"How to stop your man from straying"

181 posts / 0 new
Last post
petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Oct 18 2006 16:59
revol68 wrote:
I'm actually quite interesting in gender issues

I'LL BET YOU ARE
(like, one joke per month on revol's typing is allowed, i should think)

Grace
Offline
Joined: 19-07-05
Oct 18 2006 17:02
Jess wrote:
strange pussy

Sorry to lower the tone but am I the only one who got really disturbing mental images upon reading that?

But anyway, inane as Cosmo etc. may be I do think it's interesting/worrying (I was going to say important but I think that's the wrong word) to look at that kind of thing when discussing gender just by nature of it being so mainstream. I'm guessing its consumption far outweighs that of more sensible literature. I mean the amount of women who seem to take fucking Heat magazine as gospel and that. Maybe I'm just patronising and really your average Cosmo reader realises they're being fed a load of bullshit, I don't know. I think I'm just posting to avoid actually doing work.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 18 2006 17:06

But I wasn't even talking about fucking cosmo, it's hardly an attitude unique to women's magazines, is it? You hear that shit about men's "natural" urges all over the place, really, really frequently as an excuse for all kinds of shit.

And why do you keep posting my real name everywhere today?

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 18 2006 17:08
revol68 wrote:
I think there is alot to be gaining from examining "popular culture" but in ways that have been done a million times before.

I agree with everything Zoe wrote but it's been said a million times before, I mean seriously Cosmo and gender binaries? It's not exactly an underesearched/ discussed topic.

so we should only discuss cutting-edge virgin topics? this is a web forum not fucking aufheben :?

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Oct 18 2006 17:13
zobag wrote:
You hear that shit about men's "natural" urges all over the place, really, really frequently as an excuse for all kinds of shit.

yes, but i also hear the same about women.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 18 2006 17:15

Indeed, yet you rarely hear men being belittled or patronised for not being in control of their sexuality though, hence the contradiction.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 18 2006 17:20

Which isn't the same as a man's inability to keep his libido "controlled".

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 18 2006 17:26

Say all of that again, but in full sentences?

Pepe
Offline
Joined: 26-11-04
Oct 18 2006 17:52

OK, why couldn't you have said something like that to start with?

I think women are increasingly feeling pressure to "be sexual", and it comes from within the feminist movement as well as the mainstream media.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 18 2006 18:05

yeah, like revol says 'liberated' modern sexuality is one-dimensional whether from the media reflecting/perpetuating it or feminists fighting old already-recuperated battles. it seems this one-dimension is linked inextricably to consumption (zizek's "superego injunction to enjoy" maybe?), which is obviously where cosmo etc's incentive comes from (and the lynx effect etc etc).

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 18:07

Hi

Quote:
revol you are missing the point here mate - Jess is simply asking what are the background factors contributing to more and more of this kinds of articles being published (and the whole lads mags phenomenon while you are at it).

Ho ho. The disabled, animals, women; Christ, you never miss a trick do you. You love it, you really do. You and JK should bum each other.

Plus "Cosmo" isn't a Lad's mag. God, you're so male sometimes.

Love

LR

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 18:13

Hi

Quote:
I think women are increasingly feeling pressure to "be sexual", and it comes from within the feminist movement as well as the mainstream media.

Too true. People just love it though.

Love

LR

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Oct 18 2006 18:24
zobag wrote:
Indeed, yet you rarely hear men being belittled or patronised for not being in control of their sexuality though, hence the contradiction.

this only reveals that you hang out in certain social circles. in the one i was raised in, and that lots of people now live in, mens' sexual control is as highly prized as womens'.

this gets into a larger issue of social centers and social peripheries, and the degree of influence such a state of affairs has on each individual's experience, and in whose interest it is to assert and emphasize their existence.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 18 2006 18:34

Oh bollocks. I've just written a response out three times and I still can't explain what I'm trying to say here. Hmm. I'm gonna come back to this one!

Tacks's picture
Tacks
Offline
Joined: 8-11-05
Oct 18 2006 19:28
Jess wrote:
OK, why couldn't you have said something like that to start with?

I think women are increasingly feeling pressure to "be sexual", and it comes from within the feminist movement as well as the mainstream media.

what feminist movement? I genuinely didn't know there was one nowadays.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 20:06

Hi

Quote:
Why do you think articles like this are published?

It sexually arouses punters, albeit mildly. One’s personal mileage may vary.

Quote:
Do people really believe them?

Some do. A significant number will assume it to be true unless demonstrated otherwise.

Quote:
Could they encourage mistrust in relationships?

Where it’s due. But then a little mistrust can be quite spicy.

Quote:
Is pop-psychology/biological determinism in general damaging?

Pop-psychology is only damaging when analysed as if it was serious. As for biological determinism, part of its appeal is that it’s slightly risqué ideologically. It’s not a problem for people to ponder biological determinism, it would be more damaging to hold it up as a morally retrograde line of thought.

Love

LR

mrsmaintenance's picture
mrsmaintenance
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
Oct 18 2006 20:41

I agree - don't read Cosmo. Occasionally I'll flip through some of those chick mag's at the doctor's office or something - but only to make fun of them.

