New Gillette commercial "not an indictment on manhood"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

aegix drakan:

You're implying that if she doesn't want random people to chat her up on the street, she shouldn't dress/makeup in ways that make her look attractive.

IE, that perhaps if she wants less attention, she should cover up.

You make good points. I do think of those sex revolution women that state they wanted liberty. They understood freedom also meant risk. A woman that dresses provocatively in public risks public attention. She may want attention. She also may want the wrong people to know to back off. I don't know if a society can promise both.

France may have recently passed a law against "wolf whistling". Paul Elam warns 1: Don't do it. Makes you look like a cuck. 2: Oddly, women enjoy it. His advice: don't make it illegal but don't do it. Sounds almost right to me. Still, I'm bothered by the idea that the real issue is that you're not outlawing behavior but not being attractive enough. Even if illegal, Tom Brady could do it and rather than get arrested, get laid. Unjust. It shouldn't be illegal to not be attractive enough or show the bad judgement that you think you are.

I think it has to be one way or another; either public life is to be neutered, or risky. We have to choose.

This ad I think chose. Neuter. You seem to have made the same decision (that in the club it is OK, otherwise, don't do it). EDIT: Those freedom desiring women that wanted risk so that they can enjoy attention while knowing of risks: too bad for them.

Gorfias:

aegix drakan:

You're implying that if she doesn't want random people to chat her up on the street, she shouldn't dress/makeup in ways that make her look attractive.

IE, that perhaps if she wants less attention, she should cover up.

You make good points. I do think of those sex revolution women that state they wanted liberty. They understood freedom also meant risk. A woman that dresses provocatively in public risks public attention. She may want attention. She also may want the wrong people to know to back off. I don't know if a society can promise both.

France may have recently passed a law against "wolf whistling". Paul Elam warns 1: Don't do it. Makes you look like a cuck. 2: Oddly, women enjoy it. His advice: don't make it illegal but don't do it. Sounds almost right to me. Still, I'm bothered by the idea that the real issue is that you're not outlawing behavior but not being attractive enough. Even if illegal, Tom Brady could do it and rather than get arrested, get laid. Unjust. It shouldn't be illegal to not be attractive enough or show the bad judgement that you think you are.

I think it has to be one way or another; either public life is to be neutered, or risky. We have to choose.

This ad I think chose. Neuter. You seem to have made the same decision (that in the club it is OK, otherwise, don't do it). EDIT Those freedom desiring women that wanted risk so that they can enjoy attention while knowing of risks: too bad for them.

What the actual Fuck did I just read? " risk" women, children, men, robots or aliens for that matter should have " risk" associated with what they are wearing?! WHY? WHY would anyone be at risk for wearing something they are happy with? The only risk here should be to those who think this way, and yea they seem to be a danger to society to think they should impose " risk" onto others simply for wearing what they want to wear and not harming anyone. Seriously that mindset is deranged." freedom desiring women need em punshment by em male matsas eh? Seriously I cannot even believe you would think this is a good thing to write let alone think. That is seriously some offensive and hateful shat against women there guy.

AND FYI Not all girls that like to dress for themselves would drop their panties for Tom Brady. You seriously have a twisted view of women.

Gorfias:
Paul Elam warns 1: Don't do it. Makes you look like a cuck.

I was going to ask who Paul Elam is. The fact that he said "doing x makes you look like a cuck," caused me to stop caring.

Gorfias:

You make good points. I do think of those sex revolution women that state they wanted liberty. They understood freedom also meant risk. A woman that dresses provocatively in public risks public attention. She may want attention. She also may want the wrong people to know to back off. I don't know if a society can promise both.

You know. I really can't get over people who get offended at ads like this insulting men before turning around and acting like men have such poor control over their sexuality that women can't show their skin without risk of attack.

God, no fucking wonder I mainly hang out with people from the LGBT community. This shit doesn't fly there.

Gorfias:

I think it has to be one way or another; either public life is to be neutered, or risky. We have to choose.

This ad I think chose. Neuter. You seem to have made the same decision (that in the club it is OK, otherwise, don't do it).

I really cannot grasp your mindset. If you respect a woman's boundaries, you're neutered. Uh-huh. Or maybe you can just go on with your goddamn life. The idea that masculinity is tied to chasing after everything in a skirt infuriates me to no end. People complain that men get insulted, but your rhetoric about how men are being "neutered" if they're not allowed to act like horny animals 24/7 is far more offensive to me as a man than this ad could ever be, but ironically enough I don't see anyone who's getting all offended by the ad taking issue with your rhetoric. I find that very depressing.

Gorfias:

EDIT: Those freedom desiring women that wanted risk so that they can enjoy attention while knowing of risks: too bad for them.

Stop pretending you know what women think. You've made it clear that you just assume whatever the fuck you want to assume.

aegix drakan:
a) Is it the woman's responsibility to not get approached, and thus she should cover up/wear a burka?

Or b) is it the man's responsibility not to approach random attractive women on the street without knowing anything about the woman's availability or if she want to be approached?

Pretty sure it's b. If I wanted to chat up attractive women, I'd go to a club/bar/activity where women go, so I'd know they're likely to be open to being approached. I'm not going to bug a random girl on the street who I have no idea if they're on their way to a date with their boyfriend, or whatever else.

You are both wrong, there is no "safe area" to approach women. They can be approached anywhere it is socially appropriate to approach a man. That said, one should never assume an individual wishes to be approached based on what they are wearing.

Abomination:

I will use my own judgement to confront individuals if I feel they are behaving inappropriately and I feel I have the leverage to exert positive influence without undue risk to myself - and my sex has nothing to do with it.

It really doesn't. It's the percepeption from those misbehaving individuals about your sex that does; because that gives you a leverage that others from a different gender don't have. Is it wrong to ask directly for help to the ones in the best position to do so? Am I missing something here?

I figure looking at the transcript might help.

Ok. So fellow Sexual Assault Victim Terry Crews was the person who said that we as men have to hold other men accountable. It wasn't especially for this commercial. He did this at his hearing. But oddly enough, I don't entirely agree. Because it doesn't go far enough.

Holding accountable is just one aspect of it. Men as men have to be accepting as well. I don't know Terry (even though he used to work out at my Gym back in downstate New York), But as someone who has been sexually assaulted by both males and females, I can state that women have dealt with me better than men have. I was offered high fives after I explained my incident with a woman I knew. I was told I could have thrown her off if I didn't want it. I was told that I must have wanted it because I had an erection.

