Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
A Feminist vs. The Other Feminists
You can't tell much about a person from an online forum. Personalities are impossible to gauge. So you'll just have to take my word for it...
I'm a private person by trade. I like to be left alone by strangers. I have my group of friends, but I have contempt for people who intentionally bother me and annoy me in public. (For instance, someone on drugs came up and bothered me while I was walking the other day. Unnecessary and a bit frightening)
Also, I consider myself a conservative feminist if such a thing can be believed. I'm traditional. I would prefer the woman I marry stays home to raise our children rather than pursue a career. And I would rather have my children homeschooled initially rather than spend their days in the zoos that are public schools.
That being said, I also acknowledge that such a choice should be entirely that of the woman's or the wife's. Women should be free to choose how they live their lives, where they work/if they work, and be allowed the same opportunities as men. I also am a feminist in the sense that I have deep sympathies for the practically enslaved women of the Middle-East and parts of Africa and Asia. The burqa, genital mutilation, child marriages, punishments for being a victim of rape, and lashings for fraudulent "virtue" offenses, are all deeply illiberal and abhorrent to me.
So hopefully my feminist credentials are in order before I get on to today's story.
Anyway, while walking to class today, I was rudely yelled at by a table full of mostly women and a few men in the entrance of a building. "Hey, come on! Don't you wanna buy a chocolate vagina? Or perhaps a penis cookie! Only 5 dollars!" I stared in disbelief. This had to be some sort of male chauvinist gimmick, no?
No indeed! It was some sort of "Women's Liberation" group on my campus rather. Here they sat, straight-faced and proud, haranguing students and yelling at them to buy edible renditions of human sexual organs. All sorts of "Liberation" pamphlets dotted the table. I hurried off to class and immediately brought it up in discussion with a girl there. Surely it offended her, I thought. No, actually she called me a prude and a "puritan" for being offended by it.
I wasn't offended, but I did find it incredibly tactless. I made my point when I walked past the table on the way out. I stopped to look at their materials, and then gave them a sad look saying, "You have no shame, do you?" then walked away.
After all, I hear feminists say quite regularly that men should stop "objectifying women!" A vague complaint, I think, but what exactly do you call chocolate vaginas and and penis cookies if not objectifying men AND women?
I frankly don't see what they are trying to accomplish by being so aggressive and in-your-face like this. It does an injustice to the cause of true gender equality because it just makes feminists into a caricature. Tomorrow, I'm going to bring this up to the people at the table tomorrow.
Any thoughts?
I'm a private person by trade. I like to be left alone by strangers. I have my group of friends, but I have contempt for people who intentionally bother me and annoy me in public. (For instance, someone on drugs came up and bothered me while I was walking the other day. Unnecessary and a bit frightening)
Also, I consider myself a conservative feminist if such a thing can be believed. I'm traditional. I would prefer the woman I marry stays home to raise our children rather than pursue a career. And I would rather have my children homeschooled initially rather than spend their days in the zoos that are public schools.
That being said, I also acknowledge that such a choice should be entirely that of the woman's or the wife's. Women should be free to choose how they live their lives, where they work/if they work, and be allowed the same opportunities as men. I also am a feminist in the sense that I have deep sympathies for the practically enslaved women of the Middle-East and parts of Africa and Asia. The burqa, genital mutilation, child marriages, punishments for being a victim of rape, and lashings for fraudulent "virtue" offenses, are all deeply illiberal and abhorrent to me.
So hopefully my feminist credentials are in order before I get on to today's story.
Anyway, while walking to class today, I was rudely yelled at by a table full of mostly women and a few men in the entrance of a building. "Hey, come on! Don't you wanna buy a chocolate vagina? Or perhaps a penis cookie! Only 5 dollars!" I stared in disbelief. This had to be some sort of male chauvinist gimmick, no?
No indeed! It was some sort of "Women's Liberation" group on my campus rather. Here they sat, straight-faced and proud, haranguing students and yelling at them to buy edible renditions of human sexual organs. All sorts of "Liberation" pamphlets dotted the table. I hurried off to class and immediately brought it up in discussion with a girl there. Surely it offended her, I thought. No, actually she called me a prude and a "puritan" for being offended by it.
I wasn't offended, but I did find it incredibly tactless. I made my point when I walked past the table on the way out. I stopped to look at their materials, and then gave them a sad look saying, "You have no shame, do you?" then walked away.
