Category Archives: Society

Gender and Sexuality, Society

Such a superficial attempt to show one cares

3 Comments

Over at Right Wing Watch, Brian Brian Tashman reports on Tea Partier Selena Owens’s reaction to the Grammy awards.  His post is titled “Prove You’re Not Homophobic By Complimenting Your Lesbian Store Clerk’s Haircut,” which helps draw attention to this part of Owens’s statement:

Sometimes I deliberately go through the checkout line of the lesbian clerk to drop a few words of Jesus’ love in her ear and then compliment her haircut.

There’s just so much that’s wrong with that statement.  Not least of all, I find it telling that her go-to example of “coming into contact with LGBT people” is a situation where she approaches a working class person at her place of employment.1  Owens is approaching someone in a situation where she’s operating from a position of power.  This poor lesbian who’s just there trying to do her job has to put up with whatever conversation Owens may start up2 because, let’s face it, she has a job to do.

Heaven forbid that Owens actually seeks out LGBT people in places where they may be on equal footing to her and be equally comfortable.  Or heck, heaven forbid she step outside her own comfort zones3 to approach LGBT people on their terms.

Then there’s the whole “compliment her hairstyle,” an act that Owens seems to pat herself on the back for.  As if such a superficial pleasantry somehow shows she actually cares about the woman.  You know, as I think of a lesbian working as a cashier in a grocery show, here are the things that cross my mind:

  • How much is she making?  How many hours does she get per week?  Does her schedule and her hourly wage work out to something she and any family she has can live on?
  • Does she have healthcare through her employer?  Can her partner (if she has one) be covered through that her employer’s plan?  Her partner’s kids (if she has any)?
  • What kind of harassment does she have to put up with from some of the customers who come through her line?

Granted, these are not questions I’d ask a random stranger who’s ringing up my groceries.  That would be completely inappropriate.  But knowing those are serious questions with potentially serious ramifications, I also wouldn’t do something as superficial as compliment her on her haircut and pat myself on the back as if I’d become the epitome of compassion.

Owens’s second example is just as awful:

Or I encourage the star-struck 17-year-old to become informed on political issues that will affect her life, then discuss those big hoop earrings she’s sporting.

Why is Owens automatically assuming that this young woman isn’t already informed on political issues that will affect her life?4  And why does she simply encourage the young woman to “become informed” on such a topic and then go on to discuss those big hoop earrings?  Maybe the young woman would rather discuss the political issues that affects her life — those issues that she may well know better than Owens, as it’s her life.

This whole thing reeks of a person who obviously sees herself as superior to others seeking to engage others in situations where her perceived superiority is reinforced by the circumstances, behaving in a manner that makes it clear she feels herself superior, and acting patronizing.  And she thinks this paints her in a positive light?

1And don’t even get me started on the whole “deliberately” doing so thing, as if Owens finds choosing to through a particular checkout lane some major effort or ordeal on her part.

2Let’s face it, I’ve seen what passes for “a few words of Jesus’ love” in some Christians’ minds when it comes to LGBT people.  It ain’t pretty, and most decent people would wonder what definition of that word such Christians are using.

3Assuming she doesn’t think just talking to a lesbian — even in a place where Owens can probably still create problems for her by simply complaining to the store manager — as something terribly uncomfortable.

4Oh, right.  Because Owens is probably assuming that anyone who is really informed on such issues will automatically agree with her.  The condescending smugness of it all is vile.

Gender and Sexuality, Society

Let’s not be squeamish about the prostate

Leave a comment

[Content Note:  Sex, Homophobia]

This morning, I was listening to the morning radio show.  For their “What would you do” segment, they chose a woman who was dating a guy who was practically perfect and with whom she had been building a great relationship.  She indicated that she had looked in his bedside table drawer the other day and found a dildo and wasn’t sure how to react.  To the credit of many people who called in or texted the show, many people seemed to have an attitude of “who cares?”  Some even went so far to suggest she offer to incorporate it into the couple’s own sexual experiences, which I thought was awesome.

However, there were also those who were leery about the whole thing.  One of the (male) radio hosts was even trying to come up with non-sexual explanations why the guy might have one.  (Seriously?  To massage an old shoulder injury?)  Because, you know, heaven forbid that a guy might enjoy actually having his prostate stimulated.  That might make him gay, I guess.1

But here’s the thing:  Stimulation of the prostate can be highly pleasurable for men.  A lot of men enjoy it.  Some of us are gay.  Some of us are bisexual2.  Some of us are even heterosexual, which is great.  Heterosexual guys should be free to enjoy whatever pleasure their bodies offer them as it pleases them.

Other guys — of all orientations — prefer to skip that particular activity for whatever reason.  That’s great too.  But we as a society would be well served to stop getting squeamish and/or offering up value judgments on those guys — reagardless of orientation — who know what they like and choose to indulge themselves.

1I’ll note that there’s not just a negativity toward the idea that a guy is gay, though.  There’s often added negativity toward the idea that some guys actually like being the receptive partner in anal sex.  It’s something completely unthinkable by some people, as can be noted by Phil Robertson’s underlying assumption that the only two possible choices a man could make is whether to stick his penis in a vagina or anus in his recent homophobic remarks.

2A possibility I suspect neither the show’s hosts nor those listeners who responded even considered.