Which, by the way, is like saying you wanted to feel the pain because you got punched. Or you wanted to laugh because you got tickled. Nerves respond to stimuli. That shit needs to be buried.

If you're comfortable enough to tell me to man up to deal with what has happened to me, I'm now comfortable enough to stand up and tell everyone else that they shouldn't let this shit go because they think it's tidier that I hold my personal pain inside. This is actively becoming mental.

It is beyond me that calls for increasing decency to be exhibited and being taught to our children is something to be rallied against. Personally, I'm tired of being quiet. I'm tired of wondering what people will think of me to find out that I was raped by a woman. How my manhood will be questioned or how I'll have to explain again and again how it could happen. I'm tired of a God damned society that will only consider me a male because I hide everything that would make me vulnerable.

Before, I was just merely curious about why people zoned into this message this time when they ignored all the other PSAs and Calls for Awareness before. Now I see this spiraling more and more out of control and I find myself reminding me that this is over being Decent to each other as human beings.

What the fuck Darkest Timeline did we stumble into? I remember believing we were getting better in the 90's.

Gorfias:

You make good points. I do think of those sex revolution women that state they wanted liberty. They understood freedom also meant risk. A woman that dresses provocatively in public risks public attention. She may want attention. She also may want the wrong people to know to back off. I don't know if a society can promise both.

We can't promise total safety, that much is true.

But, we can make it clear that unwanted behaviour is not tolerated.

Like, we can't promise a world without theft or murder, but we can criminalize those things.

Likewise, with people harassing or preying on women, we can, as a culture say "No, that's not acceptable, and you will be shunned if you do that" and punish those who take that harassment to criminal levels (Stalking, sexual assault, etc).

Also, again, you're placing the onus on the woman not to dress provocatively if she wants to not have risky attention. I guess you're on team Burka after all, then?

Paul Elam warns 2: Oddly, women enjoy it (wolf whistling).

Yeah, I dunno who this Paul dude is, but I'm going to trust the words of the dozen+ women that I know, all of whom have said at least once (some of them many times more) how much wolf whistling/catcalling/etc pisses them off and makes them feel unsafe or irritated at being objectified. None of them enjoy it.

Still, I'm bothered by the idea that the real issue is that you're not outlawing behavior but not being attractive enough. Even if illegal, Tom Brady could do it and rather than get arrested, get laid. Unjust. It shouldn't be illegal to not be attractive enough or show the bad judgement that you think you are.

Yeah, I will doubt that claim. Some women might be shallow enough to go "ermagerd, Tom Brady put his hand on my shoulder and said 'Hey', I want to fuck him so bad right now cuz he's hot". Most of the women I know who complain about catcalling and other bad behaviour are equally pissed no matter how attractive the dude is, because it's still an invasion of their personal space and they still hate being objectified.

I think it has to be one way or another; either public life is to be neutered, or risky. We have to choose.

This ad I think chose. Neuter. You seem to have made the same decision (that in the club it is OK, otherwise, don't do it).

You say "neuter". I say "you have to behave when you're in public", like my momma told me all the time growing up.

If something as benign as playing with my food, or picking my nose, or talking out loud to myself are all behaviours that are looked down on, why the hell shouldn't "Trying to come onto random women on the street regardless of whether of not you know their personal intentions" be looked down on too? That one can actually get into someone's personal space to bother them.

EDIT: Those freedom desiring women that wanted risk so that they can enjoy attention while knowing of risks: too bad for them.

Well, those pussy-desiring men that want the risk of coming onto random chicks on the street in case it somehow leads to them getting laid while knowing the risks (being seen as a creepy weirdo, etc)...Too bad for them.

Street goes both ways there, man.

ObsidianJones:
*snip*

Oh man, I am so sorry to hear about your experience, AND the lack of awareness that people showed you. That seriously sucks.

Now I see this spiraling more and more out of control and I find myself reminding me that this is over being Decent to each other as human beings.

What the fuck Darkest Timeline did we stumble into? I remember believing we were getting better in the 90's.

I think it's always been like this, man.

We're just now starting to see it everywhere because of easy video access and social media, and just now starting to challenge it. :(

I know when I want to know what women want, I go to Paul Elam. I mean, the alternative is actually listening to women, but why do that when you can scream "shut up, cuck, she really likes it!"

Something Amyss:
I know when I want to know what women want, I go to Paul Elam. I mean, the alternative is actually listening to women, but why do that when you can scream "shut up, cuck, she really likes it!"

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm more offended by men defending men by claiming that we're all horny animals that can't help ourselves than I am offended by a lukewarm commercial.

erttheking:
I dunno man. I see a couple of people complaining that the ad is shaming them for talking to women, kind of seems to me like some people equate acting in a harassing way with how men show attraction.

And those assholes can just fuck right off. It is clear the context of that situation is that it's unwarranted and persistent attention, where the individual in question does not get the hint they're making someone uncomfortable.

CaitSeith:

Abomination:

I will use my own judgement to confront individuals if I feel they are behaving inappropriately and I feel I have the leverage to exert positive influence without undue risk to myself - and my sex has nothing to do with it.

It really doesn't. It's the percepeption from those misbehaving individuals about your sex that does; because that gives you a leverage that others from a different gender don't have. Is it wrong to ask directly for help to the ones in the best position to do so? Am I missing something here?

"Without undue risk to myself" and it's a PERSONAL choice, not one that should be imposed on me.

"You are a man, so you should take care of this." Fuck off.

hanselthecaretaker:

Saelune:
'Don't judge all Republicans'

Meanwhile Trump and his Supreme Court cronies just reminded me I am subhuman to them.

Lil devils x:

hanselthecaretaker:
but white washing it is no different than saying all liberals are a bunch of lazy America-hating immoral degenerates. Point is, there is a broad spectrum of each, both good and bad. The thread about labels applies here pretty well.

