I hate men!

[Johnny Mayberry]

BOOBIES!!!

 

[sweetnpetite]

No, you are not on ignore. It took me a while to finish the reply I was working on.

You won't take me seriously because of my screen-name? That is right up there with discounting what I have to say becuase I have big breasts and blond hair. Why can't I choose to describe myself in a physical way- this is a sex site after all.

I like the name- it rymes. Its true and ironic at the same time. I can be very sweet, and I'm very short and quite skinny. But I'm not afraid to be outspoken, nasty, dirty, slutty, ext. NOt in the least. there's a certain contrast in having a discussion about anal sex with someone named 'sweetnpetite.' I also have a keychain which pretty much describes my motto: "I'm not as innocent as I look."

My screen-name is a trojen horse. ALso, like the men who dressed as women in Disney's Mulan in order to get past the guards. Stereotypes can sometimes be used to the advantage, and I am not against that. It serves the stereotyper right for discounting a person simply because of gender of to delicate and 'objectifying' of a screen name.

YOu might also notice the contrast between the name 'sweetnpetite' and the tag under my name, which says, "I've been a bad bad girl."

The pic of Fiona is there for a couple of reasons. I found it while searching for an av during 'apple week.' I liked the fact that it was something very different from the expectation, yet still fit the category. I like to be different like that.

I liked it for several other reasons and so i decided to keep it. I am a very thin women. I am also very pale and have reddish hair, so there is a physical parallel from my looks to hers. Also, she has that 'jailbait' vibe as a result of her looks and her videos. Guess what- I'm 28, but I look like a teanager.

I have no problem with women looking good, or with men admiring her physically. I have no problem with women making money off there bodies, only with others exploiting and then demonizing her. If someone is going to proffet off a woman's body, it should be the woman herself.

I have no problem with men going to stip clubs. I have a problem with men thinking that they are better than the strippers. I have a problem with men who wouldn't ask there wives to fulfil there dirty desires, becuase she's 'a lady' so he seeks out 'a whore' instead.

I have no problem with men appreciating my body. But don't treat me like an idiot. Don't expect me to wait on you or kiss you ass or stand around quietly looking pretty. Don't expect me to fall all over you becuase you compliment my eyes.

Hell. I don't even mind being a sex object. As long as you understand that that is PART of who I am, and not ALL of who I am. I am not put here mearly for your pleasure. I have my own thoughts and feelings and desires.

smartnsassy would fit too. But just because I'm more than my body doesnt' mean I have to hide or deny it. I like my screen-name. It has multilayer of meaning for me. I would think that *some* of the irony would be redily apparent from my tagline, my sigline, my posts, my quote.

Guess it went over your head...

Absolutely...or submissive slaves, anyways...

I notice that our little princess chooses a screen name that objectifies herself, uses a very thin woman's pic for her AV(Fiona Apple?!?), and then complains about everyone else. I'd take her much more seriously if her screen name was "smartnsassy", for instance.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

I'm just offended that you look down on me because I am a man.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Through out history men have viewed themselves as superior. Well, maybe you will say, I have never behaved that way, so why do I deserve to be punished for what they have done.

But what did the women of the world do to be viewed as inferior, less than, born to be subservient?

Two wrongs don't make a right, but neither does one wrong make a right. Men overall still project a sense of entitlement and superiority. I don't like that, and I don't like them for it.

I feel that men are scared of women- of the power that her sexuality holds over them, of the power that she has to create life and grow it inside of her. I feel that they keep women down because they fear that if she discovers the strength of her powers, he will loose his comfy spot at the top of the totem-pole.

You may be the exception, or you may not. I don't really know you, so I coudn't say. I'm sorry to have offended you, but as a women I go threw life being offended- and I'm told that it's no big deal. Just a joke, something I took too personally. Look through this thread, everything that I was offended by I was told to get over it because I was generalizing and stereotyping- therefore my experiences where not real or somehow not applicable.

You yourself replied with:

//Get back in the kitchen and bake me a pie!

Give a woman a computer, and next thing you know she thinks she's a person...//

By making sarcastic remarks, you basically told me that I was over-reacting and that it was all in my head. That was just as condescending as the face value of the statement.

I'm offended and I'm over reacting.

