Well, you got your 200, Cat.
Sorry. I wasn't very clear.
re creativity. Obviously over time, it has been male creativity that has been given the greater focus.
In art, music, etc. now is this because the power of males' creativity is stronger? Of course we have some amazing women artists.
None are referred to as masters, though.
There isn't even a word. Mistresses? Yeah right.

Yes, your example of some air head chick, wanting her boy to thug someone.
And your take on ISIS?
Mainly men, young men. Some women involved. Those men exerting such power in their cultures, over women and children.
It is not a competition. Just furthering the exploration.
I meet some amazingly developed men who are Tibetan Monks.for example; His holiness The Dalai Lama.

@Seandr - rough to be in a relationship with? No. Perhaps you have grown your respect for others' feelings, barring vegetarians and feminists etc. If I pegged your type right it's a long journey. If Mrs Seandr thinks you're easy, I'll defer to her opinion and not mention my own again. I didn't mean to insult.

ISIS, in the tradition of many terrorist organizations, militaries in general, and high school football, takes advantage of the fact that young men have a huge amount of energy, much of it sexual and unreleased, plus have little perspective re life and how it can go, and thus often think and act like they're immortal. They think dying will be no big deal, they'll go to something better.
I read a book that came out in the 80's on college football called 'The Hundred Yard Lie,' that talked about how giving young men a purpose enabled you to ask them to do just about anything, often to their severe physical detriment. John Dolan aka Gary Brechter aka The War Nerd has several columns on this in Pandodaily.
Terrorist groups seem to come up in societies that are largely patriarchal. I believe that it's canon within antiterrorist units that you always shoot female terrorists first, as they had to work ten times harder to get into an active unit, and are thus far more motivated and devout in their cause. This might be contrasted with how it's common knowledge among strength/fitness coaches that most of the hardcore trainees are male, but a real hardcore female will outwork any two guys.
Tell the Lama I still want that five bucks he owes me.
The football book mentioned that some young men get so wrought up before a game, they ejaculate in their pants, a fine illustration of sexuality being steered into (often) self-destruction.
Speaking of ejaculations, and when am I not, here's how I now think of the 'Closure' situation -

You have a male friend over, who's a super-ultra-Orthodox Jew, or maybe a Gypsy, someone with definite beliefs on ritual pollution. You're doing dishes, your hands are full, you ask him to please get the cat toy out of the bathroom trashcan, where your girlfriend mistakenly put it thinking it was trash.
He reaches in without looking, then is aghast to find that he's grabbed a used tampon of hers. He screams, drops it, rushes to the sink to wash the hand, but he's been Polluted. Still screaming, he runs from the house. Ten years later, he still hasn't forgiven you.
You sympathize with the trauma that this has caused him, but you have a hard time thinking of him as a victim, you didn't do it on purpose, he's physically unharmed, and...you think the thought processes that lead to this being a big deal are a bit...silly. In any event, this view of pollution, besides not being supported by current laws and thus unactionable, looks to make parts of his future life quite rocky.

Cryptic Cat. The tampon wasn't wrapped up with toilet paper? Straight in the bin.
Always enjoy your stories, Cat.

Not sure, but pretty sure that they usually soak through, and are still polluting. The mythical friend who was thus polluted might therefore have a case with some Council of Elders, as the ‘Closure’ LW would with a dorm-room full of Womens’ Studies majors in one of those colleges where a guy using self-deprecating humor to try to get laid, can be charged with sexual assault...Buut not the hit-and-run car impact some posters described it as.

Cat are you ENFP? (I'm INTP)

EricaP had an awesome point that there be dragons inside. I think people remember that there be dragons in other people more often than they remember the dragons inside. For instance in car accidents. Most don't think past the legal definition of fault. But if you survive one drunk driver and keep going to the same area and getting clipped by other drunks, you might want to stay out of that area, or be more careful when you're driving through.

I think dragons can kill you but are also beautiful. I don't think they need killed off, we can share the earth.

@207 - Never taken that test. Always assumed that I'm a Caring Nurturer, like Stuart Smalley.
Hard to argue with any of your points - Yes, people have dragons inside, No, wouldn't go back to that reckless-driving area either, Yes, we can share the earth with dragons, but I think Alison meant 'hic sunt leones' in the the classical sense of 'going that way has particular dangers.'

As I meant to say earlier, I also reject biological determinism past a certain degree, at least as far as bad behavior goes. I wouldn't hear, say, that a new boss was a woman and then think, whew, I know she'll be fair and honest and upfront and....I also don't see a pretty girl dressed up and think, eh, prolly just trolling for some rich dude, she'll suck his cock, get his seed once or twice, then use him as an ATM.
I've seen bad behaviors from both sexes, and certain types appear and re-appear. I've never thought they stood for their entire gender. It's like seeing a blue Taurus on the road, you don't say, all cars are blue Taurii, you go, oh, another one of those.

Very nicely put, Cat Brother.

Yes, hic sunt leones/dracones.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_be_d…

Cat Brother @206,
Speaking of mythical, who exactly was arrested and charged for using self-deprecating humour to try to get laid?

@Cat that's awesome! I've been trying to learn how to communicate well with different personality types, it's part of why I lurk here.

If you were wondering if I agree that women can be awful, I do, I admit to having dragons. I just don't think that makes me different from anyone else. The having dragons part, at least.

Also, I don't think it's best to avoid the areas I've been hit. I think it's more appropriate to use caution, but not let bad experiences keep you from going where you want to go. I think it's just gut instinct to avoid it like a hot burner. Even if you need a completely different approach like taking a cab or bus to crowded drunk areas. And you're still risking a drunk driver hitting the sidewalk as a pedestrian. You can't eliminate the risks in life, you can just try to do what you need without getting hurt too bad. And people are social animals, the hermit is rare, we need each other whether we like it or not. Plus sex.

Philophile, ‘there be dragons’ means ‘we don’t wanna go there.’

