Regarding the Bari Weiss hate, I think that everything you all mentioned is on point, but there's another obvious (to me) factor to it all that I'm surprised wasn't brought up: her obvious heresy.
Bari is (and has always been) trafficking in all sorts of ideas that are considered verboten by the progressive establishment, which is a big part of what got her hounded out of the NYT. The fact that her ostracization from that platform didn't erase her voice from the public discourse (or at least relegate it to obscure and niche subcultures, as is the goal of all such cancellations), and in fact, has only led to her popularity growing immensely, is an incredibly irritating thorn in the sides of all these elite voices.
And that fact that she's not just still out there, and succeeding, but clearly *winning over* many incredibly influential and prominent left-leaning figures, is just absolute torture for these lefty voices that want to minimize her impact. This is why they hate her so passionately. Because despite their best efforts, she continues to be so effective at promoting normie, non-uber-left-progressive positions, and undermining their agenda.
I feel like I’m from another planet when people start talking about some secret pool of hot men that women are having one-night stands with but declining to marry. In the world that I knew, people had one-night stands with the less hot, men (and women) with whom they did not want to be associated in public but with whom they had drunkenly fallen into bed.
Ditto friends with benefits. there’s almost always one person in the pair, who wants more more and one who doesn’t.
In my experience, one night stands and friends with benefits arrangements are often the result of women using sex to lure a higher value man than they might otherwise be able to attract, or put from the opposite perspective, men having lower standards for sex than for a relationship. I can't say I've seen it a ton in the opposite direction, but it might happen, particularly in the context of educated/professional women and non-educated/blue collar men.
depends on age, really. College age and immediate post college aged women these days appear more likely to sample "the really hot guy" as a one night stand so hypergamy reigns supreme with 10% (or less) of the men getting all of the action. Of course, the age old "got drunk and stumbled into bed with" pairing can still also occur.
The women are not “sampling” these hypothetical really hot guys for fun alone. They are sleeping with them and hoping it leads to something more. See Louise Perry et al.
Women do not have a category labeled “Hot Guys I would fuck but never marry”.
College grad women don't "sample" hot doctors. They try to marry hot doctors. If there's any "sampling" going on, my guess it that it would be hot construction workers or other men that they are attracted to but whom don't check certain boxes they have for a future husband.
These terms are almost always used facetiously by women and usually in reference to people like the Real Housewives. I have never heard any woman I know use such a term seriously about a man she is sleeping with.
My circle is well-traveled, and I certainly know of women as well as men who will have a casual sex partner in a particular city they travel to. Sometimes with a boyfriend or girlfriend at home, sometimes unknowingly.
And then there's this whole concept of a "hoe phase". I've certainly seen non-TV examples of that.
Nope. I have a millennial daughter. It sounds to me that you have credulously bought in to media trend stories and the world of “reality” TV.
Lots of young women also claim to like and do things they don’t actually do due to social pressure to seem cool. What percentage of women do you think want to be choked and enjoy anal sex?
yes, but most of the time, they don't have a handle at that time about the other categories they might seek in a future husband. Perhaps the guy being "too hot" and just being a "hound" might be quickly a disqualified, but the other things remain up for grabs. I guess point is, at the time of the quickie, the women aren't thinking about future husband, but fuck/adventure for the night? (which is of course how men approach it) but "generally speaking" I suspect they also already have a 6th sense at least in case of some guys.
Most women are not into quick adventures. And when they do have a quick adventure, it’s with a guy who was in the right place at the right time. They are not picking from some constantly available pool of fuckable-but-not-marriageable men.
That’s why this whole discourse makes so little sense to me.
I'm not sure how many 20 year old college girls circa 2024 are really thinking about marriage when it comes to their encounters with men. Clearly that was true when a woman then known as Barbara Pierce dropped out of Smith to marry the handsome Yalie George H.W. Bush.
Now I will say that these calculations are a little different when you get into professional and graduate school.
I suppose we could prove this either way by surveying 35-40 year old married female college graduates with the question: did you meet your current husband in college?
You seem to be overlooking a third way — that most young women in college are looking for a steady boyfriend who may or may not turn out to be their husband. And I can guarantee you that they are not turning away candidates for being too hot or sexy.
I don't see Bari Weiss as possessing any obviously unusual qualities. Indeed, when I listen to her, the only thing that gets me is how basic her views are, particularly as compared to the rest of the "heterodox" world. That's part of what makes "Bari Weiss Derangement Syndrome" so absurd. Who hates vanilla?
