I'm not the guys, but don't you think it comes down to sort of the same thing that came up in terms of under/over-estimating the prevalence of child abuse? If you haven't run into it personally, it seems really implausible that there's much out there being concealed; if you have, you figure it's likely that any family is hiding the same kind of secrets. Either way, you're probably guessing wrong -- too high, or too low.
Same sort of thing with the men you know: you started out with your father, and stepfather, and that asshole photography teacher. And you seem to have known an awful lot of screwy, dangerous men after that. Which is going to leave you extrapolating from the men you've known well enough to know how fucked up they are, to the men where you wouldn't know one way or the other, so you assume they are.
I've had a different set of experiences -- men I've gotten close enough to that I'd know if they had nasty secrets don't, mostly (and the exceptions aren't all that nasty). The worst thing anyone's ever done to me, or a family member of mine, is cause hurt feelings. So I know dangerous, fucked up men exist, and I've heard enough second-hand experiences that I believe it, but it's not something I viscerally feel; when I meet a man, my working assumption is that the worst things about him are on a level with my father, or Buck, or all my male friends, and that scary violent men are some other species off someplace else.
And I'm not right about all the men I make this assumption, about, of course; it's just where I get to extrapolating from the men I've known best. But the alternative assumption that you're making, even though your reasons are just as good as mine, isn't any more globally reliable: there are men out there you've presumed are scary and untrustworthy, who are just as good guys underneath it all as Husband X.
No, you're right. We men all pretty much suck.
In fairness to my gender, I will say that women are pretty awful, too. Sure, misandry is more justified than misogyny, but both are crucial components of a healthy, objective misanthropy.
I do think men are a bit terrible. Not as terrible generally as alameida's experiences would lead one to conclude, but still it's justified to be a bit wary and careful of them. Not necessarily always because of violence, but so many more have non-trivial problems with booze, drugs, gambling, or are serial cheaters, pathological liars, have posters of Megan Fox on their wall and no ambitions beyond their X-box, etc.
I suspect at least half of men are completely unacceptable human beings from the get-go.
I would divide up the world of men this way:
1. Men with whom your children under the age of 15 are safe from sexual advances: 95 percent.
2. Men who would turn down an opportunity to have sex when both of you are drunk and there is little opportunity for getting caught: 25 percent.
Men and women who never make a mistake (like 5.2) over an entire lifetime?
Sex is always fraught with disaster. The power dynamics are dangerous and funky.
When I separated from my ex-wife after being married for 9 years, I was surprised at how many of the women I slept with/dated wanted hair pulling or spanking. Really?!? You want your hair pulled?
I have never asked any of my cousins to have sex despite having hot cousins.
6: I think you've got to break down the category of mistake there. Never did anything sexual that turned out to have been a poor idea is going to be way less than 25%, I'd guess; exactly what Will's talking about I'm not quite sure of.
8: I guess some people simply will not let life or death stand in the way of this sublime dangerous and funky love that they crave.
women do often suck. they can be vicious in a soul-destroying way. I guess I just don't hear as much about them beating the shit out of someone because they drank too much old crow. child abuse statistics show plenty of women abusers (vastly outnumbered by their penis-having counterparts naturally). I don't happen know as many victims, is all. perhaps I would feel differently. my mercenary friend is one of the few; it certainly fucked him right up. but see, this is a good example: I got fucked in the head and became suicidal, even wanted to take my kids with me. he got fucked in the head and what, became suicidal, and wanted to take his whole family with him, but also fucking actually kills people. there's an imbalance there, is what I'm saying. not that it's fair to make him the representative of every guy ever.
but like stalkers, how many men do you know who have had people stalk them? (what's that, your gay friend was stalked by another dude? you amaze me.) how many women you know have had people stalk them? (ooh, me! me!) I had to have male friends walk me back from the library every fucking night I worked after dark because of this stupid fucking stalker for like 8 months. in the winter it gets dark at 4 or some shit! I didn't want to invite the cops into my life and it was hard to say what he was doing that was against the law besides following me around all the time and being el creepo-supremo. the problem was eventually solved by another sketchy friend who had a crush on me beating the stalker up badly and then expecting me to swoon into his arms afterwards. god, I had totally forgotten about that guy.
