Over the months, I get the same question: who did this to you? And my answer is this story. One man too many came on with all the ardor of love, only to waft away in the cold light of early morning. It's a boring story because it's so fucking old, and I'm sorry if you were expecting fireworks, or gang rape, or a denouement at the altar, or a cheating spouse. The truth is, what pushed me into this choice was the sort of thing that men do everyday without so much as a fleeting thought. It was the callous disregard for my heart, the almost tactical deployment of a romantic narrative to kink up what should only have been casual sex, the roughshod swath cut through my life by too many men who don't understand that the emotional microaggression that passes for dating these days is like the steady dripping of a leaky sink. Give it enough time, and your house is going to collapse around you.posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:54 AM on July 28, 2011 [11 favorites]
There are also faulty assumptions behind the question about "acting like a man." The assumptions are both sexist and anti-male.
I object to whispering sweet bullshit into women's ears to get sex. I object to being too lazy or clueless to figure out what you want and too dishonest to admit that you don't know what you want. I object to men being clueless, callous cowards, because I know there's another way.
I don't object to men (and women) wanting to have sex. I don't object to casual sex. I also don't think that doing those things = "acting like a man." Equating having casual sex with "acting like a man" is sexist.
…
It also assumes that "acting like a man" means acting like a jackass, which is profoundly anti-man. I don't think man should = jackass. I don't think one gender has cornered the market on bad behavior. I do think men have cornered the market on this particular type of bad behavior.
I'd like to consign the phrase "acting like a man" to the dustbin of pre-feminist history.
So sexist crap is OK if you're a woman, I guess.I shouldn't be, but I'm always surprised by this: a lot of people haven't cottoned on to the fact that the term sexism can't be equally applied to both sexes. It doesn't just mean "someone saying something bad about the opposite sex".
"... In her dark womb we did not know our mother's face; from the prison of her flesh we come into the unspeakable and incommunicable prison of this earth. Which of us has known his brother? Which of us has looked into his father's heart? Which of us has not remained forever prison-pent? Which of us is not forever a stranger and alone? O waste of loss, in the hot mazes, lost, among bright stars on this most weary unbright cinder, lost! Remembering speechlessly we seek the great forgotten language, the lost lane-end into heaven, a stone, a leaf, an unfound door. Where? When? O lost, and by the wind grieved, ghost, come back again."posted by octobersurprise at 6:42 AM on July 28, 2011 [7 favorites]
Re: "sexism," I really wish we had two different words: one for "sex-based prejudice, bigotry and hatred, regardless of the power situation" and one for "perpetuation of sex-based oppression."I used to think this. Now that the idea of sexism-as-prejudice-plus-power has percolated a bit more in my brain, I just find it a bit silly when I see men complaining about sexism directed against them, as above.
Precisely. She is saying she does not want to play games. That she would like the person on the other end of this interaction to simply and honestly tell her they aren't interested, so that she can civilly reply 'Ok. Well, it happens. I wish you well.'
And then they both go on with their lives, with total clarity and peace of mind about that particular interaction.
I'm really surprised that this idea is getting rebuffed here. To those doing so - do you feel that way because you're coming from a 'well, this is the way it is. Idealism isn't useful here.' frame of mind? Or are there other reasons I haven't considered?
There are also faulty assumptions behind the question about "acting like a man." The assumptions are both sexist and anti-male.She already used the word "sexist" to defend men. She already says it is wrong to be sexist against men.
I object to whispering sweet bullshit into women's ears to get sex. I object to being too lazy or clueless to figure out what you want and too dishonest to admit that you don't know what you want. I object to men being clueless, callous cowards, because I know there's another way.
I don't object to men (and women) wanting to have sex. I don't object to casual sex. I also don't think that doing those things = "acting like a man." Equating having casual sex with "acting like a man" is sexist.
…
It also assumes that "acting like a man" means acting like a jackass, which is profoundly anti-man. I don't think man should = jackass. I don't think one gender has cornered the market on bad behavior. I do think men have cornered the market on this particular type of bad behavior.
I'd like to consign the phrase "acting like a man" to the dustbin of pre-feminist history.
sexyrobot: ...except, um, for the ladies, of course... Aw, hell, I'm in a good mood: WISH-GRANTING PENISES FOR EVERYONE!!!No, no- WISH-GRANTING PENISES FOR SOME, MINIATURE AMERICAN FLAGS FOR OTHERS!
everyone got to think I was talking about someone else. They could cultivate the fantasy that I was talking about One Bad Man. They could keep thinking that their magical dicks would cure me, because surely I wasn't talking about them.