Biological essentialism — understanding individuals, history and culture in terms of predetermined archetypes like the Nurturing Woman, the Warrior Man, the Primitive African, the Calculating Oriental — is never going to get us anywhere we want to go. It doesn’t matter how many blue Tauruses there are around, understanding blueness as a function of car model is completely missing the point of what colour is and is not going to help us either drive or assemble an attractive salad.

Car salad tends to get stuck in my teeth.
The Caring Nurturer thing was a goof, I've never taken that test. Meyers-Briggs, right? I do have an amusing story from a friend who worked on the early SNL, though.
I don't think anyone but some idealogues would say one sex couldn't be awful. I remember when Deborah Tannen's You Just Don't Understand came out, and some women of my acquaintance were saying that it showed how female bosses would always be better, more caring and nurturing, and I was thinking, not some I've known, if there're bigger swine around in the management chair, I'm only glad I never met them, though my best bosses had also been women
. Same with guys, or black people, or....

@JibeHo: "My hope is that the trend reverses and we all end up in a more civilized (dare I say, feminine) place..."

For the record, this is exactly how the Klan talks about black people. You're a bigot.

For everyone else: As an illustration of my point, look at how JibeHo gets treated, and consider what would happen if a man ever said something nearly as bigoted as JibeHo does. Now, see how no man here does that? That's what it looks like when one gender is forced to act nice, and the other one gets free reign to act like a piece of shit.

Eudaemonic, actually I called her on it. And then she complained that I was giving her a hard time but was giving you a free pass.
😉

Cat @204. I was coming back, after thinking of that post. And you guys rumble on, nice.
In that post Cat, you talk of this male energy. Boys crazy with body stuff, being easily manipulated.
That is an area that needs much more understanding. It's true, a very vulnerable age. Starting to become a man, and then some, in the body. The emotions, heart- still a boy's. Learning fast, though.
Gotta keep a closer eye on our adolescents. Very powerful period of
Growth.
Glad you're here, Cat.

This might be playing with fire, or not even possible, but there was a guy who used to comment a good deal here whose handle was Judah. I remember he posted a lot of thoughtful, intelligent stuff, some of which I liked enough to copy and keep.
One thread, don’t remember the subject exactly but it was male/female stuff, and he just got dogpiled, unfairly I thought. Myself I would have just ejected there, but he never posted as much since then, which I thought was a shame.
Im fairly new to regular commenting, he still show up?

Cat Brother, I think Judah stopped commenting in spring 2011.

Alison @201
I completely understand your reasons for not engaging Eud, but I hope you can understand that my hackles were raised by his unchallenged "equally shitty" comment...

Just to clarify, I don't find it hard to believe that women and men have an equal capacity to be shitty to the people in their intimate, familial, casual, and business relationships. I’ve lived long enough and have known enough people intimately to know that all humans have a dark side.
Perhaps if we had a hundred years or so of complete and uninterrupted female control over all of the worldwide levers of power – military, political, religious and economic – we could test the hypothesis of the corrupting influence of power on women. Maybe we would fail at preserving the peace, realizing equality, and conserving what remains of our planet, as spectacularly as men have. My gut tells me we could do a better job. Alas we will never know.

I read an interesting article today. Stephen Hawking was asked which human failing he would most like to change. His answer was aggression. I guess that sums up my feelings in a nutshell.

Alison - I understood your first sentence, although it would look better with "When I say dragons I mean ..." instead of the blanket statement. I'm happy there are no "You think X" statements, thank you. I'll reply to it. But I also value how you treat my feelings. A thank you for the clarification or nod toward respecting my space in the future would help us communicate better. Communicating with you is not an easy task for me.

"Dragons" in my posts=komodo dragons, personal needs which make others uncomfortable (choppy seas), and uncharted and potentially dangerous waters on a physical or emotional level.

Cat - Yes Myers Briggs (Kiersey interpretation makes more sense to me tho), I don't know Judah, I've only posted a lot since summer, I think you present your thoughts and feelings in a cool and respectful way and I'd protest a dogpile. I thought you were an Inspirer, if you were interested you can take the test here. I hope you keep putting your interesting perspective out there.

219 makes it really clear that JibeHo also doesn't think women are people.

They are. The things humanity does? Women are responsible for 50% of it; for it to be otherwise, women would have to be shockingly useless relative to men--for men to be solely in charge of the planet, women would have to be (and to always have been) incredibly stupid. I think women are people, and thus not any more useless than any other kind of people.

Which means not absolving them of the things done by all of humanity.

@215: "Eudaemonic, actually I called her on it. And then she complained that I was giving her a hard time but was giving you a free pass."

Yes. You (one person) called her on it, extremely gently, and she pretended that what she and I said were in any way comparable. Just imagine how the commentariat here would respond if I announced that women were the cause of all the evil in the world, and were inherently more evil than men.

Just suggesting that men and women are equal triggers bigoted tirades. Imagine if I actually said women were worse than men! Or any of the stuff that LavaGirl spouts about men in the other thread, when she takes a break from accusing me of gender war stuff to say stuff like "Men, as we know are useless lying pieces of shits. Whom one can't trust."

The funny part is that she's not wrong, it's just that the same is true of women. Humans are not an immensely trustworthy species, in the absence of outside forces that would make them so. For what it's worth, I think 186 was an entirely accurate summary.

@LavaGirl:
"Mr E. I do see you are working thru stuff here, and some of it makes it hard to meet you.
This anger you carry, Is serving you how?"

I'm not carrying anger, and I'm not really "working through" anything here. I am, however, unusually bad at pretending not to know things I know. I don't stop knowing anything just because knowing it makes me uncomfortable, and when I find a truth, I don't abandon it just because it's not pretty. I'm not good at unseeing, and I think the world would be a far better place if other people weren't quite so good at it.

Eudaemonic @222:

Yes.

