tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post393872584636211596..comments2023-09-28T19:10:43.760-06:00Comments on The Feminist Agenda: Guy CultureRachelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-92097671890411598812013-02-02T11:12:20.891-07:002013-02-02T11:12:20.891-07:00Remember that for many men "getting fucked&qu...Remember that for many men "getting fucked" is directly tied in with losing their gender status as a man. Getting "fucked" i.e. penetrated is something that is "supposed" to only happen to women in a patriarchial context.In this context, if penetration happens to a man, it is often seen as an indicator that he is gay, even if the man experiences penetration within a heterosexual relationship. So if penetration happens to a man, he allegedly ceases to be "a man" because he has stepped outside of the requirements of his gender role. This is obviously very homophobic , but I would assert that this homophobic perspective is very widespread among men.<br /><br /> On the other hand, men who express a desire to have anal sex with a woman are obviously not expressing a desire to strip women of their gender status. I would guess that these men are often have a desire to be in a sexually dominant role or "top" role with a consenting female partner who enjoys being in a more submissive or a "bottom" role. These men may or may not see women as a group as being "naturally" submissive to men as a group (not all sexually dominant or "top" men are sexist). Men who have a sexually dominant, or a "top" orientation might believe that having anal sex with a woman is a validation of their masculinity, because anal is a "forbidden" (and thus sometimes more desirable) form of penetration. Women who consent to anal sex with a man within our culture are (in my opinion) admitting to wanting something that they not "supposed" to want. This might indicate that the man who a woman has anal with is seen as very desirable, and/or as a better or more seductive lover (because he was able to help her feel comfortable with admitting to wanting a form of sex that it is often difficult for a woman to admits that she wants). So, for these reasons, a hetero man who prefers to be in a more dominant, or a "top" role might feel emotionally validated by his female partner's enjoyment of anal with him. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-10248915224444280052011-12-13T22:03:21.728-07:002011-12-13T22:03:21.728-07:00By the way, men typically do not undergo any major...By the way, men typically do not undergo any major sacrifices for women. What do women sacrifice?<br />Let's see:<br /><br />1. Career (to have THEIR children)<br />2. time (to cook, clean and take care of them)<br /><br />And now.. we have to sacrifice our precious buttholes ALL BECAUSE it's becoming a popular trend.the_sparrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01864891265051789362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-50934709813098675072011-12-13T22:02:01.646-07:002011-12-13T22:02:01.646-07:00I might try it MAYBE one time but if I didn't ...I might try it MAYBE one time but if I didn't like it, I wouldn't go further with it. And if I was coerced, I could just go and use a dildo in my vagina and orgasm 50 times, just the way I usually do. :)the_sparrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01864891265051789362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-31901770928697989052011-07-14T20:48:29.023-06:002011-07-14T20:48:29.023-06:00I think Riley has got it right. Most heterosexual ...I think Riley has got it right. Most heterosexual men have no interest in engaging in homosexual sexual acts and would expect them to be unpleasant experiences. For a heterosexual man of this kind to be penetrated anally or even to give another man a blow job, he would have to be coerced in some fashion, hence the negative connotation when a heterosexual man is on the receiving end of anal sex.<br /><br />Conversely, almost any natural sexual act engaged in by a heterosexual man with a woman is going to be viewed as a much more pleasant personal experience by a heterosexual man than sexual acts carried out with a man, hence why anal sex with women is viewed as a much more desirable experience.<br /><br />There need be no hypocrisy or double standard.Scarbonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-3718951022436173682009-04-12T15:22:00.000-06:002009-04-12T15:22:00.000-06:00And the real irony is, us guys have the unfair adv...And the real irony is, us guys have the unfair advantage of possessing prostates, and thus being predisposed towards getting more pleasure from the act. Truly, our sexist culture victimizes men too... <BR/><BR/>But I agree with you, the double standard is idiotic. The reactions of certain trollish commentators, even more so.Mike Crichtonhttp://chaotic-nipple.livejournal.