Are women sexist against themselves?

Post Reply New Topic

Social stereotyping seems to be going the other way in the UK at the moment. There are loads of adverts, TV programmes, jokes and magazine articles saying how women are better at everything than men.

Now I guess we deserve a taste of this treatment after years of anti-female rhetoric. However, it makes life really hard for those of us who aren't 'multi-tasking team players' and already have zero self-esteem. Suddenly, all of the character traits which are socially desirable seem to be those associated with women.

I thought the idea of sexual equality was to remove unfairness, not create more of it.

actually i think she prolly will... for a woman to say up front "i don't like you" isn't always an option... maybe she wants him to back off a little, just enough for her to make her escape

Unfortunately, from a very young age, many females are socialized into believing that they're just not as good as males. This cripples their self-esteem, causing them to derive most of their worth from others, turning them into compulsive people-pleasers.

Even worse, the more time they spend primping in hopes that others find them attractive (and the more time they spend coming up with schemes to manipulate people into liking them) the less time they have to spend on cultivating their interests, having new experiences, or improving their minds. In many ways, self-fulfilling prophecy takes over... such a woman believes herself hopelessly inferior for so long that she becomes, by any objective standard, hopelessly inferior to any self-confident woman and the vast majority of men.

----------
(she probably resents the fact you have a penis and that she has boobs)
----------

LOL... I can't speak for all women, but as for myself, no way. Boobs don't get caught in zippers, for starters. Muahahah.

And frankly, I think when it comes to virtually any intelligent, confident woman, the "Ladder System" is BS. I have to be friends with a guy first, or else I'm functionally dead from the waist down. I can't even tell you if a random guy is "hot" or not. I don't know him, how the hell should I know whether or not he's hot?

Here's how it goes, for me....

It starts as a friendship. Nothing sexual in the offing, no kissyface or any of that stuff. He and I have similar interests and compatible personalities. We talk about video games, various advances in science, and debate politics with each other. There might be practical jokes back and forth, and a lot of bawdy toilet-humor sort of jokes swapped. We go places together... out to eat, walking in the woods, and so forth... but again, nothing sexual in the offing. Soon, the intellectual bond we have formed is joined by an emotional one, as well.

We grow to know each other quite well.

Once this has occurred, it's like some ancient judge in the most primitive parts of my brain begins to size him up for marriage and fatherhood... a judge who probably wears animal hides and bones rather than a black robe. :p

How does he treat those who are substantially smaller and weaker than himself? Is he mentally well-balanced... or is he more than a bit neurotic? Is he physically weak, or would he make a fitting contribution to the genetic pool? Are there any serious hormonal imbalances or obvious genetic defects? (For example, he should have broader shoulders than I, more upper body strength than I, and have appropriate secondary sex characteristics... body hair, for instance, and the capacity to grow a mustache and beard, even if he does not choose to grow one.)

If he does not pass this evaluation, he'll remain a friend and never advance futher. For the record, most male friends don't... they generally get hung up on the psychological adjustment qualification. No, this doesn't mean I look for "normalcy". However, there are different varieties of not-normal. For example, there's "too bright to ever really be anything but somewhat eccentric" types of not-normal, and then there's "I'd vote him most likely to climb a bell tower with an assault rifle." or "Damn, and I thought I had issues!" types of not-normal. These latter two types simply don't make the cut.

If he passes this evaluation... things start to get interesting. I find myself almost unconsciously making excuses to touch him, and find myself attracted to him sexually.

I can't even begin to comprehend "casual" dating or "casual" sex. If all you're after is sexual release, then why not just masturbate and have done with it? You'd have no possibility of STDs, no possibility of unwanted pregnancy... hell, you wouldn't even have to put up with someone you've no real emotional connection to.

arrogant attitude, overconfidence, pigheaded shamelessness, musculinity, musculin vanity, prowess, it all makes teh womans hormone glands produce hormones to make her sexually respond, thats what they go for. humans are just primitive animals with but a false sense of intellectual distinction. woman just do what ever her chemicals tell her to. were all just victems of our chemicals, our primal instincts.