Interesting what roles are assigned by gender, how they change, how much flexibility there is within them. Can’t read Alison’s note of men being shamed into violent acts/jobs/sports, and not think of the classic Charles Atlas ad where the skinny weakling is shamed first by the bully, then by the girl he’s supposedly there with (“Don’t let it bother you, little boy.”) He loses the girl if he doesn’t act, he gets his ass beat (and probably still loses the girl) if he tries something. Every boy in America grows up with the expectation that if he can’t kick some ass, his life will be a lot harder.

Recently saw, on some popup somewhere, Salma Hayek is waiting ‘for a man with bigger balls than her.’ Not exactly like saying she wants a man taller than her, or who can bench more, how, I wonder, would she quantify this? He’d wear a rose-pink ascot to brunch? He’d pop her in the mouth if she lipped off? He imposed his will on all other men around her?

In the end, I think gender roles are kind of like arranged marriage - the way(s) things previously were, were a good deal simpler (at least in our cultural imagination), and no doubt we fuck things up all the time going on our own paths, but I still want that choice rather than the alternative.

Re Judah’s dogpile, I think you have to know when you’ve lost the crowd. In the ‘Closure’ thread, there were some commenters who would not be budged in their belief that the young man coming in his pants did it at least somewhat deliberately, and thus was an abuser, and were going to keep to that opinion. No talking them out of it, so I didn’t try. None of us are getting paid for this, so why fash yourself unnecessarily?

Without aggression there would be no war. Because we would be living in a Matrix. Or a Brave New World. I like aggression, and I prefer it polite. At least consensual.

There would still be aggression without war, in any world with finite resources. And probably even in a world with infinite ones. Wanting something, and wanting it badly enough to be willing to use violence get it, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with aggression.

Cat - I did agree with other posters who said 'Closure' guy could have been neglecting consent though. Uncreative has a talent for reasoning through their opinions and cares about consent I think (so do I). You were arguing different ideas, that it was probably unintentional to some extent, but 'Closure' girl's feelings also had a basis in good judgement; it's good to be wary of being used and be able to confront someone whose actions appear shady. Both opinions can be accurate at once. People who don't respect consent are dangerous to others, but it's also no good to live life in a defensive bubble, in fear of what others are capable of or imagine the worst in everyone. It's important to develop ways to deal with the bad feeling stuff and continue to seek out the stuff you like. Religion used to do that. This is getting far too abstract for this forum, if you'd like to email me at gmail, I'm philophiling.
Also sorry for my broken links, this was my guess of you and this the test/tool for personal growth and relating to different personalities. Career placement is the least intriguing application imo.

For better or for worse we DO live in a world that has been primarily shaped my men. If you want to deny that fact I can't do anything about it. Women in this country have only had the vote for about 100 years. When I was a child, my mother couldn't have a credit card in her own name. That's reality and I'm not sure what is accomplished by denying it. I realize this is a sex advice column, so the issues addressed here are primarily interpersonal, but to ignore the larger context of the world in which we live is disingenuous at best.

I have been a lurker on SL for many years. The only reason I've spoken up recently is that I've sensed an alarming trend - to my eyes at least. In the past I've seen letter writers of both sexes called out on their asshattery by commenters of both sexes. Recently though, it seems that whenever someone tries to see a situation from the female's perspective, or neglects to declare the man a completely innocent victim, there is a small but growing chorus of voices ready to jump in and call the opinion holder sexist or a bigot.

That is the aggression I'm talking about. I feel like it is having it's intended effect - to silence contrary opinions. I've been on the receiving end and even though I'm safe and sound in my own home, it is a very unsettling feeling to be attacked in that personal of a way. It discourages me from adding my own voice to the conversation, I wouldn't be surprised if others were affected similarly.

People write in for advice, the commentariat offer their perspectives. I used to really enjoy reading everyone's interpretations on the letters and the sometimes heated but usually respectful back and forth between the usual suspects.
For me, this place feels less and less like a safe haven. Frankly I don't read comments on other websites because no matter the subject, the haters and name callers and bullies always show up eventually to hijack the conversation with personal attacks.

Oh, and for the record, I don't believe that women are better than men - I think they are different. If that makes me sexist and a bigot so be it.

i myself find the disturbing trend on SL to be the recklessly-driving Komodo dragons, who run over rare hermits without consent, in unlicensed taxicabs.

Philo, we all on this board are concerned with consent. The Closure girl consented to making out, which typically has one partner on top, frequently alternating. The orgasming was the point of contention, and if you don't believe me and the other former-14-year-old dudes that it was involuntary, and thus did not make itself available for consent, then I got nothing else for you. 'Taking advantage' means 'you get something out of it,' that boy would have been a lot happier keeping that load in his balls, that was not a pleasureable orgasm for him.
- I (again) say this as a guy who was that age and was exposed to the idea of pre-ejaculation in movies and what not, where it was always a gag, happening to a nerd or loser who then crept away in shame. Yes, somewhere there might be young men who get off on it, just as SL has shown us that some men pay to get kicked in the balls. Hearing about a man who likes ball-crushing should not lead a sensible person to conclude 'Huh, I guess it's really a toss-up whether a guy likes a solid shot in the 'nads or not...' You can listen to guys in general, and conclude not.
I can't agree that Closure girl's actions were rooted in good judgement; extending that logic we'd never leave the house. I don't want to get taken advantage of either, but anyone you meet might do that in a large or small way, so I'm just to avoid people? I don't want to get in a car wreck, so I'll never drive. Is there anything good that can't turn bad?
If her conclusion to the whole deal was to tell (at 14) future makeout partners "Hey, tell me if you get too excited, OK? I don't want to go too fast, " that would be a reasonable thing. She let the one experience poison a fair bit of her life, and I submit her reaction to the event is based on thinking that he did it on purpose.
There were a number of people who argued that it didn't matter whether he meant to or not, he came and thus assaulted her. This puts his coming in the context of some ritual pollution, why I gave the analogy above. These people and I likewise won't agree, so we all move on.