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-79241795918680155062009-04-09T23:17:00.000-06:002009-04-09T23:17:00.000-06:00To Riley, While the term certainly does downplay r...To Riley, <BR/><BR/>While the term certainly does downplay rape, I don't think saying something 'raped' them means 'anything unpleasant' but rather a complete loss of agency in the situation being refereed too.<BR/><BR/>Of course, a complete loss of agency in a video game or game of Spades is pretty meaningless when compared to a complete loss of agency of a sexual assault, but the root sentiment is what I think is being expressed.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15951999523806556478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-85671799882074740922009-04-09T20:38:00.000-06:002009-04-09T20:38:00.000-06:00I've known quite a few women who have use the phra...I've known quite a few women who have use the phrase.Princesshttp://myspace.com/dreamergirlvegasnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-64063144011639154172009-04-09T12:46:00.000-06:002009-04-09T12:46:00.000-06:00@ Steven and RachelThis might be the more fruitful...@ Steven and Rachel<BR/><BR/>This might be the more fruitful direction to take the conversation in. If men are actually equating anal penetration with rape when they use it metaphoricaly then it wouldn't necessarily be a double standard. <BR/><BR/>But then you have this offensive use of rape as a metaphor for anything unpleasant instead, which downplays the horrible nature of rape and the trauma experienced by people who actually have been raped. So that would make this manner of speaking offensive in a different way. But both men and women are guilty on this count; I've heard women refer to an exam or whatever as "raping them." I think this is problematic for the same reason as casually labeling people you don't like as Nazis is.Rileynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-27553930829744976192009-04-09T12:40:00.000-06:002009-04-09T12:40:00.000-06:00@ BenThanks!@ Ben<BR/><BR/>Thanks!Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-32214980550041703272009-04-09T12:04:00.000-06:002009-04-09T12:04:00.000-06:00Perhaps I am confused. Well thanks Rachel, I enjoy...Perhaps I am confused. Well thanks Rachel, I enjoyed the conversation. I do like your blog.<BR/>-BenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-75371337669127685922009-04-09T11:43:00.000-06:002009-04-09T11:43:00.000-06:00@ BenWhat does this have to do with BDSM? I'm ass...@ Ben<BR/><BR/>What does this have to do with BDSM? I'm assuming that people involved in BDSM have both consented to it and enjoy it, so why would I have a problem with it? You seem to have some strange ideas about my worldview that couldn't possibly have come from this blog. Are you confusing me with someone else, perhaps?<BR/><BR/>On the other hand if one partner was coercively trying to force the other to participate in BDSM, or any other sexual behavior, then yes, I would have a problem with it.<BR/><BR/>And let me break down the golden rule thing a little further for you. The golden rule is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Your claim is that I'm saying men who don't want to be anally penetrated should not anally penetrate their female partners because of the golden rule. But you're just confused about what I'm saying.<BR/><BR/>I'm saying that if a man thinks anal penetration is <I>intrinsically</I> painful and humiliating, then it seems hypocritical that he would want to inflict this on a woman he claims to love. I am not saying that he should allow her to anally penetrate him first or anything even remotely like that. What I am saying is <B>if you think it's a horrible thing to do to somebody, then don't do it to the person you love</B>. That's very different from the golden rule.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-26073006450349460122009-04-09T10:37:00.000-06:002009-04-09T10:37:00.000-06:00I suppose you are against BDSM, or you only questi...I suppose you are against BDSM, or you only question the mores of the people that like to give it and not receive it?<BR/>-BenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-22894243371083439042009-04-09T10:28:00.000-06:002009-04-09T10:28:00.000-06:00Quoting Rachel,"And yet even as men seem to view a...Quoting Rachel,<BR/>"And yet even as men seem to view anal penetration as something that's super painful and humiliating, it's also seen as OK and even very desireable to do it to your girlfriend."<BR/><BR/>And...