Masculinity

[Tempra]

14 minutes ago, Savannah said:

I don't agree with that at all. 

Even if it was the case then the solution would hardly be thrusting it disproportionately upon women either. 

Why do you disagree?

And I'm not suggesting the burden should fall disproportionately on women instead of men, I'm simply making an observation on how things might be if the roles were reversed. 

[Savannah]

30 minutes ago, Tempra said:

Why do you disagree?

And I'm not suggesting the burden should fall disproportionately on women instead of men, I'm simply making an observation on how things might be if the roles were reversed. 

If Hillary Clinton would have been caught on tape saying just grab men on the crotch do you think anyone would have called her a rapist? 
Men aren't expected to be active, quite contrary in fact. 

Trouble is, there's absolutely no reward that follows passivity, in any area of life. 

If anything we should encourage men to be more active, in all areas of life.

[Week]

2 minutes ago, Savannah said:

If Hillary Clinton would have been caught on tape saying just grab men on the crotch do you think anyone would have called her a rapist? 
Men aren't expected to be active, quite contrary in fact. 

Trouble is, there's absolutely no reward that follows passivity, in any area of life. 

If anything we should encourage men to be more active, in all areas of life.

It was called sexual assault and he was, appropriately, referred to as a sexual predator. He was called a rapist due allegations of rape (including that of his ex-wife - who has since recanted after testifying under oath).

So, no she would not have been called a rapist.

I have no idea what you are trying to say with the remainder of your post.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

13 minutes ago, Savannah said:

Trouble is, there's absolutely no reward that follows passivity, in any area of life. 

Couldn't disagree more with that. Patience is a virtue. Good things come to those who wait. Etc, etc. Sometimes, overconfidence can lead to disaster, whereas patience and a well thought out long game can win the day.

[Savannah]

5 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Couldn't disagree more with that. Patience is a virtue. Good things come to those who wait. Etc, etc. Sometimes, overconfidence can lead to disaster, whereas patience and a well thought out long game can win the day.

Patience is a virtue and not even remotely the same thing as being passive. 

[Tempra]

16 minutes ago, Savannah said:

If Hillary Clinton would have been caught on tape saying just grab men on the crotch do you think anyone would have called her a rapist? 
Men aren't expected to be active, quite contrary in fact. 

Trouble is, there's absolutely no reward that follows passivity, in any area of life. 

If anything we should encourage men to be more active, in all areas of life.

I am not sure what your question about Hillary has to do with this discussion.  We're not talking sexual assault here.

If you truly believe that men are not expected to initiate sexual relationships more than women, we should just agree to disagree.  

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

3 minutes ago, Savannah said:

Patience is a virtue and not remotely the same thing as being passive. 

It requires some measure of passivity.  

[Savannah]

6 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

It requires some measure of passivity.  

No. It does require restraint. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, Savannah said:

No. It does require restraint. 

 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

41 minutes ago, Savannah said:

If Hillary Clinton would have been caught on tape saying just grab men on the crotch do you think anyone would have called her a rapist? 
Men aren't expected to be active, quite contrary in fact. 

Trouble is, there's absolutely no reward that follows passivity, in any area of life. 

If anything we should encourage men to be more active, in all areas of life.

Are you saying that men are discouraged from being active in persuit because of that risks of being accused of sexual assault?

Eirher way, the onus is definitely on men to make the first move, if they didn't you'd had a massive proportion of the male population die virgins. 

[Balefont]

3 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

well we are all pretty shallow. Anyone saying they aren't is basically lying.

Sure.  We all are to some degree or another.  It isn't inherently a male trait to be more shallow. 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

2 minutes ago, Balefont said:

Sure.  We all are to some degree or another.  It isn't inherently a male trait to be more shallow. 

I'd argue that actually it is, we are primarily driven by visual stimulus.. notice the lack of stories in porn

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

I'd argue that actually it is, we are primarily driven by visual stimulus.. notice the lack of stories in porn

Does reacting to visual stimuli mean someone is shallow?

[Savannah]

CJS

If someone wants short term relationships and is convinced that's what makes them happy so be it then. That's their business.

However if we are talking of passive men who would like to live like that but can't achieve such... eh... a social success, on their own, then
I do find the suggestion that the fault in their perceived failure lies within the assumed passiveness of women and that women should carry the onus of said social success, I find that a bit silly. 

Equality does not mean everyone getting laid equally.

Does that answer your question? 

[Buckwheat]

12 hours ago, Arkhangel said:

I don't think that's true either, and in fact for a lot of women cockiness and arrogance is a big turn-off. I think the perception that hyper-macho guys get laid more may have more to do with the fact that kind of guy is likely to boast to other guys about getting laid all the time, regardless of whether it's true.

Very strongly agree with that. I do not think that many women are in fact attracted to cockyness as it is being presented here, maybe just the women who are confident, social and easy in conversation with strangers themselves.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

42 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

I'd argue that actually it is, we are primarily driven by visual stimulus.. notice the lack of stories in porn

I dunno, I find the story about the pizza delivery guy being rewarded for prompt service very compelling.

Joking aside, sometimes I enjoy a story and sometimes I'd rather watch a pmv. It depends on my mood.

