Ask Me Anything

[Starla]

I seem to attract men who want to control me and tell me what to do. Usually the kind of guys who have been burned in the past by someone, and have zero trust in women. So they tend to act crazy when I don't answer my phone, answer emails in a timely fashion, or I do something that triggers their fears and they get even crazier.

I also attract men who just want a friends with benefits type of relationship. for them, they never want it to go further than that. They will say "Let's see where it goes".

I have never been in a friends with benefits relationship and never will. It's not me at all, but they don't get that and they keep pressing for it until they have pushed me out of their life.

[pavementtune]

Oh, so you think you're smarter than most women and men, therefore you haven't met someone who would qualify to be your boyfriend. I see. The air up there must be really thin.

[null123]

You're funny

[TuralyonW3]

well if you hold sincere beliefs you think would benefit society, and you're in the minority on those beliefs, it's not really a big stretch to think you're smarter than most people.

which I'm assuming charmbag is talking about, as opposed to rocket science or whatever

[null123]

the reason most people don't come to the same conclusions as radical feminists is not because they're dumb. I think there are certain personality types and life circumstances that tend to lead people to form these political views. but there are certain forms of intelligence or ways of thinking which I value more. it really is more about what does a person like to think about and how good are they at thinking about it. (the two tend to go hand-in-hand)

[TuralyonW3]

yeah I wasn't singling out radfem per se

[TuralyonW3]

Like I think I'm "smarter" than anyone who doesn't support gay marriage etc.

[null123]

well I don't think everyone who doesn't share my values or ideology is stupider than me.

[TuralyonW3]

well what's your "let's be real" most guys aren't as smart as me based on then, booksmarts?

not asking combatively just curiously

[null123]

not sure how to put it. I mean someone has to be at least able to engage easily with my opinions, even if they don't agree

[TuralyonW3]

ah ok, kinda like intellectual lubrication, the "playing field" more so than the content

[null123]

yeah more like that. ok we've got my whole OK Cupid profile filled in thanks for your help guys

[TuralyonW3]

charmbag are you familiar with the "women's spirituality movement" and also STARHAWK (lol for real?)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Fifth-Sacr...ref=pd_sim_b_9

just randomly found this on amazon while looking at ursela k. leguin stuff

[null123]

lol not specifically. i'm not about that white pagan earth goddess stuff

[null123]

Originally Posted by Starla

I seem to attract men who want to control me and tell me what to do. Usually the kind of guys who have been burned in the past by someone, and have zero trust in women. So they tend to act crazy when I don't answer my phone, answer emails in a timely fashion, or I do something that triggers their fears and they get even crazier.

I also attract men who just want a friends with benefits type of relationship. for them, they never want it to go further than that. They will say "Let's see where it goes".

I have never been in a friends with benefits relationship and never will. It's not me at all, but they don't get that and they keep pressing for it until they have pushed me out of their life.

why do you believe you specifically attract these kinds of men?

[cocksure]

Originally Posted by Charmbag

not sure how to put it. I mean someone has to be at least able to engage easily with my opinions, even if they don't agree

what if someone is extremely intelligent but comes from a highly idelogical school of thought that is opposed to feminism and they cannot shake those core beliefs? do you really think anyone could communicate with anyone, as long as both parties are intelligent enough? i have my doubts about that.

[null123]

nope I don't think that at all

[TuralyonW3]

Originally Posted by cocksure

what if someone is extremely intelligent but comes from a highly idelogical school of thought that is opposed to feminism and they cannot shake those core beliefs? do you really think anyone could communicate with anyone, as long as both parties are intelligent enough? i have my doubts about that.

http://ohkrapp.files.wordpress.com/2...mokes-pipe.jpg

[cocksure]

so do you think it's possible to find someone who rejects all kinds of feminism and cannot defend that position, who you would still call intelligent?

[cocksure]

bertrand russell comes from a highly idelogical school of thought? what do you mean, logicism? and he was opposed to feminism? i didn't know that.

[null123]

theoretically

[null123]

just because someone has different values or even actively hates women doesn't mean they are stupid

[cocksure]

yeah i agree, didn't think you would though. it comes down to what one means by intelligent <> stupid

[TuralyonW3]

Originally Posted by cocksure

bertrand russell comes from a highly idelogical school of thought? what do you mean, logicism? and he was opposed to feminism? i didn't know that.

I wasn't posting it because it was Russell (who was relatively femenist) I was posting it mockingly because it was a professorial fellow smoking a pipe which is what your post sounded like

[null123]

Originally Posted by cocksure

yeah i agree, didn't think you would though. it comes down to what one means by intelligent <> stupid

yeah, and I'm not really interested in being the arbiter of that distinction. I was just looking for a word to describe the ability to woo me with insight and relate over ideas n whatever. but you're right, there is more than one factor that goes into two people being able to have intellectual reciprocity.

[cocksure]

so do you believe that radical feminism is a philosophical position that can be arrived at through means of logic and observation? or do you think it takes a leap of faith, and individual circumstances are more important than convincing arguments? if you think the latter is true (and some things you said hinted at that), how do you think you can spread radical feminism? do you even want to do that?

[Future Boy]

cubs or sox

you must pick one

keep in mind cubs fans suck

[Tchocky]

Tastes great or less filling?

[Esty]

Who do you believe will end up with a more horrible life, trots or eulogy?

[null123]

Originally Posted by cocksure

so do you believe that radical feminism is a philosophical position that can be arrived at through means of logic and observation? or do you think it takes a leap of faith, and individual circumstances are more important than convincing arguments? if you think the latter is true (and some things you said hinted at that), how do you think you can spread radical feminism? do you even want to do that?

I don't think arriving at radical feminist philosophy is any more individual than Marxism or anything else. Logic and observation are necessary to understanding it. Maybe I'm not understanding your question? I don't know what about radical feminism requires a leap of faith, at least compared to any other form of feminism or social theory. I do want to spread radical feminism. Its a question of presenting these alternative ideas and making them accessible, and then supporting women for acting in ways that are not supportive of patriarchy because it's rough. The biggest barrier to accepting radical feminist ideas is that its frankly depressing and potentially makes it difficult to maintain certain relationships, habits etc. I can see this push and pull very clearly in my own life.