In and Around Rochester, Society

Two Morning Show Segments (and the Notions Behind Them) I Despise

2 Comments

No GimmicksI’ve mentioned before that I tend to listen to the morning show on 98PXY during my five minute drive to work most mornings.  I’ve blogged about the sexism (and worse) that I’ve heard the hosts of the shows espouse.  Today, I want to talk about some of the regular segments that they do for the show and why they bother me.

The first is “War of the Roses,” which has disturbed me so much that I often will turn off the radio on the days that it airs if it comes on during my commute.  The basic notion is that someone call in to the show because zie suspects hir romantic partner of cheating on hir.  So to “help out,” one of the hosts calls the partner at hir office and tells them that they are eligible to have a free bouquet of red roses sent to any person of hir choosing.  The idea is that if the partner chooses to send the flowers to the original caller, the caller’s fears are (hypothetically) allayed.  If the partner chooses to send the flowers to someone else instead — which has been the case for all of the half dozen or so times I’ve listened to the segment — zie is deemed a cheater and the original caller — who is also on the line the entire time — confronts hir.  Usually some sort of fight ensues and “great drama” is achieved.

For the record, I threw up in my mouth a little typing “great drama.”  Even in the scare quotes.  Because it sickens me to think that we as a society (or at least the segment that listens to morning radio) apparently consider this something great to listen to.  I mean, thinking your partner might be cheating on you is serious business, not to mention actually having a cheating partner.  Having dated guys who proved themselves completely untrustworthy, I get that.  Which is why I find the whole idea of using some radio show stunt as a way to try to find out or confront a cheating partner so disconcerting.1  Truth be told, dealing with a cheating partner or even just a partner suspected of cheating is not easy and I don’t think there are any simple ways to deal with that.  That includes having radio hosts try trapping and catching your partner in the act and then confronting them on air.

The other segment that bothers me is called “Communicake.”  The idea behind this one is that the hosts invite someone to call in with a situation in which they need to have an uncomfortable conversation with someone or tell them something that isn’t easy.  The hosts then put the message — letting the caller choose the exact phrasing — on a cookie cake, drop it off outside the recipient’s front door over the weekend with a card inviting them to call the show Monday morning to talk it out.  The resulting conversation is then aired, of course.  I haven’t listened to this segment (especially the conversations after the cake is delivered) very often.  The handful of messages I’ve heard about include break-up messages and one person telling her neighbor that a rank odor is wafting from his apartment into hers.

Again, I find this weird and creepy.  First of all, I find the idea of relaying uncomfortable messages via a cake troubling and trivializing.  To me, it’s like saying, “I know this might be the start of a difficult conversation, so I’m going to start it as flippantly as possible,” which strikes me as counter-intuitive.  Then there’s just the fact that the conversation is then aired for the benefit of the show’s listeners.  Because if I’m talking about something that may be uncomfortable for me and/or the other person, I sure want to have hundreds of eavesdroppers listening in on it.

The thing I note is that both of these segments have a couple things in common:

  1. They both offer “easy solutions” to complicated and troubling issues.
  2. They both offer listeners a chance to be voyeuristic when it comes to other people’s interpersonal struggles.

Are either of these things that we as a society really want to encourage?

No, don’t answer that.  The answer is obvious.  And depressing.

1I admit though that I’m more disturbed by the shows hosts who would use people’s real relationship concerns for a few laughs or even just a spectacle to observe on their show.

Society

Saying we’re all the same erases our differences and the problems they cause

Leave a comment

The comic included in this post hit my Tumblr dashboard this weekend thanks to Mad Gastronomer.  The comic was done by eighteen year old queer artist Elias Ericson and can also be found on his blog here.  I think it’s a great.  I also wish I had been half as wise and insightful at Elias’s age as he seems to be.  (For more examples of his great insight, see these two other comics.)

I love this comic because I too have heard the things said in that first panel.  And I get that the person saying it often has good intentions.  Zie sees people being treated poorly because they are different from the “average” person — for whatever that means.  Zie assumes that if we quit focusing on differences, then everyone will be treated better.  It’s a neat idea.  It’s a noble idea.  It just doesn’t work.

You see, pretending we’re not different doesn’t actually make us all the same.  It just makes our differences invisible.  That’s just as problematic, because it also tends to make invisible the unique difficulties and problems that people face because of their differences.  It erases the fact that society inherently privileges and disadvantaged different people based on those differences.  Ignoring that fact doesn’t make it go away.  In fact, it just makes it impossible to do anything to change it.

Plus, there’s the fact that if a person have to pretend that someone is “the same” as everyone else to treat them the same as everyone else, zie hasn’t accepted that person at all.  Acceptance requires accepting a person exactly as they are and embracing their idiosyncrasies, their unique characteristics, and everything else about them.  Acceptance of individuals means acceptance and acknowledgement of diversity.  Accepting a re-tooled image of someone that allows one to pretend that zie is just like everyone else is hurtful to hir.

And I love that Elias managed to capture that in this comic.

 

Gender and Sexuality, Society

Why are anti-gay people so confused about consent?

2 Comments

[Content Note:  Rape culture, Sexual Abuse, Anti-Gay Bigotry]

Yesterday afternoon, Zack Ford of ThinkProgress reported on a new statement by NARTH that’s intended to encourage the Boy Scouts of America to continue to exclude gay, bisexual, and (presumably) transgender boys from joining their ranks.  It’s the usual mash-up of misinformation about promiscuous gay men, heightened health risks, and gay people as sexual predators.  Zack does a good job of providing links that deconstruct the information.