I think the reason for it is more about her Ivy League background and her perceived betrayal thereof than anything else. A lot of the most vicious cancellation campaigns come out of those few top universities. There have always been secret societies and elitism at these places, but the culty vibe has really taken off.
Clearly being gay (not LGBTQI+++) and being Jewish are factors that push one into the alternative media world as well, as there is a very high prevalence of both those factors individually and she is both.
I wish, I wish, I wish, that women could live in the brain of a normal man for a week. I wish the reverse as well but I think about that less often.
I am generally not a fan of the dating marketplace metaphor because it takes things way too far sometimes, but there are quite a few smaller and uncomfortable truths in the metaphor.
One of these uncomfortable truths is the fact that for many, many men the bar for “I’ll sleep with you” is dramatically lower than “I would potentially marry/date you”. Some women do understand this, a great many in my life did not. This was despite my explicit intention to not lead them on. It makes me think that if you sleep with a woman more than once, something in the back of her brain thinks that you’re in a relationship. Certainly not all women are wired this way, but enough for it to be very noticeable.
Once you understand this concept, the idea of not being “one night stand” material becomes a sincere compliment.
I am probably one of the few heterosexual men for whom there is no distinction between a woman I would have sex with and a woman I would marry, simply because my level of trust is so low that even if I ever meet one such woman I doubt there would ever be a second.
And yet, I do not understand why people (mostly women) continue to act as if there is no distinction between having one sexual encounter with someone and making a lifetime commitment.
I felt like my brain was broken when you girls talked about the viral Reddit thread! In *no* world do I see that compliment as offensive. I can usually sympathize with the male/female differences over things like this, but this one doesn’t even register.
Men want to feel manly -- virile, capable, strong, etc. Say something which bursts that self image, they're not going to like it. Same goes for women and their desires and self image. Naturally there are exceptions, and probably a good percentage of men who already feel relegated to beta status and will accept that sort of comment, and worse.
Not implying one should cater to a partner's self image. But if you're misaligned on your vision of each other, time to cut your losses and look elsewhere.
Marriage material = clearly better than hookup material. And if you care about making something last, you move carefully & slowly—you don't dive right in like you would if you expect not to care what happens next week.
My perspective here is probably skewed because I never had sex prior to marriage. So maybe I'm missing a radar for whatever "virile, capable, strong" qualities an ideal hookup mate would have. But when I think hookup, I think dispensable.
I agree. This whole discourse made no sense at all to me because it doesn’t deal in reality and the way actual men and women live. Everything about it rings false and fantastical. It’s like people were discussing the way they think others live.
As a guy, do you have a pool of hot, sexy women you use for casual sex? If not, why would you assume women can snap their fingers and be having casual sex with a hot, sexy guy, who they have no further interest in?
This discourse sounds like it originated on pornhub.
As it pertains to how the woman’s comment would make me feel if I were her BF, whether or not men or women have a pool of hot casual sex partners to choose from is irrelevant. Her comment would make me feel like she’s not all that sexually attracted to me, and that she’s dating me for other reasons. I want my partner to find me sexually attractive. I have no interest in being in a relationship with a woman who doesn’t.
It’s not that fantastical. She made an offhand comment while drinking and he decided to take it extremely seriously and throw a massive strop over it because he’s desperately insecure. It rings true enough, the only thing that’s weird is people taking his side.
Brene Brown’s first TED talk was compelling even if purely emotion based. Her latest offering on emotions was non coherent. I am also amazed by Bari Weiss. She’s definitely more warrior than worrier.
I definitely think that some women have viewed me as the latter (not hot but would settle down with later), which frankly was a terrible mindset for everyone involved.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Speaking only for myself, I am not a 20 year old angry incel. I'm over 50 and have two adult children that were conceived the old-fashioned way with my wife.
Are women more discerning than men about choosing to engage in sexual encounters? Of course that's true, as a general proposition.
But the general proposition does not mean that young women are precluded from making choices based on short-term gratification. What a woman wants at 19 is often drastically different than what she wants at 29.
I'm not making things up out of thin air, I'm relaying first-hand information from conversations I had with female peers, along with observing their behavior. Per Christine Emba and Louise Perry, whom you cited earlier, yes it's true that some college women are dissatisfied with the emotional emptiness of the "hook-up culture". Other women may be perfectly fine with that culture as it reflects the wants and desires of young, vibrant people.
It's just hard to believe that the vast majority of college women are thinking who is or isn't marriage material when dating/mating. (Mileage may vary for women attending Brigham Young U., Liberty U, Catholic U. and other mission-driven schools - whatever floats their boat.)
