My 13-year-old son came out to us this morning. He plans to tell his brothers in the next few days. We love and accept our son, and this news isn’t surprising (but when will the stereotypical neatness kick in?), but we do have some concerns. He has, apparently, already made the news public at school. Any pointers you can give? We want to make sure he knows that we love him and don’t care about his sexuality, while at the same time preparing him to deal with those people who do. Also, any advice you can give for when he starts dating would be appreciated.
Dad Seeks Support
“On behalf of advocates for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth everywhere, let me be the first to say ‘thank you,'” says Eliza Byard, executive director of GLSEN (www.glsen.org), the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, which works to create safe school environments for LGBT—and straight—youth. “Simply by giving your son your love and support, you have already significantly increased his chances of living a happy and fulfilling life. The importance of an accepting home cannot be overstated.” (The damage that can be done by a hostile family also cannot be overstated: LGBT youth whose families are hostile are eight times likelier to commit suicide than their straight peers. Hostile parents can’t make their gay kids straight, but they can make them dead.)
“The bad news is that school can be a miserable place for LGBT youth,” says Byard. “GLSEN’s 2009 National School Climate Survey found that nearly 9 out of 10 LGBT teens experienced harassment in school in the past year. The good news is that engaged parents can make a huge difference.”
So, DSS, while it’s admirable that you want your son to understand that you “don’t care about his sexuality,” you also have to make your son understand that you care about him and that you’re aware of the challenges he faces.
“Talk to your son and learn more about his school and his experiences there since coming out,” advises Byard. “What kind of response has he received? What supports are in place for him at school? Does the school have a Gay-Straight Alliance? Do students have access to LGBT-affirming resources in the library? Does the school have policies that address bullying? Are there adults in the school community whom he trusts and feels are supportive?”
Call your son’s school, DSS, and set up a meeting. Making sure his teachers and school administrators know that you’re on your son’s side—and they know you intend to hold them accountable—can go a long way toward creating a safe environment for your son at school.
“Send a GLSEN Safe Space Kit (www.safespacekit.com) to your son’s school to give educators the tools they need to provide support and create a safe space in their classroom for your son,” advises Byard. “Visible signs of support, such as a GLSEN Safe Space sticker on a door, can fundamentally alter the school experience of an LGBT youth by helping them identify those adults in the community who are supportive.”
As for dating and sex…
“Treat your son with the same awkwardness you would your other kids,” says Byard. “I’m speaking as a mom myself now. Make sure he has access to all the health and safety information he needs. (Sitting down to watch reruns of Will & Grace together won’t cut it.) I have two daughters and want to be absolutely sure they have access to all the information they need to make smart and healthy—and potentially life-saving!—decisions. Make yourself available to talk whenever he needs and welcome his boyfriends inside the house the same way you would if they were girlfriends.”
I’m into BDSM and my safe word is “safe word.” It’s short, memorable, and unmistakable in its intent. Someone recently told me that “any serious BDSM player” would laugh me out of the community if I used that. Is she right? Is she just being a dickhead? Should I have to say something silly like “grapefruit” in order to get my point across?
Grapefruits Aren’t Good
I may not be the best person to adjudicate this dispute, GAG, as my safe word is “popcorn.” (And, yes, I cross my arms over my chest when I use it, as demonstrated here: tinyurl.com/safewordpopcorn.) But in my opinion, the woman who informed you that you would be laughed out of “the community” for your choice of safe word is being a huge dickhead. In fact, it sounds like she has a bad case of You’re Doing It Wrong.
YDIW is a social-skills disorder that members of the BDSM community are at particular risk of acquiring. (Others at heightened risk: religious conservatives, sports fans, advice columnists.) BDSMers with YDIW feel they have a right to inform other BDSMers that they’re doing it wrong—whatever it might be—even if the “it” being done wrong poses no risk to the YDIW sufferer or anyone else.
BDSM players should speak up, of course, when they witness other BDSMers doing something dangerously wrong. BDSMers who observe dangerous or nonconsensual play at public parties have a responsibility to speak the fuck up before someone is seriously injured. The secondary, tertiary, and quaternary goals of creating a BDSM community were the sharing of skills, the promotion of good play practices, and the holding of dangerous or malicious players to account, respectively. (The primary goal? Getting BDSMers laid.) But some BDSMers confuse a responsibility to speak up when they witness dangerous play for an invitation to critique other people’s kinks, sexual interests, preferred fetish roles, safe words, etc.
YDIW in BDSMers—and social conservatives—can be treated and cured through the application of “NO ONE GIVES A FUCK WHAT YOU THINK, ASSHOLE.” It should be applied liberally whenever YDIW flares up.
