are quite hostile toward one another. It's like trying to define what it means to be a Republican or a Democrat - it's going to mean different things to different people. Maybe one person resonates especially powerfully with foreign policy, and another person cares more about economics. These opinions about what issues are most important are usually grounded in our own personal experiences. Personally, my pet issues are sexual assault and gender norms because these are two issues I have seen have a detrimental impact on many, many people.

This is one reason it's so irksome to see folks generalizing about ''feminists'' because they are assuming an entire set of beliefs or attitudes that I may or may not hold. I don't hate men, resent them for their sexual attraction toward women, or despise masculine traits. There are some feminist issues where I have no idea how I feel, and certainly my feminist husband and I don't always see eye to eye (he has a much bigger problem with porn than I do, personally.)

So, I admit it seems like kind of a WTF question, urbanredneck, but at least you are bothering to ask. Any attempt to understand goes far in my book.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:06 AM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
That is pretty close to my thinking.

I think this picture explains it.

It just seems to me that "feminists" hate it when say men get turned on by sexy women's bodies. That whole term "objectification" is they get mad at men for being... well men. I knew one woman who told me "I should be able to walk down the street totally naked and you shouldnt do anything about it".
As Spice Weasel stated, feminism does not speak with one voice. Anyone with a passing interest would understand that, and it seems that the ones who are most dismissive of women's rights are the least to understand.

It needs to be noted that in this very thread, no one is espousing such radical feminism, yet this is the definition you seem to have stuck in your mind. After you posted your first comment on sexual attraction a number of guys have posted that they consider themselves feminists have stated that they can feel sexual attraction and still be able to control their brain. Female posters have stated that their husbands have not had that part of their brain ripped out. Yet, it's still "confusing" to you. Why?

Your question has been asked and answered, yet you are refusing to understand. What is the reason for that? At some point, it's no longer the other person's responsibility to explain, it's your responsibility to try to understand. (Unless you don't care, which I suspect may be the case.)

Let's go back to the post in question. You posted it on a public message board, so you must not realize how offensive it is not only for women but for men as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Wow, are you clueless on men's brains.

Let's say a guy drops something, you being the helpful person, bend over to pick it up for him and he gets a good look down the front of your shirt at your beautiful and ample busoms. When you stand up he stutters slightly and says thank you, or maybe... thank you!
There are so many really, really horrible assumptions here.

First horrible assumption is that men's brains are hardwired and their nature can't be changed. Men can't control themselves so we have to bundle women's bodies up in burlap. If you don't agree with that, then what exactly is the difference between those who advocate the burqa and you?

You, yourself, can control yourself in public with the right situation. If the hot girlfriend of a Hellís Angel accidently flashed herself at you right now and her biker boyfriend was scowling at you, watching your reaction, what would you do? You damn well know that you are going to avert your eyes. Likewise for your pastorís wife. See? You donít have to give up the man card just to exercise common curtesy.

Why is it that you can control this part of your brain when the tits belong another guyís wife/girlfriend but you canít when theyíre on a woman by herself? Is it that you have a basic respect for other guys where you donít have a similar respect for women?

Tell me this. Exactly how long would a care giver last, if he couldnít learn to control this tendency to become a babbling idiot when exposed to the breasts of a mentally challenged, but physically developed 14-year-old girl? The reptilian part of the brain doesnít place a check there. The cerebral cortex does.

Iím working right now with my six-year-old son on teaching him that not all emotions need to demonstrated in public. Donít care if you feel angry, but control it. Are you claiming less self-control than a child?

Second, you are saying boorish behavior is excusable and acceptable. We've had a couple of zillion threads here in which women say that unwanted sexual attention is not cool. What exactly is "thank you!" if not unwanted sexual attention?

Do you not see the difference between you wife being happy that you like her tits and some random stranger confronted with you getting turned on?