You're offended and I'm a bigot.

Clearly sexism towards men is the only sexism that truly exists in the 21st Century.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Well while I admire some of the strengths Madonna has exhibited in aspects of her life, I do not think overall she enlightened the world in terms of feminism and women's rights, or opened dialogue about sexuality...that was more a 60's thing. I am a grandmother, and believe me when she bought out 'Like A Virgin', it was not the word virgin which was shocking...had been around and spoken for eons...it was her blatent grab for attention by using her sexuality in any way it took to get what she wanted...which was what a lot of feminists of the day, and present times, objected to. I tend to think if you got it you are free to flaunt it, but if you use it to get to the top of the shit pile, someday that shit might disintegrate under you and swallow you up unless you find something else to substantiate yourself in the meantime.

Madonna has a gift for changing her image which keeps people interested. As for her other attributes, well as sad as it is her mother died when she was young (and she may be surprised she is not the only one it happened to, even her siblings suffered that loss), I am tired of her pulling it out of the closet everytime she begins a new project so she gets publicity. Now she has written a children's book, once again she is doing the rounds of interviews about her tragic loss as a child. The story is getting a little old.

And as Netzach says, art is created by individuals, some even women, just as media images are. If you choose to buy into them that is your choice. I used to be a miniscule, perfect figure type about 10 years ago, but am no more....but do I cry and carry on about how everyone in the media is slim and pretty and young, and should not be seen?...that is victim attitude, and the opposite choice is just as sexist and judgemental. Actually it is largely an American/Australian phenomena, not a worldwide one. In Europe, I have been pleasantly surprised since moving here to find most women in the media are not perfect figures, not even that slim for many; are not all young, some are well into middle age complete with wrinkles (not a couple of fine lines); do not necessarily dress in designer clothes when coming on air, actually some wear jeans and a plain T shirt, or a very plain dress or suit; and despite all this, I find the women of this nature in the media are far more respected than their perfect image couterparts in the USA and Australia are, and yet they work alongside their younger sisters who are breaking into the field. There just does not seem to be an emphasis on skin deep beauty here. Even though model looks and real women looks exist side by side, both receive equal status because they are looked at for their work, not looks.

Feminism is a guidig force in my life and has been for most of my life, but with that comes a responsibility to look at it realistically, not follow blindly because of something you read for the first time. It requires thought, analysis, and strength to challenge when you see a blatent discrimination, not a 'poor me' whimper. Blaming gets you nowhere, but does harm the movement more than help. Once you blame in any life situation, you are minimising women's power and ability, and dismissing responsibility to stand up for rights and playing a victim mode which says it is all someone else's fault. Women have gotten the rights they have by fighting for what they believe to be right, not running around criticising their opponents and relying on their guilt to right the wrongs. Feminism is about choice, balance, and strength, not creating another imbalance by condemning men as a whole.....as the saying goes, you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Catalina


Edited to correct the typos a certain person could not wait for me to do earlier

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Through out history men have viewed themselves as superior. Well, maybe you will say, I have never behaved that way, so why do I deserve to be punished for what they have done.

But what did the women of the world do to be viewed as inferior, less than, born to be subservient?

Two wrongs don't make a right, but neither does one wrong make a right. Men overall still project a sense of entitlement and superiority. I don't like that, and I don't like them for it.

I feel that men are scared of women- of the power that her sexuality holds over them, of the power that she has to create life and grow it inside of her. I feel that they keep women down because they fear that if she discovers the strength of her powers, he will loose his comfy spot at the top of the totem-pole.

You may be the exception, or you may not. I don't really know you, so I coudn't say. I'm sorry to have offended you, but as a women I go threw life being offended- and I'm told that it's no big deal. Just a joke, something I took too personally. Look through this thread, everything that I was offended by I was told to get over it because I was generalizing and stereotyping- therefore my experiences where not real or somehow not applicable.

You yourself replied with:

//Get back in the kitchen and bake me a pie!

Give a woman a computer, and next thing you know she thinks she's a person...//

By making sarcastic remarks, you basically told me that I was over-reacting and that it was all in my head. That was just as condescending as the face value of the statement.

I'm offended and I'm over reacting.

You're offended and I'm a bigot.

