Showing that feminists don't all hate heterosexual male sexuality

I have so many questions about these shoes, Scrimpshaw. Was it just you not allowed to buy them? Or were there customers they were deemed suitable for?

Do you know, Dances, I was once told by a shop assistant that I shouldn't buy shoes from Clarks as they were 'too lesbian'.

Sorry, OP, what was the question? We want to impose what? Have you seen the celeriac emoji?

I wonder sometimes if there is any mileage in perhaps showing some compassion for the difficulties that many straight men encounter in their personal lives in general

Look here feminists your feminism does not focus enough on men's feelings and men's needs. The men are worried about it. Please centre men more. Especially sexually.

Isn't there a rule of misogyny about that?

I think i might have whatabouted

So you want women to show compassion towards men who are "romantically frustrated

What about women who are romantically frustrated

Or is that whataboutery

Not sure why it's my job to help men who feel under siege because women are having feminist conversations about sex, OP. I mean, MeToo wasn't exactly an invasion with tanks.

So you want women to show compassion towards men who are "romantically frustrated"

And what do you propose us women should do? Give them a pity fuck to prove feminists don't hate them?

If they are decent men anyway, this probably won't be an issue.

It's the cockends that most WOMEN, some of whom are feminists, aim to avoid.

Oh I can’t even be arsed

dudu definitely took one for the team

I’m on my third husband so I’ve already done more than my share in this department.

Some of us even have SEX with them!

I’m sorry Lillian, but according to subsection 2, paragraph 312 of the Radical Feminist Statutes, you are obliged to return your feminist card within Five (5) working days of any or all of the below conditions:

(i) eyeing a straight male stud (SMD);
(ii) speaking to an SMD;
(iii) flirting with an SMD;
(iv) engaging in enjoyable sexual activity above the waist (SAATW) with an SMD;
(v) engaging in enjoyable sexual activity below the waist (SABTW) with an SMD;
(vi) engaging in enjoyable intercourse above and below the waist (SAATW + SABTW).

Should we not be in receipt of your feminist card with the requisite five (5) days, you will be issued with a fine and forcible removal to the re-education gulag.

You may also be required to, depending on circumstance:

A. prove purchase of sturdy shoes (receipt and photographic proof);
B. Regrow leg and underarm hair;
C. prove purchase of not fewer than two (2) pairs of “maternal pants (common name “mum jeans”);
D. Surrender to nearest active Feminist Disposal Depot any and all; cosmetics; lingerie not more than ten (10) cms at its narrowest point and not made of at least 50% canvas; and any hair removal implements other than scissors. You will be issued with a receipt and your screams of distress as your La Perla meant the shredder will be recorded for re-education purposes.

We regret this necessity and hope that at some stage in the future you will be re-issued with a probationary feminist card.

Yours in Disappointment

Acting Head Girl, RadFem Collective No. 4.

Oh thank god

I read this earlier and was a bit 😳

I know it might come as a bit of a shock to you, OP but a hell of a lot of us are actually in relationships with men. Some of us even have SEX with them

You'd have thought that given this is the feminism board on a parenting site, the OP might have figured that out.

Frankly, OP, I don't understand what you mean - except that feminism is often misrepresented in many ways, the 'man hating' trope being one.

Some sort of cack handed approach to hope we’ll be nice?
Um no, nice was what got us here.

A sort of if you are nicer we might be nicer thing?
No, you won’t, it’s nonsense and we’ve been fooled before and learned from it.

You know what you don’t see? Any sort of acknowledgement that we have a point and men need to sort their shit out. It’s always about pushing blame onto women.

I'm really confused by this recent trend of "feminists believe [insert outlandish/offensive position], don't you think it's time you were nicer?" threads.

Fear of male sexuality? Well it’s widely cited in all manner of sexual crimes that men are powerless against their sexual urges. Probably sensible to be wary of something men frequently claim they have no control over.

I think there is a feeling, imo an incorrect one, but still a feeling, among many straight men that feminism wants to impose celibacy on all straight men, and hates and derides any expression of male sexuality.

You mean the rape torture and abuse of women in porn? Is that the "expression of male sexuality" Feminists deride.Right in one.

I will put as much effort into men’s problems as they put into women’s. And by that I mean fixing them not causing them. If they stopped causing problems for women imagine all the time we’d have to put into other things.

Quite simply straight men need to stop believing in the idea that they are entitled to a woman who will facilitate their existence.

societal bias against and fear of male sexuality in general.

This i do agree with because fear of male sexuality has been society’s excuse to control women’s dress and behaviour. Because men’s sexual urges are portrayed as beyond their control, it then justifies forcing women into dressing modestly, not walking alone at night, making sure you say NO, etc and if the woman fails at any of these she is held responsible for her own rape.

I personally think the bias against male sexuality is for same reason as much different bias but still is against female sexuality- to control and subjugate women.

Gosh, you’re such a wag, OP.

I adore men. Adore them. I am grateful to feminism and feminist activists - not menm particularly - for working to get us all contraceptive and abortion provision, the Equal Pay Act and other things that mean we aren't dependent on men or on using our 'feminine wiles' to survive but can meet them honestly as sexual beings.

I'll tell you a good book to read for anyone who expresses nostalgia for the sexual politics of the past, and that's How Far Can You Go by David Lodge. All the more because the male characters are nice, thoughtful, sympathetic people, and so are the women (though the women aren't as well fleshed out as the men). That's what sexual lives before feminism were like at their very best.

I've always thought of bell hooks as a good reference for an inclusive type of feminism 'for everyone' which is perfectly legit.

Those oppressed by a system, and vocalising their desire for change, shouldn’t have to have the responsibility of reassuring those who benefit from it.

Yep, that's definitely what feminists who're heterosexual or bisexual want, to impose celibacy on all straight men, because we just enjoy inconveniencing ourselves that much.

I know, that's an interesting concept! No, I don't want to impose celibacy on any men, gay, straight, bisexual. Men aren't entitled to sex, but I certainly don't begrudge them it if they have a consenting partner. And yes I would lose out in this apparent feminist utopia!

Yep, that's definitely what feminists who're heterosexual or bisexual want, to impose celibacy on all straight men, because we just enjoy inconveniencing ourselves that much.

(If the OP could see my old thirst blog they'd have a coronary.)