Yet, you are going to expect that others control their sexual desires. How many times have you had men get excited about seeing your genitals while youíre showering at the gym? None, right? But guess what? There is a non-zero percentage of men are attracted to other men. Youíre claiming that men are unable to contain their sexual desire yet we have damn good evidence that gay men are able to hide theirs.
Quote:
Probably also why so many feminist women dress so dumpy.
Right, because the only reason to judge a woman is on her dress, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Can one be all for equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, all that but still be proud to be a guy and ok to get turned on by a hot womans body?
Wow. I have to conclude that since your definition of "feminist" is someone who is all for "equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, and all that" and that you strongly do not identify yourself as a feminist, that you do not support that. Good to know this.
Quote:
So I need to ask you, is a feminist man required to turn off the "boobies are hot" part of their brains?
No. We simply act civilized. And show the same level of respect to women that all men are capable of showing other men. Thatís all. Is that really too much?
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:27 AM
chaika chaika is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
That is pretty close to my thinking.

I think this picture explains it.

It just seems to me that "feminists" hate it when say men get turned on by sexy women's bodies. That whole term "objectification" is they get mad at men for being... well men. I knew one woman who told me "I should be able to walk down the street totally naked and you shouldnt do anything about it". Probably also why so many feminist women dress so dumpy.
Sweet Jesus. Do you really not see the distinction between sexual attraction and objectification?

As for "why so many feminist women dress so dumpy," I hardly know where to begin. How many feminists do you actually know? How are their sartorial choices related to their ideology (and how do you draw this conclusion)? And what does it have to do with you anyway? Do you think women should dress to please men? If so, why? Should men also dress to please women? If not, why not?
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 04-25-2017, 09:59 PM
raventhief raventhief is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
I hope that urbanredneck comes back to the thread. His question has raised even more questions.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:12 AM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
I hope that urbanredneck comes back to the thread. His question has raised even more questions.
Well I am trying. Very busy lately.

I agree with the above post that we as men should never objectify women or support those who do. Their is a right way and a wrong way to deal with the sight of a beautiful woman. Growing up I had some very immature and wrongful thought on women that have taken time for me to get rid of. I've still got a ways to look beyond seeing a woman as a woman and not just a person and who have their own issues which may or may not be gender based.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:21 AM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 18,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well I am trying. Very busy lately.

I agree with the above post that we as men should never objectify women or support those who do. Their is a right way and a wrong way to deal with the sight of a beautiful woman. Growing up I had some very immature and wrongful thought on women that have taken time for me to get rid of. I've still got a ways to look beyond seeing a woman as a woman and not just a person and who have their own issues which may or may not be gender based.
Yeah, it's a complicated and sometimes snarly ball of yarn to untangle.

My sense from the feminist women I've known (and the activist feminist theorists whose works I've read) is that feminist women also find it to be a complicated thing with lots of facets to consider. They often get caricatured and lambasted as hatefully angry man-hating people. I find them to be angry (yes), but, most often, refreshingly honest (perhaps because of their anger--too pissed off to make nice and wheedle), and to crave an honest and serious response from males in return.

Last edited by AHunter3; 04-26-2017 at 10:22 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 04-26-2017, 11:04 AM
Pantastic Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by TokyoBayer View Post
You, yourself, can control yourself in public with the right situation. If the hot girlfriend of a Hellís Angel accidently flashed herself at you right now and her biker boyfriend was scowling at you, watching your reaction, what would you do? You damn well know that you are going to avert your eyes. Likewise for your pastorís wife. See? You donít have to give up the man card just to exercise common curtesy.
This was buried in a longer post, but I think it should be pulled out because it's a really good way to show that the behavior is not actually some uncontrollable, innate 'man' reaction. If you can be polite to a woman because her boyfriend/husband is near, then there's nothing stopping you from showing the same politeness to her alone except for blatant sexism. And, like I said before, how do you think lifeguards at nude beaches (or bouncers at strip clubs) manage to function if 'bare boobs' actually makes it impossible for a guy to control his reaction? Do you think they're all just gay or asexual? What about guys in cultures where breasts aren't normally covered, how does the tribe function if all men either aren't interested in sex with women (so, no new babies) or can't ever do anything but stare gibbering all day (so, no work accomplished)?
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 04-27-2017, 09:02 AM
rbroome rbroome is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 2,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
I keep hearing that there is isn't a pay gap. I also keep seeing studies that show there are persistent pay gaps, at least in my industry, which is high tech. If you want to argue that oil rig workers are making more money because there aren't any women there, fine. If there is even one, btw, she should get the same money. Same thing with police, fire departments, first responders and every other "traditionally" male industry. If women are present, they should get the same money for the same job.

