Personality Cafe banner

81 - 100 of 151 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
13,931 Posts
i don't think i ever had to deal with such an overtly commercial confrontation myself. my experience has been more one of men trying to impose some more emotional form of transaction on me, which tends to be far less direct. but i have dealt with a whole lot of that, and i really relate to/agree with this statement from you.

i was thinking about this whole discussion today because i spent most of the afternoon futzing around with my car. it's parked on a public street and you have to disengage the entire front bumper to get at the back of the headlight assembly to switch out the bulbs. so, i mean, kind of obvious that i wasn't just dusting or vaccuming it.

your story came to my mind because this is exactly the sort of thing that - in my 20's and 30's - would have had random men veering out of their flight paths to offer me 'help'. in fact, i left my son's dad at age 27 and spent two or three years blowing off 'i'll teach you to drive' from the most random men - men who should have had no reason or business at all to stick their noses into the question of whether i got a license or not.

less extreme, less traumatizing, less dangerous and less insulting than what you went through. but i think it's the same kind of thing. there's a transaction embedded in there that i wanted no part in. the bargaining and arguments and all the rest were irrelevant. the guys i'm thinking of had a specific dynamic in mind; their offers were products of that dynamic, and i was not going to participate. it's fundamental.

[in the end it took me about a year to get my license, once i decided that i wanted to. and i basically learned how to drive by failing the road test repeatedly until the day when i didn't fail it. and i got both my headlights working today].




see, to me . . . this kidn of thing isn't exactly about an attempt on their part to do anything. the 'thing' has already been done; it's the attitude itself. the offer/transaction itself tells you everything that you need to know about their definition of you - if that makes sense. and the offer/transaction comes from the definition; it isn't the other way round. so i'm with you. the repudiation of that definition and the refusal to participate in it is visceral. being made to sit around negotiating about whether or not he gets to keep that attitude is new insult on top of the original one. damn straight he owed you for the time.
I think I see a similarity.

I felt angry that my value or worth wasn't being acknowledged--my abilities were being reduced to "sexual object" I guess.

And in your examples, though it wasn't really about a monetary transaction (being paid for labor), it was about men's perception of you.

Like they looked at you and assumed you couldn't drive or couldn't do the thing with the car. And then perhaps if you had accepted their help it might have felt like you were somehow agreeing with their warped perspective of you.

Similar to how if I agreed to receive money to sit there with my clothes on (for sexual gratification) that I would have somehow confirmed, at least in his mind, that I was a prostitute.

And then there's the reality that sometimes there are transactions that are hidden--like with the yacht guy I did agree to consider cleaning the barnacles off his boat but I didn't know he secretly had actually wanted to solicit for prostitution. It also happens that some men have these "unspoken" rules they believe are clear--like if they buy you dinner they get X in return. Or if they help you with your license then they get your friendship and trust (and perhaps more access to you than other men would). So there's always, especially in the past more, been this shadow over male/female communications and interactions, where a woman has to worry that she's agreeing to something she doesn't actually agree to by doing something (even wearing certain clothes etc.)

But I wonder if it was about affirming the view of the man--like the yacht man's view of me was a sexual object and a prostitute, I assume. Something I didn't identify with. The other men's view of you may be like you are a dumb little lady who can't drive or helpless with mechanics, which perhaps you felt like you'd somehow "confirm" in their minds if you were to accept help, because then they could write you off as that and walk away thinking themselves right about you.

I don't know if yacht man remembered me (he's probably dead now--he was already kind of old when I was a teen), but if I had agreed he might have walked away thinking "I just paid a prostitute for her time," whereas without agreeing he may have had to think of some other category to fit me into (failed prostitute? idk). But just that small victory of not "confirming" the other person's assumptions and views about who you are and who you must be. With yacht guy, some part of him might have even filled in other blanks like "oh she must secretly be attracted to me that she let me pull out my weiner" etc. So just nipping it in the bud and being like "no" can feel very powerful and avoid that slippery slope into other people deciding they know you better than you know yourself and they can categorize and identify you better.

Even though it wasn't my responsibility or yours, there is a slippery slope where once a man "confirms" his weird views of you, maybe he will continue to have confidence in them and not care to listen otherwise. So it can go from "oh I was right, she let me teach her to drive" to "I bet I'm right that she must be interested in me and she is probably looking for a husband like me." Or something--or just "oh I was right, women can't drive on their own without a man."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,817 Posts
@WickerDeer My INFP sister was also homeless for a time and she also stayed out of sex work even if it might have made things easier money-wise... but I think that strong Fi is the least likely type to sell out or do something inauthentic. You’d feel like you lost your soul in many ways.

Didn’t Marilyn Monroe say something like “Hollywood is a place that will pay you 1,000 dollars for a kiss and 50 cents for your soul.”

@Six. I absolutely understand and appreciate the exact way that @WickerDeer behaved and thinks. She sees it exactly the way I do and she kept her soul intact. I am not sure how to explain to you the importance of her being able to say “no” for her own sense of autonomy, but I think it was very important. I sense the intense need and danger there. That otherwise you’d feel violated and that you allowed violation. And she is right... this man was asking her to be consensual in some way, so it wouldn’t have been authentic to her— it wasn’t what she wanted at all. For him I’m sure he got off on violating someone’s autonomy and there being some neediness/power dynamics there. I do not have compassion for men who take advantage of their power, wealth, or position. I have disgust for that.

There is nothing to “sort out”. Wickerdeer bravely got through this one due to her own sense of being true to herself. And I don’t know if you would think that then she would be taking advantage of him as well or something— that is NOT what she wanted either. It wouldn’t cancel anything out— again I’m not sure what you’re thinking, but there’s definitely nothing to explain here for Wickerdeer— she sees herself and others clearly and without undue judgement. It would not be “winning” for her/us or “okay” for her/us. But if you want to understand that Fi “To thine own self be true.” It is right there.

