[Axius]

Originally Posted by 1LRM3

advise to feel it, touch it, rub it - become acquainted in a friendly way...then report back.

So you're saying don't grab her hand and/or head and shove it into my crotch forcibly?

[jtodd_fl]

Originally Posted by Axius

So you're saying don't grab her hand and/or head and shove it into my crotch forcibly?

I dunno. Seems pretty friendly?

[Axius]

Originally Posted by jtodd_fl

I dunno. Seems pretty friendly?

Dogs sniff each others asses, why can't she go in for a crotch shot?


Maybe it will turn into the next big thing, you never know.

[V2.0]

Originally Posted by Mr.SugarSkulls

Are you related to V1.47fan

Good morning, my friend.

[jtodd_fl]

OK - a for real "Ask a girl" question for Lups Biorin bimmette and Sara504 (and any other females that brave these here parts). In light of the dbag dude from Indian Wells' recent comments, we had some interesting conversations at home about sexism. So, my question is about what you guys think the real damaging sexism is in American society. (Feel free to expound on it in relation to other countries, if you so desire *looks at bimmette and lups*) I mean, we think about the overt sexism of guys like this - who say it out loud. Then there is catcalling and general objectification. Then there is the more "soft" sexism of marketing and advertising. Then there are things that could be considered "self-inflicted" like the ... I never even say their names ... Kardashians. Although some find that empowering - using their sexuality and exploiting the societal double standard to their benefit. I am curious what you four - who are all different to each other but share some interesting commonalities - think about this. Which form of sexism (even if I didn't mention it here) do you think is most damaging to women (or girls as they develop into women)?

[Verbiage]

I'm interested to hear biorin's reply to this.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by Axius

Dogs sniff each others asses, why can't she go in for a crotch shot?


Maybe it will turn into the next big thing, you never know.

You sir are a cancer upon this forum.

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

You sir are a cancer upon this forum.

Ax is a gentleman and a scholar!

[bimmette]

Originally Posted by jtodd_fl

OK - a for real "Ask a girl" question for Lups Biorin bimmette and Sara504 (and any other females that brave these here parts). In light of the dbag dude from Indian Wells' recent comments, we had some interesting conversations at home about sexism. So, my question is about what you guys think the real damaging sexism is in American society. (Feel free to expound on it in relation to other countries, if you so desire *looks at bimmette and lups*) I mean, we think about the overt sexism of guys like this - who say it out loud. Then there is catcalling and general objectification. Then there is the more "soft" sexism of marketing and advertising. Then there are things that could be considered "self-inflicted" like the ... I never even say their names ... Kardashians. Although some find that empowering - using their sexuality and exploiting the societal double standard to their benefit. I am curious what you four - who are all different to each other but share some interesting commonalities - think about this. Which form of sexism (even if I didn't mention it here) do you think is most damaging to women (or girls as they develop into women)?

Ok I'm still half asleep but what comes to mind first for me is the sexism in corporate America. The small percentage of female CEOs and the challenges for women climbing the ladder is disappointing. If women were running more big companies, it could change a lot of other things like marketing, advertising, work-life balance, etc.

[Axius]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

You sir are a cancer upon this forum.

Dawwwwww, thnx bby!

[Biorin]

Originally Posted by jtodd_fl

OK - a for real "Ask a girl" question for Lups Biorin bimmette and Sara504 (and any other females that brave these here parts). In light of the dbag dude from Indian Wells' recent comments, we had some interesting conversations at home about sexism....

This is a stupidly long answer.

I'm not sure how to best structure this answer, so please forgive any disorganized thoughts. When it comes to, how shall we say it, the state of the world, I think there's a reason that things are the way they are. Men (for the most part) are naturally more aggressive and dominating, and more likely to seek out power. I don't think there was some chauvinist back in the Stone Age telling the women that they couldn't join the old boys club to go hunt Siberian tigers -- it was more natural for women to be in the nurturing family role.