However, I want to take a closer look at one of the excerpts from the statement that Zack quoted:

How will child protection be assured? If openly homosexual boys are allowed to participate, how does a Scoutmaster monitor the influence or actions that these boys may have upon others in the troop especially during overnight events?

As someone who has spent some time in feminist circles, I think that the answer is quite obvious:  You teach all the boys involved about consent.  You teach them that they have a right to say no to the advances — be it an offer of a hug or something more physically intimate — of any of their peers.  You also teach them that it is absolutely essential that they respect the boundaries of their peers and do not cross those boundaries without freely given (as in not coerced) and informed consent.  You teach them that if a peer does not respect their boundaries, they should immediately talk to the leaders about it and reassure them that the leaders will be sympathetic and take the matter and their safety seriously.  In short, I don’t think “protecting” boys in this situation is exactly rocket science.

But then again, I have no problem with the idea of consent.  I expect others to respect boundaries and I support those who speak up when their boundaries are violated.  I’m not convinced the same can be said for all — or even many — who raise the specter of sexual abuse when the topic of LGBT people comes up.

I’ve noticed for some time that there seems to be a lot of overlap between those who believe that LGBT people — especially gay and bisexual men and trans* women — are sexual predators and those who think that men in general are incapable of controlling their sexual impulses.  The difference is that when such people think about cis, heterosexual men — they assume that this is just natural and that others — most notably women — should adjust their lives and choices to protect those men from their hard-to-control urges.1  After all, they argue that those men ultimately can’t help themselves.  Insisting they respect consent just doesn’t work.

So it’s no wonder they automatically assume that teaching and enforcing consent won’t work with gay, bisexual, and trans boys.  Many of them are likely invested in ignoring the whole concept of consent anyway.  Which tends to make their pleas to “think of the potential victims of sexual abuse” sound rather hollow to me.

Of course, the other thing is that ultimately, I think that what NARTH and people like them are really afraid of isn’t that boys will get molested by their fellow scouts.  Instead, I suspect that they are worried that closeted and frightened scouts might actually meet and discover other boys like them and learn that being gay, bisexual, or trans* isn’t so bad.2  Because in greater scheme of things, that is one way in which NARTH and other folks like them are especially hostile to consent:  They don’t want LGBT people to feel like they have the choice to truly be themselves.

1I mean, stop and think about those two statements.  First:  “Heterosexual men are just sexual and aggressive by nature, so women should stay where they are safe and avoid tempting those men.”  Second:  “Gay men are just sexual and aggressive by nature, so gay men should be kept away from heterosexual men in order to protect the heterosexual men.”  Notice the one thing that is consistent between those two arguments?

2Yeah, the anti-gay animus and stigma can be pretty rotten at times.  But being gay itself?  It’s actually pretty okay.  (I’ll leave it to those who are bi and/or trans* to comment on whether they feel the same way about their own sexuality and/or gender identity.  I don’t want to speak for others.)

Gender and Sexuality, Rants, Society

Entitled Assholes Online: The Caught Liar

Leave a comment

Today’s installment of this series is compliments of the social networking site, Tagged.  I’ve been on Tagged for a few years now and I deal with all kinds of interesting people there. As a result, I recently updated my “About Me” section on my profile to read as follows:

I’m not LOOKING for anything. I’m here to meet people and chat. If a friendship comes of it, great. If I meet someone LOCAL and we end up romantically involved, that’s fine too. But I am not on any quest to find love or anything else. So don’t ask me what I’m looking for. Don’t ask me for my Yahoo ID, my Skype or anything else. I’m not interesting in camming. And I swear, if you ask me my age, my sexual orientation, or anything else that is already listed in my profile, I will BLOCK you for failing to take the time to go through the information I’ve already provided to everyone

I suspect that today’s entitled asshole didn’t bother to read that, otherwise I would think he might have a clue that the following first message would not be well received:

hi handsomer baby, can we hook up? am single and searching. how are you today? am seriously looking for a man to be my wife your response would be an honor. regards

First of all, I’m not sure why he both asks if we can hook up and indicates that he’s looking to find a man who will be his wife.  In my experience, those tend to be two different activities.  Furthermore, while I’m sure there are exceptions, the kind of guys interested in the former aren’t generally interested in the latter and vice versa.

As for bringing up marriage in the first email:  Seriously?!  All he seems to know about me is that he finds me handsome — or possibly that he suspects I’m easily seduced by guys who compliment my looks.  He has a long ways to go with me before I’ll be ready to talk about marriage.  Unfortunately for him, the trip just got permanently canceled as far as I’m concerned.

Plus there’s the whole fact that he specifically said that he wants me for a wife.  If you’re going to use gender-specific terms like “husband” or “wife” rather than something gender neutral like “partner,” then you’d better use the term that’s appropriate for my gender.  This is particularly important because I get the strong guy that this guy is intentionally using the term “wife” to indicate that he’s looking for a guy to be the subordinate, weaker, and/or more submissive partner in the relationship.  That just pisses me off.  No person should be expected to be the “lesser” partner[1] in any relationship.

This also suggests to me that I don’t matter.  As the potential “lesser partner,” I seem to merely exist in this guy’s mind to possibly meet his needs and desires.  My feelings, my needs, my expectations do not seem to matter at all.

I noted that Tagged indicates that the guy is in Kenya (hey, I told you my profile information would come in handy), so I decide to go with a curt and pointed response that says the distance is an issue for me rather than climb the “you’re being an entitle ass” mountain that looms before me.

Try someone on the same continent as you.

