Thanks Zeriel, you’re a standup guy.
I like to say I “threw him through a window” but let’s be honest, it was summer so what I technically did was throw him through the screen.
FWIW, you have my permission to say that you threw him through a window. Windows don’t need to have glass in them, they just need to be openings in the wall.
Generally, I’m opposed to jury nullification, but in this case, if you were being tried and I was on the jury, I’d vote for justifiable defenestration.
No? You mean yes.
See, that’s not funny anyway, and it’s doubly not funny when the thread is about that specifically actually happening to someone.
pjnlsn = dumb ass, late to the party troll
This is a sad thread, from multiple perspectives.
At a meta-level, it is ironic that a discussion about how people’s communication with one another in real life social circumstances ought to be crystal clear…
is full of people projecting like wild.
This reminded me of something.
I used to have some friends who were heavily into SCA*. That got me into quite a few events. For those of you unfamiliar with the organization, “event” translates to “multiple days of drinking, carousing, and debauchery”. SCAdians do this on a regular basis, at least once or twice a month. Lots and lots of people, lots and lots of booze, lots and lots of recreation.
Women do not get raped or slapped around at these events, despite mass drunkenness and rampant sex. They don’t even (to the best of my knowledge) get pressured. The entire culture is opposed to it.
For that matter, assault of any type was simply not allowed, by anyone towards anyone. If you had a problem and felt the need to work it out physically, it was by agreement and with referees.
The only serious problem that any of my friends had ever even heard of locally was one guy one time who was a guest. He evidently was a “mean, jealous, drunk” and got into a fight with his girlfriend. He made the mistake of 1) screaming at her and 2) threatening her.
Asshole had a long-ass walk to find a phone**, since he was immediately, thoroughly, and quite physically ejected from the grounds, sans anything but the clothes on his back.
It is possible, people. All it takes is refusing to put up with the assholes and their bullshit.
*Society for Creative Anachronism
**The campground is in the middle of nowhere, and cellphones weren’t common back then - and sure as hell no one who might have had one would have loaned it to him. And since he and girlfriend came in the same car, she got the keys.
Wow, what a depressing and dismaying thread.** MOL, joddess, youwiththeface, Troppus, Olives** and the other women and (few) men who have stood up and said their piece on behalf of women (and men) who want to live lives of respect and civility are now my heroes. I just spent 2 hours reading this. Some very good points and some eloquent posters, but damn this issue is soul sucking.
The rest of you can go hang. The misogyny runs rampant in this thread and on the Dope-and other message boards as well. Christ, it makes me tired.
Been there, done that-why bother speaking when no one is listening? The ones who think they’re funny or “cute” are the most offensive, IMO: let’s intellectualize and marginalize this problem–prima facie misogyny.
As I get older, I am not confronted with sexual misogyny in RL as much (thank god-although online is a different matter), but the persistent social misogyny is ubiquitous.
Kudos to the men (whom I’d like to think are a majority, but I doubt it) who “get it”; my sympathies and support to the women fighting the good fight.
All that said, communication can be tricky and of course miscommunication abounds, but none of that is relevant to this scenario. It’s not a black and white issue–except that it is. Misconstruing signals isn’t a crime against humanity (use of hyperbole to stress a point), but ignoring a no is (because it means you are putting YOUR wants above my autonomy; you are not recognizing my right to my own locus of control or–even more hyperbole–destiny). Which is not the same as saying the Dufus McHandy is a waste of space, a criminal in the making and he should be castrated. But it does make his behavior dickish and it makes him a jerk in this situation.
It’s everything that came after that has me shaking my head. Carry on-for all the good it will do. Sorry I can’t be more yay! about those who have had epiphanies here-they’re very small points of light in a vast sea of pure shit.
This is an example of why this thread is particularly sad to me. At least in terms of men’s reactions, what I saw was maybe four or five examples of head-shakingly stupid reactions to the incident in the OP - perhaps not actually endorsing the behavior of the guy in the OP, but close enough.
Then probably the same number of guys who clearly and unequivocally stated that the guy was an idiot and no means no, but their comments somehow got caught up in a blender and turned into an anger provoking hash.
Finally, there were maybe two guys whose comments did not seem to generate a controversy.
FWIW, my own reaction was to have some trepidation about replying or chiming in, so the “sea of shit” may just be a particularly discolored tidepool that doesn’t represent the larger ocean.
I thought of this thread while lecturing about co-rumination as a contributor to depression and anxiety.
Aren’t we all?
Can I single one out? We’re always having these threads wherein women claim to like sex as much as men, and many women chime in to complain their sex drive is higher than their partners. And men yell “Bullshit! Women are cagey, hesitant, and reluctant.”
But it’s true: we like sex too and are driven by the exact same urge to procreate. With caveat. I won’t speak for anyone but myself, but “any port in a storm” won’t do for me. I’m not at all inclined to spread my seed, add to a list, or gain first hand experience what many different dicks look and feel like. I might be climbing the walls horny, but I only want to have it with the guy I’m extremely attracted to or who I’m terribly fond of. A one-night stand with a good looking stranger isn’t worth the risk of STD’s, of potentially being overpowered and forced to do something I’m not interested in, the potential emotional repercussions of casual sex, or pregnancy.
So while I might quite like a guy, find him pleasing to look at and potentially interested in seeing naked, I’m not at all willing to have sex with him just because he wants it, or just because I’m concerned about his level of frustration or desire, or just because I’m a grown-up and I can do as I please. I’m only, ever, always motivated to have intercourse, oral, or anything beyond a kiss with a man I am profoundly interested in on some level or share an intense chemistry with. The presence of a boner or wet panties won’t change that. For me. And no amount of persuading, pushing, guilt, or games is going to change my mind. Any man determined enough to use that kind of manipulation on me had better be prepared to rape me for it, or fuck off forever and lose my phone number.
Having said that: yes, I’m aware of the Coolidge effect. Variety is the spice for a lot of men. But not for me. If you want to know why I’m reluctant to jump into bed even though I’m a healthy, modern woman: it’s because I’m not that into you. Maybe I will be after I know you better, but if we have the opportunity to have sex and I’m clearly reluctant: I’m not there yet.
Troppus, that’s a very interesting, but perhaps tangential topic. I’d be interested in discussing it more, especially since reading The Selfish Gene and thinking more about the issue from an evolutionary perspective.
I’m just not sure how that relates to my observation about people projecting in this thread. Are you saying that your responses to the topic were colored somehow by your feelings of having been accused in the past of having a lowered sex drive? Or of having stronger feelings on the subject due to women in general having been accused of having a lowered sex drive?
Neither. I felt that a couple of posters who were insisting that women want to be pushed to have sex labor under the impression that we want to have sex as much as they do, but feel socially constrained and therefore need to be given “permission” in the form of pushy behavior to relax and enjoy it.
Ah, I see.
Well, the bottom line is whether or not that is the case for a given woman, it really doesn’t matter if she has made clear that she does not want to have sex with a particular guy. That is, of course, no means no. If there are some instances of people who say no but don’t really mean it, a guy is just going to have to let that one go by the board. As others suggested, perhaps women who are intentionally less than straightforward will learn to change their behavior if they aren’t getting the outcome they want.
However, it is very much the case that some women do like to have some kind of “permission” to forgo social constraints that they otherwise feel. This also includes, for similar reasons, excuses or mitigation of infidelity. TO BE CLEAR, THIS DOES NOT, TO MY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE, include permission in the form of “pushy behavior to relax and enjoy it.”
Speaking in generalities about how all women are or how all men are is in part how this thread came to such calamity, in my opinion.
However, may I politely observe that I did not see anyone explicitly say that they thought women needed pushy behavior to relax and enjoy unwanted sex? If I missed this, I do apologize and you are correct.
On the other hand, if you are reading more into other people’s statements than they put forward, it may be the case that you are in fact, projecting your feelings onto others.
I don’t want to call out names, but yes, my take on the admittedly pushy guy’s confession is that “women expect me to take the initiative so they don’t feel like sluts, therefore they are lying when they say no”.
Maybe lying is a strong word. I would agree with Troppus but change it to “they are not being serious”.
Well, it’s certainly your right to avoid potential unpleasantness. On the other hand, it does make it difficult to make sure that we’re talking about the same thing without having some common referent we can both observe and reflect upon. In my opinion, it’s less helpful to have a dialog without being clear what we’re talking about.
Otherwise, we can come up with hypothetical examples of just how terrible and unreasonable one gender or another can be (as a monolithic group), can agree how justified we are to feel that way, and ultimately end up feeling depressed about how shitty the world is.
I just don’t think that’s as productive a discussion as alternative strategies might be.
That’s a wordy way to say “Use plainspeak”
Not really. It was a wordy way to argue that you should cite claims that you make. Although I do also agree that people should speak plainly.
What you asserted was
What you cited was treis saying that sometimes women want men to initiate sex.
Since he also gave examples, such as a time that a woman said no, and they ended up sleeping next to each other, I think it’s fair to take him at his word, no? Otherwise, you might end up making the ironic argument that he is saying one thing, but that he really means something else.
I think that where treis was an asshole was in his dismissive and adamant implication that since sometimes women use flimsy excuses to facilitate sexual encounters, other behavior may also be interpreted the same way. Clearly, MeanOldLady did everything possible to render such an interpretation extremely unlikely. treis gave the impression of not taking her at her word, which was bullshit.