Womens Topless March Attracts Men

Chaltab wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

This is clearly because you have never been made to feel like a thing because of two arbitrary balls of fat in the middle of your chest. You are not a person. You are an animal, and you are nothing more than those two balls of fat in the middle of your chest. The thought of it is horrible. The experience of it is much worse. You are lucky to have never experienced this.

You think this way because clearly you have never been made to feel like a sexist pig merely because of a bundle of nerves and blood vessels between your legs.. You are not a person, you are an object, and you are nothing more than that bundle of nerves and blood vessels. The thought of it is horrible. The experience of it is much worse. You are lucky to have never experienced this.

BOO HOO
BOO HOO
WHAT TROUBLES MEN GO THROUGH
BEING CALLED A SEXIST IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS EXPERIENCING SEXISM, BOO HOO BOO HOO BOO HOO

Here's the fundamental difference, Chaltab - the idea that (straight*, cisgendered) men simply can't control their sexual urges and are ruled by their dicks is and has been used as an excuse for all kinds of piggish behaviour, ranging from leering at women to adultery to rape. Shit Majin Gojira did it in the opening post of this thread with HURRR MONKEY BUTTS. Like most misandrist ideas, it's propagated by men too, because it suits a certain proportion of them (by no means the majority of them) to use it as a Get Out of Jail Free card.

Here's another thing - men are far less likely to feel threatened and intimidated when they're objectified by women than the other way around. I'm sure you can figure out why.

By the way, if you're getting the hump because you think that us criticising some men means we're criticising all men, that's your problem.

Quote :

Nobody is saying that these men did the right thing or that it wasn't a clear picture of the double standard.

No, you're just shrugging your shoulders and saying "what did they expect?"

Quote :

We're saying that trailing the women, creepy though it is, doesn't necessarily stem from misogyny or seeing women as objects.

HA HA HA

Quote :

It's not fair to assume that when it could just as easily stem from the societal double standard and the curiosity/unusualness of topless women in public.

I wonder why and how that double standard came about. Hmm, hmm.

Quote :

Men can be clueless idiots without being sexist asshats.

Following topless women around and ogling them is being a sexist asshat. Intent doesn't matter.

Drabbler - if guys want to look at tits, they don't even have to leave the house, so your point about strip clubs and the stigma of going to them (HA) doesn't really apply.


(*When this same idea is applied to gay men, it becomes proof that they're sexual deviants, and fuels the "gay panic" defence.)

ZoZo wrote:

But: Has anybody ever made you feel like an object? Nothing more than a body part? If so, I'm sure you understand the anger.

Does being discounted as a useless trouble making idiot who wasn't worth the teachers time because I was a male count? or feeling isolated due the massive gender imbalance of my cub scout group? Or being considered a stuck up git simply because I talk differently?
Yeah I get the pain, but in no way do I get the anger, it's an unfortunate part of life that people will boil you down to your component parts and focus on just one.
Yours isn't special because it's gender specific, it IS special because it is the most wide spread. Almost every woman in the western world has been made to feel like a object at least once due to her breasts being stared at, I very much doubt being made to feel like an idiot just for being a male is anywhere near as common.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Does being discounted as a useless trouble making idiot who wasn't worth the teachers time because I was a male count? or feeling isolated due the massive gender imbalance of my cub scout group? Or being considered a stuck up git simply because I talk differently?

No, no, no, and no.
Try going up against society instead of individuals, then we'll talk.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Yeah I get the pain, but in no way do I get the anger, it's an unfortunate part of life that people will boil you down to your component parts and focus on just one.

So shut up in the face of widespread discrimination!

Somath Cegem wrote:

Yours isn't special because it's gender specific, it IS special because it is the most wide spread. Almost every woman in the western world has been made to feel like a object at least once due to her breasts being stared at, I very much doubt being made to feel like an idiot just for being a male is anywhere near as common.

Fuck you. Gender specific discrimination is fucking special, seeing as absolutely everyone here has to make an effort to think of anything other than cismen and ciswomen. How about being seen as an object for things attatched to you that don't even belong? Yeah, that's a real fucking unspecial cozy little spot there.

This is the underlying problem: viewing other individuals as their body and "sexual purpose" alone.

Nihilist wrote:

I was going to try and post something, but then my mind drifted off to beer and porn. Then I wondered, "Am I not piggish enough?"

No way man, get with the programme here! You have to comment at least on how this is all just whining, or maybe you can make an unequal analogy or metaphor. Gotta keep up somehow.