10:
The percentage of your friends/colleagues who would turn your offer for sex down. Ok, that percentage is too high.
Maybe the better question is what percentage of your male friends will not try to have sex with you?
the answer is there's something really wrong with me that attracts bad people because I'm broken, isn't it.
14:
When you were using, you were around a wild crowd. Now, you are in AA. Same crowd...just trying to not be the same crowd.
Your population sample is skewed.
I think it's easy to get into habits and patterns that are bad for you. Doesn't mean that there's something wrong with you.
you are an optimist.
Maybe. But not by much. A couple lawyers in our firm handle lots of sexually violent predator cases(civil commitments), more handle criminal cases involving sex abuse/child porn, and I handle custody cases/divorce cases where those allegations come up.
I am not overly trusting about people. Anyone can be a child molester. They look normal.
12 -- Right, but the fact that the overwhelming number of stalkers are guys doesn't get you to the overwhelming number of guys are stalkers.
I did a lot of library-walking-home when I lived in Berkeley. Haven't lived anywhere shitty enough for that to be routinely required since then.
I will add that this topic scares the crap out of me due to my daughter's inability to articulate abuse and the fact that her population is often targeted.
So, it kind of freaks me out a little. But, I take the precautions that I can take, and hope for the best. Not much more to do than that.
I guess I just don't hear as much about them beating the shit out of someone because they drank too much old crow.
A surprising number of women would totally do it but just lack the physical ability. That's why they have to get creative and bite them in the thigh and stuff.
16: I'm not sure that going to the berkeley classics library all the time can really be described as running with the wild people per se.
gswift: bring the knowledge. but: guns. the great leveler, right? women could be shooting people right and left, they don't have to bite people.
When you were using, you were around a wild crowd. Now, you are in AA. Same crowd...just trying to not be the same crowd.
will: while it's true that I started drinking when I was a child, I strongly object to this characterization of the problem and suggest you think a little harder about what you just said.
women could be shooting people right and left, they don't have to bite people.
If women don't learn to aim for the center, they'd better stick to biting people.
23:
I wasnt attempt to imply that any of the abuse was your fault at all. I was not referencing you using as a child. I am not sure I was even aware of that.
I was referring to adult activities and the population of people staying up all night. It still doesnt make it your fault.
It is NOT because something is wrong with you. That was the point of my inarticulate comment.
Al, this isn't a nice answer, but people who are predatory can often tell who's been prey before. It's not that you're broken (or I'm broken) but it's also not surprising that both of us have stories that have followed a common trajectory. Being raped once ups your odds of being raped again, and there are many things that play into that. I know in my case, I got into bad situations because I would rather say nothing and have something I didn't want happen than say no again and have it not matter. etc. I hope it doesn't sound horrible to say this, but I'm not coming up with better words.
22 -- Well, was the stalker a complete stranger or someone who knew you in some connection?
Oh, hell, what I said did sound like "You're just broken, is why." That's not what I meant; more, you see what you know to look for. Based on the experiences you've had, largely as a kid when you weren't choosing them, you've got a sense of what men are like that makes it easy for you to see confirming evidence.
There's some choice going on -- I would probably, if I met your DangerFriend, never learn how actually scary he was because I'd be too nervous to talk to him much. But that kind of reaction, being interested in scary people, doesn't make you broken.
Guns are a great leveler but I think that's a different mindset. Generally the goal seems to be getting in a fight rather than kill someone.
26: A high school gf was molested by three unrelated men in three incidents in her early adolescence. She took this as irrefutable evidence that was asking for it somehow, or that she was somehow flawed. She's been in therapy for it and has gotten better, but sometimes I think she still believes it on some level, and maybe always will.
I also don't mean this to be assholery. It's completely awful that people you know, who should recognize and abide by their obligation to protect not threaten you, so often fell short.
