The invisible men project

[ArmyOfPenguins]

I think it's important that the buyers' choices in prostitution are highlighted and shared. This project was linked to on FB. Thoughts? I think it's a great idea.

the-invisible-men.tumblr.com/

at incoherence of thought in that post abowtus.

Too boring.

At least start your own thread. It's rude to derail a thread.

Still, overall, it's been a really good informative thread.

Complete with real examples of the mindset we are discussing. it's a real learning experience.

Completely agree with sinistersal.

What I find most interesting is how someone can have such loud and confident ideas on issues that they clearly have very little knowledge of, haven't researched, haven't thought about what point they are trying to make before they've started typing out their 84th post of the day, on a thread that they haven't even read, all rudely targeted at a number of people who they presume are idiots.

That's not really the seeds of a fruitful, intelligent discussion that challenges or enlightens anyone.

It's more just lots of rude and shouty fingers-in-ears-la-la-la-shut-it-girlz-I-know-everythin-noise.

It's like a three year old loudly interrupting a conversation and jumping up and down yelling "look at me" and "listen to what I think".

abowtus, start your own thread and then you get to set the subject. That's how it works.

That strikes me as a very good summary WhenTheRed.

Yes, it is a very familiar pattern, and as you say, I think much of this thread highlights the value of women only spaces.

I didn't avoid your question abowtus, I'm jsut not going to waste my energy and time in engaging with you. I don't consider you worthy of my time. Or of anyone's time, really.

Yes SinisterSal, it's been really interesting.

Certainly, prostitution is a highly gendered activity as FloraFox and WhentheRed observe, to deny otherwise you would have to be an idiot. That said I wonder to what extent men also compensate that gender balance even as they create it. Its rather hard to sell something when others are more than happy to give it away for free, and men are generally quite chuffed when objectified for sex (up to a point anyway, the penny finally dropped for me). Sadly I was quite the little man-whore to older women when I was in my early twenties, I loved them and they loved me... less. As years passed I wondered to what extent the sexuality of men was clouding sexually predatory behaviours in women, seeing it simply meeting up with eager suppliers thus preventing it ever reaching the stage of a morally flawed financial transaction. I suppose there is no problem when there is no problem, as long as a free and willing supply is available questions of the morality of demand do not arise. Even allowing for that I cant see prostitution by gender ever being an equitable ratio, men would always be on the dark side of the equation just as they are in extramarital affairs.

I think that's sort of missing the point a bit dadwashere.

Men who want to buy women for sex, don't want sex per se; they want sex that they control with a woman who has no choice about doing it with them. They want the power of the coerced sexual encounter.

For some of them, it's not even the sex that gives them the hit; it's the handing over the money - the bit which shows they're in charge.

FloraFox First of all, unless I'm mistaken this site is mumsnet not feministnet and it's a site created "by parents for parents" not "by feminists for feminists". Second, this thread is about "The Invisible Men Project" and not "The Feminist view on The Invisible Men Project". So if you wouldn't mind getting off your high horse and allowing some non feminists and even men, room to contribute that would be nice. The men haters amongst you have become obvious and your words are typically anti-male. And for the record I am trying to understand what feminism is about and be reasonable in my comments towards punters and prostitution with feminism in mind but I'm not expecting to pass a test on it and my time is limited. Please bear that in mind.

Utterly condescending "don't bother answering that" noted: WhentheRed You constantly misunderstand and then re-state the meaning of my posts with a dash of your own incorrect interpretation thrown in. In every instance you do so while trying to make me out to me a duplicitous lying troll. Is there some reason for that? I am none of those things so far SinisterSal is the only one here who's at least tried to meet me somewhere in the middle while discussing this. Where did I even come close to saying this.............................

"Feminists are lazy, whingeing underachievers who talk (bad thing) rather than do (good thing). Why are you here"

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Or was it just you and your interpretation? I did not say that "feminists" are anything, I was discussing women. Also please do not attribute your incorrect interpretation of anything to me, it's not nice. Please do not attribute something to me which is not of my opinion or is not something I have come even slightly close to posting or meaning, thank you.