<BR/><BR/>"Which leads to this question. If anal penetration is the horrible, painful, humiliating thing you imagine it to be, why would you ever want a woman you love, or one you respect and to whom you're attracted, to experience it?" <BR/><BR/>Sorry Rachel, but that just seems so holier-than-thou, moralistic, golden-rule preaching. It's meaning to me suggests do unto others as you would have them do unto you. You have just stated it in the negative form, ie, if X is bad and don't want it to happen to you, then why would you want to do it to someone else. If that's what you believe, that's fine, but I still see the golden rule principle in it.<BR/>-BenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-20893420646221543182009-04-09T09:06:00.000-06:002009-04-09T09:06:00.000-06:00@ StevenYeah, I wouldn't go so far as to say that ...@ Steven<BR/><BR/>Yeah, I wouldn't go so far as to say that anal is a bad word. I think for many, many people anal sex is something they enjoy, and it's totally consensual. I'm talking about the attitude behind always using "getting fucked in the ass" as a negative comparison and what it reveals about its intrinsic negativity.<BR/><BR/>However, the "you're so fucked" thing <I>is</I> relevant here, and I think it possibly brings up another option that I hadn't considered. I have a friend in linguistics who studies the etymology of obscene words. According to her research "fuck" was originally pretty violent (the phonic structure of it is really violent as well, which is what makes it so satisfying to say it when you're angry) and so there was a sort of rape or violence connotation that isn't there now. So saying "fuck you" had a kind of non-consent or painful/violent connotation it may not have now. <BR/><BR/>So it might be a parallel to this situation. Some of my friends (online and in RL) have suggested that when men use the "fucked in the ass" meme they're thinking "raped in the ass," since in our culture anal penetration is supposed to be something that a straight man would never do voluntarily. Since you would never admit to agreeing to anal penetration, at least around your straight friends, it's implied that the anal penetration you're metaphorically referring to was forced and nonconsensual. In that case, there probably is no double standard here. If straight men <I>always</I> mean "anal rape" when they use this analogy, then it wouldn't be comparable to consensual anal sex with their girlfriend. <BR/><BR/>However the coercive tone of many of the how-to's is still problematic. And the "knotch in your bedpost" approach to it is as well. Big time problematic.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-38664933887554359202009-04-09T08:52:00.000-06:002009-04-09T08:52:00.000-06:00@ KevinGee, thanks so much for educating me on Gre...@ Kevin<BR/><BR/>Gee, thanks so much for educating me on Greco-Roman attitudes. It sure is a pity the year I spent researching this topic in grad school was such a total waste, seeing as how I could have just relied on your one-sentence summary.<BR/><BR/>You're actually right that age was a factor - more in Greece than in Rome. But there's a basic fact about this that you don't get. Being the passive partner was actually just fine if you were the younger of the two. Similarly, if you were of lower social status and had a "mentor" type relationship with your partner, it was considered to be just fine. The problem with men being anally penetrated for both Greeks and Romans was if they were already of an older or higher social status, and they pursued relationships in which they were the passive partner. This kind of behavior was harshly criticized because it was thought to be inappropriate, as the passive partner was acting as if he was inferior to the active one. Some sources characterize it as "acting like a woman" or "like a slave." So age was a factor, but only insofar as it indicated lower social standing and therefore the appropriateness of being penetrated.<BR/><BR/>Good guess, though.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-61995392676150487842009-04-09T08:45:00.000-06:002009-04-09T08:45:00.000-06:00@BenYour dedication to misinterpreting me is comme...@Ben<BR/><BR/>Your dedication to misinterpreting me is commendable. You gotta be good at something, I guess.<BR/><BR/>I fail to see where I suggested a golden rule for sex. If you'd like to attribute some claim to me, please provide quotes. If you can't provide quotes, then feel free to wrestle with the little strawman you made up, but don't expect to be taken seriously here.<BR/><BR/>There's a huge difference between saying that you ought to always be willing to reciprocate sexually and saying that if you think of a sex act as intrinsically painful and humiliating, then you ought not to try to convince someone you love to suffer through it just for you. I'm not talking here about women who like anal sex and are already OK with it. I'm talking about the coercive attitude that's suggested by the plethora of how-to's out there educating men on how to coerce their female SOs into trying it and putting up with it even if it's painful for them. There's a huge difference between a couple deciding together that they want to try something and one person deciding s/he wants to experience it and then setting out to manipulate his/her partner into it - <I>especially</I> when it's something that he clearly perceives as being horribly painful and humiliating.