"I want a girlfriend/boyfriend", and other such relationship advice

[obfuscator]

Brand new, sic transit gloria. About a man being raped by a woman.

 

Point being, I don't think song lyrics are that good an argument. You can find all sorts of garbage in music, and it cuts both ways.

 

Also, ginger, did you watch the video I posted?

[Ginger_Warrior]

I didn't, I promise I'll get round to watching it sooner or later, hopefully tonight. I shouldn't really have spent an hour making that last post, I've got way too much to catch up on.

[obfuscator]

I didn't, I promise I'll get round to watching it sooner or later, hopefully tonight. I shouldn't really have spent an hour making that last post, I've got way too much to catch up on.

No problem. It does offer some interesting commentary on precisely what you're discussing - the way women are objectified.

[RpgGamer]

Hit The Floor is about emotionally beating a women who cheated on him. Not ethically nice, but not exactly the point you were trying to make Ginger

[Omar]

 

Excellent points, well thought out post.

 

1) I think the comparison to Jim Crow is more appropriate, you're right, in that the arrangement is dependent on the relationship being an inherently unequal one. The main difference I'd note is that du jure discrimination has been virtually eliminated in the Western world. Another difference is that I don't think the discrimination is as strong today as it was with racism back then. Some men are misogynist and sexualize women at every turn. The majority, I'm convinced, are perfectly decent human beings and do not, but the problem is the former group aren't challenged nearly enough by the latter to change their attitudes or behaviour.

 

2) Good questions. There's certainly more men in political office, and since politics and economics dominates our newspapers, you might argue that accounts for the increased number of articles about male subjects. What's more concerning, though, is the manner in which women are presented on front pages of newspapers. In 2012, the top two woman most likely to be photographed (by far) were Kate and Pippa Middleton, perhaps not surprisingly following the wedding, but this was not followed by any description of what they've been up to or how this is even newsworthy, as they would have done for a politician, but followed by a blow-by-blow account of what they were wearing and how they appeared. I cannot recall the last time Michael Gove's or George Osbourne's attire was picked apart thread-by-thread to accompany a largely irrelevant and superficial account of their policies for education or the economy (of course, the irony there is they suit up quite well, being politicians in the public eye; perhaps some men wouldn't mind some free advice?). Again, though, the implication that women aren't there do anything useful, only to look pretty while men do the real work, is made, an association which was made ad nauseum with Diana.

 

3) This one is frequently brought up as a counter-argument to feminism. "Well, men have it bad too in some ways". I'm not going to argue against that, and I don't think most rational feminists would either, at least not the ones that follow the definition of 'wanting equality between both genders'. If we're going into more sociological territory and discussing power imbalances, though, I'd like to give a personal account. A female friend of mine who went to college to study car mechanics and engineering, but had to arrange her own work placement to pass the course, and was told by every garage in my hometown that, "You're a bird... you must be joking!". Women can't very well place themselves in hazardous occupations if discrimination stops them from even accessing those occupations in the first place, wouldn't you agree?

 

4) I doubt if your male baker was the Secretary of State, you'd ask him what designer shoes he wears, though. OK, you go to your baker for bread and you're not interested in his ideas about the world, I get that. But when it's your job to be foreign minister for the most powerful country on Earth... Is your choice of designer labels what the people are really interested in? 

1) Just off the top of my head, sexual assault courts in universities in the US are still shitty. Bad for the victims, bad for the accused. Other genders are still marginalized de jure, too, and it hasn't been very long since marital rape was made illegal.

2) Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly are they responsible for? My understanding is that for all intents and purposes the whole royal family just sits there and looks nice.

2, 3) You know what? I wouldn't mind so much if everyone did all my work for me. I think it would be kind of neat if men weren't the ones who were expected to go to war in order to protect women. I mean, it would suck to an extent, because paternalism really bugs me, but I think I'd take it over being sent to kill and get killed by people I don't even know.

 

You see what I mean? This is a little bit like saying welfare payments are paternalistic. They are, sure, but they're also free money that was taken from someone else. If you want to spend another twenty-some minutes listening to girlwriteswhat, look up her video on male disposability.

4) Lil' Wayne and Rick Ross are very happy to tell me how high status they are, and then demonstrate this with a list of things they own (cashmere socks [bleep]!). So what?

[Omar]

Looks like I found what I was looking for. From r/OkCupid:
 

 

So, I felt this was an appropriate subreddit to post this too; but I just wanted to share my thoughts.

24 year old male; At the start of this year, I had never been on a single date. Not one. That's why I decided to sign up with OKcupid and a few other online dating sites.

Lo and behold, I started to actually go out on dates. Not many, but the fact that I was getting any interest was a huge morale booster. I was thrilled! But as time went on, I realized that none of the girls were ever really interested in going out again. There was one girl, one I really did like and went on a couple of dates with (I even got my first kiss; which will remain one of of the happiest moments of my life), but she was the exception to the rule and it didn't last.

But this isn't a "Why won't woman date me post?"; I realize that I'm entitled to nothing; it's more of a revelation that I'm just not ready for this. I'm not sure when I will be. I've got no self esteem, no future aspirations, so it's no surprise my dates haven't been interested in me.

