Two posts responding to Monday’s post about men and feeling desired: Feeling Hot or Not by Lynn Gazis-Sax and Wanted Bodies, by David Schraub. (UPDATE: Here’s Sungold’s post as well.) I’m grateful for all the comments here, which I think have been helpful.
Second Update: A response from Figleaf.
I can’t stress enough that nothing I wrote was intended to suggest that it ought to be women’s job to praise men more frequently for their physical desirability. As several of the commenters pointed out, women have good reason to fear significant negative repercussions for vocalizing desire. I don’t think casually subjecting strangers to a lusful gaze is ever a good idea, of course, but it’s important to remind ourselves that the consequences of doing so are generally much more perilous for women. Our narratives about rape, for example, make it clear that the only women who are “true victims” are those who have no sexual agency, who expressed no desire. A woman who makes clear that she’s turned on, or at least drawn to, some aspect of men’s bodies (rather than, say, men’s wit or wealth or charm or kindness) risks being “slut-shamed” — and worse, she risks the suggestion that she’s “asking” to be assaulted. Bottom line: we have a perverse cultural sense that “a horny woman can’t be raped”.
Both men and women are raised around male narratives of desire. Most of us grow up hearing that all men are turned on by similar things. Where we do allow for variation, we break men down (I remember learning this when I was about eleven) into “boob men”, “butt men” and “leg men.” The depressing implication is that the desire is for body parts, not whole people. A “boob man”, or so I was told by older boys in junior high school, “needed” to be with a woman who had large breasts — and it was rational for such a man to make sexual and relationship decisions accordingly. The discourse taught me that not only was male desire intensely strong, it was also unchangeable; a boob man couldn’t overcome his obsession even with the most heroic efforts. Dating an otherwise perfect woman with an A cup was useless, almost unfair.
When I was still in junior high school, older boys taught me to rank girls on various attributes (”face” = 8, “body” = 5, that sort of sad thing.) Homosociality is powerful; as so many generations of boys discover, the real pleasure of these “ranking” conversations lies in two things: the false sense of power over women that the process seems to give, and the sense of male cameraderie that the shared discussion engenders. Part of my journey to justice as an adult man has been unlearning that training to “rank” women; part of my men’s work has been learning how to create bonds with other men without relying on either sports or the objectification of women as homosocial glue. And of course, a big part of the work is doing what I can to call other men out on the “ranking” when I hear it happening.
Lynn talks about her own experience ranking herself relative to other women:
I rank women, but only women, on a much simpler scale, prettier than me or less prettier than me. I do it automatically any time I enter a room with a group of people; these are all the women who are prettier than me, and these are all the women I have beat…
We expect women to do this; one of our innumerable narratives is that women are more competitive about appearance than men. The standard assumption we have about the sexes is that when a woman walks into a room, she does what Lynn does and ranks herself on the prettiness scale compared to other females; when a man walks into a room (particularly a young man), we assume he ranks himself based on whom he could beat up, and who could beat him up. (Call it the “ass-kicking” scale.) As men age, the presumption goes, the ass-kicking becomes less literal, and more about rivalry over intelligence or wealth. But while we expect women to compete with each other over virtually everything, and we expect men to rank themselves on comparative lethality or earning power, we generally don’t acknowledge that men do rank each other on the sexual desirability scale.
Most of us have known young men who have gone to absurd lengths to deny that they have any capacity for assessing another man’s attractiveness. It is axiomatic that our frantically homophobic culture means that in many groups, a boy cannot describe another boy as “good-looking” without risking ridicule or worse. Most of us have known young men who, despite repeated prodding, stubbornly say things like “I can’t tell” or “How should I know?” when asked if a friend or acquaintance of theirs might be hot or not. I certainly said the same when I was young — even though, like Lynn, I had a keen sense of where I ranked on the handsomeness scale compared to other men. It’s tempting to want to give the lads a break by saying “Well, maybe they genuinely don’t have a visual sense for rating other men. Maybe it’s not internalized homophobia at all, but sheer inability.” That’s akin to saying that men “can’t help” but stare at a woman in revealing clothing; in both cases we confuse unwillingness with genuine incapacity.
Years of work in men’s groups, years of teaching and mentoring, bear out — at least anecdotally — the truth that a great many young men do rank themselves in comparison to other guys on an attractiveness scale. This isn’t evidence of homoerotic desire, at least not in all instances — it’s just evidence that boys are keenly aware that there is at least some “currency” to male attractiveness. But of course, most of these young men have very little idea of what it is that girls and women find attractive — the “Brad Pitt Discourse” does a tremendous amount of damage, I think. And we make a huge if understandable mistake when we confuse external swagger with inner self-confidence. When we assume that because a boy or a man doesn’t express anxiety about his appearance that he must be secure in his looks, we miss the mark more often than not. What so many young guys don’t know is that not all women want men who look like Brad Pitt, or George Clooney, or like the men with the eight-pack abs on the front of the Men’s Fitness magazines. Or, even if they do find that sort of beefcake to be sexy in an abstract sort of way, that they — women — can find many other things to be even more desirable.
This doesn’t mean, of course, that a man can claim a right to be found attractive — we have no claim on another’s desires. Compliments are not obligatory, male insecurity, however real it may be, is not a crisis which women ought to feel compelled to address. And as many commenters pointed out, in the end there may be little difference between the levels of insecurity that both men and women feel. But it is important to point out that men’s sense that they are undesirable is perhaps more widespread than some imagine, and that outer insouciance is not proof of the absence of anxiety.
As much as my traffic counter loves the fact that your readers are directed to my post whether they want to read it or not, I’m sure Lynn would be appreciative if her hyperlink directed folks to her site rather than mine :-).
But again, thank you for the link.
Whoops, David! Thank you so much for pointing this out…
And I’ll thank David, too; he could have just stayed mum and kept my potential traffic :-). And also thanks to Hugo for linking me.
As several of the commenters pointed out, women have good reason to fear significant negative repercussions for vocalizing desire.
At a lesser level of negativeness than the “asking to be assaulted” one, I once got teased for a year for making the mistake of saying in public that a guy in the room was attractive. I can’t think the guy in question would have been teased in the same way for saying the same of me (not that having me teased for complimenting him particularly benefited him, either).
I appreciate this part - “This doesn’t mean, of course, that a man can claim a right to be found attractive.” One of the things that annoyed me about the previous thread was the sense that some of the commenters were sort of claiming a right to be found attractive and approached by women. And that left a bad taste in my mouth.
I agree that both women and men are harmed by norms that make it dangerous (physically or socially) for women to express desire and take the initiative in relationships/dating. But no one has a “right” to have other people compensate for their limitations/weaknesses (especially wrt who they choose as romantic partners). Personally, I believe that with patience and openness most people can find someone who is compatible with them and interested in a romantic relationship. But there’s no “right” for it to be easy, or for it to happen X number of times in a particular 5 year period, or for it to work out and live happily ever after.
Do most people really do that “hotter than me, less hot than me” thing…? I notice people (women) who are attractive to me personally; I don’t automatically notice men’s looks, but I can certainly judge men’s appearances when asked. But I don’t have a running hierarchy of how my attractiveness compares to others.
I assume this is because of my gender — I can’t compare myself automatically to women or men because I’m not comparable. I think of women as potential lovers much more than I think of them as competition, and I guess I sort of think of men as competition, but not really, since most of the women I might date don’t like men. So it strikes me as requiring a pretty high level of gender conformity in order to do that automatic ranking thing. I’d be curious to hear what other genderqueer folks’ experiences are here.
Daisy: I, personally, rank other women’s attractiveness only partly as a basis for desirability. I largely do it as a holdover from my teens: the “prettier” girl (or more gender-conforming girl) is fairly likely to hold more social power than me, while the “less pretty” girl is less likely to be more powerful than me. I think in some ways it’s closer to the “ass-kicking” scale than anything else.
Lis: interesting. I guess I’m just continuing to realize the extent to which I don’t feel like a girl — because I’m definitely more likely to evaluate whose ass I can kick than who’s prettier than me. I guess I don’t really use feminine forms of social power…?
But, this is likely a derail — I’ll take the topic up at my place.
Hugo,
interesting follow-up. A couple of points -
“we generally don’t acknowledge that men do rank each other on the sexual desirability scale.”
No Spam? Ever? Check your Wordpress spam queue for some examples of a probably rather important market concerned with penis size - certainly ONE element of sexual desirability on which most men clearly rank themselves AND are aware thereof.