I never comment anymore because I never listen to the episodes in a timely manner, but I have to vent on this whole Reddit thread. The idea that women find men irresistibly attractive and want to rip their clothes off, like, ever, I don't care if it's Chris Hemsworth or whoever the flavor of the month is right now, is HILARIOUS. Women are not like that, and to the extent you ever hear a woman expressing such sentiments, it is false consciousness all the way down. I know this because I would have, at various times, claimed to have been physically attracted to a particular man of my acquaintance. The attraction was never purely physical, and generally what was happening is that my true motivation for seeking the man's attention allowed me to overlook whatever was not attractive about him.
I hate to break it to anyone who is unaware, but men are just not that attractive as a group. I am trying to think if I have ever been truly physically attracted to any man I have ever been with, particularly in a long term relationship, and I can't think of one. Women are the decorative sex, and hell, most of us aren't that great shakes either. Nonetheless, I am told that men experience very strong sexual attraction to women, to the point that the standards for putting their dick in one are pretty low, which has always been my experience and observation. For men to expect women to reciprocate this is to have bought into the specious feminist narrative that posits that men and women are the same except for the dangly bits. It just isn't true.
Personally I find it feminine and a turnoff for men to want to be desired by women the way women are desired by men. It is a subversion of male nature for a man to go to pieces over the knowledge that his partner does not salivate at the sight of him and want to suck his dick every day. Not only is it impossible for this to be the case, the insecurity reflected in the need for such is unmanly in the extreme. I can only assume that this is a male response to the volatility inherent in relationships these days, including marriage. When men felt secure in their marriages, there was no need to perseverate about their wives' level of sexual attraction for them. One of many unintended consequences of the sexual revolution.
Negging is the most misunderstood and abused concept in PUA. It's better thought of as teasing, or just treating a girl more like a friend or sibling you razz instead of a goddess on a pedestal. She should be laughing, not feeling insecure or self conscious.
Nick (former editor and current something-or-other at Reason magazine) Gillespie’s wife proposed to him! Got down on one knee and everything—and at friggin’ Burning Man, no less! Lol. She’s also a couple decades his junior, which I think might’ve been part of it: maybe she figured “he might never propose to me because he’s so much older” or something like that. Also, I can only speak for myself but I wouldn’t find that emasculating! I would be deeply moved, actually, as long as it was someone I would say “yes” to; what could be lovelier than someone saying “I love you so much I wanna spend my life with you”? I would think a guy who was “emasculated” by that was extremely insecure about his own masculinity or something, tbh.
Saying someone is "husband material" or "wife material" is cringe and not respectable in any way. It suggests that the person has sex with others who don't measure up, which is self-degrading. Obviously, people may sleep with those they wouldn't necessarily marry. However, if my husband told me I was "wife material" and not a "friends with benefits" type, I would find it sleazy and degrading to both me and the hookups. By the way, my husband has never "hooked up."
@sarahhaider I actually think there is such a thing as different distribution along the attractiveness curve for certain ethnicities. (from male heteronormative perspective) And it has nothing to do with with melanin or being "brown". For e.g. I would say the same thing about Greek girls (though I would need to travel to home country for better sample, but I've seen enough ethnic Greek girls in the US to make such a claim. I might make similar claim about South Asian women. Don't hate me. but I do have eyes. (and my own opinions). And I suspect that for many women it works the same way. Re the comment to the guy, this guy must be young and still trapped in the pride/proud mindset. The older the man gets, the less he cares why an attractive and especially younger/attractive woman is in his bed.
The relationship between race and sexual attractiveness is probably one of the most common things that men talk about on a private basis when women are not around.
race? or ethnicity? or both? race WAY too broad a category though yes, I am sure we all have our preferences based on certain physical characteristics which will be influenced by racial.ethnic makeup
My point is that for a woman who gets told something like "you're pretty for an [X]", whatever X is, and finds anything unusual about that does not understand the conversation that's going on behind closed doors.
Please elaborate! As a woman I have never heard this by definition so I am curious. What I have picked up on Reddit is that Asian women are considered the most feminine, and then white women. Black women are considered most unfeminine. And all of these are judged accordingly, more feminine = more attractive/valuable. Am I missing anything?
It is very common to hear some hierarchical, generalizing statement (Hispanic girls are better cooks than white girls, Korean girls are harder working, etc.). Most of this I would not characterize as being a somewhat icky race essentialism but not overtly racist, but I did used to hear some actually racist sentiments, usually directed at black women.