So, I'm probably going to hang up my coat and call it a day. While I was hoping to find somebody to give meaning to my life, I need to become someone who can provide value to someone else. An asset rather then a liability. It may take me a year, maybe two years, maybe more but one day I hope I can make somebody else happy.

Mainly, I posted this for anyone else who may be feeling frustrated with online dating or dating in general. Don't be so quick to judge other people in their lack of interest and first examine yourself.

Maybe quitting altogether is a bit extreme, but damn, dat attitude.

[muggiwhplar]

It's sad that an attitude like that is extremely common

[muggiwhplar]

I feel like he was on the right track but then suddenly it all went out the window lol

[Hedgehog]

He's doing what a lot of guys in the dating scene should be doing

[muggiwhplar]

I think he should keep dating while still improving himself. I have a feeling that the reason he's taking a break to focus on self-improvement without any dating at all is because he's still afraid of dating and rejection, and is looking to rationalize his way out of that discomfort. But then again maybe the glass is just half empty with me haha

[Tim]

Yes but not everyone wants to go out on continuous dates with multiple women/men. To them, if they're seeing someone they want to only be seeing that one person.

 

In related news I've actually started seeing a guy, we've slept together a few times and gone out together, plus we both love the same games and shows. I guess I'm just waiting to see how it goes a bit longer and weather it'd work or not. Aside from us both being unemployed students, I don't wanna jump straight in and throw my trust straight in.

[Omar]

Face-heel turn!

 

Here's a good feminist article. If you think "but not all men are rapists!" is a good objection to Brownmiller's claim that "[rape] is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear," you should probably read it, because you don't understand the quote.
 

Also, de jure discrimination (as opposed to de facto/privately enforced discrimination) can still exist even if on paper, every individual is subject to the same rule. For example, if the law says that the only foods that can be sold as "hummus" must contain at least 5% tahini, and only one company has been making hummus that way, there's a very good reason to be suspicious (it's actually happening, I'm not making this up). A more relevant example would be gun control: granting* that it prevents the reduction of power differentials in violent altercations and that women are typically the ones who would be getting the opportunity to defend themselves if they were allowed guns, those laws are discriminatory against women, in application if not in principle.

(This is just an example of implicit de jure discrimination, not a claim that gun control, in particular, is sexist.)

[obfuscator]

Good article. But I still take issue with that definition of rape...and not all men are violently angry in that sense.

 

It seems the cases she mentioned were extreme ones. But the implication is that whenever a man gets seriously angry, it's threatening to a woman. That hardly seems reasonable; angry is an inherently violent and threatening emotion even when it's justified (not suggesting it was in the cases mentioned in the article).

 

I've certainly felt threatened by angry women at points in my life.

 

Maybe I just missed the point of the article, idk...

[muggiwhplar]

 

 

Not really, no.

 

I think I said a rut that he had dug himself into with irrational reasoning and wishful thinking, not a rut that was dug for him by centuries of prejudice, a culture of gender stereotyping which existed before he (or she) was even born, and a drastic under-representation in Congress. Furthermore, feminism isn't about men 'rescuing' women. Just like black people didn't need 'rescuing' from white people. They needed empowering through the democratic process (because that's where the real power lies) and their concerns needed legitimizing. Most of the leading figures in the feminism are women, and rightly so.

 

You could argue this guy needs empowering too. He's clearly feeling hopeless and lacks the necessary attitude and perspective to turn things around. Comparing this guy to feminism is a bit like chalk and cheese, though, wouldn't you agree?

I still can't see the difference between "rescuing" and "empowering" >_> If I say that I'm weak and I need to be empowered, I'm basically asking for someone to rescue me lol

 

 

Think of it as extrinsic verse intrinsic motivation. Empowerment comes from within, Rescuing is a reliance on others

 

 

Was looking for a particular post in a previous page on this thread and saw your response here. Whoops. My late response to this post is:

 

Yes I'd agree with that-- empowerment comes from within whereas rescuing depends on someone else. In this case we're talking about people on an individual level. What if we expand this principle to the collective level? Does the principle still hold up? I think it does, and I have a feeling that almost everybody else does too. However I draw different conclusions from this principle than other people do...

 

You know my philosophy: if you as an individual are capable of doing something, then the collective is irrelevant. The smarter/tougher individuals will empower themselves and become happy/successful regardless of the woes of the society that surrounds them. The dumber/weaker individuals will beg to be rescued by everybody else and will probably remain unhappy/unsuccessful because they don't know how to get things done on their own.

 

So, back to this principle with regards to women and equality, if I was a woman in the modern age then there's no denying that I'd experience certain things differently than if I were a man. Let's take the pay gap issue. People will say women earn 75 cents for the same job that a man gets paid 100 cents for.

 

Let's pretend that literally means my coworkers who hold the exact same position as me at work earn 33% more money than me for doing the exact same thing. My first financial goal would be to earn $75k/yr. This is because most studies suggest that past $75k/yr, more money won't make you significantly happier.