Clearly sexism towards men is the only sexism that truly exists in the 21st Century.

You are sexist, and I demand an apology!!

 

[MissTaken]

Late to the thread

and I am afraid I have very little to offer.

I have mixed views on the topic and the postings offered. I will start by saying that I am one who has difficulty with blanket statements, such as "Men are..." "Men seem to be..." I do not want to be classifed strictly by my gender anymore than I would want to make statements that appear to be used to described the other gender.

Now, as one of the Ovarian Society, I will submit that women's paths in life are more challenging in many respects than men's due to their gender.

I will submit that there are some men who prefer to keep women "in their place" and not assist them to reach their full potential. Yes, I submit that some of these men are politicians, clergy, teachers etc ...people with influence over society's development.

Further, I will submit that while I understand what feminist organizations are trying to do the only way women can and will overcome some of the issues discussed here that are true and are relevant is to just do it. The more women, like Catalina and myself, how flip the bird at supression and stereotypes and just do whatever it takes to achieve our full potential, the greater the "movement", the greater the "Voice." NOW can shout and rant the "cause" but individual women have to get off their ass and change their circumstance.

Would the Civil Rights movement have been nearly as effective if not for brave black men and women who just put in the extra effort to find success. MLK comes to mind. Rosa Parks comes to mind.

Finally, undrestand that I do not mention or seek "equality." I advocate for each individual in our society to find their place, their success, and achieve their full potential.

I will damn sure never fight on the front lines. I do not want to, but can and have achieved far more than most men do in their lifetime.

We cannot lay back and continuously point out the hardships and unfairness. Changing our own lives and circumstances is the strongest arguements for achieving success and shunning what, at times, appears to be a male dominated society.

 

[MissTaken]

In addition,

dont' throw tomatoes, please,


Try being a single male parent in today's society.

A close look at such situations might reveal a specific area wherein discrimination against men exists.

(Observation based only on personal experience)

Stirring it up a bit?

 

[yessmiss]

~Just sticking my head out to get some abuse~

I hate men too!
I love to be hated!
well, at least a little abused by Sensouos Strongwilled Women

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

In addition,

dont' throw tomatoes, please,


Try being a single male parent in today's society.

A close look at such situations might reveal a specific area wherein discrimination against men exists.

(Observation based only on personal experience)

Stirring it up a bit?

Yeah! Or look at how fathers are protrayed on sitcoms...there have been few competent fathers on TV in the last 15 years.

 

[MissTaken]

And even the good fathers on television are often portrayed as being needy.

Hell, even Livie Walton wore the pants in that family!

 

[Netzach]

well, the REASON there are no competent fathers on sitcoms, the reason the sitcom dad is a hack and a buffoon is that it reinforces the humorous notion that if the woman leaves the nest to go out for a weekend or even for a trip to get groceries, the world goes to hell in a handbasket.

Dad's an idiot. So to keep things on track mom better stay close to the nest. Or else, look what happens.

I feel secure in my ability not to stop such things from being portrayed, but in being able to read between the lines. If we all read between the lines, we'd all be a lot better off. I'm more interested in being able to interpret what the mainstream is saying rather than ENFORCING it to put a spin I personally like on everything. Spin is luring a lot of people into a very false sense of security. If you feel happy to be represented, I say someone's just noticed that there's something in your wallet, don't be so flattered.

I had a residency at a print studio that had posted a quote on the wall and I don't know who to attribute this to, but it's brilliant.

"Freedom of the press will forever be limited to those who know how to operate one."

The self-conscious riot grrl tide of the early 90's had one thing down. Media media media. Don't like it, make it. Make your own image, tell your own story, don't let anyone cover you up in their spin.

Sure there was whining. But there were a few girls who really got the notion that this is not about whining, victimization, or some lukewarm sisterhood, this is about taking a stand, and even a public one. Whatever your stand may be.

There are SO many girls out there cooler than Madonna. Some of them even know they are.

As unimpressed as I am by Madonna I don't think it's sex appeal alone that's gotten her so far...Natalie Imbruglia was a much prettier, hotter manufactured star, and where the hell is she?