I enjoyed your pieces and posts about monogamish couples. However, it’s time for a Savage Love column or two dedicated to people who are in successful monogamous relationships! I have been with my partner for 10 years. Sure, we’ll both flirt with a cute waiter and dance with hot guys at gay clubs, but we always go home together. It pisses me off when people assume that, because we are gay, we’re having sex with every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
Couple Of Compatible Keepers
That’s a wonderful idea, COCK.
People in successful, long-term monogamous relationships—even those of you who aren’t but think you are—are invited to send in their stories. Letters from monogamous sufferers of YDIW will not make it into the column, however. If you can’t write about your monogamous relationship without disparaging those in nonmonogamous or monogamish relationships then, um, you’re doing it wrong. (I told you advice columnists were at heightened risk of YDIW.) Tell us why monogamy works for you, how you’ve made it work, and what the upsides are. But please refrain from telling everyone who isn’t doing it the way you do it that they’re doing it wrong. That’s my job.
CONFIDENTIAL TO CANADA’S UNKNOWN LAWYER: Next time there’s a legal hiccup in the fair application of Canada’s marriage laws where same-sex couple are concerned, let’s err on the side of not declaring thousands of same-sex marriages—mine included—to be “invalid,” shall we? Let’s skip the shitstorm next time and jump right to the fair and just resolution.
Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.
@fakedansavage on Twitter
Ms Driasis – Personal taste is personal taste, but shouldn’t DTMFA require a real MF, not just some vague failure to meet a possibly unclear standard? And “lame”? That’s just nasty. Dislike qualities you dislike by all means, but please don’t get sucked into belittlement by Dump Culture.
@205
I’m sure you can tell the difference between a somewhat facetious SL post and how I would dump someone in real life?
How a person feels is how they feel. I consider ‘lame’ to be a pretty mild expression of dislike. It’s nowhere near say, ‘pathetic’ in terms of insulting.
Do you really consider it to be that offensive?
@203 mydriasis,
“…some women find your behavior unmasculine…”
Heh, the problem answering that kind of question depends upon when you asked it. For the sake of posterity, the summer before my freshman year I tried out for the junior Olympics on a team sport. From the time I started my freshman year till my junior winter I continued in that sport, but dropped it because my study load was getting even more insane than I could handle. At different points in time I would do things like a couple of hundred pushups and incline board sit-ups a day (in the off season), and a 10 mile run. Physically I was a 5% body fat jock, mentally I was a hard core science student attempting a minor in a European language. I also went to college with my girlfriend, but in hindsight my emotional maturity was pathetic (or pretty standard for a male under the age of 21). I was 6′ 1″ and about 175lbs. I also goofed around with the martial arts. I even had a roommate that got me into wearing a blazer and a tie on days when it wouldn’t get me killed going into the lab. So, by most standards I was rather masculine. I was also raised to be extremely polite and careful with my language. In essence I was someone that “just didn’t fit” into the kind of quick categories that pass for standards in a frat house keg party. But I was getting laid anyway, so there wasn’t any problem. I just find it unfair to categorize my girlfriend as being unfeminine for pursuing (and nailing) me. Or the one after that. Or the one after that.
I’m just being cranky at stereotypes that never really made any sense, and cost me chances to have a pleasant conversation when people found out my major. I merely seek to lower barriers for the other nerds who aren’t quite as fortunate.
Sorry for rambling.
Peace.
@207, I think it’s just about style. Sounds like your style is laid-back / polite gentleman. Whereas mydriasis (I think) likes to be ravished. (Apologies if I’m getting that wrong.)
You’re not less masculine than anyone else; there are many different ways of being masculine — thank god!
Which is, I think, what mydriasis was saying @203.
@207
You might be surprised at how similar my personal experience of not-quite-fitting-a-catagory is to yours. I could elaborate if you’re interested.
Give those ex-girlfriends some credit. I’m sure they’re self-assured enough to not be offended by the psuedo-implication that they’re unfeminine for pursuing you.
There’s oodles of guys that love sexually forward women. I wouldn’t touch them. But they certainly exist in droves. That’s the beauty of diversity: women who some might catagorize as “unfeminine” (although I didn’t) are a veritable wet dream for others.
But you can’t ever make everyone appealing to everyone. So what exactly are you seeking to change?
@208
If only I was as good at getting your points as you were at getting mine 😉
@209: “Give those ex-girlfriends some credit. I’m sure they’re self-assured enough to not be offended by the psuedo-implication that they’re unfeminine for pursuing you.”
It isn’t even a pseudo-implication when they are actively engaged. They are just doing what they do, and hopefully enjoying it. It isn’t anything until some other person opens their mouth and tries to slap the pseudo-implication on them in the form of a pseudo-derogatory label.
