There is nothing that causes outrage among men like female sexual autonomy.

[Recursion]

That's really what it comes down to.

There is a real male rage that comes from facing the fact that a woman is not just a body, but an independent agent who has desires of her own.

Religion always goes after female sexuality first. Maybe ten thousand years ago there was a legitimate reason, when bloodlines had to be known (I doubt it was legitimate then, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt).

This isn't just speculation on my part; I'm a guy. I recognize that rage because I've felt it. It has angered me when women wanted to be sexually involved with men other than me (the refrain "whore", oddly enough, tends to mean "she will sleep with men other than me&quot . That said, I'm also a human being, and I know women are human beings, so I've recognized those feelings and dealt with them. This is the step too many guys miss.

But, seriously, if you're denying that a large part of modern society is about controlling female sexuality, you're fooling yourself.

[FatBuddy]

1. women are not a passive receptacle all forms of male violence

good post.

[quinnox]

2. Sexuality is used as a way to control both men and women

in various ways throughout history, both by religions and dictator types. I guess I'm saying I wouldn't limit it to just women, in terms of this topic.

[Recursion]

3. I grant the large point, and sex has always been used to control men too

But still, the anger against female sexual enjoyment is really limited to women.

[quinnox]

6. I would tend to agree with you on this

[Bonobo]

126. Really? What about all the posts that seem to resent men "jacking off"?

There are many and though they don't say it explicitly, it is embodied in the spiteful tone of the posts.

[nomorenomore08]

129. Who actually resents men for "jacking off"? No one sane.

But men getting off to brutal, violent porn (where the violence isn't always simulated, mind you) is at the least concerning. I think that may be more the issue.

[Bonobo]

131. "Jack off", "jerk off", "get their rocks off", "get their jollies"...

These are phrases that ring with spite and condemnation. If that is not sexual "shaming" language, I don't know what other word you would use.

[nomorenomore08]

135. It may be, on some level. Rooted in a time when masturbation was considered shameful.

But since the rise of feminism - including the dreaded "radfems" who represent a small percentage of the movement - has coincided with greater sexual openness, including RE: self-pleasure, I don't think it's so simple as "anti-porn" = "anti-masturbation."

[Bonobo]

136. I agree that it is not that simple.

But I strongly suspect that, at some level, male masturbation (which represents a level of sexual autonomy) is perceived -subconsciously- as a threat to maintaining sexual control.

Sexual politics is a tricky issue. Men evince control in some ways and women in others.

Within relationships, it is largely the woman who exercises the ability to control if and when sexual relations take place. This is a function of psychology and biology. But we shouldn't pretend that it isn't true just because we don't like the sound of it.

[catbyte]

4. Yeah, but we're the only targets of all current bagger legislation, not men.

[quinnox]

8. I can't argue with that

[Recursion]

11. Bingo

It's about controlling women. Period.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

47. I'm thinking of wording that another way--

And certainly not disagreeing with you!!!

What came to me is "it's about excusing male sexual rage." Or ego....or something......

I think what I'm getting at --and this is just the beginning of an idea--is that the conscious awareness isn't that "I want to control that woman".....but maybe something more primitive---"if I can't have you, I will hurt you".....

I know I'm just splitting hairs here.....just thinking out loud and trying to understand the emotional reactions going on...... emotional reactions that have been codified and perpetuated by male-controlled institutions that shape cultures through the millenia.

[Puzzledtraveller]

5. or posts about the same

[Squinch]

82. .

[Capt. Obvious]

7. So how do you deal with your rage?

[Recursion]

9. I don't know that I have to "deal with" it; I've just felt it

Like, I "get" where misogynists and MRAs' rage comes from, I just don't live in that emotional space.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

51. I've thought many times that men who have hostility problems

Haven't learned that part of growing up means learning to deal with feelings of hurt/rejection without *acting out*.

We all have to learn that lesson, obviously. But societies have excused male aggression against women for millenia, while female aggression and self-assertion has traditionally been suppressed.

[CTyankee]

86. You said it, Blanche! Great post!

[Squinch]

90. I think that's the root of it: we have "excused male aggression...for millenia, while

female aggression ... has traditionally been suppressed."

And I guess there was a time when male aggression and "acting out" were characteristics that were useful for security, so it was nurtured. And if you are in a situation where you need male aggression, you pretty much need to have that female submission, too.

But now power lies in information, so male aggression, and female submission, are no longer necessary.

This is a pretty unique moment in history.

I have always been conscious of how lucky I am to be a woman at this moment in time, and have the freedom to completely control my own life.

But I never considered that it's almost no wonder a lot of men are feeling displaced by the fact that women can do this now. To which I would add, they need to suck it up, they had all the advantages for all that time, and we're not going backward, and what lies ahead is infinitely preferable to women AND men.

But I never looked at that displacement of the role of aggression before.

Very interesting.

[FrodosPet]

145. You made some excellent points

Lifespans were shorter, resources more scarce, war more local and personal. If you and your peeps did not make babies, you and your peeps DNA and culture disappeared.

[The2ndWheel]

146. It might work the same way for jobs

But now power lies in information, so male aggression, and female submission, are no longer necessary.

But I never considered that it's almost no wonder a lot of men are feeling displaced by the fact that women can do this now. To which I would add, they need to suck it up, they had all the advantages for all that time, and we're not going backward, and what lies ahead is infinitely preferable to women AND men.

If you change a few words...

"But now power lies in information, so "American jobs", and fewer resources for 95% of the human population, are no longer necessary.

But I never considered that it's almost no wonder a lot of Americans are feeling displaced by the fact that anyone anywhere can do this now. To which I would add, they need to suck it up, they had all the advantages for all that time, and we're not going backward, and what lies ahead is infinitely preferable to people around the world AND Americans."

[Squinch]

148. Well, that's a completely different topic, but OK.

[In_The_Wind]

10. Excellent post!

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. What you are feeling is jealousy, and you're not uniquely vulnerable to it because you are a man. nt

[woolldog]

28. That's what I was thinking.

The OP has nothing to do with "rage" about "autonomy" or any of that nonsense. It's about sexual jealousy, which is as timeless as love and lust as a human emotion. Worse yet, he claims to speak for men. What a clown.

[LordGlenconner]

48. Agreed

Especially when it comes to your last sentence.

[nomorenomore08]

107. Why do you guys take this so personally? Like it applies equally to *all* men?

I'm a man, and I've felt the same emotion described in the OP - whether you call it rage or jealousy or anything else, it presents an obvious problem if you're not able to properly control it.

[lumberjack_jeff]

114. The OP is a big logic fail.

It's a world view in search of a rationale.