Fuck it. I give up, that's what I get for trying relate what personal experiences I could about being made to feel like less than nothing, fine, enjoy fighting the very fabric of the world we live in, apparently I only have individuals to deal with.

Sorry you have no idea what facing sexism is and invalidating your pity party when you try to make a judgement on the legitimacy of an anger responce.

Verandering wrote:

Sorry you have no idea what facing sexism is and invalidating your pity party when you try to make a judgement on the legitimacy of an anger responce.

Trying relate based on what experiences I have in response to ZoZos question =/= pity party

Mentioning my lack of understanding in relation to anger response =/= Judgement of people feeling said anger response.

Oh and there's no C in Response

And now I'm out.

Verandering wrote:

...absolutely everyone here has to make an effort to think of anything other than cismen and ciswomen.

Hey, there's no need for that.

And if you live in certain places in Britain, 'talking posh' is enough to mark you every time you open your mouth. Maybe it's not going up against the whole of society, but when it occupies your thoughts every time you talk to someone the difference feels rather academic.

Sutremaine wrote:

Verandering wrote:

...absolutely everyone here has to make an effort to think of anything other than cismen and ciswomen.

Hey, there's no need for that.

And if you live in certain places in Britain, 'talking posh' is enough to mark you every time you open your mouth. Maybe it's not going up against the whole of society, but when it occupies your thoughts every time you talk to someone the difference feels rather academic.

Did you even know there are non-binary genders?
Also, thanks for telling me remembering my identity exists is academic.

Edit:
It's kind of hard to not think about it all the time when everything reminds you that the available pairs of shoes don't fit.

Verandering wrote:

Sutremaine wrote:

Verandering wrote:

...absolutely everyone here has to make an effort to think of anything other than cismen and ciswomen.

Hey, there's no need for that.

And if you live in certain places in Britain, 'talking posh' is enough to mark you every time you open your mouth. Maybe it's not going up against the whole of society, but when it occupies your thoughts every time you talk to someone the difference feels rather academic.

Did you even know there are non-binary genders?
Also, thanks for telling me remembering my identity exists is academic.

Sutremaine wasn't saying that, from what I can see. S/he was just saying that the difference in her/his accent from someone else's (British) accent feels "rather academic". Wasn't referring to trans identity at all.

Malganis wrote:

Sutremaine wasn't saying that, from what I can see. S/he was just saying that the difference in her/his accent from someone else's (British) accent feels "rather academic". Wasn't referring to trans identity at all.

Hm, my bad then.
I thought there was an analogy going on there.

Verandering wrote:

Did you even know there are non-binary genders?

What's your criteria? Quite a few years back I decided that a certain male videogame character was physically female and didn't give too much thought to it, but as far as real life goes I haven't ever given transsexuals any much more thought than homosexuals. I've known about Turner Syndrome for years, and probably some other things (that I've since forgotten about) I came across on Wikipedia and in textbooks while I was doing research for the fic I was going to write about said character.

(fake edit: yay my slow typing)

Yeah, what I was saying was that while individuals don't necessarily mean society, when all the individuals you're surrounded by judge you in a particular way then there's not much practical difference.

Sutremaine wrote:

Verandering wrote:

Did you even know there are non-binary genders?

What's your criteria?

Existing outside man or women.
Identities such as bigender (man and woman, distinctly separate), androgyne (man and woman, unified), neutrois (the absence of gender), intergender (something between man and woman), and third gender (something else entirely, usually with its own societal role expectations).

And sorry for misunderstanding you.

Sutremaine wrote:

Verandering wrote:

Did you even know there are non-binary genders?

What's your criteria? Quite a few years back I decided that a certain male videogame character was physically female and didn't give too much thought to it, but as far as real life goes I haven't ever given transsexuals any much more thought than homosexuals. I've known about Turner Syndrome for years, and probably some other things (that I've since forgotten about) I came across on Wikipedia and in textbooks while I was doing research for the fic I was going to write about said character.

(fake edit: yay my slow typing)

Yeah, what I was saying was that while individuals don't necessarily mean society, when all the individuals you're surrounded by judge you in a particular way then there's not much practical difference.

I believe Ver is talking about genderqueer people, who fall somewhere in the middle: identify as both male and female, or neither male nor female, or sometimes male and sometimes female and sometimes neither, etc.

Verandering wrote:

Existing outside man or women.
Identities such as [....]

Well, the terms and the variety are new, with the exception of the third gender, but I've never really seen male and female as a cut-and-dried binary. I've never considered my body part of my identity either, so I guess I... just didn't really care?

(edit: by which I mean it was never a preoccupation, not that I didn't care about what it meant for other people.)