The vast superiority of the Asian American woman is a subject of wide agreement among men (and well reflected in actual research that’s been done in this area). In the modern lexicon, being less “woke” as a culture is worth a lot to men. I suspect that among East Asians in particular, the fact that there is this explicit yin-yang idea which embeds a notion of equality but complementarity (as opposed to the usual feminist BS about how women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle, regardless of who actually said it) is part of what is so appealing.
What I find fascinating is when particular ethnicities go in or out of vogue. Nobody tell Sarah this, but I remember it being spoken that Indian girls were ugly and smelled weird back in say my high school days and that no American could ever want one, and then there was these phase shift in the mid-2010’s and then the subcontinent became cool and having a hot Indian girlfriend became a status symbol. I’m not entirely sure; I think part of it is that the more culturally deranged American women became, the more men started looking for alternatives. There was a faddish obsession with Russian rent a brides for a while but Russia now has a certain ick factor attached to it (except for men who like Putin). There was a Filipina fad. And so on. And then some usually rich men will express their cultural superiority by talking about how great women are from some particular country no one else has ever thought about.
I find the whole discourse around race and sexual attraction very un-progressive and fetishistic and I try to think more universally, but clearly there is a there there. Part of the reason I describe things in this way is that there was this whole notion regarding the Trump “grab them by the pussy” fiasco where it was said that all men express such sentiments in private and I disagree. Men brag about how women will fall for them without coercion. Nobody brags about even borderline sexual assault. Nevertheless, other aspects of “locker room talk” are very un-PC and sometimes beyond my limits.
Thanks for the detailed response! As a formerly deranged American white woman, I agree that this group has been made less suited for long term relationships, although I’d say the same about American white men as a group. It’s sort of a tragic race to the bottom as trust has been destroyed and the volatility of these relationships has increased. I often say that American women as a group had a pretty good deal and threw it away with both hands. There have been so many negative externalities to “women’s lib” and while it feels risky to say so, it’s become so obvious to me that I can’t not.
ok I can buy that, but the fact that Sarah's wannabe Chad was White American influences that conversation. Not sure South Asian men have the same thought patterns (though I have my own opinions on for e.g. Indian vs Pakistani female beauty. I mean, just within India itself, as huge as it is, you have phenomenal genetic diversity, also driven by thousands of years of endogamy within their geographical area and caste. Razib Khan had amazing piece on this.
though the "you're really pretty for a ____ line" is uber lame. In my own Greek claim, for e.g. though I find the curve to shift left for e.g. the ones from the far right tails are not just "hot" but amazingly, unbelievably hot genetically blessed in every single way
I really think we need to discuss the lack of "first post equity".
Like, for those people that are quick on the draw, it might be appropriate to saw off their posting fingers in order to create more equitable outcomes in post speed.
My bad. I didn’t realize I had speedy fingers privilege. I realize I am part of the problem and I pledge to be a better ally and try and listen and learn from marginalized slow people moving forward.
As a good Foucauldian, I don’t think we can ever be free of power relations. But I can at least make you feel heard. Tell me, what’s it like to be slow?
John, thank you for sharing what it’s like to be you. I am enriched by this experience. I’ve never put myself in the shoes of a slow person before and you have done that for me. I am moved beyond words ❤️
Regarding the Bari Weiss hate, I think that everything you all mentioned is on point, but there's another obvious (to me) factor to it all that I'm surprised wasn't brought up: her obvious heresy.
Bari is (and has always been) trafficking in all sorts of ideas that are considered verboten by the progressive establishment, which is a big part of what got her hounded out of the NYT. The fact that her ostracization from that platform didn't erase her voice from the public discourse (or at least relegate it to obscure and niche subcultures, as is the goal of all such cancellations), and in fact, has only led to her popularity growing immensely, is an incredibly irritating thorn in the sides of all these elite voices.
And that fact that she's not just still out there, and succeeding, but clearly *winning over* many incredibly influential and prominent left-leaning figures, is just absolute torture for these lefty voices that want to minimize her impact. This is why they hate her so passionately. Because despite their best efforts, she continues to be so effective at promoting normie, non-uber-left-progressive positions, and undermining their agenda.
I feel like I’m from another planet when people start talking about some secret pool of hot men that women are having one-night stands with but declining to marry. In the world that I knew, people had one-night stands with the less hot, men (and women) with whom they did not want to be associated in public but with whom they had drunkenly fallen into bed.
