pynchme,

'If a bloke doesn't invest some of his sense of self in things other than sexual prowess or genital size; I think that's really sad. Is it? What do you think?'

Now we are getting on. Where were you on the 'objectification' of women again? It is as sad as a girl putting all her sense of self in her appearance, then blaming magazines and models for 'making her feel bad' or 'promoting an unrealistic ideal of beauty'. As I said in the latest MTR proxy rant thread, telling women to not be so vain is more empowering than censoring magazines. You don't see men complaining all the SPAM for penis enlargements and huge dongas in porn are 'promoting an unrealistic ideal of beauty'. Women are taught to be a victim of something other than their own vanity.

Most feminists seem obsessed with the fact that men like to look at women, and ignoring the fact that a lot of women like to be looked at , and ignore that they gain some power from it to boot. To a large degree women objectify themselves to pay for male attention. Men are about as singularly attracted to stick thin models with DD boobs as women are to men with bulgin biceps and a 12 " penis. Both myths are peddled to the vain, but you don't see the government endorsing 'real women have huge tits' like they are this 'real men have a big penis' business.

I think a lot of men WISH women were only interested in a big dick, as it would make life simpler for them.

benk,

'I see no problem with women having criteria for partners.'

Neither do I. I use the example to point out men and women have different measures, and that for men to do the same is considered 'shallow'.

Antiseptic: I don't run errands. If you're interested in the way that institutions mediate to maintain the status quo, then go do your thing re: trauma and mental health. Don't overlook the way in which a traumatic experience manifests in various symptoms of mental disorders and illnesses. See what you think about the discontinuity between a traumatic incident and presenting symptomology. Also, don't overlook the way in which many people who are traumatized soldier on without help from anybody.

Houellebecq: I agree re: vanity. However, I think the issue is how people are valued. A friend of mine once told me how her hub was slumped in front of the TV - bald patch with strands of hair stickin' up; paunch; unshowered or shaven; half his false teeth out - watching some beauty pageant and voicing an endless stream of criticism like, "Aww what a dog... that one needs a boob job... too fat... hanging rear end... ". Now I laughed (... he's actually a really nice bloke btw and very good family man; his wife is a natural beauty btw who doesn't need any primping at all.) but it's a strange thing to me that women are judged on their physical attributes; while men seem to be valued more often for personal qualities other than physical appearance.

I do think it's a sad thing that many women are convinced that their major life achievement is to be wanted by some bloke who is only attracted to physical appearance.

Btw I don't know any women who care about penis size; do you? If it's true and not a myth that men are overly preoccupied with their bits - why is that?

'Aww what a dog... that one needs a boob job... too fat... hanging rear end... '

You should see the objections in one dating show I saw where one man had to impress 20 women. It's the inevitable result of putting male or female up for the judgement of others. People get picky.

'but it's a strange thing to me that women are judged on their physical attributes; while men seem to be valued more often for personal qualities other than physical appearance.'

Is money 'personal'? I think it's generally easier to look good than achieve financial success.

I too think it's sad that many men are convinced that their major life achievement is to be wanted by some chick who is only attracted to their money.

'I don't know any women who care about penis size; do you?'

I remember a party where this topic came up, and of about 10 women, all said that they had had one 'too small' (why bother) partner and one 'too large' (ouch) partner. I figure from knowing the chicks and such that they'd each had around 10-20 partners give or take. I think the gist of it all was that extremes either way were unsatisfactory, but generally they were all much of a muchness. Incidently, quite often it was the look of the penis that was more important, ie not bent or with big veins, circumcised or not etc.

'If it's true and not a myth that men are overly preoccupied with their bits - why is that?'

I cant speak for all men. I can only suggest if it's true it has to do with the fact that the penis is exterior, where the vagina is interior, and men can be competitive. And as I said, some men would rather all they needed to do to please/attract women was to have a big dick. Life would be easier. Certainly easier than working 70 hour weeks to buy that Ferrari and the pad overlooking the water and 'romantic' holidays.

<"And as I said, some men would rather all they needed to do to please/attract women was to have a big dick. Life would be easier. Certainly easier than working 70 hour weeks to buy that Ferrari and the pad overlooking the water and 'romantic' holidays.
Posted by Houellebecq, Tuesday, 1 December 2009 11:14:14 AM">

Well there you go. You see why feminism is such a boon. Feminists take pride in being financially independent. At least when a bloke has a feminist partner he can be confident that she is with him because she really values him rather than his wallet.

pynchme,

'...she is with him because she really values him rather than his wallet.'

Well, either values him or values his dick.

You seem to have the impression I'm against feminism. I'm all for feminism when it's all about the men getting a chance to stay at home with the kids and the women go out and earn some bloody money. Feminism has been a 'boon' for men in many areas.

The only beef I have with feminists are...

a) The whining about gender pay gap, when women do all the spending. Regardless of who earns the money, it's more important who spends it and on what. Couples decide what role each will do and what the family will spend money on. Who earns the family money is irrelevant. Also many women choose a work life balance that suits them, then it gets used to show women are 'disadvantaged', when they're the envy of their husband. I do accept the super gap cause for the primary carer though. Even then she'll likely inherit his money eventually.

b) The whining about men liking to look at beautiful women in various stages of undress, and the giving men responsibility for women's vanity/body image. The word 'objectify' when talking about images of women. They are objects, they're 2 dimensional pieces of paper. Men don't objectify real women, they objectify objects made from dots on paper or pixels on a screen. Even then there is demand for some personal details about the woman pictured because men want to know her kinky mind.

c) Any cherry picking and misrepresenting of stats, sponsored 'surveys' and 'studies' and general dubious raising awareness tactics that have the effect of demonizing men. Eventually we'll just get to the stage where 'studies show' 200% of women have been bashed, raped and denied curtains by the age of 4.

d) Housework as an equity issue. My solution to that, as always, is don't do it then. But stop bloody complaining about it. Oh, and go out and mow the lawns, put that in your 'study', and smoke it.

Houellebecq: <"Well, either values him or values his dick."?>

I would say that situation would be in the extreme minority and possibly even non existent.

Dicks are a dime a dozen. Never met a woman yet; any age/any looks; who couldn't get a bonk. Too many men are exceedingly non-discriminating in where they deposit their sperm.

This might be why marriage has little appeal for women anymore. Maybe all the years of 'princes' screwing around has killed any fairytale romantic notions females once had. If they get married; social reality doesn't support the idea of one man staying faithful, with the cover up argument that men are biologically driven to slut themselves out. If women don't get married; they might not like variety perse all that much, but at least they don't have to stay at home becoming increasingly disillusioned, as society would have them do.

Just speculating; what is your view on it? Why don't as many women as in previous generations want to stay or even get married anymore ?