Of course you feel jealousy, it's a human emotion. Every man and woman on this site feels jealousy.

The OP is extrapolating personal feelings of jealousy to generalized desire for control of women's but not men's sexual agency.

a) it's too big a leap, and
b) the italicized bit is more relevant in a thread about porn.

[nomorenomore08]

119. When has men's sexual agency ever been restricted to the same degree as women's?

Hundreds of years ago, women were considered all but unmarriageable if they weren't virgins (even when that was only because of rape) while men could discreetly sow their wild oats with prostitutes and "loose women" and it was all fine and dandy. Obviously we no longer live in that world, but a ghost of that double standard still persists.

On an individual level, jealousy may only be jealousy. But on a collective level, when millions experience a particular kind of jealousy - rooted in sexual insecurity or frustration - it takes on a somewhat different meaning.

[MadrasT]

128. Bullshit.

I do not experience jealousy. I am polyamorous and anyone I date is free to have other relationships. I think it's healthy and I encourage it.

[woolldog]

132. That's cool.

The point is both men and women experience jealousy.

Then there are a few people, like you, who have transcended that kind of emotion and live on a higher plane than the rest of us.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

160. Half of Taylor Swift's music catalog just as an example. nt

[Dawson Leery]

13. Organized religion was primative(unenlightened) man's means of controlling society.

[trotsky]

14. It would be nice if you added just one word to your subject line.

The word "some" in between "among" and "men."

As stated, it's a bit of a broad brush.

[nomorenomore08]

109. But are observations of large-scale social phenomena necessarily a "broad brush"?

They can certainly become one, I suppose, if misused...

[trotsky]

142. Do you think ALL men are "outraged" by a woman choosing a different partner?

Every single one?

[nomorenomore08]

153. No. But I didn't take the OP as a statement on all men, universally. Just a general observation.

[bvar22]

15. Large Brush you are using there.

Maybe you should look at that.

[DanTex]

16. Umm... speak for yourself.

[cherokeeprogressive]

57. ^^^THIS^^^

[postulater]

17. Yes there is. Bad beer.

[LadyHawkAZ]

18. K&R beautifully said n/t

[mathematic]

19. What a mess.

Boiling everything down to sexual autonomy is lazy.

Why do you discount that anti-abortion views are exactly as represented? That some people believe that life begins at conception and that abortion would therefore be a crime against that life? Conception is one of the natural choices for the start of life (other natural choices include the development of specific organs or viability outside of the womb) and it has nothing to do with sexuality. It's about "beginning at the beginning".

Economically, you might argue that closing of women entrants into the workforce is about controlling their sexuality but again, why can't this just be about people in the workforce trying to maintain their privileged position in the workforce? Do you argue that people that want to close the borders are trying to control the sexuality of Mexican day laborers? Or that people that want to limit work visas are trying to control the sexuality of Indian IT workers?

The point here is that women have been harmed for religious and economic reasons, not for some sort of sexual control. In particular, your theory cannot explain why religious women are anti-abortion. How can they have male rage at female sexual autonomy? They're not even men! Likewise, some women (though much much fewer nowadays) are in a household where their husband is the sole earner. It makes some sense for these women to support policies that maintain the privileged workforce position of their husbands. If you look at the voting breakdowns you see that married, religious women are much more republican than single or non-religious women. How is this explained with a theory of male-anything, much less male rage about female sexual autonomy?

And finally, the rage you've felt is not unique to men. Women have the same feelings of rejection and anger when they're in that situation. We even have sexist clichés about it: Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

[BainsBane]

44. Where are men widely shamed for their sexual expression?

Last edited Wed Dec 18, 2013, 05:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Words don't even exist in English for men as they do for English. Pretending that men are just as subject to this kind of cultural hatred is absurd. Men are 10% or rape victims. Women are 90%. Rape victims are shamed and even on DU people can't wait to line up to call them liars. That exists everywhere. That is a function of a strong cultural hatred for women. Pretending men are just as subject to it is ludicrous.

Additionally, your reductionist assertion that all sexism is a function of religion and economics is obviously untrue. The number of atheists with a profound hatred of women shows that religion cannot explain sexism or misogyny. While economics clearly has an influence, the more comprehensive concept of intersectionality explores ways in which class, gender, and race interact. Gender is not completely subsumed to economics, no more than race is.

People deny sexism for the same reason they deny racism: to ensure its continuation. They are both reactionary positions born of a determination that privilege go unchallenged.

[CTyankee]

89. well, I think for men to be anti-choice, it is really about the question of women being

moral agents. AS such, they have moral choice. To deny them that choice is to deny them their human agency, their ability to understand and make decisions based on that understanding about abortion for themselves.

[Arugula Latte]

20. Very true. Stomping down and controlling women is at the very heart of the patriarchal monotheisms.

I'd go so far as to say it's the main reason for these religions' existence. The "Big Three" have been a scourge upon the planet and have caused untold suffering for women and girls.

[pipi_k]

21. Well, I dunno...

I'm kind of not feeling this part of it:

This isn't just speculation on my part; I'm a guy. I recognize that rage because I've felt it. It has angered me when women wanted to be sexually involved with men other than me (the refrain "whore", oddly enough, tends to mean "she will sleep with men other than me&quot .

Because how do you think it feels for us women if/when a guy wants to sleep with anyone except us? It's not about trying to control them, IMO.

I think the roots lie in rejection.

Kind of like when you're at a dance and you get up the courage to ask some attractive lady to dance and she (nicely or not) turns you down, but then you see her out there dancing up a storm with some other guy?

No sex involved. No trying to control her...body, soul, or mind.

Just plain...rejection. And it sucks.


anyway, yes...I've been involved with men who were very threatened by the least little appearance, on my part, of autonomy.

Then I've been with men who encouraged me to be my own person.

One of the things I feel proudest of, as a mom, is seeing how my son (43, married 12 years) treats his wife. She has a good job. Has gone on trips without him. He's fine with all of it. He's not jealous. Not insecure. Don't know how he learned all of that, but maybe I wasn't as shitty a mom as I sometimes think I was.

[raccoon]

22. You won't get any argument from me. nt

[RedCappedBandit]

23. I think you meant "some" men

Sheesh

[Helen Borg]

24. Probably true, but it depends on the context, right?

If my partner, who made a commitment to be faithful to me (and vice versa), starts having sexual encounters with other women, I would be angered and disappointed as much as my partner would be disapponted if I did so. If there is no mutual commitment then it's another story. So, I'm not sure what context you are referring to.