<BR/><BR/>Does that make more sense to you? I'm not sure I could break it down into any more elementary of a structure.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-60573740856883094952009-04-08T21:59:00.000-06:002009-04-08T21:59:00.000-06:00Ugh. I get so tired of MRA's and antifeminists com...Ugh. I get so tired of MRA's and antifeminists coming into a feminist space and trying to prove our very basic beliefs wrong. There is nothing wrong with dissenting opinion, but attacking all feminists and treating us as a monolith is not a different viewpoint, it's a personal attack.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-89878859815220206472009-04-08T18:46:00.000-06:002009-04-08T18:46:00.000-06:00Greco-Roman attitudes toward pederasty, vis-a-vis ...Greco-Roman attitudes toward pederasty, vis-a-vis passive anal intercourse, were a dynamic of ageism more than anything.<BR/><BR/>In any case, I find it amusing that a woman who decries patriarchal agency within representations/interpretations of femininity has such interest in her own ultracrepidations.Kevin Caseyhttp://www.jumpingtheblog.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-57008790987761125042009-04-08T18:23:00.000-06:002009-04-08T18:23:00.000-06:00Wow. A golden rule for sex! That's really a first ...Wow. A golden rule for sex! That's really a first for me! This is what I mean by feminists having puritan/purist views. So let me get this straight. A giver of X can only give X if that same giver only likes to receive X, otherwise, if the giver on likes to give it but NOT be given unto, then that it somehow faulty? Never mind that some people enjoy giving oral sex more than they like receiving, but I digress.<BR/>-BenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-60851070314596139712009-04-08T17:03:00.000-06:002009-04-08T17:03:00.000-06:00@ BenBut I don't think you understand what I'm say...@ Ben<BR/><BR/>But I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not taking the metaphor literally. That would amount to me thinking they werer actually anally penetrated by their boss, the IRS auditor, whatever. Despite my feminist stance, I do actually understand metaphorical language. That's why I referred to it as an analogous use of language.<BR/><BR/>But that's different from analyzing the social attitudes behind a saying or phrase. Among men I know, the phrase is only ever used as a negative. It only describes negative experiences. It <I>is</I> in a metaphorical way, and I'm ok with that, but I'm questioning the negative associations. That's what I'm interested in. Because if anal penetration is always used as a metaphor for very painful or humiliating experiences, then anal penetration itself must be seen as a painful and humiliating thing. That's the way metaphors work. You wouldn't say "that exam was so fucking hard - it was like eating jelly beans while floating on a fluffy white cloud." If you want to indicate that something was negative, you choose a negative experience to compare it to. And yet even as men seem to view anal penetration as something that's super painful and humiliating, it's also seen as OK and even very desireable to do it to your girlfriend. <I>That's</I> what my question involves, not the whole metaphorical-use-of-language thing.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-71107726047427765612009-04-08T16:17:00.000-06:002009-04-08T16:17:00.000-06:00Wow. The person that said feminists tend to over A...Wow. The person that said feminists tend to over ANALyze too much is correct. I know, I couldn't resist that one. Another problem I've noticed is that feminists have turned puritan/purists in their beliefs. This means that everything is taken literally; in its absolute pure meaning. No disrespect on your blog, but we've all learned that the muscle gel called Icy-Hot is a literary tool known as an oxymoron and it would not make sense to take this literally. The same goes with the "guy culture" and "guy slang". Taking what is obviously a meataphor and a figure of speech and then applying a literal translation to it so as to say "guys" are engaging in double-talk and or double standards is highly disingenuous. Lastly, it's a bit post-Freudian of you to assume that every subjective sexual statement has some concrete sexual objective intent, and if not then it is repressed.