After all, I hear feminists say quite regularly that men should stop "objectifying women!" A vague complaint, I think, but what exactly do you call chocolate vaginas and and penis cookies if not objectifying men AND women?
I frankly don't see what they are trying to accomplish by being so aggressive and in-your-face like this. It does an injustice to the cause of true gender equality because it just makes feminists into a caricature. Tomorrow, I'm going to bring this up to the people at the table tomorrow.
Any thoughts?
0
Comments
What in the world are you talking about? Yes, I used the word "allowed." So what? I believe people should be "allowed" to worship whatever or whomever they want. Is that notion a kernel from the Reformation era?
No, it's not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things. It's quite minor. But I differentiate between a hand and a penis or vagina. And I think you do too deep down. But how does this advance the cause of feminism?
I think I understand, and somewhat relate to, what you're saying. (Please correct me if I'm wrong):
1)People should be the arbiters of their own destiny, be they female or male. (Ok, probably committing a Buddhist faux pas there, the idea of "control" is illusory, etc..)
2)You like the idea of a mom staying home with the kids, and believe that this is in their best interest. (My wife stayed home; it's been wonderful. We made the decision together, and if she had made more income than I do, it's quite possible that I could have stayed at home...she seems to be much better at the task, though..multitasking and tiny details are not my strong suit)
3)You don't like for people to be "in your face", even if they are ideologically aligned with you.
I can see that...I'm an introvert, and prefer to have control over when I'm going to be thrust into a social setting.
I suppose the thing to do is to stop, try to be REALLY open, and have some compassion for where they are in life. Assuming that these were college kids (you are, too?), it's a time in life when everything is energetic, and the more fun the better. Being a little outrageous can be fun, and it seems to get attention, which could have been their goal. Be mindful, try to think about what is going through their heads, and see if that brings clarity.
This probably makes no sense at all, but I took a shot.
EGAD! Women think sex is funny!! < / Joke >
I don't think it's a big deal. I probably would have bought a cookie, if only to send it to my mom... she loves that sort of thing.
"Contempt"...? Have you stopped to consider how they feel and why they're intentionally 'bothering you in public'...? I would look at their reason, insted of having automatic contempt for them.
Wouldn't that be kinder, and more compassionate?
or is 'Knight of Buddha' a misnomer now?
A bit frightening...I can understand that. Unnecessary.... for you, or for him?
This is not feminism. Feminism is anything but 'Traditional'.
Are you home-schooled? is this something you've voiced to your parents?
Why would you not be home-schooled?
isn't it possible your relationship with your wife will have the same parameters?
I'm gonna let this slide, because somebody has already pointed out the questionable use of allowed.
But it's big of you, I'll tell you that. This does not qualify as 'feminism'. This qualifies as being humane, civilised and educated. Join the club, sister....
no more than anybody else's. Carry on.....
see? your interpretation, again...They probably thought they were just doing something fun.
Was it just you they yelled at, or was it a general practice? I don't see it as rude, if someone yells at me from a distance....I'd be curious....
If both men and women were involved (mostly women, as you say) how can it be 'male chauvinist'....?
so...OK...here you say you were 'offended' by it, and are implying she should also have been.....
Why? What has 'shame' got to do with it? And who the hell are you to judge what is shameful, and what isn't?
so one cancels the other out.... I don't see how this is objectifying anyone, if it was an equally divided representation.
What is your point here?
Your perception again.
I wouldn't call it aggressive and in your face. Granted, you would, because I think you're probably a bit of a prude, which is fine....I would call it fun-loving and enthusiastic.
How, if cookie-dicks are involved, does this make feminists into a caricature? Why? What will your end-game be? What's your reasoning?
No, I think you're spot on. That about sums it up.
@ Federica,
Okay, I concede. It was a figure of speech. I recognize that I don't trade in "privacy."
Contempt...dislike...not a fan of...whatever. I'm trying not to get hung up on semantics. The point is that I learn towards being an introvert in public. Had someone said, "Can we interest you in some material...Do you have a few minutes...etc?" I think I would have responded much more favorably to this approach. It seemed like more salesmanship.
Unnecessary for him to be on drugs AND in public AND bizarrely engaging me.
I won't argue this. I think of myself as a feminist mainly in regards to the horrors women endure in the Middle East. I think women in the West generally have it better off than any other women in the world. More freedom, opportunity, etc.
