dagblog - Comments for "BREAKING: NYT Reveals The Problem With Feminists"

Interesting. I never really

Peter Schwartz — Tue, 03 Jun 2014 11:58:01 +0000

In reply to Post-modern feminism throws

Interesting.

I never really liked dating, though I did like meeting new people.

Never thought that my dislike of dating had anything to do with "feminism," but I do admit that a charming, beautiful "traditional" woman had charms that were very seductive.

Even when bits of "the tradition" showed through, it was nice. Maybe because they hinted at a "pathway" instead of forcing you to make up everything on the spot as we went along.

In fact, I once had a dream in which my "ideal woman" appeared. When I woke up, I knew I had seen her in the dream. She was a country and western gal, a music which I pretty much hate.

All that said, all of my lasting relationships were with "liberated" women, including my wife.

"But this isn't the fault of

AnonymousPP — Tue, 03 Jun 2014 05:46:31 +0000

In reply to It seems there is some

"But this isn't the fault of feminism nor is it women's responsibility to fix. " I agree with the first part, and only partially with the latter.

We're in a society together. It's not like women will progress and break old stereotypes & repression without some cooperation and help and change from men. Sure, they can do some things on their own, but some requires mutual action - and not everything can be legislated. And even if it could - freedom for one side doesn't have to be simply loss of privilege for the other.

Worse, if women don't help men define better, more compatible roles, I'm afraid they just won't get to a space where they'd really like to be. I'm sadly unimpressed with the results of 50 years of women's activism since the 60's - maybe I'm just nostalgic, but it seems like there's more objectification of women now, women get to do all the household tasks *AND* hold a 9-5+ job, and we still keep the image of bitch boss from hell every time there's an issue with female executives or female politicians.

So maybe we have to more consciously create a mutually compatible future, or maybe I'm just confused.

It seems there is some

ocean-kat — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 23:30:19 +0000

In reply to Post-modern feminism throws

It seems there is some percentage of men who are having trouble figuring out their role in modern times. But this isn't the fault of feminism nor is it women's responsibility to fix. Just as it was not men's responsibility to decide for women what their role should be. Women decided what changes they wanted and men had a choice to support or not support their goals. Just as heterosexuals don't get to decide what goals LGBT should pursue. They get to decide what their goals are and we get to choose to support or not.

Those men who want to redefine or find new roles for themselves in the modern world need to figure out what it is they want, get active, and then look for support from women to achieve those goals.

"Women as professionals" was only one goal of feminism and it was more about equal access to colleges and professions. Not that every women should seek to become professionals. Most women aren't professionals just as most men aren't professionals. There was only one doctor and one dentist in the small town of 5,000 where I grew up. For every white collar worker at the Bethlehem Steel there were hundreds of blue collar workers like my dad. For every manager at Walmart there are dozens of cashiers, sales people, and stockers. Feminism is and was about equality. Its about equal pay for those working class women. Its about protection from sexual harassment at work. Its about equal access to those limited number of management jobs.

Its unfortunate that your experience of the dating scene was so often negative. But don't assume that's the norm. The vast majority of the women I interacted with didn't treat me as naturally malevolent. I've had only one experience that might qualify but I didn't label it as being treated as naturally malevolent. I saw that she was fearful. I wasn't resentful, I was sympathetic. Given rape statistics I can fully understand why a women might be fearful alone with a new man. I considered the possibility she might be dealing with a rape or near rape. I can't see being resentful over what I consider women's quite justifiable degree of caution.

Going to bars and clubs was difficult for me because of my introversion. Not because I felt women treated me as a symbol of patriarchy. Perhaps my experience was atypical since I'm 5'4" and was very thin. Its possible I was seen as less threatening due to my size. Its also possible your experience was atypical too. I'd have to see some raw date before I accept your anecdotal evidence as factual for men in general.

Sonja: Oh don't, Boris,

Michael Maiello — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 16:20:53 +0000

In reply to Nothing new about liking sex.