I think her ability to reinvent and remanufacture herself according to her OWN criteria is a great model of a woman in business doing brilliantly for herself. I don't see her shitpile opening up anytime soon in some punitive fantasia, she builds that baby rock solid. Whether it's exploiting a shitty childhood or a girl-girl smooch with the girl of the moment (to me it's like a challenge, more a kiss among mafiosas, that says "you're to die, bitch, I am eternal" but Ms. Spears would never be attuned to that subtext....)

I've not really had so much of a problem in life being underestimated, intellectually. It's not an everyday occurance, not by any means. I see certain flaws in the systems of capital that have held me back, certain rules of a regional and class-based game that I'm not hip to, maybe. Now I don't really care as much. I've found other ways to turn coin, and other things to worry about. So much for selling out, well fuck it anyway.


Almost all the guys I know AND meet, DO see women as equals, superiors, perplexing, scary, certainly not as replaceable bimbos or mere robots. They are scared shitless, adrift. I feel somewhat bad for them. I do think that yes, we should all strive toward autonomus success, but that people are social animals, and guys of a certain age and social strata are essentially denied a way of connecting, a way of differentiating themselves from women, a way of viewing themselves *in* a relationship. I don't know that many guys who simply adopt some outdated and chauvenistic viewpoint whole hog.

Most of their dads don't even have attitudes like that. If attitudes are totally imported from families, anyway, I'd be the most racist, defensive, sexist tightly balled asshole you ever knew.

I can't complain about the modern man. His dilemma is the source material for some of my most happily cherished feitshes, the motor for some of the most considerate, tender, vulnerable, and sweet submissives I adore. Most of my vanilla girlfriends find this lack of certainty, initiative, confidence and decisiveness incredibly frustrating, though.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Most of their dads don't even have attitudes like that. If attitudes are totally imported from families, anyway, I'd be the most racist, defensive, sexist tightly balled asshole you ever knew.

You mean this is the happy, well-adjusted version of you?!?

 

[Netzach]

Well, I hate everybody. Not just certain colors.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Well, I hate everybody. Not just certain colors.

Ahhh, an equal opportunity bitch...

 

[Netzach]

I take it this is the luvvy-bear patented cuddly snuggly JM with the footie polar fleece pink jammies on talking?

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

I take it this is the luvvy-bear patented cuddly snuggly JM with the footie polar fleece pink jammies on talking?

LOL, I'm pretty sure that version of me simply doesn't exist! In case you missed it, I'm generally a bastard...and proud of it!

 

[sweetnpetite]

Johhney Mayberry I am sorry. Hatred is blinding and I see how it has blinded me to seeing all sides, even before I realize that I felt that way.

Sometimes it is easier to change the world than to change yourself. I have some self reflection to do.

I'm beginning to feel that perhaps we can work for our rights without fighting *against* anyone in particular (such as men or any particular political party) If in fact we can begin to work together, perhaps we can get things done instead of wasting time trying to hurt each other. If we fight against we will only get opposition, but if we fight together, we will find strength and common goals.

If I had realized this five years ago, I could have saved myself a lot of heartache. I just realized tonight that I have even delt with my personal relationships in an oppositional way, as if everything where a contest to be won. But in relationships, when one looses you both loose, so when you win, what have you really won? We are in the same boat, as they say.

We need to show men and women, blacks whites jews and everybody else that we are in the same boat, so that we can all begin to paddle together.

If I must think in terms of something vs something, rather than women vs men, I will try to think in terms of people vs injustice. But even that may not be right. Finding the common thread, what do we both want and how can we achieve it?

The world in general perhaps is too adversarial, and I too easily fell into the same patern and embraced the notion of "Me against the world." And not entirely without reason. It seemed to me that I needed the protection that it afforded me. I had wall I didn't even know that I had. But rather than protect me, they have pushed people away and created more problems in my life. What if the world were not against me- what if it were on my side? As a part of the world, my success is its success.

You might be thinking now that someone must have stollen my password, but I have had one of those days containing what Oprah calls 'a lightbulb moment.' - a sudden paradigm shift.

It is an emotional and spiritual day for me. I am overwealmed. I hope that I have been able to expess these changes that are taking place within me, and I hope that I am able to embrace and continue to grow with them.

