Exactly! We need to break down these boundaries. Because I enjoy dressing up in women's clothing, but I don't enjoy people calling the police when I go to the ladies room and pee while standing up. Because I don't appreciate the looks people give me when my 5 o'clock shadow starts poking through my rouge and matte finish. Because my boobs are just as good as my girlfriend's even if mine can't lactate.Michael Thomsen said:
259: Vaginophobia
- Thread starter Michael Thomsen
- Start date
Epoetker lost any credibility he might've had when he chose "The Spearhead" for sources.
Honestly.
P.S
AND "Citizen Renegade"? Yowee.
D.S
Honestly.
P.S
AND "Citizen Renegade"? Yowee.
D.S
I'm sorry, this will be a long post; but my wife and I have both had this on our minds for a while, and this seems to be a good avenue to share it.
What we have to realize is that we live, in fact, in a rather misandrist culture. We have actually REGRESSED in that arena from misogyny to misandry. It's such a little-thought upon idea that even the spell-checker thought I was trying to type misanthropy. Look at all of the media commercials and sitcoms of the day...fat, balding, underpaid, ill-spoken-of and ill-speaking, uncoordinated, undersized [you know what I mean], wishy-washy pussies of men [or any combination of these traits and others] who happen, by some mystery, to enjoy the love of Mary Sue, who is obviously much too good for this schlub in any sense.
The only reason all of these statistics exist to be measured and all of these opinions are floating around to be heard is because, plainly, more women in more nations all over the world have more rights and comforts than they ever had in all of human history. The right to vote, the right to free speech, the right to work, the right to dress, the right to spend money, the right to choose who they marry...the list goes on and on. Naturally, this will cause dissension whenever a woman is depicted in ways "unbefitting" in pop culture, as it should. The debate should continue until peaceful resolution is achieved.
But...we have tipped the scales inadvertently the other way. We need to stop hating on our men, and stop hating on how they express themselves in Escapism through Fantasy, where they fulfill their base biological desires by objectifying men AND women both...not often do we hear of how impossible Kratos' form is to achieve without drugs that would desiccate his testicles, do we? No, we hear about how big [you know what I mean] he and Snow must be.
Seems like I'm going all over the place, but I'm really not; what I'm trying to illustrate is the existence of a double-standard. Very unpopular to hear, but not any less true. Women want to be accepted and recognized for their independence, but when men treat them as an individual who can take care of themselves [most women have no idea the amount of degradation, insults, and general abuse that occurs in male circles as the social equivalent of displaying their plumage, which requires that one show his plumage back; often called "locking horns"], they lash out at their oppressors, and decry for a return to chivalry...only to scream at its approach when it comes, saying, I Am Woman, I can take care of myself, who are you insinuate I need your financial security? Yet, this does not abate the tide of marriages of convenience, gold-digging, and the proliferation of divorce.
Through these and other techniques, men are objectified, as well...there is a reason that 9-inch dildos and larger are the highest-selling masturbation products on the market; not all of them are gag-gifts, and not by a long shot. Do women hear men saying, "All you want is a big, hard, steaming wang to punish you until you scream with delight, that's all we are to you!" No, men go out and research crazy ways to make their schlongs larger and harder, from pills to hormones to devices to surgery, and spend hundreds of millions of dollars on them, all so they can give what they believe to be a woman's fantasy to them in reality. Men now spend factors of their income on skin, facial, and hair products, along with clothing, baubles, and trinkets, to please women. Men traditionally spend two months income on an engagement ring for women, that they may compete with other women in the who-has-the-biggest-shiniest-rock-regardless-of-how-many-human-lives-it-cost contest...when you are fascinated by a rock that sparkles, you, also, are no better than prehistoric-man-with-club. Men, however, do hear women tell them all the time that they are just degrading them to their biological components, and that kind of hypocrisy isn't right.
The hard, brutal truth is this--and I know it will upset many men and women, but truth it remains: The world has long been the domain of men; ruling it, policing it, protecting it, trading amongst it, deciding for it. The push from the codependency/opression of women through suffrage to their independence and campaign for equal [or NOT equal, if you actually listen to some arguments] power and control has happened too quickly. The human body and brain cannot evolve beyond tens of thousands of years [only measuring from the time we developed culture, mind you, it took millions of years to evolve from our reptilian traits] of culture and biology in less than a hundred, or even a thousand.
What is the solution? Is it for women to lie down, taking whatever position their man requires? No. Is it for women to beat men into submission, taking control for themselves? No. The solution is that men need to act a little more like women, and women need to act a little more like men. Men, be more supportive and emotionally understanding...not of women only, but of all people; being a little more diplomatic might not hurt, either. Women, take a side and stick with it...either you can open the car door for yourself, or you think it would be noble of the man to do it; choose and stop vacillating!