 

Unless there's some sort of serious condition affecting you, it's well within anybody's power to earn $75k/yr in the modern western world-- regardless of their upbringing, their ethnicity, their gender, their sexual orientation, etc. The difference between these groups is the difficulty in achieving that goal. Is it possible for everyone to hit a goal like that? Definitely. Is it even probable? Yes. Is it easy? It depends.

 

If you're born a woman, or if you're born black, or if you're born gay, there is no denying that life is going to be harder for you than if you were born a straight white male. Given these facts, you have two choices:

1. Choose to work harder than your contemporaries in order to get what you want out of life.

2. Complain about how unfair it is that you have to work harder than your contemporaries, and then cross your fingers and hope that everybody else will change the system so it can benefit you.

 

On the individual level, option #1 will get you to where you want to go. Option #2 will most likely just leave you unhappy and unsuccessful.

On the collective level, if you tell everybody that the answer is option #1, they're just going to get pissed off at you and call you names before they retreat to each other for reassurance. Option #2 makes everyone feel more important and it's a lot easier than option #1.

 

I think most peoples' life problems break down into three core groups: relationships, health, and money. Generally speaking (obviously there are exceptions), for the vast majority of people, it is totally possible (and probable if they're serious about it) to be successful in any of those three areas. However, the simple fact that it's going to be harder for them to be successful than their good-looking, rich, white straight male neighbor is enough to make them think that it's impossible to be successful.

 

Whenever I try to emphasize how important responsibility and accountability are to happiness, I worry that people are going to misunderstand me as being callous and unsympathetic towards those who have to work harder than normal to be successful. That's sort of true, in a glass-is-half-empty sort of sense. The (optimistic) way I see it is: every human being has a lot of untapped potential. They've just been raised to believe that any attempts to nurture that potential are futile so long as there are other people out there who can be more successful with less work.

 

 

So back to my original point (holy shit this turned out longer than I was expecting): whenever I see some sort of political movement such as feminism or the men's rights movement or the wealth gap, I just think about things on the individual level. Do I care about how much money some corrupt banker is making if I'm making enough money to make me happy? No, not at all. I couldn't care less. Do I care about men who are getting screwed in divorce courts and losing everything? No, because I do not plan on getting married and making the same mistakes as those guys. Do I care about women earning less money than men? No, because I know that they are capable of earning enough money to make themselves happy if they work hard enough.

 

 

TL;DR: Just take any issue that affects you and ask yourself how you as an individual can overcome it. You'll be a lot happier and more confident for doing so.

[muggiwhplar]

Perhaps I'm just a weirdo in the sense that I only genuinely desire things which I know for sure are realistically obtainable if I just work at it enough. Knowing that an option is unavailable to me (or just unrealistic) is enough to make me lose interest in that option... kind of like how I have no interest in super hot girls if they're dating my friends :P They're not an option for me and therefore are not worth thinking about.

 

My disbelief in marriage makes me indifferent to the idea of getting married even if the laws surrounding it were completely fair and rational. So perhaps that's not the best example to use for discussion :P Though, if I did want to get married under the condition that the laws were changed, my attitude right now would basically be, "If the laws change, cool, I'll get married. But I'm going to assume that will not be happening and plan my life around that assumption accordingly."

 

In other words, I'd base my decisions (and happiness) off what I know is possible already. I wouldn't expect or depend on an unlikely change for happiness.

[Omar]

I'm starting to think the "you might like" pictures on OkCupid only exist to torment me with girls from other cities. Either that, or Ottawa sucks. Yeah, that's probably more like it.

[RpgGamer]

Is it incorrectly assuming you dont like those girls? Maybe those girls are awesome. Just takes a bit of traveling to find out

[Omar]

No, it's only showing me girls from Montreal. Could be interesting if I was on my way there for a few days and wanted to meet someone.

[muggiwhplar]

I ignore the "you might like" section and the girls on the main homepage. Mostly because they either live far away or they haven't actually been online in months (I only message girls if they are online when I am; increases the odds of them seeing my message)

[Omar]

Does "Browse Matches" actually show you all results for your search? I think I might have hidden all of Ottawa.

[muggiwhplar]

I set it to only show me hot girls within my area :P

[RpgGamer]

Use "locals" and set your search to under 25 miles.

[Omar]

Two new girls popped up in my matches since earlier, talking to the first and waiting for the second to write something.

[muggiwhplar]

Also keep in mind that OKC hides the really hot women from non-members

[Omar]

Decided that I'd push to 23 year olds. Choice sample:

 

"My self-summary

my life is about goals, here are my 4 current goals:

 

1. to hold a massive python, boa or anaconda

2. to be eaten by a python, boa or anaconda

3. to have insects on me naked

4. to be beaten up"

• What the [bleep] is going on in this profile? I can relate to your appreciation of deafheaven but I don't think I can help you with your snake fetish.

  Sent at 9:58pm

   

• IT'S NOT A FETISH IT'S A LIFESYLE!

  Sent at 10:07pm

   

• sorry *lifestyle I could barely type though the white rage

  Sent at 10:07pm

   

[Edit] I think I just have a soft spot for indie chicks. I need to get out of this town.