Random Celebrity Headlines

[allegro]

Does "trust women" get you pussy, so you can force them to watch you masturbate to finish the circle or what?

I am a woman, and a feminist, but I often wonder about the motivations of this kind of stuff these days, too, from guys online. This social media stuff, so much of it is shit, I do myself wonder if some of these guys are just trying to cash in on some "metoo" thing so they can get more hits or look really cool so they can get laid.

Ugh, it's all just ... ugh

[theimage13]

I am a woman, and a feminist, but I often wonder about the motivations of this kind of stuff these days, too, from guys online. This social media stuff, so much of it is shit, I do myself wonder if some of these guys are just trying to cash in on some "metoo" thing so they can get more hits or look really cool so they can get laid.

Ugh, it's all just ... ugh

And here we have a perspective that I have struggled with for a long, long time.

I've always considered myself to be a generally conscientious and caring person - I'm talking back to at least early middle school, when I was the unpopular kid but people would still come to me with their problems because I was a good listener. It never got me anywhere socially or sexually (that's not why I listened - just a statement of fact for context), and so it never occurred to me that someone would use generosity as a ploy.

Fast forward to dating as an adult: for years, I tried to be upfront about the fact that I considered myself to genuinely be a nice guy. Why? Because I know how many people aren't. But now, what you just said starts to become apparent: turns out many women see a man being outspoken about not being a total prick as an attempt to get in their pants. It took me way too long to realize this and understand why, but I eventually did. "Ugh" is right.

I am, for the most part, a calm, quiet, and shy person. But so help me, when guys at work are acting like sexist shitheads, I call them out for it. I will actually yell if it gets bad enough, which I almost never do unless it's a matter of immediate safety and yelling is necessary. And apparently, it's the biggest thing that my better half loves about me. But we didn't meet online; she never saw me "advertise" that I wasn't a prick. We were introduced by a mutual female friend who had known both of us for years, so she didn't have to wonder what my motives were when I said I was a feminist.

At the end of the day, as frustrating as it is to be a guy and constantly have my motives questioned, I know it's way, way more frustrating and difficult (and heck, potentially dangerous) to be a woman and have good reason to need to question a man's motives. And it makes me feel like shit because I feel like there's nothing I can do about it, even though I know in my heart that calling it out when I see it is at least a start.

Ugh, indeed.

[allegro]

And here we have a perspective that I have struggled with for a long, long time.

I've always considered myself to be a generally conscientious and caring person - I'm talking back to at least early middle school, when I was the unpopular kid but people would still come to me with their problems because I was a good listener. It never got me anywhere socially or sexually (that's not why I listened - just a statement of fact for context), and so it never occurred to me that someone would use generosity as a ploy.

Fast forward to dating as an adult: for years, I tried to be upfront about the fact that I considered myself to genuinely be a nice guy. Why? Because I know how many people aren't. But now, what you just said starts to become apparent: turns out many women see a man being outspoken about not being a total prick as an attempt to get in their pants. It took me way too long to realize this and understand why, but I eventually did. "Ugh" is right.

I am, for the most part, a calm, quiet, and shy person. But so help me, when guys at work are acting like sexist shitheads, I call them out for it. I will actually yell if it gets bad enough, which I almost never do unless it's a matter of immediate safety and yelling is necessary. And apparently, it's the biggest thing that my better half loves about me. But we didn't meet online; she never saw me "advertise" that I wasn't a prick. We were introduced by a mutual female friend who had known both of us for years, so she didn't have to wonder what my motives were when I said I was a feminist.

At the end of the day, as frustrating as it is to be a guy and constantly have my motives questioned, I know it's way, way more frustrating and difficult (and heck, potentially dangerous) to be a woman and have good reason to need to question a man's motives. And it makes me feel like shit because I feel like there's nothing I can do about it, even though I know in my heart that calling it out when I see it is at least a start.

Ugh, indeed.

I don’t see anything posted on here or by friends on FB or whatever to be “ugh” because it’s obviously a genuine concern that is all the time, not just at specific opportunities; women really do need men’s support in the workplace for this shit to no longer be accepted. We will all continue to fight, either way, there’s safety and power in numbers. When you do and say things at work to thwart harassment, it MATTERS. It’s important.

But I think what @Volband was talking about was that specific Twitter link to a famous guy and @Volband said said that guy is playing “White Knight” to the world of (anonymous to him) women and that seemed disingenuous, and I saw what he meant. @Volband has been supportive here in his attitudes, as you have, but we are a kind of anonymous “family,” here, and it’s really great having your support. But I think @Volband had a valid point about bewaring or wondering about the Twitter White Knights, people on Twitter aren’t always very genuine.

Social Media can be a great platform, it can be a creepy platform, and even scary. This is a message forum, and that type of online media way predates Social Media.

I apologize if members here think that I meant people here. I was referring to a Tweet and Twitter.

