Scifi with aggressive sexuality

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Why are men interested in sex with strangers while women are not?

I can't speak for all women - or indeed any women - but I suspect that this is almost certainly not true. I'm sure there are men AND women who are interested in no-strings-attached flings, and also men and women who are not. I don't see why that would have anything to do with gender.

No one is impressed. Wait, let me rephrase that: No one who has anything beyond a frat boy mentality is impressed. Your post is not funny, it is not insightful, it is not witty. It lacks basic comprehension, and the barest of human empathy. In short, your post lacks anything that approaches a human thought or emotion that is willing to actually understand or engage in anything. Your post is pablum.

That post will, for all time, be read by Benedict Cumberbatch.

 

[Greylock Crescent]

This was very sexually aggressive towards me.

Even if it was, you still get to go back to a more privileged place than the women who have had to face repeatedly sexually aggressive rhetoric here. They have to daily deal with the denials and obfuscation - often in the form of attempted humor - that the problem legitimately exists ... and all the while consistently living through the sexually aggressive rhetoric.

just because someone is requesting something, it doesn't automatically mean that the asker feels entitled to it.

Even if true (not that I agree that it is) the asker, however, does feel entitled to be able to ask - for something expressly personal - and let's not use false euphemisms here. Cat-calling isn't exactly like politely asking for directions to the Statue of Liberty. It isn't polite, for starters.

 

[Amaris]

Even if it was, you still get to go back to a more privileged place than the women who have had to face repeatedly sexually aggressive rhetoric here. They have to daily deal with the denials and obfuscation - often in the form of attempted humor - that the problem legitimately exists ... and all the while consistently living through the sexually aggressive rhetoric.

The asker, however, does feel entitled to be able to ask - for something expressly personal - and let's not use false euphemisms here. Cat-calling isn't exactly like politely asking for directions to the Statue of Liberty. It isn't polite, for starters.

Cat-calling is when one verbally whips their penis out and puts it on display to the dismay of everyone around them.

 

[thestrangequark]

But perhaps this theoretical man is seeking for himself some kind of outside sexual validation from a woman that he sees and finds attractive? How would you suggest that he obtain it?

Well, the bank robber knew he wasn't entitled to the money, but it just was sitting in the bank and and he was seeking for himself monetary gain. How else would you suggest that he attain it?

Literally how stupid you sound.

 

[Awesome Possum]

For example, a bunch of people in this thread were very scornful of my identity and failed to treat me with respect just now.

I get it, you have nothing. If only you were as funny as you were persistent.

But people are responding to your posts with actual replies. That's more respect than you actually deserve. You should feel honored we're paying attention to you and your backwards views before they are lost in the dustbin of history.

 

[BigJake]

But none of what you're talking about actually has anything to do with sex.

Sure it does. Money, power, physical fitness, confidence, charm, personality, good looks are all basic components of sex. The lucky thing for men is that masculinity is privileged enough that you can mostly get by with pretty much any two of those things. If you don't have any of them then that sucks, but your prospects for genuine romance aren't any worse than they would be for a woman.

And there's the rub. You may think you want to be "sexually objectified" but you really, really don't. It's an oppressive burden, not some magical bonus being conferred on the female sex. Being objectified means being perceived and treated as prey -- or as indeed, an object -- not as a person, and whether you like the person objectifying you or not. Being objectified means (or can very easily mean) being an target of scorn and hate and outright violence when you reject someone's advances because they're ugly or charmless or just not compatible with you. It means physical and emotional intrusiveness, hideous strangers telling you to "smile" for their delight, unwanted touching, catcalling, harassment, and worse. In our day and age, being objectified means can easily mean being subjected to open-ended campaigns of bullying and abuse on and through social media and the Internet if you break up with the wrong person or choose to have agency in a way they don't approve of.

If that's something you actually think you want, you don't know what you're talking about. And like I said before, it's pretty clear to me that you don't know what you're talking about. Maybe listening is the better option.

 

[thestrangequark]

You know what's even worse? I reread that...I accidentally used the word "attain" instead of exactly borrowing "obtain" from @The Borgified Corpse 's gross, rapey post as I had meant to do.
Subtle but meaningful difference. Jesus, the more I read that the more I want to vomit.