Cat Brother @229,

It’s completely normal that Closure didn’t know what to expect. She didn’t have to be insane to think her boyfriend came deliberately, she just had to be a fairly normal fourteen year old girl. You might think that degree of ignorance is unbelievable but most of the women commenters confidently assured you that it is highly plausible. Sex is emotionally charged and we don’t know how we’ll react. She felt assaulted and highly distressed. Totally within the range of normally expectable reactions. It doesn’t matter whether the boy did it on purpose, she felt the way she felt and it’s completely understandable. It’s too bad nobody told her at the time that it was a humiliating accident, and that she held on to her feeling of violation so tightly and for so long. But please, go back to the thread and find the comment where someone blamed the boy for it? I don’t think you’ll find it. There were a bunch of men faulting the then-fourteen-year-old-girl for her ignorance but I don’t recall anyone blaming the then-fourteen-year-old-boy for his ineptitude.

If you want to perseverate some more on Closure it would really help if you could find the comments where the boy is blamed.

JibeHo @228,

If you don’t think that women are better than men, what’s your issue with Eudaemonic?

You can't let assholery ruin your life. But you can't pretend it doesn't exist either.

If you believe it's unreasonable to expect your partner to appear to give equal consideration and effort to your own sexual pleasure they we won't agree on much. I think she was right to label that general behavior bad although it was incorrect to imply it was prosecutable or completely intentional.

Well, there’s a limerick about 12 posts back flatly stating that since he came, it’s abuse.
There was one poster, forgot who, whom, who compared her status to that of a pedestrian hit by a car, a lot, where it didn’t matter whether he meant it, so that goes in the Ritual Pollution file.
I believe that if you read my posts on the subject, you’ll see that it’s not that I don’t believe that LW didn’t know how boys’ plumbing works, I’m fully prepared to believe than any one person believes almost anything; man, I been reading this paper for awhile, and I’ve heard of people thinking they could catch an STD over the Internet. So no, her reaction didn’t shock me, same as if she’d been handed some grape’n’grain punch and thought that Jesus was mainlining into her cerebellum.
There’s a difference between ‘I believe she felt like that,’ and ‘it was perfectly normal for her to feel like that,’ and it has little to do with having read Kinsey cover to cover and being Facebook pals with Tristan Toramino. Not knowing in detail when young men might orgasm is different than being traumatized when they do in our vicinity. We understand why a used-tampon-grabbing Gypsy is upset, but we don’t extend his trauma to the public at large.
Most people did indeed excuse the boy, a handful of others used, ahem, weasel words, like ‘maybe/probably/likely’ he didn’t intend to come. I really gotta set myself a limit on pointing out how very unlikely it was that he did, but try this - do you think your dad likes getting kicked in the balls? Your brother? Your significant other? If not, then no, he didn’t.
If there’s one thing that posters on this, and associated threads, agree on, it’s that assholery exists. As do Komodo dragons.
I can point out a few people blaming the boy, can you point out anyone suggesting it’s OK to be sexually solipsistic? Ahh, but we’re back to ‘he did it on purpose, to get off,’ and I said I wasn’t getting off the boat.
Wait, that’s another one blaming the boy! Alisonnnn! I’m telling Mom!

Cat - I don't think that people are assholes intentionally. I think that may be our difference of opinion. Ignorance looks pretty normal on young kids but starts to look more dangerous on older adults. But I don't think that bad behavior is rooted in anything more than ignorance and defensiveness. Defensiveness, madness, anger or a need for change without a constructive outlet=asshole to me. If someone needs to resort to bad behavior to meet their needs, it's hard not to feel sorry for them. Unless they're harming me or my loved ones or mocking our values, in which case I get my own brand of defensiveness going. Sometimes it's assholish.

Or maybe 232 was unclear. It's ok to make mistakes. A responsible person cleans up their messes. He took that literally, when he should have shown that he valued her sexual enjoyment and showed some appreciation for her patience with his. She correctly picked up on his mistake, and incorrectly avoided the subject and it blew up into a big thing. Perhaps because people were denying that she deserved any better. She did (as long as she wasn't hiding a history of treating boyfriends disrespectfully). It's ok not to get what you deserve all the time, people make mistakes, accidents happen, and natural disasters, and life adapts to reality or ends. Except she wasn't adapting. I guess you're saying she's not normal, she's some freak, and I don't get that at all.

Cat@217; Yes. Be careful of the less than polite mob who roam these parts, ever now and again.
I find it disturbing that energies can get so nasty here.

Mr E @ 222; really WTF are you talking about?
Can't unsee what you've seen.
People are imperfect creatures. Male people Female people and Other people. All people.
You think I haven't seen, dysfunctional behaviour? In myself. In others.
I don't see any point though in getting stuck in a blame game. I'm sure my understandings over the yrs, I have got stuck in blame games.
Not any more.
Damage to humans occurs.. We all know that. Some humans become so damaged, they are not recognized as humans.
Then these damaged humans, damage other humans.
I've reared children, Mr E.
I've seen first hand, the effort of Love needed to rear children Well. So they have a good heart and a good sense of their responsibilities to themselves and the group.
Some, no many people are seriously neglected as children. Abused. Etc. These people grow up damaged. Distorted in their humanity.
We are all somewhere along the line. From health to damage.
One can keep moving towards healing. Towards health.
Or one can sit in one's pain.
We all have pain.

Alison @231 "If you don’t think that women are better than men, what’s your issue with Eudaemonic?"

I have a question for you. How does the fact that I don't like how Eudaemonic treats people who disagree with him on these threads make me a misandrist?

JibeHo @238:
You first.

The fact that Eud is male and I think he's a bully with misogynistic tendencies doesn't automatically translate into me thinking women are better than men.

Your turn.

Just for the record, this part is funny: "Frankly I don't read comments on other websites because no matter the subject, the haters and name callers and bullies always show up eventually to hijack the conversation..." coming from someone who admits to having shown up just to hijack the conversation.