“There’s oodles of guys that love sexually forward women. I wouldn’t touch them. But they certainly exist in droves. That’s the beauty of diversity: women who some might catagorize as “unfeminine” (although I didn’t) are a veritable wet dream for others.”
That’s good, you are getting it, mostly. Everything except the labeling thing.
“But you can’t ever make everyone appealing to everyone. So what exactly are you seeking to change?”
Perhaps a recognition that terms like “unmasculine” by their very construction imply some sort of universal categorical standard, in a way that they have no business being. And they are offensive because they implicitly weigh the other person, measure him, and find him wanting, in ways that they have no business doing. As you yourself have demonstrated, your definition of “unmasculine” can be diametrically opposed to your friends’ definition. Two people applying the same label to two opposite sets of characteristics pretty clearly indicates that the label itself is nonsensical.
In other words, have the good sense to stick to describing your own likes and dislikes as something you own, rather than projecting them onto the other person as some sort of failure on their part to meet a standard which has already been shown to be anything but standard.
@16: Great article on what happens when things go wrong in a BDSM scene:
http://sexgeek.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/…
@203: I think you’re confusing masculinity with preferences. Just because someone cares more or less about a feature such as hair, demeanor, dominance, or whatever, that doesn’t make it more or less masculine.
@211 avast,
Thank you for so eloquently expressing what I meant. Labeling never seemed to be able to catch the nuances of a person, and couldn’t convey the intricacies that (to me) make everyone unique in their own right (well duh, right?!). You know, the parts that make them interesting?
@209 mydriasis,
I would very much like to read about your uniqueness. As, I am sure, would others.
(Getting on my soapbox mode). Labels suck because they can be misapplied, misleading, and downright cruel. I have been fortunate that I wasn’t attacked by a fellow student once when I parroted a label about a young woman that turned out to be his girlfriend. In some ways I wish he had, to assuage my shame. in the hands of some they can become tools of oppression (cough *Santorum*) (wimp, fag, n*****, liberal). They can also become sources of pride when their meanings are highjacked (nerd, slutwalk). To go back to the original theme of this thread, I would raise my child to understand the complexity of the world, and the loss of opportunity represented by oversimplification (a thoroughly un-American stance, to be sure).
So: Back off man, I’m a Scientist!
Ms Driasis – Sorry, but I really have it in for Dump Culture. And this is no reflection on what you like or dislike. I could refer you to a large group of women who would think that, “he automatically TAKES the metaphorical driver’s seat” qualifies as the MF in DTMFA.
I’ll concede that perhaps I’ve been spending too much time in places where “lame” would meet with requests not to be ableist. I can’t think of anyone objecting to “pathetic”.
Had you invoked LMB for those particular examples, I shouldn’t have blinked at it; you just seemed to be drawing progressively nearer to giving the impression of someone who took her style of expressing standards from Sandi Griffin of the Lawndale High Fashion Club. I should present that a breakup over what someone CAN’T do ought not to rise to DUMP standards, and that a dump of that nature should require at least something someone WON’T do (not that all won’ts necessarily merit a DTMFA or even a dump).
I shall spare the assembled company my usual references (“Problem at Sea” for the subtleties of the difference between CAN’T and WON’T, and *To Play the King* for why the difference between breaking up and dumping matters).
@179 (mydriasis), personal experience, plus listening to women and men talk about incidents in their lives. Happened to me more than a couple of times.
If you don’t do it — more power to you. I wished a couple of the women I didn’t (or eventually did) sleep with thought as you do.
To say nothing of what (some) other guys will say to or about you if they know you didn’t realize she “really wanted it” despite her ‘no’s.
@182(EricaP), I’m sorry if my comments rubbed you the wrong way. I stand by them, though. I’m talking from personal experience, from hearing what women told me later on they wished I had done. (And I’ll gladly ask the other guys here — has it never happened to you that a woman was displeased with the fact that you didn’t realize her ‘no’ was not meant to stop you? Or, if not the woman herself, then someone else, who you told this story to?)
You’re implying a lot of communication in your world, which is good. You’re implying partners who are open and talk a lot about sex, and who aren’t afraid of it in any way, which is good. In your world, people are indeed like that, and they should be, because things would indeed be much better if communication always worked and people really felt they could be aggressive (but responsive to others’ reaction to that aggressiveness) or not, and also say “no” or “yes” as the case may be, without this sounding like “confirmation” of some stereotype or other that others around them might have.
It’s indeed a great world, and I have good hopes that we are going in this direction. Hopefully the stereotypes will be abandoned.
Meanwhile, I don’t think I’m as much obsessed with fairness as reacting to personal experience. Just as I suppose you are.
We both want people to communicate better and to assume less qua cultural stereotypes about each other. I think we can both agree that this is what both our comments above are heading to.