And, yes, as a hiring manager, I have been specifically told to hire women because they cost the company less.
Out of curiosity, were you told the reasons for the cost advantage? Perhaps the company has found that women typically stay on the job for less time than men and hence earn less in longitivtiy pay. Or they ask for fewer raises. Or the company finds that the women will take the job for a lower starting salary. Whether any of those reasons are good ones isn't the point. I am just wondering whether the company ever explained its reasoning.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 04-27-2017, 09:17 PM
raventhief raventhief is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well I am trying. Very busy lately.

I agree with the above post that we as men should never objectify women or support those who do. Their is a right way and a wrong way to deal with the sight of a beautiful woman. Growing up I had some very immature and wrongful thought on women that have taken time for me to get rid of. I've still got a ways to look beyond seeing a woman as a woman and not just a person and who have their own issues which may or may not be gender based.
I am glad you came back, but I still have questions about the thoughts you expressed.

If a woman is walking down the street naked, what should "you do about it?" (Because of this. )

Can you control your innate male brain when faced with a bit of cleavage if the owner of said cleavage is standing with her big Hell's Angel boyfriend? (Because of this and that.)


Are you not for "equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, all that" - as you apparently have not had that part of your brain turned off, and thus you need to ask if that happens when you ARE for "equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunity, all that"?

Do you understand the difference between sexual attraction and sexual objectification?

I really do appreciate your effort to understand, and that is what I am trying to do - understand.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 04-28-2017, 10:30 PM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
I really do appreciate your effort to understand, and that is what I am trying to do - understand.
I don't know if he'll see him here again. It's hard to make a second appearance after admitting to misogyny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
This was buried in a longer post, but I think it should be pulled out because it's a really good way to show that the behavior is not actually some uncontrollable, innate 'man' reaction. If you can be polite to a woman because her boyfriend/husband is near, then there's nothing stopping you from showing the same politeness to her alone except for blatant sexism.
I have a hard time understanding it in any other terms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Growing up I had some very immature and wrongful thought (sic) on women that have taken time for me to get rid of. I've still got a ways to look beyond seeing a woman as a woman and not just a person and who have their own issues which may or may not be gender based.
Do you think you are beyond those?

What did you mean by asking about being proud to be a man, in light of your admission of "wrongful thoughts" about women?

Are you particularly proud of not being a woman, and if so, why?

What would be shameful about that?

Relating to the question of the apparent absurdity of being civil towards women who are nakid in public and the inability of men to control their sexual desire, can I take it that you would have absolutely no problem with gay men losing their their rational minds if they see you changing?

Would that be a fair comment?

If not, what conduct do you expect of someone who you have no sexual interest in, but who has sexual interest in you? A gay man, for example. Can you imagine any circumstance where you would feel uncomfortable in someone's objectification of you?

Do you not have any empathy for women whom you are sexually attracted to but have no desire to be looked at that way?

Women have been posting here for years how they hate men staring at their breasts, yet that is the one example you have chosen.

Why?
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 04-29-2017, 06:15 AM
Manda JO Manda JO is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 9,999
In terms of sexual attraction, I think there's a subset of men--and not a small one--that assume feminist men must stop being attracted to women because they consider their own sexual attraction to be inherently derogatory. These are the guys that sex as a thing men want and that women "give up". They see being fucked as being lessened, as inherently humiliating. I associate these patterns of behavior with this mindset:

1. They are troubled by sexually active women. They can't see any healthy reason anyone would submit to being fucked by a lot of different men, so they either feel sorry for sexually active women, assuming that they have emotional problems, or they feel contempt, assuming the motive is "attention" or gold-digging.

2. They are deeply homophobic, with a real emphasis on "phobic". They absolutely can't understand a man who would let himself be fucked--would voluntarily give up his dignity and self-respect. They are also terrified by the idea that a man might want to fuck them, might be thinking about it. To be fucked, even in someone else's mind, is to diminish that person.

