Men. Men. Men.

[Week]

11 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

Completely different. It would be more like me womansplaining to you what it feels like to have a baby. 

Still mansplaining.

The point I'm making, is why it's significant to have spaces for women to talk about their own issues. People like you flip that and demand spaces for men -- pointedly ignoring the fact that we are almost always discussing issues from a male-centric viewpoint. Of course, there are issues outside the mainstream to be discussed, but there is not the equivalence that you advocate.

[mormont]

35 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

That doesn't really address the point I was making. 

That may be, but you haven't addressed the point either. 

The point was, is the experience of being a man in some way different or incomprehensible to a woman in this respect? If so, how and why? I've asked you that (IIRC) three times, and your answer has simply been to repeat that it is, without any attempt to explain how or why. 

So long as you remain unable to explain that, then honestly, it seems to me that your objection to women commenting on men's experience is bunk. 

[Luzifer's right hand]

3 hours ago, baxus said:

Those guys are an exception rather than the rule, even if we buy the whole "high sex drive is the cause for this", which I don't. I'd rather say that they have some psychological issue or that at the very least they haven't mastered the basic social skills required to function in society.

The "they can control themselves when they're sober" thing stinks to high heaven, too. It seems more likely to me that they see alcohol as a valid excuse for unacceptable behavior.

I belive that quite a few men only display those basic skills to avoid consequences. When drunk some people care less or not all about consequences.

Maybe visiting Pattaya and seeing how a lot of guys change once they realise that they can treat people like things if they have money did not help but I have a pretty low opinion of my fellow men and I'm not just talking about the sex tourists who only travel because of that but also the guys who make a pit stop backpacking or are there for a bachelor party. Things like blow job bars make you wish for brain bleach. 

[Eggegg]

3 minutes ago, Week said:

Still mansplaining.

The point I'm making, is why it's significant to have spaces for women to talk about their own issues. People like you flip that and demand spaces for men -- pointedly ignoring the fact that we are almost always discussing issues from a male-centric viewpoint. Of course, there are issues outside the mainstream to be discussed, but there is not the equivalence that you advocate.

And yet here we are in a space for men to talk about mens issues and we have a woman trying to tell men what it's like to be a man.

[Kalbear]

10 hours ago, litechick said:

Because I can't grasp it, it must apply to every man?  WTF?  I did not say that or imply it.  You fabricated that and attributed it to me.  You are saying more about your mind than mine right now.

You really, really did imply it. Your anecdote was about whether or not you could ever understand the lust that men experience. Not "a man" or some men, just men.

10 hours ago, litechick said:

From my experience and observation, I wouldn't say it is a majority problem but I would say that it is not uncommon.  I'm not talking about the 1%, I'm talking about the 20%. I won't bog the thread down with examples.  You have your own examples if you are honest.

Empirical data does not support this.

10 hours ago, litechick said:

Having said that, the thread wants to move on and I don't want to stop it.  We can move it to PM or just let it go.  You get the last word.

It doesn't, as it turns out.

[Eggegg]

1 minute ago, Wolfgang I said:

I belive that quite a few men only display those basic skills to avoid consequences. When drunk some people care less or not all about consequences.

Maybe visiting Pattaya and seeing how a lot of guys change once they realise that they can treat people like things if they have money did not help but I have a pretty low opinion of my fellow men and I'm not just talking about the sex tourists who only travel because of that but also the guys who make a pit stop backpacking or are there for a bachelor party. Things like blow job bars make you wish for brain bleach. 

I've been to Thailand and it is as you say. It tends to illustrate some mens rather detached relationship with sex, that so many go over there purely for that purpose is quite illuminating, and disgusting 

[Kalbear]

27 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

I wouldn't tell a woman what its like to be a woman, because as a man I cannot possibly know, no matter how many people I ask or what links I post. So why would a woman try and tell a man what its like to be a man? 