"white washing" IS exactly part of the problem with " conservative approved" dancing. Dancing is okay with conservatives if it is considered appropriate to " white culture" standards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YIO_dxyJio
The woman gets a good twerk going on about 38:07 you can watch.
There are a good number of conservatives that find other cultures dances offensive and have even gone as far to outlaw them repeatedly throughout our History.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zw7PCVGYr4
https://newsone.com/3833341/gop-mayor-twerking-pool-ban/
They forced many Native American Tribes to have to Dance in secret as well so they were not killed for doing so.
https://timeline.com/ghost-dance-wounded-knee-71926e23cf3b
https://www.legendsofamerica.com/na-dances/
http://nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/380

Ok, for the record my personal idea of ?conservatism? revolves around the notion of simply living in a way that protects and promotes a happy, healthy, functional lifestyle for myself and any loved ones that one might be responsible for. Kinda like the principles for animal conservation, energy conservation, environmental conservation, etc.

My idea of ?liberalism? falls under dreaming big but knowing where to set pragmatic boundaries. Basically acknowledging the ?Life is tough; it?s tougher if you?re stupid? adage and keeping it in the back of my mind as much as possible. Splice genes as much as you want, but he prepared to own up to any unforeseen consequences of playing God.

I believe in a higher power; at least higher than human if for no other reason than to keep us somewhat humble. I also believe man-made religion is a root cause for much of society?s ills, much like politics. Both are ultimately twisted human constructs that reek of arrogance and accomplish much of the opposite of what Jesus himself wanted.

The labels and ?sides? are mostly more bs human inventions to me; primarily character flaws meant to instill a false sense of security and belonging for the opposition to try taking advantage of.

And also for the record, any decent father would understandably frown upon their daughter ?twerking?, simply because odds are that kind of blatantly suggestive behavior sure as hell won?t get her far in life, or at least not on the path that will instill a sense of self respect or garner it from anyone else. It?s also funny this kinda thing gets a pass or overlooked in the age of women wanting to be treated as something more than sex objects.

Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party and virtually no one in the Republican party is doing anything to depose him. Your 'idea' of what these things are doesn't change what they really are.

tstorm823:

Saelune:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was part of a music video she and a bunch of other people made in college and a bunch of Republicans condemned her for it (though they condemn her everytime she breathes)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot1etonOf_M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj2Xald7NYQ - The actual video

By a bunch, you mean 2. And by Republicans, you mean twitter accounts famous exclusively for tweeting about this video. And by condemned, you mean they said "here's a video of her dancing" and "she's acting like a nitwit".

I understand you're not a friend to the Republican Party and vice versa, and I appreciate your desire to see the forest for the trees, but some of these trees aren't real. I know your response will be "doesn't matter; still evil," but as someone aware that the story you're referring to is essentially false, I felt obligated to let you know.

All Republicans do is very poorly bash Ocasio-Cortez, because she is everything your side hates. The thing is, they have nothing on her and Republicans are floundering.

Republicans have no ground to yell 'fake news', even though it is their catch phrase when the truth is hurting them.

erttheking:
Maybe some of us see masculinity, our identity as a gender, as more than just a primalistic urge to fuck. (Because, you know, there are non heterosexual men, something people like you always seem to forget when this topic comes up)

I didn't forget anything. Like I said, you do you. I don't care.

erttheking:
Some of us see masculinity as the strength to better ourselves and stand up to injustice. But let's get to the meat of the issue here. This is ad not critcizing men for being attracted to women.

In that one scene, the guy sees a pretty girl walking by, he smiles, obviously attracted to her, and then he goes to talk to her. The other dude stops him and says no, that's not cool. What? Why not?

erttheking:
It's criticizing men who do not respect the boundaries of women, violate their personal space, give unwanted sexual advances, and talk down to them.

I'm all for respecting the boundaries of women and if a woman says no, a guy should back off. I'm also all for treating women with respect and not talking down to them. But every sexual encounter that has ever happened is initiated by a sexual advance, like an attempted kiss or something, and it is rarely known with 100% certainty whether it is wanted or unwanted until one makes the advance. It's usually at least somewhat of a gamble. And without that initial advance, reproduction wouldn't happen. Men shouldn't be crucified for guessing wrong and making an initial advance that gets rejected. If he continues to do it after she has made it clear she's not interested, then yeah, he's in the wrong.

erttheking:
Oh, and it also points out the problem of bullying and harassment. People like you go to bat about how men can be victims to, but when it comes to the very real problem that made my early high-school life a living hell? People like you don't give a single solitary fuck, because pointing out that teenage boys have a lot of bullying assholes, often with OTHER teenage boys as the victims, it's pointing out a problem with men and you don't want to hear it.

I mean, if that's your definition of masculinity, it deserves to be insulted.

I want to be a man. Not a little boy who refuses to grow the fuck up. I look in the comment section on the video and all I see is screaming little boys.

I don't have a problem with every aspect of the video. Bullying is course a real problem. I was just saying that the video goes too far in some spots, which I pointed out.

Agema:
Who the hell do you think you are to tell other people they aren't masculine if they differ from you? Nobody made you emperor of masculinity.

I don't even know what this means. I didn't judge anyone's masculinity. I just said I wish people would quit judging mine. Again, you do you. I don't care.

Lil devils x:
WOW. Do you seriously think that is what Masculinity is? Part of the problem here is associating violence, harassment and ASSUMING what a woman wants due to how she is dressed is a part of masculinity at all, it isn't, and simply because all cultures or people do not agree with that being a part of masculinity does not make them any less masculine than any other guy. People thinking that in the first place is WHY this message is needed in the first place.

Of course a guy shouldn't assume anything based upon appearance. Which is why he needs to go talk to her, which is what that guy was probably going to do. Introduce himself. If she's receptive, maybe ask her for her phone number, then call her, ask her out on a date. That's the way the world works.

Lil devils x:
Not only is sibling violence not healthy, it can cause lifelong issues with violent behavior and relationships. It is better a person learn about violence being unacceptable before they cause serious harm or injury to themselves or others.

Who said anything about sibling violence? I'm talking about playful wrestling between boys. I didn't see those two kids throw any punches in that video. I didn't see anyone crying.

http://www.youthwork-practice.com/youth-education/33-wrestling-scuffling-fighting.html

Seven Bridges, aged 10, kills himself over being Bullied by a Colonoscopy Bag

A 10-year-old Kentucky boy allegedly died by suicide after being constantly bullied over his colostomy bag.

Tami Charles came home from a quick trip to the grocery store on Saturday morning to find her son Seven Bridges had died by suicide, WHAS11 reported.

"I saw my son dead. That's something in my head," Charles told the news station.

Charles' husband Donnie Bridges was also away from home at a church choir practice.

