Um, no. If you were attracted to her, that’s on you. Your feelings of attraction are meaningless to women. They in no way amount to “superpowers”.[quote=“Max_Blancke, post:11, topic:101899”]
Nothing she said or did gave me the impression that she was even aware of it.
[/quote]
She wasn’t, and probably wouldn’t have cared. Everything that happened was in your own mind. Let me repeat: that’s not a power, that’s your feelings and your own ability or inability to understand them. None of that translates into any kind of power for women. If it did, we would have more than 22% of state government seats.
If you mean that they are constantly being stimulated by movies, ads, popular culture, magazines and so on that is made for them with that intent, I agree.
What has been explained to me by my therapist wife is that visuals are a smaller part of the attractiveness package for women. She says that while many men could not care less about anything but how a woman looks to want to bed her, most women need at least some interactional stimulation like an actual conversation to reach that level of attraction.
No one is responsible for someone else’s thoughts and behaviors in response to their physical appearance. The only thing any of us has control over in this life is our own words and actions, regardless to any stimuli.
Also it must be said that having a close association to someone who has some authority or expertise on any given topic does not make a person any kind of expert or authority on that subject.
I once dated a pilot who showed me a few things about the cockpit, but that sure as fuck doesn’t mean that I know how to fly a plane.
I have 100% taken a boy home for the purpose of sex because he was attractive. No other redeeming qualities at all (sex skills not included). He was such a pretty pretty boy and OMG was the morning awkward cuz we had no intellectual connection at all. Didnt stop me from sleeping with him again tho… and again. Oh the 00s you were fun.
But then I’m not a therapist oh sorry wait Im not married to a therapist so I have no idea at all why I slept with him…
Can’t have been physical sexual attraction /s
Also if women only sleep with men they have intellectual connections with why are there so many dudes in the “friend zone”?
Alright then. But I must reiterate it’s not my personal opinion. I don’t have one. I suppose that’s why I found that thread boring when it appeared and didn’t read much of it, I don’t have a dog in the fight.
Very relatable post, you sound like me Since ending a long-term with an older guy, it has been all about the pretty boys. I might go add some examples over in gendered objectification, maybe that type is under-represented
It’s just a matter of perspective and priorities, which differ between people and can change over time. That’s why “women do this” “men are more visual” doesn’t make sense, it’s like we’re not individuals, have no difference in taste or ability to make choices , and never change.
After just getting up and reading through the whole thread, I’m happy that seemingly you ha a good constructive time deconstructing everything and each others interior workings.
Some more thoughts:
The visual stimuli we are bombarded with everyday are often charged with female sexuality for the intent of selling stuff. Maybe in 20 years we’ll look back at such practices and say that’s gross. (But I’m not counting on it.) Can male sexual traits also be used to sell stuff? Yes sure, but it seems less abundant to me.
And now, does all this put completely unnecessary strain on relationship between genders? I’m sure it does. But seeing that this is just how the world works right now, left and right and everywhere, it’s hard to imagine what such an enlightened future, in which no one does that anymore, will feel like.
Are there manipulators (of any gender) who will use any asset they have (sexual, or other) for their gain? Experience surely teaches us that that’s true. Are some of them waitstaff? Must be, no? Does that mean that all waitstaff and everyone else (I choose to demonize) are guilty? No. But, neither does it mean that no one is guilty of doing it; unfairly and maliciously training to get really good at ‘pushing people’s buttons’ that is.
I don’t agree with that. I think being ‘proactive’ and in control so that nothing ever happens to you that you have not internally agreed to is a fantastic state, unobtainable for anyone but hermits and such types. For the rest of us, isn’t it rather that we are constantly playing ‘tag’ with each other? Often you just get tagged, if you like it or not, and we go along and play the game because it is just in our nature to play with other humans.
I don’t know. I was trying to nitpick a few more of the things that were said and dispute them, but I chose not to. I think we’re mostly good, no? Bit of a friendly conversation, no one got crushed, good. Yet beyond that, no one truly ever wins an argument on the internet, so it’s fine.
I want to point out that what is being used to sell things is not female sexuality. It is women being used to appeal to male sexuality. Women (and some men) see it every day and say that it’s gross.
We are imagining it right now, and pushing for more understanding so that we can get to that enlightened future.
Sorry, I don’t follow. The notion that media targets men with sexual imagery because they are more responsive to it is an outcome of what I said, not “the other side of the coin”. I also was careful to make clear it was a generalization, not a truism. Of course there’s a spectrum of sexuality for both genders.
Men being targeted with sexual visual imagery trains men to be responsive. It is not an inherent trait. Women recieve virtually none of the same sexualizing stimuli of male bodies, but still manage to respond to visuals. All of this is also happening in a larger context of culture encouraging male sexuality to the exclusion of other states, while muffling and minimizing female sexuality.
Since ending a long-term with an older guy, it has been all about the pretty boys. I might go add some examples over in gendered objectification, maybe that type is under-represented 