Dude, you literally are when you tell people in this thread that your sex drive is different than women's, and you are at that point telling women what their sex drive is like. You get that, right? That you saying that is no different than women telling you the otherwise? The only difference is that you are taking umbrage at it. 

[Week]

4 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

And yet here we are in a space for men to talk about mens issues and we have a woman trying to tell men what it's like to be a man.

I addressed this. Mormont addressed this. Many people have. You are the only one that I can see that still has a problem with it here.

[Chaldanya]

51 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

And yet here we are in a space for men to talk about mens issues and we have a woman trying to tell men what it's like to be a man.

The irony in this post is breathtaking, tbh.

[Dr. Pepper]

33 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

Completely different. It would be more like me womansplaining to you what it feels like to have a baby. 

No, it's not completely different.  Both examples of stupid verifiably untrue things.  

14 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

And yet here we are in a space for men to talk about mens issues and we have a woman trying to tell men what it's like to be a man.

No, this isn't true.  I'm discussing what it's like to be a person.  Barring any medical or psychological condition, people are capable of controlling their basic bodily functions for periods of time.  It's been pointed out before that you can refrain from eating for a while even if you feel a hunger pain, you can wait to drink water for a while, you can even wait to pee until you find a suitable place (assuming one is nearby).  These are all facts that are true for all genders.  It's also true that even if a man (or woman or a bigender person) experiences sexual desire, they are capable of refraining from release of that desire until a more appropriate time or space.  

And like Kalbear says, your insistence on this issue is an example of you forcefully trying to tell women what their sexuality is like, and not even offering anything other than random anecdotal babbling. Perhaps a lot of this confusion is that the nature of the penis makes it easier to visually see male desire while the nature of the vagine makes it more difficult.  We don't have anything that tents the pants, after all, and clothing tends to be absorbent enough to prevent a showing of slick.  

Look, this is a good and necessary topic.  You brought up excellent points of discussion in the OP and lots of people have come in to speak about men's issues.  Yet you keep bringing it back to this "men's sex drives just can't be controlled" issue that you tried to sell in the multiple sexual assault threads.  You're not alone in trying to sell this.  We have idioms about it that both excuse and encourage such behavior (boys will be boys, for example).  Obviously I find issue with how it relates to and drives sexual behavior, but these type of training boys receive may also be a contributing factor in other issues like high suicide rates or poor health care.  If boys are taught to be rough and tough and that they are naturally aggressive, then that probably affects how they behave as adults, how they feel about seeking medical care, how they view other genders, etc.  We've read some upsetting stories from men who had a lower quality of life because they did not think they were able to be a man and also care for their health.  

 

[baxus]

1 hour ago, Wolfgang I said:

I belive that quite a few men only display those basic skills to avoid consequences. When drunk some people care less or not all about consequences.

Maybe visiting Pattaya and seeing how a lot of guys change once they realise that they can treat people like things if they have money did not help but I have a pretty low opinion of my fellow men and I'm not just talking about the sex tourists who only travel because of that but also the guys who make a pit stop backpacking or are there for a bachelor party. Things like blow job bars make you wish for brain bleach. 

I was in Phuket, not Pattaya, but the situation is pretty similar to the one you describe.

In the end, it comes down to being a decent human being. If you are one, you won't treat other people as second class citizens, including but not limited to groping women when drunk. If you're not one, then there's no limit to how low you can go if given a free pass.

59 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

I've been to Thailand and it is as you say. It tends to illustrate some mens rather detached relationship with sex, that so many go over there purely for that purpose is quite illuminating, and disgusting 

Some men ≠ all men

The fact that there are some people who behave in way does not mean that they can't contain their hyperactive sex drive but that they are a bunch of misogynist and/or racist scum, who in all likelihood have a pretty good reason to see a psychotherapist or a psychologist.

[Eggegg]

13 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

No, this isn't true.  I'm discussing what it's like to be a person.  Barring any medical or psychological condition, people are capable of controlling their basic bodily functions for periods of time.  