we are severely inclined to analise everything as something rational, cause we want to feel like we are in controll of such things, of our own choices, hence make up all these lies, but in the end, were just hormone driven, were just slaves. people allways even manipulate themselves to believe they actually love these persons, even though they certainly do not.
other people would be less driven by their, say, sexual preference, but more by their emotional preference. they might actually "love" someone. still here its mostly based on chemical reactions. this is still just being ruled by your glands and such. they are still slaves.

some intellectuals manage to free themselves of this. theres also an entire "religion" based on this, called buddhism.
but since life is based on this, its just biology, it may very well be quite unhealthy to liberate oneself of this.
also i imagine, like myself, most aspies tend to be quite liberated in their choices of this. not per se cause they dont have the chemicals, but because there seems to be a split in intellect or the essential being, and emotionality.
someday therell be a way to healthily do this, to fully experiance emotions, yet also fully recognise them as they are, and have the ability to choose completely uninfluanced. i believe a certain givted lucky ones allready are able of this...

and mostly, women are very sexist, but against men mostly. what seems to be a most favored partner to a lot of women, is a loser macho-wannebe, with a very fragile small ego that hes trying to compensate by pretending to be socially or sometimes intellectually dominant, yet fail, but only to the somewhat clever eye. they are the most manipulateble, and thats what most women like to do most. most men are slaves of their wives yet are unwilling to perceive that.

This is how I see it..... The gender-based power struggle, I mean.... Outwardly, the man is in many non-sexual ways very dominant. However, not as dominant as feminist would have you think. It is a severe exageration that women have a hard time getting proffessional work, or that theyr paid less than men who do their same line of work. Remember, the woman has something the man wants (between her legs), woman can use this to get ahead. She can use it to bribe her way out of trouble, to get promotions, or she can find a rich man to pay her bills. Or she can simply use her sexuality as a carrot in front of the donkey's nose (the donkey being her man, or sometimes any man). The nice guys are often teased and lead on so the female can get what she wants from him (which is often times little more than a confidence boost). But, the nice guy will still try to persue her, for that 1 in 1.000 hopes that she is more than just a flirt, because he's starving for intimacy. Subtly, women have just as much power if not more than what men have, it's just basedin different aspects.
There is a counter-feminist movement arising, it's called masculism. It's not rooted in some biggotted theory that men should dominate women, it's goal is to even the stage for men, socially, I think. It's more to stand up for male victims.... The whole ladder theory has left thousands of men intimately starved, which is grotesquely inhumane, and is technically isolating thousands of men from the human race and leaving us to abandon, looking at it from an emotional-evolutionary standpoint (which explains why many of us feel the way we do). There may be a few females who are involuntarily celibate too, but they are VERY rare. Largely because the female is the "chasee", and hince she holds the cards. This is where feminine power comes in.

The plight of the sexually starved man in society.... Male sexual deprivation is a complex phenomenon, but it basically boils down to a shortage of sexually willing women relative to the sexual needs of men. But lets just say that the current situation is very sexist against men, and cold hearted and caloust and careless against our plight. This is perhaps one major reason why there is an underground connection between modern feminism and the dominionist republicans, because they both seek extreme power, and they both also find it beneficial to deny and condemn the sex drive...
This proccess gets society's gears grinding, because in the end everyone pays.... Although it will be denied by the many who believe abstinence to be virtuous, the unfortunate answer is that most sexually deprived individuals suffer psychological warping that, collectively, causes society's gears to grind. All of us pay a price, for sexual deprivation leads people to behave in uncivilized ways, from use of demeaning sarcasm to rape and even mass murder. Now, I'm not saying I agree with it happening at all, but often these demons are out of their control after having been teased and starved for many of years, watching helplessly as their window began closing on them. Look at priest who end up molesting children because they were sublimated into a vow of celibacy, look at islamic suicide bombers who are sex starved for economic reasons and are told by their leaders that they'll be rewarded for blowing up buildings in their afterlife with so many virgins (the carrot in front of the donkey scenario once again), look at prisoners who haven't seen a member of the opposite gender in so many years, end up raping smaller prisoners.
Personally, I do not know enough about masculism to call myself a full believer, and I'm usually never the one to follow anything 100%, but I am pulling for masculism to even out the gender struggle. It seems to me, either consciously or sub-consciously, the feminist movement stole a page out of The Art of War by Sun Tzu "When you are strong, feign weakness, when you are weak, feign strength". In counterpoint to feminists who view the world through a filter that makes it look like men run everything for their own interests, I'll don the equally valid filter that women are actually, though quite subtly, in control. It is they who "created" the macho male through their own eugenic mating choices over eons of evolution, who breed fighting men to plunder on their behalf while dying early by the hordes, who decide whom among men will be allowed full sexual lives, who blame men for the world's mess while manipulatively hoarding the key to balance and sanity under their skirts. But I blame them not (atleast not entirely, though maybe in part), for they are rarely even conscious of their controlling role.