After enlightenment comes work.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

sweetnpetite, I'm glad you have found a momentary shelter from the storms that seem to rage through all of our lives. I find that real change comes from us individuals finding some sort of common groud, and realizing that we are all in this together. No, the world isn't perfect, but it helps to remember that most of us have plenty of burdens that we carry though no fault or choice of our own.

If you must have am enemy to attack, if you have to pick a place to stand, consider the battle between empathy and indifference. If we all got outside of ourselves for a moment, and into the shoes of our adversaries, maybe we would all find that our differences aren't so different after all.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I am happy for you sweetnpetite in that you seem to have found some balance in your efforts to right what are wrongs in the world. It is true, everyone does have to work together, but there also has to be a degree of enlightenment. Preferrably that is done in a way which reflects calm and thought provoking evidence, and sometimes it requires highlighting aspects in a manner people cannot avoid noticing. Does not mena all the people will listen all the time, but it does make it possible to have at least some listen and over time, adjust behaviour that may be oppressive. The truth of the matter is, many of the male population have been oppressed by the male dominant ideologies we live within, many without even realising as they have been raised within it's confines. To have this imbalance cheats everyone, not just women, but women are the obvious losers in the equation.

JM is right when he says if people take the time to look, and I add without fear and prejudice, they find there are not as many differences between each of us as first perceived. There is also a story behind every face. Is part of the approach I used in counselling which enabled me to not take a judgmental stance and not feel inclined to hand out advice instead of counsel. Everyone has their story which has been instrumental in shaping the adult they become, and all deserve to have that story listened to though it may be difficult to remember at times.

Through listening, you then find how the pieces interlink with the lives of others, and with the world as a whole. The difficulty with pursuing the Feminist philosophy is that those who stand to lose, or as they see it lose, do not want to hear or react to the stories oif thoise who have never had. In other words they fall victim to the either/or ideology, This is reflected in our lives everyday in many ways, even on the Lit board where many assume in a discussion that you have to choose to have either one thing or the other in your reality, that to encompass both in a balanced fashion is not possible. It is.

Catalina

 

[Seattle Zack]

Everyone has their story which has been instrumental in shaping the adult they become, and all deserve to have that story listened to though it may be difficult to remember at times.

Through listening, you then find how the pieces interlink with the lives of others, and with the world as a whole. The difficulty with pursuing the Feminist philosophy is that those who stand to lose, or as they see it lose, do not want to hear or react to the stories oif thoise who have never had. In other words they fall victim to the either/or ideology, This is reflected in our lives everyday in many ways, even on the Lit board where many assume in a discussion that you have to choose to have either one thing or the other in your reality, that to encompass both in a balanced fashion is not possible.

I have no idea what that even means ... perhaps it's a tribute to what George Orwell considered reduced expectations of language and the substitution of attitudes and feelings for ideas. "How do you feel" has become a more important question that "What do you know."

One of the great "benefits" of the internet is true democracy, conferring upon everyone with a computer the right to be heard, but there's also the implicit tendency to assume that everyone who has a right to be heard has something worth saying. This turns out to more subversive than supportive of free speech, in the long run.

By equating a defense of the right to speak with a defense of one's position, the end result conditions the right to speak on the perceived value of what is said. Spontaneity can be the enemy of thoughtfulness. Intractivity and untrammelled vibrant debate is invigorating, but it tends to devolve into hyperactivity and a preference for speaking over thinking. Intelligent, rational discourse gives way to testimonials (after all, everyone loves to talk about themselves) and vague, unsubstantiated rants.

Popular feminism today is not interested in equality -- instead, it advocates legal redress for all the "suffering" disenfranchised women who are not able to stand up for themselves. Never mind that the facts show that women of equal experience and equal education get paid the exact same amount as men.

The simple fact is, more men are career-oriented and, thus, tend to make more money on average. Men rarely get the part-time flex-time opportunities that women do. In a recent study published on CNN, men and women were asked what they'd do if they had more time; 70% of men said they'd use it to further their careers, while less than 20% of women said the same. We work 'till we die, ladies, that's what we do, and because you live longer you get to spend our money after we're gone.