[redgreenandblue]

25. What if a woman uses her sexual autonomy to choose to become a porn actress?

Who does that outrage?

[nomorenomore08]

113. Most anti-porn activists are right-wing men. I think they would be the "outraged" ones.

Whereas I think an anti-porn (or "porn-skeptic&quot feminist would be more likely to express concern than outrage, in your scenario.

[jberryhill]

26. I first read that as "anatomy"

And thought this was a comment on the "vaginal knitting" thread.

[FarCenter]

68. ++

[NoOneMan]

27. "among men" <---- ALL OF THEM!

Ok, Ill more kindly say that this is equivalent to declaring what all women are according to some ignorant stereotype.

I'm offended and sickened that you insult all human beings born with a dick instead of a vagina. It is as awful as attacking people with dark complexions or sexual orientations that you happened to have had 1 single bad experience with. I am intolerant of intolerance and ignorance. Deal with it.

[Mopar151]

31. Get over yourself

This ann't no dissertation. And it is fair to state that any male conscious of self has dealt with this stuff, even if it is only to turn away, roll our eyes, and say "oh, Jesus, not again" under our breath.

And, to be blunt as a hammer, accepting women as fully functioning "Autonomous sexual beings" is the key to getting amazing nookie.

[NoOneMan]

46. No

You don't start a gender topic by insulting an entire gender. Its stupid. Its prejudice. Its not progressive. Its a terrible way to make a point. How can we even get past the first sentence and deal with the content, when the foundation of the statement is stereotypical in itself?



I should just get over myself and stop being offended by stereotypes. But wait, that would sort of mean I should stop also being offended about how women are stereotyped too, right? It sort of makes the entire thing a moot point if I wasn't bothered by this crap

[Squinch]

32. So, I take it you realized that your original post, before all your edits, the one that

was alerted on, was completely unacceptable?

[Squinch]

40. Well, I voted to hide it.

[NoOneMan]

42. It should no more be hidden than an OP that says all "men/women/white people/AA's/heteros/"....

I wasn't lame enough to alert on the OP though or suggest it should be hidden. I'm giving them a chance to explain themselves, learn and maybe make a sensitive edit.

[Squinch]

45. Well, but what you said was

"Fuck you too. I mean that. Not in a good way. Go fuck yourself."

That is somewhat different from saying "men/women/white people/AA's/heteros/".... See how one starts with an F and the other starts with an M?

Quite an emotional response, that.

[NoOneMan]

49. Thats a perfectly acceptable response to prejudice and stereotypes

Quite an emotional response, that.

We should all be emotionally offended by stereotypical shit against gender, race, creed, color and nationality, right?

Or should we all just laugh it off?

[BainsBane]

33. "you happen to have had 1 single bad experience"

[NoOneMan]

39. Yes, broadbrush stereotypes against an entire gender tend to create reactions that miss the point

[Aerows]

78. Do you think

that a single bad experience with either getting molested affects a person, male or female? I think it probably does. Children getting sexually assaulted, adults getting sexually assaulted, getting oppressed, etc. - folks have a reaction to that, and it isn't sunshine and rainbows and biblical phrases shooting out of their ass.

[NoOneMan]

85. Yes, but its not reason to hate an entire group of people due to their gender, race, religion, etc.

Though, I can empathize with such feelings for a victim, I certainly cannot entertain it (insofar as it creates a worldview clouded with generalization against any member of a group that victimized them) as a healthy point to start a dialogue with everyone else.


BTW, that's clearly not where we are starting from here in regards to the OP. They are characterizing men based on--correct me if I am wrong--how they perceive themselves as a man with the assumption that all men are the same.

[Bok_Tukalo]

29. I do not understand this

Are you talking about some female that isn't into monogamous relationships or is this about infidelity? Because, yea, infidelity sucks and has a tendency to piss people off.

As far as a female that likes to have a variety of partners, that's her business and it shouldn't make you mad.

[AtheistCrusader]

30. I would say 'some men', rather than 'men', which seems overly-inclusive.

Edit: This site is filled with men who are not outraged by such things.

[BainsBane]

36. The point is about endemic sexism

A societal issue. FFS.

[NoOneMan]

41. You mean the type of sexism that leads to broadbrush stereotypes?

Like the kind contained in the OP?

[BainsBane]

50. No, I don't mean having your feelings hurt

I mean a misogynist society that props up rape culture by apologizing for assailants and shaming victims. I mean a society where women are treated as inferior before the law, where they are blamed for the assault against them. I mean a society where some think their own feelings on par with--or even more important than--endemic exploitation that results in one in three women as victims of violence by a partner or family member. I mean the misogyny that results in rape victims being repeatedly shamed, their assailants defended, so that only 3% of rapists do any jail time.

[NoOneMan]

52. Oh, so now ignorant stereotypical broadbrushes just hurt our poor wittle feelings

Ill remember that one. Maybe the OP should too.

[BainsBane]

53. Which evidently you find more significant

than the violence to which 1/3 of women are subjected to. It's all about men. Women's lives are insignificant. The important thing is that men never be made to feel bad about the widespread misogyny that some can't even bother to comment on because it's just not as important as how they feel.

[AAO]

58. Oh, ffs!

[NoOneMan]

60. If you want to discuss the violence against women, do you blame ALL men first?

You have demonstrated the point perfectly. It's all about you.

This is the exact sentiment any person can display to the OP who is whining while leaning on a broad brush stereo type. We can all whine, say "whatever", and go on with our lives. How is anyone going to listen to anyone else while we hide behind ignorance and mentally lazy shortcuts to discussion and intellectual thought.

Admit it. Rather than address the obvious stereotype this thread starts with, you are personally attacking me pointing it out, implicating that my objection to prejudice is a character flaw. Thats a load of shit. That's how people talk past each other.

The important thing is that men never be made to feel bad about the widespread misogyny that you can't even bother to think about.

Who said I don't think about it? I don't certainly carry the flag in a stupid discussion like this, but that doesn't mean I don't think about it. I feel as bad about it as I do about the rainforest being cut down (actually worse about that). I don't do it, I dont engage in it, I don't condone it, I don't culture it. I am no more responsible for it as I am for the extinction of Rhinos. Oppression hurts us all as humans though, and we should all strive for tolerance and empathize with the pain of our brothers and sisters of the world. Im not sure how you think I should "feel" about it and what you mean by "bad" (do you mean guilty or empathy and strife for equality?). In anycase, that entire sentence is another trashy strawman. Come on people, we are better than this.