Remember the age-old truth: Whenever two people in a room are telling the same story, the truth is never one or the other, it is always somewhere in the middle. The same principle applies here. Another good one to remember is Postel's Law, dictating the potential interactions between computers not running on the same [spoken or programming] language: Be liberal in what you allow, conservative in what you do. Sounds a bit like Christ, doesn't it? If everyone did that, by consciously making the choice to do so, against all Pavlovian response, then we would need neither to be liberal in what we allow nor conservative in what we do, the median would work itself out...and in relatively short order, too.
Disagree with what I've said? Think I'm hitting off of the mark? Well, then ponder this:
What would be the fallout if the response to "vaginaphobia" was a call to Vaginophilia? A series of literature and films, ranging from "The Idiot's Guide to the Female Genitalia, All of it's Working Parts, and How to Please It Satisfactorily Without Degrading It," to "Dr. Strangefist, or How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the ****"?
Tell me it wouldn't be hypocritical.
What we have to realize is that we live, in fact, in a rather misandrist culture. We have actually REGRESSED in that arena from misogyny to misandry. It's such a little-thought upon idea that even the spell-checker thought I was trying to type misanthropy. Look at all of the media commercials and sitcoms of the day...fat, balding, underpaid, ill-spoken-of and ill-speaking, uncoordinated, undersized [you know what I mean], wishy-washy pussies of men [or any combination of these traits and others] who happen, by some mystery, to enjoy the love of Mary Sue, who is obviously much too good for this schlub in any sense.
The only reason all of these statistics exist to be measured and all of these opinions are floating around to be heard is because, plainly, more women in more nations all over the world have more rights and comforts than they ever had in all of human history. The right to vote, the right to free speech, the right to work, the right to dress, the right to spend money, the right to choose who they marry...the list goes on and on. Naturally, this will cause dissension whenever a woman is depicted in ways "unbefitting" in pop culture, as it should. The debate should continue until peaceful resolution is achieved.
But...we have tipped the scales inadvertently the other way. We need to stop hating on our men, and stop hating on how they express themselves in Escapism through Fantasy, where they fulfill their base biological desires by objectifying men AND women both...not often do we hear of how impossible Kratos' form is to achieve without drugs that would desiccate his testicles, do we? No, we hear about how big [you know what I mean] he and Snow must be.
Seems like I'm going all over the place, but I'm really not; what I'm trying to illustrate is the existence of a double-standard. Very unpopular to hear, but not any less true. Women want to be accepted and recognized for their independence, but when men treat them as an individual who can take care of themselves [most women have no idea the amount of degradation, insults, and general abuse that occurs in male circles as the social equivalent of displaying their plumage, which requires that one show his plumage back; often called "locking horns"], they lash out at their oppressors, and decry for a return to chivalry...only to scream at its approach when it comes, saying, I Am Woman, I can take care of myself, who are you insinuate I need your financial security? Yet, this does not abate the tide of marriages of convenience, gold-digging, and the proliferation of divorce.
Through these and other techniques, men are objectified, as well...there is a reason that 9-inch dildos and larger are the highest-selling masturbation products on the market; not all of them are gag-gifts, and not by a long shot. Do women hear men saying, "All you want is a big, hard, steaming wang to punish you until you scream with delight, that's all we are to you!" No, men go out and research crazy ways to make their schlongs larger and harder, from pills to hormones to devices to surgery, and spend hundreds of millions of dollars on them, all so they can give what they believe to be a woman's fantasy to them in reality. Men now spend factors of their income on skin, facial, and hair products, along with clothing, baubles, and trinkets, to please women. Men traditionally spend two months income on an engagement ring for women, that they may compete with other women in the who-has-the-biggest-shiniest-rock-regardless-of-how-many-human-lives-it-cost contest...when you are fascinated by a rock that sparkles, you, also, are no better than prehistoric-man-with-club. Men, however, do hear women tell them all the time that they are just degrading them to their biological components, and that kind of hypocrisy isn't right.
The hard, brutal truth is this--and I know it will upset many men and women, but truth it remains: The world has long been the domain of men; ruling it, policing it, protecting it, trading amongst it, deciding for it. The push from the codependency/opression of women through suffrage to their independence and campaign for equal [or NOT equal, if you actually listen to some arguments] power and control has happened too quickly. The human body and brain cannot evolve beyond tens of thousands of years [only measuring from the time we developed culture, mind you, it took millions of years to evolve from our reptilian traits] of culture and biology in less than a hundred, or even a thousand.
