Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
Sun Nov 25, 2012, 10:30 AM Nov 2012

Pathologizing the Male Sexual Response

http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/pathologizing-the-male-sexual-response/

Sex addiction is just the meme du jour of this century. Feminization has taken this cliché for its own purposes. Every romantic comedy, every ‘love story’ in the past 50 years, all revolve around men’s inability to fill the hole in their heart that only a special woman can. Literally, everything else in the world is just a cheap, superficial substitute for the inexplicable magical element a woman completes a man with. He literally cannot live without her piece of his puzzle.

Sex addiction is simply the new pathology of the male condition so we make the leap from Pretty Woman and the Hooker with the Heart of Gold in the 80?s to the more sinister sex addict of the new millennium who’s so hopelessly flawed he’ll burn away to hell before he sees the healing light of submitting to the feminine imperative’s medicine.



As with most other social narratives embedded into our collective consciousness, even Beta men pick up this ideology and attempt to use it to their Beta-Game-feminine-identification advantage. Convince men of an innate incompleteness, and sell women’s mystical element, women’s home-spun wisdom, women’s presumptive intuition as the completing factor he’s unable to comprehend he needs due to being a male and therefore ignorant of his deficit. Every romantic story, comedy or tragedy, has revolved around this narrative for centuries. Only recently has it been used as a social tool of feminization, as well as a commercialization of men’s presumptive inherent lack.

Women, on the other hand, are portrayed as self-contained, self-sufficient entities, and even when the story develops upon a woman’s flaws it’s never due to her ‘femaleness’, and the solution to her conflict is usually resolved through the influence of other women. There is rarely, if ever, any contrition that a man might solve a woman’s problems – and when he does, it’s usually through employing feminine means to do so (i.e. he “gets in touch with his feminine side” to resolve the conflict). Feminine primacy needs this narrative to ensure its lasting predominance as a social influence.
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Pathologizing the Male Sexual Response (Original Post) Bonobo Nov 2012 OP
It's a mixed up, shook up, jumbled up world libodem Nov 2012 #1
Yes, well there's that. Major Nikon Nov 2012 #2
I was watching "Community" last night libodem Nov 2012 #3

libodem

(19,288 posts)
1. It's a mixed up, shook up, jumbled up world
Sun Nov 25, 2012, 04:02 PM
Nov 2012

Anymore isn't it. In the seventies both sexes gave up some of the hard and fast rules of behaviors based on masculine and feminine models. Guys grew their hair long. We cut ours short. Some bras were said to be burned. (I doubt it) but we did go braless. We quit shaving our legs and unarms. Wore pants instead of skirts. Fie on the make-up. We went to work. We encouraged guys to be 'sensitive'. We asked them to be more active in parenting. We asked men to help with the dishes if we took out the garbage or mowed the lawn. We did some trading. And took some trade offs. We blazed trails of new ways of behaving.

I wanted one of those new sensitive males who changed diapers and did housework. But, until you get one home, take the tags off, and toss the receipt, you don't know if that sensitivity is toward you or just towards themselves and all you got was a whiner.

The next phase was finding that mixed male who is tidy, cooks, and keeps their truck clean, but still manly. I dated a super nice guy. We split most dates down the middle on expenses I've always been self supporting. I have male qualities of being capable and efficient. He had feminine qualities.
We liked each other but the spark, the magnetism, the attraction died pretty quickly. We were both too androgenous. Like buddies.
My goofy take, for what it is worth, is that no matter how far both of us have come we need to be somewhat opposite to attract. We don't need to try and remake each other in our own images.

Major Nikon

(36,900 posts)
2. Yes, well there's that.
Sun Nov 25, 2012, 04:49 PM
Nov 2012

The funny part is you have some feminists who exist in a perpetual state of being wrapped around the axle over how women's minds are supposedly being devalued in favor of their bodies. Imagine having your mind devalued directly just for having a Y chromosome.

libodem

(19,288 posts)
3. I was watching "Community" last night
Mon Nov 26, 2012, 11:32 AM
Nov 2012

There was a line in it about marriage, "Why don't you nut up and face it that you are just going to die alone".
It struck me as funny.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Men's Group»Pathologizing the Male Se...