[BainsBane]

66. I blame misogyny

which is a societal problem. Then I blame rapists, batters, and their apologists. I also blame the guys who insist rape prevention PSAs that don't blame victims are "misandrist" and "harangue" men. I blame the men who make it their mission to insist rape really isn't that much of a problem because reported rapes have declined. I blame the men and women who defend rapists and attack their victims. I blame the active propagation of rape culture that many engage in.

You missed the entire point of the OP because you are unable to think beyond your self.

I can see what you care about by what you write. I talk about 1/3 of women as victims of violence and a 3% rate of rapists who see jail, and you go back to what you consider the more important issue.

[NoOneMan]

69. I didn't miss the point. Rather, I didn't get to it. I stopped at the stereotype.

When I read racist writings, I don't get to the point (awww, the poor racists). When I read sexist rants, I don't get to the point (awww, the poor sexists). When I read nationalistic, right-wing garbage, I don't get to the point (oh, the poor wing nuts). I put that stuff down, because its premises are trash. If you want to make a point, don't dress it up with stereotypes.

I talk about 1/3 of women as victims of violence and a 3% rate of rapists who see jail

Then start a thread about it. Here's my two cents: try not to slaughter it with needless stereotypes if you want to have any impact.

go back to what you consider the more important issue

Do you know how to communicate without a straw man? No where did I give any precedence to these issues. Regarding the OP, I stopped when I hit the stereotype and responded. That's what happens with terribly written "points".





And by the way, just to humor you, I read the rest. Frankly, this poster's entire outlook on life disturbs me. Its disgusting that some men (including him) have thought like this, but let me tell you, not ALL men are disturbed

It has angered me when women wanted to be sexually involved with men other than me (the refrain "whore", oddly enough, tends to mean "she will sleep with men other than me&quot .

What a strange, strange post on DU.

[BainsBane]

70. Seems to me you have no idea of what sexism or racism are

If you think white men are its victims.

I post many threads about rape and violence against women. Without fail, some come to tell me the subject is insignificant because I'm not talking about men. When I post about rape, they come tell me what a liar the woman is and how innocent the man is. Every fucking day the same thing happens over and over again.

You also don't know what a strawman is. You're aggrieved I get it. The horror you've been subjected to is unfathomable. However will you soldier on?



Since we've been conversing 38 women have been raped in this country alone. Yet you've devoted at least ten posts talking about your outrage. You clearly find yourself a fascinating topic of discussion. You'll have to pardon me if I don't share that particular view.

[NoOneMan]

72. Yep, thats it. My objection to prejudice is just a bothersome character flaw

Now, that would be a strawman if you weren't insisting just that, and reinforcing it with the eyeroll picture.

Seems to me you have no idea of what sexism or racism are....If you think white men are its victims.

Anyone can be a victims of such prejudice dependent upon context/circumstance. We know who the historical victims are. That in itself does not mean that a overt, undeniable display of stereotypical prejudice magically isn't.

Since we've been conversing 38 women have been raped in this country alone.

And you've spent that time reassuring me that since I am offended by a broadbrush generalization against an entire gender that I am the one with a problem. Way to go. Mark that accomplishment on your calendar

[nomorenomore08]

116. Yeah, because everybody knows there's no basis whatsoever for women to be distrustful of men.

You sound like the type who, if a woman who encountered you on a dark street behaved warily, would start whining "Why are you stereotyping me???"

[AtheistCrusader]

43. It certainly is, and I don't dispute that.

But many of us have a voice, and we DO shout it down when and where we see it. Fixed? No. Better than it was 50 years ago? Hells yes.

A generalization like that is hurtful to people who do not participate in it, and work every day to fight against it. Maybe I'm just over-sensitive to it, and that's not fair either, but damn... Can we get a positive, work-together-on-this-problem tone going? That would be awesome.

[BainsBane]

56. In some ways it's worse than 50 yrs ago

The internet has empowered the most reactionary elements to voice their views, which in turn are validated and reinforced. I would submit the hatred of women we see online today is much worse than fifty years ago. As women have gained economic and political status, some men are threatened, and they lash out. I see it every single day. These are views I never saw ten years ago. \
Nor is it limited to one political party. Far right-wing reactionary views on gender have now gone mainstream.

[AtheistCrusader]

61. I do see some of that in certain online avenues.

Anyplace anonymity is the norm, like gamertags, it's rampant. Just rank and disgusting.

Possible my estimate of it going down somewhat is based on the highly progressive nature of where I live. Maybe it is worse. I don't know how to fairly quantify better or worse in this case. I don't even know if the comparisons of physical attacks/rape/attempted rape between now and then are fair due to the victims' likelihood of actually reporting it, or being believed in either timeframe...

I just... I don't know. Like I said, maybe I'm overly sensitive to it, but to post it that way kind of added to the mental exhaustion of standing up for these issues, in the form of an attack from an unexpected direction.

Or maybe I'm second guessing myself, and that 'THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO ME' filter isn't firmly in place? I don't know.



Do you ever get depressed that as long as we've been around, we haven't finally crossed a finish line, haven't actually SOLVED one of these damnable problems... It's so exhausting. At this point I'm basically just propelled on the energy from my own outrage at how I see others being treated.

[BainsBane]

62. I agree he might have phrased it more carefully

and that would have prompted a different reaction in you. But many would respond the same regardless. Often the ones who it most applies to are the most defensive.

Still, I very much suspect there is a way in which such sexist ideas influence all of us. Sexism and misogyny certainly have an impact on how women see themselves, on how we see our own sexuality. My feminism doesn't stop me from thinking: it was my fault for going back to his apartment with him. I should have known better. Or it doesn't stop me from being worried I'm showing too much cleavage, will look like a s...t , and invite trouble. We all are products of this society. No one is immune from it. I think of racism in the same way. It influences us all. If you're white, (speaking rhetorically here) do you unconsciously grab your purse or wallet at the site of a young black man? That sort of thing. One has to consciously confront those influences. No one is immune.

[NoOneMan]

64. "But many would respond the same regardless"

A huge amount of the replies are simply regarding the broadbrush. I do not think "many" would have complained (or responded at all) about the usage of stereotypes against an entire gender if it did not indeed exist. But it does.

Often the ones who it most applies to are the most defensive

This is essentially a way to implicate those who are bothered by stereotypes as having some deep character flaw. Consider Occam's razor. Maybe people who were most offended simply noticed an offensive stereotype being employed. It is not them who have the problem. Their reaction to prejudice is normal.

[nomorenomore08]

120. So the fact that 1 in 3 women is abused by a man is a "stereotype"?

Prejudice? Boo fucking hoo. I'm a man, and I care a hell of a lot more about men all the over the world hurting women, than I do about getting my precious feelings hurt.