@178 (Thomas):
I’m sorry you have suffered so, and hope you can find happiness. There’s still a lot of life ahead of you.
I’m glad several of the comments above mention various ways of being manly, various concepts of masculinity, and various different tastes.
I’ll merely add that we’re still often dealing with stereotypes (among which that it is ‘manly’ to ravish the girl even when she ‘says’ she doesn’t want it). This seems to be changing, but it’s not gone yet. I’m glad you didn’t have to deal with it in your personal lives, but I did. From the other side of it, that is. And that is sad.
Peace.
ankylosaur, have you watched this Louis CK video? (It’s short, just 1:42)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZ…
Sure, some people prefer that guys push past the no, and force sex on resisting women. That’s rape, unless it was negotiated. And those people are idiots.
@182 I meant that you wouldn’t earn the scorn of anyone who wasn’t a fucking idiot.
@219, Also, I don’t like this:
“even when she ‘says’ she doesn’t want it”
If she says she doesn’t want it, then that’s what she said. She may be lying, but if she said no, please don’t write that she “said” no.
@217 “You’re implying a lot of communication in your world, which is good. You’re implying partners who are open and talk a lot about sex, and who aren’t afraid of it in any way, which is good.”
No. No. No. I live in the real world. Not everyone is good at communicating. But just as we can hold people accountable for breaking the law, for violently holding someone down and raping them, it is also possible to use peer pressure to hold people accountable for being creeps. (And hold people accountable for pressuring men to rape them without negotiation, as in the Louis CK video).
@220: perfect link.
Okay! First things are first…
@avast
I urge you to follow the chain of comments I made before that one. It’s exhausting and tedious for both the reader and writer to adress those points every single time I make mention of concepts of masculinity and femininity. I made them at the outset and it’s fair for the reader to assume that I haven’t forgotten them since. :p
If you want my opinion on gender roles and “maculinity/femininitiy” here it is (if not, skip ahead)
Many years ago, people who were left handed were considered deficient. They were forced to learn how to write with their right hand. They were punished for using their left hand. There were also many negative attributes given to lefties, that we would laugh at now.
How did we fix this?
Did we force everyone to become ambidextrous? Did we deny that handedness existed? No. We allowed people to follow the method that suited them, we made some left handed scissors, and we got on with our lives. Is it harder to be a lefty? Yes, it still is. But only slightly. And no one is thought to be “sinister” because they write with the left hand.
This is my dream for gender roles. Not to deny they exist, not to force everyone to be genderless, to accept that there may be certain tendencies/majorities, but to ascribe no negativity to being ‘unmasculine’ or ‘feminine’. Is that an inherently negative term? I don’t believe it has to be. Gay rights have taken a similar tact. No one’s denying that heterosexuality is the (statistical) norm. No one is denying that sexual orientation exists. People are just trying to make it easier and more acceptable not to be the ‘norm’.
But if you look at how people approach gender issues it’s wildly different.
If you want to get into a sociological discussion suggesting that genders are exactly the same and all concepts of masculinity and femininity are imposed on us, I’m not interested. Here’s why
a. I don’t believe it’s true and the science doesn’t really support it.
b. Though a more toned down version of it may be true, it’s still not relevant to the point. Perhaps under different societal conditions, homosexuality becomes much much more common. Does that make homosexuality more or less valid? No, of course not. It’s inherently valid, unique from it’s commonality or origin – whether it’s genetically or societally induced is irrelevant.
Finally, in the example I give, they are opposed, yes – that’s the point. Just because a concept is subjective and complex doesn’t mean we should stop describing it or taking away words to describe it. If I call something beautiful and you call it ugly – should we give up on the ideas all together?
But let me be clear: beauty is a value-laden concept… gender need not be.
@213
I think you misunderstood my point. My post here is already getting exceedingly long so maybe could you reread what I wrote?
@214
See above for my opinion on labelling and masculinity/femininity. More on the personal application below.
Growing up, I was what I could refer to as “left handed” in terms of gender. Back in the old days we used to call that a “tomboy”. Never once did that bother me. I wasn’t raised to think that being “girly” was better or that being “boyish” was negative – but kids aren’t stupid – I was vaguely aware that I was “supposed” to be playing with dolls (never owned a barbie) instead of legos. Here’s the thing: I didn’t care. Not to harp on it, but shouldn’t that be the salient goal?
One time in conversation with a good friend, we noted that bright people typically are less “girly” if they’re women and “manly” if they’re men. Smart women are (typically) less interested in chick flicks and Cosmo, and smart men are (typically) less interested in crushing beer cans on their heads and sports.
Because this is SL, I’ll say it again: see how I said typically? That means that a trend appears to exist. It is not a denial of exceptions. See how tedious that is to do every time?