22: he knew me because he was a failed graduate student who still hung around the campus all the time and developed a weird obsession with me. it's true that I talked to him sometimes in the area with the sofas in front of the library proper. I really don't think you can hang this one on me, and I don't know that it can possibly spring from the kindest impulse to try and explain every story of mine that way.
32 -- Well I definitely think there's something wrong with Berkeley. Which would be the first place I'd go for explanation of something like that, rather than the crowd you've run with at different times.
This is usually the sort of thing you write intending to end a thread, not start one.
he knew me because he was a failed graduate student who still hung around the campus all the time and developed a weird obsession with me
Guys are totally fucked in the head in this way in far greater numbers. I mean, comb through the "missed connections" on Craigslist sometime. This kind of thing you just don't see from the ladies near as often.
http://saltlakecity.craigslist.org/mis/2657349025.html
I would probably, if I met your DangerFriend, never learn how actually scary he was because I'd be too nervous to talk to him much
This comment combined with 32 strikes a cord with me. Kind of the "no good deed goes unpunished."
When you are willing to show kindness, compassion, and interest to those people who do not receive those things from other people because they are "weird" or "odd," then it isnt surprising to me that they obsess over you.
Others shun them.
Look, people extrapolate from their experiences. It's hardly surprising, and probably somewhat healthy, to have a very narrow circle of trust after what happened to you.
I don't think anyone is walking around with an accurate assessment of the risk posed to them or their loved ones by any given stranger. It's probably better, on average, to be a little too suspicious than a little too trusting. So, no, we don't all suck, but you're still not crazy to feel the way you do.
Oh, and: no one can be trusted to do the right thing all the time.
Will, I can't tell if this is just tone deafness or what, but, man do your comments still sound like victim-blaming.
If you're an extremely good-looking woman and give the time of day to a guy, there are a lot of them who'll convince themselves there's something more there that they owe it to themselves, dammit, to pursue. I can't imagine what a pain in the ass that must be. In conclusion, (a lot of) men suck.
The Patriarchy is largely to blame for the "niceness" of women and the assholery of men. Back on the veldt it was equal-opportunity tooth-and-claw who the fuck knows.
As you would expect, I tend to think physicality is way over-emphasized, and would rather have a broken arm than ten years of soul destruction.
"Don't touch me"
"Shut up."
About sums up human relations.
I actually don't like to think about this stuff much, and definitely avoid talking about it.
why am I doing this to myself? thoughtful unfogged commenters write me all the time and say, maybe you should just stop posting things like this since you know it's going to make you miserable? I don't take advice well. I just thought maybe I should feed the blog and that it was funny to only have two names on this whole long empty list. thorn is right also; people who are abusive are good at figuring out who's going to "keep their fucking mouth shut." it's possible that "school me on how I'm just crazy on his one" was not the most positive suggestion as to how the discussion should go.
to take a different tack, a surprising (to me) number of guys who take frequent business trips away from their narnia-based homes are screwing some other chick every single time they leave town. sure, the people who end up in AA are fuckups, but they're also unusually honest in sharing things about themselves that people ordinarily lie about. I honestly do think the rate of cheating in this particular situation, in which "bar girls" of some nebulous sort are more or less provided by the asian company doing the entertaining, is extraordinarily high. shall I blame the patriarchy? that is, when women traveling on business trips are being plied with abercrombie and fitch models by their japanese IT sales hostesses it'll all look different?
it just can't be right as an adult to go around dividing the world in half and saying half are prone to violence, deeply fucked up about sex
Of course it isn't right. The percentage of people who are deeply fucked up about sex is way higher than 50%.
I don't agree with the choice of specific situations and numbers, but I think there's a lot of wisdom in 5.
Almost everyone does something pretty sketchy at some point in their life (dating a cousin, sleeping with a married person, breaking n/2+7, etc.), and almost everyone hurts someone really badly at least once in their life. Nonetheless, for the 95% those behaviors are rare and not indications that the person's a moral monster. I'm pretty sure that the episode that was the worst someone has ever hurt me (which in the context of this thread is not very badly) is probably the worst she's likely to treat anyone, rather than indication that she's actually worse than most people.