[LadyHawkAZ]

73. I would agree that it could have been phrased better

And this site is indeed full of men who have no interest in controlling women's reproductive organs.

However, even at DU we have problems with a few people who want to control women's sexuality, and DU is a progressive site. The problem gets much broader when we take it outside our echo chamber and into the general population, where people tend to be less progressive. The attack on abortion rights and birth control access, to cite two examples. I didn't read the OP as being an attack on DUers, but a commentary on society in general, and society in general (religious society in particular) does have a problem with women's sexuality.

[nomorenomore08]

121. +1

Right on. Some people are just too damn touchy about this.

[Squinch]

34. Well said. And it is an interesting area for discussion. But, of course, that won't happen.

Discussion will happen, but it will be about everything but what you said.

[tkmorris]

35. What a ridiculous post

It starts by painting 49.9 percent of the population of the planet with exactly the same (presumably impossibly large) brush and goes screaming downhill from there.

The worst part is that there is a nugget of truth at the center of this Whoopsie-Pop that is definitely worth discussing, however the OP is so completely over the top that any attempts to do so are doomed before even beginning. Too bad.

[The Green Manalishi]

37. Could you please restate this?

"There is nothing that causes outrage amongst *insecure* men like female sexual autonomy".

I mean any guy who cares how many lovers his lover has had is a twit. And almost certainly a lousy lover to boot.

The classic definition of a hypocrite - someone who would consider a guy who made love to 100 women in the past year a 'stud' but a woman who made love to 100 guys in the past year 'a slut'.

So, not disagreeing, or disrespecting, but kindly speak for yourself and/or identify your generalizations as such, they do NOT apply to every guy.

I find women in control of their own lives, most particularly including their sexuality, to be far more interesting and sexy than the damsel in distress, June Cleaver or some blushing virgin (not that the women who might be described by those other crass generalizations are not worthwhile, valid beings worthy of love and who will hopefully find a partner who will cherish *THEM*).

[AAO]

54. Could you at least title the OP: "causes outrage among SOME men"

I'm a man and do not feel like that about women. Never felt rage or even anger at "women".

[whatchamacallit]

55. Might be YOUR issue

No one likes rejection, including women. But any guy who loses his shit over a women exercising free will, has major problems.

[SomethingFishy]

59. Well the main flaw in your logic is...

You seem to think that every man is exactly like you. We're not. You may speak for a small segment of men but you certainly don't speak for all of them. Or even close to all of them.


"There is a real male rage that comes from facing the fact that a woman is not just a body, but an independent agent who has desires of her own".

IMHO if you are "raging" because a woman is being a human being with the same wants, needs and desires as everyone else then you may want to seek help.

[lumberjack_jeff]

65. The secondary flaw is the presumption that women don't feel the same thing.

"It has angered me when women wanted to be sexually involved with men other than me"

I'm assuming that you mean "women who I'm emotionally invested in" If so, switch the genders and it still is valid.

If not, then "no men don't" and the OP should stop generalizing. I truly don't care who my casual female acquaintances are sexually interested in.

[Major Nikon]

80. The idea that they don't is sexist in an of itself

There's also no shortage of women (including some feminists) who seek to control the sexual agency of other women, so one has to wonder how that fits inside his paradigm.

[tazkcmo]

79. I agree

I prefer a woman that doesn't NEED me but does WANT me. A woman with pride in herself and doesn't take guff of any kind from anyone. And I don't care how many sexual partners she had, who they were or any of that nonsense.

[TheSarcastinator]

63. There is nothing that causes outrage like a hasty generalization

...but then again, logic and critical thinking aren't in strong demand around these parts, really.

Rock on, brave gender warrior.

[Throd]

67. I'm not outraged that women don't want to fuck you. Your issues are your own.

I felt disappointment in myself, not rage at females, when I have been spurned in the past. Speak for yourself.

[Feral Child]

71. Not all men.

I've never felt anything remotely akin. I've always respected women as individuals and admired women confident in their sexual autonomy. Before I became monogamous, I was always more attracted to women that were confidant and comfortable with their own sexuality.

I married one.

I want to share time with an equal. I'm not saying I never got my feelings hurt when I was more involved in a relationship than a specific female, but that's absolutely not something to induce rage. Really, I can't understand why any man would find a weak, submissive girl-child attractive. Boring.

Besides, virgins are like unicorns. They might exist, but I've never met one...

[swishyfeet]

74. This isn't the Sudan

I can't believe I came upon this thread from the Greatest page, and it's crap like this that makes me wonder why I have DU pasted to my bookmark bar at all.

My default assumption is that women think more or less like I do (except for that Pinterest thing). If a woman doesn't want to mate with me I assume she doesn't like me or has a better opportunity. I've never thought about it any other way.

A bunch of bagger Congressmen do not "a large part of modern society" make.

[BainsBane]

101. 3% of rapists in this country do jail time

but you go ahead and pretend there is no misogyny here.

Amazingly, the OP isn't about you or your ego. It's about endemic sexism and misogyny in American society. But I guess the fact that 1 in 3 women here are subject to violence from a partner or relative just doesn't matter because I should be lucky I can drive and don't have to wear a Birka. It's not the Sudan, right? American women need to count themselves lucky and keep their mouths shut.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

75. Speak for yourself

You may feel rage that comes from the fact that a woman is not just a body--in fact, you said you've felt that rage. Not everyone else has. Please speak for yourself, and not for the billions of men you know absolutely nothing about.

[Aerows]

76. Thank you

This was a great post, and exceptionally so since I know you have been in India (are you still there?). Great post, Recursion.

[arely staircase]

77. I can think of lots of thing nt

[athena]

81. This thread is very interesting.

Based on his life experiences, one man presents a theory as to the origins of misogyny. Instead of responding with logical arguments, men post, one after another, about how they would never have such misogynistic feelings.

Of course, we all know that misogyny, racism, homophobia, etc., are all caused by a few bad apples in our midst! How could such things possibly be caused by some aspect of the human condition that we all share!

In my experience, a person who is secure enough to consider that some of his/her actions or instincts might be unintentionally misogynistic or racist or homophobic or otherwise discriminatory is a much fairer person than one who declares that s/he is egalitarian by definition.

[lumberjack_jeff]

84. Why is his generalization based on a personal anecdote any more valid...

than anyone elses personal anecdote? - only one of which is enough to disprove and invalidate his generalization.

I don't care who you are sexually attracted to, therefore his point is false. QED.