3. They are very indulgent boyfriends and husbands. They perceive sex as a gift, an extraordinary gift, that their wife or gf--a NICE girl, a good woman--is willing to bestow. They are grateful, and they respect her not for what she does, but for her willingness to do so. It's not a think they can imagine doing themselves. So they try to reciprocate that "sacrifice" with great manners, lots of attention, general supportive behavior. These are the same guys that process an angry woman's rejection of sexual advances as "punishment"--not that an angry person doesn't want to fuck the person they are angry at.

If you are a guy who thinks of sex that way, then desiring a woman is a "bad" impulse that needs to be shut down to be a true feminist. What those guys have to learn to see is that the sex act isn't inherently debasing for the receptive partner, and that female sexuality is more like male sexuality than it is different.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 04-29-2017, 08:28 PM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 18,502
I grew up on the outside of the phenomenon Mando JO is describing but very very much aware of it, and being aware of it is a big part of why I wanted to be on the outside of it. The attitude actually predates adult sexual awareness, it's a 3rd-grade-boys' attitude of rejoicing in contempt and disgust for its own sake, which somehow gets mapped onto sex (along with bathroom functions).

Oh, and, umm, it isn't just the men. Some female people have a hard time conceptualizing any form of male sexuality that isn't derived from that, and they don't have in their heads a notion of sex as it might exist between equally situated people. But they are outnumbered by the guys with that mindset by a considerable margin.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 04-29-2017, 09:58 PM
trylikeafool trylikeafool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
As a woman, and particularly one born and raised in the South, I'm a little ticked off when men don't let me off the elevator first, or hold open a door if they're going through it as well, or don't step up to take control of a difficult/dangerous situation and expect me to handle it. I live in California now, so that's how I get treated by men all the time. In the South, men are still quite chivalrous.

I don't see it as a man being condescending towards a woman when he does those things. I see it as a man honoring a woman and being kind. Heck, I hold open doors for men (and women) all the time because it's the nice thing to do.

Besides that, men are physically stronger than women (generally), so it makes sense for them to offer to carry heavy things or to act protective in a dangerous situation. Sure, I may be able to carry it or handle it fine, but it's nice to at least have an offer to help.

Feminists have the wrong view of chivalry in my opinion. They think that it makes women appear weak and helpless. Real women aren't threatened by it, and appreciate it. To us, it shows that you care and are thinking about us in a respectful way. As long as you aren't actually chauvinistic and start talking about how women are helpless creatures only good for popping out babies, I'm totally fine with you opening a car door.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 04-29-2017, 10:13 PM
jsgoddess jsgoddess is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by trylikeafool View Post
Feminists have the wrong view of chivalry in my opinion. They think that it makes women appear weak and helpless. Real women aren't threatened by it, and appreciate it.
For a fake woman, I sure do a lot of method acting.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 04-29-2017, 10:25 PM
raventhief raventhief is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by trylikeafool View Post
As a woman, and particularly one born and raised in the South, I'm a little ticked off when men don't let me off the elevator first, or hold open a door if they're going through it as well, or don't step up to take control of a difficult/dangerous situation and expect me to handle it. I live in California now, so that's how I get treated by men all the time. In the South, men are still quite chivalrous.

I don't see it as a man being condescending towards a woman when he does those things. I see it as a man honoring a woman and being kind. Heck, I hold open doors for men (and women) all the time because it's the nice thing to do.

Besides that, men are physically stronger than women (generally), so it makes sense for them to offer to carry heavy things or to act protective in a dangerous situation. Sure, I may be able to carry it or handle it fine, but it's nice to at least have an offer to help.

Feminists have the wrong view of chivalry in my opinion. They think that it makes women appear weak and helpless. Real women aren't threatened by it, and appreciate it. To us, it shows that you care and are thinking about us in a respectful way. As long as you aren't actually chauvinistic and start talking about how women are helpless creatures only good for popping out babies, I'm totally fine with you opening a car door.
It's nice to have an offer from help from anyone, male or female. It's annoying to have someone, male or female, swoop in and "take care of something," assuming that I cannot. Sometimes I can't, and I try to be strong enough to ask for help (it's a struggle, I'll be honest.) I grew up and live in the South, and it doesn't bother me at all if a man doesn't let me off the elevator first, or open a car door or whatever. It's not something I even notice. I DO notice, and get a little ticked off, when a guy becomes a stammering mess because he accidentally caught a glimpse of my cleavage, or tells me to my face that I am not a real tech because I am a woman.