Quote :

And sorry for misunderstanding you.

No prob, this topic is setting people on edge.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Drabbler - if guys want to look at tits, they don't even have to leave the house, so your point about strip clubs and the stigma of going to them (HA) doesn't really apply.

As I stated earlier, I was talking about the real thing, not pictures on a screen. Still gotta go out for those. [If pictures were an adequate substitute, no men would've shown up, and this thread wouldn't exist.]

Drabbler wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Drabbler - if guys want to look at tits, they don't even have to leave the house, so your point about strip clubs and the stigma of going to them (HA) doesn't really apply.

As I stated earlier, I was talking about the real thing, not pictures on a screen. Still gotta go out for those. [If pictures were an adequate substitute, no men would've shown up, and this thread wouldn't exist.]

Drabbler, have you thought about getting a girlfriend? They tend to have breasts, too.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Does being discounted as a useless trouble making idiot who wasn't worth the teachers time because I was a male count? or feeling isolated due the massive gender imbalance of my cub scout group? Or being considered a stuck up git simply because I talk differently?
Yeah I get the pain, but in no way do I get the anger, it's an unfortunate part of life that people will boil you down to your component parts and focus on just one.
Yours isn't special because it's gender specific, it IS special because it is the most wide spread. Almost every woman in the western world has been made to feel like a object at least once due to her breasts being stared at, I very much doubt being made to feel like an idiot just for being a male is anywhere near as common.

You have identified the problem and missed the point completely. My experiences--our experiences--happen everywhere. Our experiences are considered acceptable in society. I have lost count of the number of times people in this thread have said variants on "shut up and stop whining". You did. "That's just how it is", you say. And that's what really pisses us off. We feel like objects based on something we can't help, and if we express that we are less than happy about this situation, if we are told to put up or shut up. Of course I'm angry. A lot of us are.

Your experiences, as you correctly surmise, are less widespread. The rot isn't there yet, it's not something that is generally condoned. Men have a certain privilege. As do the posh. God, I wish I could get my accent back. Fact is, you are lucky, and your experiences are isolated.

I could tell numerous stories of my experiences, things which are generally considered OK by society, but are not. I couldn't possibly list a lifetime of experience, so here's a few from this weekend:
-Two men followed me along the street on a day it was fucking hot so I had bare legs.
-I was called a slut for my sexual history that, were I a man, would lead to me being called "a legend".
-A nine year old boy grabbed my arse. His parents laughed and said "he thinks you're pretty".

All shit that is considered A-OK. I think I'm even expected to take it as a compliment.

Drabbler wrote:

Most of the time, if a man wants to see breasts (that don't belong to his wife or girlfriend, if he has one), he has to go to a place specifically created for that purpose...

ZoZo wrote:

Drabbler, have you thought about getting a girlfriend?
They tend to have breasts, too.

Covered that. And I've only ever been speaking generally, not about myself. [Partly because I don't want discuss my personal life publicly and partly because it's just not relevant.]


As for your last one, seriously, that kind of parental reaction (for anything their child does) stops being acceptable when the kid is about three or four years old.

"He thinks you're pretty."
"I think he's committed assault and battery."

ZoZo wrote:

-A nine year old boy grabbed my arse. His parents laughed and said "he thinks you're pretty".

What.

ZoZo wrote:

-I was called a slut for my sexual history that, were I a man, would lead to me being called "a legend".

And there is yet another problem. Society's double standard on sex. If a man has had multiple partners, he's a legend/casanova/playboy/amazing in bed. If a woman has had multiple partners, she's a slut/easy/constantly plastered/STD-ridden.

Just thinking while typing here, but this may well tie in to the shirtless thing. If a man walks around shirtless, he's showing off his chest --> muscles --> virility --> manliness. If a women walks around even with just a bra on, she's immediately a trollop, simply for expressing her sexuality in the same way as the man. Or maybe it's just bleedin' hot.

Maybe. If that made sense. Did that make sense?

This thread brings out my inner feminist, so to speak.

Quote :

ZoZo wrote:

-I was called a slut for my sexual history that, were I a man, would lead to me being called "a legend".

And there is yet another problem. Society's double standard on sex. If a man has had multiple partners, he's a legend/casanova/playboy/amazing in bed. If a woman has had multiple partners, she's a slut/easy/constantly plastered/STD-ridden.

Just thinking while typing here, but this may well tie in to the shirtless thing. If a man walks around shirtless, he's showing off his chest --> muscles --> virility --> manliness. If a women walks around even with just a bra on, she's immediately a trollop, simply for expressing her sexuality in the same way as the man. Or maybe it's just bleedin' hot.

