Gender Everything

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Moderator: Uccisore

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Pandora » Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:41 pm

Some examples of female natural privilege:

https://www.inquisitr.com/1817950/ancie ... n-siberia/

https://www.sciencealert.com/pregnant-m ... ia-bologna

While men are free to pursue and satisfy their sex drives, the females take on themselves all the risk and burden. The man, in turn, can offset the risk by just taking many/multiple women, which they historically have had done.

It is no wonder that Silphium was worth its weight in gold and harvested to extinction.
User avatar
Pandora
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4044
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Ward 6

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Thu Mar 29, 2018 11:16 pm

Pandora wrote:Some examples of female natural privilege:

https://www.inquisitr.com/1817950/ancie ... n-siberia/

https://www.sciencealert.com/pregnant-m ... ia-bologna

While men are free to pursue and satisfy their sex drives, the females take on themselves all the risk and burden. The man, in turn, can offset the risk by just taking many/multiple women, which they historically have had done.

It is no wonder that Silphium was worth its weight in gold and harvested to extinction.

Nothing in your post disproves female-privilege. You should use better, and more modern examples, to demonstrate how men are "more privileged" than any woman. Of course, you will avoid the percentage of men incarcerated in prison, the percentage of men on frontlines in wars, the fact that males die sooner than females, etc.

Do you have anything at all?
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Pandora » Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:28 am

Does not disprove? How is being used as sexual and reproductive chattel, and then possibly dying from from complications in pregnancy or child birth a proof of privilege, in your view? It’s not women’s fault that men need to pick fights and suffer for it.
Then you ask to give you modern examples while saying

Because women are the privileged-gender, women are protected both in the physical sense (laws, police, military) and in the mental sense (no personal responsibility, no accountability). Thus men are the expendable-gender. Men are relatively worthless, compared to women. In order to compensate for this difference of innate value, men must live lives of toil, work, and high risk tasks. [lol!] Men are soldiers, killing other men, and themselves being killed in war zones and battles, on behalf of women


Yes, behold the hard and unfair life a modern man!

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
Pandora
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4044
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Ward 6

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Silhouette » Fri Mar 30, 2018 3:58 am

The bottom line is that without giving birth, the species stops forever. Women are the ones who give birth.
Men are needed for a few minutes to initiate this necessity, but that's it. So what else are they good for?

Well the best they can do to be chosen to fulfill their part is to offer a healthy albeit potentially brief contribution, and/or perhaps even assist in the longer term by compensating for the resources that a woman has to sacrifice in order to give birth and bring up a child. The better they can do those 2 things, the more they'll be chosen to be involved in the whole thing, and if they don't contribute enough in either or both of those things, they're literally worthless.

All women are necessary, though given enough women, some not being necessary is allowable.
But most men are not necessary - a much smaller proportion of them are needed to fulfill a potentially minimal contribution, though at least it's not as small as it could be given that assistance in child rearing has value. Human babies have evolved to be delivered prematurely to allow them more time to adjust to the ex utero world when they would otherwise be in utero.

It's hard to be necessary, but it's also hard to be constantly under pressure to prove yourself to those who are necessary, and it's hard to fail in this regard and be worthless.

Which is privileged?
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3197
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Mar 30, 2018 5:10 am

One cannot be both Privileged and Expendable at the same time.

So everybody seems to know which gender is truly privileged, and which is expendable.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:10 am

Urwrong wrote:

So everybody seems to know which gender is truly privileged, and which is expendable.


Sounds like you have a bad case of ......

As there is the concept of female penis envy, there is also Womb Envy, which denotes the anxiety that many men may feel caused by envy of the biological functions of the female sex (pregnancy, parturition, breast feeding). Wiki
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:27 am

Pandora wrote:Yes, behold the hard and unfair life a modern man!


For me those are images of humans smiling in hell. A cold, empty, loveless, mechanized, solipsistic, highly controlled hell.

This is not me agreeing with some idea about men being more victimized currently than women. I am reacting to those photos outside debates around that issue. Those men may be too stupid to realize it or so mechanized and simple not to be able to feel it, but ugh, that is hardly life.
Karpel Tunnel
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Serendipper » Fri Mar 30, 2018 3:31 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Pandora wrote:Yes, behold the hard and unfair life a modern man!