"For the few minutes that we left, he didn't want us to see that," Bridges told WHAS11 of his son's death.

Throughout his short life, Seven was faced with a number of challenges.

After he was born, Seven underwent several surgeries that included the insertion of a colostomy bag. When he grew older, it was removed but he continued to have difficulties when waste would leak, the outlet reported.

Children at Kerrick Elementary allegedly taunted Seven due to the smell that came from his bowel condition.

"Twenty-six surgeries from the day my son was born. Twenty-six surgeries. He just wanted to be normal, that's all," Seven's mother explained to WHAS11.

The situation came to a head in August when Seven was allegedly choked and called a racial slur while riding the school bus, WDRB.com reported.

"He couldn't fight back," Bridges told the outlet. "He didn't know how to hurt you. He had no malice, none."

Charles brought the incident to the school's administrators, prompting them to open an investigation.

Unfortunately, Charles' decision to stand up for her son only made things worse for Seven.

"Because I was so aggressive in advocating for him, they started to act differently toward him," Charles told WDRB.com of students and faculty members.

Nearly a month before Seven would allegedly take his own life, his parents found him hysterically crying in his bed.

He told them that he wanted to "let the past be the past," but his friends only ostracized him further.

"We cried that night," Charles told the outlet.

Despite his circumstances, Charles never would have imagined her son would die by suicide.

Tell me that there's nothing wrong with 'Boys will be Boys'. Tell me that this was for his own good and he needs to toughen up. Justify his life and the countless others that feel the only way out is by death... and then weigh that against being put out by a Ad done by a razor company saying shit like this is devastating to us all. And that we can all prevent it by making sure we are better to each other, and we teach being better to each other.

I'm here to hear that. Because he is not.

erttheking:

Something Amyss:
I know when I want to know what women want, I go to Paul Elam. I mean, the alternative is actually listening to women, but why do that when you can scream "shut up, cuck, she really likes it!"

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm more offended by men defending men by claiming that we're all horny animals that can't help ourselves than I am offended by a lukewarm commercial.

Which makes sense to me. I've never got the mentality of circling around bad actors. I'd rather tell people that so-and-so does not speak for me/represent me.

Weirdly, that seems to be the thrust of both the issues of Paul Elam and this commercial.

I'm also mystified by who the pack leaders tend to be. Roosh V, rapist who hides in his mom's basement , is another example.

Kerg3927:

I didn't forget anything. Like I said, you do you. I don't care.

You exclude non-heterosexual men when you're talking about masculinity and still expect people to care when you talk about how a milquetoast razor commercial hurt your feelings. You may want to take an approach that has a less "it's all about me, fuck everyone else," attitude.

Kerg3927:

In that one scene, the guy sees a pretty girl walking by, he smiles, obviously attracted to her, and then he goes to talk to her. The other dude stops him and says no, that's not cool. What? Why not?

Because she had no idea who the heck he was and women walking on their daily commute don't care for random guys hitting on them when they're on their daily commute.

Talk to a woman and ask what they actually want sometimes, you might learn something.

Kerg3927:

I'm all for respecting the boundaries of women and if a woman says no, a guy should back off. I'm also all for treating women with respect and not talking down to them. But every sexual encounter that has ever happened is initiated by a sexual advance, like an attempted kiss or something, and it is rarely known with 100% certainty whether it is wanted or unwanted until one makes the advance. It's usually at least somewhat of a gamble. And without that initial advance, reproduction wouldn't happen. Men shouldn't be crucified for guessing wrong and making an initial advance that gets rejected. If he continues to do it after she has made it clear she's not interested, then yeah, he's in the wrong.

Ok. I need you to listen to me. Ok. Acting like any and all sexual activity on behalf of men is being demonized is a hysterical overreaction to that commercial. Figuring when a woman does or does not want sexual advances is not hard if you're the type of person who actually takes the time to try to understand what's going on in a woman's head instead of just going "PWEETY! ME WANNA FUCK!" So stop acting like the act of reproduction is being demonized because women don't want to be hit on 24/7, would you?

Kerg3927:

I don't have a problem with every aspect of the video. Bullying is course a real problem. I was just saying that the video goes too far in some spots, which I pointed out.

You mean exactly one spot, and you seem to take offense to the idea that men can't hit on random women they see in the street, even though women tend to not be keen on being hit on when they're just trying to get from point A to point B.

Seriously man. Talk to women and see what they want and stop assuming that people just hate men. As a man who actually talks to women this entire situation just makes me want to roll my eyes.

Xprimentyl:

Ok, this is where shines the ironic sensitivity of those who?re convinced that the sensitivity of everyone else is the problem.

I'm confused here, this is not about sensitivity, this is about stereotyping and guilt by association, and with the association being one that is not a choice. I remember that here after the terrorist attacks in the metro and airport a lot of discussions started about the muslim community. And while none (except maybe some statements from the far right) came close to this type of bullshit many muslims took offense to the idea they should take actions (like publicly denouncing these attacks) just because they share the same religious beliefs. Their point was that they are just as much "linked" to these terrorists as anyone else and nothing special should be expected of them.(and the left very aggressively agreed with them, and the moderate right also rejected the way some people tried to associate the entire muslim community with terrorists that way). Yet here we have an ad promoting the exact same thing because we share sexes (which is even worse, because a religion is chosen) and the left is not simply "not attacking" this ad but actively defending it.

The ad doesn?t assign responsibility to only men to police other men. It calls to upstanding individuals to encourage people who behave like the animals we supposedly evolved from thousands of years ago to act like decent humans beings. Are you seriously offended that a commercial might suggest it?s ok to tell a mongoloid buddy who?s harassing someone to settle the fuck down and that the alpha male bullshit has gotten stale?

That's not the issue, the ad explicitly calls for "men" to hold "men" accountable. There is nothing wrong to ask people to hold people responsible, but by limiting the perpetrators and those who have to do something about it to a particular group you clearly assign responsibility. Again, this is something that would have never passed for any other group (except perhaps "white people"). And this is probably what annoys me the most, not so much the ad itself (which will likely change or affect very little) but the fact that an ideology (the 21st century social progressives) has become an abomination of itself that contradicts everything it should stand up for. You can't be a champion against sexism and yet defend sexist ads due to sexist double standards.

aegix drakan:

We can't promise total safety, that much is true.

But, we can make it clear that unwanted behaviour is not tolerated.