Re The View, I mostly get a kick out of Joy Behar, she HATES Trump — more than anybody I see on TV, more than ME, even — and we watch it most days during breakfast; it doesn’t mean I agree with everything, sometimes I agree with Meghan McCain, LOL. I stopped watching for years because of Simone and Cameron Bure and some others. This current panel is balanced. Although, I don’t like Sunny Hosten, at all (too Catholic Church with everything). Whoopie provides a different perspective as a black woman from a different generation. The View is now mostly a Liberal echo chamber but ... I like that lol.

[Volband]

I don’t see anything posted on here or by friends on FB or whatever to be “ugh” because it’s obviously a genuine concern that is all the time, not just at specific opportunities; women really do need men’s support in the workplace for this shit to no longer be accepted. We will all continue to fight, either way, there’s safety and power in numbers. When you do and say things at work to thwart harassment, it MATTERS. It’s important.

But I think what @Volband was talking about was that specific Twitter link to a famous guy and @Volband said said that guy is playing “White Knight” to the world of (anonymous to him) women and that seemed disingenuous, and I saw what he meant. @Volband has been supportive here in his attitudes, as you have, but we are a kind of anonymous “family,” here, and it’s really great having your support. But I think @Volband had a valid point about bewaring or wondering about the Twitter White Knights, people on Twitter aren’t always very genuine.

Social Media can be a great platform, it can be a creepy platform, and even scary. This is a message forum, and that type of online media way predates Social Media.

I apologize if members here think that I meant people here. I was referring to a Tweet and Twitter.

Re The View, I mostly get a kick out of Joy Behar, she HATES Trump — more than anybody I see on TV, more than ME, even — and we watch it most days during breakfast; it doesn’t mean I agree with everything, sometimes I agree with Meghan McCain, LOL. I stopped watching for years because of Simone and Cameron Bure and some others. This current panel is balanced. Although, I don’t like Sunny Hosten, at all (too Catholic Church with everything). Whoopie provides a different perspective as a black woman from a different generation. The View is now mostly a Liberal echo chamber but ... I like that lol.

Exactly. There is nothing wrong with defending anybody, who is is clearly not enjoying any of the shit being thrown at them. As long as you can recognize and separate banter from any form of harassment, you are good to go. Though when mysogynists or racists talk at my workplace, I just lay low; they don't hurt anybody right there and then, and I sure as hell don't want to confront some of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard.

But you see, what that disgusting white-knight wrote in his twitter post is nothing more than disingenuous PR talk. "Trust women" is one of the dumbest sentence you can utter, and it remains just as dumb if you exchange women for men. It has nothing to do with trusting women, and everything to do with trusting reliable sources.

In fact, that prick actually hurts and derogates women, and any girl with a sense of dignity* would laugh and say "fuck off" to him. If I were a woman (though the same sentence could be said for every gender), I'd like to be addressed as a normal person, and not some handicapped toddler. Don't fucking condescend to me by telling others what to do with me. I would not want anyone to trust my words just because I have a vagina. I would want people to listen to me as they would listen to anyone else, and decide themselves if they believeí me or not. Everyone would be more than welcome to help me out, but not by pointing out my genitals, which has nothing to do with being a reliable source, but by strenghtening my arguments, backing me up with useful facts.

*I could understand how some desperate women would fall for phony people like this scum. He is basically trying to win over people by giving them some candy that looks really delicious from the outside, but absolutely rotten inside. If you want to be on a pedestal, then eat his words up. If you want us to be equal, then laugh just laugh at idiots like him.

theimage13: Yes, not only thiy guy is fake af, it is also not a good way to net that pussy he is looking for. He might get them as voters, but girls prefer guys with an actual backbone. You know, when your forced personality revoles around "WOMEN ARE ALWAYS RIGHT. I LOVE WOMEN. WOMEN ARE SO SMART AND AWESOME. WOOOOO!!", it can be quite repelling and boring. The thing with being a nice guy is that you never try to sell yourself as one. People will notice, and that should be enough. You don't bark at waiters, you don't force down your opinion on others, you don't throw hissy fits and you can treat women equally without the need to tell them that you are in fact treating them equally - which in turn would result in the exact opposite. When nice guys complain about "girls liking jerks", there is always more to those stories. If your grand plan in wooing a chick is to figuratively lick her ass, then you immidietly strip yourself from any personality traits she might've found appealing otherwise.

You should watch Black Mirror s02 e01. It is about a woman, who loses his husband, but gets to rebuild him as a total lookalike "robot" with all the information about him being downloaded from his social accounts, so the doppelganger behaves as him. There is a scene that pretty much sums up everything I've been talking about in this post.


Now why would any self-respecting person would want to live with someone like this? It's boring, it's fake, it's "trust women", it's uhhh.

allegro: hahaha, understandable about The View. We all have our guilty pleasures. Too bad Hollywood took another spin of that expression.

[Mantra]

Exactly. There is nothing wrong with defending anybody, who is is clearly not enjoying any of the shit being thrown at them. As long as you can recognize and separate banter from any form of harassment, you are good to go. Though when mysogynists or racists talk at my workplace, I just lay low; they don't hurt anybody right there and then, and I sure as hell don't want to confront some of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard.