And someone’s perverted and insecure fantasies and lack of compassion and lack of being able to put themselves into other people’s’ shoes and unable to help the world around them will be a mystery to people who do see people’s circumstances and think of things to help the people around them... and it would remain a mystery even if broken down. Because even if being compassionate is inconvenient and comes at personal cost whose who are compassionate and do things for others at personal cost and also those who have benefited from others doing this see so much value in it that it is almost impossible to understand someone not valuing it. Anyway, this is a long enough ramble. This subject is interesting, I will get back to the OP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,396 Posts
And in your examples, though it wasn't really about a monetary transaction (being paid for labor), it was about men's perception of you.
if i say 'it was about men using me/my situation and their perceptions of both to get off on themselves", then it minimizes you. but i did detect pure psychological masturbation in it [I Am Studly. And I Will Be Looked Up To For It] and that's why it wasn't okay.

Like they looked at you and assumed you couldn't drive
i couldn't :p i didn't mean to give the impression the offers just came out of total nowhere; i got myself a driver's license when i had the means and a reason for it and could learn to do it on terms i was happy about. i was a very single single parent and very conservative about over-extending myself, so that turned out to be somewhere early in my 30's.

what i meant by 'random' was that these offers would come from people i barely knew and who barely knew me. random male friends of some friend. male classmates in school. male parents of other kids at my son's daycares. and so forth. men who were not interested in me - i could see that even if they couldn't. they simply saw me as 'disadvantaged' and took it for granted that 'disadvantage' created an opening in which they could pick up a nice virtue-flavoured little power trip for themselves.

what they assumed was that they had knowledge [true] that i wanted [not true] and that i would be admiring and grateful to have it bestowed on me by them. what i was actually thinking was various forms of 'fuck no'.

or couldn't do the thing with the car.
And then perhaps if you had accepted their help it might have felt like you were somehow agreeing with their warped perspective of you.
well, that just annoyed the pure out of me without my feeling the slightest bit of desire that they would know me better than that. i just found them presumptuous and offensive. but what i would also have been agreeing with - and wouldn't - was their equally-warped perspective of their own selves. I Am Studly etcetera. and i wouldn't do it because i didn't think they were Studly at all.

So there's always, especially in the past more, been this shadow over male/female communications and interactions,
bingo. and this goes to that comment i made earlier, about the conditioning that says if there's a woman (of the correct age and dimensions etc) in the frame, then she's an object of something on the part of the male. there is absolutely no reason whatever, at any time, why any guy would assume the having or not-having of a driver's licence by another human who is a total stranger . . . is any business of his. and it isn't. imo that is borne out just by the fact that they don't learn a random fellow-guy has no licence and offer to teach him to drive. they don't stop to try help a woman who's 55 change her headlights (thank fuck). there just isn't a reason, objectively. and yet i saw it constantly as a single mother; men's minds reflexively seeing 'possibilities' just in the parameters, regardless of the individual 'self' of each person involved.

The other men's view of you may be like you are a dumb little lady who can't drive or helpless with mechanics, which perhaps you felt like you'd somehow "confirm" in their minds if you were to accept help, because then they could write you off as that and walk away thinking themselves right about you.
i'm not sure either :p I just got pissed off.

there is a slippery slope where once a man "confirms" his weird views of you, maybe he will continue to have confidence in them and not care to listen otherwise.
and then, ime, often takes minimal responsibility for his own part in that slope when the reality hits. at a certain point in my life i got fucking sick of hearing men gripe about how their partners were 'not who i thought she was' as if they had had nothing to do with creating and even imposing whatever delusional bubble had turned out not to be true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,817 Posts
Okay so Disney, fairytales, the Twilight Saga. I think that modern media does just as big of a disservice to young men and the wool is thrown over their eyes much easier. What I mean is— understanding and building skills that make an intimate relationship work are not really being taught to men in the media, but the importance of sex and sex appeal is being taught constantly. It’s actually what is used to sell lots of products.

In the past Fairytales were often used to inform girls about what life was going to be like. That had little choice about who they would get to marry. I read a lecture once about how the fairy tale “Donkey Skin” taught girls that it was okay to run away from incest and that incest was wrong not right. The story is about a king who vows not to remarry until he finds a woman as beautiful as his first wife. He becomes obsessed with his own daughter.

Beauty and the Beast is supposed to teach the moral of looking for the good in people— I think this was probably an important lesson in times when young women had almost no choice about who they married. Sometimes there are choices between despair and bitterness and surviving tolerably. Stockholm syndrome or having no power and choice at all. Life has not been easy in the past for most women. Although looking the other way while a husband is violent or abusive of one’s children is unforgivable to me at this time period now, and it’s not like I don’t see that happening. I told my husband that the 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 who is molested, it is usually their family members and since people tell me stuff, I believe this is the exact proportion of women who are abused. My husband said “People tell you this? “. I said “Yes! And usually it’s dads and brothers and grandfathers.” So yes. And women in those family cycles often turn a blind eye or think they are the only ones in their family when of course they are not and so... any woman reading this who needs to hear it...please wake up about what is happening, go to a women’s shelter and protect your kids. Don’t say “This is just how men are.” Most of them aren’t. But it is really sad when women have no contact with truly good men.

I think many movies in the past taught different society agendas. What about “The Red Shoes” How strong the message that you could not have a career on stage and be a person’s wife was at that time! And that’s from when my mother was a teenager.

Twighlight and 50 shades were written by women who had their own weird fantasies and I personally find Edward Cullen to be somewhat isolating, very controlling and the only upsides are his looks and wealth. When she says he plays the piano it’s like she is checking off a box. It’s not like Bella’s character discusses music with Edward or understands his playing. It’s just all a fantasy. A not very healthy one either.

However... do I think any of this even comes close to touching how much marketing of fantasy girls has gone into the minds of young men? Not even a pinch. If we are talking dollar signs? I knew young men in college who didn’t believe girls farted— I knew 2 guys who separately said this to me. “I just can’t imagine that they do.” No it’s WAY out of hand with men. Have you guys ever watched a video of an Incel talking about why and how he is an Incel? It sounds kind of like “I met a hot girl and I got obsessed and she didn’t like me!“. Their expectations are SO far off. SO FAR OFF.