If you have lots of interaction with the 5%, like you have, I think it makes sense that it'd be hard to truly trust people because the 95% still occasionally do really shitty things.
Wait so, having read only the OP, am I gathering correctly that the metric of trustworthiness here is whether we'd try to have sex with you if we were on drugs? I am pretty confident in saying you can trust me fully. Nothing pers, you know, Kinsey 5.9998 and all.
(Otherwise I think I'm not stepping up for the role of gender-wide spokesmodel. It feels a little which-of-you-shall-we-say-doth-rape-us-least?)
41.2 is very definitely Narnia-specific. Or at least specific to Narnia and the surrounding countries (Archenland, Calormene, the Lantern Wastes, I think this metaphor is now overstretched).
45: no. not me. that other vulnerable person who happened to be there, and who you did have the hots for. but that's not the only kind of mistake there is to make in the world! I only mentioned it about my cousin because normally you'd think you could get a few more family members on the list, plus it's just kind of funny.
For what it's worth, if anything, you have two more guys on your list than I do if the metric is "guys I trust enough to speak really openly about painful things." I don't know that the list gets that much longer by adding women. Do other people really trust more freely than that? My current barely formed theory is that wanting that kind of trust is really the gateway to disaster. YMMV, etc.
Look. I have always hated being touched, and never touch, with an exception for sex. The process leading to sex is/was complicated, leave that aside. But it was rare, because the steps leading to intimacy are really hard for me. Not that rare. Whatever, anyway. I loathe being touched.
Now. Guess which gender is the biggest offenders in uninvited aggressive touching, especially as acquaintance approached relationship. Y'all might not see the demanded hug as gendered aggression, but I do.
No, it's not rape. But it is so socialized, so permissable, so fucking approved that my feelings felt insane. Literally insane.
So I guess I still relate to the young boy who tries to squirm out of auntie's embrace, while everyone in the room is laughing at the cuteness.
43: 34: what is?
My interpretation of ned's 34 is that pertains to starting with comity and good will rather than ending a thread with it.
I'm making myself miserable like this instead of doing my fucking psych homework, can anyone imagine why? I was in such a good mood before too. it's almost like part of me is just fucking with the other part. why don't I just print 14 out and put it on the mirror, it'll save time.
people who are abusive are good at figuring out who's going to "keep their fucking mouth shut."
I wonder if this isn't just survivor bias. Maybe people who are abusive are no better at figuring out who's going to "keep their fucking mouth shut" than anyone else is, but people who are abusive and not in jail are good at it.
This may speak to my abstemious habits godawful priggishness more than my pine-scented-color-safe-bleached morals, but I have never been much conflicted about declining opportunities with drunk women.
As for the predictable, unrelieved wretchedness of men, yeah, pretty much.
On the other hand, I read in Harper's the other day the statement of secular faith that most people, most of the time, are doing the best that they can, and the genuine sociopaths are fewer and farther between than their horrifying wakes of wreckage and misery suggest, which seems like a reasonable position to take.
I don't really want to talk about this, I don't think, but the whole "Oh, you're decent-looking and polite to people and so OF COURSE they're going to fall head-over-heels and stalk you" thing really creeps me out and yet I don't know how to respond.
It was worse when I was younger and more polite/friendly/whatever in part because I had a strong ethical framework that included treating people decently and politely for as long as possible, but if it just happens and happens and happens you have to realize at some point that you just can't have straight guys as friends unless you want the pseudorelationship or worse. I avoided believing that because it's a horrible stereotype, but in practice it's where I ended up anyway because I was so worn out by it all. I do have straight men as friends, but I definitely like having the filter of the internet there or else have their wives around too. It would be fun to be able to flirt for the sake of flirting sometimes, but it's just too much work to deal with the aftermath.
I know of at least one female stalker. Of course you are right that the majority of this behavior is from men. It seems like a pretty simple LSAT-style logic point solves the whole issue: men are overrepresented among people who are child abusers, rapists, etc,, but most men are not child abusers, rapists, etc. Isn't that the whole point?