And how do you distinguish wanted from unwanted behavior ?

Like, we can't promise a world without theft or murder, but we can criminalize those things.

But we are not talking about rape, assault or coercion. Which are already criminalized.

We are talking about (unwelcome) acts of courting. And we don't want to criminalize courting.

Also, again, you're placing the onus on the woman not to dress provocatively if she wants to not have risky attention. I guess you're on team Burka after all, then?

And that is where the core of the idea is. The dress of a woman is interpreted as a way to signal if advances are welcome or not.

I don't really agree with this sentiment. Even if used that way, it would be impossible for a woman to us clothing to signal which kind of advances are welcome or from whom. And there are many many other considerations when choosing clothing that have nothing to to with this which all would have to take a backseat to make clothing a usefull signal. Which makes it a poor way of communicating your wishes.

That said, there once existed styles, often with complex cultural rules that showed relation status and availability. Most of those were about accessories or hairstyles. Whereever such rules are in place, using them to signal "i am an available single" to the world would certainly justify more courting behavior. But with the more and more global and interconnected world, most of that has long vanished in obscurity.

The other thing is, while clothing in a way that shows and accetuates your sexual characteristics would certainly not excuse any rude behavior, it very much does excuse oogling. That is basically the one thing you really can influence with cloth styles and where you are resposnible for the result.
You have the freedom to dress like you want without having to justify it for it but other people have the freedom to look at you or not without justifying it.

Can't say anything about wolf whistling. Never heard it done in real life. There were a couple of idiots using it as ringtone, but otherwise i only know it from TV. But it seems it is a thing as close as France.

ObsidianJones:
Tell me that there's nothing wrong with 'Boys will be Boys'.

How is this a boy thing. Just yesterday i read about a Chinese girl being bullied into suicide (in an article about social media and privacy).

Yes, those things happen. They are very bad. They are also very much not gender specific at all. How does this stuff even get linked with masculinity in the first place ? It shouldn't even be associated with this elusive toxic masculinity because it has nothing to do with sexism or macho-behavior. It is probably more justified to link drunken driving to toxic masculinity than this. And that would be a stretch too.

Satinavian:

aegix drakan:

We can't promise total safety, that much is true.

But, we can make it clear that unwanted behaviour is not tolerated.

And how do you distinguish wanted from unwanted behavior ?

Like, we can't promise a world without theft or murder, but we can criminalize those things.

But we are not talking about rape, assault or coercion. Which are already criminalized.

We are talking about (unwelcome) acts of courting. And we don't want to criminalize courting.

I have an idea for this one. We teach our children that when they are adults, if someone is bothering them to say "Fuck off". Loudly. Clearly. It leaves no room for guess work on the other party's end.

Gorfias:
France may have recently passed a law against "wolf whistling". Paul Elam warns ... 2: Oddly, women enjoy it.

Christ. Surely we're not going to take Paul Elam's opinion on what women like seriously. Let's not mince words: MRAs seem to have an uncommonly high failure rate of getting or maintaining relationships with women (Elam included) which hardly speaks well of their ability to understand and get on well with women.

Gordon_4:

I have an idea for this one. We teach our children that when they are adults, if someone is bothering them to say "Fuck off". Loudly. Clearly. It leaves no room for guess work on the other party's end.

Indeed it doesn't.

But the sort of behaviour going on here such as around wolf-whistling often isn't "courting" in some kind of sense or polite dating. It's usually aggressive and invasive: you can tell because if the woman challenges a man for catcalling in any way, the man often gets nasty very quickly. That's why women usually just ignore it and move on.

aegix drakan:

Well, those pussy-desiring men that want the risk of coming onto random chicks on the street in case it somehow leads to them getting laid while knowing the risks (being seen as a creepy weirdo, etc)...Too bad for them.

Street goes both ways there, man.

Agreed. Keep it legal. But know if you, the man, aren't up for the pick up, you risk rejection.

EDIT: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-squeaky-wheel/201307/10-surprising-facts-about-rejection

Your (this guy's) problem. But this ad has a cock blocker stop, from what I can tell, an attractive man from chatting her up. What if he is charming and rich too. Who says that girl would have wanted the cock blocker to act as he did? In France, they're talking of making it illegal to even try. I suppose I would prefer that kind of concrete line. For now? This ad assumes that line already exists.

To others seemingly shocked that freedom = risk: example my right to eat what I want exposes me to risk. I may eat wrong and get sick, fat, or die early. I want that risk. I'll take it over having government agents surround me, guns drawn, telling me to drop the doughnut and eat an apple.

Agema:

Christ. Surely we're not going to take Paul Elam's opinion on what women like seriously. Let's not mince words: MRAs seem to have an uncommonly high failure rate of getting or maintaining relationships with women (Elam included) which hardly speaks well of their ability to understand and get on well with women.

Or they understand too well and it interferes with their relationships. I'm advised if you are married and red pilled, and want to stay married, keep that to yourself. I'm trying and so far, mostly succeeding.

erttheking:
I really can't get over people who get offended at ads like this insulting men before turning around and acting like men have such poor control over their sexuality that women can't show their skin without risk of attack.

So the apparently attractive man that gets cock blocked was going to uncontrollably attack that girl? That is the problem with you guys that want to treat someone that says, "smile" to a girl at a party like a rapist. You are trying to outlaw men trying to get sex/and or form relationships that just might, y'know result in human happiness. And that, ultimately, is one of the biggest problems with this add. (The other suggesting little boys be drugged rather than rough house).

Gorfias:

aegix drakan:

Well, those pussy-desiring men that want the risk of coming onto random chicks on the street in case it somehow leads to them getting laid while knowing the risks (being seen as a creepy weirdo, etc)...Too bad for them.

Street goes both ways there, man.

Agreed. Keep it legal. But know if you, the man, aren't up for the pick up, you risk rejection.

EDIT: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-squeaky-wheel/201307/10-surprising-facts-about-rejection

Your (this guy's) problem. But this ad has a cock blocker stop, from what I can tell, an attractive man from chatting her up. What if he is charming and rich too. Who says that girl would have wanted the cock blocker to act as he did? In France, they're talking of making it illegal to even try. I suppose I would prefer that kind of concrete line. For now? This ad assumes that line already exists.

To others seemingly shocked that freedom = risk: example my right to eat what I want exposes me to risk. I may eat wrong and get sick, fat, or die early. I want that risk. I'll take it over having government agents surround me, guns drawn, telling me to drop the doughnut and eat an apple.

