Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

and holy shit to that entire fucking website.  that's the most self-loathing display of latent homosexuality i've ever come across.

they're gay as fuck, self-hating misogynists, and they should own that shit.

like a man.

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 5/5/2018 at 3:45 AM, austingirl said:

I first heard of these guys after the Santa Barbara shooting. So delusional. And creepy, honestly. 

This is my favorite "she doesn't owe you anything" article. Spoilered because long.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

here's the thing: all sex is transactional, whether we like to admit it or not. and this isn't a "you're paying for it some way" hot take, i mean it seriously.

as a chivalrous guy, i frequently sprung for drinks or dinner when i was dating. i would be lying if i said that there wasn't some soft expectation buried in that chivalry. i honestly think that's natural, so some of the anecdotes up in that article bother me. an unwanted advance is not an assault. i would argue that if girls want to be on the left side of the equation, then they stop accepting drinks or dinners from guys. that takes you from the sum of the equation to the math part of the equation. it also empowers women.

however, some dudes are total assholes, and rape culture absolutely exists, no matter what slorch tries to claim. and both men and women are a part of that culture. there is a reason that baylor and penn state went on for years. hell, even women counselors at baylor tried to bury the rapes that existed there. that's how ingrained it was.

it exists when guys like slorch claims it does not. we are all part of it to varying degrees, whether it's my soft expectation that enough dinner dates would get me a bedroom date. to deny that it exists is folly. because slorch feels somehow victimized in the castigation of rape culture, it must not exist? that's ridiculous.

but it brings me back to my point: all sex is transactional. whether one pays a hooker, or pays for dinner, or even facilitates a free flow of ideas about philosophies of life, there IS a trade of some kind made before the pants come off. virtually no sex occurs without some transaction. so the part of the article above that annoys me is "she doesn't owe you shit." it's a two way road, and we owe each other any number of things. by accepting invitations to expensive dinners, by accepting invitations to hotel rooms, women put themselves back at the sum part of the equation, instead of the empowered left side of the equation. if a girl accepts my invitation to my hotel room, i would expect she knows why i'm asking. that doesn't give me free reign to do whatever i want once she crosses that threshold, however, and if at any time she wants to stop, things need to stop - i want to be clear on that front. but there ARE sexual expectations out there.

anyways, just a few thoughts i was having over the weekend.

tl;dr: boys and girls in america have such a sad time together; sophistication demands that they submit to sex immediately without proper preliminary talk. Not courting talk — real straight talk about souls, for life is holy and every moment is precious. - kerouac

Posted

James Franco isn't exactly unattractive and he been slept by #MeToo.

I don't think ALL sex is transactional.  There are social expectations of politeness that surround accepting a drink, but there is no strict rule that you have to accept every drink someone buys for you or that you have to decline the drink if there's no chance in hell of a date (or of fucking the buyer).  That doesn't turn everything into a transaction.

I agree to a limited extent that men should probably approach it from a transactional perspective if they want to improve their chances.  Maybe focus on the attainable women at the bar, since your time is a limited resource and so is your budget for buying women drinks.  But also there are more ways to get laid than by approaching a stranger at a bar.  How many people out there got married to a high school or college sweetheart?  Or to a co-worker?  Or a mutual friend?  No "first drink" required there.  Just basic attraction.  She does not "owe" you anything.  Especially not any feelings of attraction.

There is also no guarantee that if a woman declines every drink offered to her that she will never get an unwanted advance.  These advances can happen in the workplace, they can happen on the bus, they can happen literally anywhere.  Some of these are harmless, but some ARE also sexual assaults.  The fear is real, and there is no way to differentiate between an unwanted advance that will become a sexual assault and an unwanted advance that won't.  That's why it's such a problem.

 

 

 

Posted

Serious question, how many of y'all have been sexually taken advantage of by a female while you were under the influence?

 

Posted

In a world where masculinity, assertiveness, and the pursuit of women for sex purposes is a bad thing, I would think that celibate beta males would be the wave of the future, cherished even.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
  On 5/7/2018 at 7:27 PM, F250 said:

Serious question, how many of y'all have been sexually taken advantage of by a female while you were under the influence?

 

Expand  

It's obviously far different for a lady than a guy.

 

To answer the question, I may not have been "taken advantage of," but I certainly had women who siezed upon the opportunity.  Of course I fought it kickiing and screaming.