What is the solution? Is it for women to lie down, taking whatever position their man requires? No. Is it for women to beat men into submission, taking control for themselves? No. The solution is that men need to act a little more like women, and women need to act a little more like men. Men, be more supportive and emotionally understanding...not of women only, but of all people; being a little more diplomatic might not hurt, either. Women, take a side and stick with it...either you can open the car door for yourself, or you think it would be noble of the man to do it; choose and stop vacillating!
Remember the age-old truth: Whenever two people in a room are telling the same story, the truth is never one or the other, it is always somewhere in the middle. The same principle applies here. Another good one to remember is Postel's Law, dictating the potential interactions between computers not running on the same [spoken or programming] language: Be liberal in what you allow, conservative in what you do. Sounds a bit like Christ, doesn't it? If everyone did that, by consciously making the choice to do so, against all Pavlovian response, then we would need neither to be liberal in what we allow nor conservative in what we do, the median would work itself out...and in relatively short order, too.
Disagree with what I've said? Think I'm hitting off of the mark? Well, then ponder this:
What would be the fallout if the response to "vaginaphobia" was a call to Vaginophilia? A series of literature and films, ranging from "The Idiot's Guide to the Female Genitalia, All of it's Working Parts, and How to Please It Satisfactorily Without Degrading It," to "Dr. Strangefist, or How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the ****"?
Tell me it wouldn't be hypocritical.
Isn't it somewhat ironic that you chose to describe "fear of WOMEN" as "Vaginophobia". Fear of *women* is gynephobia. Vaginophobia would be fear of vaginas. While the one possesses the other, the two are not interchangeable.
I wonder if the problem with anxieties about sexuality doesn't derive from the fact that we generally let members of the SAME sex inform our attitudes and standards for our sexual characteristics, leading to this spiral where the various anxieties of the involved parties feed off each other creating ludicrous and impossible standards.
For instance, if you read women's magazines (predominately written BY WOMEN and "effeminate" men) you could very easily come to the *incredibly* mistaken conclusion that if you're not some kind of super-model sex machine slathered in makeup and the latest fashions, no man could POSSIBLY be interested in you. I suspect that men have the same problem when most of what they guess about women is derived from the B.S. they hear out of *other men* who are no better-informed than they are.
Exploring unknown territory is always a bit scary. In most other situations, we can get a map, advice, a compass maybe. But how scary does it become when the map you've been given is wrong, the advice terrible, and your compass broken? Better to explore blind--and know you're doing it--than to trust guides of this kind. Unfortunately a lot of us don't have the time/opportunity to do everything ourselves, just like how we don't all go out and discover fire and agriculture for ourselves. We depend on transmission of knowledge for progress, so a lot of us wind up using the broken guides *even though we know they are broken* and trying to cobble together SOME kind of at least semi-functional result out of the mess.
Lastly, don't go thinking that this is a man's problem (or that the men are adolescent). Women have just as many absurdly mistaken ideas and anxieties about sexuality as men. I'd suspect that the #1 most common one is the idea that the whole issue is somehow the MEN'S fault and their responsibility to fix. Women need to take the responsibility to do their share of the exploring and communicating. We may think we're not "adolescent" because we're (maybe) more in touch with our own feelings/desires--but we SUCK at communicating both of them in any constructive manner, which is no mature attitude either. You could very well translate the perpetual female demand for "sensitive" guys into "I want someone to read my mind and give me what I want without me ever having to say anything."
Men may have ingrained anxiety, but women have ingrained silence that often erupts into less-than-helpful vituperation. So let's all admit that nobody's got a good map and set out to make a new one as best we can.
I wonder if the problem with anxieties about sexuality doesn't derive from the fact that we generally let members of the SAME sex inform our attitudes and standards for our sexual characteristics, leading to this spiral where the various anxieties of the involved parties feed off each other creating ludicrous and impossible standards.
For instance, if you read women's magazines (predominately written BY WOMEN and "effeminate" men) you could very easily come to the *incredibly* mistaken conclusion that if you're not some kind of super-model sex machine slathered in makeup and the latest fashions, no man could POSSIBLY be interested in you. I suspect that men have the same problem when most of what they guess about women is derived from the B.S. they hear out of *other men* who are no better-informed than they are.
Exploring unknown territory is always a bit scary. In most other situations, we can get a map, advice, a compass maybe. But how scary does it become when the map you've been given is wrong, the advice terrible, and your compass broken? Better to explore blind--and know you're doing it--than to trust guides of this kind. Unfortunately a lot of us don't have the time/opportunity to do everything ourselves, just like how we don't all go out and discover fire and agriculture for ourselves. We depend on transmission of knowledge for progress, so a lot of us wind up using the broken guides *even though we know they are broken* and trying to cobble together SOME kind of at least semi-functional result out of the mess.