No, I was not home-schooled. I went to normal schools all my life, though I consider myself partially self-educated. Yes, I have brought it up to my parents, who thought it was an admirable goal if it could be worked out. You'll have to rephrase your last two questions because I don't really understand them.
Again, please, let's drop the semantics. Nit-picking each other's words is a waste of time. "Allowed" simply seemed like a reasonable verb to use. It seemed more appropriate than "endowed by their creator with the inalienable right to..."
And the world is filled with indecent people unfortunately.
I'm sure they did. But let's not get bogged down in relativism here. Everyone has their ideas of what qualifies as rudeness. Mine are evidently more strict than others. Being accosted to purchase human sexual anatomy in edible form is rude in my books.
It was my initial reaction. Making edible, chocolate vaginas just sounded like something that my neanderthal friends in a drunken state would think of. In the future, I will monitor more closely my incorrect gut reactions.
Again. Salesmanship. I don't think yelling at people to buy edible sexual organs is a way to win over skeptical opposition.
A bit harsh, but...
Well who the hell am I to judge what is a good meal? How inconsiderate of me! How offensive to those who think it wasn't a good meal!
Can't we drop the obsessive analysis of language on here? Just because we don't all have a party-line view on what constitutes as shame, that doesn't mean that individuals can't.
Please. Most people make value judgments on things like what is appropriate to do in public. I would be incredibly ashamed if a family member of mine swore profusely in public at a waiter. (Who the hell am I to think that?) I would personally be ashamed to yell at people to buy edible forms of penises and vaginas.
No. I don't think they do. It objectifies both, but it makes feminists look silly to me in this case. If there were some sort of male pride group raising awareness on "men's issues," and they were trying to raise awareness by selling "penis suckers," I would find it equally absurd.
Yes, my perception. I apologize for having one. :rolleyes: Fine, I'm a prude. I lose. I'm practically a puritan when it comes to sex and health. Healthy conversations on sexuality are a good thing I think. It's constructive in my view. (I know! My view! Not everyone's! Just putting that out there before anyone jumps on that...) We simply have different "perceptions" on this one.
Starting a conversation? Public discourse? Exchange of ideas? You name it.
I hope I've answered all your questions sufficiently (maybe not correctly), but as best as I can given my evidently reactionary views.
Whilst I'm sure the experience put an awful lot on your plate in the way of food for thought, (if you'll pardon the similes) it might have been more useful if instead of recounting your reactions, you'd stopped to consider why you felt the way you did.
Feminism is not the issue here, in my opinion.
Scrutiny and intense examination is part of Buddhist living.
That's why, I scrutinised your post in the way I did.
Not to make me think.
To make you think.
Which brings me back to the question which never received a reply.
Is Knight of Buddha a misnomer, now?
Somebody really needs to explain what this means. Are you still hung up over the "Allowed-Gate?" Tell me a verb that would be been more suitable. Or hopefully we can just drop that dead-end issue altogether.
I'm no psychologist, but I think I explained pretty clearly why I feel the way I do. And I don't think I need to explain it much more.
Very well. Public examination was the point of this thread. I'm happy that you all take the time to scrutinize my posts on here, but I'm only asking that we not get so hung up on the perceived meanings of this or that word. (see above)
I think we can do without..."see? your interpretation, again..." Of course it's my interpretation. If it wasn't, I wouldn't be posting it as my interpretation.
Your "interpretation" of my post was that I was a prude. But I didn't take issue that it was merely a interpretation on your part. It would not have been pertinent to the discussion to take issue with it.
Well it is the only name I have on here.
This is what I was trying to get you to think about.
Not necessarily the words you chose, with regard to definition of those words, but the intention behind your thoughts and the interpretations and judgements you are making about the intentions of others.
As I said, Feminism isn't the issue here.
What I feel the issue is here, is what lies behind the whole incident, with regard to what was going on, behind your eyes.....
Hence, my question with regard to your Forum name.
It might be the only name you go by here.
It used to fit.
I question really, whether it still does, given that in the threads you've created lately, you have never alluded to any form of reference to Buddhism, at all.
This is a Buddhist forum.
If you're not here to discuss matters from a Buddhist perspective - what's your point?
You've lost me. I'm well read, but not extremely intelligent. This is simply not comprehensible to me. I've been as straight-forward and plain-spoken as possible. I don't know what else to say.