Anyway, in my opinion a real problem is that people do not understand that actually being with other people takes good interpersonal skills. It’s all skills like listening, compassion, honesty... yet nobody has broken that down for many people. Most people have to rely on positive role models and not everyone has those. Too bad that a 2-D screen teaches some people life’s most important lessons due to a lack of teaching anywhere


Here are some videos that show case some of the different ideas I posted. Some are funny....




Sorry these are text to speech off of reddit, but it just shows the collective crazy expectations out there. Not that women can’t have Weird expectations... but... look:


You know I think the thing that is overwhelmingly being sold and bought by us all is very specific ways to look. Anorexia nervous and bulimia nervous are typically American and Brazilian and somewhat Western European. But lately we’ve been documenting what happens when the Philippines and Nicaragua start watching American shows—for the first time ever people report going on diets and Anorexia starts to appear. So really American media Sells a lot of physical image stuff to us all and I think it is very detrimental. It can take over people’s lives.
 
S

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
WE are broken people. Some clearly out of our own bad decision, some few from other's.

We are here to improve ourselves since life still have lots of thing to offer (or else we already end up in the cemetery, amirite?). In that spirit, we should share and take our past as lesson and come up with clearer vision for the future. We shouldn't take what broke us and project and impose it into others.

No way jose. They say misery loves company, which is very true, but we simply refuse to do it, delving and immersing ourselves into vicious cycle of hate.

We should take our own responsibility since we are much better than that and we yearn to also make it better for everybody else.
 

·
Registered
Stealth Warship
Joined
·
678 Posts
@WickerDeer My INFP sister was also homeless for a time and she also stayed out of sex work even if it might have made things easier money-wise... but I think that strong Fi is the least likely type to sell out or do something inauthentic. You’d feel like you lost your soul in many ways.

Didn’t Marilyn Monroe say something like “Hollywood is a place that will pay you 1,000 dollars for a kiss and 50 cents for your soul.”

@Six. I absolutely understand and appreciate the exact way that @WickerDeer behaved and thinks. She sees it exactly the way I do and she kept her soul intact. I am not sure how to explain to you the importance of her being able to say “no” for her own sense of autonomy, but I think it was very important. I sense the intense need and danger there. That otherwise you’d feel violated and that you allowed violation. And she is right... this man was asking her to be consensual in some way, so it wouldn’t have been authentic to her— it wasn’t what she wanted at all. For him I’m sure he got off on violating someone’s autonomy and there being some neediness/power dynamics there. I do not have compassion for men who take advantage of their power, wealth, or position. I have disgust for that.

There is nothing to “sort out”. Wickerdeer bravely got through this one due to her own sense of being true to herself. And I don’t know if you would think that then she would be taking advantage of him as well or something— that is NOT what she wanted either. It wouldn’t cancel anything out— again I’m not sure what you’re thinking, but there’s definitely nothing to explain here for Wickerdeer— she sees herself and others clearly and without undue judgement. It would not be “winning” for her/us or “okay” for her/us. But if you want to understand that Fi “To thine own self be true.” It is right there.

And someone’s perverted and insecure fantasies and lack of compassion and lack of being able to put themselves into other people’s’ shoes and unable to help the world around them will be a mystery to people who do see people’s circumstances and think of things to help the people around them... and it would remain a mystery even if broken down. Because even if being compassionate is inconvenient and comes at personal cost whose who are compassionate and do things for others at personal cost and also those who have benefited from others doing this see so much value in it that it is almost impossible to understand someone not valuing it. Anyway, this is a long enough ramble. This subject is interesting, I will get back to the OP.
I don't disagree she did the right thing I'd consider it obvious in fact - (although tactically speaking if you really wanted to fuck the guy over you'd let him do it, film it with a cameraphone and forward it to his wife - or his place of work, or the police - it might be what I'd do...): However there was this issue she touched on which (again) I'm undecided on because (Fe) YOU (Fi) YOU'RE THE ONES MAKING THE RULES (Ti) I'm just deciding whether they make sense - and this issue is:

@WickerDeer

She was umm'ing and aah'ing and reflecting and wondering about whether:

A. Oh, my authentic, romantic, ideals about what could be and is to thine own self be true and AGH, disney princesses - sing along ladies:


B. Fucking hell man you can make a fast bbbuck if you're just willing to show a little tit whilst yacht man masturbates, god damn, house ownership's nothing. Just give up your fucking soul, allow yourself to become dead inside and see how the world opens up once you actually let go of what you love - you have to get kicked in the balls (or ladyballs) an awful lot...

"I think there's something wrong with your suit..."


You know:

"...there's a dead guy in it."

It's degrading, however so much of life is - you think the life of your average office flesh drone wage slave isn't - or whatever else? Air-Conditioning engineer who has to shit in a bucket in the back of his van because customers don't like you using their loos on a blazing summer in some attic with your tin snips sweating like a dog locked in a hot car? Or whatever else, the guy who has to scrape a dead sheep's carbonised guts out from under the transformer pf fallen electrical pylon at 3am so the 2 million people sitting on their ass just "waiting" for the power to come back on can go back to watching netflix? The haulier who puts his back out permanently at 40 hefting your giant amazon parcels out of his lorry as if they all appear by magic instead of by hard-pressed, brutal competition applied to people who have 3rd party contracts. The 17 year old who has to have a suicide net installed outside their cell window so they don't miss their targets for installing motherboards on your next phone? - there's so much suffering and degradation out there, pick a flavour, you're upset you can't be appreciated as an artist - urgh, give me a break pull your head out of your ass - we've all been homeless, I've been homeless - and I certainly didn't somehow manage to end up a yacht with some rich woman asking to pay me her to masturbate in front of me during it either so how homeless you might have been I don't know if it's really explored the situation.

But of course all that would involve perspective which distracts you from yourself - dare I say it, "compassion" - the sort which doesn't have to make an enormous display of itself as its own reward because it's actually concerned with the suffering out there to the bare minimum of actually wanting to pull its own weight and not act like it's in an entitled fairytale -

It's all degrading - at least stripping and prostitution pays faster for a slightly more compressed form of degradation instead of long term - you can make bank if you're savvy and get out, (or you can't, in the words of Missy Elliot):

Just make sure you're ahead of the game:


And this is a strange sort of power, such an odd point (it's up there for me with the number of feminists I've met who enjoy having their throat choked during sex (which disgusts me) as if their issues with "patriarchy" and that aren't the same coin - an issue which they won't address either sides of and so they wrought it upon the world at large instead of confronting it themselves).