I'm not sure why as the discussion was around what its like to have a cock and balls. Since you do not have those I'm saying you are not qualified to really talk with much authority on the subject. Now if you wanted to simply state what its like to have a vagina and discuss how you feel it might be different, that all very well and that would be an interesting and worthwhile conversation. But you didn't do that.

13 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

 It's also true that even if a man (or woman or a bigender person) experiences sexual desire, they are capable of refraining from release of that desire until a more appropriate time or space.  

As I have said REPEATEDLY in this thread ( and I'm tired of saying it) I believe that men are perfectly capable of controlling their desires. I'm not sure how you keep missing that, or how other posters attack people like Litchick and twist what they are saying to make it appear that they espousing that belief. 
 

13 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Look, this is a good and necessary topic.  You brought up excellent points of discussion in the OP and lots of people have come in to speak about men's issues.  

Yes I did, and I would have preferred the thread to stay that way, it hasn't been me pushing that line of conversation, I'm just responding to those who come in here and seemingly only wish to talk about that. Funny that I responded to an interesting comment about male education last night nobody responded to it, because it seems people would rather talk about wanking or getting into arguments over things people haven't even said. 

Now if we would all like to stop talking about wanking or sex drives and go back a worthy topic like male education I'd be more than happy.

[mormont]

5 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

I'm not sure why as the discussion was around what its like to have a cock and balls.

Er... no, it wasn't.

It was around whether men have a harder time restraining themselves sexually. You want to take that as read. Everyone else is asking you why we should do that. 

Male education is a very worthy topic but on that subject, nobody has said something controversial and then kept on doubling down on it when challenged. That's why there aren't as many posts on that. 

[Week]

Oh great, you'll let the conversation move on after a few more parting shots? (while also ignoring a number of people pointing out that you're obsession with a male-only-centered space is wack)

Classy move bruh.

[Dr. Pepper]

40 minutes ago, Eggegg said:

I'm not sure why as the discussion was around what its like to have a cock and balls. Since you do not have those I'm saying you are not qualified to really talk with much authority on the subject. Now if you wanted to simply state what its like to have a vagina and discuss how you feel it might be different, that all very well and that would be an interesting and worthwhile conversation. But you didn't do that.

No, the discussion is about what cocks make men do.  You've brought it up multiple times in multiple threads.  

And for fuck's sake not every man has a cock and balls. 

Quote

As I have said REPEATEDLY in this thread ( and I'm tired of saying it) I believe that men are perfectly capable of controlling their desires. I'm not sure how you keep missing that, or how other posters attack people like Litchick and twist what they are saying to make it appear that they espousing that belief. 

I agree, you've said it, but only after many posters told you repeatedly that this is true.  Before that you argued

Maybe posters are rebutting your's and Litechick's (confused how she gets to have an opinion considering she may not have a penis) because they all disagree with it, yes even the one's who have penises.  I don't think anyone is twisting any posts.  Again, you specifically have posts on this topic in multiple threads and you have repeated the same things over and over.  Maybe you aren't saying what you think you've said.

Quote

Yes I did, and I would have preferred the thread to stay that way, it hasn't been me pushing that line of conversation, I'm just responding to those who come in here and seemingly only wish to talk about that. Funny that I responded to an interesting comment about male education last night nobody responded to it, because it seems people would rather talk about wanking or getting into arguments over things people haven't even said. 

Now if we would all like to stop talking about wanking or sex drives and go back a worthy topic like male education I'd be more than happy.

Yes, it has been you.  You've repeatedly responded to it and moved this conversation forward.  I've brought up multiple different topics, male education has been brought up several times in this thread.  And yet you specifically and those you've named here have brought it back to cock and balls and how one can't know even basic biology unless they have cocks and balls.

Ok, if you want a different topic, how about you do it? How about you tell us what's allowed to be discussed here.  I just have a vagina, can't make points of discussion without permission amirite.