<BR/>-BenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-63208915931996783522009-04-08T13:39:00.000-06:002009-04-08T13:39:00.000-06:00@ V.A.C.You said this:If your not fond of a partic...@ V.A.C.<BR/><BR/>You said this:<BR/><I>If your not fond of a particular sexual act, refrain from the activity.</I><BR/><BR/>which seems strange if you really<BR/><BR/><I>never thought her piece was about condemning anal sex.</I><BR/><BR/>Oh, and the contraction for "you are" is actually "you're," not "your."Lizzaynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-32112699513113379012009-04-08T10:18:00.000-06:002009-04-08T10:18:00.000-06:00To anon at April 8, 2009 12:07 AM.I don't think th...To anon at April 8, 2009 12:07 AM.<BR/><BR/>I don't think that 'hypocracy' is the right word to use here.<BR/><BR/>The use of a colloquialism is not hypocrisy if you don't follow through with it literally.<BR/><BR/>Campaigning against homosexuality then being caught requesting anonymous gay sex in a bathroom is hypocritical.<BR/><BR/>Saying you are for family values then being charged for domestic violence would be hypocritical.<BR/><BR/>Saying you are opposed to anal sex because it is evil and degenerate... you see where I am going.<BR/><BR/>Using a colloquialism? Not so much. <BR/><BR/>Think of it this way... If a dude says that dudes should not be penetrated (for what ever reason) and then that dude refuses to be penetrated, then he is not a hypocrite.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15951999523806556478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-45052710646929053582009-04-08T09:22:00.000-06:002009-04-08T09:22:00.000-06:00@ AnonymousI agree that it's too broad of a statem...@ Anonymous<BR/><BR/>I agree that it's too broad of a statement, so I should have said that the use of the anal sex analogy is <I>extremely prevalent</I> among straight men or something like that. I don't think I know any straight men who don't use that analogy, or at least don't laugh when someone else does. But I agree that there are probably some who don't, and for many of them who do, acting as if they would never consider anal sex is probably a way of "passing" around other men.<BR/><BR/>But I disagree that we can't critique these gendered behavior patterns. I'm just as ready to crititque the bullshit gendered behavior that so many women mindlessly engage in. I realize that both men and women are socialized to behave in these ways, but by the time you're a self-aware adult, you can choose not to engage. I cannot stand it when women dumb themselves down and act all giddy and frivolous. If you object to the cultural attitudes that portray women as irrational, overemotional, and not to be taken seriously, then there's absolutely no reason why you should be acting that way. I realize that not all women do act that way - I myself don't and never have. But it's still a prominent feature of straight female culture, and I have critiqued it in the same way that I critiqued this aspect of straight male culture. Nobody's exempt, in my view.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-61779200167368888832009-04-08T09:12:00.000-06:002009-04-08T09:12:00.000-06:00The reason why people are upset is because you've ...The reason why people are upset is because you've cast a rather large stereotype over a lot of people. There's a lot of collateral damage when you say things like<BR/><BR/> "If a group of straight guys is discussing<BR/> something unpleasant, like a tax audit, or<BR/> some stressful event at work, or an upcoming<BR/> exam, or some interaction with police, they<BR/> always, always, ALWAYS use the same analogy."<BR/><BR/>The thing is it's not "always"*3. There are a lot of hetero men who never make anal jokes, there are others that do but don't want to have anal sex. There are still others who may make the joke then be really into pegging or something. You can't lump a really large group of people together like that and say they're all the same and then cherry pick some articles from crappy websites like askmen as justification for labeling everyone in the group as the same. <BR/><BR/>For example it is a fact that "heterosexual women never never NEVER have ambition and are all looking for sugardaddies," and as proof look at articles like http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/dating/Fascinating-Facts-About-Rich-Guys.<BR/><BR/>If the above statement about all hetero women offended you that's because it is an indefensible typecasting of a lot of people, a portion of which may fulfill the stereotype. You wonder why so many MRAs were upset by your post put yourself in the shoes of someone reading a blog post about women looking for rich men like that. People don't like to be put in bins on any terms but their own.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com