It's cool of her to admit that, though. Yes, for the record, I've noticed the same trend--where the comment section here used to be 100% female-dominated, and now it's only about 95% man-hate-accepting. I see why the trend bothers you, given that you're used to an environment where there's total sympathy for women and none whatsoever for men, and how the presence of, what, four-ish? egalitarians seems like a threat.

But this is horseshit:
"For better or for worse we DO live in a world that has been primarily shaped my men."

Imagine if it was true. Hell, imagine if it was even possible, if men could shape the world the way they wanted it without regard for women's preferences: That could only happen if women were congenitally stupid, wouldn't it? A world shaped primarily by the whims of men is only possible in a universe where women are subhuman.

I think men and women are equal, obviously, so you're obviously wrong. If you think women are (or were?) really so stupid that men could wield all the power, I'm inclined to think you're speaking for yourself.

In your zeal to slander men, you're accidentally slandering women as well. This always happens, once slandering other people for being other becomes the sole priority--which you're kind enough to admit is the case for you--but wow. It's still really funny, in a terribly sad kind of way.

Alison - Eud's post @241 is case in point. His use of "stupid" is insidious. If I disagree with his premise, than that means I think women are stupid.

There's no where to take that conversation constructively.

Okay, JibeHo, let's pretend: How do you imagine men managed to control the world, for all time except the last 100 years?

Now Philo, you recall neither I nor anyone else called LW a 'freak,;' I believe she was called a 'misbegotten hellspawn whose very presence blots out the sun, and makes God turn his face from the human race. Fie, foul thing!' Or maybe that was SeattleBlues, I can't see a thing without my glasses.
It's a bit much to expect a 14-year old boy who just came in his pants to stay like that and get her off then, in fact why would he? They were just making out, it wasn't two adults together for sexual congress. If he'd stayed, and done his youthful/inexperienced best to start bringing her to orgasm (by humping her leg? Jamming his hand down her pants?)...well, picture the comments here yourself. I doubt there’d be many cheering his ‘sharing is caring’ spirit.

It blew up, in her mind, because of who she was, not because of other people, who correctly told her that it was, in fact, no big deal. Some people probably told that man in TX (whose boy was upset at not getting a truck for Christmas) that it was also not a big deal, are they responsible for Dad hitting him with a bat?
There are people in the world who are genuinely traumatized by the sight of, say, a woman traveling on the street alone with her face uncovered. I don't know that I'd call them 'freaks,' I do know they'll have a rough time in what we consider egalitarian society. Somewhere between jurisprudence and the 'reasonable person' standard, I wrote long ago.
I think Eud and JibeHo are having a coded conversation about the show 'V;' one of them has to be a lizard person. Did anyone watch the reboot? I only saw that beat 80's original with Freddy Kreuger as the innocent alien. Certainly, the influence of the Lizard-Aliens has grown in the last 100 years.

Eudaemonic - I have some trepidation but I'll bite.

My understanding is that before Christianity, women were worshipped right alongside men, so "for all time" is a stretch. Let's just say for most of recorded history. When Eve was created from Adam's rib and then proceeded to corrupt the poor innocent man in the Garden - the tone was pretty much set for the next 2,000 years...

I have a question for you. Without holding meaningful leadership positions in most Judeo-Christian denominations until recently (will there ever be a female pope?), without having the right to vote until 1920, without a woman on the Supreme Court until 1981, without a woman president, ever, how do YOU imagine that women managed to have an equal role in controlling the world? Just look at any history book taught in schools - the overwhelming majority of historical figures - figures that shaped our history - are men.

Disclaimer - I'm a recovering CPA - never took a women's studies class, never read any feminist literature. I did graduate high school the year Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court, had an awesome and brilliant mother, and have 3 incredible sisters. Oh, and I have almost as many awesome, caring, and loyal male friends as I do female friends.

CatBrother - Now I wish I'd seen V so I could let you know if I am, in fact, the lizard person in this conversation.

Just so you know, I think the girl in Closure has some serious issues. I also agree that there was not even a hint of assault in the boy's accidental discharge or his subsequent grope.

Cat,
If he'd stayed, and done his youthful/inexperienced best to start bringing her to orgasm (by humping her leg? Jamming his hand down her pants?)...well, picture the comments here yourself.
I'd picture them to be a whole lot more understanding than the ones in the 'Closure' thread.
In an adult relationship, I'd expect them to know that making out is sexual. If you want to keep your partner it's wise to be equally considerate toward your partner's sexual pleasure. You agreed with me when I spoke of a woman getting off on a guy's leg. That she should attempt to return the favor somehow. Why don't you think the same applies to a man? I know they were young and inexperienced but that doesn't mean you don't attempt to be considerate to your partner in whatever naive way you can... that's how you learn.

I think I published my opinion on the other debate going on a month or two ago. I think men have more energy and women are better at cooperating. Kinda boring conversation to me. But now shit I can't resist,

JibeHo - Do you find it difficult to believe, or difficult to care, that a woman can also be a misogynist bully?

JibeHo @245 “My understanding is that before Christianity, women were worshipped right alongside men.” So everywhere on the planet before 200CE, women and men took equal place in the pantheon. The monotheistic religions (zoroastrianism, judaism) had hermaphrodite gods. And after 200CE, all religions everywhere became male-only overnight. Is that it?

JibeHo @240,
You’re changing the subject and not addressing he question. Your issue was with Eudaemonic’s claim that half of the shittiest people on the planet are women. You think this claim is problematic; you also claim that women are not better than men. Unless you no longer think that’s a mistaken claim and you have changed your objection to one of tone?

The fact that you haven’t read any of the relevant literature shows. That’s cool. I’ll take that into consideration.

