Gay Menyaio and the false narrative of escapism

submitted by grammaroo from self.LGBDropTheT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]grammaroo[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

thats just a form of gaslighting to dismiss the underlying homophobia straight women are responsible for perpetuating and inflicting. it's usually invisible to gay men because it's not directed at them but their target of desire. Heterosexual men are highly regulated by...heterosexual/bisexual women. And they do it through homophobia. They call their boyfriends/husbands FGGTS if they dont take out the trash, or do their "manly duties" or perform their gender roles and whatever their expectations are within the relationship. Their underlying expectations within the relationship include violence and they heavily eroticize it. Yes, they dont like the consequences of the oppression but they dont have the ability to not respect a non violent or non threatening man, hence "the bad boy". The bad boy isnt some ridiculous "twisted caricature" of masculinity. He IS masculinity. They cant conceive of any other kind. The violence, the rape, the killing. They yearn for that BUT they expect to be the exception. That he's a menace to society and can be used, manipulated and wielded against other people. How many youtube videos have we seen of women proudly instigating fights and then escalating them to the point where their "man" has to step in and physically fight people? The overwhelming majority of straight/bi women have these expectations of men. Let's not be inconsistent here and respect feminist screeds against porn and its underlying dynamics that are presented as erotic and "dangerous" and then consider those desires a perverted, unhealthy and toxic form of sexual dynamics revealing a fundamental core of someone's character that needs to be changed when it comes to heterosexual male porn and the abuse they enjoy but then close our eyes and ears when straight/bisexual women have an ocean's worth of yaoi/literature doing the exact same thing. Yes, we know they dont want to physically be stabbed but they sure do heavily desire someone capable of doing the stabbing over someone who doesnt. Thats a deep part of their sexuality that they need to focus on.

[–]PosthumousScholar 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

thats just a form of gaslighting to dismiss the underlying homophobia straight women are responsible for perpetuating and inflicting.

By definition this is not a phobia, which involves overwhelming irrational fear/disgust towards the object in attention. Using gay men as props for a fantasy is not synonymous with being scared of them. You can be equally offended at being objectified for another's benefit, and I doubt any sober observers would claim debacles like the Harry Styles saga aren't extremely harmful.

Heterosexual men are highly regulated by...heterosexual/bisexual women. And they do it through homophobia. They call their boyfriends/husbands FGGTS if they don't take out the trash, or do their "manly duties" or perform their gender roles and whatever their expectations are within the relationship.

Yes, women use the threat of diminished respect to keep men in check. Men are particularly weak to being judged as sexually undesirable - just look at how 'incel' is the default slur hurled towards them - and women understand this.

Their underlying expectations within the relationship include violence and they heavily eroticize it. Yes, they dont like the consequences of the oppression but they dont have the ability to not respect a non violent or non threatening man, hence "the bad boy". The bad boy isnt some ridiculous "twisted caricature" of masculinity. He IS masculinity. They cant conceive of any other kind. The violence, the rape, the killing. They yearn for that BUT they expect to be the exception. That he's a menace to society and can be used, manipulated and wielded against other people.

Well, it's a twisted caricature because nobody can realistically match these standards and it runs counter to a man's conception of masculinity.

Like I mentioned before, the erotization of male-on-female violence is a recent development. A cursory familiarity with the genre suggests a strong correlation with women's relative freedom and autonomy within society.

  • When the threat of violence loomed like a ubiquitous presence and women had restricted responsibilities, popular fantasies dwelled on social mobility, freedom of choice (in breaking social norms) and acquiring improved status through marriage/education. The heroine's triumph was an escape from the drudgery of day-to-day life as well as reifying the ambition of obtaining a portion of power enjoyed by the opposite sex. Just look at Jane Austen's contemporaries or "Amish girl" literature. By the same token, the man showed his love through restraint and a measure of compassion. Hitting a woman was easy regardless of affection.
  • By contrast, the notion of powerful men restricting, controlling, and threatening women by force becomes a common trope and gains traction within the genre as women gain power, influence, and sovereignty in both private and public life. Once social mobility, education, and freedom in love turned into everyday realities, they stop being eligible as turn-ons or aspirations. Women can accomplish all of these without associating with men. What's left? Sexual prowess and status. It's no wonder these two aspects become inflated to preposterous degrees in modern erotica. Edward Rochester can't contend with an immortal vampire, a 25-year-old billionaire magnate, or an Italian mob heir who can kidnap his object of affection at a whim.

