How would you feel?

[Drunken_Angel]

Did you know if you weren't exclusively into chicks I'd get you drunk and try a clumsy, blatant, pass at you?

If I weren't exclusively into women, do you think you'd need to get me drunk?

I do appreciate a well formed sentence, even if it makes me want to smack you.

 

[Light Ice]

If I weren't exclusively into women, do you think you'd need to get me drunk?

I do appreciate a well formed sentence, even if it makes me want to smack you.

You're an absolute doll, did you know that?

 

[Drunken_Angel]

You're an absolute doll, did you know that?

Just don't dress me in anything pink.

 

[Light Ice]

Just don't dress me in anything pink.

Never. You seem a purple kind of girl. A dark, deep, passionate purple.

If I'm off, that's fine.

 

[Drunken_Angel]

Never. You seem a purple kind of girl. A dark, deep, passionate purple.

If I'm off, that's fine.

Angel smiles pleasantly*

"So you were talking feminism?"

 

[Last_Rider]

DISCLAIMER: The following is not necessarily the most relevant, but hopefully has some insight lost somewhere in there. Feel free to ignore/disregard/angrily ask me for your time back if you feel the need.


As to the original question, how would I feel, I have no idea the situation has never happened and probably never will. The reason for this is two fold, one I rarely go out due to a combination of lack of interest and lack of funding; two, I am far too ordinary to attract attention. In addition to being male, average height, average build, second most common eye color and wholly unremerkable, I am almost cirpplingly shy in social situations. Even were I to attract attention of a couple for whatever reason, odds are I would politely decline. Either because I'm in an overly cynical mood and don't want company, or because I'm in a depressed state and really can't stand the thought of another human in that close proximity.

Looking from the other side, were I a slightly different person capable of approaching a total stranger and asking them to eat with me, it would have to be someone who seemed to seek that company. I wouldn't go blindly up to someone whos seemed perfectly content and ask, but someone male or female who seemed like they could use the companionship, I would probably make the effort. Granted that's an exercise in futility since I am at the end of the day myself and no one else.

If I might wax mildly philosophical about the subtextual male/femal discussion going on, too often we confuse "different" with "easier". I am under no illusions that men and women live in fundamentally different worlds, emotionally, biologically, socially, etc. we are different. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I view it as a benefit.

As to the relatively cynical and depraved nature of society where couples approaching a lone person tend to inspire sexual thoughts almost first and foremost, it's a sad yet inevitable thing. The human race has always been depraved, self absorbed, short sighted, and essentially a useless life form. We do nothing, contribute nothing, having only the useless capability for abstract thought. While this inspires beauty at times, more frequently it results in disgusting, useless, or bizarre things. If you'd like a comparision to check that, try googling websites devoted to beautiful art, music, literature, etc. Then try the number of websites devoted to teenagers in sexual situations.

Ok, rant/vent mode off. Hope the evening/day/whenever you read/ignore this finds you well.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

"There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I view it as a benefit."

Yes, it might be a benefit, however, your world is SIGNIFICANTLY safer than mine.
Your world holds significant power over mine.
Your world doesn't treat my world very nicely at all.

 

[Last_Rider]

"There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I view it as a benefit."

Yes, it might be a benefit, however, your world is SIGNIFICANTLY safer than mine.
Your world holds significant power over mine.
Your world doesn't treat my world very nicely at all.

Sadly all true. If it helps, I would happily wipe out humanity if the opportunity came along.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

btw, I want to clarify.
There are many acts that I will point out as sexist, but I don't blame the perpetrators. Their motives may have been benevolent and all.
What I am pointing out is that these attitudes are woven into the societal structure, and that you aren't even aware of them.
What I am trying to do is make you aware of them, so you can change the behaviors.

 

[Drunken_Angel]

Sadly all true. If it helps, I would happily wipe out humanity if the opportunity came along.

That doesn't help hun. We all need each other.. we just need to be needing each other in different ways than we currently do.

 

[Light Ice]

A provocative question or two:

If we are looking for true gender equality does that mean that women should be placed on the front line amongst men in war time?

Are we denying that there is truth in the maternal instinct?

If gender inequality is a case of nurture, not nature, then how is it that in the natural kingdom so many species have defined roles?

 

[Last_Rider]

makes concentrated effort to turn off nihilistic side

Apologies for the above, a rough couple of days have left me with a decidely fatalistic view of everything at the moment. Please take it as nothing more than the venting of a person who has difficulty looking at himself in the mirror and projecting those issues onto everything else.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

A provocative question or two:

If we are looking for true gender equality does that mean that women should be placed on the front line amongst men in war time?

Are we denying that there is truth in the maternal instinct?

If gender inequality is a case of nurture, not nature, then how is it that in the natural kingdom so many species have defined roles?

1. yes
2. yes. You'd be shocked how many women feel shitty about not particularly being obsessed with their babies. And how ashamed they feel
3. We aren't animals. We are significantly more than that.

 

[Drunken_Angel]

makes concentrated effort to turn off nihilistic side

Apologies for the above, a rough couple of days have left me with a decidely fatalistic view of everything at the moment. Please take it as nothing more than the venting of a person who has difficulty looking at himself in the mirror and projecting those issues onto everything else.