The feminist lobby is violently opposed to the Paternity Fraud legislation that's currently pending in many states. More than 30% of men are paying child support for a child that's not theirs. In fact, many social workers and family courts encourage women to identify high-wage earners -- preferably boyfriends or husbands -- as fathers. Even if the woman knowingly lies about who the father is, it's all perfectly legal.

There's no legal redress for the man, either, unless he's smart enough to get a DNA test within a year or two of the child's birth. Here in Washington, it's even worse -- if a man hooks up with a woman who has a child and forms an "emotional bond" with the child (the term is not legally defined, it's up to the family court judge) then he can be on the hook for child support even if he didn't know the woman when the child was born. Who'd want to pay child support on some other guy's bastard until the little brat turns eighteen? No wonder there are more single moms per capita in Washington than any other state.

That's just one example, but it's indicative of the efforts of the feminist lobby today. Hardly sounds like equality to me.

 

[Netzach]

You'd probably have a kvetch about the fact that female sex workers have a bigger industry than male ones.

Paternity fraud is by all means a social bummer, but nowhere near as scandalous to me as, oh, what I'm supposed to be paying as a COBRA payment, ($600 a month for just me is portability?) or ENRON, or where those building contracts in the freshly made-over Iraq are going, or take your pick of a lot of crap out there.

I have no idea what your notion of the popular feminism of today is. What you describe has a chewy retro seventies flavor to it. I don't want redress, although I like to say that to particularly humiliation craven male subs, I play that angle all I want.

I don't know of any feminist lobby who says that divorce court lying is the way to go, rock on. In fact, I don't know of any feminist lobby that holds that much clout at all, traditionally female voter concerns like decent schools and clean air hang on by the skin of their political teeth.

 

[Netzach]

I did like your points about feeling vs. rationalism though, and the dying art of logic in a sea of screeds.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

I have no idea what that even means ... perhaps it's a tribute to what George Orwell considered reduced expectations of language and the substitution of attitudes and feelings for ideas. "How do you feel" has become a more important question that "What do you know."

One of the great "benefits" of the internet is true democracy, conferring upon everyone with a computer the right to be heard, but there's also the implicit tendency to assume that everyone who has a right to be heard has something worth saying. This turns out to more subversive than supportive of free speech, in the long run.

By equating a defense of the right to speak with a defense of one's position, the end result conditions the right to speak on the perceived value of what is said. Spontaneity can be the enemy of thoughtfulness. Intractivity and untrammelled vibrant debate is invigorating, but it tends to devolve into hyperactivity and a preference for speaking over thinking. Intelligent, rational discourse gives way to testimonials (after all, everyone loves to talk about themselves) and vague, unsubstantiated rants.

Popular feminism today is not interested in equality -- instead, it advocates legal redress for all the "suffering" disenfranchised women who are not able to stand up for themselves. Never mind that the facts show that women of equal experience and equal education get paid the exact same amount as men.

The simple fact is, more men are career-oriented and, thus, tend to make more money on average. Men rarely get the part-time flex-time opportunities that women do. In a recent study published on CNN, men and women were asked what they'd do if they had more time; 70% of men said they'd use it to further their careers, while less than 20% of women said the same. We work 'till we die, ladies, that's what we do, and because you live longer you get to spend our money after we're gone.

The feminist lobby is violently opposed to the Paternity Fraud legislation that's currently pending in many states. More than 30% of men are paying child support for a child that's not theirs. In fact, many social workers and family courts encourage women to identify high-wage earners -- preferably boyfriends or husbands -- as fathers. Even if the woman knowingly lies about who the father is, it's all perfectly legal.

There's no legal redress for the man, either, unless he's smart enough to get a DNA test within a year or two of the child's birth. Here in Washington, it's even worse -- if a man hooks up with a woman who has a child and forms an "emotional bond" with the child (the term is not legally defined, it's up to the family court judge) then he can be on the hook for child support even if he didn't know the woman when the child was born. Who'd want to pay child support on some other guy's bastard until the little brat turns eighteen? No wonder there are more single moms per capita in Washington than any other state.

That's just one example, but it's indicative of the efforts of the feminist lobby today. Hardly sounds like equality to me.

I think this is a screed to rival the one that started this thread.

 

[Netzach]

(nods, chants, maturely of course)

Uh huh, uh huh...
JM busted the reactionary...
uh huh...