I hope we are better now than we were years ago with regard to booze and rape.  When I was in high school and college, a drunken yes was still a yes.  I think we are raising a generation who is more aware of those nuances.  Of course shitheads are still going to ignore all of that and go full neanderthal.

Edited by slorch
Posted
  On 5/7/2018 at 8:18 PM, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

If the content wasn’t so hate filled, I’d have sympathy for these boards.  They are totally isolated rejects that have to suffer 1000 slights a day. I’m sure it feels good to have other folks to be able to commiserate with.   

Expand  

Sure...but they feed off each other.  Instead of hearing and digesting what they need to hear: bathe, shave, move out of the basement, and go out and practice some gotdamn social skills.

Echo chambers are gonna be the death of this country.

From NY liberals saying "how could George Bush have won, I don't know anyone who voted for him!" to the olds/Trumpkins/both getting all of their information from the feedback loop that is Hannity and Fox News, to these fucking losers telling each other "WE aren't the problem....chicks with standards, man...THEY'RE the problem."

Every one of them needs an open-hand slap to the face and a rebuke to "get the fuck out of your bubble and go figure shit out."

  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
  On 5/5/2018 at 2:05 PM, bolverk said:

It seems these twats could learn a thing or two from 80s pop culture. We had a plethora (yeah, I said it) of movies to teach us the ways. Don't be this guy:

4563_10_screenshot.png

Get creative and make something of/for yourselves like them:

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

 

 

Expand  

I remember the first time I watched Revenge of the Nerds, probably on cable, I know I was pretty young, maybe 12-15.  The scene where he bangs the girl who thinks it's her boyfriend made me cringe, even then.  He fucking raped her.  She liked it, so I guess it's okay, lol.

Posted
  On 5/7/2018 at 8:04 PM, Macanudo said:

I have not.  But I'm willing to learn.

Expand  

It helps if females find you attractive. Also, be prepared for your male friends to support you differently than a girl's female friends would in the same situation.

Male friends showing their support.

giphy.gif

Posted
  On 5/7/2018 at 9:25 PM, 'stache said:

I remember the first time I watched Revenge of the Nerds, probably on cable, I know I was pretty young, maybe 12-15.  The scene where he bangs the girl who thinks it's her boyfriend made me cringe, even then.  He fucking raped her.  She liked it, so I guess it's okay, lol.

Expand  

For better or worse, probably a lot worse, it’s a reflection of the times. 

Posted
  On 5/7/2018 at 7:17 PM, F250 said:

James Franco is borderline Steve Buscemi unattractive.

 

 

Expand  

Bite your tongue, sir.

  On 5/7/2018 at 6:56 PM, chainsaw said:

James Franco isn't exactly unattractive and he been slept by #MeToo.

I don't think ALL sex is transactional.  There are social expectations of politeness that surround accepting a drink, but there is no strict rule that you have to accept every drink someone buys for you or that you have to decline the drink if there's no chance in hell of a date (or of fucking the buyer).  That doesn't turn everything into a transaction.

I agree to a limited extent that men should probably approach it from a transactional perspective if they want to improve their chances.  Maybe focus on the attainable women at the bar, since your time is a limited resource and so is your budget for buying women drinks.  But also there are more ways to get laid than by approaching a stranger at a bar.  How many people out there got married to a high school or college sweetheart?  Or to a co-worker?  Or a mutual friend?  No "first drink" required there.  Just basic attraction.  She does not "owe" you anything.  Especially not any feelings of attraction.

There is also no guarantee that if a woman declines every drink offered to her that she will never get an unwanted advance.  These advances can happen in the workplace, they can happen on the bus, they can happen literally anywhere.  Some of these are harmless, but some ARE also sexual assaults.  The fear is real, and there is no way to differentiate between an unwanted advance that will become a sexual assault and an unwanted advance that won't.  That's why it's such a problem.

 

 

 

Expand  

When y'all are talking about transactional sex, do you mean while in the dating world? Or also when people are in committed relationships?

In some situations I think it could accurately be considered a transaction. But still, "transactional" implies that the individual parties agreed upon the terms before closing the deal. That doesn't happen all the time, especially if you're getting to know one another. If I go out on a date with you, and let you buy me drinks and dinner, and by the end of the night find you to be a pig, I don't owe you sex or a kiss or anything. I appreciate your generosity, but no, I don't owe you shit just because you paid for my meal. It's more of a gamble than a transaction. On both sides.