As such, I'm not surprise it evolved that way, which unfortunately did turn into blatant sexism at some point. I think there's been a great change in terms of recognizing that women are just as capable of the same roles as men, and I think that as we see more women pursue C-suite and executive roles, more women will be appointed. However, I think it seems a bit forced now, Affirmative Action-style. In my opinion, it takes away from the cause, and says "hey, we don't have a worthy woman so we'll appoint one just to say we did and be politically correct." Selecting someone for a position based on gender is just as bad as excepting someone from the position based on gender. I know a girl who wants to make partner at my firm because "it'd be really cool to be a woman partner," but it seems to me a bit sad that that would be your primary motivation. Is it great to achieve success like that as a woman? Absolutely! Do you want to be handed something you don't deserve just because it looks good or fills a quota? No.

The whole "women get paid less than men" has also been disproven so many times (Women are more likely to take a break from their career to raise a family, and are more likely to pursue lower-paying jobs like teaching, which skews the results. Plus, if you could really pay women 25% less, why don't companies just hire all women? Would really save on costs.), and while I don't doubt that there has been such pay discrimination on several occasions, I think harping on those false arguments is more damaging to the cause.

It's fantastic that we can celebrate girl power and women's causes and women helping women, but I dislike that it's now very difficult for men to do the same thing without being labeled as sexist.

I'm trying to be more short-winded now. The double standard is unfortunate. I have a cousin who's a complete hippie, and he sees sex as a "hey, I wanna have sex with you, you wanna have sex with me, it's just sex, let's enjoy it, why not." I get the whole lock and key argument, but it's unfortunate that women can't do the same thing without being viewed as a whore. I've had people on BP assume I'm a turbo slut for being open about some of my responses in this thread, and that's a damn shame, honestly.

I have a lot of female friends who flirt with guys to get free drinks or free dinner or free gifts. If that's not objectification of men as a friggin wallet, I don't know what is. Yes, it sucks that some men do it. Yes, it sucks that some women do it. Neither gender is innocent, but it doesn't mean that all of us do it.

People treat catcalling like it's rape. Yes, it can be creepy, but guess what? You're not going to like everything everyone has to say. Ignore it - I'm not sure why some stranger thinking you're bangable and saying it in a crude way is so horrifically offensive. Obviously, if it goes beyond that into physical pursuit etc., that's not okay.

The most harmful thing for girls, in my opinion, is all the photoshopping and skewed perceptions of beauty. Women are just as guilty of this as men. There's retouching, but it goes too far. I think I'm done writing for the next five years now.

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by Biorin

This is a stupidly long answer.

I'm not sure how to best structure this answer, so please forgive any disorganized thoughts. When it comes to, how shall we say it, the state of the world, I think there's a reason that things are the way they are. Men (for the most part) are naturally more aggressive and dominating, and more likely to seek out power. I don't think there was some chauvinist back in the Stone Age telling the women that they couldn't join the old boys club to go hunt Siberian tigers -- it was more natural for women to be in the nurturing family role.

As such, I'm not surprise it evolved that way, which unfortunately did turn into blatant sexism at some point. I think there's been a great change in terms of recognizing that women are just as capable of the same roles as men, and I think that as we see more women pursue C-suite and executive roles, more women will be appointed. However, I think it seems a bit forced now, Affirmative Action-style. In my opinion, it takes away from the cause, and says "hey, we don't have a worthy woman so we'll appoint one just to say we did and be politically correct." Selecting someone for a position based on gender is just as bad as excepting someone from the position based on gender. I know a girl who wants to make partner at my firm because "it'd be really cool to be a woman partner," but it seems to me a bit sad that that would be your primary motivation. Is it great to achieve success like that as a woman? Absolutely! Do you want to be handed something you don't deserve just because it looks good or fills a quota? No.

The whole "women get paid less than men" has also been disproven so many times (Women are more likely to take a break from their career to raise a family, and are more likely to pursue lower-paying jobs like teaching, which skews the results. Plus, if you could really pay women 25% less, why don't companies just hire all women? Would really save on costs.), and while I don't doubt that there has been such pay discrimination on several occasions, I think harping on those false arguments is more damaging to the cause.

It's fantastic that we can celebrate girl power and women's causes and women helping women, but I dislike that it's now very difficult for men to do the same thing without being labeled as sexist.

I'm trying to be more short-winded now. The double standard is unfortunate. I have a cousin who's a complete hippie, and he sees sex as a "hey, I wanna have sex with you, you wanna have sex with me, it's just sex, let's enjoy it, why not." I get the whole lock and key argument, but it's unfortunate that women can't do the same thing without being viewed as a whore. I've had people on BP assume I'm a turbo slut for being open about some of my responses in this thread, and that's a damn shame, honestly.