But you see, what that disgusting white-knight wrote in his twitter post is nothing more than disingenuous PR talk. "Trust women" is one of the dumbest sentence you can utter, and it remains just as dumb if you exchange women for men. It has nothing to do with trusting women, and everything to do with trusting reliable sources.

In fact, that prick actually hurts and derogates women, and any girl with a sense of dignity* would laugh and say "fuck off" to him. If I were a woman (though the same sentence could be said for every gender), I'd like to be addressed as a normal person, and not some handicapped toddler. Don't fucking condescend to me by telling others what to do with me. I would not want anyone to trust my words just because I have a vagina. I would want people to listen to me as they would listen to anyone else, and decide themselves if they believeí me or not. Everyone would be more than welcome to help me out, but not by pointing out my genitals, which has nothing to do with being a reliable source, but by strenghtening my arguments, backing me up with useful facts.

*I could understand how some desperate women would fall for phony people like this scum. He is basically trying to win over people by giving them some candy that looks really delicious from the outside, but absolutely rotten inside. If you want to be on a pedestal, then eat his words up. If you want us to be equal, then laugh just laugh at idiots like him.

theimage13: Yes, not only thiy guy is fake af, it is also not a good way to net that pussy he is looking for. He might get them as voters, but girls prefer guys with an actual backbone. You know, when your forced personality revoles around "WOMEN ARE ALWAYS RIGHT. I LOVE WOMEN. WOMEN ARE SO SMART AND AWESOME. WOOOOO!!", it can be quite repelling and boring. The thing with being a nice guy is that you never try to sell yourself as one. People will notice, and that should be enough. You don't bark at waiters, you don't force down your opinion on others, you don't throw hissy fits and you can treat women equally without the need to tell them that you are in fact treating them equally - which in turn would result in the exact opposite. When nice guys complain about "girls liking jerks", there is always more to those stories. If your grand plan in wooing a chick is to figuratively lick her ass, then you immidietly strip yourself from any personality traits she might've found appealing otherwise.

You should watch Black Mirror s02 e01. It is about a woman, who loses his husband, but gets to rebuild him as a total lookalike "robot" with all the information about him being downloaded from his social accounts, so the doppelganger behaves as him. There is a scene that pretty much sums up everything I've been talking about in this post.


Now why would any self-respecting person would want to live with someone like this? It's boring, it's fake, it's "trust women", it's uhhh.

I don't understand why you're rambling on and on about this guy just for saying "trust women." What exactly is the issue here?

Women have been saying that since forever, because for years the default mindset for most people (especially men) has been the OPPOSITE. A woman comes forward to tell people that she was sexually assaulted, and the general response was just equivocating cowardly bullshit like: "Well, IF that really is true, fine, I agree that's terrible, but honestly, we shouldn't jump to conclusions because, after all, women lie too ya know. It's not like women are perfect. In fact, that attitude is just another kind of sexism! Plus the whole innocent until proven guilty thing. So, for now let's just assume this woman is a liar by default until I see irrefutable proof to the contrary." The pervasiveness of this mentality has resulted in a culture that, by default, doesn't give a shit about what happens to women. It's half the reason sexual assault is so under-reported. "What's the point? No one will believe me anyway."

The whole attitude needs to change, which is why women have been saying some variation of "start believing women" "trust women" for so long. The default reaction needs to stop being "You're a liar until proven otherwise."

[Volband]

I don't understand why you're rambling on and on about this guy just for saying "trust women." What exactly is the issue here?

Women have been saying that since forever, because for years the default mindset for most people (especially men) has been the OPPOSITE. A woman comes forward to tell people that she was sexually assaulted, and the general response was just equivocating cowardly bullshit like: "Well, IF that really is true, fine, I agree that's terrible, but honestly, we shouldn't jump to conclusions because, after all, women lie too ya know. It's not like women are perfect. In fact, that attitude is just another kind of sexism! Plus the whole innocent until proven guilty thing. So, for now let's just assume this woman is a liar by default until I see irrefutable proof to the contrary." The pervasiveness of this mentality has resulted in a culture that, by default, doesn't give a shit about what happens to women. It's half the reason sexual assault is so under-reported. "What's the point? No one will believe me anyway."

The whole attitude needs to change, which is why women have been saying some variation of "start believing women" "trust women" for so long. The default reaction needs to stop being "You're a liar until proven otherwise."

His tweet implies that on 1 on 1 accusations, we should trust the women, because they are women. Giving a shit and immidietly assume that women are saying the truth are not the same. If he wants to say the former, then word it accordingly.

[Mantra]

His tweet implies that on 1 on 1 accusations, we should trust the women, because they are women.

Uh, no, his statement very clearly stated that he was referring to the FOUR women who came out against Roy Moore, so I'm not sure where you're getting this "1 on 1 accusations" thing from. There's nothing wrong with what that tweet. He's 100% right: all of those women who have spoken out against Roy Moore should be trusted.