Ditto friends with benefits. there’s almost always one person in the pair, who wants more more and one who doesn’t.
In my experience, one night stands and friends with benefits arrangements are often the result of women using sex to lure a higher value man than they might otherwise be able to attract, or put from the opposite perspective, men having lower standards for sex than for a relationship. I can't say I've seen it a ton in the opposite direction, but it might happen, particularly in the context of educated/professional women and non-educated/blue collar men.
depends on age, really. College age and immediate post college aged women these days appear more likely to sample "the really hot guy" as a one night stand so hypergamy reigns supreme with 10% (or less) of the men getting all of the action. Of course, the age old "got drunk and stumbled into bed with" pairing can still also occur.
The women are not “sampling” these hypothetical really hot guys for fun alone. They are sleeping with them and hoping it leads to something more. See Louise Perry et al.
Women do not have a category labeled “Hot Guys I would fuck but never marry”.
College grad women don't "sample" hot doctors. They try to marry hot doctors. If there's any "sampling" going on, my guess it that it would be hot construction workers or other men that they are attracted to but whom don't check certain boxes they have for a future husband.
Yes. And these would be guys that they met by chance, not guys in some big pool, who they could select for a dalliance on a whim.
disagree, particularly at college undergrad level. Yes in grad school the calculus begins to change
It's puzzling to me that you think that "fuckboys" and "boy toys" are not common terms among women. Or you think they don't really mean it.
These terms are almost always used facetiously by women and usually in reference to people like the Real Housewives. I have never heard any woman I know use such a term seriously about a man she is sleeping with.
i think those terms are far more common, and less facetiously used among women of your daughter's generation. Ask her
You are literally manspaining here, telling me what women think.
My circle is well-traveled, and I certainly know of women as well as men who will have a casual sex partner in a particular city they travel to. Sometimes with a boyfriend or girlfriend at home, sometimes unknowingly.
And then there's this whole concept of a "hoe phase". I've certainly seen non-TV examples of that.
Maybe this is one of those generational things.
Nope. I have a millennial daughter. It sounds to me that you have credulously bought in to media trend stories and the world of “reality” TV.
Lots of young women also claim to like and do things they don’t actually do due to social pressure to seem cool. What percentage of women do you think want to be choked and enjoy anal sex?
yes, but most of the time, they don't have a handle at that time about the other categories they might seek in a future husband. Perhaps the guy being "too hot" and just being a "hound" might be quickly a disqualified, but the other things remain up for grabs. I guess point is, at the time of the quickie, the women aren't thinking about future husband, but fuck/adventure for the night? (which is of course how men approach it) but "generally speaking" I suspect they also already have a 6th sense at least in case of some guys.
Most women are not into quick adventures. And when they do have a quick adventure, it’s with a guy who was in the right place at the right time. They are not picking from some constantly available pool of fuckable-but-not-marriageable men.
That’s why this whole discourse makes so little sense to me.
again I think this happens at collegiate undergrad level. Starts to change in grad school
I'm not sure how many 20 year old college girls circa 2024 are really thinking about marriage when it comes to their encounters with men. Clearly that was true when a woman then known as Barbara Pierce dropped out of Smith to marry the handsome Yalie George H.W. Bush.
Now I will say that these calculations are a little different when you get into professional and graduate school.
I suppose we could prove this either way by surveying 35-40 year old married female college graduates with the question: did you meet your current husband in college?
You seem to be overlooking a third way — that most young women in college are looking for a steady boyfriend who may or may not turn out to be their husband. And I can guarantee you that they are not turning away candidates for being too hot or sexy.
Point well taken. I knew several long term couples in college. Some still married.
that's entirely possible. Fair point. but plenty of who aren't particularly looking on a particular night but just feeling horny, adventurous, etc.
One exception is travel. Hookups at conferences and at vacation spots are fairly common.
“Bari Weiss is the nastiest skank b**ch I have ever met. Do not trust her, she is a fugly sl*t” — Facebook discourse by grown adults in 2024
I don't see Bari Weiss as possessing any obviously unusual qualities. Indeed, when I listen to her, the only thing that gets me is how basic her views are, particularly as compared to the rest of the "heterodox" world. That's part of what makes "Bari Weiss Derangement Syndrome" so absurd. Who hates vanilla?
I think the reason for it is more about her Ivy League background and her perceived betrayal thereof than anything else. A lot of the most vicious cancellation campaigns come out of those few top universities. There have always been secret societies and elitism at these places, but the culty vibe has really taken off.