This is how I see it..... The gender-based power struggle, I mean.... Outwardly, the man is in many non-sexual ways very dominant. However, not as dominant as feminist would have you think. It is a severe exageration that women have a hard time getting proffessional work, or that theyr paid less than men who do their same line of work. Remember, the woman has something the man wants (between her legs), woman can use this to get ahead. She can use it to bribe her way out of trouble, to get promotions, or she can find a rich man to pay her bills. Or she can simply use her sexuality as a carrot in front of the donkey's nose (the donkey being her man, or sometimes any man). The nice guys are often teased and lead on so the female can get what she wants from him (which is often times little more than a confidence boost). But, the nice guy will still try to persue her, for that 1 in 1.000 hopes that she is more than just a flirt, because he's starving for intimacy. Subtly, women have just as much power if not more than what men have, it's just basedin different aspects.
There is a counter-feminist movement arising, it's called masculism. It's not rooted in some biggotted theory that men should dominate women, it's goal is to even the stage for men, socially, I think. It's more to stand up for male victims.... The whole ladder theory has left thousands of men intimately starved, which is grotesquely inhumane, and is technically isolating thousands of men from the human race and leaving us to abandon, looking at it from an emotional-evolutionary standpoint (which explains why many of us feel the way we do). There may be a few females who are involuntarily celibate too, but they are VERY rare. Largely because the female is the "chasee", and hince she holds the cards. This is where feminine power comes in.

The plight of the sexually starved man in society.... Male sexual deprivation is a complex phenomenon, but it basically boils down to a shortage of sexually willing women relative to the sexual needs of men. But lets just say that the current situation is very sexist against men, and cold hearted and caloust and careless against our plight. This is perhaps one major reason why there is an underground connection between modern feminism and the dominionist republicans, because they both seek extreme power, and they both also find it beneficial to deny and condemn the sex drive...
This proccess gets society's gears grinding, because in the end everyone pays.... Although it will be denied by the many who believe abstinence to be virtuous, the unfortunate answer is that most sexually deprived individuals suffer psychological warping that, collectively, causes society's gears to grind. All of us pay a price, for sexual deprivation leads people to behave in uncivilized ways, from use of demeaning sarcasm to rape and even mass murder. Now, I'm not saying I agree with it happening at all, but often these demons are out of their control after having been teased and starved for many of years, watching helplessly as their window began closing on them. Look at priest who end up molesting children because they were sublimated into a vow of celibacy, look at islamic suicide bombers who are sex starved for economic reasons and are told by their leaders that they'll be rewarded for blowing up buildings in their afterlife with so many virgins (the carrot in front of the donkey scenario once again), look at prisoners who haven't seen a member of the opposite gender in so many years, end up raping smaller prisoners.
Personally, I do not know enough about masculism to call myself a full believer, and I'm usually never the one to follow anything 100%, but I am pulling for masculism to even out the gender struggle. It seems to me, either consciously or sub-consciously, the feminist movement stole a page out of The Art of War by Sun Tzu "When you are strong, feign weakness, when you are weak, feign strength". In counterpoint to feminists who view the world through a filter that makes it look like men run everything for their own interests, I'll don the equally valid filter that women are actually, though quite subtly, in control. It is they who "created" the macho male through their own eugenic mating choices over eons of evolution, who breed fighting men to plunder on their behalf while dying early by the hordes, who decide whom among men will be allowed full sexual lives, who blame men for the world's mess while manipulatively hoarding the key to balance and sanity under their skirts. But I blame them not (atleast not entirely, though maybe in part), for they are rarely even conscious of their controlling role.