For me those are images of humans smiling in hell. A cold, empty, loveless, mechanized, solipsistic, highly controlled hell.

This is not me agreeing with some idea about men being more victimized currently than women. I am reacting to those photos outside debates around that issue. Those men may be too stupid to realize it or so mechanized and simple not to be able to feel it, but ugh, that is hardly life.

Ignorance is bliss!

"Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know." - Ernest Hemingway
Serendipper
Thinker
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:44 pm

A Shieldmaiden wrote:there is also Womb Envy,

I want to fuck (beautiful) women, not be a beautiful woman. You're confused. I'm already happy, as a man, because I have increased my value (from zero) to hero. I'm worth more than an average woman already.

As Silhouette mentioned, when there is an abundance of women, some women become devalued too, in which case men can overtake them in terms of general worth/value/power.

For example, many western women, who have bought into the lies of feminism, age 35-50, childless, fruitless, quickly become desperate and time runs out to reproduce, and they realize they must compete with the much more attractive and younger, fresher, 20 year old women. Average men are repulsed by desperate women, just as average women are repulsed by desperate men. Older men are much less desperate than younger men. Older women are much more desperate than younger women.

Again, gender is not equal. No double-standard. Different measures (of value) applied to each, according to sex.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sat Mar 31, 2018 3:33 am

LOL, the above reminds of the movie Parenthood.

https://youtu.be/yV9er3DfMUI
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:14 pm

A Shieldmaiden wrote:LOL, the above reminds of the movie Parenthood.

https://youtu.be/yV9er3DfMUI

Great movie, same applies to women.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:33 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:

If
same applies to women
how do you explain
Again, gender is not equal. No double-standard. Different measures (of value) applied to each, according to sex.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Gender Everything

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:50 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote
Older men are much less desperate than younger men.


I missed this!

This is so wrong.

Older men make fools of themselves chasing younger women. Although this has less to do with sex and everything to do with their fear of ageing. The old guy in the latest sports car, top down, cruising the highway, hair slick (if he has any) validates his power of youthful appeal that he is still hot. :mrgreen: oblivious to the fact the he is 'Dad" in the young girl's eyes.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:19 am

A Shieldmaiden wrote:how do you explain

Easily. Because men and women are held to different standards of what it means to be a "deadbeat" father or mother.



A Shieldmaiden wrote:This is so wrong.

No, it's not. Testosterone decreases with age. Older males have experience with women, and less need for immediate satisfaction. Young males are inexperienced, and will do anything to "lose their virginity". Thus, young men are many times more desperate for sex than older men. Older women are more desperate, because younger women get all the attention and focus. A woman over 35 is basically ignored by 99% of men. You're out of the sexual market.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sun Apr 01, 2018 5:11 am

I did say "this has less to do with sex and everything to do with their fear of ageing".

There is an aching discomfort emerging within that occurs in many middle-aged men.... I’m not so sure I want to get old.... which dictates their behaviour, more than the hunt for sexual gratification. It is the fear and recognition of the fragility of life and it is not exclusively male, women are also victims. I think women tend to cope better on their own than men. A man is more likely to seek out a woman to "take care of him in his old age" than a woman would.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Pandora » Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:56 pm

URWrong and Smears are like polar opposites: one objectifies women as virtuous madonnas and the other objectifies women as whores. A person is not even there except as a fetishized sex object.
I’d thought that maybe only gay men would not sexually objectify the woman, but they fetishize a man-made ideal image of a woman. The real woman is not even there, in his mind, only some glorified version of her, again, essentially, a man’s own imagination. I feel that a gay man cannot stand a real woman, like she’s a nonexistent entity, and only becomes “a woman” when she changes into his idealized image. Hair, dress, mannerism, psychology, etc.
I was watching the Assasination of Versace series, and was surprised to see that many older perverted wealthy men mentioned are not even pedophiles, but just gays with younger gay lovers. Maybe a man simply feels the need to sexually objectify... anything. Take the big fuss about the Donatella & Versace dress in the press; is she dominatrix or a sex slave, they speculated? I say, what difference does it make, a woman is still presented as some kind of sex object. First of all, it’s not even original; secondly, whose creation is that? So the basic idea behind it: let us just play on the idea of a woman as sex object and all possible variations of it.
Image
By the way, when I saw Donatella’s recent photo I almost fell off my chair. How did this happen?! This is what happens to a woman who’s obsessed with being fetishized to the point where she no longer sees or remembers her real herself, but exists as a subsequent “creation”, a walking doll in a gay tailor shop. Gay men just seem to do it (objectifying) better than straight men.