There's also a whole world of sketchy but not exactly evil sexual behavior -- cheating, sleeping with married people, etc. There, I'm not even sure the majority of offenders are men, but even if they are it seems like we're talking about pretty different things. Women can be really really fucked up about sex and relationships as well.
It seems like a pretty simple LSAT-style logic point solves the whole issue: men are overrepresented among people who are child abusers, rapists, etc,, but most men are not child abusers, rapists, etc.
Bayes' Rule has a wider reach than just the LSAT, law-talkin' guy.
I have always hated being touched, and never touch
Humans are primates. Primate societies are held together by social grooming.
Y'all might not see the demanded hug as gendered aggression, but [...] I still relate to the young boy who tries to squirm out of auntie's embrace
Um.
a pretty simple LSAT-style logic point
To the extent I haven't blocked that section of the LSAT out completely, I'm fairly certain I would not describe it as simple. Or maybe that was your subtle way of saying, "This stuff is hard for most people to parse!"
As I've said before, I feel the same way as the OP most of the time. Straight cis-men are often really screwed up in this way that only makes sense when you think about how patriarchy works and has worked for such a long time. I don't really like being around them much, especially not in those homogenous groupings where the really fucked up shit starts coming out of their mouths. It's creepy and gross. And I'm not sure that I'm so much better.
Most recent moral failure: As you may remember, the radical scene here in Mpls. is working on the defense of an African-American transgender woman who was attacked by some racist, transphobic people, one of whom wound up stabbed. This happened essentially in my neighborhood, blocks from where I work, a mile or so from where I live. So the other day I'm walking down Lake St., by the Little Caesar's, and there's a young, African-American trans (as far as I could tell) person who's got the unenviable job of standing there with the stupid sign, waving it at passing cars. (At least they were not forced to wear the costume I guess.) And there's an African-American man of about my age, dressed like someone in the building trades, getting all up in their face. Nothing physically violent, but kinda getting in their way and not backing off until the last second. I wanted to go over and observe, but I was worried about escalating things, and from a snippet or two I heard, it sounded like maybe the older guy was actually trying to tell the younger person that they should get a better job because this one was demeaning. Which, sure, but who can find better jobs these days?
So I did nothing.
In general it's a good idea to be cautious about trusting:
1. People from dysfunctional families or childhood situations, especially those who have been victimized in some way;
2. People from reasonably or highly-functional families and backgrounds who may be yearning to try something taboo; and
3. Addicts.
The first and third categories overlap heavily, and someone who has belonged to both will know a lot of people who've belonged to both, and often seen them at their worst and lowest. But include category 2 -- and one should -- and the set of people one ought practically to be cautious about trusting runs roughly to "everyone." Which sounds about right.
This is not a facile observation that "people suck," because people do not suck. They just sometimes do things that suck*. There are a ton of beautiful, wonderful and interesting people who wind up in category 1, for instance, who go on to do amazing things and be generally amazing. This does not mean they will not have occasion to do genuinely shitty things along the way, too, in the categories of venial or even mortal sin. Let he among you who is without cast the first... & c.
(* Get habituated to doing enough things that suck, and granted it gets hard to avoid being labeled a person that sucks. I've seen some of the best minds of my generation destroyed by crack cocaine, leaving death threats on their exes' answering machines and ominous holes in the walls of their apartments, and it didn't have to be that way. When it happens enough times you eventually, just practically, have to write the offender off as someone who wasted their potential. But these cases of Deep Shittiness are outliers... and even they aren't completely lost to humanity, they just wind up with several lifetimes' worth of amends to make and a lot less chance of pulling out of the downward spiral before they die.)
57: it's sort of too bad I spent all that time studying formal logic and didn't notice this.
There are a ton of beautiful, wonderful and interesting people who wind up in category 1
s/b
There are a ton of beautiful, wonderful and interesting people who wind up in category 3
60-- oh, I just meant as an intellectual problem, obviously your psychological mechanisms of relating to the world are going to be based on generalizations from your experience, and the most extreme experience will leave the biggest impression. If I had A's life I'd probably be loaded up with guns in a fortress on top of chicks-only mountain.