He came back with the following response:

am in pensacola Jarred, why you scolding me away from your heart ?

Okay, so now he claims to be in Florida.  Given that I’m practically dipping my toes in Lake Ontario, the distance is still an issue.  But I have bigger issues than that, so let me go through them.

First of all, he corrects me and claims we’re on the same continent.  But he doesn’t say, “Wait a minute, why do you think we’re on different continents?”  That’s one big misconception for me to have.  If I were in his shoes, I’d want to know how someone got such an allegedly wrong idea.  (Frankly, I think he’s lying and he really is in Kenya.)

Instead, this EA starts asking me why I’m “scolding him away from my heart.”  Again, this is why I think he’s ultimately lying.  Rather than trying to clear up the misconception, he’s attempting a guilt trip here by suggesting that he’s just a nice guy and I’m trying to keep him at arm’s length.

Except here’s the thing:  I have every right to keep him at an arms length.  By asking me why I’m “scolding him away from my heart,” he’s implicitly assuming that he’s entitled to have my heart.  No way.  I decide who gets near my heart since, you know, it’s my heart.  And this dude has already given me plenty of reasons to put a full army battalion between it and him.

So given his total sense of entitlement and the fact that he has presented me with conflicting information and has made no effort to explain it, I decided to call him on it.

According to Tagged, you are in Kenya.  Liar.

Finally he decided to offer an explanation:

am not in kenya i went there on a contract business am i have completed my contract

I’ll be honest, given the rest of his behavior, I’m considering the other experiences on the site.  I’ve heard a lot of people talk about being from the United States, yet in Africa “on contract.”  While I’ll grant that this is the first EA that’s claimed to be back stateside, I also recognize this is a common ruse of scammers.  I’ve heard the whole “I’m on contract and there’s an issue with money, please help me out” bit before.  And given this guy’s total sense of entitlement and the fact that his story reeks like last week’s roadkill already, I’m thinking it’s not much of a stretch to imagine he’s a conman as well.

Before I could respond to that message, he sent me a follow-up:

how could you just make conclusion on something so irrelevant?

I’m simply amazed that someone could consider the question of where they actually are and the fact that their profile and what they are telling me don’t even match up is irrelevant.  Again, this is a sure sign that what’s really irrelevant is me.  As far as he’s concerned, I should just STFU and be delighted that he wants me to be his “little woman.”

Like that’s going to happen.  So I made my feelings clear:

Still not interested.

The fun thing about EA’s is that they’re often masters of butthurt.  I got two final replies from him before he blocked me:

then bounce
who cares

Yeah, because he contacted me looking to get something out of me, yet I’m the one who should get lost.

As for who cares, I don’t know.  Which guy spent a lot of time trying to get the other one to just trust him and give him a chance despite other guy’s stated lack of interest?

Notes:
[1]  I actually think that this is a reason that gendered terms are best avoided when talking about people in relationships.  No one should be a “wife” if by “wife” we mean “lesser partner.”  I think it’s much better to go with gender-neutral terms[2], suggesting a more mutual and egalitarian relationship.

[2]  Though I’ll admit I have a different problem with the term “partner,” especially when it comes to same sex relationships.  It can be somewhat vague and allows some people to pretend that the partnership is something other than the romantic and sexual relationship it is.

Gender and Sexuality, Rants, Society

Today on Sexist Morning Radio: Dating Games and Double Standards

Leave a comment

This morning on my five minute commute to work, I caught part of a segment on my local morning radio show.  They were talking about relationships, dating, and the games “women” play.  (Granted, they may have talked about games “men” play too and I just missed that part.)  The part of the segment that I caught involved them talking to a female caller who talked about how she broke up with this guy and when he started dating some “hot chick,” she turned around and started dating his cousin, apparently with the purpose of making said ex jealous. She also commented that the guy still wants her back, despite it being five years later.  One of the hosts (Duffy, I believe — it usually seems to be Duffy) called her actions evil and suggested she’s just keeping him around to make her feel better about herself.

Evil?  Really?  Now granted, I would not date someone in an attempt to make a third party — even an ex — jealous.  Nor would I necessarily brag about an ex who still has feelings for me. I’d either take that ex back or encourage them to move on with my life.  I’m not big on games.  I’m also not big on calling such actions, evil though.

I’m also not big on acting as if — as the host does — that these kinds of games is something that all women engage in.  I know several women who wouldn’t do such things.  They’re much more interested in finding men (or other women) they like who also like them and enjoy each others’ company.  When it comes to exes (or other guys there’s not a mutual connection with), they’re much more inclined to cut them loose than play such games.  Tarring all women as such game players is both inaccurate and sexist.

I’m also not big on acting as if only women engage in these sorts of games, either.  Truth be told, I know guys who engage in such games, and other games.  Some guys go by the attitude that they have to “treat a women like shit” in order gain and keep her interest.  Guys are just as capable of such nonsense, and some of them engage in it regularly.

But you know what?  We don’t treat men who play games the same way.  A morning radio host isn’t likely to call such a guy or his action evil.  That’s because we live in a society where we still view guys playing such games as “men being men.”  We ignore it.  We permit it.  Hell, we even celebrate it and make televisions shows glorifying it.

I’m not a fan of games.  I prefer to treat dating and relationships as something much more direct and honest[1].  But I also prefer to be honest and note that a lot of people do this and that it’s not limited to a particular gender or other class.  Nor do I want to support or even ignore a double standard where such games are condemned when played by one group but praised when played by another.