I have a lot of female friends who flirt with guys to get free drinks or free dinner or free gifts. If that's not objectification of men as a friggin wallet, I don't know what is. Yes, it sucks that some men do it. Yes, it sucks that some women do it. Neither gender is innocent, but it doesn't mean that all of us do it.

People treat catcalling like it's rape. Yes, it can be creepy, but guess what? You're not going to like everything everyone has to say. Ignore it - I'm not sure why some stranger thinking you're bangable and saying it in a crude way is so horrifically offensive. Obviously, if it goes beyond that into physical pursuit etc., that's not okay.

The most harmful thing for girls, in my opinion, is all the photoshopping and skewed perceptions of beauty. Women are just as guilty of this as men. There's retouching, but it goes too far. I think I'm done writing for the next five years now.

I fucking called it!!!!


Now time to actually read the post.

[Verbiage]

I think it is interesting that you went with the concept of men being incessantly labeled as sexist nowadays. I believe a large portion of that has to do with the surging empowerment of females and the targeting of those who are opposed to it. I personally think it is necessary and long overdue (not the sexist part, carry on male species).

It's funny because most of my managers (including my current manager) were all women, and extremely effective at their jobs. All were members of mid-tier junior management, and were viewed as quite reputable.

However, concerning the objectification in society, I believe that is simply a choice you make. You choose what is important to you (physical glorification, the desire to be desired, monetary gain, etc.). It almost (and this is just my opinion) makes most women appear less than desirable because of the contorted view that the mainstream has painted. I've always been a less-is-more kinda guy, myself. But I shudder to think of what will become of teenage girls in 15, or even 7-10 years' time.

[jtodd_fl]

Originally Posted by Biorin

This is a stupidly long answer.

{... abbreviated a whole lot of awesome...}

I think I'm done writing for the next five years now.

Interesting. I think this really mirrors my viewpoint. I really thing that it is the "softer" undermining of young women's self-confidence that has the most harmful effect. As you stated, very eloquently may I add, much of the societal imbalance is a matter of our biological evolution catching up to our societal revolution. I also share your views on affirmative action-style overcompensation. I do, however, think that unconscious bias is a real thing and we do need to hold people accountable when they fuck up. Thanks for this. I will likely share it with my daughter (printed out of course so no one can see my lecherous Internet persona!) When people stop using porn and photoshopped pop-cultural references as their standard for what women should be (and men, too, by the way - the male ones are just less crucifying) then we will all be better off.

[Biorin]

Originally Posted by Verbiage

I think it is interesting that you went with the concept of men being incessantly labeled as sexist nowadays. I believe a large portion of that has to do with the surging empowerment of females and the targeting of those who are opposed to it. I personally think it is necessary and long overdue (not the sexist part, carry on male species).

I agree. It's just hypocritical to me (the sexism).

Originally Posted by Verbiage

It's funny because most of my managers (including my current manager) were all women, and extremely effective at their jobs. All were members of mid-tier junior management, and were viewed as quite reputable.

I don't doubt it! There's many women who are. I only disagree when it's clearly done for political reasons, or if a woman is passed up for a job and it's blamed on sexism when she genuinely wasn't qualified.

Originally Posted by Verbiage

However, concerning the objectification in society, I believe that is simply a choice you make. You choose what is important to you (physical glorification, the desire to be desired, monetary gain, etc.). It almost (and this is just my opinion) makes most women appear less than desirable because of the contorted view that the mainstream has painted. I've always been a less-is-more kinda guy, myself. But I shudder to think of what will become of teenage girls in 15, or even 7-10 years' time.

I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying you can choose whether to objectify yourself? I agree to an extent, but in the case of women using men for free stuff, I don't think a guy buying a girl a drink is him choosing to objectify himself. You could argue that in some cases, it's a trade of sex for money, which is certainly at your discretion. However, I often see this happen where the girl has zero interest in the guy beyond his wallet.

[jtodd_fl]

Originally Posted by Verbiage

I think it is interesting that you went with the concept of men being incessantly labeled as sexist nowadays. I believe a large portion of that has to do with the surging empowerment of females and the targeting of those who are opposed to it. I personally think it is necessary and long overdue (not the sexist part, carry on male species).