I don't really want to talk about this, I don't think, but the whole "Oh, you're decent-looking and polite to people and so OF COURSE they're going to fall head-over-heels and stalk you" thing really creeps me out and yet I don't know how to respond.
It's weird. I don't think of myself as having come to how I interact people out of fear -- it's just how I've always been -- but I am really guarded with people generally, which has probably led to many, many fewer bad experiences, but also just a lot less open interaction with people.
I've got a good friend who could have written something very much like 56, and very much like the original post, and a lot of her bad experiences come from what looks to me like being a good person; being warm, and open, and caring with people on somewhat slight acquaintance. It completely sucks that that sort of behavior gets punished.
If you want to have better men, you have to believe men can be better. This is why sex educators who work on sexual violence target their message to men.
I hope that as a parent of a boy I can contribute to this effort, and teach him to recognize and avoid the behaviors, blindnesses and attitudes that hurt women. I do not think it will be easy, and thinking about it often makes me unbelievably sad. But we have to believe we can be better, otherwise we are sure to be worse.
Primate societies are held together by social grooming.
Social grooming and the iron fist of the alpha male.
Primate societies are held together by social grooming.
What is "socialization" anyways?
It is the acceptance, even enjoyment, of hierarchies and rituals of domination as natural and unobjectionable.
And we learn it in the cradle.
67: It's funny -- I just don't look at Newt and worry about him ever hurting anyone. He's not perfect by a long shot, but there's nothing about him that makes me think that there's something specific I have to teach him about or warn him against so that he doesn't hurt women when he grows up. I hope I'm not being blind here, it is something I do think about.
When will today's leaders take notice and require wire mommies?
I hope I'm not being blind here
It still, per Rev. Bayes, seems doubtful.
It completely sucks that that sort of behavior gets punished.
Yeah, for a long time I kept my rigid morality and went with some paraphrase of the "Why should I have to change my name when he's the one who sucks?" thinking, that just as I don't stop using my turn signal because that's what all the other assholes are doing, I shouldn't stop being civil and treating others with respect and whatnot just because I'm the one who gets used as a doormat. I still don't know the answer from a moral perspective, but I've just gone back into my cave and decided what things I'll do and what I won't.
Lee has never been particularly hurt by anyone (outside the standard heartbreak context) but hates men as a class much more than I do. On the other hand, almost all her close friends are straight men and when she's meeting new acquaintances, she's drawn to what I consider frat guy/bro-ish losers. Maybe it's the shared taste in shitty beer? I don't know, but I won't participate and she's dropped some of her prior friends because of that. (And again I get the moral conflict thing here. But they do suck!)
I do like the idea of McManus raising a generation of art-cinema devotees without human contact from a locked control room in a an orphanage made up of featureless white rooms with food dispensers.
I think the "ha ha yes men are awful" elements of this discussion are undermining the fact that seriously bad stuff happened to alameida, which is not normal and was not just the way the world works. It's not that she's broken and attracts bad people, it's just that she's been through terrible, terrible things and has, as a result, developed a strong presumption against trusting men.
I have complicated feelings about the question of how many men think that whenever a pretty girl smiles at them it means she wants them, but don't have time to go into that right now. For now, I'd just like to add your cousin trying to sleep with you to the list of stuff that is way fucked up. Even if he wasn't a dick about it later, that was very wrong in the first place. You're not supposed to have to be on guard against sexual advances inside your family.
It happens regularly in these conversations that someone, usually male, will say something that seems reasonable but is taken as victim-blaming. Speaking as someone with this tendency, I think at least part of the problem is that these someones haven't fully grasped that the victims might have considered, once or twice, the possibility that something they are doing might contribute to their victimization, and that these seemingly helpful observations aren't very groundbreaking.
