१७ जानेवारी, २०११
"Are there any 'unlovely aspects' to female sexuality? And, if so, what social institutions legitimize them?"
Glenn Reynolds reacts to Natasha Vargas-Cooper "going on and on and on about 'the unlovely aspects of male sexuality that porn legitimizes.'"
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
६१ टिप्पण्या:
a) The menses.
b) The Vagina Monologues.
"Are there any 'unlovely aspects' to female sexuality?"
Ever see the infamous Sandra Bernhard/Jerry Lewis bondage sequence, in The King of Comedy...?
Feminism legitimizes everything unlovely about women, including the unlovely aspects to their sexuality.
There's a spitefulness, the whole 'a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle' syndrome. The 'men owe us an orgasm' attitude seems to hold them in thrall somehow. The idea that they need something a man can give them drives them completely insane.
PS Skookum's right on b.
PMS. Duh.
Unlovely aspects of Female Sexuality.
Examples? Imagine the following having sex:
-Rosanne Barr
-Barbara WaWa
-Babs Streisand
-Oprah
-Sandra Bernhard
-Hillary Clinton
Imagine the following having sex:
-Rosanne Barr
-Barbara WaWa
-Babs Streisand
-Oprah
-Sandra Bernhard
-Hillary Clinton
All. At. Once.
A new baby is born every 10 seconds...someone stop that woman. The power to create new human life is in women's hands. That makes female sexuality a threat/unlovely to many selfish and hateful folks, both male and female.
I'll believe that porn "legitimizes" part of male sexuality when male politicians can openly admit to enjoying porn without the admission being newsworthy. Right now, the attitude appears to be "we know you do it, you dirty perverts, but you should be ashamed of yourselves for doing it".
Personally I think Jeff Foxworthy said it best:
You ever hear a group of women talking? "Ooh, I wish I knew what he was really thinking!". Ladies, I will tell you what we're really thinking. We're thinking "I'd like a beer, and I'd like to see something naked". That's it.
What bullshit.
Lots of women love porn.
Tara Reid's boob job.
what social institutions legitimize them?
The United States Supreme Court. So-called "feminist" groups.
Are there any 'unlovely aspects' to female sexuality
You know the answer to that. Those aspects -- those fraudulent and corrosive aspects -- which tell a woman to deny the truth of her very womanhood and encourage her to destroy and kill the fruit of that womanhood.
Are there any 'unlovely aspects' to female sexuality?
There's no point in my replying because everyone knows exactly what I'm going to say.
Peter
Feminist women nattering on in feminist essays about men is one of the most disgusting aspects of female sexuality.
Fuck feminist women. Well, you fuck them. I don't want to.
Don't have to either. Other women are available. Better women.
Unlovely aspects?
Well, the farting can be off-putting at times.
All those commercials where the men are dopes and the wives treat them like dopes*... some women must find that dynamic satisfying because it is a common setup in commercials. Anyway it's pretty "unlovely".
*Realized mose annoyingly by the relationship between Raymond and his wife in the execrable "Everybody Loves Raymond"
"Right now, the attitude appears to be "we know you do it, you dirty perverts, but you should be ashamed of yourselves for doing it"."
That's what makes it fun. If it wasn't shameful and dirty, it wouldn't be any fun.
Questions.
Blogging.
O/T: Police Say Man Shot Over French Fry Argument
"Witnesses tell police the shooter drove off in a silver Mercedes."
That's what makes it fun. If it wasn't shameful and dirty, it wouldn't be any fun.
I'm going to go way out on a limb and say that ogling naked women would still be fun even if society was in favor of my doing it.
There's cave art of well-endowed people fucking. The official explanation is prehistoric fertility rituals, which just goes to show that flimsy rationalizations FOR porn are as old as porn itself.
There's cave art of well-endowed people fucking. The official explanation is prehistoric fertility rituals, which just goes to show that flimsy rationalizations FOR porn are as old as porn itself.
"Ogg only look at that wall for the articles. Ogg swear."
Women with 3 names is an unlovely aspect of female sexuality. It gives the impression they are straddling the fence for just in case instead of committing completely.
Pussies smell bad. They ooze all kinds of liquids, some quite disgusting. It's all very complex down there, too.
My cock is very simple and only does secretes a couple things.
Glenn Reynolds reacts to Natasha Vargas-Cooper "going on and on and on about "the unlovely aspects of male sexuality that porn legitimizes."
And I'm proud of him. And the answer to the question of if there are unlovely aspects to female sexuality is yes:
The smegma cannon.
(Yes, I win the thread.)
@Crack: Five bucks if you say "Smegma Cannon" to Amanda Marcotte, clearly and distinctly, during a Bloggingheads. ;)
Women's problems.
@Crack: TEN bucks if you murmur it to Andrew Sullivan in an intimate, dimly-lit Italian restaurant, over a bottle of Chianti. ;)
"Are there any 'unlovely aspects' to female sexuality? And, if so, what social institutions legitimize them?"
When you walk into the bathroom and see a box of Monostat 7... that's been used...
(Fuck you, Crack. I win the thread... :D )
There can be unlovely women, but I don't think there are any unlovely aspects to female sexuality, as a generality. Depends on the person.
The article the lady wrote sounds more like she is attracted to the bizarre, and somehow wants to cloak it by generalizing about males.
Lying about pregnancy - mind games of that nature - nothing else comes close. In my experience, not that many women lie about rape. I've known one in my life that I think had a drama attack in that area - but I would say a good fifty percent played some kind of mind games when it came to pregnancy. Saying they were pregnant when they weren't to emotionally blackmail or take revenge on a guy, or to actually get pregnant to yes, trap a guy, etc.
Then there's faking orgasm - which I'd say a good 95 percent of women do on occasion with a substantial percentage (25ish) faking close to all the time.
In my 20s, I lived in an apartment with a lot of L.A. wannabes. There was a woman above me, 30s, fake boobs, getting a little old and desperate to move her dreams forward before the clock ran out, who would bring home guys and "audition" every night about 3AM.
She would wake us up and I would chuckle because it was so obviously fake. Then one night right in the middle of her loud, long, perfectly ascending crescendo she had a little tiny real one (a female knows) that kind of imploded within the performance.
Hahaha That fits right in with the porn angle. Humans are kind of pathetic.
wv: I kid you not: Dogge.
Are there any 'unlovely aspects' to female sexuality?
Maybe a few ... Manipulation? Extortion? Viewing marriage as a stepping stone to financial independence via divorce?
And then there's Rita Rudner's line about dating men and sizing them up as potential marriage partners: "I ask myself, is this the man I'll want my children to spend every other weekend with?"
I think it's odd that most of the articles about pornography are written by females ... who are trying to understand it and to explain it to themselves and to other women. And they invariably miss the mark.
It's a Y-chromosome thing, I guess.
wv: licks (!)
Tom Lehrer:
I do have a cause, though. It is obscenity. I'm for it. Unfortunately the civil liberties types who are fighting this issue have to fight it owing to the nature of the laws as a matter of freedom of speech and stifling of free expression and so on, but we know what's really involved: dirty books are fun. That's all there is to it. But you can't get up in a court and say that, I suppose. It's simply a matter of freedom of pleasure, a right which is not guaranteed by the Constitution, unfortunately. Anyway, since people seem to be marching for their causes these days I have here a march for mine. It's called ...
Smut!
Give me smut and nothing but!
A dirty novel I can't shut,
If it's uncut,
And unsubt-
Le.
I've never quibbled
If it was ribald,
I would devour where others merely nibbled.
As the judge remarked
The day that he
Acquitted my Aunt Hortense,
"To be smut
It must be ut-
Terly without redeeming social importance!"
Por-
Nographic pictures I adore.
Indecent magazines galore,
I like them more
If they're hard core.
(Bring on the obscene movies, murals, postcards, neckties,
samplers, stained-glass windows, tattoos, anything!
More, more, I'm still not satisfied!)
Stories of tortures
Used by debauchers,
Lurid, licentious, and vile ...
Make me smile.
Novels that pander
To my taste for candor
Give me a pleasure sublime.
(Let's face it, I love slime.)
All books can be indecent books
Though recent books are bolder,
For filth, I'm glad to say, is in
The mind of the beholder.
When correctly viewed,
Everything is lewd!
I could tell you things about Peter Pan,
And the Wizard of Oz -- there's a dirty old man!
I thrill
To any book like Fanny Hill,
And I suppose I always will,
If it is swill
And really fil-
Thy.
Who needs a hobby like tennis or philately?
I've got a hobby: rereading Lady Chatterley!
But now they're trying to take it all
Away from us unless
We take a stand, and hand in hand
We fight for freedom of the press --
In other words, Smut!
Ah, the adventures of a slut.
Oh, I'm a market they can't glut,
I don't know what
Compares with smut.
Hip hip hooray!
Let's hear it for the Supreme Court!
Don't let them take it away!
Female modesty, a great strength, when it gets out of hand and becomes secretiveness, can be, if not unlovely, difficult.
It's easier to evolve a male brain attracted to female genitals than to make female genitals attractive.
Of course that leaves males with a question to be answered.
She did manage to surprise me on the second page of the essay with the story about having anal sex with the guy during the one night stand. After the first page, I was pretty sure that she wasn't the type.
As far as why men like porn, well, most men like seeing women naked and seeing them doing sexual things. While women will say, "Well, haven't you seen women naked? If you've seen one, you've seen them all," most men will reply, "I've seen women naked but I haven't seen HER naked." There is a lot of variety, and most men like that. Porn allows them to appreciate the female form in all its many permutations.
Unlovely?
Of course; we're all unlovely in one way or another.
Thurber complained long ago: “I hate women because they always know where things are."
But he was closer to the difference in saying: “I imagine that many a bowerbird, after chasing a female for two to three hours, says the hell with it and goes home to bed.”
Natasha Vargas-Cooper notes her disgust with the relentless sex drive of men that leads them to porn. No differnet than women's relatinship with food (or chocolate).
Each side deplores the other's control of appetite. Both are in part correct.
I think you're all missing the point of this post.
The point of Glenn's post isn't that there are unlovely aspects to femal sexuality ... the point is that no writer for The Atlantic would ever be allowed to submit such an article.
Men are the outlet of hate for the left. They aren't allowed to hate blacks, or Mexicans or lesbians or gays or any other "protected" minority but they are allowed to hate men.
They are allowed to practice blatant misandry openly and proudly. If we were black, they'd be calling us "nigger" openly - but we're just men, so they can write long blatantly misandric in nature.
Not to mention Ms. Cooper's hatred of dwarfs ... who she describes as "bizzare" just because God created in them a desire to procreate just like everybody else.
The Atlantic is known to hire very odd journalists - and a misandric among them isn't really out of the ordinary. (They even had a fake journalist covering the Iraq war.)
But if you really want to know why Ms. Cooper hates it that her boyfriend would rather beat off to internet porn than to fuck her you simply have to Google her and click "images." She's a butt-ugly fatty
So it's not too surprising that she's a man-hating misandric.
Florida, you're being overly harsh. She doesn't look fat to me. I'd hit that.
It's funny, but she is quite clearly making the conservative argument:
"It wasn’t just Ward Cleaver–type stuffiness that prompted generations of dads to warn their daughters not to get into cars with boys. Dads are grown men, and they know that when it comes to sex, most men will take every inch a woman yields.
...Internet porn exposes that reality; it may even intensify that reality; it doesn’t create it.
...But removing pornography won’t alter the unlovely aspects of male sexuality that porn depicts and legitimizes. The history of civilization would seem to show that there’s no hope of eradicating those qualities; they can only be contained—and checked—by strenuously enforced norms."
This permits Palladian's true observation to remain so.
In answer to the main question;
...even a bad pizza, etc, etc.
Even as I hit PUBLISH an unlovely aspect occurred to me. Everyone knows one or more or has in their past. That really hot, sexy woman who was fully, painfully aware that she was bot hot and sexy...using that unlovely aspect to the T and milking it for all it's worth. Rules don't apply to her. She gets in where she wants and drinks for free. Both in reality and in her expectations.