Your mileage may vary.
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:45 AM
jsgoddess jsgoddess is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
I DO notice, and get a little ticked off, when a guy becomes a stammering mess because he accidentally caught a glimpse of my cleavage, or tells me to my face that I am not a real tech because I am a woman.
Well, now you know you're also not a real woman! Progress!
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:52 AM
chaika chaika is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by trylikeafool View Post
Feminists have the wrong view of chivalry in my opinion. They think that it makes women appear weak and helpless. Real women aren't threatened by it, and appreciate it. To us, it shows that you care and are thinking about us in a respectful way. As long as you aren't actually chauvinistic and start talking about how women are helpless creatures only good for popping out babies, I'm totally fine with you opening a car door.
Huh. I have believed for years that I am a real woman as well as a feminist. Have I been wrong all this time? Should I hand over my "real woman" credentials to someone? Are there forms to fill out?
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 04-30-2017, 08:07 AM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
I grew up in a very conservative Mormon environment and I would say that Manda JO is has it right. I think that there are also possible reasons as well, though.

Mormonism has a very fucked up (pun intended) view of human sexuality. I'm only four generations away from polygamy where women were often close to chattel.

As a youth, we were taught that only men had sexual desires; that women acquiesced to sexual affection in order to ensnare obtain a relationship with a guy. Guys wanted sex; women wanted marriage. If the women didn't give sex away for free then guys would be willing to get married in order to have sex. Most marriages for women in my generation were at 19 or 20.

Girls were taught that no one wanted "used gum." Elizabeth Smart, the girl kidnapped by a polygamous self proclaimed Mormon offshoot prophet, was held a few hundred yards from where the searchers were looking but since she had already been raped, then she figured no one would want her and remained silent. Really fucked up.

It took a while for me to appreciate that women had sexual desires as well. Fortunately I had a patient teacher in one early relationship.

I really don't like the misogyny I hear from too many guys when women aren't around. One (now former) American friend in Japan had a son about the same time we had our daughter. He would go on and on about how he was going to teach him how to pick up women. Then he had a daughter about the same time we had our son. He actually seemed in dismay about how guys were going to use her.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 04-30-2017, 08:52 AM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by trylikeafool View Post
In the South, men are still quite chivalrous.

(snip)

To us, it shows that you care and are thinking about us in a respectful way. As long as you aren't actually chauvinistic and start talking about how women are helpless creatures only good for popping out babies, I'm totally fine with you opening a car door.
My bolding.

I think you would like my brother-in-law. A perfect Southern gentleman who opens car doors every time. At my previous company, there were a few other guys from Georgia and damn, they treated women with respect.

Of course, once the women folks are out of the room, you can't walk without tripping on the misogyny, but hey, as long as they don't talk about it in front of you, that's cool, right?

Last edited by TokyoBayer; 04-30-2017 at 08:53 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 04-30-2017, 09:50 AM
raventhief raventhief is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsgoddess View Post
Well, now you know you're also not a real woman! Progress!
So does that mean i am a real tech after all, or am i now doubly not real?
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 04-30-2017, 12:02 PM
jsgoddess jsgoddess is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
So does that mean i am a real tech after all, or am i now doubly not real?
I'm fairly sure cleavage makes you not a real tech, even if you're a fake woman.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 04-30-2017, 12:11 PM
raventhief raventhief is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsgoddess View Post
I'm fairly sure cleavage makes you not a real tech, even if you're a fake woman.
I had no idea i am such a fakey fake fake.

< hangs head in shame>
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 05-03-2017, 09:55 AM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So I need to ask you, is a feminist man required to turn off the "boobies are hot" part of their brains?
My answer is best found here.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 05-03-2017, 12:13 PM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
It's not as stupid a question as some people may be thinking it is. Some feminists HAVE EVER expressed the sentiment that it is always evil and wrong to sexually objectify someone. Or at least for a man to do so to a woman because of the existing power imbalance.
I would say it is wrong to objectify someone in any case, its being sexual is just a specific flavor.

Finding someone attractive doesn't equal objectifying.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.