Note:
[1]  And there’s a whole separate rant I or someone else could go into about how society tends to frown on women who are so direct and honest when it comes to relationships and their expectations, which often serves to push them towards such games.

Rants, Society

Entitled Assholes Online: Policing Emotions and Behavior

4 Comments

My previous installment of “Entitled Assholes Online” involved threats involved threats of physical violence.  While this installment will be devoid of such threats, I promise that it will not be any less manipulative, nor will it be lacking in its own awfulness.

By way of background, a few months ago, I posted the following ad online:

I’m a 38 year old computer professional looking to talk and connect with guys who are mature, funny, interesting, and personable. I tend to be the shy guy who is a total treasure and keeps a person in stitches once I get to know them enough to feel comfortable around them. I’d love to meet someone who enjoys movies, dining out, conversations that range anywhere from silly to deeply serious, and just having a good time. Someone who also believes in romance would be a good thing as well.

Drop me an email and lets see if we can relate.

I didn’t really expect it to get many, if any replies.  I posted it to a site that is notorious for hookup ads.  But I figured there was the lonely section that was clearly marked “romance, NO HOOKUPS” and there was nothing to lose by giving it a shot.

This is the first message I got from one guy:

I’m 225 6ft and 6in cock.
It is so hard to meet a nice guy to connect with. I’ve almost given up.  Looking for a good good friend.
Let’s talk.  Please send some kind of pic.

Attached to this message was FOUR PICTURES (or four copies of the same picture, I’m not sure which) of said cock.  And we’re not talking about this kind of cock, either:

rooster-j.jpg
I was flabbergasted and reviewed my ad, wondering what I said that would give any indication that this was the kind of reply I wanted.  After reassuring myself that I had made it pretty clear I was looking for romance and a chance to get to know a guy and just not what he was hiding in his pants, I sent a reply:

Wow.  Four pictures of your penis, but none of your face.  You told me how tall and how heavy you are, but not your name.  You say you’re looking to connect, yet you’ve told me nothing that might help us find a point of common interest.

I think it’s safe to say you responded to the wrong craigslist ad.  Your actions make it pretty evident to me that we’re looking for different things.

I figured that would be the end of it, but I got a reply from the guy:

Yea I know sorry.  It’s hard to figure this out.  I’m not really ok with sharing face pic right away.  It’s ok.  Never mind.  Just trying to connect with someone.  🙂

Okay, I could get that he doesn’t feel comfortable sharing a face picture right off the bat, though it did leave me wondering if he was another closet case.  I figured he responded, so I’d offer some admittedly unsolicited advice:

Bit of helpful advice then:  When answering an ad that talks about romance and never mentions sex, try starting with, “Hi, my name is ___.  My hobbies and interests include _____.”  Go from there.

If you’re just looking for sex – and that’s how your email came across – then don’t respond to ads that talk about romance and never mention sex.  Instead, respond to ads that have titles like “looking to get fucked tonight” or “nsa fun.”

I figured that would be enough to make it clear that he really should either revise his approach or stick to ads that were more geared toward casual sex and anonymous anyway.

He replied:

IC.  Ok thanks.  Good point.  Well that’s why I responded to the add.  I do want romance and not just sex.  I need a guy I can hang out with and play golf or basketball with.  But I do want sex…  I just now it’s not all about sex.  :). Well Im am also married and need discretion.  Anyway….

FYI,  you sound univiting and angry.  Did mean to set ya off.  Just sayin…

At this point, I was livid.  Note that it took him three emails before he admitted that not only is he closeted, but he’s married.  So he’s looking for someone to sneak around with behind his wife’s back.  I saw nothing in my ad (go read it again) that suggested I was interested in being some married man’s dirty little secret.  Quite frankly, I pretty much find “Gee, thanks for letting me fuck you, now I got to get back to my wife” the antithesis of romance.  Others are free to disagree, of course.

And that bit about “sounding uninviting and angry”?  Pure manipulative and entitled bullshit.  (And agin, I suspect this is something my female readers could write entire dissertations on and lecture me on for hours.)  Did he really expect me to be grateful for any attention from him or any other guy?  Was I supposed to simply bend over for whoever expressed interest?  It sure seemed that way.  I shot off my final message, deciding it was time to remind him that he’s not the only one that has expectations, wants, and needs:

Ah, so you’re looking for a friend wirh benefits that you can hang out with and have sex with before going back to your wife.

Did you see the part where I said I was looking for romance?  Have you considered what I want at all?  Have you considered how your current situation runs contrary to what I said I’m looking for right up front?  Because it sure doesn’t look like it from where I’m sitting.

If I seem angry, it’s because I am angry.  Frankly, I think it’s an understandable emotional response, given how you approached me compared to what I said I was looking for.  Wouldn’t you agree?

And if I seem uninviting, it’s because your every action so far has left me finding you an unlikely prospect in terms of what *I’m* looking for.

He got in the last word:

Right.  Friends with benefits.  But friends can be romantic too.  Anyway.  I see we are not a fit.  Thanks and good luck.  🙂

Now, I don’t know.  Maybe some people do act romantically toward friends.  That’s just not my experience.  And quite frankly, this guy hadn’t shown any indication that he was capable of romance or even understood romance as I understand it.  Like I said, I don’t find it romantic to get all sexed up and then abandoned for the wife.  (And that’s really not cool for the wife either.)