70: I forget how old Newt is, but I had several awkward-for-him conversations with Rowan about enthusiastic participation being the standard for consent. That one, I think, is key. But we talked a lot about consent, awareness, and contraception in general. It's really scary for young people who grew up being hurt by the adults who loved them to figure out how to love (in an adolescent context) others without getting all muddled and miserable and triggered.
Imagine, remember, Faye Wray getting picked up by King Kong. What, she is going to scream and cry and struggle, making Kong nervous and angry? Sheeet. She will learn to like it, or at least pretend. Anyway, she wasn't immediately killed, so maybe she can relax a little. Think that little critter knows it's mother?
Babies are smart, but ignorant. They learn so fucking fast.
And no, this isn't nation of vipers shit.
"Men are scum" goes without saying.
"Women are as bad" needs saying.
76: "You fell asleep before watched your daily quota of bleak portrayals of human society. No food pellets for you and write 'I will not take joy in interpersonal interactions' two hundred times.'"
79: Yeah, he's ten, so a little young for that specific talk yet, but when he's a bit older, definitely.
76:Donald Kingsbury, Courtship Rite
Children raised in creches from about 2 to 15 with absolutely no adult supervision. Some die. The rest learn about cooperation and tribes.
They come as equal independent free adults.
80: It is oppressive and undemocratic that babies are cared for by larger, stronger, and more coordinated organisms. Could we train teams of mice to feed the babies in the Creche de Cinema? They would rightly fear being crushed by their infant overlords.
am I the only one who has different sentiments towards lord castock's posts now? I think the new pseud is more authoritative. thanks natilo, I always appreciate your comments and they never make me upset, ever, which is nice. no, the funny thing is, I alternate between this view and the more general view that people are kind and decent on the whole. or schizophrenically hold both views at once, is more accurate. more painfully, if the latter view is true I feel myself pushed towards the idea that the answer is there's something really wrong with me that attracts bad people because I'm broken. because how else? but I don't want any of you to tell me that's right, either. it's not true. I have a million fucking useful things I could be doing even if I didn't want to tackle my stupid homework. damn you feeble brain!!!
most people, most of the time, are doing the best that they can, and the genuine sociopaths are fewer and farther between than their horrifying wakes of wreckage and misery suggest,
This is something I believe.
77: I think the "ha ha yes men are awful" elements of this discussion are undermining the fact that seriously bad stuff happened to alameida, which is not normal and was not just the way the world works.
Yeah, I rather doubt this is lost on anyone by this point, and it should probably be just taken as read into most comments on the thread. Shearer hasn't weighed in yet and would be a possible exception, admittedly, so we can be sure to refer him to this comment if he turns up.
The cousin thing is not necessarily the most fucked up thing in the world in and of itself, however (unless it's part of the story that Al was 12 when it happened or he'd deliberately gotten her wasted before asking or something). Rules around cousin relationships are way more in flux and harder to define than other kinds of familial relations, and there are whole continents where cousin marriage is still common.
I just shouldn't post things like this if I don't want lots of people I like to say things that hurt my feelings. thus, I shouldn't post things like this.
Here's the men who are currently annoying the living fuck out of me: about 1 in 50 students I have is the "goofy puppy" who relishes these big, grandiose, disruptive markers of incompetence.
Current goofy puppy: interrupts lecture to ask if he can schedule his study session. "Sure" I say, with a sigh, since it needs to get scheduled anyway. "Can I hold it at 3 am on Saturday?""
I stop and give him icy stare of death and say "I've never put restrictions on times for study sessions, as long as they're accessibly to everyone."
"I was thinking on the baseball diamond?" he says.
I basically suggested another time and pressured him to change it, without actually outlawing 3 am on the baseball diamond, but seriously kid. You're too old to pull this kind of disruptive bullshit. I can't stand goofy puppies.
Just roll-up the newspaper and smack him.
because how else?
Simply as a logical exercise, and not an attempt to explain anything specific to you, an answer to this question (and really I'm thinking much more of someone else) might well be 'because you are attracted to broken people.'
I have said to a student, in a slightly different context: "You think you are being cute, but you are not." It had the desired effect.
I have said to a student, in a slightly different context: "You think you are being cute, but you are not." It had the desired effect.