“I remember learning this when I was about eleven) into “boob men”, “butt men” and “leg men.” The depressing implication is that the desire is for body parts, not whole people.”
Quite frankly, as problematic as such a reduced list is, I find it as problematic to say that it’s not ok to be aroused by a certain visual feature because of alleged “objectification” - people have preferences for facial structures, hair, eye-colour even if you don’t get into the arousal factor of actual “objects” (aka fetishes).
So if there is a guy who reacts strongly to large breasts, a woman with small breasts will have a harder time making him interested in her sexually, if that’s what she wants. And it is absolutely ok to have visual and sexual preferences, we all have them, women as well as men, and they’re NOT some kind of disregard for someone else’s personality, they’re just a part of our own psychology. It may be worthwhile to look outside one’s pattern, but there is certainly nothing wrong to stay within it.
“Part of my journey to justice as an adult man has been unlearning that training to “rank” women;”
Would be really interested to find out what’s “unjust” about it. It may not be fair to summarize attractivity on a scorecard, however balanced, and it certainly doesn’t do justice to any person’s personality, but that’ not the point of the exercise. So how is it unjust? (women do it, too, btw, and - if I may say so, in a much more brutal way than any man would ever do: the level of detail in which men are judged by groups of women is astonishing - I know because I’ve actually turned ranking into a bar game for mixed groups ;)
“I had a keen sense of where I ranked on the handsomeness scale compared to other men.
But of course, most of these young men have very little idea of what it is that girls and women find attractive — the “Brad Pitt Discourse” does a tremendous amount of damage, I think.”
Whatever the reason, of course you can rank yourself within the male group acording to your OWN criteria, but, to be honest, I think my own criteria are completely off when it comes to what women (on average) seem to find attractive.
You’re certainly right to say that there is no right to be appreciated. But I will repeat a point I made in the other thread in a reply to figleaf - I think a lot of the male behaviour often considered as problematic is a direct consequence of not feeling sexually confident. So, as a rule of thumb, I’d say - help men get more sexually confident and the world will be a better place.
SamSeaborn: “So if there is a guy who reacts strongly to large breasts, a woman with small breasts will have a harder time making him interested in her sexually, if that’s what she wants.”
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. If a gal reacts strongly to a man with very large penis, that is of course her prerogative.
Sam: How do we “help men get more sexually confident” and whose job is it exactly?
Mark me down as another woman who frequently ranks other women in a room and I totally agree with Lis above that it is pretty much the same things as the ass-kicking scale. I’m straight, so how pretty a woman is doesn’t mean too much to me personally except that attractiveness dictates social order, especially in more traditional surroundings where openly apparent wit, intelligence and confidence might be considered less desirable in a woman. (Ask me about the multiple people who have attacked me in my life for thinking my (educated, but not really superlative) vocabulary is too large! It’s weird.)
But I’m not sure how much this post and the previous one are dealing with public interactions and how much is about communication between lovers because I have very different feelings depending. Is this more about unfamiliar women not actively salivating over how a man looks or a female lover not confessing that she finds her male partner hot?
“How do we “help men get more sexually confident” and whose job is it exactly?”
It’s the job of individual men to learn to feel more sexually confident. It’s the job of all individuals - male or female - to develop sexual confidence (if they want sexual confidence). I suspect that Sam believes that women should play a part in helping men develop sexual confidence, which as Hugo already stated, not our job. People have to learn for themselves to feel confident in themselves, whether we’re referring to sexual confidence or other realms of confident behavior and attitudes. No one else can do that for an individual.
Both men and women have a responsibility to act ethically and with courtesy toward others, and that’s about where the “help others be sexually confident” ends.
“Mark me down as another woman who frequently ranks other women in a room and I totally agree with Lis above that it is pretty much the same things as the ass-kicking scale.”
As a bisexual woman, my take on this is somewhat different. I notice other women’s attractiveness, although my idea of attractiveness in a woman is often very different from a man’s idea of what is physically attractive in a woman. I’m just as likely to see a soft butch woman as attractive as I am a femme woman (more so possibly). When it comes to actually ranking other women in regards to their possible competition for men in the room, I just don’t really do that. ::shrugs:: For starters, I’m not a terribly possessive person so I have no objections to “sharing” men with other women. I’m highly unlikely to compete with other women for sexual attention from men. The only time I might feel any real competitiveness with other women for male attention is when a woman is actively trying to cut me out of the picture by trying to monopolize the attention of a man I was already partnered with. Even then, I’m not likely to cling or compete heavily. The more you cling or compete the more likely you are to lose the very attention that you’re trying to maintain. Plus, I’m no more entitled to a man’s attention than he is to mine. If he prefers another woman over me, that’s just a fact I have to accept.
Faith, I agree with you and was asking Sam because, as you said, I think he believes women should play a part and, yeah, it isn’t our job, but I was curious about how Sam thought that it would work. Maybe Sam meant something different, but if not than I want to know what he imagines women’s responsibilities to be in this department.
I do not rank other women according to their attractiveness, and have never heard of a woman in my circle doing so. I absolutely do not have thoughts like ‘prettier than me’, ‘not prettier than me’. As a woman I do appreciate attractive women - both for their natural physical blessings and their sense of style - but then I used to work in fashion/costume and my work has always involved my love and fascination with the visual. When I walk into a room full of people, if anything, I wonder which women I might want to be friends with/talk to! I do also spend a fair amount of energy checking out style/latest trends etc and sometimes I imagine what improvements I might make - like a stylist, or interior designer walking into a beautiful, but not freshly decorated stately home. Some of my friends appreciate this trait, although I’d never volunteer advice unsolicited!!!
I have read about women creating some competitive/comparative listing in their heads in the media and always assumed it to be some mysoginistic slurr. So I’m very suprised it is being discussed her as such a given.
Also, this idea that men and women have a type they must go for??? I did that when I was a teen, it changed every six months. Now I realise that whatever my ‘type’ is they will only remain so if their brain is engaged and their true character is as fine as their looks. I pity men who are trapped and enslaved in some big boob quest!!! Also, I mean, does that mean that if the boob man finally gets his type, he’ll give up on her if she gets breast cancer and has to have a masectomy?? does that spell a lifetime of misery or divorce for them both??
I really think this whole importance on physical hotness is pretty superficial and immature. Being thought of as hot never brought me anything great, the best relationships I’ve had, in which I’ve felt the most loved for who I am have been based and much more than that. I can understand what Hugo was saying about men wanting to be wanted for themselves and not for their money, or what they do; but trading that in for looks is just jumping from the frying pan into the fire. You might find some temporary relief but the novelty would wear off pretty quick.
Sam Seaborn: If you set up a situation where men and women are asked to rank members of the opposite sex, that is entirely different to it being part of a natural process. And yes, if you ask a group of women to carry out a task and they set their mind to it they’ll do it as thorough as possible.
“If you set up a situation where men and women are asked to rank members of the opposite sex, that is entirely different to it being part of a natural process.”
Being drunk isn’t a natural state of being either (He said it was a bar game. I’d assume that means most of the people involved had at least had a couple of drinks). People behave and think far differently when they have been drinking than when they are sober. One small sample of women Sam knows is also hardly represent of the majority of women.
This is also the first time I’ve ever heard anyone state that women rank men more brutally than men rank women. Most of the men and women I have spoken with about this fully agree that ranking members of the opposite sex for physical attractiveness is far more likely to be a male activity than a female one. Whether or not they believe this is a negative behavior or one which needs to be changed varies.
How does a sexually confident man act? If a man acts generally confident, does that work?
Does he present himself to women saying, “I’m hot, right?”
Seems to me the only difference between a man who is sexually confident and one who is not is that former gets it when a woman says it, even indirectly. The latter does not.
A guy who walks around like he’s God’s Gift to Women is going to be razzed pretty good by his buddies.
Better be better at listening to the women. Let the bling go.
I don’t have this tendency to ‘rank’ women on physical attractiveness, although of course I notice it. I’ve never been highly invested in an environment where the social structure was based on prettiness (sometimes it’s been based on look-smart-ness, which is a combination of ‘pretty’ and ‘not sexy’ as far as I can tell). It’s hard for me to consciously say whether someone is prettier or less pretty than I am, although who knows what sort of subconscious reactions may be going on.
I find it very easy to believe that some group of women could be extremely harsh in their assessments/rankings of men. Bitterness, homosociality, power plays - these things all apply to women as well. But it’s much less a part of mainstream, publicized “women’s culture” than it is for men.