 

[ancient]

No one is impressed. Wait, let me rephrase that: No one who has anything beyond a frat boy mentality is impressed. Your post is not funny, it is not insightful, it is not witty. It lacks basic comprehension, and the barest of human empathy. In short, your post lacks anything that approaches a human thought or emotion that is willing to actually understand or engage in anything. Your post is pablum.

This really hurts me, so I'm going to ask you to be more PC, use common human decency and apologize and promise to never say such mean hurtful things again. It's just common courtesy, I don't know why it's so hard.

 

[Sindatur]

"She's someone". Perfect, just perfect.

Yes, she is someone with human rights, hopes and dreams that are all her own. None of these things have anything to do with anyones else, and cannot (well, should not) be negated by a patriarchal system that tells her:

"well, what did you expect dressing like that?"
"well, you're going to have children in a few years, so do you really think that I should give you this job?"
"You have a professional job...who takes care of your children? They need you, why aren't you home looking after them?"
"Smile!"
"you'd be so much happier if you put on some make up, wore some nicer clothes...and lost a little weight"

No. Just no. A woman is someone with rights, who is capable of going after whatever she wants to make her life a happy one according to her own rules. We are not sorry for standing up for ourselves and telling others that they can't hold us down anymore, not without a fight.

Ya know, I don't know why, because that list is all pretty rude, but, for some reason, "Smile" strikes me as being the most dismissive?

 

[thestrangequark]

It's because it's an outright command.

 

[Amaris]

This really hurts me, so I'm going to ask you to be more PC, use common human decency and apologize and promise to never say such mean hurtful things again. It's just common courtesy, I don't know why it's so hard.

There is no point being made in your post. It has all the reasoning and logic of a 3 year old demanding a cookie. Your post does not deserve a cookie.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Stop sounding like Cumby, dammit!

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

Well, the bank robber knew he wasn't entitled to the money, but it just was sitting in the bank and and he was seeking for himself monetary gain. How else would you suggest that he attain it?

Literally how stupid you sound.

thestrangequark, it's a legitimate question, despite your sarcastic response.

I'm just trying to think through the issue logically. Let's go through this step by step:

1. Some men are engaging in catcalling.
2. Presumably, they are doing this because they want to have sex with the women that they are catcalling towards.
3. Considering the hostile reactions that this evokes from the women in question, it's probably not going to work.
4. Since it's not going to work, they need to find some other tactic to achieve their objective (i.e. sex).
5. So what would that tactic be? Perhaps women would have some insight as to what they do find sexually appealing?

In answer to your bank robber analogy, the answer is to get a job. Getting money is not, in theory, a difficult question. Getting sex is much more complex.

Sure it does. Money, power, physical fitness, confidence, charm, personality, good looks are all basic components of sex.

Money doesn't have anything to do with sex (unless you've got a dead-guys-in-powdered-wigs fetish). Women may be attracted to it and may have sex with men who have it but it doesn't inherently have anything to do with sex.

And there's the rub. You may think you want to be "sexually objectified" but you really, really don't. It's an oppressive burden, not some magical bonus being conferred on the female sex.

{Emilia} herself said previously in the thread that sometimes a woman might want to be objectified in the course of some sexual role play or something.

If that's something you actually think you want, you don't know what you're talking about.

I never said I wanted it. But I can imagine situations where a man would wish to be sexually desired with the kind of vigor with which men often have for women.

But because this doesn't tend to happen and because there isn't a whole industry of fashion magazines dedicated to advising men on how to be more sexually attractive, it's hard to make 1:1 comparisons between genders.

I can't speak for all women - or indeed any women - but I suspect that this is almost certainly not true. I'm sure there are men AND women who are interested in no-strings-attached flings, and also men and women who are not. I don't see why that would have anything to do with gender.

And yet, it seems that only men are engaging in catcalling. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of that.

Even if true (not that I agree that it is) the asker, however, does feel entitled to be able to ask - for something expressly personal - and let's not use false euphemisms here. Cat-calling isn't exactly like politely asking for directions to the Statue of Liberty. It isn't polite, for starters.

It certainly isn't polite and I certainly wouldn't recommend it. I never do it.