Women and men are different. Historically, before society as such existed men went and got the food while women made the home. It is the same basic truth with almost every species on this planet. If and when a woman in this day and age decides to deny that nature and be something else, she certainly can so so and millions do. There is evidence of this everywhere but the NATURE of women is still to make the home and nothing anyone can say or do will change that fact. That does NOT make them "lazy, whingeing underachievers" and I think your interpretation is a disgrace. Also, my "wake up call" was and is genuine and I find your suggestion it was not to be insulting, thank you for that.

My comments about feminists was based on what I see in life and have read about. Feminists in protests with banners, feminists on Internet forums complaining about male domination. I was wrong about one thing, male domination from the feminists view does exist, it is in that nature which I mentioned a second ago. But it's not a male choice, it just is nature and I do think society has come a long way to change that and level the field for everyone, or at least try to.

There are thousands of women who have denied that nature and became dominant females. The sad thing is that for too many men in society, none of that has altered their view of women in general. Punters, and even "men" like Richard Keys are evidence of this and that makes me sad.

DadWasHere "Certainly, prostitution is a highly gendered activity as FloraFox and WhentheRed observe, to deny otherwise you would have to be an idiot."

Indeed, it is "highly gendered", not exclusively gendered which is what Catlike claimed and all I was "denying" so I'm not sure who your idiots actually are.

WhentheRed Re: your post on Tue 13-Aug-13 20:13:36

I did not change my behaviour because Beachcomber threatened to report me. If I really wanted to be disruptive I could be, I changed because words like "idiot" which don't bother me, did bother others so out of courtesy I stopped using them. Thank you also for making me out to be not only a liar and a trouble maker, but also for doing it in a pre-determined and hateful way. This thread and the Invisible Men project has changed my views and if you don't believe me please keep that opinion to yourself.

It is the same basic truth with almost every species on this planet.

That's not true in the slightest, many species do not operate in this way. Many don't even have defined genders!

the NATURE of women is still to make the home and nothing anyone can say or do will change that fact.

Sorry again, that's also not true. The jury is still out on what is considered natural and what society has taught (for want of a better word). There is no overbearing "nature" between genders. Life would be much easier if there was, but thinking about things in such predefined terms only serves to create an underclass and an overclass. Such as women and Patriarchy.

But it's not a male choice, it just is nature

See above, "nature" is not a vlaid excuse for the way we have evolved as a society. Choice is exactly what it is, not always consciously, but always a choice.

The sad thing is that for too many men in society, none of that has altered their view of women in general.

But surely that would be beyond their capacity if it was in there nature? Only if it was a choice could they alter their view.

sghueks are you aware of which board of mumsnet you're on? It's called Feminism/Women's rights.

Mumsnet is of course welcoming to all, except trolls, yes abowtus, I'm looking at you so anyone feminist or not, can post here. But you seem somewhat surprised by the feminist viewpoints here

As countless others have said, it is frustrating when talking about a particular subject "the invisible men" to have to keep going through Feminism101 with you.

'this thread is about "The Invisible Men Project" and not "The Feminist view on The Invisible Men Project'

This thread is about the Invisible Men Project in the Feminist sub-forum

'Men haters...high horse....anti male'
This is what you said. No one comes onto a feminist forum and insults our views like that in good faith. They are not the phrases of someone with an open mind who wants to consider things and mull over things from a different perspective. They are the words of someone who already has a strong view on feminism, whether unconscious or not. And not a positive one.

'Women can be and do anything, this was not true years ago but now surely is, so has changed.'
This is denial of the work that feminists have done to 'change things'
Those women who want to be whatever they want to be don't talk about it, they do it. Women in general don't really want to change their position in society, and those that do sit and talk about it while expecting men to make the changes for them.'

Well, surely that makes them 'lazy whiney underachievers'? What else could it possibly mean?

'Women and men are different.

Not that different - come on! We all have one head, 2 arms, want love, sex, comfort, fun and people to think well of us. We all love our parents, partners, kids and friends. The differences are overstated, unimportant - football v cupcakes, anyone? - and quite often socially constructed.

(Or simply made up. For example Men need sexual variety. Some men do. So do some women, but we are not allowed say that! It's approval/disapproval of certain traits in certain people that give rise to much of this. We are social animals every bit as much as we are biological animals.)

Historically, before society as such existed men went and got the food while women made the home. It is the same basic truth with almost every species on this planet.
Not true, evidence (from the fields of osteoarchealogy and contemporary anthropology, NOT evopysch bollocks) suggests women contributed 60% of the calories for the tribe. And everyone spent a lot of time around campfires. who knows what they did? We can't say only women scraped the bedding furs, and only men shaped the hunting arrows.