Okay, but understand that as long as the men are the only ones who initiate, and that 1 “Yes” in 50 is considered a good ratio for men who are already good with women, men will continue to display the pathologies of thwarted suitors. At the very least, women who actually experience desire in response to a man’s being or actions could act on it–but women know from their experience that initiating means rejection, and they wont’ intiate unless they have to, and most don’t–and one crucial element is being the initator of sensual touch.
But they won’t, because heterosexuality is overwhelmingly a system that caters to women, even the totally average woman, and no one gives up a power position to risk an ego blow *if he/she has a choice.*
Seeing as I’m in my mid-sixties, my recollection of being told I was hot–so that I actually heard it–is probably pretty rusty. On the other hand, there may be nothing to remember.
I do recall two separate situations where a woman said, “You looked good.”. I thought that was pretty cool until I twigged to the fact that they’d have applauded Quasimodo. It was a matter of seriously deteriorating situations which were moving toward being threatening.
So those went overboard.
Then there was the girl who said, “You know something, Aubrey? You’re clean.”
I was absorbing that, wondering if I needed to check myself in to the hearing clinic, when she expanded on the subject.
“Look,” she said, at the disproportionate number of wannabe hippies with their bed hair, their wispy beards as if they’d forgottent to wash their faces (probably true) and their dirty bare feet.
So what I had thought was necessary but not sufficient turned into damned near sufficient. Depends on the context. Probably a lesson there, someplace.
Interesting topic.
I’m a trans woman. For a number of years following my transition, I used to rank my own attractiveness relative to other women. However, I did this out the fear of not passing as cissexual (non-transgender). It came out of a desire for safety and a desire to be properly gendered by others. That was a number of years ago and since I have gained confidence that I pass as cissexual, I do this far less often. Since I’m (mostly) a lesbian, I don’t really care much if men find me attractive.
Prior to turning 17, when I still identified as male, I didn’t bother sizing up other males on their physical prowess. I was so poorly skilled at defending myself that my default assumption was that any male in the room could give me a trouncing.
As a woman who survived physical and emotional abuse during her childhood, I do size up men on how safe I’m likely to be in their presence. I only do this with men I don’t know well.
Since I’m a lesbian, I’m speaking as an outsider, but it seems to me that heterosexuality has plenty of drawbacks for everyone involved. The uneven gender roles seem to make many female/male interactions a minefield of misunderstanding. Furthermore, the whole system is embedded in a society-wide power differential that favors men. At the very least, how many guys have to face the prospect of date rape?
While I can agree that men probably face a lot of unfair expectations by a system that’s still riddled with gender-restrictive assumptions, I’m hardly unconvinced by the notion that heterosexuality favors women.
Change that to “hardly convinced”.
Elle Dee,
sorry, I’m a bit in a hurry, just a brief reply. a) Of course women aren’t more responsible for male well-being than vice-versa. But what I was trying to say was that I think lack of sexual confidence is what causes a couple of problematic behaviours in men. To the extent that women can contribute to giving men more confidence, for example, by telling them that they are “hot” when they are, and thus by allowing them to see that they do hold sexual power as well. I believe that would go a long way in helping to address many of the male behavioral issues that are often discussed in feminist discourse. Sure, men are responsible for their own psychological well-being, but on the other hand: confidence is a relational construct, it is only relevant with respect to other humans.
Eurosabra,
“Okay, but understand that as long as the men are the only ones who initiate, and that 1 “Yes” in 50 is considered a good ratio for men who are already good with women, men will continue to display the pathologies of thwarted suitors.”
Sorry, 1 “yes” in 50? What kind of “yes” are you talking about?
matey, faith,
well, I think my female friends aren’t a representative sample of all women, but, overall, the women I meet in clubs probably are. Be that as it may, the bar game idea came up when I witnessed women doing this in a way that was worthy of a dialogue in Sex and the City…
“Okay, but understand that as long as the men are the only ones who initiate,”
Men are not the only ones who ever initiate. I’m a woman who initiates and I know several other women who do initiate. Men might be the ones who do the majority of the initiating, but that is slowly changing. If men want that to change more drastically, then supporting feminism - or feminist goals - is one of the most obvious ways to empower women to feel more confident in approaching men.
“men will continue to display the pathologies of thwarted suitors.”
As someone who approaches women for romantic/sexual purposes, I have been repeatedly rejected by women (I also approach men, but I can’t recall ever being rejected by a man). Yet, somehow, I have managed to not get all pissy about it and blame them for not being interested in having sex or a relationship with me.
“But they won’t, because heterosexuality is overwhelmingly a system that caters to women, even the totally average woman, and no one gives up a power position to risk an ego blow *if he/she has a choice.*”
Uh, no, heterosexuality is not a system which overwhelmingly caters to women. Heterosexuality is a system which has a long history of shitting all over women in virtually every capacity. The fact that women do not approach men more often isn’t because of a fear of a blow to the ego, it’s because of a very real fear of being shamed for expressing desire, and a very real fear of possibly being physically harmed.
“well, I think my female friends aren’t a representative sample of all women, but, overall, the women I meet in clubs probably are.”
I’d say that’s a negative as well. They are perhaps representative of, oh, the type of women who go to clubs.
Sam, for all that SATC talk - only Samantha went for looks in the end! Oh and they don’t grade men - they do express preferences about appearances, but there is no scale and appearance is not the only factor in their preferences.
Women in clubs are not an overall representation of women. Try again.
Eurosabra - you sound like a devotee of those g-d-awful pickup artist TV shows. 1 out of 50? What kind of “cold calling” are you talking about here? Do you count everyone you ever have a conversation with? Is it a “no” if the check-out clerk at the grocery store doesn’t ask you out after you engage in civil chit-chat? That’s just not how people interact.
My husband “asked me out” but he asked me out AFTER we had had a number of friendly conversations, then some flirty conversations, and after I’d specifically e-mailed him to tell him I was going to a particular event that he was also invited to. He knew that I was interested. Who took “the initiative”? It was an INTERACTION, one that we were both a part of.
Personally, I would never go out with someone who walked up to me in a bar or on the street and asked me out. Why? Because I don’t know who the hell that person is! I guess some people do it, but if you think it’s the only way that people ever become partnered, you’re missing out on a whole lotta life. When people get to know each other from working together, or going to a class together, or sharing a hobbie or sport, they get to know each other slowly, they get to trust each other, like each other, and get a sense of whether the other person is romantically interested in them. That’s how everyone I know has gotten partnered. Not by walking up to someone on the street and saying “you’re really hot, want to go out on Friday?”
Emily, you are right! so right. And I know it’s a bit off track but that thing of being approached in the street happened to me last week and when I checked the guy’s name on email list of the university he said he went to, he was not there. It did feel weird to be approached like that, if very flattering - I got a buzz from it, but also felt a little creeped by it. He said he’d seen me around and how attractive he thought I was etc, etc. Felt a bit unreal, like what does he know of me? Would a grown adult really ask another person on a date just cos they looked a certain way? And what on earth do we have in common? Like who the hell is this person? And is he attracted soley on looks is he just interested in sex? But I admired his bottle, and I must admit, as I was just about to turn 40 it did re - assure me that, yes, I am probably still a contender. Sad, but true, and I wish I hadn’t needed the re - assurance.
One of the things that annoyed me about the previous thread was the sense that some of the commenters were sort of claiming a right to be found attractive and approached by women.
I thought most of them were claiming a *desire* to. Big difference.
Of course nobody has a right to be found attractive. But that doesn’t mean it can’t suck when you want to be but aren’t. (And it doesn’t mean that there’s nothing wrong with conventional beauty standards, or that folks who are excluded from being regarded as desirable are acting entitled by complaining about this.)
Sam,
That would be anything from meeting a stranger in a public setting, to a common-interest event, to a circle-of-friends introduction, with about 5 to 15 minutes of conversation, the establishment of a certain degree of rapport, and asking for a follow-up (if the setting/event doesn’t allow for deeper rapport). The crucial thing is the presence of enough connection to make a follow-up viable, and the establishment of a romantic (or proto-romantic, I guess) context. A phone number without connection is useless, a phone number in a “just friends” context is not good for romance. I suppose I am really talking about picking someone up, romance, seduction, with any attached predatory connotations having to be nullified by 1)being agenda-less and 2)being accepting of whatever the other person chooses to share rather than demanding.
Context being everything, a lot of the discussion is, well, orthogonal. I am almost tempted to push the NiceGuy(tm) reply, “Yeah, but I meant WOMEN.” Meaning straight, white, cis-sexual, young, middle-class, able-bodied, thin, and usually conventionally-pretty. Did I miss anything? Fluent in the culture’s dominant language, as well. However, since we have a very diverse group, I suppose Sam’s experience is some kind of norm, although his discourse, like mine, is about people who are within that norm. So there is a bit of a blindness there which, statistically speaking, cancels out the experience of the vast majority of women.
