Keeping with the discussion of inequality.
Here's my theory. Men and women are human beings. And we all need attention and validation. No matter how much "self confidence" or "self-awareness"
all of us need to be validated and made felt relevant by someone else.
If this point is agreed. then why do so many women feel they deserve more attention and validation, in particular in the beginning of a relationship?
Is this not a dereliction of a core belief of equality, now if a woman doesnt believe in equality and is willing to do her part, then there's no hypocrisy at all.
But having as a core belief of male-female equality (which by my understanding, is the underlying tenet of the entire feminist movement) how can one maintain that such unequal behavior must take place?
it's just a bum deal for guys (and yes I know by stating that I alienate any women who are reading this, but truth is truth)
For the women actually reading this, I've looked through the "rules" book. you must be aware of that bullsh*t. How can women subscribe to such nonsense like "you should be able to come 15 minutes late and the guy shouldnt complain" I mean seriously?
What if some guy wrote a book that said, "you should be able to grab her ass 3 times without her getting mad at you" Wouldnt that be labelled sexist, this-ist and that-ist?
Yet no, a book published by a mainstream US publisher can advocate such sexist behavior out of women, behavior that encourages women to devalue a man's time (and god knows what else)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
I feel your rage HMF, and I understand your points. I think the reason why some females desire an excess of attention, or more attention than they give their men is because ultimately many women have fallen hard for men just to be ignored, neglected, rejected or dumped by them. That is why we often test men according to how much attention or affection they throw our way. We hold back on it, and it's hard because we often feel so deeply, but then if we express how we really feel the man may find us "clingy" or "needy" and back off. It's silly.
So many times I wanted to come and tell a guy how much I really felt for him but I was afraid.
Women's advice columns are also scaring us with that "commitment phobia" phobia. You know, men are commitment phobes, tred carefully, reel him in slowly so he'll keep you, etc.
It's also not easy for us.
"just to be ignored, neglected, rejected or dumped by them. "
And men don't run the same risk of having their emotions shat on just the same? What makes a female emotion more protectable, guardable, or valuable to it's owner than a male one? In fact men, having to put on the stiff faced, stoic look of courage all the time, are in a tougher place as showing their emotion is often a sign of weakness. Just look at the military, who's suffering more? its the men, they come back disproportionately more f*cked up because they are constantly fed a social bullshit that showing mental strain is a sign of weakness. Women have no such encomberance.
"So many times I wanted to come and tell a guy how much I really felt for him but I was afraid. "
And this is exactly my point. that men and women are human beings, we want and need the same things. Many men have felt the same way. So whats the solution? Since we live in a society that puts the initial onus on us, men have to devise ways of showing interest without actually showing any interest and feeling like we gave away the farm, because whether you agree or not, we live in a society that values a female emotion or sentiment more than it values a male one.
"It's also not easy for us."
No one is claiming it is. However it's the constant narrative that it is WITHOUT EQUIVOCATION harder for women in EVERY aspect of life. I acknowledge the difficulties women have, but If I speak of the difficulties men have, I'm reminded that women couldn't vote or have to wear burqas 4000 miles away or some other tangential bullshit point. The running narrative is women have it hard, and men have no troubles in life at all.
This perception needs to be obliterated. And I have the guts to do it, even in the face of f*ckers like Nayagan taht say, "what are you gonna cry now?"
Its questions like that, that indelibly PROVE MY POINT.
"You know, men are commitment phobes, tred carefully, reel him in slowly so he'll keep you, etc"
Yes we are commitment phobes. but its this bullshit society that makes us into commitment phobes. Whats the problem with commitment? when it boils down to it, it's knowing that you have to spend every waking moment with the same person. and more so, it has to do with having the same job (one that you took under duress in order to make money) for the rest of your life because a woman somehow expects you to keep making money, irrespective of your own happiness.
What you see as rage, I see as a simple inequity being addressed. One that has gone on for so long, due to hypocritical women, and men that say things simply to have sex with lots of women. Now I can appreciate the latter, being a man, having a male brain I can understand the frustrations our brains pose us as they are hard wired to respond to fertility and fitness indicators. WOmen wouldnt spend hours in the gym, hours fretting about eating an extra french fry, hours getting skin treatments and eyebrow threading, and spending $400 on haircuts and shoes and all that other bullshit if it wasn't directly related to pinpointing sensors in the male brain.
It would be nice if women afforded the same basic human decencies to men, and understood the difficulties we have to go through.. ON A DAILY BASIS.
Not to mention applying mascara while going 60 mph on the highway. or having silicone injected into their body... etc...
$400.00 on a haircut? To impress some dude? Shut UP.
I don't even shave my pits! LOL.
Finally I found a guy that accepts me just the way I am, warts and all, and I accept him just the way he is, empty pocket and all.
If you can't be with the one you love than honey, love the one you're with!
Contentment is bliss.