[Iskaral Pust]

I'm not sure if I'm even following this meandering debate accurately at this point but I would suggest that the relative sexual success at a certain stage of life by men with more traditional masculine markers -- whether that's being cocky/confident, loud and noticeable, physical appearance, alpha bearing, or whatever -- is not just because those guys make more passes at women but because many women find that more attractive in sexual partners at that stage of life.  Most of the traditional masculine markers are signals of higher testosterone levels: "manly" jaw-line, deep-set eyes, muscular build, deep voice, assertive/aggressive behavior.  Just as many traditional feminine markers are signals of higher estrogen levels.

It might be hard to disentangle but this is the stable-danger complex that I mentioned before, similar to madonna-whore.  At least some women have a preference for a relationship with a stable, reliable guy but want sex with a slightly dangerous/dominant/physical guy, hence the success of 50 Shades Of Grey as fantasy titillation -- a wealthy, successful boyfriend who also offers the dangerous/dominant sex.  That's no different to men being sexually attracted to a kittenish coquette but would expect more substance in a long term partner.

This is related to gender norms of men initiating romantic/sexual pursuit, but I think the point stands without braving the swamp of pick-up artist creeps vs awkward friend-zone creeps.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

1 minute ago, Iskaral Pust said:

I'm not sure if I'm even following this meandering debate accurately at this point but I would suggest that the relative sexual success at a certain stage of life by men with more traditional masculine markers -- whether that's being cocky/confident, loud and noticeable, physical appearance, alpha bearing, or whatever -- is not just because those guys make more passes at women but because many women find that more attractive in sexual partners at that stage of life.  Most of the traditional masculine markers are signals of higher testosterone levels: "manly" jaw-line, deep-set eyes, muscular build, deep voice, assertive/aggressive behavior.  Just as many traditional feminine markers are signals of higher estrogen levels.

It might be hard to disentangle but this is the stable-danger complex that I mentioned before, similar to madonna-whore.  At least some women have a preference for a relationship with a stable, reliable guy but want sex with a slightly dangerous/dominant/physical guy, hence the success of 50 Shades Of Grey as fantasy titillation -- a wealthy, successful boyfriend who also offers the dangerous/dominant sex.  That's no different to men being sexually attracted to a kittenish coquette but would expect more substance in a long term partner.

This is related to gender norms of men initiating romantic/sexual pursuit, but I think the point stands without braving the swamp of pick-up artist creeps vs awkward friend-zone creeps.

I had some thoughts about this, but since I haven't been in the dating game for years, I haven't updated them much.

I think that feminists on the internet, in general, don't provide very good advice on approaching* women for heterosexual men. Basically, the advice they give is typically better suited for the loud macho alpha sports star to tone it down and be more considerate that he's making people uncomfortable that it is for quiet, shy guy who's already second guessing every word he says to any woman he may be interested in. And typically it's the latter type who's more likely to go looking for advice on the internet.

That's wouldn't be a big deal, since giving pickup tips to heterosexual men isn't one of the core missions of feminism, except that I'd often see some people berate and mock men for even asking. Generally the people that do give readily advice to these men are at least associated with some of the most toxic groups on the internet.

Now, this might have changed in the last few years. I have seen plenty of good feminist dating and relationship advice, but that's not the same thing as advice on how to approach women.

I also suspect that a lot of the "shy nice" guys aren't genuinely looking for advice, but are really just looking to complain about the bitches that won't sleep with them. But that doesn't preclude the existence of genuine shy nice guys or guys on the tipping who probably need to be guided away from joining the alt-right.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

I had some thoughts about this, but since I haven't been in the dating game for years, I haven't updated them much.

I think that feminists on the internet, in general, don't provide very good advice on approaching* women for heterosexual men. Basically, the advice they give is typically better suited for the loud macho alpha sports star to tone it down and be more considerate that he's making people uncomfortable that it is for quiet, shy guy who's already second guessing every word he says to any woman he may be interested in. And typically it's the latter type who's more likely to go looking for advice on the internet.

That's wouldn't be a big deal, since giving pickup tips to heterosexual men isn't one of the core missions of feminism, except that I'd often see some people berate and mock men for even asking. Generally the people that do give readily advice to these men are at least associated with some of the most toxic groups on the internet.

Now, this might have changed in the last few years. I have seen plenty of good feminist dating and relationship advice, but that's not the same thing as advice on how to approach women.

I also suspect that a lot of the "shy nice" guys aren't genuinely looking for advice, but are really just looking to complain about the bitches that won't sleep with them. But that doesn't preclude the existence of genuine shy nice guys or guys on the tipping who probably need to be guided away from joining the alt-right.

As someone who was a "nice-shy" type I do admit that, looking back at myself, there was a level of entitledness to the whining about being "friend-zoned".  I wish I could talk to myself at that age and tell myself to get my head out of my ass and recognize that a woman choosing someone other than me isn't a character flaw on her part.  It was extremely stupid.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

I'll second Iskarels post, the traditional male markers are generally what women seem to look out for when short term dating is involved, hence why those guys are more successful. Those women looking for something a bit more stable tend to go for guys with less of those markers.

There was a theory that the Dad Bod was attractive to ladies looking for long term partners because it showed a lack of testosterone , labelling them as more trustworthy and dependable.

Id also say that some of the absolute worst dating advice I've ever been given was by women, and it wasn't until I stopped listening to them that I managed to do a lot better in the dating sphere.

Many young men have become utterly terrified of looking like a creep or a rapist and so hold back from making a move. This tends to put a lot of women off because it shows a big lack of experience and sexual confidence. Quite often, taking charge and being reasonably dominant is actually a massive turn on in of itself.

Of course that sort of thing would probably offend some feminists.