Women have this weird issue on stripping and prostitutes where they see it as somehow empowering - look at this latest progressive debac film "Cuties" - somehow dancing like a whore now in front of obvious fucking pedos is "A Coming Of Age Story" now?



I mean what the fuck. Because it's "empowering" for a woman to learn how much effect selling her body in some form is to get by in society?

THAT'S what WickerDeer is circumambulating around as if this is a moment of regret - WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED if I'd just gone down that path for rich yacht guy, would I have a house like my selling-sex friends - no, I can't do that - but oh, how hard life is - and is it bad? Who wins in the end - the idealist or the mercenary?

I mean I'd love to see a film on how women (and not Pretty Woman - I mean a true, deep, ugly, dark, gritty film about it) actually view that sort of life - because it does seem as if that's a theme that runs deep and confuses women - do you sell yourself or not - I love that in all aspects of human experience - Faust to Transformers, it's there in our collective depictions of our dreams: The Temptation Of The Amoral, Loss Of The Soul: The nature of the soul - it's fantastic - you root for the moral party yet you can't deny the chic of the amoral - you know?

What is that? What is the "soul" - so much that it appears in fiction either so venerated or silly?!

I feel sorry for you Prime.


Your allegiance to these humans? The Trouble With Loyalty To A Cause: Is That The Cause Will ALWAYS Betray You.

You are betrayed by the Cause, by the Romantic Ideal?

That's Faust, in point of fact.


I'd take the deal and crawfish and drill that Old Devil in the ass. How about you Ringo what would you do?
I already did it.

Because you're in this weird civilisational spot where acting like a whore is empowering yet you know it isn't - where does you soul truly lie in that process - what is it you're actually selling and what are you doing it for?

That's a GOOD question and whilst I agree she obviously made the right choice - if you don't understand it you can't move past it.


It circulates around that deeper issue you feel you can't express (which doesn't make you smarter or more noble incidentally - a truth you can't express is a useless one) - so try?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dulcinea

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
Women have this weird issue on stripping and prostitutes where they see it as somehow empowering - look at this latest progressive debac film "Cuties" - somehow dancing like a whore now in front of obvious fucking pedos is "A Coming Of Age Story" now?
For the record, the producer of Cuties intended to make a social commentary (criticism). Netflix completely ignored the entire point and tried to sell it as sexy. Netflix is pretty gross. You should actually try watching it and be railing against Netflix. Netflix marketing is disgusting, not the movie. Next they'll call 1917 a romantic comedy.

As for the rest of it, I've never been in a situation where I had to make a decision between survival and prostitution. I grew up dancing ballet and there isn't a lot left to the imagination but somehow that's considered cute. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267904189_Femininity_Sexuality_and_the_Ballerina_Pointe_Shoes_and_Pin-ups_in_the_1950s_United_States In the 19th century ballet was considered the realm of sluts. I think there's a middle ground somewhere in society's attitude.
 

·
Registered
Stealth Warship
Joined
·
678 Posts
For the record, the producer of Cuties intended to make a social commentary (criticism). Netflix completely ignored the entire point and tried to sell it as sexy. Netflix is pretty gross. You should actually try watching it and be railing against Netflix. Netflix marketing is disgusting, not the movie. Next they'll call 1917 a romantic comedy.

As for the rest of it, I've never been in a situation where I had to make a decision between survival and prostitution. I grew up dancing ballet and there isn't a lot left to the imagination but somehow that's considered cute. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267904189_Femininity_Sexuality_and_the_Ballerina_Pointe_Shoes_and_Pin-ups_in_the_1950s_United_States In the 19th century ballet was considered the realm of sluts. I think there's a middle ground somewhere in society's attitude.
And I'm very much in two minds about it:

A. On the one hand - I can see how it can be social commentary, because I've seen critiques of it and from the trailer footage they show - they show these kids watching all these videos of icons twerking and stripping and dancing in sexualised manners.

You can definitely be angry at the sexualisation of the children in the film, but if your anger is directed at the people who made it you could be said to be missing the point - they're showing where this stuff comes from.

B. On the other - a lot of people seem to have taken a Culture War side on this where a lot of the very same people will say a racist joke is never ironic or social commentary and can only be seen as perpetuating racism seem to think that this is not bound by the same meta-observations. That this isn't sexualising children because it's social commentary and it isn't perpetuating the acceptance of sexualising children.

I truly don't know because I'm only one person, I don't make moral values - society does collectively, but I do see inconsistencies (I'm sure that's part of their evolution that they're in a constant state of flux and contradiction) however you can track where those contradictions are going to resolve.

Personally I think society is too sexualised.

Muslims have a pretty categorical solution:



I'm in two minds about that because let's compare it with an alternative:



You can make the argument:

A. It's in fact the girls wearing burqas who are more likely to be spoken to or valued for who they are as people.
B. Versus the woman who's showing cleavage (which is acceptable to do in Western societies) - how many guys (girls for that matter) are spending 20% of their concentration simply attempting to not look at your tits?

I prefer the idea that people should be allowed to comport themselves however they want - but that unwritten, unlegislated sensibilities should incentivise them to conduct themselves in a way that keeps sex out of the equation except where it's actually meant to be - in the bedroom.

And this is a weird spectrum you leave open to women in the West - do you want to sexualise yourself and use that power (even if it objectifies you and you know it?) You're welcome to - but do you want to do it and what for or not?

Really it seems clear to me: Sex is for having children - and every behavior which is not conducive to stable families that look after those children, (by promoting cheating, or poor planning, or making casual sex acceptable) is probably one that you should feel a pressure against engaging in.

But is that "patriarchal"?

shrugs

A lot of people would say so - but then are you arguing in favour of women sexualising themselves and being considered as objects instead of as people?

A fair-sounding answer to that can be: "You can think of me as sexy and still a person."

Speaking honestly however if you've ever tried to sexualise yourself to attract that sort of attention, how much of that do you think was based on what you innately feel you are as a person instead of for how you look?