Though the religious right is probably using the feminist movement as a tool to gain power for themselves by getting the wheels turning. Logically, the radical christian extremists are gonna have deep seated resentment against feminism, as it is not in accordance with the more old-fashioned way of thinking (where the man dominates), and also, seeing as many feminists are lesbians.

Though the religious right is probably using the feminist movement as a tool to gain power for themselves by getting the wheels turning. Logically, the radical christian extremists are gonna have deep seated resentment against feminism, as it is not in accordance with the more old-fashioned way of thinking (where the man dominates), and also, seeing as many feminists are lesbians.

Though the religious right is probably using the feminist movement as a tool to gain power for themselves by getting the wheels turning. Logically, the radical christian extremists are gonna have deep seated resentment against feminism, as it is not in accordance with the more old-fashioned way of thinking (where the man dominates), and also, seeing as many feminists are lesbians.

Did you know that a feminist can also be male?

Does that throw you off?

I use the term feminist to mean I simply think what is TRULY feminine, which can be a whole lot of beautiful things, should be praised. Just as certain aspects that are definitately masculine, should be praised in their own way. Granted this is unlikely to actually happen, but wouldn't it be wonderful is masculine and feminine didn't even apply to the sexes themselves?

My partner is female, she DOES NOT want to be dominated, and I do not want to dominate her, the reason she likes me in the first place is I'm not like most men she's come into contact with, no ego battles because my obsessions are something she doesn't want to compete with or will never understand the level to which I push myself.

At the same time she can write so beautifully, she can socialise in ways that I never will, and many other various things that are definitely feminine, I worship those sides of her that I am not. That seems to be the point to me.

Feminist doesn't have to mean angry she-bitch fighting for female dominance, it can simply mean fighting for the woman in women! Even the woman in some men!

Both can dominate in their own ways, granted its different, but through self-honesty as opposed to criticism of the other that we don't understand we could probably find a place between.

I haven't read all posts (too long for me) but this needs rebuttal.

Boys don't want barbie dolls for toys. Girls don't want to fool around with army stuff (except maybe Captain_Brown ).

Boys and girls are different. You may not want to accept there is a gender difference in the minds of young kids, but there is (IMO as a parent)

And as an aside, the whole masculinism thing is a joke. Fifty years ago, a morally loose woman was called a slut or a tart and shunned in polite society.

Now? You can't go anywhere and hurl a brick without hitting half a dozen of them. There are legions of misguided, unhappy women out there who are willing to sleep with virtually anyone, just to feel like they exist for one fleeting moment.

So much for a 'sex shortage', huh?

I find it the height of irony that men would complain, when historically they've had all the power and held all the cards. You want to know why women learned to use sex to manipulate men long, long ago?

Because if she didn't, she and her children would have starved.

Stop making men out to be the abused and long-suffering heroes of human history, because it simply isn't true. Even in wartime, yes... the men faced death. What did the women face, if the men lost? Rape and slavery, sometimes both, and often for the rest of their lives... however long the victors decided to let them live. :p

Even today, men still hold most of the cards. You deny it, but it's still true. In a random sexual encounter, you worry about your performance, and the possibility of disease. The woman worries about disease, pregnancy... and whether or not she's going to be found dead in a dumpster tomorrow morning. That she even walks out of the room alive is entirely up to him, so again, stop whining.

Last edited by Hazelwudi on 29 Oct 2006, 3:23 am, edited 2 times in total.

So you're saying most women arent feminists?

I'm a man, I'm feminist, I believe women should be whatever they are..

I'm also a masculinist, because their is a serious problem in that men don't have enough outputs for aggression, which leads to violence. Each man should be whatever he is.

Simple?

Even when it comes to that, I stay stop whining and start coping. Many women out there (myself included) have abandoned many of the irrational and counterproductive aspects of femininity. We decide things on the basis of logic, not emotion. We are assertive, rather than passive or "doormat-like". We realize that there's a lot more to life than tricking some poor sap into marrying us and then proceeding to have as many babies as possible. We have our own hobbies and interests, rather than childishly trying to guilt-trip our boyfriend or husband into abandoning his hobbies and interests to give us constant attention. We rely on our own assets and accomplishments for self-esteem, rather than constantly whining and fishing for compliments.

Frankly, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Women had to evolve to meet the changing demands of modern society. What makes men think they're exempt from doing the same?