I’ll also note that he didn’t even acknowledge my question about whether he thought my anger was understandable.  Once again, he demonstrated that he didn’t want to even consider my point of view or my needs.  He simply wants someone to give him what he wants and feel satisfied with whatever — if anything — he feels like giving in return.

And I loved how he mentioned that he saw weren’t a good fit.  Gee, I’m pretty sure I said that five messages earlier in the exchange.

Society

Entitled Assholes Online: The Fake Favor

4 Comments

I’ve been quiet for some time now.  I can’t promise I’ll be back regularly at this point.  However, I wanted to take a moment so share something with you as an introduction to a series I’ve been mulling over.

I spend a significant amount of time online with various activities:  blogging, online dating, social networking sites, and just tooling around having a good time.  Over the past few months (actually, it’s been the past few years, but I’m focusing on a more recent window of history) I’ve dealt with all kinds of guys who wanted something out of me (hint:  it’s usually some form of sex) and feeling entitled toward me.  Talking it over with a friend, I thought it might be interesting to take a closer look at some of these men, their mentalities, and the behavior it encourages them to engage in.  Part of this is because, the more I look around and talk to women, it’s very similar — though not nearly as common — as a lot of the bullshit that women have to put up with, too.  So I thought it would be interesting to do this to expose and combat some men’s sense of entitlement in general and how ugly it can get, and hopefully encourage a bit more empathy for women who deal with this thing all the time.  (Hint:  If you’re the kind of person who thinks I as a guy shouldn’t have to put up with this bullshit but think nothing of it if a woman is given the same treatment because “that’s just the way things work,” uh-oh!)

I didn’t move on this for a couple months.  However, I had the perfect exchange earlier this week that convinced me it’s the perfect introductory material for this post.  To give a bit of background, I recently joined a social networking website that caters to people who are into or curious about kink.  Through it, I found a local group which maintains an online presence and discussion groups on the site.  I introduced myself in their main discussion group  indicating that I was hoping to attend their next public social function and wanted to know if there was anything I needed to do, such as give advanced notice.  I got a handful of warm welcomes and people told me that no advance notice was necessary and they looked forward to seeing me.  All very pleasant.

Then a few hours later, I got the following message from an older man:

not gay but if you wanted someone to go with I’ll gladly come with you. But and not gay married , but I do enjoy man head every once in a while, and no my wife don’t know, and I don’t want her or anyone else to either.

Okay, at first glance, this may seem like a friendly invitation and a cool idea.  After all, the idea of having someone to pal around with at an event where I don’t know anyone is very appealing to me.  If one of my friends made such an offer, I’d jump at it.  Under other circumstances — that is, if the rest of what I have to say about this message didn’t happen to be true — then I might have accepted.  The thing is, this isn’t a friend.  It’s a total stranger.  Offering to do me a favor by giving me some company on my way to a new social experience.  That strikes me as potentially awkward.

But as the message continues, it becomes pretty clear that he’s not really offering me a favor at all.  After all, it’s pretty clear that he’s looking for a blowjob on the side in exchange for this favor.  Sure, some people might argue that he never said he wants me to blow him.  But let’s be honest, if you’re not looking for me to give you head, why mention that you like the occasional blow-job from the occasional man at all. So now there are strings that are attached to this great favor he’s supposedly offering me.

And the strings get even more complicated after that.  He makes it clear that he’s married and that he doesn’t want her or anyone else to know he fools around with guys.  So now if I accept his “generous favor,” not only is it presumed I’ll likely blow him, but I’m required to remain quiet about it and never tell a soul.  In effect, I have to submit to becoming his dirty little secret.  Suddenly, this favor that I never asked for seems more about him getting what he wants, and he’s not even willing to do me the courtesy of admitting to that.

This lack of honesty isn’t surprising mind you.  Remember that he just admitted that he had a wife, that he enjoys fooling around with men behind her back, and is likely looking to do so with me.  There’s not a single thing about that which I find honest.  This lack of honesty is increased when I check his profile, which says he’s single.  So apparently, he’s also lying to everyone online about his marital status.

So here we have a guy who has — at best — a strained relationship with the truth and is pretending to do me a favor while trying to get something out of me in reality.  He’s shown no indication that he cares what I want at this point and has made it clear that what he wants is paramount and Not To Be Ignored.  At this point, I’m thinking there’s only one appropriate response to his “offer.”  I decided to go with a more civil version of it instead:

No thanks.

I would have thought that this would have been the end of the conversation.  But he decided to follow up with me.

okay not a problem and meant no disrespect if that’s how you rook it

Again, at first glance this reply seemed nice enough.  Then I got thinking about that second bit about him meaning no disrespect versus “how I took it.”  It’s the whole “intent isn’t magic” argument in a nutshell.

I don’t care what the guy meant, I find everything about his “offer” and the circumstances surrounding it disrespectful to everyone even remotely involved.  I find his choice to suggest I have sex with him in his first message disrespectful.  I find all the rules and conditions he wants to place on things after assuming I might be interested in having sex with him disrespectful.  I find the fact that he’s seeking to fool around on his wife — who I’m guessing believes she has been promised and therefore can expect total monogamy — to be disrespectful to her.  I find the fact he’s claiming to be single on the site — a site that welcomes and embraces openly poly people, no less — to be another act of disrespect, both toward his wife and toward everyone he’s conversing with at the site.  So for someone who doesn’t “mean” any disrespect, he’s managed to dish out an incredible mountain of it, as far as I’m concerned.

Plus, there’s the fact that he gets the idea that I might find his offer somehow disrespectful, otherwise he wouldn’t be telling me he didn’t “mean” it.  Now a more decent person might actually turn around and say, “Hey, did you find this disrespectful?  If so, could you explain why?”  (Then again, a troll trying to convince me I was wrong might do the same.)  Such a person might try to understand why someone might find what he did disrespectful.  But not this guy. This guy doesn’t care why I might find him disrespectful.  He’s convinced himself that how I feel doesn’t matter.  He just doesn’t want to be accused of being disrespectful.

If you’re sitting there thinking, “That’s pretty disrespectful in itself,” pat yourself on the back.

I also got the impression he wanted me to reassure him that oh no, I didn’t find what he said disrespectful at all.  In other words, he not only doesn’t care how I actually feel, he expects me to tailor my feelings for his comfort and convenience.  Um…no.

I spent a few minutes pondering if I really wanted to get into all of the above with the guy.  I eventually decided against it.  At this point, I just wanted to end the conversation.  So I sent a very short message:

Bye.

And that’s when the fecal matter hit the mechanical air circulator.  Apparently, dude didn’t like being dismissed without reassurances that his behavior was a-okay.  I got this back:

now when I do go to the social I’m gonna point you out as being a ass , as I said I didn’t mean any disrespect to you and I said I’m sorry , but that racist ass attitude you wow be accepted this is a place where people get together make friend communicate laugh joke have fun, and people like you will not be welcome . I’ll remember to point you out ! and thabks

Well, alrighty then!  So much for not meaning any disrespect.  Dude decided he didn’t like being dismissed — as if he was entitled to my continuing attention — so he decided to make threats and accusations.

First of all, note that contrary to his current statement, he never actually said he was sorry for anything.  He simply said that he hoped I didn’t think him disrespectful since he didn’t “mean” to be.  That is not an apology, though I understand that we live in a  society where this sort of thing is increasingly presented as an apology.

He goes on to accuse me of having a racist attitude.  I’m not sure why he would come to that conclusion.  At this point, I had no idea what race he was.  For all I knew he was white.  The accusation of racism just seems to be tacked on here as something he’s hoping will cow me into accepting his sense of entitlement.

To take a moment to go on a tangent, I think this is particularly troublesome in that it only serves to provide noise people can then use to ignore actual criticisms of racism.  Racism — especially in the form of racial bias and privilege — are very real and troubling things in our world, and things I admit that I’m not immune to.  To be frank, I grew up in a predominantly white area of the country.  In my combined junior high and senior high school of roughly five hundred students, I can only recall seeing three students who weren’t white.  There are many issues that are either unique to non-white people or affect them disproportionately more than they do white people, and I’m unfamiliar with and likely even unaware of them in many ways.  So I have no doubt that there are times that I say or do things that may be racially insensitive and even contribute to systemic racism. Those are things that people should legitimately call me out on when they see me do it.  I don’t want to see those callouts become silenced or go ignored because of some dude who raises the specter of racism just to try and score points against me in an argument.  (And I certainly won’t ignore such callouts!)

I think what also gets me is that I’m open to having my privilege and problematic behavior exposed, even when I feel initially defensive or uncomfortable as a result.  So his apparent attempt to use such an accusation to get me to react in a certain way seems counterproductive to me.

The whole message, in fact, is a way to get me to react in a certain way.  He threatens to ruin my reputation and paint me as a rude and racist person because I didn’t act the way he wanted me to.  So not only has he still not given up on the idea that he’s entitled to dictate how I respond to him, but he feels entitled to resort to extreme manipulation if I resist his dictates.  But remember, he’s meant no disrespect this whole time.

I’ll also note at this point that this is where I suspect I have an advantage over a woman who finds herself in a similar situation.  Men are granted more freedom in society’s mind when it comes to how we respond to others.  As a man, most people are probably going to allow me a certain amount of incivility and briskness.  A woman in this situation, on the other hand, is more likely to be told that she should have been more polite, gentle, and even “lady-like” in turning the guy down.  Personally, I disagree vehemently, but there is a lot of pressure on women to be “nice.”

One thing my friends — not to mention former friends — know about me is that I don’t like threats.  I don’t like being manipulated.  At this point, I decided that politely declining and abruptly ending the conversation were no longer sufficient responses.  So I let him know exactly what I thought of his threats:

Sure thing. And when confronted, I’ll gladly whip out my phone and share this conversation with whoever confronts me. They’ll see that you approached me and potentially propositioned me for oral sex behind your wife’s back. I’ll then show them your profile where you falsely claim to be single. Tell me, how does the group feel about liars?

Note that I didn’t respond to accusations of rudeness or racism.  I simply let him know that if he showed up and tried to ruin my name and if anyone took his accusations seriously and decided to confront or even ask me about it[1], I figured I’d simply let the exchange speak for itself.  If they thought me rude, I would accept that.  But I was pretty sure that they’d take more issue with the level of dishonesty and the threat to make trouble on his part.

I guess dude agreed with me, since he immediately changed tactics:

then U can also show them later after my friends wait for you and beat the shit out you and I don’t give a fuck that you show them that, u still have your ass kick, I only ask you a question, you got rude so I DON’T GIVE A FUCK I’LL STILL KICK YOUR ASS ME AND MY BUDS , now shot that

Since I made it clear that threats to ruin my reputation weren’t going to work, dude decides to go with threats of violence.  This isn’t surprising.  There seems to be a strong undercurrent in our society that encourages and permits men to resort to threats of violence and even actual violence when things don’t go there way.  This guy is simply following through with that.