It's an impossible thing to resolve of course, and there's no answer except a "middle ground" - but in defining it you've got to be consistent on how you apply the mores which circulate around wherever that middle ground is - otherwise you leave it open to be moved around.

If you want to be valued for your mind - use your mind.
If you want to be valued for your body - use your body.

However women are always going to have that dynamic skewed towards sexualising themselves because it's honestly a lot more lucrative for them to do the latter than it is for guys. Sure there are male strippers and sex workers but there's a lot more guys sitting around waiting to throw cash at sex than there are women who have to do that.

And honestly we solved all these issues back when there was chastity and marriage - the exchange of resources for sexual access was pretty soundly resolved. Now it's oppressive so you've got a lot of values to reflect on about how you want that to work if at all - because it's always going to be the case that men are willing to pay for sex a lot more than women...

It's why I say to guys who resent that ease with which some women can get through life skating on their looks and being only attracted to money or power:

"Are you really not sure they've got the rawer deal? At the end of the day at least with money and power there's a prospect you've earned it using capabilities and achievements you'd consider to be more innately you than how you appear. Even the shallowest woman on that score can at least be said to be giving you more of a shake at meritocracy than shallowest guys give to girls..."
 

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,866 Posts
Discussion Starter #89
There's a much better way to make a statement about the sexualization of children than hiring children to dress in skimpy outfits and dance in provocative ways.These are real actors that are too young and inexperienced to fully understand the meaning behind what they're doing. This is child exploitation. I don't care what anyone says, and am surprised any of these girls' parents consented to their being in something like this.

And, no, I'm not a conservative, but I was a child who was sexualized: sexually abused and harassed, and understand how degrading it is to be a child and to be looked at in that particular way, and would never wish that kind of experience on anyone!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Llyralen

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
There's a much better way to make a statement about the sexualization of children than hiring children to dress in skimpy outfits and dance in provocative ways.These are real actors that are too young and inexperienced to fully understand the meaning behind what they're doing. This is child exploitation. I don't care what anyone says, and am surprised any of these girls' parents consented to their being in something like this.

And, no, I'm not a conservative, but I was a child who was sexualized: sexually abused and harassed, and understand how degrading it is to be a child and to be looked at in that particular way, and would never wish that kind of experience on anyone!!!!
You haven't watched it. Put the incredibly bad Netflix marketing aside and judge it on it's own merit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
A. It's in fact the girls wearing burqas who are more likely to be spoken to or valued for who they are as people.
B. Versus the woman who's showing cleavage (which is acceptable to do in Western societies) - how many guys (girls for that matter) are spending 20% of their concentration simply attempting to not look at your tits?

I prefer the idea that people should be allowed to comport themselves however they want - but that unwritten, unlegislated sensibilities should incentivise them to conduct themselves in a way that keeps sex out of the equation except where it's actually meant to be - in the bedroom.

And this is a weird spectrum you leave open to women in the West - do you want to sexualise yourself and use that power (even if it objectifies you and you know it?) You're welcome to - but do you want to do it and what for or not?

Really it seems clear to me: Sex is for having children - and every behavior which is not conducive to stable families that look after those children, (by promoting cheating, or poor planning, or making casual sex acceptable) is probably one that you should feel a pressure against engaging in.

But is that "patriarchal"?

shrugs

A lot of people would say so - but then are you arguing in favour of women sexualising themselves and being considered as objects instead of as people?

A fair-sounding answer to that can be: "You can think of me as sexy and still a person."

Speaking honestly however if you've ever tried to sexualise yourself to attract that sort of attention, how much of that do you think was based on what you innately feel you are as a person instead of for how you look?

It's an impossible thing to resolve of course, and there's no answer except a "middle ground" - but in defining it you've got to be consistent on how you apply the mores which circulate around wherever that middle ground is - otherwise you leave it open to be moved around.

If you want to be valued for your mind - use your mind.
If you want to be valued for your body - use your body.

However women are always going to have that dynamic skewed towards sexualising themselves because it's honestly a lot more lucrative for them to do the latter than it is for guys. Sure there are male strippers and sex workers but there's a lot more guys sitting around waiting to throw cash at sex than there are women who have to do that.

And honestly we solved all these issues back when there was chastity and marriage - the exchange of resources for sexual access was pretty soundly resolved. Now it's oppressive so you've got a lot of values to reflect on about how you want that to work if at all - because it's always going to be the case that men are willing to pay for sex a lot more than women...

It's why I say to guys who resent that ease with which some women can get through life skating on their looks and being only attracted to money or power:

"Are you really not sure they've got the rawer deal? At the end of the day at least with money and power there's a prospect you've earned it using capabilities and achievements you'd consider to be more innately you than how you appear. Even the shallowest woman on that score can at least be said to be giving you more of a shake at meritocracy than shallowest guys give to girls..."
Except the women in burkas aren't being respected or listened to.

There are plenty of fields men use their bodies but they don't lose respect for it. 3.5% of firefighters are women. 24.4% of farmers are women. 9.9% of construction workers are women. There are plenty of fields where physical strength helps and men dominate those fields, using their bodies. A man using an advantage of his sex remains respectable but women using an advantage of her sex results in loss of respect. They're both using their bodies to get ahead.

It's equally inappropriate to push boys into physically demanding work before their time or push girls into sexual roles before their time. There are physical and psychological issues with both.

I 100% disagree that sex is about reproduction. You're ignoring homosexual couples and how much sex is with birth control and non-reproductive sex acts. Even how many people die never having sex with another person but masturbating. Sex is so much more than for having children. If the traditional European model solved so much, why were there always so many bastards filling the poor houses and so many "widows" starving for so many hundreds of years? It didn't work.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
13,931 Posts
I don't disagree she did the right thing I'd consider it obvious in fact - (although tactically speaking if you really wanted to fuck the guy over you'd let him do it, film it with a cameraphone and forward it to his wife - or his place of work, or the police - it might be what I'd do...): However there was this issue she touched on which (again) I'm undecided on because (Fe) YOU (Fi) YOU'RE THE ONES MAKING THE RULES (Ti) I'm just deciding whether they make sense - and this issue is:

@WickerDeer

She was umm'ing and aah'ing and reflecting and wondering about whether:

A. Oh, my authentic, romantic, ideals about what could be and is to thine own self be true and AGH, disney princesses - sing along ladies:


B. Fucking hell man you can make a fast bbbuck if you're just willing to show a little tit whilst yacht man masturbates, god damn, house ownership's nothing. Just give up your fucking soul, allow yourself to become dead inside and see how the world opens up once you actually let go of what you love - you have to get kicked in the balls (or ladyballs) an awful lot...