Lastly, don't go thinking that this is a man's problem (or that the men are adolescent). Women have just as many absurdly mistaken ideas and anxieties about sexuality as men. I'd suspect that the #1 most common one is the idea that the whole issue is somehow the MEN'S fault and their responsibility to fix. Women need to take the responsibility to do their share of the exploring and communicating. We may think we're not "adolescent" because we're (maybe) more in touch with our own feelings/desires--but we SUCK at communicating both of them in any constructive manner, which is no mature attitude either. You could very well translate the perpetual female demand for "sensitive" guys into "I want someone to read my mind and give me what I want without me ever having to say anything."
Men may have ingrained anxiety, but women have ingrained silence that often erupts into less-than-helpful vituperation. So let's all admit that nobody's got a good map and set out to make a new one as best we can.
Umm... that statistic is only true if FarmVille counts as a game. Seriously, I can guarentee that number would reduce at least fourfold if you de-classified FarmVille as a game.
Men do seem to be scared silly about being portrayed in any way that could suggest they are slightly feminine. Girls are more likely to be ( or claim to be) bi in my school, since if a guy even vaguely hints that he is interested in other guys he is shunned and some how girly. They are also insecure about playing sports with girls. In PE if a girl starts to beat a guy she's either an exception to most girls or they give up and don't take the game seriously.
Videogame-wise, I don't consider guys who only play sports games or Gitarre Hero/Rock Band to be gamers. It's like farmville for boys. I say the same for guys who only play Halo/Call of Duty or just "manly"(read:childish) shooters. I can't talk with any guy in my grade about games since they only recognize Halo and Call of Duty as "real games." In my mind, a gamer plays more than one type of game or at least can respect other types of games.
There is the perception that girls hate games because they're girls and don't like "manly" things. BS. The main reason is that they only see obnoxious boys sitting around their parent's basement boasting about killing imaginary people.
Many boys who play games are introduced through shooters, sports games, or fighting games (from what I've seen/heard). All the girls I know who are gamers have been introduced through RPG's (not neccisarily JRPGs) or action/adventure/exploration games. Or Pokemon. Video games can appeal to girls, just not always in the same way as guys.
Also: for a previous poster (don't know/care which post), don't assume girls are attracted to overly buff men. Sure, it's nice if they are some what muscular, but there is a limit. If I remember correctly, the whole overly buff thing actually is aimed more at men than women, implying that the character/ person is more manly than you. If you are the character, you can be caught up in the fantasy and imagine yourself more manly.
Good article, although it seems it has mostly fallen an deaf ears. Video games are for escaping and fantisizing and those who make said games are guys who are making games for what they see as a male audience. If you read and analyze romance novels (the ones with the racy covers) or Twilight that are made to be an escape for women, you can find issues women have with their sexuality and men. The main difference is that videogames are a medium and romance novels are a genre.
Videogame-wise, I don't consider guys who only play sports games or Gitarre Hero/Rock Band to be gamers. It's like farmville for boys. I say the same for guys who only play Halo/Call of Duty or just "manly"(read:childish) shooters. I can't talk with any guy in my grade about games since they only recognize Halo and Call of Duty as "real games." In my mind, a gamer plays more than one type of game or at least can respect other types of games.
There is the perception that girls hate games because they're girls and don't like "manly" things. BS. The main reason is that they only see obnoxious boys sitting around their parent's basement boasting about killing imaginary people.
Many boys who play games are introduced through shooters, sports games, or fighting games (from what I've seen/heard). All the girls I know who are gamers have been introduced through RPG's (not neccisarily JRPGs) or action/adventure/exploration games. Or Pokemon. Video games can appeal to girls, just not always in the same way as guys.
Also: for a previous poster (don't know/care which post), don't assume girls are attracted to overly buff men. Sure, it's nice if they are some what muscular, but there is a limit. If I remember correctly, the whole overly buff thing actually is aimed more at men than women, implying that the character/ person is more manly than you. If you are the character, you can be caught up in the fantasy and imagine yourself more manly.
Good article, although it seems it has mostly fallen an deaf ears. Video games are for escaping and fantisizing and those who make said games are guys who are making games for what they see as a male audience. If you read and analyze romance novels (the ones with the racy covers) or Twilight that are made to be an escape for women, you can find issues women have with their sexuality and men. The main difference is that videogames are a medium and romance novels are a genre.
Awesome article, with some very interesting links mixed in. I tried to find a video for the Rant you talked about but unfortunately couldn't find one. Not exactly sure what the general public could do about the situation but at least now I'm thinking about it. Also, I haven't played many of the games you talked about in the article.
To be fair the vagina isn't exactly the most aesthetically pleasing part of the human anatomy.
Also Vagina dentata!
Also Vagina dentata!