Philo, I think, given her reaction to his orgasming, if he’d done anything but leave the room, except perhaps apologizing profusely, things would’ve gotten worse.
This is based on her reaction to him just coming, period, it’s not like she wrote “...and there I was, soaking my panties, and the bastard ran off without getting me off! Dan, how can I prevent this in future?” She was traumatized by a guy coming in his pants, you think he could have gotten her off then?!
I agree that there’s nothing worse than one party getting off then rolling over, or running from the room. Some exceptions are given. He was embarrassed as shit, and just wanted a quick escape, he didn’t loll back and light a Camel.
Alison, are you flicking your tongue in and out rapidly as you type? Aha!

@245: I'm not asking you whether you think men control everything, since you've made it clear you do (and that for some reason Christianity magically compelled it to be so), I'm asking you how you imagine that happened.

I've agreed to play the game you're asking to play, but now you seem not to want to play any more. Why not? Why not just tell me how you think men accomplished the total conquest of womankind? It sounds difficult, and it sounds impossible if men and women are both human. If men aren't inherently superior to women, it's impossible for us to have done what you say we did. I'm pretty sure we aren't, and that therefore we didn't, but I'd love to hear your evidence.

Instead, you want to play a different game: "how do YOU imagine that women managed to have an equal role in controlling the world?"

Fine, I'll play this one for a moment, though I still want you to tell me how men compelled women to let us control everything, and why we no longer possess that magical power. Anyway. Imagine if women are men's equals. That would mean that either women didn't want to control the world, or that control of the world is not so simple as you're claiming, and men didn't actually control it.

I think that's the world we live in.

For this not to be true, women would either have to be subhuman--since if women aren't clearly men's inferiors, it's impossible for men to control them to the extent you're pretending we did--or you're claiming that men's slight edge in upper-body strength lets us run everything, even though you've presumably noticed that the grizzly bear is not the master of planet Earth.

So, you're either claiming that men possess mysterious superpowers (or that women are subhuman), or you're admitting that you're wrong about everything, or... what?

I reject the first answer, because it's obviously bullshit. If you're claiming that you're inherently inferior to men, such that a man can control you completely, I'll accept that. For all I know, that much is true. If you're claiming that this is true of women in general, though I won't accept that, because I'm aware that women are people and men are people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdpxmLjh…

@249: "Alison, are you flicking your tongue in and out rapidly as you type? Aha!"

Wait, are you saying Alison is Serpentor or something? I guess our Cobra brethren really are everywhere.

Alison,

If I didn't have a business to run I'd respond to your incredibly condescending post now. But since I do need to make a living, I'll have to put off responding to you until I have the time to unpack all of the incredible wisdom and insight you so thoughtfully shared.

BTW, @240 I was responding to your direct question, which apparently you didn't have time to formulate as clearly as my inferior pea brain requires. @231 you asked me: "If you don’t think that women are better than men, what’s your issue with Eudaemonic?" I now understand that your question actually was: "what's your issue with Eudaemonic's assertion that women are half of the shittiest people on the planet". Not having read all of the relevant literature, I hope you'll forgive me for answering the wrong question.

I also hope that Eudaemonic will forgive me for hijacking this thread by responding to something he said, on this thread (go figure!), and calling him out on his null hypothesis re: gender shittiness which must be true because I don't have measurable and quantifiable data on degree of gender shittiness to cite.

@249 Philo, I think, given her reaction to his orgasming, if he’d done anything but leave the room, except perhaps apologizing profusely, things would’ve gotten worse.
You could think of attempting reciprocation as an apology but I think of it as valuing cooperation or fair trade or something. She did say she wanted an apology but we have different interpretations of what he would be apologizing for. I think her feelings were hurt by the lack of consideration, I guess you think her feelings were hurt because she's irrational or she just wants an apology to be spiteful. It's ok that we disagree.

Eud, I really do need to work, so I'll make this short. Slight advantage in upper body strength? I can't even take that seriously.

You said "If men aren't inherently superior to women, it's impossible for us to have done what you say we did" I guess what you're saying then is that the women and girls being routinely kidnapped (right fucking NOW) by ISIS and Boko Haram to be sex slaves are inherently inferior because they are letting this happen to them. I'm sorry, but that is complete and utter bullshit.

You also said "I've agreed to play the game you're asking to play..." Correction. I have gone to great lengths not to address you directly and I certainly don't want to play any of your games. YOU were the one who asked me a question. In a moment of stupidity I took the bait. Big mistake. I'm done.

I have the perfect reparte
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qa28ZrH…

There's just one thing that's getting in the way
When we go up to bed, you're just no good, it's such a shame
I look into your eyes, I want to get to know you
And then you make this noise and it's apparent it's all over

It's not fair and I think you're really mean
I think you're really mean, I think you're really mean
Oh, you're supposed to care
But you never make me scream, you never make me scream

JibeHo, I have to ask, what is the origin of your handle? Are you a fiend for turning a ship’s boom over? “Oh man, don’t let her at the rudder, that chick’s a total Jibe ho.” All I could think of.

Cat Brother - I have a 29 foot Cal sailboat on the Chesapeake Bay. Her name is NautiCal. Get it?

You live in DC or MD? I lived on Capitol Hill thru most of the 90’s.
Alison, we now have to see if your eyes glow red in the dark. Cobra Commander, lizard-V-people....it’s all coming together.

Annandale Virginia actually. Grew up in McLean. Returned to the area 15 years ago after wandering through Florida Texas and California.

I grew up in McLean too, was a Highlander, class of ’84. Sure wish I’d bought a couple acres of land on 23...
Wait, this is just how the lizard-people would get to me...

This isn’t Liz Cheney, is it? ‘Cause if it is, go back to squatting out west or some shit.

Hoorah for Highlanders! Suck it Langley!!!

So you were a freshman when I was a senior!

I lived on Courser Ct. Where did you live?

BTW, if I know, I'm gonna freak the "%^# out!

I had a go kart. Lots of Mcleanites know me for that.

Great Falls St.. Had a sister named Amy, would have been in your class, or maybe one behind. Last name starts with C.
Damn, this is like one of those spy movies where it turns out they both came up in the KGB.