Translation: I’m sorry, but your experiences and your views are irrelevant because none of you are normal women.
Nice.
Here we have fancy new words wrapped around a tired old prejudicial response. Folks have been using lines like this since the birth of second wave feminism. Feminist viewpoints have been dismissed because the women stating them “are too aggressive,” “behave like men,” “are a bunch of hairy legged dykes,” “are ‘failed women,’” and so on. Essentially, all of those responses distill down to variations of, “you aren’t normal, so why should we listen to you?”
“Meaning straight, white, cis-sexual, young, middle-class, able-bodied, thin, and usually conventionally-pretty.”
Yes, because people with vaginas who do not fall into each and every one of those categories are not women.
Oy.
Put another way, when someone says that our responses are orthogonal to the discussion at hand because we don’t represent women who are “straight, white, cis-sexual, young, middle-class, able-bodied, thin, and usually conventionally-pretty,” what he is saying is a politely worded variation of this:
Right, and I see I should’ve made it clearer that that is NOT a discourse to which I subscribe, distancing myself from it in a more explicit manner than “I am tempted…”
Faith, Matey,
“Women in clubs are not an overall representation of women. Try again.”
Hmm, you think people who “go to clubs” are - on average - different from people who “do not go to clubs”? Interesting. Why? In my experience, everyone “goes to clubs” occasionally, and the demographic for both males and females is probably rather representative of the general society in a specific age range, except for the fact that they may be more often single than not. Yes, it’s possible to go to places who cater to a more specific target group, but I wasn’t talking about “gentlemen’s clubs” or swinger clubs, just about places where a lot of urban people choose to hang out with friends, preferably on weekend evenings and nights.
Eurosabra,
you’re talking 1 in 50 for every interaction of the kinds you mention? Well, I think that’s not true for most men, let alone men “who are good with women”. Last year, I had some kind of follow-up (fb, email, phone, more) with 85 out of about 100 women I met (approached, was introduced to, or who approached me). Sounds a lot, but it actually means meeting and having a conversation of some kind with two previously unknown women a week, which isn’t that much. Doesn’t mean I had dates with 85 women, doesn’t mean I had sex with 85 women, but the ratio is still quite different from the 1 in 50 you mention. Had *I* wanted to, I probably could have sex with about 20 of them, 8 or so of which were seriously interested in a longer-term relationship. So that would make the “possibility of sex” “conversion rate” for each encounter 1 in 5. I’m not telling you the actual number, though ;).
And I’m a guy who had, until a couple of years ago, a seriously repressed sexuality and who still has problems to be as open and physical as he should/could be. And no, no Brad Pitt either.
I’d say 1 in 50 is also off even for people who are what would commonly be considered “bad with women”, simply because they a) usually will never talk to as many women to find out they’re bad, because rejection seriously sucks, and b) they will usually fall in love with one of the first women who give them some attention which then sometimes leads to the nice guy syndrome, but more often actually results in a relationship because “being bad with women” is also a good way to find out if she’s really interested in you as a person and not mostly into mutual entertaining (which is perfectly fine, it’s just not something men who are “bad with women” are looking for or can offer).
Emily,
“My husband “asked me out” but he asked me out AFTER we had had a number of friendly conversations, then some flirty conversations, and after I’d specifically e-mailed him to tell him I was going to a particular event that he was also invited to. He knew that I was interested. Who took “the initiative”? It was an INTERACTION, one that we were both a part of.”
That’s the way it should be :)
Hmm, you think people who “go to clubs” are - on average - different from people who “do not go to clubs”?
Well, I do. It never even occurred to me to think otherwise.
In my experience, everyone “goes to clubs” occasionally
Sure, that’s almost true, but in my experience, “occasionally” works out to “a couple of times and then never again” for some people and “nearly every weekend” for others. Having known a lot of people, even single people, in the “almost never go to clubs” set, I think there has to be some difference between the folks who go to clubs and those who don’t. Even if it’s just a different average level of introversion/extroversion.
Also, back in the day when I was young, much of the time when my friends did go to clubs it was coming and leaving in the same group and showing no interest in meeting the people who were already there. So people who actually meet people in clubs, with any regularity, seem to me even more potentially different from the average person.
(On the other hand, I have known people to meet an SO through a gym, so I suppose if you count gyms as a sort of club …)
Lynn,
“Having known a lot of people, even single people, in the “almost never go to clubs” set, I think there has to be some difference between the folks who go to clubs and those who don’t. Even if it’s just a different average level of introversion/extroversion.”
Yes, I guess that’s a fair point. But even though, the mix of people you will get on an average night in an average club will be one of people who will go there “almost never” and people who are “refular clubgoers”, and thus, probably not be too different from the clubgoer/non-clubgoer composition of the overall population.
“Also, back in the day when I was young, much of the time when my friends did go to clubs it was coming and leaving in the same group and showing no interest in meeting the people who were already there.”
Well, in my experience almost no one doesn’t want to meet new people, and not necessarily for mating, just because new people are new and thus potentially exciting (and humans are usually inherent variety seekers). It just depends on HOW it happens. And with respect to going out, groups are, in my opinion, plesant to be with, and a literal and conversational safety net for most people, not an indication that they are not interested in meeting new people. Could be the case, of course, but in my experience that’s not the rule, not even when they tell you at first: I recently met a female friend in a club and we chatted a bit, then one of her girlfriends who did not know me came over and told me that they were “on a lady’s only night” so I should stop talking to her friend. So I said, sure, not a problem, said bye to my fiend and walked away. Five minutes later the girlfriend who was apparently only trying to protect her friend from someone she didn’t know finds me and tells me, “since I had already ruined their lady’s only night, I might just as well get to know her…”
“So people who actually meet people in clubs, with any regularity, seem to me even more potentially different from the average person.”
I’m not sure, it may also be that they have become more confident in an environment they feel comfortable in.
“(On the other hand, I have known people to meet an SO through a gym, so I suppose if you count gyms as a sort of club …)”
Wow, I find it particularly complicated to meet people in the gym, because I find it much more intrusive to approach (or be approached) when I’m so self-absorbed and working out. So, no, I don’t count gyms as clubs.
Of course nobody has a right to be found attractive. But that doesn’t mean it can’t suck when you want to be but aren’t.
The problem is when “I want to be found attractive” and “I have a right to be found attractive” get conflated. That’s what the whole Nice Guy ™ thing is about - guys who feel that they are owed female attention, and when they’re not getting it, turn that anger at females for behaving badly (i.e., lavishing attention on others and not them).
Mythago,
The nice guy TM, nice girl TM thing isn’t merely about attention and not getting it, it’s about miscommunication and conflated categories of value exchange in a relationship - it’s about not getting the *specific kind of attention* you want from someone while not being able to appropriately communicate the interest in the specific kind of attention (and therefore resorting to a different kind of communication strategy hoping the other party will understand what you’re actually trying to say) as well as (usually) a certain unwillingness of the other party to openly address such problems as soon as they become apparent, which, if done intentionally, because the “nice person” is convenient, is bad in its own right. Most “other parties” who later complain about “nice people” and their wrong expectations in my experience are partly responsible for maintaining an unclear situation even when they think there may be such interest differentials for fear of conflict or because they find the situation convenient. I’ve yet to come across a case in which the “other party” was completely unaware of the dynamics of the relationship with the “nice person”.
“Hmm, you think people who “go to clubs” are - on average - different from people who “do not go to clubs”?”
Yes.
“Why? In my experience, everyone “goes to clubs” occasionally,”
I know people who never go to clubs. There are also plenty of people worldwide who do not go to clubs. There are people worldwide who don’t even have access to clubs. They are lucky to have roofs over their heads. They certainly aren’t spending their time going to clubs. When you take in the entire population, there’s probably only a very small percentage of people who have ever even set foot in a club. You can’t take your experience as an obviously privileged individual and apply it to the collective.
I was under the impression that this was a discussion about men and women. Not middle-upper class men and women.
“The nice guy TM, nice girl TM thing isn’t merely about attention and not getting it, it’s about miscommunication and conflated categories of value exchange in a relationship”
No, I’m pretty positive that it is very much about wanting attention, not getting it, and getting pissed off because they believe they have a right to some attention from some woman at least some of the time.