It's funny because most of my managers (including my current manager) were all women, and extremely effective at their jobs. All were members of mid-tier junior management, and were viewed as quite reputable.

However, concerning the objectification in society, I believe that is simply a choice you make. You choose what is important to you (physical glorification, the desire to be desired, monetary gain, etc.). It almost (and this is just my opinion) makes most women appear less than desirable because of the contorted view that the mainstream has painted. I've always been a less-is-more kinda guy, myself. But I shudder to think of what will become of teenage girls in 15, or even 7-10 years' time.

Interesting point... I had not really thought about, but I work for a very large company... so forgive the endless layers of management - we have over 150K employees. My management chain, from bottom to top is Male -> Female -> Female -> Male -> Female -> Male (although he is co-CEO with a woman, but he runs the sales side, she runs finance and admin side). This was a well-thought, well-written post. Are you sure you wrote this yourself?

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by Biorin

I agree. It's just hypocritical to me (the sexism).

Yes.

Originally Posted by Biorin

I don't doubt it! There's many women who are. I only disagree when it's clearly done for political reasons, or if a woman is passed up for a job and it's blamed on sexism when she genuinely wasn't qualified.

Yes pls.

Originally Posted by Biorin

I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying you can choose whether to objectify yourself? I agree to an extent, but in the case of women using men for free stuff, I don't think a guy buying a girl a drink is him choosing to objectify himself. You could argue that in some cases, it's a trade of sex for money, which is certainly at your discretion. However, I often see this happen where the girl has zero interest in the guy beyond his wallet.

Well, my statements were more or less within the context of the presence of the image women hold within the current societal temperature; i.e., Instagram and other outlets. What people do for one another in a literal sense is of their own discretion. However, my focus is of the image portrayed and the message sent based upon actions taken attention garnered as a result.

Almost like a, "what kind of response do you really think you'll get?" based off the action.

[Biorin]

Originally Posted by jtodd_fl

Interesting. I think this really mirrors my viewpoint. I really thing that it is the "softer" undermining of young women's self-confidence that has the most harmful effect. As you stated, very eloquently may I add, much of the societal imbalance is a matter of our biological evolution catching up to our societal revolution. I also share your views on affirmative action-style overcompensation. I do, however, think that unconscious bias is a real thing and we do need to hold people accountable when they fuck up. Thanks for this. I will likely share it with my daughter (printed out of course so no one can see my lecherous Internet persona!) When people stop using porn and photoshopped pop-cultural references as their standard for what women should be (and men, too, by the way - the male ones are just less crucifying) then we will all be better off.

I gave a speech for a college course (with an extremely feminist teacher) on male standards in movies. My dad used to tell me it was wonderful to be a woman - you could be gentle and soft, or you could be kickass and fierce. You can laugh, you can cry, it's all okay. For men, he said, you're expected to be more of this singular standard of manliness with a defined range of emotion and actions. I tend to agree.

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by jtodd_fl

Interesting point... I had not really thought about, but I work for a very large company... so forgive the endless layers of management - we have over 150K employees. My management chain, from bottom to top is Male -> Female -> Female -> Male -> Female -> Male (although he is co-CEO with a woman, but he runs the sales side, she runs finance and admin side). This was a well-thought, well-written post. Are you sure you wrote this yourself?

Well, dad, I tend to take after you sometimes. Thanks for noticing who you raised.


And yes, my next point was going to be concerning males in senior management, as it seems to be the norm that they dominate these levels. However, sometimes I wished more women held those roles.

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by Biorin

For men, he said, you're expected to be more of this singular standard of manliness with a defined range of emotion and actions. I tend to agree.

I can be soft if I wanna, uknowhuimsayin?

[jtodd_fl]

Originally Posted by Verbiage

I can be soft if I wanna, uknowhuimsayin?

His real struggle is being hard... but there is medication for that.

C'mon... you KNEW this was coming.

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by jtodd_fl

His real struggle is being hard... but there is medication for that.

C'mon... you KNEW this was coming.

You know, after I typed it I was gonna say something ignorant and manly, but considering my previous posts, I wished not to invalidate my stance in the presence of Biorin.


Besides, you and I have this relationship of slam dunking the layups, anyway.