I appreciate your comments.Thanks, SplitDik. I think we are largely in agreement on behavior, just with different ideas about causes.
SplitDik (imported) wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2002 12:43 pm
Whenever we need to talk about laws and society, we HAVE to get into generalizations. For example we make laws against rape even though there is a small percentage of women who like being forced into sex acts.
Of course we need to generalize. Generalizations provide us a structure from within which we can better deal with the world. Without them, each and every interaction would require a detailed analysis, and we simply don't have time to do that, and still unction. My concern is that we don't guide ourselves by generalizations that are based on misperceptions.
SplitDik (imported) wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2002 12:43 pm
My test for whether a generalization is true is to looks at where the money flows. Football, boxing and WWF are huge money-making industries, therefore I would say that it resonates with a significant portion of society (which is largely made up of men). So when I say men like violent sports, I agree that not all men like them (I don't). But I think saying men like violent sports is more accurate than saying men don't like violent sports ...
Well, they're certainly lucrative, but I think you're confusing men's fantasies with their everyday personalities. We all, at some point in our lives, fantasize about being a hero. It's how men are largely judged in human society -- the men whose exploits result in their gaining power -- and to a slightly lesser extent, wealth -- are the ones who get the best pick of the women. Unless he's gay, the average man is going to seek out the best possible mate he can find. We naturally want our genes to pass on via the healthiest and best looking woman possible. Few of us have the wherewithal to gain any real power, so we work with what we have, but still retain the fantasy, which is all those things are. Even the most avid football or WWF fan, if he's otherwise just an average guy, isn't going to live his own life violently. He'll live it vicariously instead, but at its root, it's little more than the reproductive drive expresing itself the best way it can. That's something our young friend might do well to think more deeply about.
SplitDik (imported) wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2002 12:43 pm
There is also a lot of money in porn, and the majority of porn is geared toward a male audience. So I think saying men like sex is more accurate than saying men don't like sex ...
I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with here, since I never said that men don't like sex. All I said was that just because they desire and seek out sex, don't assume they're objectifying the women they pursue.
SplitDik (imported) wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2002 12:43 pm
Since porn and violence seem to appeal to a large segment of men, our laws need to reflect those forces and our society needs to provide outlet for them.
My worry is that our society tends to repress sexual outlet, and then our laws are very brutal on men who act out in frustration.
Now this I quite agree with, and if anything, things are getting worse in this area. Since the advent of modern "feminist thought" (now there's an oxymoron!), men have been generalized such that we are all considered potential rapists , child molesters, etc. Any societal trust of men is gone, and it's a terrible loss. I remember when I was a little kid, I could walk up to a couple of old men sitting on a park bench and talk to them, and nobody would blink an eye if one of them sat me on his lap while I did it. Try that today.
There is a tremendous distrust of male sexuality, even a revulsion toward it, throughout most of U.S. culture today. (I haven't spent much time on the Continent in the past 15 years, so can't comment much about Europe, but I know the U.K. isn't far behind us in this regard.) The problem, again, is that our feminized, feminist culture has for some 30 years been trying to make us all into women, ignoring the fact that, despite declarations of wanting a "sensitive" man, women in general don't want a man who behaves like a woman. They want one who can take charge of a situation (although some would argue that this is only if he takes charge for her, not from her.
SplitDik (imported) wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2002 12:43 pm
I feel that both of these trends are initiated by women, and therefore I feel to compelled to warn women that further repression of sexual outlets and increasing punishment for sex crimes will not solve the problem -- it creates it.
Then shout it from the rooftops, but realize that doing it with generalizations of men as inherently violent and unable to control their libidos is going to destroy any effort you make to change things, because as long as people accept those stereotypes as universal truths, they will side with those who would punish us yet more harshly. It's a road to second-class citizenship for men.
You are correct that men physically need regular sexual release. It's a good argument to say that we need to recognize that there's a distinction between a need for release and rapaciousness, and that we should seek benign ways to provide the former as a way of avoiding the latter. Women need to be warned not to listen to the man-hating activists among them, and recognize that attempts to deny men any sexual outlets while shaming them for their sexuality are precisely the things that generate the sense of powerlessness, coupled with rage, that creates a rapist.
Our self-obsessed young friend needs to understand that the world doesn't revolve around her view of it, and real partnership requires that she truly give as much consideration of his needs as she demands that he give hers. These days, unfortunately, convinced by the idiotic propaganda that they've somehow been getting a raw deal from men (even if they can't say precisely what that is), most women seem unwilling to do that.
A-1