Clearly being gay (not LGBTQI+++) and being Jewish are factors that push one into the alternative media world as well, as there is a very high prevalence of both those factors individually and she is both.
I think she’s fine but the comments on the Free Press posts are nuts. Lots of election deniers and other conspiracy theories.
True. I don’t find it very productive commenting in those threads.
I wish, I wish, I wish, that women could live in the brain of a normal man for a week. I wish the reverse as well but I think about that less often.
I am generally not a fan of the dating marketplace metaphor because it takes things way too far sometimes, but there are quite a few smaller and uncomfortable truths in the metaphor.
One of these uncomfortable truths is the fact that for many, many men the bar for “I’ll sleep with you” is dramatically lower than “I would potentially marry/date you”. Some women do understand this, a great many in my life did not. This was despite my explicit intention to not lead them on. It makes me think that if you sleep with a woman more than once, something in the back of her brain thinks that you’re in a relationship. Certainly not all women are wired this way, but enough for it to be very noticeable.
Once you understand this concept, the idea of not being “one night stand” material becomes a sincere compliment.
I am probably one of the few heterosexual men for whom there is no distinction between a woman I would have sex with and a woman I would marry, simply because my level of trust is so low that even if I ever meet one such woman I doubt there would ever be a second.
And yet, I do not understand why people (mostly women) continue to act as if there is no distinction between having one sexual encounter with someone and making a lifetime commitment.
I felt like my brain was broken when you girls talked about the viral Reddit thread! In *no* world do I see that compliment as offensive. I can usually sympathize with the male/female differences over things like this, but this one doesn’t even register.
Men want to feel manly -- virile, capable, strong, etc. Say something which bursts that self image, they're not going to like it. Same goes for women and their desires and self image. Naturally there are exceptions, and probably a good percentage of men who already feel relegated to beta status and will accept that sort of comment, and worse.
Not implying one should cater to a partner's self image. But if you're misaligned on your vision of each other, time to cut your losses and look elsewhere.
Marriage material = clearly better than hookup material. And if you care about making something last, you move carefully & slowly—you don't dive right in like you would if you expect not to care what happens next week.
My perspective here is probably skewed because I never had sex prior to marriage. So maybe I'm missing a radar for whatever "virile, capable, strong" qualities an ideal hookup mate would have. But when I think hookup, I think dispensable.
I agree. This whole discourse made no sense at all to me because it doesn’t deal in reality and the way actual men and women live. Everything about it rings false and fantastical. It’s like people were discussing the way they think others live.
As a guy, I can’t think of anything that would insult me more.
As a guy, do you have a pool of hot, sexy women you use for casual sex? If not, why would you assume women can snap their fingers and be having casual sex with a hot, sexy guy, who they have no further interest in?
This discourse sounds like it originated on pornhub.
As it pertains to how the woman’s comment would make me feel if I were her BF, whether or not men or women have a pool of hot casual sex partners to choose from is irrelevant. Her comment would make me feel like she’s not all that sexually attracted to me, and that she’s dating me for other reasons. I want my partner to find me sexually attractive. I have no interest in being in a relationship with a woman who doesn’t.
It’s not that fantastical. She made an offhand comment while drinking and he decided to take it extremely seriously and throw a massive strop over it because he’s desperately insecure. It rings true enough, the only thing that’s weird is people taking his side.
Brene Brown’s first TED talk was compelling even if purely emotion based. Her latest offering on emotions was non coherent. I am also amazed by Bari Weiss. She’s definitely more warrior than worrier.
I'm retroactively embarrassed by how taken I was with Brene Brown's first Ted Talk
I remember some women in college compartmentalizing men. There was "I'm 20 years old and this hot guy looks like a lot of fun for right now".
Then there was another group of [more nerdy?] men in the "I'm not interested now but maybe in 10 years when I'm ready to settle down".
As BB notes below, the sexual marketplace was indeed very skewed, with about 25-30% of the men having 75 -80% of the sex.
(This was 33 years ago, I have no clue if things have changed for college kids.)
I definitely think that some women have viewed me as the latter (not hot but would settle down with later), which frankly was a terrible mindset for everyone involved.
You and BB are guys, and it shows.
yes thank you. I like being a guy. That's why I am speaking from a guy perspective :)
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Speaking only for myself, I am not a 20 year old angry incel. I'm over 50 and have two adult children that were conceived the old-fashioned way with my wife.
Are women more discerning than men about choosing to engage in sexual encounters? Of course that's true, as a general proposition.