“Most “other parties” who later complain about “nice people” and their wrong expectations in my experience are partly responsible for maintaining an unclear situation even when they think there may be such interest differentials for fear of conflict or because they find the situation convenient.”
That might make sense when you apply it to “nice guys”, except for the fact that they get pissed off after women have made themselves perfectly clear. Regardless of how clear or unclear another person is, no one has the right to get upset with an individual for not giving them the attention they want. They certainly don’t have the right to take their anger out on half the population simply because they haven’t received the attention that they desire.
Faith,
“There are also plenty of people worldwide who do not go to clubs. There are people worldwide who don’t even have access to clubs. They are lucky to have roofs over their heads.”
Sure. Plenty of people worldwide don’t go to clubs in the common Western sense. On the other hands, having been to slums and Favelas in Latin America, I can tell you that they do have their equivalents.
“I was under the impression that this was a discussion about men and women. Not middle-upper class men and women.”
It was a discussion about personal experiences, to the extent this is possible. I was generalizing my experience to that part of humantiy that I think I can attempt to generalize about as well as the part of the collective that is relevant to me with respect to the question at hand.
“Regardless of how clear or unclear another person is, no one has the right to get upset with an individual for not giving them the attention they want. They certainly don’t have the right to take their anger out on half the population simply because they haven’t received the attention that they desire.”
That’s two different things - a) no, it’s certainly stupid to think all men or all women are “like that” and take their anger out on every woman or every man. That said, b) being angry often isn’t a matter of being right or wrong, it’s an emotional reaction and thus valid in its own right from the perspective of the angry person. Of course it’s not fair to blame someone for not being attracted. But whether anger about someone taking advantage of someone else by not communicating a perceived differential in mutual attraction would be justified would obviously depend on the specific case.
Hey Samseaborn: Ermmm! so, these ‘women in clubs’… For a start, there are many different kinds of clubs. There are pick up places, muso places, posing haunts for stylistas even places you can just go and play snooker etc, etc, etc. And from what I remember, in the not too distant past, yes, people of all sexual variants go to these places hoping to meet someone who might want to flirt with, have sex with or love them. However!! this does not mean they are all grading and categorising eachother - in my experience of the more sensitive souls’ kind of night club people are more likely to be standing around/dancing/trying to break the ice, and hoping that someone will like THEM!! And more often than not the novelty wears off and they give up. In fact, there is a very famous and brilliant Smiths song about that very experience.
Some lyrics from ‘How Soon is Now’penned by Morrisey
There is a club that you have to go
So you go and stand on your own,
And you leave on your own
And you go home and you cry
And you want to die
Lyrics which have resonated with millions across multiple continents and decades.
Alot of people are not creating league tables, but hoping for something they’re very unlikely to find in a club - genuine affection. Or alternatively, just using nightclubs in a realistic fashion and having a laugh with friends. This leads to another type of club goer - the type that goes to cheesy joints for a laugh with friends and gets irritated by creepy blokes eyeing up their ladyness - they’re not jotting down a league table. Perhaps there are places where league tabling and critiquing of men by women happens collectively and en mass, and clearly that’s what makes you tick, so more power to you, but not everyody feels the same way, and not all clubs and club goers are the same.
The other factor in this is - perhaps you choose your company and they choose you according to type - birds of a feather and all that. Or maybe, because people who know know you savour this sort of thing they play up to it. And yes, I do know this theory works vice versa. Errmmm, I am middle class, white, not old, not fat and have done a bit of modeling. I don’t know what ci - sexual means. I looked ci up in the dictionary and it means this side of Rome. Do I now qualify as a woman in your book, or just almost woman? Because most women are not as you describe… or anything like it. And most of them are beyond an age when night clubs hold any magnetic allure… if they ever did.
Matey, I think I pretty much agree with all you’re saying.
I also think I’ve already addressed a couple of your points in my last reply to Faith.
Btw, I never said anything about creating league tables but about a natural tendency to rank people according to individual criteria, often just for the one reason that is “approachability” - you rightly mention this -
“Alot of people are not creating league tables, but hoping for something they’re very unlikely to find in a club - genuine affection.”
As a bar game it’s just fun and not to be taken seriously, but it’s a tremendous equalizer because most women actually like doing this out in the open (of a small group), and particularly doing so with a man. With respect to the subject matter of this post, it also allows women to express their appreciation for the hotness and explain their visual preferences in a way they probably wouldn’t do.
“Regardless of how clear or unclear another person is, no one has the right to get upset with an individual for not giving them the attention they want. They certainly don’t have the right to take their anger out on half the population simply because they haven’t received the attention that they desire.”
I feel compelled to note the irony of that statement in context to feminist discourse about male attraction to women and the beauty standard. The complaint made by women who are not considered conventionally attractive is that men ought to find them attractive, that women are owed male attention and advances, and when they do not receive it, it is fair to take that out on males. The assumption that men should find all women attractive is held up as the standard behavior men should have and that female insecurity is a crisis men should feel compelled to address.
I am inclined to agree that the issue is primarily one of miscommunication. Both men and women fail to communicate their actual interests and both do not know how to handle rejection. The sense of entitlement is shared by both sides, and for what I would argue are equally self-serving reasons. Invalidating male feelings of rejection does not help the problem because everyone wants to feel desirable, and not being desired, as many women can attest to, does not feel very good.
On a slightly related note, as someone who goes out of his way to be sexually undesirable, I have noticed that the way I dress, what I talk about and how I present myself has a far greater effect on how women respond to me than anyone acknowledged here. I think women rate men based on sexual attractiveness more often than they are willing to admit, and the unwillingness to admit it probably has more to do with women holding a much higher opinion of their own motives than it does any social restraint.
Matey,
“Cis” means the opposite of “trans”: “One the same side” as opposed to “across”. At least, in organic chemistry and fields like that. I’ve never heard ‘cis-sexual’ before, and it has me roll my eyes a bit, but I think I can figure out the meaning.
A reminder, folks, that all comments here need to be feminist-friendly.
Sam,
Basically, there are a lot of things about myself I can’t change, such as the autism and depression, that make it hard for me to be normally social, although I manage it and have a decent number of friends, and am very close with a few female friends. What I can’t avoid, as a depressed Aspie with some ADD and anxiety, is a petulant anger when I don’t get what I want, and leaves my long-term “success” ratio–meaning multiple meetings–at 1 in 250. “Game” taught me how “typicals” mate, and how to recognize when someone is willing to/trying to get with me. I get very cynical when I read words like “owed” or “entitlement”, because I have gone periods of up to ten years without a relationship, two years being average, and the shortest 9 months, and all of that as an extrovert, and being as social as time allows. If I don’t act like I am at least entitled to begin a conversation, I’ll be alone indefinitely.
If you often, frequently, or even only sometimes have members of the appropriate sex spontaneously desire you and try to gain rapport with you, and you can recognize that desire and that attempt to gain rapport, you are experiencing a type of privilege.
Eurosabra,
well, not sure what to say. I think it’s great that you manage to have meaningful relationships, even if rarely romantically, despite your suffering from such diseases. I’m not an expert, but I’d say that’s quite an accomplishment. And you seem to keep trying despite being aware of your challenges. Impressive.
I wasn’t doubting that there are a number of people who have severe problems interacting with other people, particularly of the opposite sex and particularly if they aren’t well versed in picking up other people’s emotional reactions.
Until a couple of years ago, I was rather bad with women as well, and often was the guy in the morrisey song quoted above. But I would never have gotten to 1 in 50, because I didn’t even approach at all and when I was approached and things started to develop I usually ran away before it got serious because I was afraid.
My point is - if you had said out of 50 women you would like to interact with how many did you actually interact with - that may have been a reasonable ratio for most of my life. BUT - that was mostly because I did not initiate anything, not even when women were making eye contact for an hour. But simply wanting to interact and not doing anything doesn’t count for a ratio of “thwarted pursuit” which was the original context.
I can’t blame anyone but me for all those lost opportunities. It’s certainly not any of the woman’s fault. To the contrary, when I finally (partly thanks to therapy, partly thanks to scientific research in mating psychology, partly through finally taking friends’ advice seriously and partly through self-help books) to partly break out of my self-destructive pattern, and was able to look at myself I had to realise that I have always had opportunities, that there were always women around who had been interested in me and that I simply hadn’t been able to either understand their advances or that I was unwilling to jump to even having any kind of romantic interaction. I was a virgin when I received my graduate degree because I was afraid of opening myself up both emotionally and physically, not because women had thwarted my active pursuit 49 times out of 50 as long as you don’t count thinking “she’s hot” as pursuit.