But, considering sex is a mutual activity, if a cat-caller is asking "for something expressly personal," he is also inherently offering something expressly personal at the same time.

But then, there's this unfortunate notion in our society that sex is something that women aren't interested in and that it's something that men have to "trick" women into doing or something. Asking for sex, although often done in a very vulgar fashion, is treated as an unwanted intrusion even in concept. Women ask to be respected and yet treat the sexual desires of men with contempt. I can understand why they wouldn't like the expression that it takes but there seems to be an underlying hostility towards male sexuality at all. And when a man tries to examine the other side of a male/female issue that has been almost exclusively examined from the female perspective, he's called all number of vile things.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Yes, we must think of the poor oppressed men. They're the true victims in this.

 

[Greylock Crescent]

But perhaps this theoretical man is seeking for himself some kind of outside sexual validation from a woman that he sees and finds attractive? How would you suggest that he obtain it?

By being desirable. And, by that I mean, you know, not cat-calling. Or objectifying women. Or imposing his desires and needs onto a complete stranger and/or a woman who just isn't interested.

Instead, he should simply be a decent human being. Take care of himself (basic hygiene and health). And have something legitimately interesting intimacy to offer someone else - and, here's the thing: intimacy isn't just physical. It's intellectual. It's emotional. It's creative. It's spiritual. I once had a guy friend bemoan to me, "I just want to be desired." I get feelings of loneliness and self-doubt. Believe me, I've been there. But my response him was: "Then do something to be desirable." Find a passion. Genuinely make the lives around you better (and, hint, cat-calling wasn't going to make his, or anyone's else's life better). Find out who you are, and be confident and comfortable with who you are. Have a life worth sharing with someone else. (And who wants to share a life with someone who cat-calls, or commands a stranger to smile. Seriously, that's really a bizarre, unsettling attempt to establish dominance).

Do that, and people will find this "theoretical man" interesting, in general. The more people who do, the more chances there will be a mutual attraction between the Theoretical Man and someone who finds him interesting. In the meantime, Theoretical Man™ gets to live a more interesting and fulfilling life than bemoaning why da wimminz won't validate his sexuality despite his repeated, and without permission, intrusions upon their business and personal space.

he is also inherently offering something expressly personal at the same time.

No. He's not offering anything other than the intrusion. Full stop.

Asking for sex, although often done in a very vulgar fashion, is treated as an unwanted intrusion even in concept.

Something vulgar, done in a vulgar fashion, is treated as an intrusion? Whaddya know!

Yeesh.

Women ask to be respected and yet treat the sexual desires of men with contempt. I can understand why they wouldn't like the expression that it takes but there seems to be an underlying hostility towards male sexuality at all.

No. Women (as if there's some monolithic entity that speaks for all women) do not, in general, treat the sexual desires of men with contempt. They do, however, treat the repeated, unwanted and vulgar (your term) intrusions with contempt. It's no surprise that anyone would develop hostility after such repeated, unwanted, and often dangerous vulgarities.

And when a man tries to examine the other side of a male/female issue that has been almost exclusively examined from the female perspective, he's called all number of vile things.

Well, when one is offering justifications for vulgarities, there should be no surprise when one receives, let's say, criticisms, for such reprehensible justifications.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

I think we should stop judging people in society based on the nobility of their victimhood. All people deserve respect. People don't get to claim that their suffering is more important than all other people's suffering simply because of the group they belong to. If we want to talk about our individual suffering, we can do that. But dismissing the feelings of an entire group because you're "less privileged" than they are is the height of bigotry.

If people think I'm being insensitive to their feelings, I'm sorry. That's very much not my intention. I'm just trying to examine the facts at hand, sometimes from angles that other people in this thread don't seem to be looking at too closely. To a certain degree, that puts me in a devil's advocate position. So sue me. I like to give all people the benefit of the doubt. When someone transgresses the normal rules of decent society, I think it's worth asking, "Why did he do that? What motivated him to behave in that way? Why don't other people do the same thing?"

[...] keep them from being able to achieve their happiness and meaning as easily as men.

Another problem with the feminist victim narrative: There's this notion that, because men don't face the kind of systemic "oppression" that women are said to face, that it leads to men having an easier time finding fulfillment. Yet men may actually be having a harder time finding fulfillment since the male suicide rate is 3.5 times that of women!