But the general proposition does not mean that young women are precluded from making choices based on short-term gratification. What a woman wants at 19 is often drastically different than what she wants at 29.
I'm not making things up out of thin air, I'm relaying first-hand information from conversations I had with female peers, along with observing their behavior. Per Christine Emba and Louise Perry, whom you cited earlier, yes it's true that some college women are dissatisfied with the emotional emptiness of the "hook-up culture". Other women may be perfectly fine with that culture as it reflects the wants and desires of young, vibrant people.
It's just hard to believe that the vast majority of college women are thinking who is or isn't marriage material when dating/mating. (Mileage may vary for women attending Brigham Young U., Liberty U, Catholic U. and other mission-driven schools - whatever floats their boat.)
Particularly when you consider:
A) The general attitude against having children expressed by women in this age bracket, and
B) The lack of knowledge about fertility and relationships from those who are interested.
I mean, is being male something to be hidden?
Not at all.
I never comment anymore because I never listen to the episodes in a timely manner, but I have to vent on this whole Reddit thread. The idea that women find men irresistibly attractive and want to rip their clothes off, like, ever, I don't care if it's Chris Hemsworth or whoever the flavor of the month is right now, is HILARIOUS. Women are not like that, and to the extent you ever hear a woman expressing such sentiments, it is false consciousness all the way down. I know this because I would have, at various times, claimed to have been physically attracted to a particular man of my acquaintance. The attraction was never purely physical, and generally what was happening is that my true motivation for seeking the man's attention allowed me to overlook whatever was not attractive about him.
I hate to break it to anyone who is unaware, but men are just not that attractive as a group. I am trying to think if I have ever been truly physically attracted to any man I have ever been with, particularly in a long term relationship, and I can't think of one. Women are the decorative sex, and hell, most of us aren't that great shakes either. Nonetheless, I am told that men experience very strong sexual attraction to women, to the point that the standards for putting their dick in one are pretty low, which has always been my experience and observation. For men to expect women to reciprocate this is to have bought into the specious feminist narrative that posits that men and women are the same except for the dangly bits. It just isn't true.
Personally I find it feminine and a turnoff for men to want to be desired by women the way women are desired by men. It is a subversion of male nature for a man to go to pieces over the knowledge that his partner does not salivate at the sight of him and want to suck his dick every day. Not only is it impossible for this to be the case, the insecurity reflected in the need for such is unmanly in the extreme. I can only assume that this is a male response to the volatility inherent in relationships these days, including marriage. When men felt secure in their marriages, there was no need to perseverate about their wives' level of sexual attraction for them. One of many unintended consequences of the sexual revolution.
Negging is the most misunderstood and abused concept in PUA. It's better thought of as teasing, or just treating a girl more like a friend or sibling you razz instead of a goddess on a pedestal. She should be laughing, not feeling insecure or self conscious.
dating sucks :) yes
Nick (former editor and current something-or-other at Reason magazine) Gillespie’s wife proposed to him! Got down on one knee and everything—and at friggin’ Burning Man, no less! Lol. She’s also a couple decades his junior, which I think might’ve been part of it: maybe she figured “he might never propose to me because he’s so much older” or something like that. Also, I can only speak for myself but I wouldn’t find that emasculating! I would be deeply moved, actually, as long as it was someone I would say “yes” to; what could be lovelier than someone saying “I love you so much I wanna spend my life with you”? I would think a guy who was “emasculated” by that was extremely insecure about his own masculinity or something, tbh.
Saying someone is "husband material" or "wife material" is cringe and not respectable in any way. It suggests that the person has sex with others who don't measure up, which is self-degrading. Obviously, people may sleep with those they wouldn't necessarily marry. However, if my husband told me I was "wife material" and not a "friends with benefits" type, I would find it sleazy and degrading to both me and the hookups. By the way, my husband has never "hooked up."
@sarahhaider I actually think there is such a thing as different distribution along the attractiveness curve for certain ethnicities. (from male heteronormative perspective) And it has nothing to do with with melanin or being "brown". For e.g. I would say the same thing about Greek girls (though I would need to travel to home country for better sample, but I've seen enough ethnic Greek girls in the US to make such a claim. I might make similar claim about South Asian women. Don't hate me. but I do have eyes. (and my own opinions). And I suspect that for many women it works the same way. Re the comment to the guy, this guy must be young and still trapped in the pride/proud mindset. The older the man gets, the less he cares why an attractive and especially younger/attractive woman is in his bed.