  • Like 5
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
  On 5/8/2018 at 4:14 AM, austingirl said:

When y'all are talking about transactional sex, do you mean while in the dating world? Or also when people are in committed relationships?

In some situations I think it could accurately be considered a transaction. But still, "transactional" implies that the individual parties agreed upon the terms before closing the deal. That doesn't happen all the time, especially if you're getting to know one another. If I go out on a date with you, and let you buy me drinks and dinner, and by the end of the night find you to be a pig, I don't owe you sex or a kiss or anything. I appreciate your generosity, but no, I don't owe you shit just because you paid for my meal. It's more of a gamble than a transaction. On both sides.

Expand  

I'm pretty sure he meant in the dating world.  I guess it applies in a different way to committed relationships in a "if the guy doesn't wash the dishes maybe she won't be in the mood" kind of way.  It's hard to disagree that sex doesn't motivate people, and that it can be and is used as an incentive to get people to do what you want.

In the dating world what I believe hayden_horn was saying is that when a guy decides to buy a woman a drink he's making an "investment" of sorts, and that it is understandable for a guy to feel like he was conned if he makes that "investment" and the woman does not even let him talk to her.  My response to that is pretty much what you said.  It's more of a gamble than a transaction.  Just as all "investments" are.

I think most men understand that, or at least they should understand that.  A gift is a gift, with the hopes of it leading to a conversation.

I think most women also understand that if they accept a drink the polite thing to do is at least give the guy a chance to talk, so that he does not feel like he was being conned (even though there's no guarantee that a drink will even lead to a conversation).  That would also mean that the polite thing to do is to decline any drinks that are offered by men who have zero chance with you, since accepting the drink would basically require you to talk to a guy who has no chance (wasting everyone's time) or to make him feel conned.  

The other side of that same coin, if you're an obese neckbearded basementdweller with b.o. and you should know that you have no chance with an attractive woman across the room, the polite thing to do is not even attempt to buy the woman a drink, which would put her in a very awkward position of having to decline the drink.  I would think that 99% of people understand more or less what their "league" is, at least when they're sober they understand, and most drink-for-conversation "transactions" are somewhat plausible dating arrangements.

Honestly I think the real problem is that men are not properly trained in handling rejection.  They grew up on movies with impossible odds being overcome and the geek, dweeb, fatass "gets the girl," often through persistence (which in the real world is stalking and is terrifying).  I can't think of a single example of a popular movie or TV show where the main character has strong feelings for a woman, gets rejected, and he handles it in a mature way.  Sometimes the guy doesn't get the girl, but 10 seconds later he ends up with someone much hotter (500 days of summer is one example, although JGL is hardly unattractive).

So we have a lot of guys who grew up on porn and romantic comedies but who are not themselves getting any of the affection or sex that they are being told they need to have in order to be complete people.  Meanwhile I'm pretty sure anyone who is in their lives is saying that they need to hit the gym and get jobs and get their shit together, and that's all true.  They don't want to hear it, but it's true.

So instead of listening to the good advice, they go online and hear what they want to hear, which is that women are the problem and that we should go back to the "good" old days when women were property and lacked any power to control their own lives (or bodies).  I think it starts out very innocent, with stuff about how women can be really shallow that's easy for anyone to identify with.  It's true that SOME women are really shallow and shitty to other people.  Nobody can disagree with that.

Pretty soon what applies to SOME women is generalized and then "ALL women" are parasites who bleed men's wallets dry.  ALL women forgot how to cook and clean.  ALL women want to fuck as many hot guys as possible.  ALL women are "feminazis" who love having abortions.

Then the next logical step is to empathize with the chump who shot up students at Santa Barbara, to ignore or even promote domestic violence, and to consider yourself part of this "movement."

This is all because it's easier to go online and find people who will tell you what you want to hear instead of accepting what you needed to hear in the first place.

What I don't understand is that some of these people aren't even obese guys without jobs.  They're regular guys.  Maybe not even virgins.  I have no idea what their deal is.  

What I do know is that a lot of this could have been prevented if somebody had explained to them how to manage rejection.  Women seem to be rejected all the time and you never see them radicalized.

  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 1
Posted

I think young men get a lot of mixed messages about dating.

First, they grow up with the societal expectations that you are polite and respectful. You aren’t too aggressive when perusing women and that being overly persistent is creepy. Gifts are a nice touch when you know she has some interest.