"I think there's something wrong with your suit..."


You know:

"...there's a dead guy in it."

It's degrading, however so much of life is - you think the life of your average office flesh drone wage slave isn't - or whatever else? Air-Conditioning engineer who has to shit in a bucket in the back of his van because customers don't like you using their loos on a blazing summer in some attic with your tin snips sweating like a dog locked in a hot car? Or whatever else, the guy who has to scrape a dead sheep's carbonised guts out from under the transformer pf fallen electrical pylon at 3am so the 2 million people sitting on their ass just "waiting" for the power to come back on can go back to watching netflix? The haulier who puts his back out permanently at 40 hefting your giant amazon parcels out of his lorry as if they all appear by magic instead of by hard-pressed, brutal competition applied to people who have 3rd party contracts. The 17 year old who has to have a suicide net installed outside their cell window so they don't miss their targets for installing motherboards on your next phone? - there's so much suffering and degradation out there, pick a flavour, you're upset you can't be appreciated as an artist - urgh, give me a break pull your head out of your ass - we've all been homeless, I've been homeless - and I certainly didn't somehow manage to end up a yacht with some rich woman asking to pay me her to masturbate in front of me during it either so how homeless you might have been I don't know if it's really explored the situation.

But of course all that would involve perspective which distracts you from yourself - dare I say it, "compassion" - the sort which doesn't have to make an enormous display of itself as its own reward because it's actually concerned with the suffering out there to the bare minimum of actually wanting to pull its own weight and not act like it's in an entitled fairytale -

It's all degrading - at least stripping and prostitution pays faster for a slightly more compressed form of degradation instead of long term - you can make bank if you're savvy and get out, (or you can't, in the words of Missy Elliot):

Just make sure you're ahead of the game:


And this is a strange sort of power, such an odd point (it's up there for me with the number of feminists I've met who enjoy having their throat choked during sex (which disgusts me) as if their issues with "patriarchy" and that aren't the same coin - an issue which they won't address either sides of and so they wrought it upon the world at large instead of confronting it themselves).

Women have this weird issue on stripping and prostitutes where they see it as somehow empowering - look at this latest progressive debac film "Cuties" - somehow dancing like a whore now in front of obvious fucking pedos is "A Coming Of Age Story" now?



I mean what the fuck. Because it's "empowering" for a woman to learn how much effect selling her body in some form is to get by in society?

THAT'S what WickerDeer is circumambulating around as if this is a moment of regret - WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED if I'd just gone down that path for rich yacht guy, would I have a house like my selling-sex friends - no, I can't do that - but oh, how hard life is - and is it bad? Who wins in the end - the idealist or the mercenary?

I mean I'd love to see a film on how women (and not Pretty Woman - I mean a true, deep, ugly, dark, gritty film about it) actually view that sort of life - because it does seem as if that's a theme that runs deep and confuses women - do you sell yourself or not - I love that in all aspects of human experience - Faust to Transformers, it's there in our collective depictions of our dreams: The Temptation Of The Amoral, Loss Of The Soul: The nature of the soul - it's fantastic - you root for the moral party yet you can't deny the chic of the amoral - you know?

What is that? What is the "soul" - so much that it appears in fiction either so venerated or silly?!

I feel sorry for you Prime.


Your allegiance to these humans? The Trouble With Loyalty To A Cause: Is That The Cause Will ALWAYS Betray You.

You are betrayed by the Cause, by the Romantic Ideal?

That's Faust, in point of fact.


I'd take the deal and crawfish and drill that Old Devil in the ass. How about you Ringo what would you do?
I already did it.

Because you're in this weird civilisational spot where acting like a whore is empowering yet you know it isn't - where does you soul truly lie in that process - what is it you're actually selling and what are you doing it for?

That's a GOOD question and whilst I agree she obviously made the right choice - if you don't understand it you can't move past it.


It circulates around that deeper issue you feel you can't express (which doesn't make you smarter or more noble incidentally - a truth you can't express is a useless one) - so try?
Just some clarifications--I don't regret anything about yacht guy. It might seem different to you--I mean it's possible a woman would rape you or chop you up and dump you in the ocean, but statistically, it's probably more likely that a man will do that and perhaps even more likely if you're a 90 lb teenage girl on the street. So it might seem glamorous that some rich old woman wants to pick you off the street to jerk off in front of you, but I don't know if we can really switch roles that easily.

As for the apprehension--it's more to do with, as you said, how other traditional activities can be just as dehumanizing (so maybe instead of just labor, also traditional female roles in relationships).

But also just the concept that sex is supposed to be some kind of connection between people. And that I never experienced that really--so to me it almost does feel like I always had this ideal and nothing in reality could ever come close to it, so why not be realistic and pragmatic?

Being a stripper or some other adult work like that would probably feel less like selling out my ideals than settling for some kind of shitty relationship, which is really all that would have been possible for me in life, given the choices I've made. If I am perfectly happy being single now, compared to not, then why wouldn't I just used sex for profit instead? Being alone and rich is probably better than being alone and poor, so long as you didn't have to hurt anyone to get there.

I'm not talking about yacht guy either--that was being an at-risk teen runaway and there was nothing empowering about that situation to me except being able to say no. I'm just talking about resenting that part of who I am that refused to consider options that are somewhat pragmatic because of some unrealistic idealism.

But I guess another aspect of it that would make me angry is that the type of person most likely to shame me, imo, if I had been a prostitute would be a man who is upset I'm not upholding my feminine virtues. The type of person who's going to try hardest to pressure me to do something "shameful" or "slutty" is also a man. It's irritating that a society that pretends to value women's virtue has always been so hell bent on destroying it whenever possible--if the women is poor.