[athena]

100. You are not addressing the argument he made.

The argument he made is that male possessiveness and jealousy are at the origin of misogyny. I have not seen anyone on this thread offer an alternative explanation for the origin of misogyny. (I can think of one or two other explanations, although they would not necessarily be any more convincing than the OP's explanation.)

Note that the OP's argument was not an anecdote. He was making a point about misogyny, starting from a personal observation. That's very different from claiming, for example, that smoking doesn't cause cancer because one's uncle smoked until dying at the age of 98 in a car accident.

Saying, "I am perfect and would never have such misogynistic thoughts like the ones you shared with us" does not respond to the argument. Moreover, since the claim is unverifiable, such a statement is content-free.

Doing something about the unfairness around us starts with humility, not with self-defense. In my experience, people who start with the assumption that they are not racist, who would not even question whether they have any racist tendencies, are some of the worst racists because they define racism to be someone else's problem, something that couldn't possibly involve them. I see no reason to think that misogyny is any different from racism in this regard.

[The2ndWheel]

106. If you want to start a conversation, you don't accuse others of something right off the bat

If he had said "I have this rage inside of me from time to time", etc, etc, then that invites others to listen, and then to share their own thoughts. If you open with "You know, all of the men here are all guilty of hating sexually free women", that's not going to bring people together, except for those that agree that all men are guilty of hating sexually free women. Then lines get drawn, because there's no invitation, just accusation, and nothing goes anywhere.

[athena]

122. That's not what he said.

You chose to read it that way.

I once attempted to started a discussion on racism in the way you suggest, by mentioning a personal anecdote but not generalizing from it. You know what happened? The lady sitting across from me told me point blank that the problem was clearly with me and that she herself was above it all. Racism was other people's problem, not hers, and she couldn't see why it was useful for her to even discuss it. Absolutely nothing was gained.

One can't end things like sexism and racism if one's goal is to avoid hurting fragile egos. And it's always easier to blame someone else of discrimination than to own up to one's own discriminatory tendencies. The latter is painful but is necessary if things are to change.

[The2ndWheel]

133. Fair enough

No single thing works with everyone.

Maybe that is what he said, but you chose to read it another way.

Things rarely end by talking anyway, since that's all based on perception, like reading something two different ways. I'm pretty sure nothing will be solved in this thread, no matter how long it goes. It usually comes down to force of some sort. Whether it's war, or the monopolistic power of government, it takes a little bit more than conversation to steer things one way or another. It's more painful that way, but it's usually necessary.

[nomorenomore08]

124. What if it's something they're actually *doing*? If only subconsciously?

But yeah, I guess civility and sparing people's feelings is more important than anything else. Even endemic hatred of women.

[The2ndWheel]

137. Then it will be much more difficult to consciously change it

Accuse people until the day is done. That's not going to work if you want people to open up and try and figure things out. Civility and sparing people's feeling probably won't work either, but if you build a trust over a period of time with other people, it's more likely to work than accusing them of whatever.

But, like I said, it's usually going to take force, one way or another, somewhere down the line. I see history as might pretty consistently making right. Whether it's war to figure out who gets to make the rules, or the power of government to enforce those rules, talking doesn't end anything. It gets you to a point, but for anything to actually change, people must be forced in some way to change.

[nomorenomore08]

139. Agreed. Some will more or less willingly acquiesce to change, others will have to be dragged

kicking and screaming. But I think we'll all get there, or somewhere slightly better than here, at least...

[lumberjack_jeff]

111. You're paraphrasing and projecting your own views.

And unless you're accusing the OP of being a misogynist, his anecdote it fails on on that basis alone. If he's not a misogynist, his "rage" at the idea that you may be attracted to someone other than him is irrelevant to the topic (if not of concern for other reasons).

It's still an anecdote, but it's a step removed. His argument is "I recognize that rage because I've felt it. It has angered me when women wanted to be sexually involved with men other than me" is the cause of (other people's) misogyny.

The analogous argument he just made is this: "Smoking kills everyone. I know because I smoke". One can be generally positively disposed toward the argument without accepting his obviously stupid rationale.

[athena]

118. Nice try.

No, his argument is more like, "Smoking is addictive to humans. I know because I'm addicted to smoking." Just as the response "I'm not addicted to smoking; speak for yourself" would be irrelevant to the argument being made, so is the response "I'm not a misogynist; speak for yourself."

And no, your claim that the OP is a misogynist but that you're not does not convince me. Quite the contrary. It seems to me that the OP is a sensitive person, a person who is secure enough to reveal some of his weaknesses in an effort to make a point about the human condition. Those who are desperate to define themselves to be above human emotions like jealousy and possessiveness seem to me to be deeply in denial.

[lumberjack_jeff]

123. Your argument depends upon him self identifying as a misognynist. Right? Surely you can see that?

Last edited Wed Dec 18, 2013, 10:29 PM - Edit history (1)

"Smoking is addictive. I know because I'm addicted."

is like

"A desire for jealous control of all women causes misogyny. I know because ____________"

You would have me accept "...all y'all other men are misogynists!" as an answer.

I'm in a position to know that it's false and he is therefore wrong.

I'm sorry that I'm not a sensitive enough guy. C'est la vie.

[The2ndWheel]

141. He did reveal personal weaknesses

but it was behind the cover of the men suck shield. "There is nothing that causes outrage among men like female sexual autonomy". That's the first thing that was written. It was only after that that the personal weakness was revealed. If the title was "There is nothing that causes outrage in me like female sexual autonomy", this becomes a different thread. Now you might have more people sharing their own personal weaknesses. If they so choose. Which is fine, because they're personal issues.

The actual title of the thread takes the personal out of that. It's now a given that men suck, in a specific way, but in the general male population. Men may in fact suck, and have a whole host of personal issues and weaknesses. Women can suck too, and have a whole host of personal issues and weaknesses. In fact, a thread should be started that says, "There is nothing that causes outrage among women like...", pick something positive about men and throw it in there. How many defensive and "that's not me" responses would there be from women?

[Squinch]

152. Bravo!

[smirkymonkey]

155. Personally, I thought his observation was very astute.

I think the OP seems like a very empathetic and self-actualized person, which is not something you see in a lot of men. They may not think they are personally sexist, but they don't examine their own behaviors and motives enough to see where they might possibly be guilty of certain prejudices.

It's funny, but I can hear a person of color (as a white, blue-eyed, blonde person) complain of racism and not take it personally. I understand that I don't understand their day to day experience in the world and I can allow them their personal reality without being offended or getting defensive. I just don't understand why so many men can't do the same. I see it as a complete lack of empathy.

