Showing that feminists don't all hate heterosexual male sexuality

[IronPyrites]

OK so I am talking about consensual adult sexuality only.

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.
Now, while I think this is unfounded, 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, and perhaps even that the pain of sexual or romantic frustration is no less real (and perhaps heightened by societal expectations of the straight male stud) for this group of people than anyone else. I have nothing but contempt for the so-called incels who clearly despise and feel entitled to women, and for men who express disdain for and behave badly to women in other ways, but I do think it may do some good to counter the message that you sometimes hear that feminism is anti-men, and showing that there is probably a societal bias against and fear of male sexuality in general. I hope you understand what I mean.

Oh I can’t even be arsed

I thought I said that I disagreed with the feeling that feminism wanted to impose celibacy and that it was unfounded, so I don't know why people are reacting as if I actually.think this myself. I don't. And I don't think feminists need to be nicer. I am aware that many straight women are in or have been in relationships with straight men. I was simply and perhaps I expressed it badly wondering whether there was a way that demonstrating through communication that feminism is not against consensual heterosexual relations (which feminists know to be true but others don't seem to) might be a path to dismantling some of the sense of being under siege that some straight men seem to say they experience (possibly as an excuse not to engage, I don't know).
I find it sad that so many seem to have misinterpreted what I said as an attack on feminism or that I think that it is against consensual relations or male sexuality. I know it's not.

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.

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

What about women who are romantically frustrated

Or is that whataboutery

I think i might have whatabouted

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?

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 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?

Nah you want to be asking men to fix men problems. We have enough to keep us busy. Try ARRSE or Petrolheads.

I was simply and perhaps I expressed it badly wondering whether there was a way that demonstrating through communication that feminism is not against consensual heterosexual relations (which feminists know to be true but others don't seem to) might be a path to dismantling some of the sense of being under siege that some straight men seem to say they experience (possibly as an excuse not to engage, I don't know).

I suspect most of the tedious people who say feminists hate men know perfectly well that many are in happy heterosexual relationships.... just not with them.

Clarifying this (not sure how ... photos of us with our DH/Ps? Testimonials?) would probably just rub salt into their self inflicted wounds.

It was in another shop, full of fucking awful shoes with too many straps and heels. I asked where Clarks was because none of the shoes were actually wearable. And a rather unprepossessing young shop assistant told me that Clarks's shoes were 'a bit lesbian' and started sniggering. And trailed off when she saw my [jawdrop].

Salesperson of the month, there.

@IronPyrites

I thought I said that I disagreed with the feeling that feminism wanted to impose celibacy and that it was unfounded, so I don't know why people are reacting as if I actually.think this myself. I don't. And I don't think feminists need to be nicer. I am aware that many straight women are in or have been in relationships with straight men. I was simply and perhaps I expressed it badly wondering whether there was a way that demonstrating through communication that feminism is not against consensual heterosexual relations (which feminists know to be true but others don't seem to) might be a path to dismantling some of the sense of being under siege that some straight men seem to say they experience (possibly as an excuse not to engage, I don't know). I find it sad that so many seem to have misinterpreted what I said as an attack on feminism or that I think that it is against consensual relations or male sexuality. I know it's not.

We get these what about the poor men who are not being serviced on a fairly regular basis here. Like you they want to know what we think needs to be done about it. Nothing. That's my answer. Why? 2nd rule of misogyny: Women saying no to men is a hate crime. That's why. Women already treat men better than they deserve.

The bar is so low that I'm just glad it wasn't prefaced with the usual, "Now don't you she-lions eat me alive for saying this, har har."

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

No, this isn't what I think. I have never said it and I don't think it. Just to clarify, I don't believe that women should give sad men a pity fuck in any circumstances.

*DancelikeEmmaGoldman•

But I already went out and bought new ‘lesbian shoes’ from Clark’s! Can I use that in my defence?

I was simply and perhaps I expressed it badly wondering whether there was a way that demonstrating through communication that feminism is not against consensual heterosexual relations (which feminists know to be true but others don't seem to) might be a path to dismantling some of the sense of being under siege that some straight men seem to say they experience (possibly as an excuse not to engage, I don't know).

OP, plenty of feminists spend a great deal of time actively reassuring men that feminism is not 'out to get them', doesn't hate them, etc. And reminding men that feminism is good for them (particularly in relation to their emotional lives and breaking down toxic expectations of men). All this even though the idea that feminism is anti-male comes from men deliberately, wilfully misinterpreting, or jumping to conclusions, or not paying attention. It doesn't come from women 'not having explained' well enough, or not having communicated clearly enough.

In terms of political effectiveness, of course persuading others, no matter how resistant they are, is important. But even when feminists put in the time and effort to nicely persuade the men who are resistant, the return is minimal.

Nothing that you said in your first post is in any way groundbreaking - I do understand that if you're new to these issues, you might feel like this is a topic that needs discussing, and be annoyed at some of the responses here. But the be-more-likeable stuff, the man-hating stereotype... it's come up over and over and over again. To not be aware of this in any way reflects a lack of knowledge, and if you're lacking in knowledge about the topic of a forum - well, ask more, type less.

What is it that you're asking feminists to do, then, OP?

@ScrimpshawTheSecond

It was in another shop, full of fucking awful shoes with too many straps and heels. I asked where Clarks was because none of the shoes were actually wearable. And a rather unprepossessing young shop assistant told me that Clarks's shoes were 'a bit lesbian' and started sniggering. And trailed off when she saw my [jawdrop].

I love a brogue, me.

And sandals with socks.

Maybe the shoe shop assistant is right and my husband number 4 will be a wife?

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, and perhaps even that the pain of sexual or romantic frustration is no less real (and perhaps heightened by societal expectations of the straight male stud) for this group of people than anyone else.

Women have done the best they can at showing compassion for men like those they describe. I am sorry you do not feel women have done enough, but on the other hand, there are those who feel that women do far too much. Yanno, that 'second shift' thingummy?

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

So? Why are you telling us?

Go tell the men they've got the wrong end of the stick if it bothers you that much.

If you see a movement for equality for women as anti-men what’s the thinking there? That men will lose something by women being equal? What would they be losing?

Seriously?

Why are so many people spamming us atm?

No, not remotely interested. Couldn't give a fuck if the OP thinks feminists hate men. I'm straight, but this post might have just tipped me over into separatism....

There are plenty of men who know that feminists are not anti-sex. Often they are the ones in relationships with feminists. They are the ones to educate other men who have the wrong idea about feminism. They'd be listened to. We wouldn't.

I mean, how do you show that you are not anti-sex to a stranger except by being sexually explicit? And what feminsit wants to do that with sexist random men? Only the other men can have a meaningful conversation about feminism not being anti-men or anti-sex. If the men who get it can't be arsed to educate the others, well, that suggests they don't think it is a big issue or the other men wouldn't listen.

Not women's problem to solve; men's problem to educate each other. It is entirely within their capability to do this. I have heard say from reliable sources that men talk about sex and women amongst themselves often rather crudely and explicitly when the women are not present. So, they have plenty of opportunity to discuss. Let them get on with it if they think it is an issue worthy of action.