She started dressing cuter?
88: Man, I'm sorry. Does it make sense to close the thread? And if so, do you know how? I don't, but I know it's doable.
enthusiastic participation being the standard for consent.
I remember trying to explain this--just as a thought experiment! just think about it!--to my working-class coworkers at my horrible previous job. It did not go well.
do you know how? I don't
When you're looking at the post on the back end, there's a little checkbox below the extended entry part with "Accept Comments?" beside it.
65 If I had A's life I'd probably be loaded up with guns in a fortress on top of chicks-only mountain.
Yeah, something like that. alameida, I almost never comment on these posts because I don't know what to say, and thus maybe I should remain silent. But I'm quite sure that if I'd lived through some of your experiences I'd be deeply fucked up, and you strike me as eminently level-headed despite everything.
88: Uhhh, sorry if that was me, free me so far in your most generous thoughts that I have shot my arrow o'er the house, etc...
96: Hah. The design of the back end is busy enough that I end up looking past things for ages. Years ago, Austro asked me to ban his IP address so he could get some more work done, and it took me forever to find out how.
the answer is there's something really wrong with me that attracts
no, you are just too beautiful, so you attract the opposite sex, maybe something about the female sex hormones levels play a role there maybe too, just generally i wonder, so if one doesn't want the excessive attention one maybe could implore some neutralizing techniques i guess to downgrade one's attractiveness, like wearing plain clothes etc no? i just recalled an old movie (an extreme example of course), i think it's in the occupied by enemies territories and young girls put some masks imitating some rash on their faces to repel the occupants suitors
if ugly or just average looking, not much dangerous situations or too much attention and advances from the proposing/assaulting males could happen to one i guess
Castock is a new pseud for someone old? That's what I get for mostly not reading for a couple weeks...
It's an anagram of DS's old pseud. I was right in the thread where people started anagramming, and I still couldn't get it -- anagrams are not a strong point of mine.
99: Awww, Austro. Whatever happened to that guy?
101: Jesus, read, can't you just shut the fuck up? Your comments are offensive and hurt the people you profess to be trying to help, no matter how well-intentioned you believe yourself to be.
I don't actually know what happened to him, but he said something once that indicated he had severe health problems. So, not sure, but I think there's a good chance he's not okay.
aaaand read wraps it up for us. killer. apo, I'm just so not seeing that box, so you check it for me.
85: I am glad that I have commented well. This whole midlife-crisis thing I'm going through with regard to ethics gets all muddled when I think about sex/love/relationship ethics, because obviously I do not want to abandon those kinds, quite the contrary.
It's hard to see so many people in pain all the time. I want to help people and nurture them, but that is not always possible or desirable. It's easy enough to say "Oh, don't worry about it, just be a decent person and you'll be doing your bit", but that's not the way I was raised or the way I want to live. Of course, I don't want to stick my oar in where it's unwelcome, in terms of nurturing people.
To parents of boys: I realize that it is heartbreaking to think about your kid raping someone. How can you even consider it, without falling into a deep depression? Nonetheless, please please please talk to them about consent and respect. I've met a number of men who've done really fucked up things and felt terrible about them afterwards, who probably could have done better if they'd had some extra positive reinforcement early on. Or maybe not, I don't know.
Parents in general should raise all their children to be staunch feminists (apparently we can't say 'radical feminists' any more because that term has been hijacked by transphobic jerks? Annoying.)
I've got a new post I can get up. Hang on.
Or anyone else as well! Two is twice the fun.
109.2 is so humane and kind and good.
It is oppressive and undemocratic that babies are cared for by larger, stronger, and more coordinated organisms.
Well, yeah. The babies don't get a vote, or much of a choice.
And the young are cared for in the creche, by the older. The assholes are outnumbered, have to sleep, and do not have the usual social protections.
And most importantly, in the creche the mechanisms of the reproduction of social control/structures are overt and not mystified. Nobody abuses in the name of love.
110, 111: make it three! Why not.
read is here to remind us how women can be crass and hurtful, too.