Although it does suck that women are sucked into this kind of thinking...while people like us are simply smart enough to avoid it or take it with a grain of salt, there are some people who put more stock in it than they do their religions.

And it does look like some of the comments toward Jess were kind of mean. sad

Jess, to answer your question - articles like that are published because they sell magazines. Women (and men) will do just about anything to keep their partner from straying in most cases. I agree that it's wrong that women's magazines get away with essentially saying men are dirtbags. I've read men's mags like Maxim and they don't have that kind of derogatory shit toward women. Sure, there are pictures of pretty girls, but I don't see them saying that all girls are cum guzzling gutter sluts, either.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 20:59

Hi

Quote:
all girls are cum guzzling gutter sluts

Oi! I continue in the tradition in a long line of cum guzzling gutter sluts, thank you very much. Don't knock it 'till you've tried it.

Besides, people aren’t under enough pressure to be sexy. Not judging by the mingers I have to put up with.

Quote:
And what can we do about it?

Something like “Highstreet Honeys” is highly effective in getting the lady in your life to up her game. And for those of us who like a bit of man action, letting them “catch you” wanking to a Fifty Cent video works a treat.

Love

LR

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 18 2006 21:17
mrsmaintenance wrote:
while people like us are simply smart enough to avoid it or take it with a grain of salt, there are some people who put more stock in it than they do their religions.

i don't think it's as simple as intelligence. i know people who know what cosmo does but are sucked in all the same. it's got to do with stuff like self-esteem and that too

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 21:20

Hi

Quote:
it's got to do with stuff like self-esteem and that too

Oh here we go. Jesus.

Love

LR

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 18 2006 21:21

you're mentioning Jesus a lot lately, anything we should know :?

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 21:32

Hi

Stop flirting with me victim-boy. God, you can be so male sometimes.

Love

LR

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 21:34

Hi

Quote:
the problem with low self esteem is that it can't be solved by upping the money supply.

Low self esteem isn't a problem to be solved. It's an opportunity to be taken advantage of.

Love

LR

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Oct 18 2006 22:00

Why do they say that shopping is therapy then?

Not because it stops nasty coughs. I think that being super rich, would definetly give me enough of a buzz to not care about that little voice inside me. Yeah, with enough money I could shut down and work on autopilot.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 18 2006 22:12

Hi

Quote:
Grannies and sucking eggs comes to mind.

I love it when you talk dirty.

Quote:
Why do they say that shopping is therapy then?

Why do you think? For the love of Christ, the level of discussion on this forum is sinking to an all time low. I blame myself.

I wish I could think of some meaningful action to propose.

Love

LR

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 18 2006 22:22
Lazy Riser wrote:
For the love of Christ

there he is again. omniscient indeed :?

jason's picture
jason
Offline
Joined: 22-07-06
Oct 18 2006 23:57
Quote:
Is pop-psychology/biological determinism in general damaging?

God no. Richard Dawkins is The Man, a true working class liberator.

john
Offline
Joined: 9-07-06
Oct 19 2006 03:10
Lazy Riser wrote:
It’s not a problem for people to ponder biological determinism, it would be more damaging to hold it up as a morally retrograde line of thought.

Why? Who would it damage?

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Oct 19 2006 03:12
Lazy Riser wrote:
the level of discussion on this forum is sinking to an all time low. I blame myself

hand

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 19 2006 07:34

right, dragging this thread, drugged and heavily beaten back on topic ...

revol68 wrote:
Basically womens so called "control" (one dimensional and negative) of their sexuality is a means of disempowerment through an uneven empowerment. Women therefore feel ashamed and insecure through a failure to live up to the virginal chastity (not so much anymore in the west) whilst men have control in their sexuality in an equally one dimensional manner (pure affirmation) and are insecure through a failure to actualise this.

Of course this is a very narrow analysis based on long dead gender ideals (not that they ever lived in an ideal form, nor could they).

like you say, the old 'virginal chastity' vs 'alpha male' binary is of little use today. i think jess has a point about women being under pressure to "be sexual". i mean the virginal ideal remains (the stigma of being a 'slut', 'slapper' etc), but has been superceded/preserved by an injunction to affirm your liberated female 'independence' (from an increasingly young age) - 'you're not a prude are you?' - by ritualistic casual sex.

simultaneously, as zobag points out, there is a similar tension between the supposed male role of some insatiable freudian libido, rape on legs, and the 'common sense' that men are otherwise completely out of tune with 'nature'.

I mean an obvious hypothesis is that this is just a reflection of the marketing trick/spectacular roles which are neccessarily contradictary in order to be unobtainable (just one more outfit, aftershave, mascara ...), and thus function as an objet petit a (there, i used it) of consumption. It could also be said (and probably has been) that these new, more complex gender roles represent a successful recuperation of the somewhat niave 60s sexual liberation sentiment, now reconciled with consumerism.

dislaimer: i actually haven't read or thought much about this, and i'm happy for revol to point out if/how i'm rehashing a 20 year-old liberal analysis, if he can do it without being a superior, patronising cock wink