Again. This doesn't really make sense to me. I've gone pretty good lengths today to make my views (right or wrong) on the matter as plain as I can. My thoughts...what's going on behind my eyes is everything I've written in this thread.
You're right. I picked the name when I was 15 years old and had just stumbled upon Buddhism in my history book. Because I was obsessed with medieval history at that point in my life, and thought knights were just the coolest guys ever. Trust me, it was not a deep philosophical decision that reflected any particular values at the time.
Did it ever fit? I don't know. I recall many years ago people taking issue with the inconsistency of the Buddha and a symbol of martial power combined into one name.
I create very few threads. I believe my most recent one was about debating Right Intention in regards to Buddhism and whether other things like Right Action trumped it.
I don't visit any other forums at all. What happens in my daily life is typically discussed amongst friends, and occasionally I like to step outside my circle of friends and get an outside perspective. Since viewpoints on here are often times very different than my own, I think it's extremely healthy to do so.
I'm the first to admit that my knowledge of Buddhism is not at an expert level. I read just about all the threads that are created on here, and frankly, the ones that are most easy for me to understand are the ones that have nothing to do with Buddhism. The ones that do concern Buddhism are often totally incomprehensible to me, and my opinion would add nothing to their discussion. The language is simply nebulous and foreign to my ears. I struggle with theoretical concepts that are not concrete in my mind.
I am a bit puzzled though. Just about every thread I engage in where my viewpoint diverges sharply from your own, I am lectured that I should discuss Buddhism more, lectured that I don't live up to a pseudonym I created as a child, and my motivations for being on here are called into question. Well, why else would I make comments and threads if not to receive feedback from Buddhists on here and others?
I'm not malevolent. I have no agenda on here other than honest discussion and debate. I'm respectful to everyone, answer arguments almost down to the last question, and follow all the rules.
If it makes things any better, I'll gladly go and offer my two cents on some Buddhism-centric threads now.
Perhaps. But I hear that excuse around here for everything! :rolleyes:
Stumbling around in public drunk...hey, they're college students!
Sleeping in until 3 in the afternoon and playing video games all day...hey, they're college students!
You name the misbehavior, and the excuse is being in college. I use the excuse only sparingly. After all, I have a lot of middle-aged people in some of my classes. It would be entertaining for them to use that line.
Personally, I wouldn't call a Women's Liberation group selling genital-shaped confectionaries on campus to raise money misbehvaiour, I'd call it clever marketing. I know I'd probably buy one or two.
Ok, let's put this as plainly as I can.
As someone posting on a Buddhist forum, in discussion with a group of people who follow or practice, or are investigating incorporating Buddhism into their lives, what kind of comments - from a Buddhist perspective - are you seeking from us? Are you asking us "What do you think should be the Buddhist response to something of this kind?"
Not really. First you seemed to imply you were offended, then you said you weren't.... you're fairly judgemental in your attitude, but, really, what I was trying to get you to do, was to question your own responses and attitude to these people, and ask you whether you should perhaps address your own bias, judgement and prejudice, instead of finding fault with them....
you'll have to clarify that one, because I have no idea what you're referring to here. I doubt anyone else fully understands where you're coming from, either....
The Eightfold path is not a set of separate guidelines, but a prescription for living to be taken as a whole...Right View cannot be trumped, as you say, by Right action... you can't have one without the other....
but don't you realise that your posts/threads can be very ... militant and frankly, that your views don't always fit with the ethos of this forum? It's NewBuddhist' for a reason, you see....
isn't this the point? To educate yourself and strive to understand? Or is it that, actually, you don't want to and are not drawn to further understanding? Is this any reason to disregard Buddhism altogether? there is much i don't understand, but I keep absorbing and contributing anyway....
Because of what Brian has introduced every sub forum with:
Welcome to our forums. The purpose of these forums is to provide a place for westerners to discuss Buddhism, ask questions about Buddha and his teachings, and to bring peace and happiness to all who visit.
You could do the same on any political, Educational or general chat-forum....
Look forward to it.....
I'm sure you'd find it a salutary experience.....:)
If one were to judge you by what you post here you could probably be described as being self-righteous, hyper critical, overly opinionated, strident, closed to views other than your own, and apparently completely unable to understand how other people could possibly take exception to your often incendiary views and the ways in which you present them.
In your posts you come across as pompous, haughty, smug, and scornful. You mix antediluvian opinions and sneering judgment with a bit of forward thinking and have the arrogance to call yourself a feminist.