Maybe. If that made sense. Did that make sense?

This thread brings out my inner feminist, so to speak.

At least you have one.

It does make sense. I think society's views of sex are also what need to change. For a women to be sexual, its to be offering yourself, letting a man take you and use you and you just let him like a helpless monkey. And if you like it, that's even worse- taking charge of your sexuality and enjoying the act is the same as being a slut especially if your tastes or fetishes are alternative. Some may be proud of you for being unashamed, but that's never the first thought. And for a man, its like taking what is rightfully theirs, like women are not people you just, you know, like or love or what to be with. It has to be a conquest, a cheap fuck so you have another notch on your bedpost. Especially since it's usually not that easy to get a women in bed because of the "sexist pig/scary rapist/ew loser" thoughts many women have when guys approach. They have to sort of scout out the receptive ones, test the playing field and lose out a few times until they finally SCOOOOOOOORE. I'm not saying that all sex is like this, but when you have single men and single women and you hear they're having one night stands, the connotations are not the same for both.

Because sex is this secretive defiling thing thats all about who has the power and basal primal instincts that shame and mystique and snap judgement abound. just so terribly embarrassing apparently that it's hard to make normative or *real* despite the media saturation. I mean, why so many misconceptions? Why the lack of proper sex ed? Why the glamorous/pornographic/awkward allusion dipictions of sex rather than showing what it really is? I mean, I've heard mothers ask if movies that they've heard are disgustingly, grossly, unashamedly violent and ask if it was appropriate for a child NOT due to the violence, but the presence of sex scenes. The violence was fine. But GOD FORBID there was sex. No one says "gratuitous gore" or "gratuitous violence" or anything like that. It's "gratuitous boobs" or "gratuitous sex." And who gets naked first? Always the woman. There is not sexy cinematography of the mans body because the movie is generally tailored to straight men. You'll never see an action movie tailored to straight women where the woman initiates, strips him, has the lingering gazes all over the abs, the bulge, the contours of his back and waist close ups of his face, his sex sounds... I could go on. And if there is a movie like that, its generally because the woman is not only badass, but known for using her sexual power, which, again, is usually code for whore. Come to think of it, I honestly don't know how you would cinema-graphically plan a movie where the sexual "conquest" IS the man. Like I honestly don't know how that would go.

Oh wait, never mind. Mens scent commercials. remember that Aqua Di Gio one? In black and white with waves, then wet body, waves than wet body, waves, face? That was hot.

Anyway, my point is that sex, still steeped in mystery, legend, history, and misconceptions, is an expression of power and is not deeply person, but deely political and cultural. For anything to change about double standards, sex/gender rights, etc etc, overhauling peoples (cant find the word... innate taught misconceptions? personal prejudices from socialization? primary notions?) about sex is going to be a major part of that. Not necessarily a precursor. One does not necessarily have to follow the other. but it will be a serious part of it, especially WHAT is sexual and what isn't.

... Wow, Jesus., I think you just outlined for me pretty much exactly why I'm asexual. Hm.

Now if only I could afford a mental health professional out here.

Verandering wrote:

... Wow, Jesus., I think you just outlined for me pretty much exactly why I'm asexual. Hm.

Now if only I could afford a mental health professional out here.

It's pretty much the reason I'm still a virgin. I want to have sex, or even really just find someone, but I'm scared about what it will mean to my identity, my purity, whether or not I can handle the sexual jungle, the power struggles, etc etc. Plus the mystique and gaping chasm between cismen and ciswomen, can I handle bridging the gap and testing the waters and finding the real men behind the wall of obvious pigs that I've been confronted with and might-be pigs? I fear anonymous might-be pigs in such a way that they actually have more power over me than the obvious ones, but I guess that's just my issues. I mean really, I guess I could just chalk it up to inexperience and irrational fears, but it's still really annoying. And kinda makes for loneliness. but again, my issues. They should be the worst the world should deal with, I guess.

You know if I saw a huge group of topless women walking down the street I'd follow. Because I'd know SOMETHING was up and it might be fun. Plus if you look at the page it says that *gasp* shirtless men were part of the group.

And the men have the same right to leer as women. Has no one else been with a group of females and tried to disappear when they start catcalling some poor guy just walking down the street? Sure he might not have thought that we'd gang rape him, but that's another issue.

*is high in lack of sleep, ignore all errors*

I'd call a man who is constantly sleeping with multiple sex partners a slut. I don't think being promiscuous is something to be proud of regardless of your sex.