[The Mance]

1 hour ago, Dr. Pepper said:

It's been pointed out before that you can refrain from eating for a while even if you feel a hunger pain, you can wait to drink water for a while, you can even wait to pee until you find a suitable place (assuming one is nearby).

Err…we have pretty strict guidelines ensuring that people's eating, drinking, and defecating needs are accommodated during their work hours.  Like, mandated break schedule regiments, min/max meal times, appropriate and available facilities, etc, sooo…maybe not the strongest argument against.  Just saying'.

[Dr. Pepper]

19 minutes ago, The Mance said:

Err…we have pretty strict guidelines ensuring that people's eating, drinking, and defecating needs are accommodated during their work hours.  Like, mandated break schedule regiments, min/max meal times, appropriate and available facilities, etc, sooo…maybe not the strongest argument against.  Just saying'.

Yeah, and it's really interesting that people can wait until they reach the toilet before shitting.  Or wait until their break time before eating.  Like just because you feel the need to shit doesn't mean you absolutely need to do it right at the moment in your pants (assuming no medical issues).  We can control our functions for periods of time.  

Furthermore, not jacking off in the middle of the work day (assuming not medical issue) isn't going to create the same health hazard as not eating or peeing or pooping.  

[Lily Valley]

3 hours ago, Eggegg said:

And yet here we are in a space for men to talk about mens issues and we have a woman trying to tell men what it's like to be a man.

#notallwomen

[The Mance]

1 hour ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Yeah, and it's really interesting that people can wait until they reach the toilet before shitting.  Or wait until their break time before eating.  Like just because you feel the need to shit doesn't mean you absolutely need to do it right at the moment in your pants (assuming no medical issues).  We can control our functions for periods of time.  

Furthermore, not jacking off in the middle of the work day (assuming not medical issue) isn't going to create the same health hazard as not eating or peeing or pooping.  

Well, not to ruin a good strawgasm, but my point was that, while yes, people can control their basic biological functions to a large degree, in the interests of physiological need, convenience, morale or productivity or whatever, we still have agreed upon mechanisms to ensure that, where possible, they don't have to.  

Now, you can certainly claim to know that nobody should ever need to jerk it at work, and I'd probably agree.  But I don't see why, given appropriate considerations to privacy, decorum or sanitation, anybody should give a shit if they do.

[Liffguard]

It's probably a lost cause, but here's my possibly quixotic attempt to wrench this thread somewhat back on topic.

Has anybody else been reading How Not To Be A Boy by Robert Webb? Part memoir, part musing on issues surrounding masculinity in the modern world. I've not quite finished it yet but what I've read so far has been good. I doubt it will fundamentally rock anyone's worldview but Webb presents the topic pretty thoughtfully.

One of parts that got me thinking was earlier on when he's having an imaginary conversation with his younger self. He reveals that he went through a period of defining himself in direct opposition to his abusive, drunken, emotionally immature, hyper-masculine northern dad, and by extension in direct opposition to toxic masculinity as a whole. More to the point, he also delves into how this was almost as unhealthy as wholeheardtedly embracing it. After all, if your whole identity is based around being the exact opposite of a certain stereotype, you're still allowing the stereotype to define your life. In many ways the exact opposite of the hyper-masculine "alpha male" is the passive "nice guy," which is just an expression of toxic masculinity in a different package.

This got me wondering, is toxic masculinity composed of inherently toxic traits, or is it taking traits that are healthy in moderation to an unhealthy extreme? At another point in the book Webb talks about how he struggled to reconcile that it's possible to be strong and active without being domineering and aggressive, or that you can be kind and well-mannered without being docile.

Ultimately, one of Webb's main points (so far as I am in the book) is the conceptions of masculinity and femininity aren't particularly useful, and that trying to redefine masculinity into a more healthy form is still just perpetuating an idea that men are expected to act a certain way. Positive personality traits stand as positive on their own merits regardless of the genitals (or personal identity) of those who exhibit them, and the same is true for negative traits.