|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2010 19:39:04 GMT
We all know that most men are excited one way or another by violence, 'luckily' in most cases only as spectators, but at least we admit it. Leader of the pack, alpha male and all that stuff.
However, I was thinking about how many women are excited when men fight over them (while usually denying it), but what is even worse, the number of women who want to be hit ('punished'). Luckily, I only encountered this once in an argument ("yes, go ahead and beat me; I deserve it!") and did not follow through, but there was this whole desire of domination and punishment that was so obvious.
We men do talk about these situations with each other and the number of women who still subscribe to the school of "the fact that he hits me shows that he cares." Is this purely a psychiatric problem, a societal one, or a biological one dating back to prehistory?
Any ideas about this?
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on May 15, 2010 21:17:59 GMT
This was the first thing that I read today and it’s appalling. My whole body went into red alert. From my personal experience it isn’t true. This brutality was never exciting or a badge of honour. It was horrifying and left me feeling hurt, enraged, powerless and wanting to block it from my mind forever. I never understood what I did to ‘deserve’ it and hated any man who did this to me, father or ‘lover’. With the passage of time, I hated them even more for instilling a vision of violent males in my mind that has affected my entire life. Counselling, reading self help books, talks with 'stable' people (most of whom have absolutely no idea what you are talking about) do little. Some memories I wish I didn’t have. Even seeing it on film disturbs me and horrible memories surface.
Trying to be somewhat objective, I suppose the odious thoughts... ‘I was thinking how many women are excited when men fight over them’ ‘what is even worse, the number of women who want to be ‘punished’ ‘the fact that he shows me shows that he cares’’
…may be true for some women in some cultures. If so, I think it’s a combination of a psychiatric problem, a societal one and a biological one. Since we can only speak with any semblance of understanding from today, the first two are significant. Our society is patriarchal and most women have been raised in male dominated homes where the father and brother reign supreme. ‘Slapping around’ or, beating the female is taken as the god given right of the males. Women raised thus have it ingrained in their consciousness from the first day of awareness that this is ‘how it is and should be’. Open your mouth to protest and you will regret it. Years of financial and emotional dependence reinforced the situation. Even today, there are few escapes. This becomes ingrained in the psyche and this brutality is accepted as part of living with a man. ‘oh well dear, your father had a bit much to drink, he didn’t really mean it’. This sets up a double whammy, the abusive father and the mother who justifies his behaviour. Since there is no one to take the child's side, she begins to doubt her original primal protest. "They' must be right. On and on. To survive, usually the only way out is silence, until she can escape the brutality. However, this leaves about 16 years of endurance and a lifetime to undo the damage.
Are you actually saying that men that you know think that women enjoy and are excited by being abused? That you think this? I confess that as I grew older, my burning desire was to reach for an automatic gun. Living with brutality day in and day out is not exciting.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2010 22:11:05 GMT
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. I am appalled, but it does seem to be a rather common (sexual) perversion. The master and slave relationship seems actually quite common, and violence is often used to define the rules.
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on May 16, 2010 1:02:57 GMT
I once knew a man who seemed to want to be beat up. He was forever being belligerent and starting fights, yet he had no skill whatever at actually fighting so usually got the worst of it. As this was a repeated behavior, he must have known he was likely to get beat up so I can only assume he had some perverse want or need to be.
People can be very strange, wanting to be victimized by violence seems like just an amplification of the common masochistic or submissive roles that some people seem to... can I say enjoy? I'm not sure they really enjoy it in any sense I'd recognize but on some level I suppose they must.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 16, 2010 1:53:39 GMT
I can only assume that the OP is meant to be provocative. Being a woman and having known untold other women throughout my life, I've never met a single one who wanted to be abused. I have met a few poor souls whose life circumstances must have made them think they'd always be victimized, but this is a tiny minority.
As for the sexual perversion part of it, I was under the impression that the desire to be dominated occurred equally throughout any population.
As far as women in any given culture rationalizing brutal treatment by thinking it means "he cares" or whatever ....... I suppose it's possible that could be a thought process instilled in a benighted group of women, but I can't imagine all of them truly subscribing to it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 5:24:55 GMT
Well, for something that women claims mystifies and repulses them, there is certainly a lot of research about it on the net.
Getting a charge out of watching men fight over them is simply the biological confirmation that female animals want to mate with the male that will produce the strongest offspring. If that male later uses some of the strength in excessive physical domination, it just indicates to his mate that he is still the pack leader.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 16, 2010 5:38:29 GMT
That's an amazing amount of unsubstantiated ignorance to pack into two short paragraphs.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 5:43:25 GMT
Quick knee jerk reaction as well. Not be able to analyze an unpleasant subject is a typical female trait.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 16, 2010 5:47:12 GMT
What is the point of analyzing a false premise, such as your OP?
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on May 16, 2010 10:17:04 GMT
I cannot believe that women crave violence and I speak as one who has been subjected to it.