[NoOneMan]

88. This thread goes beyond someone recognizing their own person actions or instincts

They are assuming an entire group of individuals are exactly the same. I found the comments (re rage) pretty disturbing, and its more offensive to state all men are equally disturbing in their thoughts regarding women.

[BainsBane]

102. You have no idea what the OP is arguing

Nor do you care. So don't bother with it.

[nomorenomore08]

125. I don't know that I'd go so far as to call it "disturbing." Sexual jealousy/frustration is a common-

place human emotion. It's what you do with it - i.e. channeling it in a non-destructive fashion - that's really important.

[Squinch]

149. Really, the issue is what a culture does with it. Every culture uses it's rage cudgel

against women in a way that is way outsized compared to the way it uses its rage cudgel against men.

In ours, it's one in three women assaulted. In others it's female genital mutilation, in others it's hiding women for life behind black shrouds. There are no corresponding actions against men.

Every culture that I know of expresses its rage at women in ways that would not ever be applied to men. I am sure there are exceptions, but I can't think of any.

SO the generalization is not inappropriate.

[nomorenomore08]

154. I don't find it inappropriate either. And I've never physically harmed anyone but I've certainly

felt plenty of "rage" in my life. I'd like to think that I have some positive influence on the world, simply by controlling my own emotions, but I really don't know...

[BainsBane]

96. That is someone who at least has the awareness to work toward egalitarianism

While those who insist racism and sexism aren't problems and that they themselves are above it all shows their determination that privilege go unchallenged.

[athena]

104. Exactly!

If you think you're irreproachable, then it's not your problem; it's someone else's.

I was recently at a talk, where the speaker pointed out that racism will not end until white people decide to do something about it. I was momentarily unconvinced, until he added that if black people could end racism on their own, they would have done so already. In the same way, I think that sexism will be around as long as individual men think it's not their problem to solve.

[BainsBane]

105. Yes, because we are raised in a society with endemic sexism and racism

It influences all of us. The key is to confront those ideas in ourselves and challenge them.

[BainsBane]

83. For one example

Last edited Thu Dec 19, 2013, 09:35 PM - Edit history (1)

Compare some of the comments in the thread about the performance artist's vaginal knitting to the rape porn threads. Some of the same people who vigorously defended rape porn refer to that woman as "disgusting" and deserving whatever backlash is visited upon her. The message I take from that is that women's sexuality is appropriate only as objects of male gratification (such as depiction of violent assault that arouse some men), but using their own bodies for other purposes is not acceptable.

Another example of this is the reaction to breast feeding in public. Many express disgusting that a woman use her breasts in public for the purpose they were designed--feeding babies. Yet If their toplessness is for the purpose of male arousal, that's okay. It's their choice. Yet why isn't it their choice to feed their children or perform an art piece? Of course it is, but that choice isn't acceptable to some because it serves a purpose other than arousing men. The implicit message is that female sexuality--indeed women's bodies-- belongs to men. Autonomous expressions are therefore unacceptable.

[NoOneMan]

91. "Some of the same people..."

Who? Do these people exist? Got any names?

I've never even heard of rape porn and vaginal knitting until its suddently the rage on DU. Its getting silly.

Many express disgusting that a woman use her breasts in public for the purpose they were designed--feeding babies

Who? Who is many? Got any names? Anyone on DU or just an occassional idiot Walmart employee who subsequently gets reprimanded for stupidity?



Maybe there are people here like this. Most certainly not in this thread. This is a progressive board. You are normally preaching to the choir until you need to use stereotypes and generalizations to get your points across.

[BainsBane]

93. I'm not calling out names

You can read the threads yourself.

Your insistence on pretending that women who breast feed don't get shit is absurd.

One thing that DU has taught me is that party ID has no correlation to how one treats or views women. Some democratic men are just as capable of indulging in relentless self pity and sexism as Republicans. I certainly know of no evidence linking propensity to commit rape or domestic battery to party identification. I know some Democrats like to pretend they get some sort of credit on women's rights just for posting here, but I disagree. It's about ideology and behavior, not the party the person says he votes for.

I didn't use stereotypes of generalizations. I observed behavior. Whether you agree is entirely irrelevant.

[smirkymonkey]

156. +1000

A particular annoyance of mine.

[Springslips]

87. Bullshit!

Don't project your issues on to me, or other men. I've grown up in a feminist world; I am fine, in fact happy, to live in a world where WOMEN ( your use of female gives you away) have sexual autonomy. Nothing outrages me more than the idea of control. I'd fight, and do fight, so that my friends, family and other woman can live in the world without bullshit.

Your last sentence is a strawmen; we live in a world that patriarchy, duh. That is changing. It is not doing so fast enough, but it is. But keep your own issues to yourself and stop putting it on everyone else. Take care of your own hang-ups.

[TroglodyteScholar]

92. Are you here trying to find a girlfriend something?

What's the point of telling us how bad our entire gender is?

[BainsBane]

94. Since the obvious eludes many here

This is the corresponding thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4193546

[lumberjack_jeff]

95. .

[The2ndWheel]

97. From the body of your post

It seems as though your title would've been better served if you had used "in me" instead of "among men".

And a large part of modern society is about control, period. It's the foundation upon which human progress is built.

[Squinch]

150. Do you think there is any difference between men in general and women in general

around the way they seek to use force to control others?

[TroglodyteScholar]

98. If a grasp of "the obvious" requires reading all of DU every day...

...then I guess I have too many other things going on in life to ever rank better than "clueless."

I don't care what else was posted here today, though...this OP is pointless and a bit offensive. And he attempts to validate his despicable, broad-brush claims by citing his own personal shortcoming.

Your problems are yours, dude, not your gender's. Leave me out of it.

[Egalitarian Thug]

99. If you go back 10,000 years, you'll find that religions worshiped the female.

I think there's a direct connection to the degradation of the female aspect and the rise of the Desert God of Death's rise to dominance.

[Trajan]

103. Yeah .... those men ...

Sweeping Generalization Fallacy much?

[LittleBlue]

108. Please don't project your rage issues on to other men

I've never felt "real male rage" as you call it, nor have I felt roid rage, road rage or any other rage.

Your issues are yours, bro. Take ownership and deal with it rather than projecting it.

[Courtesy Flush]

110. Yes, of course. They hate us for our freedoms. nt

[Kaleva]

112. "It has angered me when women wanted to be sexually involved with men other than me"

Are you talking about a spouse or girlfriend you are involved with in a serious relationship or just any woman?

[Bonobo]

115. Wanting to control other human beings is a bad part of human nature.

And there are also plenty of women that try to control their men.

[whistler162]

117. Someone is into the Christmas cheer a tad early!

all 100 proof of it.