The relationship between race and sexual attractiveness is probably one of the most common things that men talk about on a private basis when women are not around.
race? or ethnicity? or both? race WAY too broad a category though yes, I am sure we all have our preferences based on certain physical characteristics which will be influenced by racial.ethnic makeup
Both, I suppose.
My point is that for a woman who gets told something like "you're pretty for an [X]", whatever X is, and finds anything unusual about that does not understand the conversation that's going on behind closed doors.
Please elaborate! As a woman I have never heard this by definition so I am curious. What I have picked up on Reddit is that Asian women are considered the most feminine, and then white women. Black women are considered most unfeminine. And all of these are judged accordingly, more feminine = more attractive/valuable. Am I missing anything?
It is very common to hear some hierarchical, generalizing statement (Hispanic girls are better cooks than white girls, Korean girls are harder working, etc.). Most of this I would not characterize as being a somewhat icky race essentialism but not overtly racist, but I did used to hear some actually racist sentiments, usually directed at black women.
The vast superiority of the Asian American woman is a subject of wide agreement among men (and well reflected in actual research that’s been done in this area). In the modern lexicon, being less “woke” as a culture is worth a lot to men. I suspect that among East Asians in particular, the fact that there is this explicit yin-yang idea which embeds a notion of equality but complementarity (as opposed to the usual feminist BS about how women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle, regardless of who actually said it) is part of what is so appealing.
What I find fascinating is when particular ethnicities go in or out of vogue. Nobody tell Sarah this, but I remember it being spoken that Indian girls were ugly and smelled weird back in say my high school days and that no American could ever want one, and then there was these phase shift in the mid-2010’s and then the subcontinent became cool and having a hot Indian girlfriend became a status symbol. I’m not entirely sure; I think part of it is that the more culturally deranged American women became, the more men started looking for alternatives. There was a faddish obsession with Russian rent a brides for a while but Russia now has a certain ick factor attached to it (except for men who like Putin). There was a Filipina fad. And so on. And then some usually rich men will express their cultural superiority by talking about how great women are from some particular country no one else has ever thought about.
I find the whole discourse around race and sexual attraction very un-progressive and fetishistic and I try to think more universally, but clearly there is a there there. Part of the reason I describe things in this way is that there was this whole notion regarding the Trump “grab them by the pussy” fiasco where it was said that all men express such sentiments in private and I disagree. Men brag about how women will fall for them without coercion. Nobody brags about even borderline sexual assault. Nevertheless, other aspects of “locker room talk” are very un-PC and sometimes beyond my limits.
Thanks for the detailed response! As a formerly deranged American white woman, I agree that this group has been made less suited for long term relationships, although I’d say the same about American white men as a group. It’s sort of a tragic race to the bottom as trust has been destroyed and the volatility of these relationships has increased. I often say that American women as a group had a pretty good deal and threw it away with both hands. There have been so many negative externalities to “women’s lib” and while it feels risky to say so, it’s become so obvious to me that I can’t not.
ok I can buy that, but the fact that Sarah's wannabe Chad was White American influences that conversation. Not sure South Asian men have the same thought patterns (though I have my own opinions on for e.g. Indian vs Pakistani female beauty. I mean, just within India itself, as huge as it is, you have phenomenal genetic diversity, also driven by thousands of years of endogamy within their geographical area and caste. Razib Khan had amazing piece on this.
though the "you're really pretty for a ____ line" is uber lame. In my own Greek claim, for e.g. though I find the curve to shift left for e.g. the ones from the far right tails are not just "hot" but amazingly, unbelievably hot genetically blessed in every single way
I don’t think anyone knows exactly what they’re doing, Bari Weiss or otherwise
Oh, I know what I'm doing. I'm just not at liberty to say. Please respect my privacy at this sensitive time.
First
I really think we need to discuss the lack of "first post equity".
Like, for those people that are quick on the draw, it might be appropriate to saw off their posting fingers in order to create more equitable outcomes in post speed.
My bad. I didn’t realize I had speedy fingers privilege. I realize I am part of the problem and I pledge to be a better ally and try and listen and learn from marginalized slow people moving forward.
In an equitable world, no one would ever be first.
As a good Foucauldian, I don’t think we can ever be free of power relations. But I can at least make you feel heard. Tell me, what’s it like to be slow?
Being differently fast is an experience full of joy.
John, thank you for sharing what it’s like to be you. I am enriched by this experience. I’ve never put myself in the shoes of a slow person before and you have done that for me. I am moved beyond words ❤️