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on May 16, 2010 10:17:24 GMT
I wonder why kerouac is having such a retro machismo eruption. Is it like boils?
This is strange, as in the "manipulative bitches" thread, you are describing exactly the same human behaviour among men with regard to women who exploit them and mistreat them. Sure, there are people like that, men and women, but I think most of what can be described as women craving violence is a learned reaction to persistent misogyny. One can observe the same among people (of either sex) in slavery or peonage, people in concentration or POW camps, or famously in a situation of hostage taking.
There is just as much evidence that women seek out a partner who will be a good father, and not a violent, domineering brute.
|
|
|
Post by lola on May 16, 2010 13:02:31 GMT
I think it's legit to try to understand what women want. This should be a good forum to air your non-PC questions. K can't exactly ask around the office, "Say, why do chicks like getting beat up so much?"
I've never been struck by a man or had them fight over me, and I have no fantasies in that direction or know anyone who admits liking that sort of thing, so I kind of doubt K's premise also. I suspect that if there's a lot about this on the internet it's largely related to male fantasy. Some egregious exceptions, of course.
Where I used to live in northern New Mexico groups of Penitentes met (meet) in the mountains to flagellate each other during Holy Week. These are all men. Redemption by physical suffering, taking on the sins of the world, is not a female idea.
That said, some of us like a little gentle dominance. Paperback romance novels covers all feature half clad damsels roughly grasped by sexy brute with the bedroom eyes. The ideal would be Jason Bourne-like guy who can fight off a room full of bad guys and then turn to you sensitively. NOT then turn to you and beat you up.
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on May 16, 2010 14:31:41 GMT
Oh yes, people (of both genders and all sexual orientations) may like a little gentle dominance, bonding or play S&M. A select few like much rougher stuff. But there is a chasm between fantasy roughness and actual brutality, just as there is between fantasy rape and actual sexual assault. A lot of people, men and women, gay and straight, have fantasies of being "ravished". But the ravishee is in control of the fantasy, and the rapist rarely has bad breath.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 14:35:23 GMT
Well, basically, I am surprised that nobody here has contested Sigmund Freud's claim that women are inherently masochistic. A recent French book by Michel Onfray has given Freud a kick in the teeth, but Paula Caplan published a book in the U.S. in 1985 contesting Freud's views, "The Myth of Women's Masochism."
Nevertheless, Gothic romances continue to outsell such works probably by a million to one. Many of these are written by women for women and contain all manner of mistreatment, beatings and torture, as lola alludes in her reply above.
More serious erotic works such as Justine or The Story of O also appeal much more to women readers than male ones.
|
|
|
Post by lola on May 16, 2010 14:41:36 GMT
Hmmm. I don't go in for gothic romances. I'm surprised there are beatings and torture in them. Most of us like to sit on our satin pillows in comfort.
Will go ahead and admit I haven't read any serious erotic torture works either. The idea doesn't appeal to me, and I dislike current trend of inserting gratuitous torture scenes into movies. (e.g. Slumdog Millionaire)
|
|
|
Post by lola on May 16, 2010 14:50:46 GMT
Speaking of "both genders", if I may stick in a brief sidetrack: my daughter who's going to a Tacoma WA college in the fall had a health history form that asked them to state gender:
M F T
A new one on me, and very west coast.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 15:02:09 GMT
Well, there are niche sexes just as there are niche abuse fans. I often get in trouble on lots of websites for talking about what 'ordinary people' are doing rather than we internet elite people with our lofty interests and values. In discussions of 'literature,' if I point out that the gothic book sections at Walmart or Target are huge, I get flamed instantly for intellectual vandalism.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 16, 2010 15:25:42 GMT
Kerouac writes: Well, basically, I am surprised that nobody here has contested Sigmund Freud's claim that women are inherently masochistic. A recent French book by Michel Onfray has given Freud a kick in the teeth, but Paula Caplan published a book in the U.S. in 1985 contesting Freud's views, "The Myth of Women's Masochism." Freud died in 1939. His outmoded views on women have been debunked numerous times since then.
Kerouac writes: Nevertheless, Gothic romances continue to outsell such works probably by a million to one. Crappy entertainment literature outsells serious works of scholarship? Hardly surprising, but hardly proof of masochism in women, either.
Kerouac writes: Many of these are written by women for women and contain all manner of mistreatment, beatings and torture, ... Gothic romances? That's simply not true.
Kerouac writes: ... as lola alludes in her reply above. She did? Is it written in invisible ink?
Kerouac writes: More serious erotic works such as Justine or The Story of O also appeal much more to women readers than male ones. I seriously question that de Sade has wide appeal for women and would like to know on what you base that statement. The Story of O was written by a woman and taps into a vein of female fantasy. As LaGatta so eloquently said: "But there is a chasm between fantasy roughness and actual brutality..."
And if I can again quote LaGatta: I wonder why kerouac is having such a retro machismo eruption. Is it like boils?