Agema:

Christ. Surely we're not going to take Paul Elam's opinion on what women like seriously. Let's not mince words: MRAs seem to have an uncommonly high failure rate of getting or maintaining relationships with women (Elam included) which hardly speaks well of their ability to understand and get on well with women.

Or they understand too well and it interferes with their relationships. I'm advised if you are married and red pilled, and want to stay married, keep that to yourself. I'm trying and so far, mostly succeeding.

erttheking:
I really can't get over people who get offended at ads like this insulting men before turning around and acting like men have such poor control over their sexuality that women can't show their skin without risk of attack.

So the apparently attractive man that gets cock blocked was going to uncontrollably attack that girl? That is the problem with you guys that want to treat someone that says, "smile" to a girl at a party like a rapist. You are trying to outlaw men trying to get sex/and or form relationships that just might, y'know result in human happiness. And that, ultimately, is one of the biggest problems with this add. (The other suggesting little boys be drugged rather than rough house).

You need to stop. Like, you really need to stop. Respond to what I say, not what you cook up in your head. That comment wasn't directed at the guy in the video. It was directed at you saying women make risks based on what they wear. When "she was asking for it dressed like that," is rapist line 101. So you don't get to play the victim card. Not when you pull shit like that and then straw man me about hating all flirting and pulling the idea we should drug kids out of your ass. You're the guy who complained he can't grab the asses of women at work. You're upset you can't sexually assault women. So don't spew bullshit at me that people want a permanently chaste society when you think women invite unwanted advances based on how they dress and you think you're being wronged that you can't grab them freely. It's 2019, start acting like it. Oh and don't flatter yourself. Don't confuse your desire to fuck with the foundation of a happy relationship.

Quick question. How old are you?

erttheking:

Gorfias:
Paul Elam warns 1: Don't do it. Makes you look like a cuck.

I was going to ask who Paul Elam is. The fact that he said "doing x makes you look like a cuck," caused me to stop caring.

The best way to sum up Paul Elam is that he cites his Red Pill moment (ie, the moment that made him aware that women truly rule the world and men are the only true victims of sexism) came at age 13, when his mother got his brothers to hold him down to make him take his Diarrhea medicine.

The 'founding father' and 'most influential' MRA believes women have all the power because his mum made him take medicine to stop him s***ting himself.

erttheking:
You need to stop. Like, you really need to stop. Respond to what I say, not what you cook up in your head. That comment wasn?t directed at the guy in the video. It was directed at you saying women make risks based on what they wear. When ?she was asking for it dressed like that,? is rapist line 101. So you don?t get to play the victim card. Not when you pull shit like that and then straw man me about hating all flirting and pulling the idea we should drug kids out of your ass. You?re the guy who complained he can?t grab the asses of women at work. You?re upset you can?t sexually assault women. So don?t spew bullshit at me that people want a permanently chaste society when you think women invite unwanted advances based on how they dress and you think you?re being wronged that you can?t grab them freely. It?s 2019, start acting like it. Oh and don?t flatter yourself. Don?t confuse your desire to fuck with the foundation of a happy relationship.

Quick question. How old are you?

I'm old enough to know there are women who are blue nose prudes that would like to return to genteel times where a man may not talk to her without her father's permission first, and those that want to get wasted at a party and get gang banged and everything in between.

Anyone treating women like a they are a monolith or suggesting that little boys be drugged rather than allowed to rough house is the problem.

And your suggestion that a male interest in sex with a woman and the possibly of a relationship = rape? That is part of the problem. I cannot imagine the cold, loveless, sexless brave new world you must be imagining.

Windknight:

erttheking:

I was going to ask who Paul Elam is. The fact that he said "doing x makes you look like a cuck," caused me to stop caring.

The best way to sum up Paul Elam is that he cites his Red Pill moment (ie, the moment that made him aware that women truly rule the world and men are the only true victims of sexism) came at age 13, when his mother got his brothers to hold him down to make him take his Diarrhea medicine.

The 'founding father' and 'most influential' MRA believes women have all the power because his mum made him take medicine to stop him s***ting himself.

I think the best thing he says is we need to teach women to stop abusing men too. Course if he said it, we should disregard, amiright?

EDIT: But seriously. If you think there is nothing to be learned about social power by a woman successfully ordering 2 males to hold down a 3rd, I think you are being myopic.

Windknight:

erttheking:

Gorfias:
Paul Elam warns 1: Don't do it. Makes you look like a cuck.

I was going to ask who Paul Elam is. The fact that he said "doing x makes you look like a cuck," caused me to stop caring.

The best way to sum up Paul Elam is that he cites his Red Pill moment (ie, the moment that made him aware that women truly rule the world and men are the only true victims of sexism) came at age 13, when his mother got his brothers to hold him down to make him take his Diarrhea medicine.

The 'founding father' and 'most influential' MRA believes women have all the power because his mum made him take medicine to stop him s***ting himself.

I can hear Freud jerking it in his grave. Jesus Christ. I had no idea how on point my man child comments were.

Gorfias:

erttheking:
You need to stop. Like, you really need to stop. Respond to what I say, not what you cook up in your head. That comment wasn?t directed at the guy in the video. It was directed at you saying women make risks based on what they wear. When ?she was asking for it dressed like that,? is rapist line 101. So you don?t get to play the victim card. Not when you pull shit like that and then straw man me about hating all flirting and pulling the idea we should drug kids out of your ass. You?re the guy who complained he can?t grab the asses of women at work. You?re upset you can?t sexually assault women. So don?t spew bullshit at me that people want a permanently chaste society when you think women invite unwanted advances based on how they dress and you think you?re being wronged that you can?t grab them freely. It?s 2019, start acting like it. Oh and don?t flatter yourself. Don?t confuse your desire to fuck with the foundation of a happy relationship.

Quick question. How old are you?

I'm old enough to know there are women who are blue nose prudes that would like to return to genteel times where a man may not talk to her without her father's permission first, and those that want to get wasted at a party and get gang banged and everything in between.

Anyone treating women like a they are a monolith or suggesting that little boys be drugged rather than allowed to rough house is the problem.

And your suggestion that a male interest in sex with a woman and the possibly of a relationship = rape? That is part of the problem. I cannot imagine the cold, loveless, sexless brave new world you must be imagining.