[grahamhgreen]

127. LOL, I've always enjoyed it - far from outraged;)

[MadrasT]

130. Well stated.

And boy is the outrage and pushback in this thread enlightening.

[Throd]

134. Broadbrush attacks calling out an entire gender for collective guilt will do that.

[Jim Lane]

138. Too many of the replies are hung up on "all" versus "some"

Come on, people, this is an internet forum, not an academic research paper. DUers should feel free to post without spelling out common-sense qualifications.

It's not a valid cause for outrage if I write something like "Men are taller than women." I could instead give a completely accurate statement -- mean heights, median heights, standard deviation, range, passing reference to WNBA players, limitation of the statements to adults because I think there's an age at which the average female is taller than the average male, etc. -- but, for many purposes, the generalization is good enough.

Most of the OP's critics are criticizing something they read into the post. Because the author didn't take care to say "some", they choose to respond to an imaginary post that says, "What I'm writing here is true of every man now alive, absolutely without exception." The author didn't say that, either.

My reaction isn't limited to the gender issues addressed in the OP. It seems to me that, regardless of the subject area, DU threads often feature too many people who seem to be looking for something to get outraged about.

BTW, I for one have had feelings similar to those described in the OP. I don't think it's an extraordinarily rare reaction, or Joe Jackson wouldn't have had a hit with "Is She Really Going Out With Him". It's a feeling of -- oh, wait, let me clarify, In my particular case it's a feeling of -- "I would be a much better boyfriend for her than that lout she's actually seeing, but, dammit, he's the one she's actually seeing."

[PeteSelman]

140. I don't care if a woman wants to fuck other men.

As long as we're not in a committed relationship. If we're just bed buddies, then it doesn't matter. I've had casual sexual relationships with women and never cared

As to your overall point, I say that's definitely the right wing "Christian" agenda. And while those idiots have an inordinately loud voice, I'm not so sure that the attitude of overall society reflects your statement.

[Squinch]

143. Someone upthread said, "This isn't the Sudan." That is true, but

I think the reference to female genital mutilation is instructive here. Whole cultures, over a large part of the world, for hundreds of years and continuing to today, mutilated women to prevent them from making men feel jealous. In the process, they took away those women's capacity for sexual pleasure for their entire lifetimes.

So yes, women and men DO both feel jealousy. But the response is often very different.

[Harmony Blue]

144. This is illogical

If a man that is a grass-eater doesn't want to do anything with a woman on a sexual or relationship level then why should he care what choices a woman makes?

Only traditionalist cling onto traditional gender roles.

[darkangel218]

151. How many men are straight, yet some are homophobes

Even though it does not affect them directly?

Think about it.

[Harmony Blue]

157. Those men are from traditional

backgrounds with traditional gender roles and they have explicitly told me at times that it directly effects their perceived value of sustaining these traditional gender roles.

Strip away the gender roles and you start to care a lot less about what other people do and care more about what you do.

[CrispyQ]

147. Everyone's so flipped out about your subject line, when the point is really your last sentence.

Spot on!

I believe the roots of patriarchy go back to when humans first realized men's role in procreation. There was a long period in our history when we didn't connect having sex with a birth nine months later. During this time, women were more valued in society, more equal. Bloodlines were traced through the mother, which actually makes more sense. When the sex/birth connection was made, controlling women's sexuality was a way for men to control their bloodline. I think this knowledge changed everything between the sexes. Could we have reacted differently? I don't know, but most modern societies are patriarchal.

I agree with the poster above, that religion is largely for the sake of controlling women. It's good to control the undesirable elements of society, too, but it is used to control all women. So here we are in the throes of the patriarchy, which does so much damage to both men & women -- to our relationships in general.

And to the poster above who stated that things for women are better than they have been in 50 years, I say bullshit. I think the world is much more hostile to women now, than 30 years ago, when I was young & single. I thought we were starting to make some good progress but we have gone backwards considerably in just the past 10 years!

[Harmony Blue]

158. Let me offer a different take

In pre-historic times men and women both were gatherers and hunters, but for the sake of building a civilization women were increasingly pushed aside from the dangerous roles of hunter/gatherer and focused on child rearing for the propagation of the species to grow in numbers. Men and women both have different sexual reproductive strategies, which is why women are more selective with their mate because he must be reliable to provide resources when she is pregnant and can't hunt/gather for herself. Men's reproductive strategy is most optimal if he mates with more than one woman to increase the chance his genetic lineage is passed on when he is long gone. Traditional gender roles were established by early civilizations to foster stability and growth of the human species. Women were oppressed by having reduced roles in work so they could focus on child rearing and men had to try to shy away from their reproductive strategy of having more than one mate so they could focus pooling all his resources for the wife and the children.

Religion is a form of control where it dictates the roles men and women must take upon themselves. But it is ironic that a lot of these patriarchal religions (which are still practiced today) deify and worship a women so much (eg Christianity). But this is a relic from the pagan era of religion where birth was highly revered and it was associated with the four seasons. If not convinced take for example Christianity where three of the four major celebratory days are the worship of the Theotokos (a.k.a. the Virgin Mary).

To me what patriarchy is the reinforcement of the traditional gender roles. Men must be worker drones and women are the damsels in distress that are deified and are not allowed to go outside of this role, hence why it is the oppression of women. But patriarchy is also oppression of men where they work till they die and deify women because they are the gatekeepers to sex and childbirth.

In the modern era are species is so large in population clinging onto the traditional gender roles simply has no place in our culture anymore. We have come full circle were women and men were hunters and gathers side by side are so once more, but some still cling to some double standards unfortunately. But in due time this can be rectified as well but the adjustment will have to come from women as they are increasingly the larger, and growing voter bloc in our country.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

159. Sooo....when a woman says....

...."Look at so and so with her big fake boobs and tons of makeup dressed like a whore"....what's that about?

Also, how many women are you meeting on a daily basis that you want to be "sexually involved" with? Is that all you want? Because that's pretty fucking shallow, speaking as another man.

[99Forever]

161. Speak for yourself.

You sure as fuck don't describe anything about this man what he thinks or believes.

That's some broadbrush stupid shit there.

[Nye Bevan]

162. Whoa. A bit TMI there with your inner rages.

As for me, I have never felt "rage" at a woman's personal choices. I hope that you are able to manage and contain these rages appropriately. There are professionals who can help greatly in this regard.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

163. I believe the OP has abandoned this steaming pile of illogic.

I think he wanted to score sensitivity points, but instead ended up admitting he has mysogenistic feelings of rage while trying to lay this at the feet of all the rest of the males on the planet. I'd abandon it too.