And another point. Take trannies who say they genuinely “feel” like a woman inside, they are feminine vulnerable, etc., etc. are they also not internalizing a fetishized version of a woman?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nextshark. ... agram/amp/

Does this transgender person really knows what it feel like being a woman? Obviously not. He’s acting a role, yes, a pretty one, yes, but still an idealized version of a woman. Perhaps it’s out of jealousy, or some kind of projection, but he’s not a real woman, to me, not even close. If anything he’s a gay man who hates real women. People who buy into this idealized version of a female are also easily duped into believing that this is a real woman, or what a real woman should be like.
User avatar
Pandora
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4044
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Ward 6

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Apr 01, 2018 11:50 pm

Women you are the ones who wear makeup, dress provocatively, act sluttish and flirty, and then you accuse -me- of "fetishizing women"?

This is a classic example of women trying to "think". You're thinking absolutely backward. As-if -I- am to blame, responsible for, the habits and actions of women.

Pandora you are completely irrational. You seem to have no conception of "How women are" versus "How I wish them to be". As long as you continue to straw-man my idealization, then you expose yourself as a fool, because you don't read, or can't absorb, what I'm writing. And to repeat the point for the dozenth time, just because I have (high) standards, doesn't mean that I expect women in general to meet them. They won't. You can't. My expectations are higher.


Smears is sexually liberal. I'm sexually conservative.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Apr 01, 2018 11:53 pm

Pandora, you are sexually liberal, just like Smears. Otherwise you would agree with me.

Most if not all women are sexually liberal....until they want to, or accidentally, have kids. Once pregnancy is a possibility, then the "values" change (to conservatism). Rarely do women stay sexually liberal after having their first child.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Pandora » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:58 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Pandora, you are sexually liberal, just like Smears. Otherwise you would agree with me.
You missed my whole point. Image
User avatar
Pandora
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4044
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Ward 6

Re: Gender Everything

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:14 am

When I read Pandora's summation of Mr R and Urwrong, I instantly thought of the Madonna/Whore complex.
This complex, which men (and women but for the sake of this example exclusively men) codify women into two camps and here we have two examples, one the saintly Madonna (Urwrong's) and the Whore (Mr R's). The good girls, (Madonnas) are almost virginal and the bad girls are the whores, sexually voracious almost masculine. So why are some men unable to combine the two images they have of women into a woman. Women at least know, there is no division in female sexuality but some men have issues with the separation of sex from love. Well, according to Freud it all stems from Mommy Dearest. The most difficult thing to do for some is to accept that all women are sexual beings, even the mother of your children, (or children yet to be conceived).
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Mr Reasonable » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:05 am

Pandora, you've got me wrong here. I don't objectify woman as sex objects. If we're talking about sex, then talking about some woman that I had sex with is what I'll be talking about, but that's certainly not the whole picture. You don't get to have a regular flow of women in your life who are willing to spend time with you and even have sex with you if you go around treating them like or seeing them aswhores when they don't want to be treated like or seen as whores. Sometimes though, that's exactly what they want. You play the game. More than half of my closest friends, people I've known for decades and have always been in touch with, are women. Some of them I've had sex with, some I haven't. I think there's too much emphasis on the sex part. I have at least one meal a week with one of 2 philosophy professor women that I'm friends with. Most days I eat out and usually there's some female or another who tags along. This doesn't mean I'm trying to fuck them all. I will have sex with a woman who I find attractive if the offer is on the table. But I don't generally associate with people who only want to have sex with me and nothing else. You can't look at people as either men or women first and foremost. People are people. Most of them have something interesting or entertaining to say if they're in their element and comfortable. I've dated women who work at churches and ones who went to college to get degrees in "divinity". I've dated elementary school teachers, physical therapists, environmental scientists, girls who work at those weird shops that sell herbs and candles to people who are against conventional medicine, girls who sell drugs, girls with felony convictions, strippers, real estate investors, kept daughters of people who spend their time at country clubs, you name it. Surely I didn't see them all as simply whores. I feel like you've got a bit of a bias here, and I feel that way because you seem to have categorized me incorrectly. I don't think of sex as all that important a part of life. Maybe that's why I'm able to get it without a lot of trouble. Stop acting like a physical act between 2 consenting adults is the end-all, be-all of sacred experiences and as though it is in some way a detriment to your humanity to participate in it and you may find that the world is a lot more lighthearted and enjoyable that it might seem to you now.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25171
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:22 pm