 

[T'Arwen]

But then, there's this unfortunate notion in our society that sex is something that women aren't interested in and that it's something that men have to "trick" women into doing or something.

Society has a schizophrenic view towards how much sexual desire women have. Somehow they should be flattered with catcalling. But when those in long-term relationships want help when their desire goes down, some doctors tell them to just accept their bodies are changing or just a natural part of aging. Or worse, be told it's all in her head.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...f6cb0a-50dd-11e5-933e-7d06c647a395_story.html

 

[Greylock Crescent]

All people deserve respect.

Then men should stop cat-calling women. And cease any justification for such vulgarities (your term, remember).

There's this notion that, because men don't face the kind of systemic "oppression" that women are said to face

That's because men don't face the kind of systemic oppression that women face. I walk, alone, through Harlem, carrying my DSLR camera and don't have to worry about being sexually assaulted. Or harassed. Or intruded upon. And wherever I go, men call out to women and, when ignored, offer up the most vile insults imaginable. It's not that men don't face problems of their own, but any post that asserts there's even remotely an equivalency between the problems that men and women face when it comes to rape culture in general, and unwanted public (and private) advances in particular, is monumentally obtuse, ignorant, and dead wrong.

ETA:

If people think I'm being insensitive to their feelings, I'm sorry. That's very much not my intention.

Your posts are insensitive. Furthermore, your posts, filled with continued justification and apology for vulgar intrusions, do not demonstrate any remorse for that insensitivity. Your posts are, therefore, hypocritical.

 

[Amaris]

I think we should stop judging people in society based on the nobility of their victimhood. All people deserve respect. People don't get to claim that their suffering is more important than all other people's suffering simply because of the group they belong to. If we want to talk about our individual suffering, we can do that. But dismissing the feelings of an entire group because you're "less privileged" than they are is the height of bigotry.

If people think I'm being insensitive to their feelings, I'm sorry. That's very much not my intention. I'm just trying to examine the facts at hand, sometimes from angles that other people in this thread don't seem to be looking at too closely. To a certain degree, that puts me in a devil's advocate position. So sue me. I like to give all people the benefit of the doubt. When someone transgresses the normal rules of decent society, I think it's worth asking, "Why did he do that? What motivated him to behave in that way? Why don't other people do the same thing?"



Another problem with the feminist victim narrative: There's this notion that, because men don't face the kind of systemic "oppression" that women are said to face, that it leads to men having an easier time finding fulfillment. Yet men may actually be having a harder time finding fulfillment since the male suicide rate is 3.5 times that of women!

You're disgusting. I'll take a warning for it, I don't care. Feminist victim narrative, my ass, and don't you fucking put oppression in goddamned scare quotes you fucker. These women have been trying to get through to your sorry, lazy excuse for a brain, but you've been so busy flapping your empty jaws that you haven't listened to a word they've said, and have instead overrode their very personal experiences with some stupid devil's advocate bullshit that is the hallmark of a pseudo-intellectual pretentious twit. So go ahead, dumbass, "All Lives Matter" this entire group of people and let them see you for the misogynistic scumbag you really are.

Fuck you.

 

[Greylock Crescent]

For the record, those posts offering justification for personal intrusions and vulgarities, for attempting to build a false equivalency between the problems men and women face, and asserting that women somehow "treat men's sexuality with contempt" are prime examples of rape culture. No, they do not explicitly justify or glorify rape - but they are part of the culture that insists that little to no consequences should result from when a man tries to assert dominance over a woman - regardless of whether it's a stranger on the street, an acquaintance, co-worker, what have you.

No woman should feel as though it is her responsibility for validating the frustrated sexuality of a man who thinks it's perfectly acceptable, and that he's perfectly entitled to, intrude upon a woman by cat-calling, commanding a smile, touching, or otherwise invading her personal space, including denials that women routinely face problems such as these. This creates a general (and genuine) concern for personal safety and agency - not the least of which is when posts such as these explicitly attempt to delegitimize the issue.

Put simply, there are far more vulgarities - far more personally toxic words and ideas - in those posts than in the one directly above this one.