Then I smashed that fantasy. Because there was no one bad guy and no one bad experience.
Not:Reading on from there:everyone got to think I was talking about someone else. They could cultivate the fantasy that I was talking about One Bad Man. They could keep thinking that their magical dicks would cure me, because surely I wasn't talking about them.
Then I smashed that fantasy. Because there was no one bad guy and no one bad experience.
And let me tell you something embarrassing. I did it too. I gave someone my phone number; he called me, and I never called him back. I had my reasons, but it was still rude and thoughtless. So when I realized what I had done, I sent him an apology.So at least she admitted her own failing there, right?
We all fuck up. It would be nice if more of us apologized.
So, yeah, she really does blame all men for the failings she has run into.She doesn't blame all men. I'm not quoting the same thing for the third time.
it's anger and hate backed up by ignorance and no it's not alright if anyone does that.There is anger there, definitely, but hate? I really don't see any at all. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but I thought it was especially sweet that her profile states at the end that she is looking for: guys who like girls, ages 18-99, located anywhere, for new friends.
It's horrendously unbelievable that she really can't find anyone to treat her like a human being or even give her respect.Why? I mean if you're coming from the view that when you have one bad relationship after another, the only thing in common is you, then I get your point, but am not sure it's a good basis on which to judge people. I mean, it is possible, through sheer chance, that she has just had an awful run of luck with the men she met. It happens. It may be she is meeting men in the wrong places. It may even be that it is her, that she is subconsciously drawn to men who were always going to break her heart, because of some childhood trauma or other issues. It would be good if she could try to examine her own part in those relationships, yes, but that kind of awareness does not come easy. It doesn't mean she deserves the ridicule she has had in this thread.
Or perhaps it is believable because it seems she has a very narrow idea of what respect implies. Excuse the hyperbole, but "I just want to fuck and not get into that relationship stuff, but why won't you treat me more than just a fuck buddy" is not a very convincing stance. The very fact that she wants NSA relationships diminishes the idea of deep interaction because interaction connects those strings.I'm skimming through it again, and cannot even find where she wants deep interaction from NSA fuck buddies. Many of her stories are from strings-attached dating. In the NSA story I can see, she was objecting to the deceptions, not the lack of deep interaction. Did I miss something?
Also, maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong here but throwing guys a "fuck for good behavior" because he "deserved" it, isn't exactly applying a level of respect to others when she's using sex like Scooby snacks for good little boys.It was in the middle of a rant, and I didn't and don't think she really said to the guy (or even thought) that she was fucking him for good behaviour. She might have fucked him for being a half-decent guy after a string of horrible ones. If he wasn't led to believe it to be anything more than NSA, I don't see anything bad she has done here.
And if I find that man who really acts like a slut in the best possible way, maybe I'll whisper sweet truths into his ear, and maybe I'll sleep over, and maybe I'll let myself imagine romantic love and emotional security, and maybe I'll let him know there can be more, and maybe I'll invite him to join me in making it up as we go along.She doesn't hate men, at all. She is fucking aching and yearning for a man to prove her wrong. It runs right through the whole piece.
And when I left, I didn't say "I'll call you" and then not call. And the next day, I didn't ignore him, or blow sunshine up his ass, or pretend not to understand when he said that he wanted more fucking. I didn't say "oh yeah sure" with no intention of following through. I said thanks but no thanks and invited him out for a platonic beer instead. I returned every email. I helped him work on a job application letter. I commiserated about dating woes.So through all the self-congratulatory bullshit she just laid down, she can't even cop to a blooming friendship that was based on mutual respect and therefore negates most of what she talks about. Or maybe he still wasn't respectful and she enjoys the mental abuse just to prove a point. OR, maybe, it was a ruse on her part to prove a point, which in turn is disrespectful. Where does that leave us?
"...patriarchy takes from men the opportunity to have true equally partnered relationships with women. I can personally attest to the reality of this issue. In many ways my ex husband was emotionally withdrawn and unavailable - not at all because he didn’t desire to be kind or caring, but because he didn’t feel that it was safe to do so, he didn’t have the tools to do it, and society told him that his wife (who is a woman) is not allowed to instruct him on how to."We really, really need more of this kind of writing. We also need tools to help us take steps toward creating relationships of radical equality even in the "belly of the beast," as it were.