Then they go to college and watch the aggressive guys that go hard after women bang 10s all day while they jerk off to porn.

Does that give guys a right to be rapists? Of course not, and I don’t want to blame women because they can date whoever they want. I just want to recognize that we feed boys a bunch of bullshit about what women are looking for in dating. 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 5/9/2018 at 1:31 AM, Larry T. Spider said:

Then they go to college and watch the aggressive guys that go hard after women bang 10s all day while they jerk off to porn.

 

Expand  

This is a boogeyman.  There's no such thing as a real "Chad."  There are guys upon whom we project our fears and desires, but make no mistake, these "Chads" still get rejected regularly and they have plenty of sexless nights.  Fewer than you or I, but still plenty.  

Does it pay to be aggressive? Sure, if you never get called out for it or suffer consequences.  If you subtract the intimidation factor from this strategy, how much of the sex that they get is actually 100%, no fear of regret, consensual?  

The purely consensual sex that they get is probably due to their confidence, which is due to a lack of fear of rejection, which cannot exist until they've experienced so much rejection that it doesn't lead to a downward spiral of self-loathing (as it would for an incel).

I agree overall that guys do receive a ton of really bad advice for getting dates/laid.  That's because the advice they're getting is based on the assumption that the girl likes the guy and is dating him.  So if a girl says "I really wish a guy would get me a bouquet of flowers," what she's saying is that she really wishes that a guy who she is already dating or is actively interested in would do that for her.  If she's currently in a relationship, she's going to know all about what her current guy should be doing to keep her happy, and she will know fuckall about how to actually get her interested in the first place.

 

Posted (edited)

Don’t take my previous post as giving any type of advice in dating for guys. Just a call to stop giving young men terrible advice about what women want. It sets them up for failure followed by confusion. Women want guys that are good-looking, confident, and have their shit together. Shoot for two out of three. 

Edited by Larry T. Spider
Posted
  On 5/8/2018 at 12:34 PM, chainsaw said:

I think most women also understand that if they accept a drink the polite thing to do is at least give the guy a chance to talk, so that he does not feel like he was being conned (even though there's no guarantee that a drink will even lead to a conversation).  That would also mean that the polite thing to do is to decline any drinks that are offered by men who have zero chance with you, since accepting the drink would basically require you to talk to a guy who has no chance (wasting everyone's time) or to make him feel conned.  

Expand  

Yeah, I'm cringing just imagining accepting a drink from someone and then ignoring them. It's just ...mean.

  Quote

Honestly I think the real problem is that men are not properly trained in handling rejection.  They grew up on movies with impossible odds being overcome and the geek, dweeb, fatass "gets the girl," often through persistence (which in the real world is stalking and is terrifying).  I can't think of a single example of a popular movie or TV show where the main character has strong feelings for a woman, gets rejected, and he handles it in a mature way.  Sometimes the guy doesn't get the girl, but 10 seconds later he ends up with someone much hotter (500 days of summer is one example, although JGL is hardly unattractive).

Expand  

This is spot on. Last night Animal House was on, and I'd forgotten about the scene where Amadeus is making out with the girl from the grocery store and she passes out, and the devil on his shoulder is telling him to fuck her because she wanted it anyway. He doesn't, but God. 
 

  Quote

 

What I don't understand is that some of these people aren't even obese guys without jobs.  They're regular guys.  Maybe not even virgins.  I have no idea what their deal is.  


 

Expand  

Because those aren't the top of the priority list for many (maybe most) women. So what if you have a job and don't look like a goblin? It doesn't mean shit if you're an asshole, and it's usually not hard to figure out if that's the case.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
  On 5/7/2018 at 7:27 PM, F250 said:

Serious question, how many of y'all have been sexually taken advantage of by a female while you were under the influence?

 

Expand  

Pretty much my entire sophomore year.  

Butterface with a great body.  Rich as hell.  I was poor.  I didn't have a car and lived in a dorm.  She'd drive over in her brand new BMW with a bottle of top shelf liquor for me, take me back to her apartment, get dinner delivered, and then have her way with me.

 

Damn, those were the days.   

Edited by Beau Vine
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 5/8/2018 at 12:34 PM, chainsaw said:

I'm pretty sure he meant in the dating world.  I guess it applies in a different way to committed relationships in a "if the guy doesn't wash the dishes maybe she won't be in the mood" kind of way.  It's hard to disagree that sex doesn't motivate people, and that it can be and is used as an incentive to get people to do what you want.