Sonja: Oh don't, Boris, please. Sex without love is an empty experience.

Boris: Yes, but as empty experiences go, it's one of the best.

The Amish may know what to do

Peter Schwartz — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 16:12:59 +0000

In reply to Nothing new about liking sex.

The Amish may know what to do to some degree: bundling.

http://www.exploring-amish-country.com/amish-dating.html

Nothing new about liking sex.

Ramona — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 15:39:53 +0000

In reply to I'm guessing the answer to

Nothing new about liking sex. Or having sex before you're ready. We were getting married right out of high school, not because we wanted to be married so much as we wanted to have sex and it was drilled into our heads that you couldn't have it without a license.

Messages about sexuality have always been mixed, mainly, I think, because nobody really knows what to do when sex organs mature before the brain does. Hypersexuality reigned during the Flapper era, too, and then it calmed down again to an almost prudish state before it flared up again during the Hippie era. Then it calmed down a bit and now you would think it's all anybody ever thinks about. There's big money in sex. It pays to keep the myth alive that you're nothing and nobody without an active sex life. I mean, come on. . .Viagra?

Regarding that last sentence,

Elusive Trope — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 14:14:44 +0000

In reply to I don't know what in the hell

Regarding that last sentence, what he is saying is that our culture has bounded sex, that is the amount of sex one is getting, to the amount of self-respect one has for one's self. That is, if I can't get any action, I must a worthless piece of garbage.

He then goes on to assert that in the long run, this binding of the two will generate a society where more and more people will get less sex and have less self-respect.

Which is a weird bit of logic. But again, there is some basic kernel of truth in what he is talking about. Decades ago, I knew by the time I was in the 9th grade, as a male, if one was a virgin, one definitely did not let this fact become known. It was probably one of the worst things one could be. I think, and this was around 1980, not the same for the girls. But it wasn't necessarily something one proclaimed out loud for them either, at least not in the party crowd I hung out with. The girls had the problem of being considered too easy, which the boys didn't.

Today, with the likes of Miley Cyrus leading the cultural vanguard for the youth, both sexes, regardless of orientation, tie one's sexual action (or one's ability to get some action should one choose) as a key if not the primary indicator of one's worth and place in society. This is as true for adults. When I watch cable television, I find myself feeling like some old prude, appalled at not only the shows hypersexuality, but the commercials in-between the shows, which make sex and sex appeal as the most important thing one can possess or achieve in life.

The point being - regardless of one's age or orientation or whatever, the greater the ability to get some action is seen as some key indicator of the person's standing within the pack. This has become a kind of accepted conventional wisdom. The difference was even in my days as a youth, tv sensors as well as the male dominated media industry shielded me to a great degree from facing this reality. I could watch tv and not feel like a crappy little virgin. Today, unless one just keeps the weather channel on, this isn't the case.

I'm guessing the answer to

Michael Maiello — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 12:38:41 +0000

In reply to I don't know what in the hell

I'm guessing the answer to the question of whether it's easier or more difficult (heheh, I almost said "harder") to grow up in our more hypersexualized culture is going to be of "your mileage may vary."

Some young people, of both genders, are going to have a hard time controlling their feelings and desires. Others are going to find themselves better suited to more outward displays of hedonism. Some people benefit from a certain amount of decorum while others find it oppressive.

It would probably shock Ross to find out that some women also like sex...

The column makes no sense.

rmrd0000 — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 04:42:30 +0000

In reply to BREAKING: NYT Reveals The Problem With Feminists

The column makes no sense. Why bring up feminists? Is there any evidence that there were close male friends? Are the males who frequent misogynistic websites to blame for the deaths? They supported the killers' point of view on women. Or should we just acknowledge that this was a case of a severe mental illness and leave it at that?

I don't think Douthat knows

trkingmomoe — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 04:23:54 +0000

In reply to I don't know what in the hell

I don't think Douthat knows half the time what he is writing about. I just don't think he is worth the time to read.