Additionally, male violence becomes synonymous with power as it's one of the last taboos in modern Western culture; men can't hit women publicly without being denounced into a hundred different ways. The prospect of a (handsome, rich) man ignoring social convention and "putting her in her place" transforms into a strange, fascinating possibility instead of a depressing fact. But in order to enable physical domination, the men in these fantasies must possess a sociopathic, cruel streak that makes them completely indifferent to shame or morality.

The overwhelming majority of straight/bi women have these expectations of men.

Eh, I doubt that. I don't know why you insist bisexuals share the same proclivities as heterosexuals either.

Let's not be inconsistent here and respect feminist screeds against porn and its underlying dynamics that are presented as erotic and "dangerous" and then consider those desires a perverted, unhealthy and toxic form of sexual dynamics revealing a fundamental core of someone's character that needs to be changed when it comes to heterosexual male porn and the abuse they enjoy but then close our eyes and ears when straight/bisexual women have an ocean's worth of yaoi/literature doing the exact same thing.

Who's "we"? I never claimed to endorse or rely on feminist critiques of porn.

Yes, we know they dont want to physically be stabbed but they sure do heavily desire someone capable of doing the stabbing over someone who doesnt. Thats a deep part of their sexuality that they need to focus on.

Yes, many women associate violence with power in their fantasies. It's perhaps the sole tangible aspect that distinguishes men from women in the realm of relationships. There are many different streams feeding into that murky lake.

[–]grammaroo[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You literally just pulled the “how can they be homophobic If they’re not afraid of gay men” 12 year old response. it seems that your understanding of homophobia is incredibly superficial since you think it directly deals with gay men. Homophobia isn’t directed at gay people because some gay man stole a heterosexual’s sandwich 900 years ago and we’re learning to reconcile because of that conflict. You’re intentionally being dishonest and childish here.

Reading through your post, you seem to struggle to understand that the perversion of gender is intimately tied to homophobia.

I’ve read some of jane Austen’s works. Whats the point of bringing them up as if you’re some sort of scholar in women’s literature? What in god’s name was she going to write about during the 1700’s in polite society? A nude man with a gigantic dick and hairy balls smashing her face into the mud with his big sexy feet as she masturbates to his power? Lol more dishonesty. Her works don’t reflect her sexuality and her desires and had nothing to do with sex but finding a romantic partner. I didn’t read anything about giant sweaty huge dicks in her works or how hot and sexy men are when their abs accidentally flex when they breath.

You’re not doing a very good job obfuscating and deflecting the flaws within heterosexual/bisexual female sexuality and I find it fascinating that you think anyone is convinced when you feign confusion that bisexual women aren’t exactly like heterosexual women when it comes to these flaws, especially when homosexuals (both gays and lesbians) constantly complain bisexuals share the exact same flaws as highly gendered heterosexuals.

You can’t exactly hide the overwhelming majority of women’s underlying expectations of men since they’re regularly stated by women themselves and heterosexual men won’t stop complaining about them.

[–]PosthumousScholar 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You literally just pulled the “how can they be homophobic If they’re not afraid of gay men” 12 year old response.

Go take it up with the APA and the Oxford Dictionary.

it seems that your understanding of homophobia is incredibly superficial since you think it directly deals with gay men. Homophobia isn’t directed at gay people because some gay man stole a heterosexual’s sandwich 900 years ago and we’re learning to reconcile because of that conflict. You’re intentionally being dishonest and childish here.

Funny how you're consistently inventing ad hominem accusations with no proof but I'm the bad guy.