Thanks Hector. I think I understand what cis - sexual is meant to mean now - not bisexual - I think… well I’ve never been bisexual, or gay. I’ve been single alot! five years is the longest stretch, and that’s not because no one found me physically attractive, it’s because no one found ME attractive and I didn’t find THEM attractive enough.
Paul Weller, Jeremy Paxman and Ricky Gervais are hot, hot, hot. But in no way bathing beauties.
Yeah, women find men physically attractive. Big news! but is that really how you want to define yourselves? We’ve been struggling with it for centuries, so please don’t ask us to pass that baggage over to you.
And Toysoldier: if you are trying deliberately to look unattractive, maybe you come accross as a bit odd, hence women avoiding you. Why the effort?
“The complaint made by women who are not considered conventionally attractive is that men ought to find them attractive,”
That’s a bit of an overstatement. I’ve never heard any feminist state that men ought to find conventionally attractive women attractive. Much of feminist discourse is actually about the exact opposite problem: figuring out how to get men to stop viewing women as sexual objects and getting men to understand that they have no right to thrust sexual attention upon us that isn’t wanted.
However, in relation to the aspect of feminism you are referring to, what gets discussed is how women are forced into attempting to maintain a very narrow definition of beauty in order to maintain some degree of social standing since we live in a society that often does not allow women any power outside of our sexual attractiveness to men. Since women are - or often feel - dependent upon men’s attention to determine their worth, this leads women to engage in majorly self-destructive behaviors. I personally don’t believe the goal of feminism is to get men to find more women attractive or to insinuate that men ought to find all types of women sexually attractive. The goal of feminism is to free women from feeling, or actually being dependent on men to obtain a certain form of self-worth, or to literally survive as the case may be.
“I’ve never heard any feminist state that men ought to find conventionally attractive women attractive.”
Make that “unconventionally attractive women”
“On the other hands, having been to slums and Favelas in Latin America, I can tell you that they do have their equivalents.”
I think you’re missing the point, but I’m not going to comment any further on this since it’s a really off-topic. There are plenty of people who do not go to clubs. There are plenty of people who do not have any desire to go to clubs. I do believe that the type of person who goes clubbing is going to have a very different attitude and mentality from the average person who does not. And again, there are plenty of poverty-stricken and rural areas which do not have anything that even resembles a bar or club.
“It was a discussion about personal experiences, to the extent this is possible.”
My point was simply that your experiences are not at all the norm. The type of life you have made quite clear that you lead is only shared by a small percentage of the population. Most people are lucky to have any college education at all, much less a graduate degree, and most people do not have the disposable income necessary to frequent clubs on a regular basis.
Matey,
You misunderstand. I am not trying to court women, yet seem to attract their unwanted attention.
Faith,
What you describe is exactly how men — primarily nice guys — feel in regards to the expectations placed on them by society and by feminists. They often are and feel dependent on women’s attention to determine their worth, which leads them to engage in majorly self-destructive behaviors. Yet, in your posts you invalidate their feelings.
Again, I think the issue is that people generally want to be desired, and it is easier to find fault with those who do not find them desirable than it is to accept that they are viewed as undesirable. The anger from both women and men is disproportionate to the actual situation, however, I do not agree that it is necessarily unwarranted, particularly when all that they have to go on are the poorly communicated cues from the other group.
::confession::: I get jealous of women and men who have better abs and hair than me. Heh.
Toy Soldier, I was refering to this statement of yours:
‘On a slightly related note, as someone who goes out of his way to be sexually undesirable, I have noticed that the way I dress, what I talk about and how I present myself has a far greater effect on how women respond to me than anyone acknowledged here.’
Or are you so devastatingly attractive you have to dress down to avoid the crowds and be able to leave the house in the morning? If someone is going ‘out of their way to be sexually desirable’ they tend to look a bit odd and uncomfortable. This is what I was refering to.
Samseaborn:
Your original posts were about how you think, (or more precisely were trying to tell us you know better than we do), the majority of women rank men according to their physical attractiveness. You based this assumption firstly on evidence gleened from an activity you orchestrated whereby women were asked to compete against men in ranking members of the opposite sex. Then you said it wasn’t just that, but also that you’d heard ‘women in clubs’ doing it too. Hence my responses.
Renegade: I get jealous of people who I think are out ranking me in my career too. I think that’s quite healthy.
“They often are and feel dependent on women’s attention to determine their worth, which leads them to engage in majorly self-destructive behaviors.”
Except for the fact that men aren’t at all dependent upon women’s attention in our society. Men’s power is not dependent on finding a woman in order to survive, or even to have status. Men already have status by virtue of being male (even if they are poor or a POC, they still have status that women do not). Men also still control the majority of the wealth and it’s necessary to have wealth to survive in a capitalist society.
Women are struggling to be able to live independent of men’s attention while men often feel entitled to women’s attention. It is two different phenomenons.
“Renegade: I get jealous of people who I think are out ranking me in my career too. I think that’s quite healthy.”
Except it doesn’t have anything to do with my career. I don’t compete with men career wise, and as far as women go…having a six pack is not exactly a sought after thing and qaulities such as youth, thin-ness, being blonde and breast size are more important.
I just happen to like nice hair (on both men and women-preferably long, actually) and personally prefer athletic (not thin, not slim/skinnny- but athletic)bodies, both to have and to look at.
I love how people always think they know how and why other people like/want/value what they do….
Renegade: You didn’t gender your first comment, you just said you got jealous of people with better hair and abs than you. Nothing about six packs either. And we were discussing how women rank or don’t rank themselves in relation to eachother.
I love how people make vague statements out of context and then wonder why they are misunderstood. (not really, ha, ha, isn’t irony clever!!!!!!)
Matey- No, flat out you assumed my statement was work related. My statement is that I get jealous of men and women with better abs than me. Now, if anyone else made such a statement would you assume it was work related? Would you? If an accoutant, or editor, or IT director, or teacher said they got jealous of people (male and female) with better abs then them that it was work related? No? Well cupcake, I am more than my job…Just Like Every Other Human.
Also shows you actually know pretty little about what is valued physically in the sex business…nice abs (at least for women) are pretty far down on the list….
So yeah, you annoyed me with your statement. Just because i am a sex worker does not mean my envy of people with nice abs has to do with my job, and if you would not assume that for any other profession, well, stop assuming the same sorts of shit for sex workers, thanks.
To get back to the original post:
Do most people prefer feeling desired to feeling not desired?
Yes.
Are women more or less likely, or the same, as men in wanting to feel desired?
Probably the same, although whether it’s actually more or less, probably not by much more or less. Which means that the issue can’t be dismissed by saying it affects very few of the group which is less interested in feeling desired.
Are women desired for their attractiveness? Of course. Are men? Yes, but with far less public attention, talk, beauty contests, designers desperate for new and profitable seasons flattering women, spots for advertising practically everything but heavy equipment.
As my wife said, “You know what every man wants all the time,” speaking of her time in college.
The fact is, most men do not know this about themselves. Either women for the most part do not sexually desire men in the, say, top half for conventional attractiveness, or they do.
If they do, why do men not know it?
We’ve discussed various reasons.
One I’ve not seen is that if the man knows he’s desired, he has power. If he’s permanently in the selling mode, he can be manipulated. It would pay a woman to keep that to herself until further into the relationship than men do, or can.
The next question is, so what? What does it mean?
What needs to be done?
As I mentioned earlier, I am familiar, from my college time, with at least half a dozen examples of women wanting a relationship with a particular guy which did not happen because the guy couldn’t interpret her interest. He couldn’t interpret her interest because, for guys, it so rarely happens that it is not part of their world.
If she says, “You have very attractive eyes,”, he thinks, “Well, damn. That’s nice of her to say. I’ll have to look in a mirror to see what she’s talking about.” But he’ll say, “You want another beer?”
So, if the relationship the woman wants doesn’t happen, both lose.
Communication theory says that the communicator is 100% responsible for the success or failure of the communication. He ought to know what it takes to get through. If the other party is deaf, is distracted, is hostile, is clueless, the communicator needs to factor that in. Keeping in mind that the motive for the communication is to solve the communicator’s problem which is that the other party needs to hear something. No matter how thick the other party is, if the communication doesn’t happen, the communicator’s problem is not solved.
Perhaps women need to be more forthright. Perhaps a social change could be foreseen, in a very long time. In the short-term, she needs to kick him in the shins and speak in short, clear, SVO sentences.