Again, I will note that this is where I think I have an advantage over women.  Even as a gay man — because gay men do face threatened and actual violence — the idea of someone committing violence against me is not as big and real an issue for me as it is for a lot of women.  This is actually only the second such threat I’ve ever personally received, whereas I know women who receive such threats on a  regular basis.

At this point, I decided to quit responding to dude.  My personal take is that when it comes to getting threatened, it’s time to walk away.  I shared the conversation with a few people, who encouraged me to contact the group holding the social I plan to attend, as the group may have had other problems with the same guy.  So I sent off a message to one of the board members that had responded to my public posting.

In the meantime, Dude decided he couldn’t let things go at threatening to form a mob and beat me.  His next message was pretty unremarkable:

lmao@u

I’m not sure what exactly he’s laughing at me for.  Is he laughing at the thought of me lying beaten and bloody someplace?  Or does he think I’m actually scared at this point?  Apparently, after a few more moments, he realized that he might have crossed a line (without “meaning to,” I’m sure) and could have gotten himself in trouble.  I get the following:

hey they can close this page I don’t give a fuck because I always can open another, and bam there u go I see you again bitch!

Apparently, he realized that he could conceivably get banned by the site for threatening another user.  But he wanted to make sure that this wouldn’t stop him from harassing me.  He’ll stalk me as long as he wants to.

Fortunately for me, I haven’t heard from him in over 24 hours.  Apparently, he got tired of stalking me already?  Again, I suspect I’m very lucky in this respect.

Note:
[1] To quote Jayne Cobb, “I smell a lot of ‘if’ coming off this plan.”

Gender and Sexuality, Society

The more I think about men’s issues, the more I want to promote feminism

1 Comment

Patriarchy sucks for a lot of people.  Some of those people are men.  After all, patriarchy seeks to establish some sort of code on what it means to be a man and enforce it.  That means that if some man — I’ll use myself as an example — don’t meet that code, we are deemed “not man enough” and are often ridiculed and mistreated by the patriarchy’s many enforcers.

According to the patriarchy, my “manhood” is open for debate because:

  • I am terrible at sports.
  • I tend to be very sensitive an emotional.
  • I like various “girly” things.
  • I like kissing other men, not to mention doing other things with them.

Being teased or having my “manhood” questioned isn’t fun.  Like I said, not being a sufficiently sanctioned “real man” in the patriarchy sucks.

But you know what sucks even more in the patriarchy?  Being a woman.  This is because women are the real targets of the patriarchy.[1]  The whole reason that the patriarchy wants to define what it means to be a “real man” is to set men apart from women, demonstrate that they’re extra-special, and thereby justify and maintain male superiority, male privilege, and male dominance.

Patriarchy’s mistreatment of me is a side effect of its real objectives, which is to wage war on women.  To put it more bluntly, I’m nothing more than collateral damage.[2]  Furthermore, while I may be hurt by patriarchy, I also benefit from it and the privileges being male grants me:

  • It’s highly unlikely that my accomplishments will be overlooked or diminished by men who are more interested in how big my breasts are or how good I am in bed.
  • I don’t have to be nearly as worried about whether the man who strikes up a conversation with me at the coffee shop will rape me because he thinks he’s entitle to any man he decides to be friendly toward.
  • Not many people will be inclined to assume that I can’t possibly be an engineer, a firefighter, a doctor, or a soldier simply because I’m a man.[3]

I don’t bring this up to diminish the fact that I and other men are hurt by the patriarchy.  I do, however, want to put the harm done to us into the proper context, because I feel that context recommends the best response I and other men can make.

If we are collateral damage in the patriarchy’s war on women, then I think it’s time to start allying ourselves with the women in that war.  After all, if we’re all being hurt by the patriarchy, it’s time we all start fighting against that same patriarchy.  And that’s why I’m for promoting feminism and feminists.

This is where I think it’s important to understand that as men hurt by the patriarchy, we’re collateral damage rather than the actual targets, our role in this fight is also secondary.  I strongly believe we need to follow the women’s lead in this fight.  As I said in my previous entry, we can’t make this all about us, even though we will benefit in the process.[4]  But we need to be willing to set aside our egos and our desire to take the center stage — reasserting that same male privilege that the patriarchy already grants us[5] — and work as supporters and allies.

Notes:
[1] Actually, I suspect that trans* people of all types also qualify as real targets as well.  After all, whereas I might question the gender policing that the patriarchy uses to enforce male superiority and dominance, trans* people reject it thoroughly and completely by having the “gall” to refuse to “stick with their rightly assigned gender.”

[2] Not that this makes me or other man any less injured.

[3] People might assume that I can’t do some of those things because I personally am lacking in some way as an individual.  They’d be right.  But there’s a difference between that and assuming women can’t do those same things because they’re the same.  I’m a man, so I get to be an individual.

[4] And despite what some may think or claim, many feminists want us men to benefit from feminism.  I’ve heard far more women talk about how patriarchy hurts men than I’ve heard men talk about it.

[5] And that’s the thing.  It seems like a lot of men who are hurt by the patriarchy aren’t ready to give up the ways in which the patriarchy still serves them.  They want to be able to “like girly things” — to pick an example — yet still maintain some sort of special status over women.  Fighting the patriarchy doesn’t work like that though.  You fight it all or you ca’t really fight it at all.