All of which would be fine if you accepted with a little grace why others might disagree with you rather than arguing with them ad nauseum about why you're right to be inflexible in your opinions and contemptuous of others who don't share your puritanical views.
Are you really unaware of how and why you rub some people the wrong way? Or is that just you being disingenuous? I have the feeling it's the former which is why I took the time to post this although I'm pretty sure it won't make a bit of difference.
In any case, I sincerely hope you didn't go back to that table of feminists to tell them off because if you did you're just going to antagonize them. Don't fool yourself into thinking you're going to change their ways or make any friends. But if your opinions are more important to you than being respectful you probably did go tell them off.
I bet you're a lot of fun at a party...
You may very well be right. And I take this accusation quite cheerfully. I even dress pretty old-fashioned. My nickname (a playful one between friends) is 'Grandpa' because I smoke a pipe and generally have old habits. And the girl I am currently seeing is quite old-fashioned too.
I can't argue with you calling me any of those things except "over-opinionated." Yes, I have opinions on most things, so what? I don't see how I'm supposed to interpret that except that I should have less opinions. My being "incendiary, self-righteous, hyper critical, strident, closed to views" I of course disagree with, but without you directly citing examples, I can only leave that up to other readers to decide.
Perhaps you could be more specific. "KOB is not a feminist because of A, B, C." Instead you just call me.....
Pompous, haughty, smug, scornful, antediluvian, sneering, arrogant...(I had to look up antediluvian). That is really a rogue's gallery of negative qualities, none of which you cite examples for. I'm more than willing to take criticism, which is why I continue to engage in this thread. But there's very little I can do to further the discussion or modernize my "pompous" views for that matter when you just call me names.
Every one of my posts on this thread has been an attempt to try and understand exactly what the criticism is against me. All quotes and responses have shared the goal of either clarifying what people are trying to say to me or to disagree/respond to criticism. Thus my confusion with you simply labeling me as a reactionary and other less favorable things with no specifics.
To be honest no. I am truly trying to understand what the hubbub is. I have been to the best of my knowledge, totally respectful and receptive in this thread, taking the time to answer all criticism (whether you vehemently disagree with me or not). By all means, PLEASE quote where I was disingenuous, pompous, haughty, smug, scornful, antediluvian, sneering, arrogant, etc...
I did not in fact. I lost interest in the prospect of doing so and they moved to some other area evidently. Ah. But had I confronted some Young-Earth creationists who were shoving Bibles and challenged them about why I think they were wrong, would you have found it equally troubling and inadvisable?
I reread everything I wrote. I can't help but find it interesting that I have not made one personal comment about anyone else responding to me in this thread. I may have debated them down to the tee, but I have not said anything personal. And in just one post, you have called me disingenuous, pompous, haughty, smug, scornful, antediluvian, sneering, arrogant, described as being self-righteous, hyper critical, overly opinionated, strident, closed to views other than your own, often incendiary.
I take offense to none of it, but you cited not ONE example of any of these fairly serious charges. I don't take any of it personally, but I'm simply at a loss to respond to it.
If you haven't guessed, I dislike parties and avoid them as a general rule.
I'm trying to be a little light-hearted here. Actually, I'm kind of claustrophobic and dislike large crowds. I prefer smaller groups where alcohol is not around.
No, I'm not going to cite specific examples from your posts for you. You'll just have to do the work yourself.
I wish you growth with true maturity, clarity, development of your heart, confidence in yourself and your fellow human beings, and great peace and joy.
Well, I think you are wrong on just about every issue. Yes, very wrong. Delusional even! But I won't name any particular issue nor point out anything specifically wrong that you have said or believe in. I'll just leave you with the knowledge that you are wrong and leave you to figure out where...
The above is tongue-in-cheek, but if it weren't, I hope you would find it as condescending as I find your above-quoted remark.
Just to recap my position on this thread:
-I think that chocolate vaginas and penis suckers are in poor taste
-I believe it makes feminists look silly and that it does not advance their cause
-I would find it personally shaming to sell edible sexual organs in public
-I am guilty as charged of being prudish and even a bit uptight
I bet they taste pretty good, actually. It's hard to fuck up chocolate and sugar.
Perhaps, but I think it all depends on how you choose to look at the situation. To me, it sounds like they're just trying to raise money for the group in order to fund things that will advance their cause (whatever they may be). Like I said, I think it's clever marketing considering the location.