Faith:
“Except for the fact that men aren’t at all dependent upon women’s attention in our society. Men’s power is not dependent on finding a woman in order to survive, or even to have status.”
This is utter nonsense. I’m a rather low-status guy who does not garner ANY female attention most of the time. Trust me, both men and women grant status based on one’s perceived dating success. I have been mocked for my social handicaps by both genders, and generally the women have been far crueler, more biting, with their commentary than most of my male peers. The usual sort of abuse I get is that no woman would want me. Perfect fucking strangers in bars still do this to me from time to time.
I’m a reasonably intelligent guy, I have nearly finished my law degree, I’m well read, etc. None of this matters. Even my own friends, try hard as they might not to, still fall into the habit of relegating me to the bottom rung of the social hierarchy totem pole, and being a dateless wonder has a lot to do with it. When you’re the only guy in the group without a +1 and this state of affairs just goes on and on, everyone, male and female, either pities or hates you. Neither is good.
I’m sorry, but your observation is, in my experience, plainly wrong.
“What so many young guys don’t know is that not all women want men who look like Brad Pitt, or George Clooney, or like the men with the eight-pack abs on the front of the Men’s Fitness magazines.”
Really? I think there are close to as many women as men (assume you’re referring to hetero) who want conventionally hot partners. ToySoldier is in part correct that “I think women rate men based on sexual attractiveness more often than they are willing to admit,” only that it’s not a question of not admitting it to themselves or friends, but of not letting men know they are being rated in ways men rate women.
Matey/Ren — I agree with Ren that being jealous of people with more conventionally attractive features is independent of career. As a headhunter, I’m jealous of people with better abs as well.
As a postscript, I should add that often the features women are jealous of in other women aren’t those that are more conventionally attractive. I am jealous of women who are muscular enough that my husband thinks they’re man-like — and his preferences, for better or worse, closely reflect the mainstream gestalt.
Faith,
“Except for the fact that men aren’t at all dependent upon women’s attention in our society.”
I’d have to say that we should probably agree to disagree because there’s no way to determine who’s right logically. In my opinion, “patriarchy” is a consequence of male weakness, not an expression of male strength - particularly in the sexual realm. I won’t go back to the discussion we had here a couple of weeks ago (wanted/needed), but I still thought it’s an important point to note.
I can only speak for myself, as a very short, conventionally unattractive, adolescent, mostly straight male, and with regards to my relationship with straight women.
I think it’s not a healthy situation to place one’s self worth on perceived sexual desirability and attention from the opposite sex, but alas, not everyone is healthy. This is true at least from my personal experience; I’ve never been kissed, never had a romantic relationship, and this makes me feel like a worthless person, as well as smothering any sexual confidence I might have had. I feel totally cut off at the knees with regards to finding someone.
My romantic loneliness corrodes me every day, I want so badly, more than anything, to be loved and desired; both for the wonderful benefits a good relationship brings, but also to prove to myself (everyone?) that I’m a capable male. I’d be thrilled to be approached by a women. I’m not owed any of these things.
I can’t imagine that I’m the only person that feels this way.
I can see where coming from a position like this could lead to a lot of the behaviors deplored of men; insecurity and desperation make people do stupid things, especially with the amount of pressure on men to tie their worth to their sexual prowess.
However, this isn’t anyone’s responsibility to deal with but mine and my psychologists.
As for whose job it is to repair men’s sexual confidence, it’s theirs, but that isn’t to say that the culture, other men, and women can’t have a hand it in. I’ve had a number of my friends, both men and women, tell me that I’m capable of finding a relationship. Was this their job? No, but it was nice anyway. My insecurities might not be entirely my fault, but they’re mainly mine to address.
Sorry, I’m rambling. What I’m trying to get at with these anecdotes is that not feeling not feeling naturally desirable for whatever reason leaves men scrambling for other ways to prove their ‘worthiness’ in courtship, through wealth or what have you. We’re also stuck here given constructs preventing women, in the vast majority of situations, from taking the first step in courtship. We’re left without an accurate gauge of how (un)desirable we might be; so we’re left with Brad Pitt. It’s hard to feel good at something with no one being in a position to tell you. This has all been said before.
I think mythago had it right: “both men and women have a responsibility to act ethically and with courtesy towards others, and that’s where the “help others be sexually confident” ends.”
“In my opinion, “patriarchy” is a consequence of male weakness, not an expression of male strength”
Patriarchy is a consequence of the belief that men are designed and intended to dominate women and are entitled to certain “services” - particularly when it comes to sex and reproduction - from women. Part of it is -perceived- male weakness, which is something that Hugo has written several posts about.
“They often are and feel dependent on women’s attention to determine their worth, which leads them to engage in majorly self-destructive behaviors.”
I’d also like to add that there is a drastic difference in the way that men and women tend to deal with being snubbed by members of the other gender. The average women when she has been snubbed doesn’t typically harm anyone but herself. Men might engage in self-destructive behaviors as a result of being rejected, but more often than not they harm other people, particularly women and children. A man who has been rejected might very well beat the woman who rejected him, rape her, or even kill her and even her children for good measure. There have been several well-reported incidents of this occurring in the U.S. in the past couple of months alone. Men also respond to lack of sexual attention by trying to take away women’s rights or deny us our rights in the first place.
Pardon me, but I have a helluva lot more compassion and sympathy for people who harm themselves than I do for people who lash out at others.
“particularly when all that they have to go on are the poorly communicated cues from the other group.”
In regards to the idea that “nice guys” are just victims of poor communication, I’ve had several encounters with “nice guys”. Now, I am nothing if not perfectly direct. I made it quite clear to them that I had no interest in them sexually. That if they wanted to associate with me that was fine, just so long as they were clear that I was only interested in a platonic relationship. They agreed with this only to later get angry somewhere down the line because I did not have sex with them.
They were holding out for the possibility that our relationship might become something sexual/romantic even though I made it quite clear -repeatedly- that it never would. Miscommunication was -not- the problem; their refusal to pay attention to what was being communicated to them quite directly was the problem.
But they won’t, because heterosexuality is overwhelmingly a system that caters to women, even the totally average woman
Baloney. A system in which women can’t approach directly at all for fear of being labeled unfeminine or desperate is NOT one that caters to them.
Oh good grief Ren! good, toned abs are usually considered very attractive, on either sex. And you did say men OR women. And having looked at your blog over the last few months your work and looks seem to be very much tied up with eachother. Both seem to be quite a preoccupation for you - especially the opportunity your work gives you to show off the muscular physique you work so hard for. So from what you let people know about yourself, then I think what I said is OK. I do not care if your are a sex worker - but it is clearly an issue for you.
Put another way, when someone says that our responses are orthogonal to the discussion at hand because we don’t represent women who are “straight, white, cis-sexual, young, middle-class, able-bodied, thin, and usually conventionally-pretty,” what he is saying is a politely worded variation of this:
Timberwraith, you crack me up.
I do wonder why he was HERE, all upset about why “Pick Up Artist” techniques aren’t getting him laid. Unless it was just an excuse to hate on some non-women (in lieu of the actual women he can’t attract).
And I should have put scare quotes around “non-women” and “actual women” to indicate sarcasm. Sorry.
The complaint made by women who are not considered conventionally attractive is that men ought to find them attractive, that women are owed male attention and advances, and when they do not receive it, it is fair to take that out on males. The assumption that men should find all women attractive is held up as the standard behavior men should have and that female insecurity is a crisis men should feel compelled to address.
Um, no. The complaint is that women are objectified such that (even if they find love when they’re not the cultural ideal) their SOCIETAL VALUE is gauged upon their adherence to said ideal. It has nothing to do with female insecurity. It’s about females being treated as objects instead of human beings.
Nice try, though.
Cara, the point was that perspectives here were so diverse that no one could relate to Sam’s perspective because he was addressing “mainstream” perspectives alone, which then got magnified into an interesting discussion about clubs with Faith that showed how clearly we were discussing a subset of a subset of one subculture of humanity.
I am here because Hugo represents a humanism and an ideological position I want to emulate, although I am currently a predatory sociopath.
” although I am currently a predatory sociopath.”
Come on back, we have our own row!
Matey,
I am no more and no less attractive than the women who claim they receive unwanted attention from men. In regards to your other comment, there is more than one way to present oneself as undesirable. Unfortunately, my mannerism gets taken as being moody, which appears to encourage women rather than dissuade them.
Faith,
Social standards contradict your position on men’s dependency on women’s attention, so perhaps your perception is skewed by your political views. A man who cannot attract women or be desired by women is generally considered less of a man. Being able to attract women demonstrates a man’s prowess and his wort, not just to other men, but also women. Obviously, this would not be an experience you would be familiar with it, however, that should not make it less valid.