You should read this book. Came out some years ago, but is still a good read:
http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Male-Power-Warren-Farrell/dp/0425181448/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
"$400.00 on a haircut? To impress some dude? Shut UP.
I don't even shave my pits! LOL."
Come to New York City, 400 is low.
"Finally I found a guy that accepts me just the way I am, warts and all, and I accept him just the way he is, empty pocket and all."
Look I'm not saying women should act this way or that way, Im saying choose a way and be consistent. You obviously dont conform to social norms and don't demand that from your guy. BUT YOU ARE A RARITY is the point Im making here. most women want social norms to be broken when it doesnt directly effect them
So we couldn't spend the night together because she had all kinds of restrictions even though thats how "normally it's done" yet I was supposed to shower her with phoncalls and messages and emails (more so than she gave me) because that social norm was perfectly fine to maintain. It's blatant hypocrisy.
When and where is it a social norm to "spend the night together"?
If you want sex and that's it, then be up front and tell a woman from the getgo. There are plenty of women out there just looking for that, no strings attached. Can't find a girl like that? Hire a pro.
It's not a social norm to spend the night together after a date or even a few, for most people. If that's what you want then you have to hang with people for whom that is a social norm. There are websites for hook ups and one night stands as well.
What's your complaint here????
"t's not a social norm to spend the night together after a date or even a few, for most people"
whoa whoa, hang on a second, I'm talking about after 5-7 dates here, well after the "boyfriend/girlfriend" stage has been reached.
Im talking about a girl who expects boyfriend behavior, without giving girlfriend behavior. The same way a woman can say, "I want him to pay, but its not about the money, its about the gesture, and symbolizes his commitment" couldnt I say, its not ABOUT the sex, but about her emotional commitment to me. but then again, its labelled as sexist.
"If you want sex and that's it, then be up front and tell a woman from the getgo."
whoa hang on again. I would love to, if we lived in a world where women appreciated honesty, I would, but we don't. we live in a world where women want misdirection, veiled innuendos and bullshit like that. Not only that, women lament the fact that men want sex, YET TARGET THAT VERY MECHANISM to get what they want out of men. Hypocrisy to the fullest.
Whoa, YOU hold on Mr.!
There are plenty of sites on the net that are designed specifically for people looking for no strings attached sex.
You have NO complaint in this day and age. ITS AVAILABLE!
When did I say I was looking for that? And even if I was, there's a certain looks factor involved as well.
I made some clarifications on the assumptions you made.. and yes, having sex is considered "standard girlfriend/boyfriend behavior"
you say that after 5-6 dates of spending cash that you should get sex. hint: you don't have to spend that much money OR time. professionals will supply you with what you want at much less expense the first time around.
non-professionals on the otherhand don't neccessarily equate 5-6 dates with automatic sex supply.
Ugh you're missing the point. I'm not saying it's not attainable quicker. And I'm not saying that 5-6 is a guarantee, what I am saying is 5-6 is adequate time for girlfriend/boyfriend behavior.
especially if she expects boyfriend behavior.
Some people even hold off until marriage to have sex HMF. What world are you living in that 5-6 dates = sex?????? Especially amongst desis!!!!
Amongst those desis...., 5-6 dates IS marriage.
OK, well, if 5-6 dates IS marriage, then there's no question.
If they are married, they are having sex, so what IS the issue here? Now if you mean 5-6 dates means "engagement", then no, they may not be having it because many desis wait until AFTER the actual wedding day. Not all, but still alot.
No, what I'm telling you is, within 5-6 dates, of a romantic interest, sex is usually a component of that.
because desi's are bound by culture, the desire for sex (basically being horny as fuck) usually marry the first fuckable person they can get their hands on, beforehand. So the marriage a is a social sanction for wanting to fuck.
My underlying point is, if a girl expects boyfriend behavior, she should be willing to do girlfriend behavior, which usually involves sex.
I think alot of trouble and confusion can be avoided if men and women are just honest with each other from as early on as possible regarding their expectations.
Then you can filter out much sooner, or commit much sooner, depending on if the other person's expectations suit you, and you them.
haha.. the ol "lets be honest", ok so lets be honest about being honest.
I think every man that gets into a relationship doesn't want to be dating for 6 months without having sex.
people who say they "wait until marriage" before they have sex basically just bump up the marriage time, just so they have social sanction for sex.
And honesty and straightfowardness is not the best policy, I should know, I adopt it only to my disadvantage.
Look at it this way, if I want to have sex with a girl, I should be able to walk up to her and say, "I want to have sex with you" Honest, direct, correct?
But lets assume it's 'not about looks" as you claimed in a different thread, none of the guys that get steady sex do that.
So we must conclude honesty and directness are not prerequisites to success.. rather they are hinderances.
I just think it's nice, warm and fuzzy to keep saying "I think its best to be honest"
Look, most women don't want to date someone for 6 months without sex either. But we like to be clear on whether the relationship is "open" or "closed". If a guy does not want to be exclusive with me then I prefer he let me know so that I can also keep my options open as well.