To add a bit of oddness, my father has a tiny dock on the Chesapeake Bay, although I've never lived in MD.

I believe the evidence of (now revealed to be amphibious) space-Komodos, hinted at in ‘V,’ is too strong to ignore. Sorry they got to your father, Philo.
Jho, think me old yearbooks are up in the attic. I thought the ones for my years, like my years there (except for the Drama Department), pretty much sucked. I liked one from a few years before me, swiped a copy, have to see if you’re in there, whomever you are.

Yo, Ho, ‘fess up. Who the hell are you? Do you have a sister/are you named Laurel/Lauren?
Found that yearbook, btw. It’s from ’78. Presume you’re not in it.

Cat - I'm on page 166 of the 1981 Clan. The Clan took a wrong turn the year I graduated. If I'm right about who you are, I think your sister might have had a hand in that :) We were members at Tuckahoe. My sister was there all the time - she is a dwarf. You may remember her?

I had three sisters. They all graduated before me. One in '76, one in '77, and one in '79. i'm in the '78 yearbook - page 186. Why would you have a yearbook from 1978 if you didn't graduate until '84?

Remember Tuckahoe, Mom and especially my dad were big tennis deals there.
According to me sister, that year at the Clan, there was an influx of people wanting to be associated with the yearbook but not actually do anything, which had the real workers shrink the 'yearbook staff' pic down to almost nothing. That woman in charge was a nasty piece of work, too.
I got the yearbook because I really liked it, used to come in that yearbook room off the cafeteria all the time to read it, then noticed they had a bunch, one day said fuck it and swiped one.
Parsing the old Clan....drawing a blank. THought you might be a Kelleher, or one of the Ehats. Most especially the dreaded Lulu Ehat, who apparently put out some pheremone that made her irresistable, my buddy Bob said he was ready to marry her after working some event with her for an hour or two....Think she won Most Outgoing, with David Parchen...no, that was Sara Pappas.

Holy shit!

Eudaemonic got brave and talked of so many ignorant beliefs, I wonder if he will do the adult thing and admit which ones were fatally flawed.

If he seriously cannot see how this world was most definitely a "man's world" and that that power has only recently been begun to be taken away from the gender, he is either a liar/manipulator or a liar/manipulator, or whatever word he would use to describe his denial or whatever caused him to intentionally stop short in his mind's evaluation of whether or not this earth was a man's world.

and conveniently stopping short at a spot where he did, he cannot not be aware of

What a bullshit excuse that if someone cannot describe the exact means of how the male gender accomplished it, then it didn't happen. Complete and utter bullshit, the crime took place, and unsolved crimes do not magically erase the fact that a crime took place

How'd they do it?

By not respected the rights of others simply because they didn't have to. By physically overpowering the individuals who opposed them and using the fear of that beatdown to control all others who would outspokenly oppose them, and after initial fear their control was maintained simply by restricting access to the truth, preventing education and knowledge (both of the Truth and the Selves of Women and Non-caucasians) and kept those requirements in place until they could no longer continue their crime against humanity

The rights of women and non-caucasians were never granted simply because the legality of the males fatally flawed logical recognition of the Truth was brought to their attention, it was deny, deny, deny, lie , lie , lie, physically defend your crime by calling it a right and only cough up what has been wrongfully withheld when you are overpowered by The People.

Not respecting rights (as privileges afforded by law as well as access to Truth) for no other reason than simply because you don't have to, is the way of male, it's a rape mentality

The opposite being to respect the rights, privileges and personal private space of individuals simply because it is the right thing to do

on a different not Eud,

Do you what Love is Eudaemonic?

I cannot get over your statement of

"...If someone's hurting you because hurting you gets her what she wants--if she can always win arguments by being cruel, and so can always get her way by starting an argument--then it's not irrational behavior on her part, and it's not really even sadistic..."

If it isn't, it is certainly choosing to be ignorant of the behavior, and if a person chooses to remain ignorant to the Truth behind their abusive or manipulative behavior, they are not capable of participating in healthy romantic relationships because those relationships require honesty

To know the Truth, you first have to realize that honesty is a practice, it's not convenient, it's not pleasant, and many are of the opinion that you should eat, drink, and be merry, honesty is simply a choice.

It isn't, and because we are such emotional beings, it takes a great deal of self-reflection in order to be honest with yourself, and the person who you described as "not irrational" and "not really even sadistic" is failing to be honest with herself

either that or the person understands love to be nothing more than game, one where dishonesty and manipulation as well as not giving a shit about keeping your word with others is all well within the acceptable behavior, so long as you win the game, and only the losers should have to be held responsible.

Pssst, Eud, just stay on the thread where the girl sniffs the guy's hands for lube evidence. It was just calming down around here.

Cat - Look for the goofiest looking chick on my page from the 1978 Clan and you'll know who I am :) I thought maybe you knew my sister because you were quoted (twice!) in the 1981 yearbook where you mentioned you worked at Tuckahoe.

First name?

Diana. Worst picture ever.

Well. Who photographs well at that age? Certainly not me. At the time, I was the Intercontinental Belt-Holding Skinny Dork Champeen, so won’t be casting any aspersions.
Tuckahoe...ugh. Scrubbing toilets while trying to figure Life out, a part of my life I like to skim over.

There are so many things Eudaemonic said that I wanted to respond to, but after trying to draft a comprehensive response, I realized that my post would be staggeringly long. So, after much consideration I’ve decided to only focus on two of his comments here.

The first:

Eudaemonic @161 “If someone's hurting you because hurting you gets her what she wants--if she can always win arguments by being cruel, and so can always get her way by starting an argument--then it's not irrational behavior on her part, and it's not really even sadistic.

And if a person is less likely to be confronted about cruelty just because of their innate characteristics, they're more likely to be cruel--people tend to use the licenses they're given.”

I find this very interesting. I’m going to change just a few of Eud’s words - just to see what happens:

If someone’s hurting you because hurting you gets him what he wants – if he can always win arguments by being physically abusive, and so can always get his way by starting a physical altercation – then it’s not irrational behavior on his part, and it’s not really even sadistic.