In my experience, women handle rejection far worse than you acknowledge. I have been called all sorts of homophobic names and women have violate my boundaries. Such has been the case since I was a child, so I am quite aware of women’s propensity to presume that my gender indicates automatic consent and what occurs when I do not grant it, and there are many men who have had similar experiences. That does not mean all women behave that way, but quite a few do.
In regards to nice guys, as you noted, “… your experiences are not at all the norm.” It is unfortunate that you were treated that way, however, that does not mean all nice guys behave that way. Again, I think you are invalidating men’s experiences. Some men misconstrue women’s interest because many women who state they are only interested in being friends later ask the guy why he did not call her or ask her on another date. That strikes me as clear miscommunication.
Eurosabra,
“I am here because Hugo represents a humanism and an ideological position I want to emulate”
likely a bit off-topic, but I have to ask - what do you mean by “emulate”? It strikes me as paradoxical to attempt to *emulate* a philosophical position, something that claims to offer at least part of truth. Either you accept such a position in whole or in part, or you don’t. But you can’t accept it and not be it at the same time.
I’m a young queer woman, and though I’ve never been with a man, I’ve certainly thought about it (as was posted on a while ago here.) I’ve had to “reject” advances from both men and women, and based on my experience can say that its absolutely absurd to suggst that men handle rejection better than women do. I’ve been called a “f*cking dyke” by many angry men, stalked and harrassed. The worst thing a woman has ever said to me was “You aren’t such hot sh*t”. The worst thing a man has ever said to me was “I’m going to cut you, you stupid c*nt.”
I think I know which sex handles rejection better.
And yes, I have been shot down by women too, and it stings, but I always say to myself “your loss” and let it go…
“I have been called all sorts of homophobic names and women have violate my boundaries.”
Which is horrible. But it does not compare to being physically violated. As I’ve already stated, men often react to rejection with direct or indirect violence. While being verbally degraded is something to be taken seriously, it does not compare in any regards to physical violence.
“It is unfortunate that you were treated that way, however, that does not mean all nice guys behave that way.”
Can’t recall saying anything about “all”.
“Again, I think you are invalidating men’s experiences.”
Funny, because I’m pretty sure you’re doing the opposite.
“Come on back, we have our own row!”
I’ve never been called predatory or a sociopath, but I have been called a psycho. Does that earn me a seat?
“your perception is skewed by your political views”
My political views are a result of my perception, not vice versa.
Faith,
Your consideration is unnecessary as I doubt the sincerity of your concern for me given my gender and your political views. I have been violated by women, and while I realize that you may consider such acts inconsequential, that should not render any man’s experience of direct or indirect physical or sexual violence at the hands of women invalid nor should it prompt gender-essentialist comparisons.
You are correct that I am doing the opposite in regards to men’s experiences. I am not invalidating them. I think their experiences should be acknowledged and listened to just as much as women’s as it would help the situation, not simply dismissed, downplayed or portrayed as entitlement. There is more than one perspective on issues and dismissing those that do not reflect your perceptions only perpetuates the problem. It is important to consider the other side precisely because it comes from a different perspective.
Actually, I can, to the extent that I can intellectually recognize that his position is best-suited to the liberal, pluralist society in which I actually live, whereas my overgrown sense of entitlement is actually pretty bitchy and inconvenient. If I’d acted just a little bit more entitled, I would’ve been able to enter into a few more relationships where my potential partners were wavering, hauling them along in my enthusiasm. And I doubt very many people are confronting the wide range of issues I have that make me feel like an outsider to normal life in many ways.
“. I have been violated by women, and while I realize that you may consider such acts inconsequential, that should not render any man’s experience of direct or indirect physical or sexual violence at the hands of women invalid nor should it prompt gender-essentialist comparisons.”
I never invalidated your experience of experiencing sexual violence at the hands of a woman, TS. If you’ve experienced sexual violence at the hands of a woman, you deserve just as much consideration as a woman who has been victimized. But, I have to ask, if you doubt my sincerity, then why are you “talking” to me?
“You are correct that I am doing the opposite in regards to men’s experiences. I am not invalidating them.”
I actually meant that you are invalidating women’s experiences.
Faith:
Psychos are one row up. The whole predatory sociopath contingent needs its own space, because it really has been a very direct way to insult, other, and dismiss some of us out here in net world. I have actually decided to take pride and humor in the predatory sociopath label put on me by others…I mean, it is a very specific kind of psycho really.
We will however share our soda and popcorn.
“We will however share our soda and popcorn.”
Oh goody. I like popcorn.
No Butter, Real Butter, Movie Theater Butter or Kettle Corn?
Toy soldier - it sounds as if you’ve had a tough time with some women and you are carrying considerable bitterness about you experiences. It’s sad that this takes you to extreme measures such as deliberately disguising your appearance. I have been through some horrific experiences, and did the same thing, so I was speaking with my own history in mind in my original comment to you. Whatever people have done to you, you shouldn’t let it snuff out your light. Please don’t lump us in together. We are not a homogeonous mass of ‘women’ all out to get you just as ‘men’ are not a homogeonous mass out to get women. From my experience as a lurker here, and as a poster, almost everyone here has good intentions, and is trying to find a way for men and women to relate better and be happier. So please treat us as innocent until proven otherwise.
Faith,
When you, as a woman, state that men cannot experience this or that society does not demand that of men or that women never do this or that, you are invalidating the feelings men who have been through those things. I think discussion is ultimately helpful, even with those who will never see things from the other group’s perspective, as it puts those issues on the table. It was a good thing that Hugo acknowledged men’s feelings and needs, although he quickly backtracked from that in the above post. However, it was not good that some seemed to take a very hardline approach to men’s feelings and experiences. One would think that it would be best to listen and learn from those who have had experiences that one will never have (and vice versus), regardless of one’s opinions. A person’s experiences provide an insight not just into how that person view the situation, but how others comes across to them, which in some instances is contrary to what those people intend.
“No Butter, Real Butter, Movie Theater Butter or Kettle Corn?”
Real butter, please. It’s one of my view dietary vices.
“It’s one of my view dietary vices.”
Make that “few”.
“When you, as a woman, state that men cannot experience this or that society does not demand that of men or that women never do this or that, you are invalidating the feelings men who have been through those things.”
TS,
I never said that men -never- experience “this” or “that”. Men most certainly can experience abuse, sexual violence, and abuse at the hands of women. I never said otherwise. I was talking in generalities and majorities, not absolutes. If you believe that I said men -never- experience abuse, you either misread what I wrote, or you are projecting.
If you have experienced sexual violence at the hands of a woman, you have my deepest and sincerest regards. But I’m not sure this is the place for you to try to work out your feelings about being traumatized.
Faith,
In regards to your opinions on men’s dependency on women’s attention and men’s reaction to rejection, you spoke in absolutes. Even if you wish to call your comments generalities and majorities, most men do not respond or behave in the exact same manner, so generalities and majorities would not present an accurate depiction of men.
As you noted before, miscommunication is not the problem, so I do understand your comments. However, they strike me as counter intuitive and contradictory. In regards to the other matter, I would appreciate if you extended the same decency that I granted you when you mentioned your experiences with “nice guys” and refrain from sharing any tangential opinions and commentary about my experiences.
“In regards to your opinions on men’s dependency on women’s attention and men’s reaction to rejection, you spoke in absolutes.”
TS,
Quoted from one of my comments: “The average women when she has been snubbed doesn’t typically harm anyone but herself. Men might engage in self-destructive behaviors as a result of being rejected, but more often than not they harm other people, particularly women and children. A man who has been rejected might very well beat the woman who rejected him, rape her, or even kill her and even her children for good measure.”
If you look closely, you will see words like average, typically, often, and might. You will not see words like always and all. There isn’t a single absolute in that passage.
“I would appreciate if you extended the same decency that I granted you when you mentioned your experiences with “nice guys” and refrain from sharing any tangential opinions and commentary about my experiences.”
You brought up your experience, TS. I was following your lead. If you don’t want your experiences to be discussed or mentioned, don’t bring them up.
Faith,
“might very well”
c’mon, don’t be unfair. That’s definitely a pseudo-absolute.
Faith,
Ultimately, I think the issue is an unwillingness to acknowledge men’s perspectives as they do not fit into the feminist paradigm. It is best that we should agree to disagree. One hopes the details of my experiences bring you some gratification as they appear to have provided you with no edification.