That isn?t an answer. Also as much as I don?t give a shit about your baseless views on women, clearly none of the women here think that, and you seem to have no respect for the boundaries they want:

No one suggests either of those things. You made them up because you want to be the victim.

I?ll repeat myself. You need to fucking stop. Stop pulling shit out of your ass and respond to what I say. The only thing I compared to rape was you grabbing co workers without permission and saying women who dress scantily invite danger when that?s rapist line 101. If take offense to that being rapey, boo hoo. Treat women like people and not like walking cock recepticals. If you can?t get anything by treating women like equal partners, that?s a you problem. I?ve talked to women about this. Without violating their boundaries. It isn?t hard. It?s fucking easy. I shouldn?t have to explain this.

EDIT: we should stop abusing men? We've been over this before. I pointed out, as a man who contemplated suicide, how your views do not represent me and insult me.

Saelune:

All Republicans do is very poorly bash Ocasio-Cortez, because she is everything your side hates. The thing is, they have nothing on her and Republicans are floundering.

Republicans have no ground to yell 'fake news', even though it is their catch phrase when the truth is hurting them.

I agree, there are a lot of poor criticisms of her. I'd argue that happens not because she's everything my side hates, but because she talks, a lot. Most politicians don't talk so publicly so often, and they especially don't put numbers on things, and she does these things aggressively. I really like that about her, and I hope most of the criticism keeps bouncing off of her so that we can get past the point where people keep their mouths shut about the issues thinking its politically expedient to say as little as possible. I think socialism is typically a mistake and every one of her solutions, except maybe the "Green New Deal" depending on the details, is misguided, but her insistence on talking about problems is a good thing and I like it. And constantly attacking her is dumb.

But everyone has grounds to yell "fake news" at fake news. if you don't want to hear about fake news, don't buy into it.

erttheking:

Gorfias:

erttheking:
You need to stop. Like, you really need to stop. Respond to what I say, not what you cook up in your head. That comment wasn?t directed at the guy in the video. It was directed at you saying women make risks based on what they wear. When ?she was asking for it dressed like that,? is rapist line 101. So you don?t get to play the victim card. Not when you pull shit like that and then straw man me about hating all flirting and pulling the idea we should drug kids out of your ass. You?re the guy who complained he can?t grab the asses of women at work. You?re upset you can?t sexually assault women. So don?t spew bullshit at me that people want a permanently chaste society when you think women invite unwanted advances based on how they dress and you think you?re being wronged that you can?t grab them freely. It?s 2019, start acting like it. Oh and don?t flatter yourself. Don?t confuse your desire to fuck with the foundation of a happy relationship.

Quick question. How old are you?

I'm old enough to know there are women who are blue nose prudes that would like to return to genteel times where a man may not talk to her without her father's permission first, and those that want to get wasted at a party and get gang banged and everything in between.

Anyone treating women like a they are a monolith or suggesting that little boys be drugged rather than allowed to rough house is the problem.

And your suggestion that a male interest in sex with a woman and the possibly of a relationship = rape? That is part of the problem. I cannot imagine the cold, loveless, sexless brave new world you must be imagining.

That isn?t an answer. Also as much as I don?t give a shit about your baseless views on women, clearly none of the women here think that, and you seem to have no respect for the boundaries they want:

No one suggests either of those things. You made them up because you want to be the victim.

I?ll repeat myself. You need to fucking stop. Stop pulling shit out of your ass and respond to what I say. The only thing I compared to rape was you grabbing co workers without permission and saying women who dress scantily invite danger when that?s rapist line 101. If take offense to that being rapey, boo hoo. Treat women like people and not like walking cock recepticals. If you can?t get anything by treating women like equal partners, that?s a you problem. I?ve talked to women about this. Without violating their boundaries. It isn?t hard. It?s fucking easy. I shouldn?t have to explain this.

EDIT: we should stop abusing men? We?ve been over this before. I pointed out, as a man who contemplated suicide, how your views do not represent me and insult me.

There's no ignore feature.. unless it is back. Please do not read or reply to my posts anymore.

Gorfias:

erttheking:

Gorfias:

I'm old enough to know there are women who are blue nose prudes that would like to return to genteel times where a man may not talk to her without her father's permission first, and those that want to get wasted at a party and get gang banged and everything in between.

Anyone treating women like a they are a monolith or suggesting that little boys be drugged rather than allowed to rough house is the problem.

And your suggestion that a male interest in sex with a woman and the possibly of a relationship = rape? That is part of the problem. I cannot imagine the cold, loveless, sexless brave new world you must be imagining.

That isn?t an answer. Also as much as I don?t give a shit about your baseless views on women, clearly none of the women here think that, and you seem to have no respect for the boundaries they want:

No one suggests either of those things. You made them up because you want to be the victim.

I?ll repeat myself. You need to fucking stop. Stop pulling shit out of your ass and respond to what I say. The only thing I compared to rape was you grabbing co workers without permission and saying women who dress scantily invite danger when that?s rapist line 101. If take offense to that being rapey, boo hoo. Treat women like people and not like walking cock recepticals. If you can?t get anything by treating women like equal partners, that?s a you problem. I?ve talked to women about this. Without violating their boundaries. It isn?t hard. It?s fucking easy. I shouldn?t have to explain this.

EDIT: we should stop abusing men? We?ve been over this before. I pointed out, as a man who contemplated suicide, how your views do not represent me and insult me.

There's no ignore feature.. unless it is back. Please do not read or reply to my posts anymore.

Hm let me think about it. No. I mean what even gives you the right to demand I don't read your posts? What am I supposed to do? Cover my eyes and scroll down if I see your avatar? No.

You claim to speak for abused men. I AM an abused man. I was bullied and hit. And I don't care for the way you view women. I'm not shutting up because it's inconvenient for you.

Abomination:

CaitSeith:

Abomination:

I will use my own judgement to confront individuals if I feel they are behaving inappropriately and I feel I have the leverage to exert positive influence without undue risk to myself - and my sex has nothing to do with it.

It really doesn't. It's the percepeption from those misbehaving individuals about your sex that does; because that gives you a leverage that others from a different gender don't have. Is it wrong to ask directly for help to the ones in the best position to do so? Am I missing something here?

"Without undue risk to myself" and it's a PERSONAL choice, not one that should be imposed on me.

"You are a man, so you should take care of this." Fuck off.