This is strange, as in the "manipulative bitches" thread, you are describing exactly the same human behaviour among men with regard to women who exploit them and mistreat them.
I wonder the same thing. Does he actually think so poorly of women, or is this a somewhat trollish ploy to get a "debate" thread going?
|
|
|
Post by lola on May 16, 2010 15:27:10 GMT
I went through a little gothic lit phase in high school, but the books were pretty tame. The heroes brooded mysteriously, of course, and seemed dangerous, but then turned out to be misunderstood.
Okay, I'm at work now and have the office to myself. I'll go search the break room and see what I can come up with.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 16:12:14 GMT
Yes, Bixa, how true that women don't want to cross the line between fantasy pain and real pain. I guess all of those items for ladies that I see in the windows of the piercing stores are a figment of my imagination. No normal person could possible want that done to them. Since brandings and tribal scars go back to prehistory, clearly I was born on another planet.
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on May 16, 2010 16:15:23 GMT
As for Freud, we must remember that in his day, he was a revolutionary for thinking women were sexual at all.
We were supposed to shut our eyes and think of Austria, or England, or wherever...
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 16, 2010 17:51:24 GMT
I guess all of those items for ladies that I see in the windows of the piercing stores are a figment of my imagination. No normal person could possible want that done to them. And this proves what? There have been several news reports of men dying in the process of inducing auto-erotic asphyxiation. Does this mean that everyone who has sex with a man is simultaneously worrying that he'll accidentally kill himself during the act?
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on May 16, 2010 17:53:50 GMT
Bixa - 10
Kerouac - 0
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on May 16, 2010 17:56:20 GMT
Lola - does the 'T' stand for Transexual....?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 18:19:30 GMT
T is transgender.
Now that you all agree that women are only interested in nice things and wish to avoid all displeasure, perhaps one of you will explain the peculiar attraction to a very common "entertainment" by so many women -- "the tearjerker." Men who are attracted to this genre are often considered not to be "real" men. But women who love tearjerkers are considered to be among the most "womanish" (often with disdain by other members of their own sex).
If women don't like to cry, why do they like to cry so much?
|
|
|
Post by lola on May 16, 2010 19:10:33 GMT
Hey, K. There is a fairly wide middle ground between "craving violence" and "only interested in nice." (I did kiddingly mention the satin pillow thing, but sheesh.)
Women are vulnerable and need protection, especially with small children -- if you want to get all evolutionary -- and so value strength. Where's the evolutionary advantage in choosing a guy who's going to harm you?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 19:48:01 GMT
We'll have to ask spindrift that.
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on May 16, 2010 21:07:35 GMT
That's not nice. Please apologize.
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on May 16, 2010 21:10:50 GMT
Kerouac’s fantasy that women enjoy being beaten and raped is disturbing. Perhaps he is trolling. Perhaps he and his male friends actually believe it. I haven’t noticed the other males on this forum leaping in to defend the viewpoint, nor have I read any reference here that gives this any credence. However, the pornography industry certainly backs up K’s OP…a male dominated industry. The worldwide sex slave industry certainly enhances his viewpoint, again male dominated etc. etc. In other words, this male fantasy is controlled, perpetuated by, and enriches males.
Kerouac: I often get in trouble on lots of websites for talking about what 'ordinary people' are doing rather than we internet elite people with our lofty interests and values.
Here is a diversion thrown in to justify the OP. Somehow, ‘women loving to be beaten and raped’ has become 'bravely' translated into ‘what ordinary people are doing’. I don’t think so.
Kerouac: Now that you all agree that women are only interested in nice things and wish to avoid all displeasure...
No, I don’t agree, possibly others may, but ‘women’ are not so tidily summed up in a phrase. Its healthy to think of people as individuals. But, yet another diversion.
The gap between an intellectualized discussion of being beaten and raped and the reality is almost beyond words. From a safe distance anything may be said but it bears no relation to reality. None. In this discussion, being male is the safest place to be. You are the perpetrators of the crime and indulge yourselves in fantasies to justify this violence against women.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 16, 2010 23:51:36 GMT
I really don't understand what your game is here, Kerouac. You open with a generalization that implies men are superior ("at least we admit [to being excited by violence]"). Of course, one could say that this supposed admission to their supposed titillation means that men are "more in touch with themselves", or "in touch with their feminine side", if you prefer.
Whatever, the wording of your OP assumes all women, or at least all women on this forum, will, by explaining this "problem" evidenced by this unspecified number of women you reference, tacitly validate your sneakily worded premise that women crave victimization.
Then, when you get a wtf reaction from women here, you up the ante with downright silly statements about the content of romance novels, and "research on the net", whatever means.
Then, in the face of statements such as Fumobici's about the pathology of wanting to be hurt occurring in both sexes, and further statements by women refuting the charge of masochism, you dance off to even more silly charges, what Jazz quite pertinently confronts as "diversions".
But what you said to Spindrift is downright nasty and uncalled-for.
|
|