Although their motives for seeking sex with a prostitute differed, there were similarities among certain groups. Married clients and college graduates were more likely to want a different kind of sex than they had with their regular partners. Steady or unmarried clients and non-college graduates reportedly felt shy and awkward when trying to meet women but did not feel intimidated by prostitutes.posted by Miko at 10:18 AM on August 1, 2011 [1 favorite]
Monto also explored the clients’ attitudes toward “rape myths”—that is, attitudes that have been used to support sexual violence against women.[5] Less than one-half of 1 percent of those surveyed indicated acceptance of all eight rape myths. On the other hand, 20 percent indicated acceptance of four or more items. Researchers believe that this latter group may be responsible for perpetrating violent acts against women for hire.
Next, Monto measured the degree to which clients regarded sexuality as a commercial commodity.[6] Monto found that the greater a client’s belief that women and sex were commercial products, the more frequently he would visit prostitutes. This mindset was also a strong predictor of the acceptance of rape myths, less frequent condom use with prostitutes, and a disinclination to view prostitution as a demeaning profession for women.
In 2007, Eaves and Prostitution Research and Education (PRE) began a study of the attitudes and behavioural patterns of men who use women in prostitution. Both organisations have previously studied and reported on the violence that is integral to prostitution...
Men’s acceptance of prostitution is one of a cluster of attitudes that encourages and justifies violence against women.Note that the latter quote isn't a conclusion from the research, it is part of the basic assumptions uses. If you start from your conclusion that violence is integral, etc, it's not a surprise when you find data showing it.
Studies of male consumers of commercial sex find them to be similar to the general population in most regards, and quite unlike most populations of criminal offenders (see, e.g., Kennedy, 2004; Lever and Dolnick, 2000; Monto, 1999). In a comparison of men who had been arrested for purchasing sex to nationally representative samples of men (i.e., male respondents of large-scale national surveys; Monto, 1999; Monto & McRee, 2005) found that those who had purchased sex were actually more likely to have attended college, and were just 15% less likely to be married (41% for arrested johns versus 56% in the national survey; Monto, 1999).In other words, men who paid prostitutes were more educated, had more liberal views about sex and homosexuality, were less likely to have been sexually abused, and less likely to have committed sexual assaults. This is a far cry from the claims of the advocacy groups which have a vested interest in making johns look like total creepos who hate women.
While men who solicit prostitution are not atypical demographically or in terms of criminal history, they are unsurprisingly and measurably different in terms of a range of attitudes toward women, relationships, and commercial sex. For example, Monto & McRee (2005) found that consumers were less likely to be happily married than men in national samples, to have sexually liberal attitudes (e.g., to view premarital sex, sex among minors, and homosexuality as acceptable), and to think about sex more often. Commercial sex participants were also less likely to have been sexually molested as children, or to report having forced women into sexual acts. The differences between samples were not large, but were statistically significant.
The FOPP founders assumed that there were several key attitudes and beliefs that cause or allow men to solicit sex. They concluded that the john school could reach at least some of the men by countering erroneous beliefs and filling gaps in knowledge. The program targeted the following:Reading the participant comments in Section 7 and the summaries of each class session sheds some more light on the critical area of attitudes towards women and towards prostitutes.
1. The belief that the risk of arrest and legal sanction are low.
2. Denial or ignorance of the risk of contracting STDs or HIV through purchased sex.
3. Ignorance of the risk of being robbed or assaulted by prostitutes or pimps.
4. Denial or ignorance of the negative impact prostitution has on the neighborhoods in which it occurs.
5. Ignorance of the links between street prostitution and larger, organized systems of sex trafficking.
6. Denial or ignorance of what motivates them to solicit prostitutes (e.g., addictions, compulsions, unmet social or sexual needs).
7. Denial or ignorance of the negative impact of prostitution on “providers.”
8. Denial or ignorance of the fact that money is the only reason prostitutes have sex with them.
9. The mistaken belief that the women they hire care about them, and that they are in some kind of relationship with them.
10. Denial or ignorance of the anger, revulsion, or indifference that many prostitutes have while they are having sex with johns.
11. Ignorance about how to have the healthy relationships that could replace their reliance upon commercial sex.
« Older MurdochAlert warns you whenever you visit one of t... | The dial-up sound, 700% slower... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by cmgonzalez at 11:34 PM on July 27, 2011 [2 favorites]