A capitalist society like this doesn't bother putting money where its mouth is. If money is supposed to be some social currency that reflects a society's values, then it really shows how much not just this society but other more traditional societies value women, because in pretty much any society you'll find dumbass old farts who'll pay to sleep with young women. And it really makes humanity look pretty stupid.

I will keep my head up my own ass about art--I can put it wherever I want. It is my decision. And honestly, sometimes creative expression in the form of writing or art allows me to engage with my own ideals and dreams better than reality. So perhaps that's what I really wanted all along, rather than some relationship, financial security, or whatever.

I do think though--when someone is under extreme stress decisions aren't really that well thought out. I was sort of like a zombie during that period of my life. I think that's what happens when you're not getting basic needs met. And you can't really engage with ideals or dreams or whatever that well at that point when you are really just trying to survive.

Also--just to clarify this as well--yes I am familiar with labor. I have worked low paying, physically and emotionally demanding jobs for most of my life. I have worked through illness and mental breakdown. And yes--I agree a lot of work is degrading and disrespecting in its own way. Putting people's bodies at risk, taking up huge amounts of their life energy, and leaving them with almost nothing so that someone else can get a profit off them. I didn't shun hard work the way I shunned sex work, which is probably what infuriates me even more--that society values a young girl's body being used for sexual gratification of rich men over so much else she would choose to do or they would need her to do (because much essential work is done by women--many essential workers are women). It's just so hypocritical.

All and all it's just one of those moments at being angry at reality, angry at society, etc. because it doesn't measure up to the ideals. Which itself is a rather disrespectful, ungrateful attitude but Idk I think it's probably alright to be angry sometimes and just try to do what you can to not contribute to it--so I don't buy prostitutes or treat prostitutes like crap or slut shame them. It's pretty easy to avoid contributing to that.
 

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,866 Posts
Discussion Starter #93
You haven't watched it. Put the incredibly bad Netflix marketing aside and judge it on it's own merit.
I don't think I need to watch an entire film to know that this sexualizes children.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
@Convallaria Majalis
I think I relate to some of what you’re saying.

However think about this. Where does the influence of those changes come from? Who else do you know that agrees a change should be made? Who is responsible for implying there was a problem to begin with?

If you can’t answer a single one of those questions with the name of someone you know and see regularly, turn around and run. You can’t change a world you’ll never meet in person.
“You can’t change a world you’ll never meet in person.”

^ This sentence is really intriguing to me. It feels on track with the truth but I’m not sure I fully understand what you’re saying.

Could you please elaborate what you mean by this? Is this basically a “choose your battles wisely” sentiment?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
ISFP
Joined
·
2,664 Posts
“You can’t change a world you’ll never meet in person.”

^ This sentence is really intriguing to me. It feels on track with the truth but I’m not sure I fully understand what you’re saying.

Could you please elaborate what you mean by this? Is this basically a “choose your battles wisely” sentiment?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t believe this is a “choose your battles wisely” sentiment, because that’s too vague and focuses on a win/lose ratio.

My words are more focused on being present at the problem area, where it matters most. Think emergency relief for ground zero in a disaster struck area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
I don't think I need to watch an entire film to know that this sexualizes children.
It was made by a woman and her point is fighting FOR these children. The shitty marketing glorified it ie. did the opposite of what the film is about. All you've done is posted the shitty marketing. Bravo.
 

·
Registered
🌈🎹☮INFJ 666 sx/sp🇺🇸💃🏻💋
Joined
·
2,793 Posts
It was made by a woman and her point is fighting FOR these children. The shitty marketing glorified it ie. did the opposite of what the film is about. All you've done is posted the shitty marketing. Bravo.
I'm actually really pissed off at Netflix for this TBH.
As someone who's been involved in dance in one form or another since the 80's, you can go to any professional or even non professional dance show and see similar moves performed by girls this exact age if not younger. Over sexualization of girls in dance has been an thing since I was 9 and remember there being a big to do about another group doing hips thrusts to Push It. Or at 11 when I was told my body was too proactive for ballet. (Remember a few years ago the controversy about 8 year olds dancing in bras and spankies to Beyonce?) Is it all of them? No. But it is enough that if I had a daughter I'd have to seriously vet any dance company she studied with, should she choose to dance.
I could google a dozen videos of similar performances, and while they would be at a distance, don't think for one second that there aren't close ups just like this video.



Anyone interested in the actual plot of the movie here it is:

 

The girls family is a traditional Muslim family from Senegal and they live in a poor region of Paris I believe. She is upset that her father is taking a second wife and has to watch her mother feign excitement despite being very upset. She befriends a girl in her apartment who is trying to, with some other girls, win a dance contest. These girls do dress in crop tops and just seem more grown up. Possibly they also have very little parental supervision. But the dance moves they do are not overtly sexual. She does steal a phone and see some provocative dance moves performed by adult women, which she teaches the other girls. While watching the dance moves on the phone, the adult woman dancing lifts her shirt exposing her breasts. There is a scene where they flirt with some older boys but the boys have no interest and leave. There is also a scene where some older girls bully her and pull her pants down and make fun of her child like underwear. She also starts her period. She is told she is a women now and her grandmother tells her how shortly (a couple years) after she started hers she was married off. When the person who owns the phone sees she has stolen it, he argues with her and wants it back. She tries to seduce him by taking her shirt off (reveling a crop top) and starts to unbutton her pants. Disgusted, he leaves and then she locks herself in the bathroom. She takes a photo of her vagina (implied not seen) and posts it on social media. The her friends get mad at her for this and make fun of her. Her new group of friends no longer want to be friends with her, and kick her out of their dance group.

She is bound and determined to still dance at the competition with her friends. At one point she pushes one of the other dancers in a river/canel so that she can take her spot. At first their dance is the simple dance moves they did in the beginning. Then, they switch and start doing the overtly sexual and provocative dance. The audience is appalled by their dance moves. Literally they are disgusted. They boo them and they camera pans to a nasty looking creeper who is obviously enjoying it. Midway through the dance she runs off stage and goes home. Her family is getting ready for her father's wedding to his second wife. The aunt is furious with her but the mother intervenes and tells the aunt to back off. The girl does not want to be a part of the wedding. The mother lets her leave.