Offers Rider a warm hug.

 

[Light Ice]

1. yes
2. yes. You'd be shocked how many women feel shitty about not particularly being obsessed with their babies. And how ashamed they feel
3. We aren't animals. We are significantly more than that.

1. We disagree.
2. We agree.
3. We certainly disagree.

There's a lot of conversation that could be had. This thread, though, I feel is ill-suited. You know?

 

[Vail_Indigo]

1. We disagree.
2. We agree.
3. We certainly disagree.

There's a lot of conversation that could be had. This thread, though, I feel is ill-suited. You know?

1. sexist
2. good
3. blind. Seriously, how can you think we are like giraffes? we have things like language, laws, property. We are conscious and self-aware. If you honestly believe we are not qualitatively different, just quantitatively different from animals, then you and I have no common ground from which to launch a discussion.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

And since #3 means we can't have any kind of meaningful conversation, there's no need to find another thread.

 

[Last_Rider]

Actually I wouldn't compare us to animals. Animals have harmony with the world around them, exist to fulfill specific purposes, humans do neither.

To answer your questions LI

1. yes. I don't care about sex as long as whoever is out there is the most qualified.
2. This question is an over simplified one. I've seen people ruin their lives by becoming baby hungry, and others regret not having children. Others are absolutely content on either side. This comes down to both nature and nurture. The biology and physiology of each unique brain and the events shaping one's life.
3. I believe inequality is the wrong word here. Firstly, nothing is equal. One man is not equal with another man, there are always mitigating factors that prevent true equality. There are differences, and in pure nature settings each species works those differences to their advantage. Ant colonies are ruled by females, male lions serve as guardians of their pride etc. Humans are vastly different animals than anything else, so the same rules don't necessarily apply.

 

[Light Ice]

1. sexist
2. good
3. blind. Seriously, how can you think we are like giraffes? we have things like language, laws, property. We are conscious and self-aware. If you honestly believe we are not qualitatively different, just quantitatively different from animals, then you and I have no common ground from which to launch a discussion.

What makes us different? The society we've built? The language?

Those are what make us different?

Are you proposing that the other species on this planet, or rather amongst the many other species on this planet, there are others that are not sentient?

What makes us special? What makes us greater?

 

[Vail_Indigo]

What makes us different? The society we've built? The language?

Those are what make us different?

Are you proposing that the other species on this planet, or rather amongst the many other species on this planet, there are others that are not sentient?

What makes us special? What makes us greater?

I am saying that the vast majority of creatures on the planet don't think in any way we'd see as thinking.
Language is a conceptual thing. Dogs, for example, don't have the capability to handle abstract concepts.
If you think we are just like dogs, pretty much, then thats cfine. And, from that perspective, I suppose you are right. Why shouldn't women be treated like breeding stock. Why shouldn't women be forced into roles that make them miserable and dependent on men for survival.

I, however, don't see us that way.

You and I have no common ground.

You might as well be talking about God, while I'm an atheist.

 

[Last_Rider]

Yes LI, we are greater. Not better, but greater. In terms of us being greater, we dream more, create more, and on several levels experience more. Plus, again in terms of purely being greater, we can kill them all.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Yes LI, we are greater. Not better, but greater. In terms of us being greater, we dream more, create more, and on several levels experience more. Plus, again in terms of purely being greater, we can kill them all.

yeah, I didn't say we were better behaved

 

[Vail_Indigo]

and on that note, I'm off to bed. As I said, there's no common ground here, no frame of reference. We can't talk about how humans treat each other if we don't agree on what humans are.

 

[Drunken_Angel]

A provocative question or two:

If we are looking for true gender equality does that mean that women should be placed on the front line amongst men in war time?

Are we denying that there is truth in the maternal instinct?

If gender inequality is a case of nurture, not nature, then how is it that in the natural kingdom so many species have defined roles?

1. Equality is not sameness. There will always be legitimate reasons to treat people differently. I'm looking for a society in which difference is NOT automatic grounds for differential treatment. If a woman wishes to fight, then hell yeah.

2. Actually there is very little evidence to support a maternal instinct. However, I feel that under this question is a deeper one about how much of femininity is biological. I would rather discuss that one.

3. Gender cannot be exclusively nature or nurture, but must have aspects of both. We learn to be women and yet our bodies are built differently. The balance between social and physical is where the interesting conversation lies. Regarding animals, be aware that "Roles" are our layers of meaning applied to observations, we are looking at interactions and trying to put human culture upon them and then using that effort to reflect back on our cultures. It becomes circular reasoning at that point.

 

[Light Ice]

I am saying that the vast majority of creatures on the planet don't think in any way we'd see as thinking.
Language is a conceptual thing. Dogs, for example, don't have the capability to handle abstract concepts.
If you think we are just like dogs, pretty much, then thats cfine. And, from that perspective, I suppose you are right. Why shouldn't women be treated like breeding stock. Why shouldn't women be forced into roles that make them miserable and dependent on men for survival.

I, however, don't see us that way.

You and I have no common ground.

You might as well be talking about God, while I'm an atheist.

I think we've more common ground then you'll allow. But I won't push a conversation that's not wanted. Certainly no need.