Labels are tricky. During my university career my first part time job was as a barista at a hipster restaurant. The people there were shocked to learn that I was studying neuro at my school – they assumed I went to art school, based on the way I looked/dressed/acted and the music I like. Now I work at a sports bar that’s fairly well known for skimpy uniforms. You can imagine the surprise I get when customers want to know what I’m in school for. People who know me as a “student/intellectual” are surprised when I make references to the days before I started at college. I was a total delinquent (I’ve gone into it here one time), I was fairly well aquainted with the drug trade as well as other gang-related activity, I was a big hedonist, mildly OD’d a couple of times although bedhopping was really my extracurricular of choice. Doesn’t line up with “mild mannered girl who stays in studying at night” they know today.
The fact that labels aren’t all-encompassing is what makes them fun. I like defying labels. Would you want a word that described you flawlessly?
I’m going to put racial slurs aside because I don’t see those as similar to “labels” personally. If anyone wants to try to argue that “masculine” or “unmasculine” is as offensive as the n word don’t even bother, because I won’t even entertain that.
But in terms of words like ‘slut’, ‘nerd’, ‘liberal’, ‘intellectual’: the mind works by catagorizing. We can try fighting that – but good luck. I think a less futile and equally helpful goal would be to take the negativity out of labels and understand that they aren’t all encompassing, it’s been done successfully in the past.
You see, that’s the point: often otherwise good men will push beyond polite levels (see mydriasis above) not because they have a sense of self-entitlement and think sex is always theirs for the taking, but because they’ve had the experience of being mocked — sometimes by the very woman who they were respecting — for being ‘too respectful.’
Yes, exactly what ankylosaur said. God, I wish more women would understand this.
It’s essentially women internalizing patriarchical standards of male aggression and masculinity — if a guy is too ‘respectful’ he’s not masculine enough and therefore not attractive or worthy.
@ Ven
“Ms Driasis – Sorry, but I really have it in for Dump Culture. And this is no reflection on what you like or dislike. I could refer you to a large group of women who would think that, “he automatically TAKES the metaphorical driver’s seat” qualifies as the MF in DTMFA.”
I don’t know what Dump Culture is.
But if you’re curious about my MO, I suspect you’d have to file me under ‘rejection culture’ rather than ‘dump culture’.
I’m aware of this group – my oldest and closest friend is a member. The fact that that large group of women exists is why it should be nonthreatening and inoffensive for me to voice my own personal preference. Again, it was meant to be facetious. I wasn’t talking about a real person, nor was I referring to anyone here in the hypothetical. I’m failing to understand why it was so offensive to you, but I am curious.
“I’ll concede that perhaps I’ve been spending too much time in places where “lame” would meet with requests not to be ableist. I can’t think of anyone objecting to “pathetic”.”
Really? I’ve never heard a medical professional use the expression “lame” to refer to disabled, nor have I heard anyone else use it in that context. There are many outmoded words that used to refer to specific things that have lost that meaning. Cretin, for example. But if you find it offensive, I’m sorry.
Pathetic is a much more loaded word in my opinion. Language is funny, isn’t it.
“Had you invoked LMB for those particular examples, I shouldn’t have blinked at it; you just seemed to be drawing progressively nearer to giving the impression of someone who took her style of expressing standards from Sandi Griffin of the Lawndale High Fashion Club.”
Don’t understand the LMB reference, do understand the Daria reference. Nice work. I was more of a Jane though.
“I should present that a breakup over what someone CAN’T do ought not to rise to DUMP standards, and that a dump of that nature should require at least something someone WON’T do (not that all won’ts necessarily merit a DTMFA or even a dump).”
Again, it was a somewhat rhetorical use of DTMFA. I just don’t date guys like that. So I don’t dump them, I reject them. See above.
But wait… hold on. Are you suggesting that a person must stay with a partner regardless of unmet needs just becasue the person “can’t” fufil them?
“I shall spare the assembled company my usual references (“Problem at Sea” for the subtleties of the difference between CAN’T and WON’T, and *To Play the King* for why the difference between breaking up and dumping matters).”
Too bad because it might help me undestand your point. :p
@225
Siiiiigh.
Okay look, as much as I love the patriarchy and hate fun-ruining feminists…
this is why none of what you said makes sense to me, so please explain.
This is how I (the feminist nightmare) catagorize men:
1. I don’t want to have sex with you. I say no, you try to push it, I’ll say no firmer and “ruder”, and if you still push it I’ll claw your eyes out.