In the dating world what I believe hayden_horn was saying is that when a guy decides to buy a woman a drink he's making an "investment" of sorts, and that it is understandable for a guy to feel like he was conned if he makes that "investment" and the woman does not even let him talk to her.  My response to that is pretty much what you said.  It's more of a gamble than a transaction.  Just as all "investments" are.

I think most men understand that, or at least they should understand that.  A gift is a gift, with the hopes of it leading to a conversation.

I think most women also understand that if they accept a drink the polite thing to do is at least give the guy a chance to talk, so that he does not feel like he was being conned (even though there's no guarantee that a drink will even lead to a conversation).  That would also mean that the polite thing to do is to decline any drinks that are offered by men who have zero chance with you, since accepting the drink would basically require you to talk to a guy who has no chance (wasting everyone's time) or to make him feel conned.  

The other side of that same coin, if you're an obese neckbearded basementdweller with b.o. and you should know that you have no chance with an attractive woman across the room, the polite thing to do is not even attempt to buy the woman a drink, which would put her in a very awkward position of having to decline the drink.  I would think that 99% of people understand more or less what their "league" is, at least when they're sober they understand, and most drink-for-conversation "transactions" are somewhat plausible dating arrangements.

Honestly I think the real problem is that men are not properly trained in handling rejection.  They grew up on movies with impossible odds being overcome and the geek, dweeb, fatass "gets the girl," often through persistence (which in the real world is stalking and is terrifying).  I can't think of a single example of a popular movie or TV show where the main character has strong feelings for a woman, gets rejected, and he handles it in a mature way.  Sometimes the guy doesn't get the girl, but 10 seconds later he ends up with someone much hotter (500 days of summer is one example, although JGL is hardly unattractive).

So we have a lot of guys who grew up on porn and romantic comedies but who are not themselves getting any of the affection or sex that they are being told they need to have in order to be complete people.  Meanwhile I'm pretty sure anyone who is in their lives is saying that they need to hit the gym and get jobs and get their shit together, and that's all true.  They don't want to hear it, but it's true.

So instead of listening to the good advice, they go online and hear what they want to hear, which is that women are the problem and that we should go back to the "good" old days when women were property and lacked any power to control their own lives (or bodies).  I think it starts out very innocent, with stuff about how women can be really shallow that's easy for anyone to identify with.  It's true that SOME women are really shallow and shitty to other people.  Nobody can disagree with that.

Pretty soon what applies to SOME women is generalized and then "ALL women" are parasites who bleed men's wallets dry.  ALL women forgot how to cook and clean.  ALL women want to fuck as many hot guys as possible.  ALL women are "feminazis" who love having abortions.

Then the next logical step is to empathize with the chump who shot up students at Santa Barbara, to ignore or even promote domestic violence, and to consider yourself part of this "movement."

This is all because it's easier to go online and find people who will tell you what you want to hear instead of accepting what you needed to hear in the first place.

What I don't understand is that some of these people aren't even obese guys without jobs.  They're regular guys.  Maybe not even virgins.  I have no idea what their deal is.  

What I do know is that a lot of this could have been prevented if somebody had explained to them how to manage rejection.  Women seem to be rejected all the time and you never see them radicalized.

Expand  

Succinctly put, and also right to the point. 

Posted
  On 5/5/2018 at 10:25 PM, JimmyJames said:
This issue reminds me of a guy I knew in college who worked out a lot so was pretty buff but had the goofiest face imaginable and so most chicks completely ignored him.
So what he did was at every party we had or went to he immediately sought out the fattest chick there and talked her up. He got laid every time and just didn’t give a shit what you or anyone else thought. Was proud of it. 
Thats all I got. 
 
 
And that guy's name was Vic Mackey
  • Like 2
Posted
  On 5/9/2018 at 6:37 PM, austingirl said:

Shmitty, are you going to provide any context to why you're negging everything I post?

Expand  

Damn, you could tell it was me?  Sorry, but the preachy-hi-horse, anti-male attitude doesn't jive.  And no, that doesn't mean I condone how some men treat women.    

  On 5/9/2018 at 6:46 PM, Larry T. Spider said:

Because you are a chick and he has to take out his frustrations from his moms basement?

Expand  

No, I took out my frustrations from you're moms bedroom.  

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 5/9/2018 at 4:00 AM, Beau Vine said:

Pretty much my entire sophomore year.  

Butterface with a great body.  Rich as hell.  I was poor.  I didn't have a car and lived in a dorm.  She'd drive over in her brand new BMW with a bottle of top shelf liquor for me, take me back to her apartment, get dinner delivered, and then have her way with me.

 

Damn, those were the days.   

Expand  

You poor soul. I guess you had to just close your eyes and pretend it was Bill James taking you to town until it was over. 

Posted (edited)

Lol at the notion of anything that austingirl, myself, or any other woman posted being "hi-horsey" or "anti-male."

 

Edited by trauma babe
Shitty early morning grammar
  • Like 3
Posted

I would agree that neither one of you have.  Austin girl's perspective has been particularly objective and helpful.

 

When I objected earlier in the thread, it was to the phrase of 'rape culture'  and the tendency of people who use it to be off the deep end when it comes to interactions of men and women. Neither of you have posted with that attitude/ opinion.

I jumped the gun, but it was because of a couple different recent real life interactions with people who act like every freaking dude out there has either raped a woman or promotes it in some way.

" Well I've never raped a woman, made one feel uncomfortable in my presence( with regard to safety,) or remotely encouraged anyone to do so.  Oh, and I've demonstrated said behavior to my 2 sons and raised them to do the same."

"Well all men are guilty on some level or another.  This rape thing happens to 125% of all women.  You should be castrated. #metoo!!!"

 

yeah, I exxagerated their response, but only slightly.  neither of you belong in that group and I apologize for any appearance that I felt that way.

 

Posted
  On 5/10/2018 at 9:56 AM, slorch said:

I would agree that neither one of you have.  Austin girl's perspective has been particularly objective and helpful.

 

When I objected earlier in the thread, it was to the phrase of 'rape culture'  and the tendency of people who use it to be off the deep end when it comes to interactions of men and women. Neither of you have posted with that attitude/ opinion.

I jumped the gun, but it was because of a couple different recent real life interactions with people who act like every freaking dude out there has either raped a woman or promotes it in some way.

" Well I've never raped a woman, made one feel uncomfortable in my presence( with regard to safety,) or remotely encouraged anyone to do so.  Oh, and I've demonstrated said behavior to my 2 sons and raised them to do the same."

"Well all men are guilty on some level or another.  This rape thing happens to 125% of all women.  You should be castrated. #metoo!!!"

 

yeah, I exxagerated their response, but only slightly.  neither of you belong in that group and I apologize for any appearance that I felt that way.

 

Expand  

This is a really good post. 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 5/10/2018 at 9:56 AM, slorch said:

I would agree that neither one of you have.  Austin girl's perspective has been particularly objective and helpful.

 

When I objected earlier in the thread, it was to the phrase of 'rape culture'  and the tendency of people who use it to be off the deep end when it comes to interactions of men and women. Neither of you have posted with that attitude/ opinion.

I jumped the gun, but it was because of a couple different recent real life interactions with people who act like every freaking dude out there has either raped a woman or promotes it in some way.

" Well I've never raped a woman, made one feel uncomfortable in my presence( with regard to safety,) or remotely encouraged anyone to do so.  Oh, and I've demonstrated said behavior to my 2 sons and raised them to do the same."

"Well all men are guilty on some level or another.  This rape thing happens to 125% of all women.  You should be castrated. #metoo!!!"

 

yeah, I exxagerated their response, but only slightly.  neither of you belong in that group and I apologize for any appearance that I felt that way.

 

Expand  

The thirst is real.

Posted
  On 5/10/2018 at 6:45 AM, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

I know that even though this is ostensibly a UT forum most of you haven’t read anything literary in decades, but I really recommend reading this story that caused an understood uproar last year in the New Yorker. I think it leaves the reader with an understanding of both the fragile psyche of women in this day and age as it pertains to hooking up and culture and also men and their subconscious expectations and hostility. I’ll link it here, and before anyone confuses me with a feminine studies guy let me just say if I was in school now I’d probably be charged with lots of crimes as most of my hook ups were because I was a good liar and got hammered and my dates equally hammered so they’d ignore their instincts.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/cat-person

Expand  

I read the story. I read a Huffpost article about why the story was important. I still don't see it. It's in the New Yorker, so of course it is well-written, but it is fairly meh overall. Neither character is particularly interesting and the plot is hardly novel. It was probably a well-tread meme when 'Brat was a young man.

Posted

 

  On 5/10/2018 at 9:56 AM, slorch said:

I would agree that neither one of you have.  Austin girl's perspective has been particularly objective and helpful.

 

When I objected earlier in the thread, it was to the phrase of 'rape culture'  and the tendency of people who use it to be off the deep end when it comes to interactions of men and women. Neither of you have posted with that attitude/ opinion.

I jumped the gun, but it was because of a couple different recent real life interactions with people who act like every freaking dude out there has either raped a woman or promotes it in some way.

" Well I've never raped a woman, made one feel uncomfortable in my presence( with regard to safety,) or remotely encouraged anyone to do so.  Oh, and I've demonstrated said behavior to my 2 sons and raised them to do the same."

"Well all men are guilty on some level or another.  This rape thing happens to 125% of all women.  You should be castrated. #metoo!!!"

 

yeah, I exxagerated their response, but only slightly.  neither of you belong in that group and I apologize for any appearance that I felt that way.

 

Expand  

I really appreciate this. I know we disagree on a lot but the discussion here has been great.

  On 5/10/2018 at 5:05 AM, Shmitty said:

Damn, you could tell it was me?  Sorry, but the preachy-hi-horse, anti-male attitude doesn't jive.  And no, that doesn't mean I condone how some men treat women.    

Expand  

I'm not sure if you're serious about knowing it was you, but yes, you can click on the green or red number in the bottom right corner of a post and see who all likes or dislikes it. You should also get notified if someone reacts to your post or quotes you, and the notification panel shows you who is reacting.

Anyway, I'm genuinely curious as to what you found to be high-horsey and/or anti-male. I've been married to a guy for 15 years and am raising two boys. I, as I'm sure is the case with most everyone here, have a lot vested in working through these issues, and have found the conversation in this thread to be very insightful.

Posted
  On 5/7/2018 at 7:27 PM, F250 said:

Serious question, how many of y'all have been sexually taken advantage of by a female while you were under the influence?

 

Expand  

Honestly, I came to from passing out drunk being ridden by a chubby stalker who had a thing for me in college once.  I remember passing out alone.  I in no way consented to what happened and I actually stopped it mid process.  She was really embarrassed and I didn’t make it a bigger issue than stopping it.    

Posted
  On 5/10/2018 at 10:30 PM, Apep said:

I read the story. I read a Huffpost article about why the story was important. I still don't see it. It's in the New Yorker, so of course it is well-written, but it is fairly meh overall. Neither character is particularly interesting and the plot is hardly novel. It was probably a well-tread meme when 'Brat was a young man.

Expand  

You thought that was well written? Lol. It reads like the work of a college sophomore who's not a writer.

Posted
  On 5/11/2018 at 2:07 AM, austingirl said:

I'm not sure if you're serious about knowing it was you, but yes, you can click on the green or red number in the bottom right corner of a post and see who all likes or dislikes it. You should also get notified if someone reacts to your post or quotes you, and the notification panel shows you who is reacting.

Expand  

Just noticed he was doing the same on my posts.  What the fuck is "anti-male" about expecting men to hold themselves accountable for their own shortcomings in the dating world?  Learn to accept "no" like a fucking man, and not a sniveling little bitch.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
  On 5/11/2018 at 12:21 PM, El Diablo said:

You thought that was well written? Lol. It reads like the work of a college sophomore who's not a writer.

Expand  

Yes. It is supposed to be the narrative of a college underclassman who apparently isn't all that bright. The author absolutely nailed that voice.

Posted
  On 5/11/2018 at 6:31 PM, Apep said:

Yes. It is supposed to be the narrative of a college underclassman who apparently isn't all that bright. The author absolutely nailed that voice.

Expand  

Makes me wonder how much training it takes to sound like a dumbass. Years?

Posted

It's the New Yorker, so I'm guessing the author either got lucky with a timely piece or she studied for years to switch from condescending jackass to dumbass.

Posted
  On 5/11/2018 at 7:34 PM, Apep said:

It's the New Yorker, so I'm guessing the author either got lucky with a timely piece or she studied for years to switch from condescending jackass to dumbass.

Expand  

The entire exercise of writing in that "voice" entails a bit of condescending jackassery. It's not enough to simply explain a point, the author felt the need to write it so that a 7th grader could get the gist? Makes for a nice commentary on what they think of their audience. Or maybe it's just typical New York.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...