There is a dress in the move that symbolizes her heritage. It’s ugly and what she has to wear at the wedding. That dress and the dance uniform symbolize the two extremes the girl is dealing with if her “coming of age moment”. When she leaves see finds some kids jumping rope and joins them. It’s obvious she is finding some middle ground in her transition of cultures and growing up.


This is not showing dancing proactively as being sexually empowering. Quite the opposite in fact.

It's slow moving (I've literally seen paint dry faster than this movie moves) and while I do question some of the decisions made here, the director has stated that there was a child psychologist and also a social worker on stage working with these girls and putting everything into context for them.

My friend called it a remake of the movie Thirteen but with French subtitles.

 

·
exploring space
ENFP
Joined
·
9,394 Posts
^ Haven't watched the film, it kinda seems to me like a bad choice to show them dancing in those angles, would perhaps do more for the symbolism of how absurd it is if they showed us a static audience view. I guess if the director wanted to shock and make us uncomfortable it works but doing so with real children doesn't seem like a great choice...

but in the end, this film is prob not worth the outrage compared to the real damage tiktok and insta do to kids in that regard, tiktok especially.. spending hours in front of the mirror & camera to achieve the best dance moves and look the sexiest...sets a bad precedent for social approval. But maybe those types of kids who invest in this don't have the nature to do something else anyways, and the rest will just grow out of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
There are many memes about the Disney movies we grew up with. How Ariel wants to run off with a man she just met, how Belle has Stockholm syndrome, and how Jasmine, ends up with a man who lied to her about his status. But, at some level, I'd think we can understand these are fantasy stories and are not necessarily meant to be a reflection of reality. I don't know too many young women who modeled their relationships after the Disney princess model. On the other hand, they are based in enduring archetypes that has been an appealing basis for stories to women for generations.

Then you get to the literature that came out when many people were teens: Twilight, then later on, 50 shades of gray. These are just the really famous examples, but I imagine there's a whole subgenre of novels like this. I mean the kind of male romantic figure being presented is nothing new, and goes all the way back to the 19th century, being dubbed as the "Byronic hero": moody, mysterious, super rich and/or powerful, and full of angst. This is an old trope. In high school, I read Jane Eyre, and I love it, but if I were to describe Jane Eyre it would be that a naive young woman false in love with a much older man who locked his wife in the attic for years. Seems a bit creepy, if you were to stop and really think about it. I don't think too many women would specifically seek that kind of relationship, but what of the dynamic between Jane and Rochester, the dialogue, the presentation of Rochester of a rather dark and brooding man who is transformed by love?

Of course, this isn't based on reality, so much it's based on a common female fantasy of seeing a man in the depths and transforming him into something better. It's a common girlfriend stereotype to say "I know he's rough, but I can change him." I mean, essentially that's what Beauty and the Beast is all about, really: the feminine transformation archetype, a very common feminine archetype. Also with Aladdin, you see that term, "the diamond in the rough."

I wonder, if, by using these common archtypes, if many books, films, etc. are presenting the idea of a relationship that is actually somewhat toxic, and in some instances, outright abusive, as something to pursue or healthy? I mean there's another thread about women being in relationships with convicts. It does make me wonder if the media presents to women an unrealistic standard to pursue when it comes to a successful relationship.
"50 shades of gray" is just attemp of author who is unfamiliar with BDSM.
For everything fluffy,stop to "cure" people from their own sexual interests.
What about "Safe,sane and consentual"? Author should research books about BDSM.
That dreaded book is just miserable attempt to attract people who are average,traditional in the worst sense of that word,and who would go to sleep thinking "Everything is O.K. now.Pure sick man is cured from his sexual deviations". Well,author earned a hefty sum of money from people who are unwilling to even think of something that is out of what society and churches teach them what is only "right way" of thinking.Thanks,Red panda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
There are many memes about the Disney movies we grew up with. How Ariel wants to run off with a man she just met, how Belle has Stockholm syndrome, and how Jasmine, ends up with a man who lied to her about his status. But, at some level, I'd think we can understand these are fantasy stories and are not necessarily meant to be a reflection of reality. I don't know too many young women who modeled their relationships after the Disney princess model. On the other hand, they are based in enduring archetypes that has been an appealing basis for stories to women for generations.

Then you get to the literature that came out when many people were teens: Twilight, then later on, 50 shades of gray. These are just the really famous examples, but I imagine there's a whole subgenre of novels like this. I mean the kind of male romantic figure being presented is nothing new, and goes all the way back to the 19th century, being dubbed as the "Byronic hero": moody, mysterious, super rich and/or powerful, and full of angst. This is an old trope. In high school, I read Jane Eyre, and I love it, but if I were to describe Jane Eyre it would be that a naive young woman false in love with a much older man who locked his wife in the attic for years. Seems a bit creepy, if you were to stop and really think about it. I don't think too many women would specifically seek that kind of relationship, but what of the dynamic between Jane and Rochester, the dialogue, the presentation of Rochester of a rather dark and brooding man who is transformed by love?

Of course, this isn't based on reality, so much it's based on a common female fantasy of seeing a man in the depths and transforming him into something better. It's a common girlfriend stereotype to say "I know he's rough, but I can change him." I mean, essentially that's what Beauty and the Beast is all about, really: the feminine transformation archetype, a very common feminine archetype. Also with Aladdin, you see that term, "the diamond in the rough."

I wonder, if, by using these common archtypes, if many books, films, etc. are presenting the idea of a relationship that is actually somewhat toxic, and in some instances, outright abusive, as something to pursue or healthy? I mean there's another thread about women being in relationships with convicts. It does make me wonder if the media presents to women an unrealistic standard to pursue when it comes to a successful relationship.
On your question,answer is Yes.
There are many examples of strong,independent woman.
I will mention only one-Paradox Trilogy from Rachel Bach.
Deviana Morris is still one of my favourite female main protagonists in books,movies,or TV series
 
81 - 100 of 151 Posts
Top