2. I do want to have sex with you, I don’t say no. The end.
@225 – “women internalizing patriarchical standards”
Yes, and don’t pander to it. Educate her. Change the culture. Watch the Louis CK video, and pass it along to people who need to see it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZ…
@220: I think you’re seeing things in too much black and white. You can be aggressive and pusy without raping. Men are expected to be somewhat pushy, not to rape. Failing to rape someone will not earn most people’s scorn, but I don’t think anyone’s talking about that: the issue is failing to be sufficiently aggressive.
@227: How are you a feminist nightmare? That seems like the feminist ideal. You are allowed to prefer aggressive men.
You’ve said before you don’t like it when someone checks in with you too often, if I recall correctly. How does it not make sense to you?
@227: Essentially, men often need to strike the exact correct balance between not being too pushy and not being too passive. It’s different for every person and direct communication is often difficult in the early stages of getting to know someone, for the obvious reason that some women don’t like being checked in with too much.
The upshot of all this is that guys are going to be more aggressive than perhaps is polite, because it’s easier to recover from that mistake than from the opposite one.
@228: That’s a very idealistic view… but from a pragmatic point of view, most of us are trying to fit in and be accepted. When you’re trying to fit in with a group and learn about its norms, that’s not really the time to lecture about how you think the world should be.
Your suggestion makes sense once you know someone and have reached a certain level of comfort with them, but that’s somewhat of a Catch-22.
@231, I can’t offer a middle ground where you get to push past the ‘no’ and be confident the girl won’t tell her friends you’re a creep. She might love it, she might not. Most guys who push past the ‘no’ do fine in life. Usually, the woman doesn’t press rape charges, or if she does, they don’t stick.
On the other hand, if you act aggressive but back off one step when she pushes your hand away or says no — I can’t guarantee that you’ll get laid as often. But you’ll be doing your part to make the world a better place.
That’s all I’ve got.
Oh, acting aggressive but backing off slightly and trying again in a little bit is what I’m talking about. I don’t think that makes someone a creep. By the time someone actually verbalizes a ‘no’ (which, honestly, is difficult and uncomfortable for men as well as women, in sexual or nonsexual contexts) continuing to push would not be productive.
Though I think it tends to be lack of confidence that people react negatively to. Confidently teasing a girl doesn’t usually get negative reactions. Say, pushing a hand into her jeans and sliding it slowly around from her hip, stopping just short of her clit as she starts to breathe hard and gasp.
(I lied)
@232 “back off one step” isn’t the same as pack up and go home in a sulk. The idea is to build on her sexual interest, not push your way past her disinterest.
How about using all that male aggression and confidence to get HER to do something? — Demand she suck your dick, or strip for you, or touch herself, or squat over you with her pussy on your face.
If you’re not threatening actual violence… if she does those things it’s because she’s hot for you. If all she’ll tolerate is you doing things to her, then yes, you do have to worry about her thinking of you as a pushy creep.
@233 Hot! But actually, other men (not you) do push past a gentle no. That’s what I’m talking about. Their partner clearly indicates discomfort, unhappiness, passive resistance (not arousal, as in your example), and they push further. They may get laid, and then they may get talked about as a creep.
@Blackrose
How are you a feminist nightmare? That seems like the feminist ideal. You are allowed to prefer aggressive men.
Why thank you – it depends on the feminist.
I love agressive men, but agressiveness isn’t going to magically make me attracted to someone I didn’t want to have sex with earlier.
For another comedian’s (more accurate) opinions on women… (couldn’t find the video, but here’s a transcript)
“A woman knows if she’s gonna fuck you within the first five minutes of meeting you.
Women know right away.
They’re shaking hands like, “I’m gonna fuck him. I hope he don’t say nothing too stupid.”
Bonus points to whoever knows the quote.
@BlackRose, yes indeed, that is exactly what I was talking about. Some women expect the men to do all the guessing — ‘he should know exactly how aggressive/non-aggressive I want him to be’ — which is indeed a problem, since most often there is no way of telling what a particular woman’s preferences will be if she hasn’t talked about them herself. So men guess. When things go well, both smile and laugh and have a good time. When they don’t… the ‘creep’ label comes in handy.
EricaP, I honestly don’t see where we disagree. We both want communication. I’m simply saying that women sometimes fail to communicate by playing some sort of game based on stereotypes (‘you were supposed to do X now without me telling you! why didn’t you?…’). I think this should change, and that women should behave more as you or Mydriasis above do. Surely this is perfectly compatible with your ideals?
I wished it were as simple as saying that what a woman says is either true, or then she was lying. There is more to that, at least in my experience with dating and relationships (not only romantic ones, actually). Sometimes a woman said to me something (e.g., ‘no’) hoping that I would understand something else (e.g., ‘yes’, or ‘try harder’). Was she lying? Literally, yes. But in her own mind she wasn’t; she was simply speaking another language, and I failed to react appropriately. It’s about such situations that I say she ‘said’ something — because what she said wasn’t what she ‘said.’