And if a person is less likely to be confronted about physical abuse just because of their innate characteristics, they’re more likely to be physically abusive – people tend to use the licenses they’re given.

One of men’s innate characteristics is that the average man is larger and more powerful than the average woman. According to the CDC, men are, on average, 5 ½ inches taller and 30 pounds heavier than women. Another of men’s innate characteristics is a much higher level of testosterone. Men have between 4 and 70 times the level of women. If we’re going to call a characteristic innate, I would posit that biology is about as innate as you can get.

So, by Eud’s logic, because men are innately more aggressive (due to higher testosterone levels) and because they generally have an appreciable size and strength advantage over women, men will be more likely to sexually assault and physically abuse women. Since “people tend to use the licenses they’re given”. That’s just logic people. Although I still have a hard time making a connection between women and cruelty - something something ipso facto innate characteristics?

The second thing Eud said was in response to something I said @188:

@214 “@JibeHo: "My hope is that the trend reverses and we all end up in a more civilized (dare I say, feminine) place..."

For the record, this is exactly how the Klan talks about black people. You're a bigot.

For everyone else: As an illustration of my point, look at how JibeHo gets treated, and consider what would happen if a man ever said something nearly as bigoted as JibeHo does. Now, see how no man here does that? That's what it looks like when one gender is forced to act nice, and the other one gets free reign to act like a piece of shit.”

I’m curious. How, exactly, are men “forced to act nice”? This statement seems of a piece with Eudaemonic’s many and various assertions that men are put into boxes and not allowed to have emotions. From this I guess it follows that men are therefore somehow forced to act nice to women? This seems like the perfect place to quote Eud one more time:

@221 “219 makes it really clear that JibeHo also doesn't think women are people.

They are. The things humanity does? Women are responsible for 50% of it; for it to be otherwise, women would have to be shockingly useless relative to men--for men to be solely in charge of the planet, women would have to be (and to always have been) incredibly stupid. I think women are people, and thus not any more useless than any other kind of people.”

Let me show Eud a mirror one more time…

Eudaemonic makes it really clear that he doesn’t think men are people. They are. The things humanity does? Men are responsible for 50% of it; for it to be otherwise, men would have to be shockingly useless relative to women – for women to be solely in charge of human feelings and emotions, men would have to be (and to always have been) incredibly stupid. I think men are people, and thus are not any more incapable of feeling emotions than any other kind of people.

Perhaps at a later date we can discuss how men managed to control most levers of power in the industrialized nations until recently, and how they continue to maintain that control in much of the rest of the world even today. Alison should be relieved to know that I’ve done a lot of reading in the last week on this very subject.

JibeHo: Perhaps at a later date we can discuss how men managed to control most levers of power in the industrialized nations until recently...

No. You claim that they did. This seems impossible. I asked you how we managed to do that, and you're avoiding answering. Because, I suspect, on some level you know it's impossible for your beliefs to be true, and are trying to avoid looking at that fact head on.

For the record, everything else you've said is false; the one claiming that only one gender is responsible for the actions of all of humanity is you.

I know that's absurd; that's why I'm asking you why you are making it. Pointing out that the statement is absurd is not addressing the question of why you believe something absurd.

I’m curious. How, exactly, are men “forced to act nice”?

There's a thing called human civilization. Are you now claiming not to be aware of it? That claim seems absurd, but it seems no more absurd or dishonest than anything else you've said.

"Although I still have a hard time making a connection between women and cruelty - something something ipso facto innate characteristics?"

I do believe that you're having a hard time to make the connection, since you don't seem to be all that bright. When a man exhibits cruelty, he gets confronted for it. When a woman exhibits cruelty, she doesn't get confronted for it. That means women have a license, and men do not. Your attempt to pretend that biology has anything to do with it has been noted, and I'm ignoring it because it's stupid. This was pointed out earlier; apparently you missed it, since you do seem to miss things a lot.

Either that, or you're just pretending to have missed it. I'm not sure which hypothesis seems more plausible, at this point, but the fact that you admit to being here only to maintain discursive hegemony is telling.

This thing you're doing? You should stop doing it. It's not something a decent human being would be doing. Stop doing it, and become a better person. It will be easier than you think.

I give up. You're obviously just a troll not interested in having an actual conversation. Have a nice time in your echo chamber.

Here's a link to some websites you might enjoy http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/in…

Enjoy. I'm done.

@281: GIven that you admitted that your only purpose here is to engage in gender-role-policing in order to maintain the walls of an echo chamber, you're unintentionally hilarious.

The only thing I "admitted" to was that I'm sick and tired of your gender-role-policing and that someone needs to counter your misogynistic bullshit.

I'll just take a page from your book and stoop to your level: Your're a subhuman stupid lying bigot.

With all due respect i want to thank Dr. Okika for bringing joy and happiness to my relationship and my family. I want to inform you all that there is a spell caster that is real and genuine. I never believed in any of these things until i loosed my boyfriend, I required help until i found okikaspelltemple@gmail.com A great spell caster, And he cast a love spell for me, and he assured me that I will get my boyfriend back in just 24hours after the spell has been cast. 24hours later, my phone rang, and so shockingly, it was my boyfriend who has not called me for past 2 years now, and made an apology for the heart break, and told me that he is ready to be my back bone till the rest of his life with me. DR. OKIKA released him, to know how much i loved and wanted him. And He also opened his eyes to picture how much love we have share together. As I am writing this testimony right now i am the most happiest girl on earth and me and my fiance is living a happy life and our love is now stronger than how it were even before our break up. So that is why I promised to share my testimony all over the universe. All thanks goes to DR.OKIKA for the excessive work that he has done for me. Here is his email address OKIKASPELLTEMPLE@GMAIL.COM or OKIKASPELLTEMPLE@YAHOO.COM or you can call him through his private number +2348134367919.