If and when a woman in this day and age decides to deny that nature and be something else, she certainly can so so and millions do. There is evidence of this everywhere but the NATURE of women is still to make the home and nothing anyone can say or do will change that fact.

What a horrible little phrase and indicative of your mindset. You think we rightfully belong in the kitchen, and only the unnatural among us want out.

That does NOT make them "lazy, whingeing underachievers" and I think your interpretation is a disgrace.
See 3rd paragraph up, what other interpretation could you put on that paragraph? It's a valid interpretation from your own words.

Also, my "wake up call" was and is genuine and I find your suggestion it was not to be insulting, thank you for that.
I am glad that you have found things to reflect on here, I have too. But from reading your own words I have to conclude that you still have an us and them mindset. There is an anti woman bias in your posts. Maybe you don't mean there to be.

My comments about feminists was based on what I see in life and have read about. Feminists in protests with banners, feminists on Internet forums complaining about male domination.

This is belittling and insulting.
Protests and discussions (not mere 'complaining' [hmmm]) are important to feminists, for obvious reasons. But so are real life work for and behalf of people in some terrible situations, that makes up the huge bulk of feminist activism. That's much less visible. For some reason.

I was wrong about one thing, male domination from the feminists view does exist, it is in that nature which I mentioned a second ago. But it's not a male choice, it just is nature

I disagree, I think it is a male choice if and when to dominate. Everyone has natural urges, if that is indeed what we are dealing with here. Some aspects of our nature are unhelpful, so as humans we consciously try to control them. Or not. But it is a choice.

and I do think society has come a long way to change that and level the field for everyone, or at least try to. I agree.

You must be aware that 'lying duplicious trolls' are not unknown around here.

This is me trying to meet you half way again.

Keepithidden I wrote "almost every species" not all species, which was correct.

What is natural to our society in terms of physical effort (eg: work, career, home maker, etc) is what we see every day, if it wasn't then surely things would change, naturally. Choice is in our nature so that too is natural to us and it's not an excuse it's a reason, I don't see why we need an excuse. So we have a natural ability to choose and what we are choosing in many areas of life is the easy option, that's not wrong or requires an excuse it's just what it is, easy. 'necessity is the mother of invention', etc.

What is neither easy or difficult and also why it is sad, is that many men, who all will have it in their nature to make a choice about the way they view women, don't change that view. I'll never forget Richard Keys being caught on "off" camera and it made me sick.

choices aren't made in a vacuum. Social norms are incredibly powerful and have a big impact on decision making and what we call 'common sense'.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones Yes I am, and thanks for (by omission) not calling me a troll which I am honestly not. I was just trying to point out that this website and it's forums appear to be open to all and some crossing of types will be inevitable and possibly a good thing if people weren't so quick to judge.

I'm not confused by the feminist view, I have been totally ignorant of it and grasping enough of it to use here while also keeping my own head straight about the actual subject of the thread isn't easy. For example, I thought "feminism 101" was just a personal term used by Beachcomber until she used it more than once, at which point I googled it and opened up a whole new world of references. :)

For the record; if I post something which seems a bit harsh I'm not being harsh or nasty I'm just expressing a view. I am also open minded enough to change that view if I believe it's flawed.

Keepithidden I wrote "almost every species" not all species, which was correct.

Ah well, if we're into semantics you'll have to be a bit more specific as to what you mean by "almost" after all the overwhleming species numbers on the planet are invertebrates and often genderless, therefore I'm afraid from that perspective the majority do not fall into your gender stereotype.

What is natural to our society in terms of physical effort (eg: work, career, home maker, etc) is what we see every day, if it wasn't then surely things would change, naturally. Choice is in our nature so that too is natural to us and it's not an excuse it's a reason, I don't see why we need an excuse. So we have a natural ability to choose and what we are choosing in many areas of life is the easy option, that's not wrong or requires an excuse it's just what it is, easy. 'necessity is the mother of invention', etc.

So choice is also in our Nature? How does that square with dominant women chossing something against their nature , or rather choosing to "deny" their nature?

The easy option for one class may not be the easy option for another. If the former holds all the power the latter gets no say. I.e. has no choice!