I thought "Without undue risk to myself" was implied and went without saying.

And who is going to police that you take care of other men's behavior and put you in trial if you don't!? Tell me who is going to make you PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE for not stopping the evil deeds of those near you!?

*sigh*

At this point, I simply don't know how to explain to you why you should care about other people. I don't know how to convince someone how to experience the basic human emotion of empathy. Not only for the victims, but for your friends and close ones who will get into serious trouble if they aren't stopped.

Satinavian:

aegix drakan:

We can't promise total safety, that much is true.

But, we can make it clear that unwanted behaviour is not tolerated.

And how do you distinguish wanted from unwanted behavior ?

Well, a good starting point is if the behaviour is harmful to others, or if it's imposing on them, and they aren't consenting to it, it's harmful? If that's too broad, we can back it up a little or drill down for more precision.

Like, we can't promise a world without theft or murder, but we can criminalize those things.

But we are not talking about rape, assault or coercion. Which are already criminalized.

We are talking about (unwelcome) acts of courting. And we don't want to criminalize courting.[/quote]

Did you miss the part right after where I said:

Me:
Likewise, with people harassing or preying on women, we can, as a culture say "No, that's not acceptable, and you will be shunned if you do that" and punish those who take that harassment to criminal levels (Stalking, sexual assault, etc).

I'm not saying it should be criminalized. I'm saying we as a society should make people who engage in such behaviour feel unwelcome until they adjust.

Like, stuff we already designate as "unwanted" behaviour, and thus "shunned behaviour" are:
- Talking out loud to yourself in public
- Using a phone at the movie theater
- Taking a shit in the bushes
- Cutting in front of people on the road (it's not technically illegal as long as you signal, right?)
- Driving past a school or romantic-themed restaurant with a boombox blasting out swearwords.
- Walking past a bus stop and using racial/sex-based slurs at everyone in line.
- Picking your nose

Most of these things are not illegal in any way (Well, except maybe shitting in the bushes). But if you do these things, people will shun you or tell you you're an asshole until you stop engaging in that behaviour.

Why not do the same for unwelcome catcalling, wolf-whistling, or trying to approach random women on the street? Most women will tell you (or at least they've told me) that this kind of behaviour grosses them out or makes them feel unsafe.

Also, again, you're placing the onus on the woman not to dress provocatively if she wants to not have risky attention. I guess you're on team Burka after all, then?

And that is where the core of the idea is. The dress of a woman is interpreted as a way to signal if advances are welcome or not.

I don't really agree with this sentiment. Even if used that way, it would be impossible for a woman to us clothing to signal which kind of advances are welcome or from whom. And there are many many other considerations when choosing clothing that have nothing to to with this which all would have to take a backseat to make clothing a usefull signal. Which makes it a poor way of communicating your wishes.

I agree, using clothes as an indicator of whether you're DTF or not is silly.

Gorfias, meanwhile thinks that it's an obvious indicator. *shrug*

The other thing is, while clothing in a way that shows and accetuates your sexual characteristics would certainly not excuse any rude behavior, it very much does excuse oogling. That is basically the one thing you really can influence with cloth styles and where you are resposnible for the result.
You have the freedom to dress like you want without having to justify it for it but other people have the freedom to look at you or not without justifying it.

I'm an understanding man. While I do think it's rude, I'm not going to take a stand against oogling or staring. That strays too close to thought-crime territory for my taste.

As far as I'm concerned, stare away.

ObsidianJones:
Tell me that there's nothing wrong with 'Boys will be Boys'.

How is this a boy thing. Just yesterday i read about a Chinese girl being bullied into suicide (in an article about social media and privacy).

Yes, those things happen. They are very bad. They are also very much not gender specific at all. How does this stuff even get linked with masculinity in the first place ? It shouldn't even be associated with this elusive toxic masculinity because it has nothing to do with sexism or macho-behavior. It is probably more justified to link drunken driving to toxic masculinity than this. And that would be a stretch too.

It's a "boy" thing because "boys will be boys" is an excuse used only for boys to excuse bullyinh, and it's shockingly common.

When girls bully other girls, their behavior isn't excused with "oh, you know how girls are, this is just how they develop". More than likely they'll be told "No, this is unladylike, stop this shameful behaviour at once!"

Whereas boys see their bullying often excused along gender lines.

I've experienced this firsthand.

I went to an all-boy school, right? And I got relentlessly bullied. From dozens of people using anti-gay slurs on me because they thought I was gay (Because I had no interest in girls at the time), to lining up along hallways and then pinball-shoving me back and forth along it until I crashed to the floor, to singling me out in any sports game to tackle to the floor the second the teacher wasn't looking, to the horrible shit they used to do in the gym locker rooms.

Most of which I've suppressed due to trauma, but I've still got distinct memories of being dragged by the legs across the floor in my underpants while people pointed at my yellow underpants and went "ha haaaaa, he's got an orange thong, I told you he was a sissy, haaaaaa!" and having a trash can dumped onto me.

And the administration did basically fuck all. For 4 years. Finally, my dad had enough and grilled the VP of discipline about the lack of action, who responded with "Well, you know how boys are, they have their little locker room rituals, it's all completely harmless. Nothing to really get worked up about!"

Mind you, after my dad really grilled the bastard, he FINALLY sent someone down to see what was going on and realized just how bad the situation was. Still took 4.5 years of torment though, which was excused with "boys will be boys, you know how they are, this is natural, no need to look into it, I'm sure it's not even that bad".

So yeah, TLDR, it's a boy thing because it's an excuse that's frequently used to excuse male on male bullying.

Kerg3927:

Agema:
Who the hell do you think you are to tell other people they aren't masculine if they differ from you? Nobody made you emperor of masculinity.

I don't even know what this means. I didn't judge anyone's masculinity. I just said I wish people would quit judging mine. Again, you do you. I don't care.

Can I remind you that you said:

Just because some people don't have masculinity, don't understand it, and don't see a reason for it to exist, doesn't mean it's a good idea to get rid of it.
...
If some guys aren't masculine and don't want to be masculine, that's fine. You do you, and quit trying to force your non-masculinity on me, IMO.

Well, you don't have a right to tell other guys that they aren't masculine because they do things differently from you. Perhaps masculinity can be a lot of things that other than wrestling, hitting on girls, and whatever you think it is because it's what you do or assume is "normal".

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here