Pandora, I wonder if you're too vain to understand and empathize with a man's perspective.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Pandora » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:17 pm

More than half of my closest friends, people I've known for decades and have always been in touch with, are women.
This is your advantage, Smears. Men who spend a lot of time with women, or have grown up surrounded by women, “get them”, but they are also paying the price for it by risking becoming like one themselves in their minds.

Pandora, I wonder if you're too vain to understand and empathize with a man's perspective.
Judging frim your post you’re just as vain, wrong, but your vanity is driven by your own deep insecurities.
User avatar
Pandora
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4044
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Ward 6

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Silhouette » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:36 am

I heard an interesting argument on youtube that women don't dress up in ways that get them criticised as sex objects (usually by other women btw) because they want to be seen that way, or treated as such, but they do it because the act and result makes them feel better in itself.

I don't think they're lying or being naive when they say looking sexually attractive is for them and not for others, even though it completely looks that way to an outside observer and the obvious result of it in reality is that others consequently treat them as sexually attractive in any of the various ways that they do - many of which are unwelcome, and some of which work out in their favour in the sexual marketplace.
Men don't think that acting all cocky in front of women, wooing them in ways that make them feel uncomfortable or even repulsed, or even looking at porn will get them any real "action", they just do it because it feels good in itself. Such acts aren't being chosen for any secret Machiavellian purposes, they're just urges in just the same way as it is for women wanting to look pretty (though of course it is possible for both men and women to act with such intentions).

The obvious result is that sexual attraction gets to sometimes happen even without either party trying or making an effort towards those ends. Clearly this unintentional approach works better than intentional approaches, because it still works as is proven by its prevalence even today, and it does so whether people seem to want it or not. It's cliché when people say you fall in love when you least expect it, but I think the above explains why. People are just doing what makes them feel good, without necessarily wanting or even expecting the consequences.

Of course, since the unintentional approach works so well, it also unintentionally puts either sex into unintentionally bad positions. Men occasionally get accused of appearing to be sexual predators, or even acting as one, when all they're really doing is following their instincts like they might have done countless times before without any negative result, and women occasionally get accused of cock-teasing, "asking for it" or being sluts when all they're really doing is following their instincts that make them feel good in themselves.

Successful sexual selection doesn't require completely rational approaches, idealised courting doesn't require approaching one another as real people getting to know each other at a really deep level before finding each other attractive. It can result in that, that can be part of it, but it isn't the primary cause of successful sexual selection. The "shallow" stuff does that, and it does so unintentionally.

Donatella isn't a dominatrix or a sex slave or a sexual object, she's just doing what makes her feel good. It happens to work, and it doesn't obviously invite "seeing the real her", but it doesn't need to and there's not even any practical reason to demand that it should. The idealised romantic story sounds all very nice and everything, but the bottom line is what works best is going to keep happening, it should keep happening and it is going to continue to not be as simple as it appears. Maybe another way will emerge in future, maybe it will become the idealised romantic "real you" way, maybe it won't - whatever works will endure.
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3197
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Gender Everything

Postby Serendipper » Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:22 am

Silhouette wrote:I heard an interesting argument on youtube that women don't dress up in ways that get them criticised as sex objects (usually by other women btw) because they want to be seen that way, or treated as such, but they do it because the act and result makes them feel better in itself.

David DeAngelo says women don't dress to impress men, but each other.
Serendipper
Thinker
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users