I’ve read some of jane Austen’s works. Whats the point of bringing them up as if you’re some sort of scholar in women’s literature?

I know despite your sophistry, you're a bit too thickheaded to grasp any point that's not framed as a incendiary polemic. So let me explain it in language a child can understand:

  • Popular fantasies among women are based on what they lack access to. These can be divided into two categories: things that are taboo and things beyond their present capacity to obtain. These are contingent on what women expect from life. I illustrated this by comparing popular women's literature from 200 years ago to the present day and explaining how the social + material circumstances influenced stated desires.
  • Fujoshi (women who read yaoi) read violent yaoi in order to project their desire for powerful, masculine men onto gay couples. They do this specifically for gay men because it's considered socially inappropriate within their circles to read similar erotica with women as the main character - it offers plausible deniability. Is it offensive towards gay men? Yes. Is it stark evidence of homophobia? No more than a Samantha Price novel "proves" regular heterosexuals has a phobia of Amish people.
  • The mania over dominance, sexual and otherwise, comes from the absence and unfamiliarity with masculinity in their own lives. Women in the 18th century didn't fantasize about being sexually dominated by men since men had most of the rights and privileges in that arena. These fujoshis are mostly naive young girls and women who haven't experience assault and rape firsthand; victims dream of escaping domestic assault. Getting punched in the face, and experiencing the terror and pain firsthand, would solve this problem (in a brutally efficient, fucked up way).
  • Since the audience, by and large, have access to sex/material comfort/career and social opportunities, their fantasies blow up the object of desire to extreme levels. In the past, women ate up stories about being courted by petty nobles and landowners. Prosperity and free time inflates the demand to unrealistic standards like immortal werewolves and supergeniuses with six-packs. Do women believe these are pragmatic options in their future? For most of them, no. Do they want what they symbolically mean? Absolutely.
  • Women like bad boys for numerous reasons. But what constitutes a bad boy depends on the culture and social norms. 70 years ago, it was riding a motorcycle with a black jacket and smoking with an ineffable cool drawl. Previously women dreamed about freedom and choice in love because they didn't have those experiences; now they crave being controlled and dominated with lust for the same reason. A craving to witness, or instigate, violence is not innate in women - it is a byproduct of modern gender norms. In one sense, it's the dilemma of current feminism: telling them what they desire is wrong only sanctifies the taboo and makes them yearn for it more. No different than their father's warning to avoid that troublesome, handsome boy hanging around at the corner.

Your basic complaint is rabid fujoshis are representative of all heterosexual women (fallacy of composition right there) and what women fantasize about in their minds represents what they want in the real world. The latter is only partially true in the sense that dreams reflect our anxieties and obsessions in reality. Here's a secret: when most heterosexual guys want porn, they don't actually want a big penis like the male talent. They want the self-assurance and confidence to be sexually entitled that they erroneously attribute to the penis itself. That's why they call it a fetish.

You’re not doing a very good job obfuscating and deflecting the flaws within heterosexual/bisexual female sexuality

You're doing a bad job pretending this is nothing more than a bad faith argument where you can flash your nonexistent credentials in order to police a discussion. If you want to grow up and stop waving around your internet wiener in a bout of ego insecurity, I'll be waiting.

especially when homosexuals (both gays and lesbians) constantly complain bisexuals share the exact same flaws as highly gendered heterosexuals.

Again, your "NO, YOU" gambit fails. Frankly, your obsession with bisexuals and inserting them into arguments where they are at best tangential to the topic is bizarre and more indicative of your priorities than anything else. Let's also not pretend biphobia isn't a problem within the gay community itself. Oh yes, I'm quite aware.

You can’t exactly hide the overwhelming majority of women’s underlying expectations of men since they’re regularly stated by women themselves and heterosexual men won’t stop complaining about them.

You're cherry-picking when you take women at their word. Should I assume looks don't matter and they truly want equal partnerships by the same logic because the majority state so? Most don't want to get beaten up, kidnapped, threatened, gaslit or tortured in real life period. It's ridiculous I have to point out this obvious fact.