EricaP, Mydriasis, I certainly wish all women (at least all women I had relationships with) thought as you do. And I have indeed met women similar to you. There seem to be more and more of them, and I’m all for it. It’s easier to deal with them. But there are other kinds of women out there as well, who still play the old games. I think the latter women should reconsider.
That’s all.
@236, I was going to say Seth McFarlane in Family Guy, because, believe it or not, I saw yesterday an episode in which Glenn Quagmire says that to Peter Griffin. Google tells me it’s Chris Rock, though.
EricaP, I totally agree that it is stupid to be with a partner who signals passive resistance, discomfort, etc. and still push to get sex. There indeed are men who do that, and I not only think they’re wrong, I think they’re crazy: what is the pleasure of getting sex from someone who isn’t willing to give it to you? Do they have to project a whole fantasy in which the woman is an enthusiastic participant and close their eyes to what is really going on? To me, this is rotten sex at best, not at all appetizing.
The counterpart is that there also are women who are into it, but won’t say so — the Louie C.K. video you linked to is an example — and this is also bad. A woman may — like Mydriasis — prefer guys to take the driver’s seat, but she should at least say so at some point, not simply hope he’ll guess that this is what she wants and then, in case he doesn’t, say it’s his fault.
@235
I encourage it.
But I would be upset at the use of “rape” unless she mades her “no” clear.
* I encourage them to call him a creep.
@237, you’re a talented linguist, and if you want to deal with complicated codes where ‘no’ means ‘push harder,’ then you’re probably up to the challenge.
Most humans, being bad at communication, should take a ‘no’ as a ‘no,’ as an active request for something different. (Ideally, the ‘no’ would be accompanied by some expressed enthusiasm for something else).
@238 agree agree agree.
@ankyl
It is Chris Rock. A much more datable man than Quagmire. :p
I agree with you 100%
Until you said this: A woman may — like Mydriasis — prefer guys to take the driver’s seat, but she should at least say so at some point, not simply hope he’ll guess that this is what she wants and then, in case he doesn’t, say it’s his fault.
Waiting for me to say that’s what I want is not taking the drivers seat. This is why I take issue with the hyperfeminist ideal of what all men should behave like. Not all men are going to match all women. Some men take the drivers seat, some women like it, some women don’t and vice versa.
I’m not waiting for him to “guess” that’s what I want. I want it to be what he wants, and for guys I’m attracted to, that’s typically the case.
That was the whole point of the Chris Rock clip – women know what they like. Just be yourself, either she’ll like it or she won’t, just the same as how you’ll like her or you won’t. There is no universally appealing man, just like there’s no universally appealing woman.
Beyond anything else there’s nothing less appealing to me than a man who’s trying to calibrate his behaviour to what kind of person he thinks I want. It’s deceptive and insincere. I obviously want him to TRY, but I want him to be himself.
@227 mydriasis,
I just want to state, again, as long as you are getting what you want, and how you want it, wonderful. Truly.
As per myself, I know I’m masculine, and nothing will change that. That in large part is why I “dared” to let myself be seen with gay friends in public (in the early 80s). And if bravery is a masculine trait, those guys were a damn sight more manly than I. But, going forward in time, a mother giving birth for the first time is brave as well. The times I have felt most manly in my life include taking care of my youngest child, experiencing a vomiting fluish bug for the first time. To be able to clean up the mess, ease the fear and misery of MY frightened child, and control everything through to normalcy made me feel INCREDIBLY powerful. That was part of my “whipped” comment; that somehow associating with feminine needs (like getting fucked) diminished my testosterone output or my ability to bench press more than my body weight. Getting rid of the old gender stereotypes doesn’t benefit only women.
Peace.
@238/242 – can we split the difference? A man in the driver’s seat doesn’t ask “is this what you want”? But a woman who likes that will coo and moan when he gets aggressive, rather than getting passive and unhappy.
@244
Haha – you and I are on the same page.
Neither of us understand women who say “no” when they mean yes, or act unhappy but secretly want a man to push ahead anyway.
No splitting required.
Men who took the drivers seat with me in the past had no doubt as to whether or not I liked it.
@241, maybe; but considering that I was actually rather unsuccessful when confronted with women who used such codes, I come out prefering sincerity.
I can figure out a language if I’m given sentences with translations to work on. But I can’t figure out a code if its user wants me to guess her intentions. (I remember a girlfriend who used the phrase ‘I know what men are like…’ to signal that she wanted me to guess something without her having to tell me what it was. I didn’t understand that at first and thought she was criticizing me for being ‘unmanly.’ That led to several misunderstandings, some comical and some tragic.)