I think it's understandable you feel this way — many people do — but you're not the one selling them. Obviously the people who are don't feel the same, and what really seems to be bothering you is the boisterous way in which they're doing it.
Maybe they think we live in a very sexually repressive society — that we've been made to feel ashamed about our naked bodies — and they find it liberating to be more open about these things. Who knows.
I don't think there's anything wrong with feeling the way you do about things, but it concerns me that you often seem to get so irritated by other people who don't feel the same. I think there's a fine line between being opinionated and being judgmental, so just be careful.
To recap my position
-I think that chocolate vaginas and penis cookies are funny and I would have bought some to support their creativity.
-I believe it shows that women think that they are being sexually reppressed, so they showed they do know that sex exists, and *gasp* they enjoy it. Thus it advances their cause.
-I would have asked if they needed more volunteers to help sell it.
-I agree totally, you are prudish and uptight. Women aren't dolls that will stay "pure" and asexual. We have the same urges as men. Most men in america have this complex where they think that any women who expresses sexual desire is a whore or a harlet. These women were not even expressing desire so much as humour over the parts we were born with.
I have to respectively disagree with this. I am a straight male and I certainly don't feel this away. I would rather be with a honest, open woman, than someone who is repressed. I think a lot of men would agree with me.
I'm Canadian, but culture wise, I think we are very similar to Americans.
A lot of men would, but a lot does not equate to most.
I guess I'm just naive.
I have to take issue with this generalization as well. Although I don't know every man in America, I certainly don't think that any women who expresses sexual desire is a whore or a harlot.
We're not all repressive monsters!
Then again if you and KOB were best friends maybe you could use that language.
As for KOB I thought he was gracious to try to respond to these posts but I sensed his frustration. (and the frustration of those at him as well of course). What a mess?
I know if you feel threatened by a different culture the first thing is to strike back and reprimand. But is that going to change anyones mind? No people will just stay in their own insular culture (in america we call them the red states) and keep on with their own views.
Might I suggest a change in language and non-violent communication as an alternative (ie mostly listening yet defending what you uphold as true, which you did is good just I think a little more gently please)
Think please.
My roommates! Haha. No, it's quite alright. I call myself a prude and I am uptight on on sex and morality compared to some of the freewheelers I'm friends with. Conservative as well. So it's not troubling to me at all.
Very sneaky, aren't you?
Interesting. If that is indeed the typical male complex in the States, just where exactly are these green pastures of enlightened men who DON'T view women as whores or harlets for sexual expression? I don't feel that the male complex is really all that varying from one Western country to another as far as views on women are concerned.
By the way, I believe the particular women's group that had the table set up was the Women's Liberation Front/Organization. Shortly afterwords, Life of Brian came to mind and I envisioned setting up a rival Front of Women's Liberation.
Nevertheless, I fail to see how that changes the fact that women are judged unfairly when it comes to sexual expression.
I am curious though, why does sex offend you so much?
Splitter!
"That Girl" Marlo Thomas, .......and "Love American Style" oooh that was bad. My mothers friend who let me smoke her Menthal cigarettes.
I don't think there's anything wrong with selling penis or vagina cookies, can't say I would ever buy one though, haha.
Also, sex is different for men and women. A man does not view sex the same way that a woman does. Women are more discriminating when it comes to sex, they don't just lay on their back and give it up for any man who wants it.
Men on one hand do not discriminate, become friends with a gay guy and you will understand what I mean. For gay people, sex is just sex, there are no strings attached.
ALL my gay friends are very discriminating. I myself am still a virgin.
Also, I know a few girls who would drop on their backs for anyone swinging pipe.
Please don't make such broad statements. Even if you didn't mean it it feels as if you just told me that all gay people will just lay anything that moves and that offended me.:(
I am being general distorted, not everyone fits the stereotype.
Your gay friends may be the exception, but go to a gay club with them and then come back telling me that men and women share the same outlook on sex. I'm using gay men as an example because it shows the male perspective on sex.
Have you ever heard of man yelling rape? Think about why that is.
I would say men don't scream rape because many would judge a man as a lesser man if he did so and so those men who are rapped sit in their shame and embarrassment.
Is that so? Hm, I must not have gotten the memo. Thanks for setting me straight on that one. :rolleyes:
Pun intended? :cool: