I wish feminists gave as much “what to do” advice as they gave “what not to do” advice…

Leave a comment

… without some sort of framework to determine appropriateness, the male listeners may be left to conclude the advice only really applies to the speakers, and not generalizable, especially in light of the fact that not EVERY woman is constantly terrified.

Because without a “how to,” then we’re left to conclude sex and relationships just won’t happen because girls won’t ever initiate.

And it’s sad because I GET why women are terrified in some situations over others, and why some situations are inappropriate because of uneven power distance, but I can ALWAYS imagine coming off creepy to some women. It’s always in the back of my head that it’s a possibility but I know what I want from my life and I have to TRY otherwise it’s never going to happen at all. I HAVE to make mistakes and learn from them because no one’s just going to look at me and try to get to know me just because I exist. And I’m a human being with wants and needs and… dreams.

But I just find it especially interesting in light of the fact that on SO many levels it’s not something women generally have to think about, even if she’s unattractive it’s generally not going to be the case that she has to worry about THREATENING someone just by talking to them. Not to a guy OR to a woman. And they generally don’t absolutely HAVE to try to talk to anyone for a sex or a relationship to happen. If you just go about your business, eventually you can just respond positively when your finally in the right frame of mind.
And if they decide to talk to people, they don’t have to worry about being threatening to men OR women.

I don’t know what it’s like for gay guys, I suspect it varies. But I think it might be similar as far as fellow gay guys are concerned, not too much to worry from each other unless… specific reason to feel threatened.

Men and women are in a unique situation.

Bottom line, we’re going to have to put our heads together about this.
But the people with the list of “Do not”s aren’t going to come up with anything because they frankly don’t have to.
I don’t think it’s ever going to be within their collective frame of reference until several generations.
Or unless they start doing feminist campaigns for women to make the first move in dating/ propose to guys/ etc.

Best advice I can give is try to find as many different stories about men successfully talking to women for the first time from her POV and try to find repeatable patterns in context and content of interaction. (I wonder if there’s a blog about this, or if I or someone else could make one.)

Then find a theory to predict positive response.

Feminism: Why the terminology?

2 Comments

The main argument I hear for why “feminism” shouldn’t switch to a more gender-neutral name is “it doesn’t emphasize what women (reformers/suffragists) have went through. Historically.

My question: Why should it?

What obligation does a movement for gender-equality have to emphasize the work/suffering of ONE gender over the other? And what qualitative basis do they have for deciding?


    • Where the movement originated?
      The were quite a few “Pre-Feminist” men, you know.
      Those women didn’t draw their ideology from thin air.The seeds were sown in ancient Greece (Plato) in speculation of a perfect society.
      You know… old guys with white beards talking to each other.

      Abolitionists didn’t name their movement after black people or Africans, they named it after their ideology.IF feminism does NOT begin and and with women. Then it should change its name.You did good, but your goal has expanded.
    • Same goes for masculinists.
    • Or… masculists. Whatever the Hell they call themselves.

What Came First?

Leave a comment

 

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

Neither. The process of laying eggs evolved from cellular division.

 

Anywho… lets apply my conclusion about “The Chicken and the Egg” to the “The Culture and the People.”

 

What came first, the culture or the person?

At once, people behaved in a way that was most advantageous for a certain circumstance, that “method” self-replicated when the group expanded, and remained and developed independently of the external circumstance.

Ideas, concepts, and systems, and processes are platonic, symbiotic life forms that use people to replicate.

When a species of “culture” evolves, it will condition the people within its sphere of influence for its own self-replication and expansion, but a culture can be killed, a culture can die…

 

…And most importantly, a culture can be an evolutionary dead end that will relentlessly drag the people into extinction with it.

 

That’s why the truth, rationality, communication, and education are so important to our survival…

Some statuses/tweets on gendered topics worth discussion…

Leave a comment

What other people call “objectification,” I call “a lack of compassion overlapped with sexuality.” I SINCERELY doubt that necessarily entails the most epic taxonomic failure of all time…. Recognizing a homo-sapien.


“So, will you think of women sexually or with respect?” is a false dichotomy.


 

I don’t know WHERE girls get this idea that super skinny automatically = sexy. Not from any guy I’VE associated with…

 

It’s interesting to note that I’ve personally encountered more Pro-Life females than males in my life.

Character Relationships Ticking

Leave a comment

We all know that romantic love is an emotional reaction. Emotional reactions can be determined by experience, outlook, thought patterns, associations, and aspirations.

Now, how/if romantic relationships work out is a different matter altogether.

Here I’d like each poster to post a character (romantic/really close platonic) relationship and give your take on what they see in each other, how it is/isn’t working out, what attracted them initially, why the attraction faded/persists. etc.

Nice mind exercise for psych, philosophy, sociology, majors and the like.

EXAMPLE:

Lois and Clark- Lois Lane is Superman’s hero. Despite the implication of the otherwise, Lois Lane’s personality seems to come up as a cross between Hal Jordan and the new Batwoman. Her endangerment is usually as a result her risky journalism. Superman has been shown to have regard for the one’s who are more vulnerable than he, yet do the things he does. The persistence of this type of behavior, in light of all the horrible people are ALSO capable of, reinforce his “faith” in humanity.

Lois displays this on a regular basis in her pursuit of the truth, which is another reason she is invaluable to him, to his generally positive outlook on mankind, despite his enhanced vision and hearing of various counter-examples. So her constant need of being “rescued” only perpetuates this. Also, he can work on satellites and moon bases thousands of miles away from home with stripperiffic co-workers and not even THINK of any woman except Lois.  You see, back in Action Comics #1, it wasn’t because Clark was a nerd that she disliked him by the end of the story, it was because “Clark” was a coward. Lois liking Clark is a tad more simple: Her contentions relationship with her dad, as well as his OWN mistrust of suitors has passed onto her, leaving a very cynical outlook on men, resulting in an EXTREMELY high standard. But… Superman is to Lois as Edward Cullen to Bella. The only guy capable of living up. Also, they can’t have babies, so that puts a wrench in the traditional conflict of “giving up may career to care for the kids.” (This has been subjected to potential change in the aftermath of caring for Chris Kent in LAST SON.)

As of “Secret Origin” Sam Lane (Lois’s militaristic father) tried to give her over to Corben, (that I’ll assume had a past of significant delinquency in order to blend with pre-infinite crisis accounts of him being a “petty thief” before his transformation into Metallo) as a way to ensure what he wanted is carried out. Apparently a genuinely nice, reclusive guy like “Clark” is too good to be true. Suspicion and hostility ensues.

“Clark” around his workplace is an act. But Lois could see through it. (In light of “Secret Origin” any post-CRISIS hostility she initially had toward him can now be interpreted as her dislike of being perpetually lied to, that eventually cooled over when they got to know each other better.)

(Most people are unaware of the subconscious mechanisms resulting in attraction.)

Edit: I just thought of something else: Lois and Clark almost HAVE to have pretty stable relationship. It would be over if he ever lost his temper with her.

Yet, she isn’t afraid or intimidated by him in the slightest, and doesn’t hesitate to speak her mind as if she’s talking to any other guy, while she’s certainly not in denial of his abilities.

Maybe THIS is why he chose her over Lana.

Lana’s known about his powers for awhile, and can be described as being in awe of what makes Supe’s feel different, while Lois appeals to what makes him just like the rest of us.

art by Jim Lee
words by Brian Azzarello

_______________________________

Batman & Robin

I think Batman vicariously lives through his orphaned pupils. If Bruce was able to fight like as they can when he was THEIR age, then his parents wouldn’t be dead. It’s is kinda awkward to imagine children that young protecting their parents from harm, as well as imagining them being so concerned with doing so. It’s a touching statement on how the unconditional parent/child love can go BOTH ways.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331548,00.html

(Alexis Goggins was a Real Life seven-year-old who took six bullets for her own mother. She also managed to survive.)

___________________________________________
Batman & Catwoman

I’ve GOT IT!

I’ve finally figured out an angle for what makes the Bruce/Selina relationship tick!

I USED to think it was perverse sexual lust. Catwoman outputs the persona of a dominatrix. Batman has been presented as a pretty guilty guy when he believed something was his fault. (For example: His parent’s death, Jason Todd’s death, Harey Dent’s scarification, the Joker’s crap.) He often uses any guilt as fuel to keep going/ push himself further.

I theorized his attraction to Selina was a response to his guilt.

Here’s another angle…

Catwoman was the first similarly-themed woman he met, so their continued, ongoing presence builds a shared history. Her initial elusiveness would no doubt make her the preoccupation of a mind set on solving crimes. She’s not totally evil, and has repeatedly shown Robin Hood esque criminal behavior. (Though she keeps more than enough for herself.) And often stealing from organized criminals.

She’s not a hopeless cause, their relationship can represent the dichotomy between Batman’s efforts to actually change Gotham, or “save” her. He loves the city, but can’t give himself over to it completely lest he cease to be Batman. Maybe his attraction is a sexual manifestation of his deep immersion into Gotham’s criminal element. (He hasn’t developed very strong romantic relationships with OTHER super heroes, for some reason.) Catwoman has changed for the better due to her relationship with Batman, but won’t necessarily stay that way in his absence. (For example, after Wayne’s death, she’s currently allied with Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn.)

Batman was Selina’s, distant inspiration for her Catwoman career. (Does his initial distance trigger childhood desire to be closer w/ father?) And Bruce is genuinely touched by her desire to get to know him.

In fact, her whole “master thief” shtick: figuring her way into locked, closed, spaces she’s been locked out of.. can be read as a response to that.

While satiating any current need for affection with her many…MANY… cats.

Another angle! Bruce’s mom wore pearls the night she was murdered. Bruce could be recognizing Martha Wayne’s love of jewelry in Selina.

The game changing storyline in their romance is HEART OF HUSH, where he admitted how hard he’s fallen for her. Of course, this took place shortly before his “death.” So we’re left hanging on how this will play out until he makes THE RETURN.

It could be/could’ve been many of these, only a few, one, or the other. I can’t be sure if any new writer to pick up on this relationship will use ANY of these…

This, my friends, is what happens when SO many writers and artists try to fully grasp the dynamics of an on-again/off-again romance over the course of decades… It inevitably becomes TANGLED!

Art by Jim Lee
Words by Jeph Loeb

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Wonder Woman/Steve Trevor

…But a reason I think the Trevor/Diana relationship was also so paramount to the classic Wonder Woman is that it embodied the ideal peace between the two genders and two cultures. “Man’s world and Woman’s world.” The uniting and William Marston’s ideal method of harmonizing these two aspects of humanity. If male/Ares embodied war, then female/Aphrodite embodied love. Trevor’s loving submission to Wonder Woman was like “war surrendering to love,” especially when you consider Steve is a soldier at heart.

BUUUT… Where I check out of this whole philosophy/myth/idealization is where it becomes a GENDER ISSUE. HAHaha!

____________________________________________________________________________

Richard “Dick” Grayson (Robin, Nightwing, Batman)/ Koriand’r (Starfire)

From birth, Starfire was taught to trust her emotions first and foremost as an indicator of how to make decisions. Taught to hate enemies thoroughly, and love allies without restraint. As a result, behavior patterns tend to be very feral and instinctual. In a group setting, she naturally gravitated toward Robin as the “dominant male” of the Teen Titans. Despite his initial, standoffish behavior, she persisted in her advances.

Think of this as a gender-reversed “defrosting the ice queen.”

Dick Grayson was trained by Batman to be logical, reasonable, evidential, not impulsive, and deductive.

Bruce generally handled this by redirecting his emotions, but Dick would tend to repress them.

When Robin was with Batman, there was a need to lighten the mood, break the depressing tension and somber spirit about him. (Either Batman had no issue with it due to his experience, or he kept the humor to himself) There was a need for Grayson to wisecrack, make one-liners, and whatnot.

When he was with the Titans, however, then need diminishes when you’re surrounded by the likes of Speedy.

The things he learned from Batman are conducive to his leadership status.

Strategy and whatnot are need when you’re brightly clad AND without powers.

To Robin, Starfire embodies this liberation from repression that he finds very, enticing, but mysterious, and/but perhaps counter-intuitive.

Obviously, after chasing psychos on a nightly basis, and having the friggin’ DARK KNIGHT as a partner, her appearance and power level don’t bother him in the slightest.

His choice between the Barbara and Kory MAY, to him, represent the (un)necessary choice that must be made in the MIND/BODY dichotomy.

(I wonder how well Barbara and Starfire know each other.)
batgirlstarfirea.jpg

More/less to come….