@Mydriasis, I couldn’t agree more with the spirit of what you’re saying. Except that… it’s not entirely true that people know whether or not they’ll want to fuck you in the first five minutes. First impressions, à la Mr Darcy, change; I’ve seen myself surprisingy attracted to women later on who, at the first meeting, had not at all attracted me. I’ve heard similar stories from women, too.
But with this caveat, of course it’s better to be yourself and simply be with the people who like the kind of person you are. But still: after the initial decisions, there is still a lot of getting-to-know-each-other that often involves unravelling expectations about ‘what men are like’ and ‘what women are like.’
I wished these expectations were replaced by ‘what I like in men’ and ‘what I dislike in men’ — it’s more sincere, less confusing, and doesn’t seem to contain hidden accusations (‘men should be this or that way’). I will take anytime a woman who prefers men who like to take the driver’s seat because that’s what she likes over one who has the same preference because ‘everybody knows’ that’s how men should be.
I agree that a man who takes the driver’s seat just because he thinks it’s what the woman wants is not doing what he should — he’s not being himself (Leonard in the last few episodes of The Big Bang Theory, in which he tried to be more assertive only because he thought this would please Penny, comes to mind).
But this is not what I had meant. The key word in what you quoted from me is: “…in case he doesn’t, say it’s his fault.” That’s the stereotype thing: if you happen not to be my type and still try to woo me, then it’s your fault. No, it’s not. You should tell him that he’s not your type as soon as possible — preferably as soon as you realize it yourself. Even if only for practicality’s sake: so nobody’s time is wasted.
@245 indeed 🙂
@244 Pre-CISE-ly!
Now, how do we get men and women to do that? It’s basically what I had wanted to say.
Oh believe me, I do tell them ASAP.
I do know in the first five minutes. Or at least I always have in the past.
@EricaP and Mydriasis,
I don’t either. (Or maybe I do, but that’s a long story…) But they’re out there; I’ve been in relationships with some. And they’re part of the reason why some guys are pushy: they’ve also met these girls.
Frankly, if more women were like the two of you, I’d be much happier.
Here’s an example. I had a ‘girlfriend’ once (we behaved like gf’n’bf for a couple of weeks, mostly because she wanted to, but still) who would often say ‘but I know what men are like!…’ — for example, when she wanted me to guess what she wanted; or when she insisted on stereotypical behavior and wanted to criticize me; or basically when she wanted to manipulate me into doing something.
I would have been OK with a woman who had exactly the same preferences as she did (though if said woman were upfront about them we’d probably not have started a sexual relationship, we could still have been friends); but this particular one had to pin it down to ‘what men are like.’ That is what rubbed me the wrong way: the apparent implication, repeated a number of times in a number of situations, that the fact that I was not exactly as she wanted meant that I was somehow ‘wrong.’
…insisted on stereotypical behavior
…wanted to criticize me
… wanted to manipulate me
Um, can’t help but think you’re better off without this one. Sometimes you just have to walk away.
@242/245: mydriasis, I’m a little confused. You want guys to actually want to be dominant or aggressive, not to pretend to be for your sake. That I understand. And you signal to them that you want this, “leaving them no doubt.” But you don’t want to say it?
Is it that you prefer nonverbal signals to verbal ones? Or is it that you want to see a sign of dominance first before you signal back that you want it? For instance, say a guy you liked pulled you into him, kissed you, and tugged your hair, then said “You like when I grab you like that, don’t you?” Would you answer? (I say things like this all the time, partly cause I like hearing her tell me, partly to feed my ego, and partly to fish for more info about what turns her on.)
I’m not sure I get it. If someone did want to adjust their behavior for what they wanted, they could feel the waters by trying a few different things and seeing what you responded to, right? Alternatively, someone may want to be dominant with you but need some sign that you’re interested first, especially in situations where there’s some risk to misreading you (I’m thinking, say, a coworker or friend of a friend).
I just think a little clear communication can go a long way in situations where people are slightly misreading each other or uncertain what the other wants, and when you don’t know someone well, that happens sometimes.
@224: Regarding masculinity and femininity, what I meant was that people sometimes conflate “the most masculine qualities” with “qualities they like in a man.”
In other words, if A, B, C, and D are masculine qualities, and a woman likes A and B, she might say that a man with just C and D isn’t masculine enough, or that A and B are more masculine qualities, rather than just saying that he doesn’t have the qualities she prefers.
This mistake happens because people sometimes make the associations “masculine” = “good” and “attractive” (for men), and “feminine” = “bad” and “unattractive.” They conflate attractiveness and masculinity (in men) because they’re both “good” — there’s prejudice against a guy being unmasculine in any quality (even though every guy other than a gorilla is in some way).
All this for women as well, though I suspect masculinity may be more policed.