Usually after about 2-3 dates the question of "exclusivity" or not comes up. I appreciate honesty at that point, and guys, it really does work to your benefit. Most women when confronted with "lets see other people as well", if it's in the beginning of a relationship, are totally happy with that because guess what? It means we get to see other men. Yipee!
"But we like to be clear on whether the relationship is "open" or "closed"."
ok, but at what juncture were we discussion open vs closed. unless your statement reflects that a closed relationship is a pre-req for sex?
" I appreciate honesty at that point, and guys, it really does work to your benefit."
I think some women are different than others. but you're shifting the sphere from sex to a discussion of monogamy.
I think at about the 3rd date discussions of open or closed can begin. As far as sex, that's up to the couples. I see no reason why sex needs to be exclusive if dating is not. But it varies from person to person, couple to couple. Alot of men don't like the idea of sleeping with a woman who is sleeping with other men. They become insecure and self-conscious which results in performance anxiety. I've dated men who like the idea of open-ended relationships on their end only. Those days are over fellas. Like since about 1967.
Look, you're completely shifting the sphere of discussion.
But I'll address your tangential point:
Performance anxiety and nervousness happens any time one partner feels the other is more experienced and will judge them.
So yes, If I think my girlfriend has been ridden more times than seattle slew, then yes it will make me nervous about sticking my dick inside her.
HOWever, you've yet again elucidated yet another female privilege, that of sexual insecurity. women are allowed to have it, even if they're the friggin michael phelps of sex.
Men on the other hand, always need to be "Strnog" and "secure" and "confident" even if its clear we lack the experience.
What some men need is basically a coupple freebies, sex with women that will not judge them on performance.
Now, onto your last tangential point, listen I dont care if you fuck enough white guys to get an honorary membership in the KKK. in fact I assume every desi girl I meet has been drilled more than an Iraqi oil field... so that means nothing to do me. also what the fuck happend in 1967 to make that the breaking point?
Anyway, you've skirted around the point like you've done on every other discussion thread - ie women that want unequal behavior in relationships, where as they clamor for equality in others. It's an endemic problem, and must be stopped.
Shanti. I love you and all your hypocritical women friends tonight. just this night
Hells motha fuckin yea bitch
"But I'll address your tangential point:"
What about my tangenital point?
Most of the dudes that drilled me have been desi. And the first few times I withheld judgement. But after about the 7th, and several coaching sessions, I think I'm within my rights to expect at least half of the big Oh, don't you?
I never said you weren't. again you keep shifting the discussion, I'll take that to mean you concede the point that original I made
How old are you since you're on the subject
My age is irrelevent to the subject at hand.
Women want equal treatment in the boardroom, in the bedroom and in the kitchen. I have no idea where you came up with the theory that they don't.
They don't want equality in the lead up to the bedroom.
I want to guage your sexual experience with respect to your age.
Neither my age nor my sexual experience are any of your business.
oh take a chill. It's you that volunteered that information so freely. right here:
"Most of the dudes that drilled me have been desi. And the first few times I withheld judgement. But after about the 7th, and several coaching sessions, I think I'm within my rights to expect at least half of the big Oh, don't you?"
Im curious about these coaching sessions. were they male or female taught?
plus when you say after about the 7th, it's helpful to put that into context, you know if you're say 19, it means something, if you're 29, that also means something.
I met a girl who was 29 and said she had sex with 21 people.
What I meant by 7th was after the 7th time with the same person. I mean the first few times I cut the guy some slack, from there on in I train him, and if by the 7th time round he still don't get it.....
well.....
21 people in 29 years? Is that considered a lot or a little or about average for North American folk in the 21st century? I'm out of touch....
well guys need some slack, its easy for women that have the guys to do all the work and basically sit back and evaluate like a judge on american idol.
I have no idea if thats a lot, it sure seems like a hell of a lot.
Anyway I see you've dropped your mission to hook me up with this girl you have in mind? What posessed you to think any girl would want to have anything to do with me, given my views.
"They don't want equality in the lead up to the bedroom."
I see you nicely avoided answering this question. You're quite adept at that. Were you Sarah Palin's debate coach?
And how are you sure you're so skilled to be giving coaching sessions.
..."They don't want equality in the lead up to the bedroom."
I see you nicely avoided answering this question. ...
Where's the question? I see a statement with a period at the end.
As far as giving coaching lessons in what pleases me in the bedroom, I'm qualified for that because guess what? I know what pleases me.
"Where's the question? I see a statement with a period at the end."
Don't be coy. the question is whether or not you concede that women believe in inequality when it comes to forming relationships, but want equality in relationships and other aspects of their lives.
"I'm qualified for that because guess what? I know what pleases me."
So likewise, I take it you will accept coaching lessons from your men on how to provide pleasures?
Post a Comment