As I got into my mid and late 20's, once the hormonal fizz started to ebb somewhat and I could think about such women objectively, this unlovely aspect became one of my least favorite when dealing with hot, sexy women.
What social institutions legitimize her and her behavior?
All of them.
Oh, and here's another.
The Lifetime Network.
A sensible article in many ways, but it does illustrate one of the "unlovely aspects" you're looking for: Women do tend to assume that wherever they happen to be standing must be the moral high ground.
Feminist self-righteousness was deconstructed in the 80s by the smarter feminists. This woman is really out of it.
I like Glenn Reynolds!
"Men are the outlet of hate for the left."
Well, white men are.
Trey
"Women do tend to assume that wherever they happen to be standing must be the moral high ground."
I second that. And don't try and get them to see this point. Just let it go, man. Be supportive when you can. She'll return the favor.
Let the feminists squawk.
As a man I would just like to say that I do not need anything to legitimize my sexuality.
Now getting my wife's permission....
Two things:
They are allowed to practice blatant misandry openly and proudly. If we were black, they'd be calling us "nigger" openly - but we're just men, so they can write long blatantly misandric in nature.
She said it! Florida said it! Somebody do something! She's white and said the word! Thought crime! Blasphemy! Run! Hide! The world's coming to an end!
Ahem.
Second: The Left is selective in their man-hatred. Before my marriage crumbled, I was "the black man", loved and respected by all. After my marriage crumbled, I was "a man", and to blame for everything - including murder.
That fucked with my head like nobody's business.
Sorry for calling you "she", Florida. An assumption on my part. I try not to do that, for obvious reasons.
"Sorry for calling you "she", Florida. An assumption on my part."
It's quite alright. I am a she. Also black, so I can say it.
Imagine the following having sex:
-Rosanne Barr
-Barbara WaWa
-Babs Streisand
-Oprah
-Sandra Bernhard
-Hillary Clinton
All. At. Once.
With each other.
Sandra was fugly, but, if memory serves, she had a smokin' rack. Or are you speaking only of her contemporary rack? Said later rack lacks.
She did manage to surprise me on the second page of the essay with the story about having anal sex with the guy during the one night stand.
She said that? dang. Now I have to go back and read the entire article.
thanks for pointing that out!
ScottM: Everyone knows one or more or has in their past. That really hot, sexy woman who was fully, painfully aware that she was bot hot and sexy...using that unlovely aspect to the T and milking it for all it's worth. Rules don't apply to her. She gets in where she wants and drinks for free. Both in reality and in her expectations.
I'd say being willing to deploy one's natural endowments to take advantage of other people is an unlovely aspect of human nature. And using sex appeal specifically to do that is hardly limited to women. It's used because it works. Over and over and over. (What may be unique about the hot, sexy women who do it, is that theirs are the only "marks" who are known occasionally to brag about letting her get away with it.)
I also don't know how a hot, sexy woman could not constantly be aware of her attractiveness. It's not like other people are going to let her forget it.
...this unlovely aspect became one of my least favorite when dealing with hot, sexy women.
...the evil bitches...
The Lifetime Network.
Now you're talking real sex-specific evil. That, and the (iirc) female exec who destroyed the History Channel.
Maybe Lifetime is where evil bitches go to do evil when they're not hot and sexy anymore.
That, and the (iirc) female exec who destroyed the History Channel.
oooo didn't know about that one. Is that why it sucks so bad now? 24-hour Ancient Aliens and UFOs?
Florida,
I am a she. Also black, so I can say it.
You hate yourself.
I thought the article was fascinating but the author's bias was evident in the first few sentences.
Of course there are unlovely things about female sexuality. And females in general. Not any more or any less than males.
"It's easier to evolve a male brain attracted to female genitals than to make female genitals attractive."
What?
"Of course that leaves males with a question to be answered."
Go on...I'm listening.
Of course that leaves males with a question to be answered
Some of us never got in the tuna boat. We're wondering about the rest of you.
Yaoi and slash fiction are pretty gross, if you're a straight guy...
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा